08-03-2004 Council Work SessionA

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

c.attached. C Tax Levy The total tax levy required to ftind the proposed 2005 budget is $3,461,670. I his is an increase of $263,740, or 8.25 % over the 2004 levy. Tlie breakout of the use of tax levy revenues by fund is shown on the attached chart titled Tax Levies. Tlie General Fund expenditures have the greatest impact on the proposed tax levy. In addition, the Infrastructure levy in the PIR Fund (for street rehabilitation) has been increased from $35,940 to $85,950. The tax levy required to fund the proposed 2005 General Fund budget is $2,990,470. This is an increase of $339,240, or 12.8% over the 2004 levy amount. Of this amount, $125,000 is not a levy increase, but rather is a shifting of tax levy from the Improv ement and Equipment Outlay Fund to the General Fund. Excluding the $125,000 of expenditures shifted to the General Fund, the levy increase is $214,240, or 8.1%. Although the General Fund tax levy is proposed to increase substantially, the funding will address a number of high priority needs, which will provide substantial benefits in terms of increased service levels, productivity, customer service, consultant assistance regarding tlie Highway 12 turnback, and a jump start to the Navarre streetscaping project. Tax Capacity Rate and Impact ol the Tax Levy on Property Owners Although the County has not yet prov ided an estimate of the City’s tax capacity, based on the annual property revaluation conducted by the County Assessor, it is estimated that the City's tax capacity (or tax base) has increased by approximately 10%. Applying the proposed tax levy- to the estimated tax capacity results in a tax rate of 17.378“/i, which is a slight reduction from the 2004 level of 17.599 %. Using this tax rate, the City’s share of the property tax bill on a home valued at $300,000, assuming a 5% value increase, will increase by $$ 18.18, or 3.4%. For a home valued at $800,000, the City's share of the property tax bill will increase by $$48.47, or 3.4%. Police Stalling The Police Department has identitled the need for three additional officers. These include a second investigator, a narcotics investigator, and a patrol olTicer. I hc proposed 2005 budget reflects the addition of the investigator position. The Department’s current investigative caseload is too large for one officer. Other Departments of Orono’s si/e (and smaller) have two investigators, (i.e.Mound, Excelsior). The Depanment’s greatest criticism from citizens during the past three y ears has been about poor follow-up on case reports. T he investigator is much more effective when he has a partner who can back him up on .stime interv iews and investigations When the School Liaison Officer was available during the summer to assist in investigations, the clearance rate increased and many more cases received inv esligativv attention. The