My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016 Approved Budget and CIP
Roseville
>
Budget
>
2016 Approved Budget and CIP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/2/2018 11:21:24 AM
Creation date
2/2/2018 11:21:14 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
121
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The following table depicts a comparison of local property taxes within the Twin Cities Metropolitan <br />Area, serving a population between 25,000 -45,000; and for a home valued at $215,000 <br />2015Local Property Taxes <br />City <br />MunicipalityTaxes * <br />Brooklyn Center$1,506 <br />Richfield1,293 <br />Savage1,112 <br />Maplewood997 <br />Inver Grove Heights980 <br />Fridley935 <br />Cottage Grove890 <br />Oakdale841 <br />Roseville837 <br />Shakopee814 <br />Andover800 <br />Shoreview750 <br />As shown in the above table, in 2015(the most recent available) Roseville has the fourthlowest property <br />tax burden amongstcities within the metro area that serve a population between 25,000 and 45,000. <br />If an expanded comparison were made to include all cities in the metro area that serve a population in <br />excess of 10,000, Roseville would have the 21stlowest taxes out of 60cities. The tax burden on Roseville <br />homeowners has consistently remained below the average for this peer groupover the past two decades. <br />This is summarized in the chart below. <br />City Tax Rate Comparison <br />1995-2015 <br />55% <br />45% <br />46.6% <br />40.1% <br />35% <br />21.1% <br />25% <br />18.0% <br />15% <br />19952000200520102015 <br />RosevillePeer Average <br />In 1995, Roseville’s tax rate was 15% lower than the peer average. In 2005, Roseville’s tax rate was 27% <br />lower than the averagereflecting a period of relatively low levels of capital replacements. Today,after a <br />significant increase in levy-supported capital investmentswe’re 12% lower. <br />14 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.