HomeMy WebLinkAboutTNT Hearing Documents d r ^ ud�
CITY OF O AK PARK HEIGHT
TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING
followed b
CrI"Y COUNCIL, MEETING
MONDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2000
7:00 P.M.
i
7:40 P.M. TR UTH IN TAXATION HEARING (1)
8:00 P.M: CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO DISCUSS
STREET LIGHTING STUDY (2)
8 :30 P.M. ADjouRN
PLEASE NOTE: THE CITYCOUNCIL MEETING wzu DIRE07ZYFOLLow Tkum IN T AXATION
HEARING AND, THEREFORE, MAY CONVENE EARLIER OR LATER THAN THE SCHEDULED TIME A SECOND
TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARlNQ, IF NECESSARY, IS SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 1 2000 AT 7:00 P. M.
1. Tom — introduction
2. Proposed 2001 General Fund Budget Overview
6.71 % increase in expenditures
Main increases in budget
Snow Removal budget changes — line item only
Sanitation subsidy change - $8,000 out of Contingency
General Fund Balance History — info — JLS included
3. Utility Fund Update
Springsted study — annual increases 6% for next 4 years. Will update
study and recommend rate change.
Water Fund ok
Sewer Fund shortage — study takes into consideration — increases annually
to reduce deficit
Sanitation short of revenues — rate increase or subsidy increase.
Recommend budget change for 2001— transfer in to sanitation — decrease
contingency, increase subsidy
Utility rate comparison attached — all rates converted to quarterly. (OPH,
No. St. Paul were monthly)
4. Pay 2001 Proposed Taxes
Levy increase 10.3%
Rate increase 0.038%
City tax capacity rate increase 9.9%
Phase in of taxes for annexed areas (Kern Ctr & Island) — 6 years
starting 1999 to 100% in 2004. 2001 will be 60%
Market Value increase citywide 7.9%
No change in HACA
No change in class rates
Fiscal Disparities Program explanation
Tax Calculation rates by governmental entity — OPH 22 %, School 48 %,
County 24 %, Other 6%
Examples of property tax impact — 0% market increase & 8.5% market
increase
5. Q &A
n
Proposed 2001 General Fund Budget Overview
The proposed General Fund budget for expenditures will increase 6.71%
over 2000. The main increases in budget are attributable to the following:
1. Increased cost for copying, i.e. copier maintenance, paper, etc.
2. Salary increases. We have several employees that will have a step
increase or longevity or incentive increase in 2001. Building
inspections has budgeted for part-time inspector /clerical help for the
busy summer months.
3. There was a 17% increase in the employee health insurance
premium.
4. MIS costs for the computer will increase. A maintenance
agreement for the AS400/36 will be purchased.
There will be a change to the Public Works -Snow Removal budget. They
are line item changes only. The total for the snow removal budget will
remain the same. The changes are:
Salaries of regular employees $2,500
Other contractual services $42,480
Other material & supplies $3,500
Rent of equipment $18,000
PERA contribution $130
FICA contribution $190
Machinery & auto equipment $4,000
Total $70,800
I also recommend a change to the sanitation subsidy we transfer to the
Utility Fund - Sanitation Department. I believe the proposed revenue budget
for sanitation will be about $8,000 short of the proposed budget for the year
2001. The General Fund Contingency can be reduced by $8,000 and the
General Fund transfer out to sanitation can be increased by $8,000 without
affecting the tax levy or rate.
City of Oak Park Heights
Proposed Budget Summary 2001
General Fund
Percent
1999 2000 Received 2001 Increase Increase
Actual Budgeted 1 -1 thru 6 -30 -00 Proposed (Decrease) (Decrease)
Revenues:
Tax Levy 1,321,416 1,380,800 0 1,529,035 148,235 10.74%
Payment in Lieu of Tax 11,778 45,000 0 60,000 15,000 33.33%
Special Assessments 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Licenses & Permits 227,693 241,535 38,421 245,280 3,745 1.55%
Fines & Forfeits 58,886 63,150 28,410 66,400 3,250 5.15%
Inter - Governmental Revenue 194,234 185,511 12,501 161,231 (24,280) - 13.09%
Charges to Other Funds 87,908 115,000 49,700 95,300 (19,700) - 17.13%
General Government 14,767 13,200 7,406 14,300 1,100 8.33%
Development /Construction Chg. 65,632 29,000 0 57,000 28,000 96.55%
