The Truth in Taxation meeting to discuss the city’s proposed increase in the property tax rate is tonight. The General Fund presentation is online, while details for the other funds have not been posted. A final vote on the city budget will be at the December 20 City Council meeting.
In September, the City Council approved a preliminary levy equal to that of last year, which effectively means that property taxes will be raised 6.7% to offset a similar decline in property valuations in 2011.
Under the preliminary levy, the median homeowner in Chaska would see a decline in property taxes of $1 versus a decline of $30 if the tax rate were to stay the same.
Additionally, the plan called for the following cuts:
Unfortunately, the City Council has not gone further and addressed additional expenses that should be looked at. I would propose these additional measures, with the savings going to reduce the tax rate:
- A one-year pay freeze for city employees. This would be entirely appropriate, given the continued budget problems and the dismal conditions in the larger labor market — as most families have seen their wages frozen (or worse) in the current economy. Many other cities have already taken this step. Councilor Gino Businaro has been pushing for this, and we shall see if he votes against the budget again because it is not included.
- Elimination of the downtown flower program and begin a transition away from city subsidies for “Concerts in the Park”, Taste of Chaska, and River City Days. These are excellent opportunities for the Chaska business community to step up. The goal should be for the city to eventually not have to subsidize these events at all, but the transition should happen over a three-year timeframe to allow organizations to fundraise to fill the void.
- Voluntary pay cuts from the Mayor and Council: Under Chaska statute, changes to the pay for the Mayor and Council wouldn’t take impact until 2013. However, nothing prevents the Mayor and Council from voluntarily cutting their pay. A 10% (or more) cut would be a sign of good faith, even if it wouldn’t have significant budget impact.