HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.e. Minutes of the December 4, 2006 Special City Council ProceedingsROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL MEETING
DECEMBER 4, 2006
CALL TO ORDER
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a Special Budget Hearing of the Rosemount City
Council was duly held on Monday, December 4, 2006, at 6:32 p m. in the Council Chambers
at City Hall, 2875 145 Street West.
Mayor Droste called the meeting to order with Council Members Baxter and Sterner
attending. Council Members DeBettignies and Shoe Corrigan arrived shortly thereafter.
Staff members present were City Admirustrator Verbrugge, Assistant City Administrator
Foster, Finance Director May, Communications Coordinator Cox and City Clerk Domeier.
2. 2007 BUDGET AND LEVY PRESENTATION
Finance Director May stated the purpose of the special meeting was to comply with the
Truth -In- Taxation requirements that call for the City to hold a special budget heanng for the
public that allows residents to speak on the proposed budgets and levies. If a continuation is
not needed, the proposed budget and levy amounts will be sent to Council December 5,
2006 for adoption. He added that if necessary, the public comment period may be
continued to December 11, 2006 for further discussion and forwarded to the City Council
on December 19, 2006 for approval. The information is due to the County before
December 31, 2006 to close out the budget process.
Finance Director presented the Truth -In- Taxation Hearing PowerPoint outlining the budget
schedule and the proposed budget and levy amounts.
A resident in attendance questioned the tax capacity rates. Mr. May explained the tax
capacity rates and stated everything is based on the valuation of a resident's property. City
Administrator Verbrugge added that it's a rate and not a percentage. The rate is the amount
of the levy divided by the total capacity in the community and the rate is calculated against a
resident's taxable value.
Council Member Stemer questioned if the debt is up or down from last year. Mr. May stated
the actual amount of the debt levy is slightly down. There were two debt issues this year for
the County Road 38 project and for the water tower. Mr. May added there was a slight
increase m overall debt but the amount that is levied went down by about $53,000.
Council Member DeBettignies confirmed that the proposal is a 2.84% decrease in the City
share of the tax rate.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
Gary Anderson, 3418 Cromwell Trail, Rosemount, stated his concerns with the City taking
approximately rune months to sort out a budget of 17 million dollars. He questioned the
total increase from 2006 to 2007. Mr. May stated the operating budget is up by 7.8 He
added there were other factors including the enterprise funds which increased $700,000. Mr.
Anderson requested clarification of enterprise funds. Mr. May stated those funds operate
under a profit and /or loss statement.
lo• C.
ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL MEETING
DECEMBER 4, 2006
Mr. Anderson questioned where the City is losing money. Mr. May stated the City is losing
money in the arena fund and it needs a subsidy Council Member DeBettigmies stated the
City has always lost money in the arena fund. Mr. Anderson questioned why the arena was
built. Mr. May responded building of the arena goes back to 1993.
Council Member DeBettignies stated the increases with the joint dispatch center and the
cost of operating the facility. He noted the City will be spending five times the amount they
are currently spending for dispatch services Mr. Verbrugge stated while there was an
increase in the operating budget the City has held the line with the operating costs. The City
has negotiated contracts with its employees, has the $100,000 subsidy for arena operations,
and has added $240,000 for the joint dispatch He added the major increases are for electric
and gas utilities, a salt /sand mix and gasoline. Mr. Verbrugge stated the City previously
contracted with the City of Eagan to provide emergency dispatch. A decision was made by
communities m Dakota County to consohdate to a single answer point so effective January
1, 2007 all cities in the county will share the expenses. He added that 1/3 of the total
increase in the operating budget is due to the joint dispatch center.
Mr. Anderson stated that property values are going down but taxes went up. He further
stated he does not receive a break for maintaining his own street. He added his street does
not require City maintenance and therefore he should be taxed at a different rate. Mr. May
stated this discussion has happened before when people were being taxed who lived on
County roads. Mr. May further questioned how you would break down who pays what
share and noted it would be a complex formula.
Dave Meacham, 13668 Crompton Avenue, Rosemount, stated he has seen a 12 to18%
decrease m the valuation of the average house but a 35% increase m the assessed value of
the property. He further stated the property taxes are going up but the properties are not
worth what they are being taxed at. Mr. May stated the County has all control on setting the
value of a home and he encouraged the residents to contact the County to make changes to
the values of their homes. He further stated the City is bound to use the valuation provided
by the County. A resident has an opportunity to appeal their taxable value at the County
level. Mr Meacham questioned if the City has taken into account the number of employees
who have been laid off at Northwest Airhnes and the Ford motor plant. Council Member
Shoe Corrigan stated that while the concerns are vand those issues need to be addressed to
the County.
Mr May stated that while they may maintain their own streets they still utilize the City police
and fire departments. The developer decided to make those roads private when the project
was developed. Council Member Shoe Corrigan added the developer sold the idea that it
was an amenity to offer pnvate streets. Council Member Baxter added that was the deal the
residents made when the purchased the home they live m and that deal has not changed.
Mr. Anderson commented that it's all about fairness Council Member Baxter stated
residents made a deal and need to live with the deal Mr. May added when the development
was before the City Council there were concerns raised regarding certain standards for fire
trucks and both the police and public works departments stated the roads weren't wide
enough. He further stated the developer wanted to have an exclusive neighborhood.
ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL MEETING
DECEMBER 4, 2006
Everyone can make an argument that they do not use something they are being taxed for
Mr. Anderson again questioned why he should pay for roads not maintained by the City.
Steve Kopel, 3434 Crumpet Path, Rosemount questioned the Rosemount portion of taxes
and how this meeting could be considered a tax hearing. Mayor Droste stated the process
tonight is to present our budget numbers for the operation of the City. Mr. Koppel stated
it's hard to talk about taxes if they are all based on the market values. Mr. Verbrugge stated
he did understand the frustration on the valuation. The State sets the tax capacity rates, the
County sets the valuation and the City sets the levy.
Mr. Koppel stated he came for a tax hearing and to discuss the market value that is
established and now found out it can only be dealt with at a future County meeting. He
stated the timing is not right and that the market value should be contested before a budget
hearing date. Mr. Verbrugge stated the City is working with the schedule that legislation
provides.
Mr. Koppel added he did not see a benefit of having private streets. Council Member Shoe
Corrigan stated the developer sold private streets as a benefit to slowing down traffic and
offering a sense of walkabtlity through the neighborhood and all other kinds of aesthetic
reasons. She stated she understood the resident's concerns but as a local government body
we do not operate the City like a private business.
Mr. Verbrugge stated the hearings are held when a decision has been made. In relation to
the budget itself we make it an open process to the public. He added he wrote a City
column in May when the budget started, again m August regarding the preliminary levy and
again last week discussing the final budget. The City tries to make the information available
to residents and to inform them we are going through a public process. He stated the City
makes it a public process so residents can understand the budget.
Mayor Droste noted there were tremendous challenges before the City Council to keep the
budget realistic in going forward. He added that 21% of the budget is for the police
department.
Council Member Baxter stated a problem the City Council often hears is that while the tax
rates are going down the valuations of properties are going up. He stated the City Council
spends a fair amount of time talking about assessments for streets, sewer and water and how
the charges will affect residents who live on fixed incomes or have lost jobs. No one wants
their taxes to increase but no one wants fewer services, parks, communications, police or fire
department members.
Mr. Verbrugge stated in looking at other communities' tax rates every community is
different. Our goal is to add commercial and industrial businesses to the tax base We no
longer have municipal liquor operations hke Apple Valley and Lakeville. Over the last five
years the City has seen incredible growth and the tax rate has been reduced about 23 He
added the City has done a good job managing the growth and tax rate in Rosemount. The
ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL MEETING
DECEMBER 4, 2006
City is not looking to add staff for 2007 and there is an impact to the service level over time
by not making additions to staff.
Mr. May encouraged property owners concerned with the market values to contact the
County Assessor's office and added the County takes those factors into consideration when
setting the tax rates.
Roger Schnaser, 3472 Crumfield Path, Rosemount, stated he attended the meeting to discuss
the valuation of his property. He appreciated Mr. May's suggestion to contact the County
now to discuss the valuation of his property. He spoke of the experience in trying to sell his
property and noted it was on the market for exactly what it was evaluated at two years ago
Motion by Baxter. Second by DeBettignies.
Motion to close the pubhc heanng.
Ayes: DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Sterner, Baxter.
Nays: None. Motion carried.
Mayor Droste urged the residents to contact their local Legislators regarding the local
government aid.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Droste adjourned
the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Amy Domeier, City Clerk