Bayport Inspections 36,122 27,500 25,396 30,000 2,500 9.09%
Interest Earnings 36,970 52,500 19,901 50,000 (2,500) -4.76%
Other Revenue 66,707 57,000 6,830 56,000 (1,000) -1.75%
Transfers In - TIF Admin Fees 0 15,000 0 10,000 (5,000) 0.00%
Total Revenues 2,122,113 2,225,196 188,565 2,374,546 149,350 6.71%
Customer Collections (JLS) 25,718 28,000 13,550 28,000 0 0.00%
Non - budget, replaces previous
lawsuit costs )
11/29/00 Page 1 Proposed 2001 Budget Overview.xls
City of Oak Park Heights
Proposed Budget Summary 2001
General Fund
Percent
1999 2000 Expended 2001 Increase Increase
Actual Budgeted 1 -1 thru 6 -30 -00 Proposed (Decrease) (Decrease)
Expenditures:
General Management 78,367 66,675 32,179 74,950 8,275 12.41%
Mayor & Council 60,296 61,900 22,852 58,650 (3,250) -5.25%
Legal 23,338 30,000 8,338 31,500 1,500 5.00%
Elections 0 4,800 0 800 (4,000) - 83.33%
City Administration 194,601 213,650 106,799 238,400 24,750 11.58%
Planning & Zoning 43,704 30,000 15,955 29,500 (500) -1.67%
Finance 129,718 150,100 73,437 164,025 13,925 9.28%
Computer 22,622 15,300 11,273 25,800 10,500 68.63%
Audit 7,141 15,120 9,167 12,500 (2,620) - 17.33%
Insurance 165,725 151,300 72,862 167,795 16,495 10.90%
Assessor 16,735 17,000 0 17,000 0 0.00%
Engineering 29,421 30,000 6,571 30,000 0 0.00%
Community Development 94,700 104,430 45,901 112,700 8,270 7.92%
Police 745,617 788,485 384,492 814,025 25,540 3.24%
Fire 83,019 82,000 78,090 81,105 (895) -1.09%
Building Inspector 99,116 88,590 48,024 106,830 18,240 20.59%
Animal Control 970 925 0 900 (25) -2.70%
Street Maintenance 66,976 34,205 10,718 31,725 (2,480) -7.25%
Snow /Ice Removal 58,259 69,750 31,179 70,800 1,050 1.51%
Street Lighting 45,438 45,000 17,805 46,000 1,000 2.22%
Tree & Weed 33,251 28,925 13,150 28,925 0 0.00%
Transfer to Garbage Utility 65,000 75,000 0 75,000 0 0.00% )
Recreation 74,003 110,040 20,615 115,595 5,555 5.05%
Contingency 5,396 12,000 3,356 40,000 28,000 233.33%
Transfer Out 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total Expenditures 2,143,413 2,225,195 1,012,763 2,374,525 149,330 6.71%
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (21,300) 1 (824,198) 21
11/29/00 Page 2 Proposed 2001 Budget Overview.xls
City of Oak Park Heights
Proposed Budget Summary 2001
Utility Fund
Percent
1999 2000 Received 2001 Increase Increase
Actual Budgeted 1 -1 thru 6 -30 -00 Proposed (Decrease) (Decrease)
Revenues:
Assessments- Principal & Interest 798 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Interest 27,060 26,000 11,989 20,000 (6,000) - 23.08%
Water:
Permits 1,545 750 450 750 0 0.00%
Customer Collections 285,056 275,000 130,942 315,000 40,000 14.55%
Meters 10,930 20,000 3,795 15,000 (5,000) - 25.00%
Other Services (Hydrant Use) 1,899 1,200 440 1,200 0 0.00%
Transfer In From Other Fund 0 1,738 0 0 (1,738) - 100.00%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total Water 299,430 298,688 135,627 331,950 33,262 11.14%
Sewer:
Permits 615 750 150 700 (50) -6.67%
Customer Collections 354,619 412,000 174,792 407,000 (5,000) -1.21%
Transfer In From Other Fund 0 1,737 0 0 (1,737) - 100.00%
Miscellaneous 619 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total Sewer 355,853 414,487 174,942 407,700 (6,787) -1.64%
Storm Sewer:
Customer Collections 13,628 77,000 27,758 58,000 (19,000) - 24.68%
Sanitation & Waste:
Customer Collections 71,584 87,000 39,925 100,340 13,340 15.33%
Transfer in from General Fund 65,000 75,000 0 75,000 0 0.00% `
Total Sanitation & Waste 136,584 162,000 39,925 175,340 13,340 8.23% )
Total Revenues 833,353 978,175 390,241 992,990 14,815 1.51%
11/29/00 Page 3 Proposed 2001 Budget Overview.xls
City of Oak Park Heights
Proposed Budget Summary 2001
Utility Fund
Percent
1999 2000 Expended 2001 Increase Increase
Actual Budgeted 1 -1 thru 6 -30 -00 Proposed (Decrease) (Decrease)
Expenditures:
Water:
Personal Services 95,632 81,700 41,399 106,650 24,950 30.54%
Contractual Services 45,272 46,400 9,506 55,700 9,300 20.04%
Materials & Supplies 7,018 17,700 11,265 18,000 300 1.69%
Fixed Charges 17,116 37,455 12,978 43,225 5,770 15.41%
Capital Outlay 128 2,500 0 3,100 600 24.00%
Other Expenses 98,243 107,770 15,485 105,000 (2,770) -2.57%
Total Water 263,409 293,525 90,633 331,675 38,150 13.00%
Sewer:
Personal Services 106,749 80,700 43,287 71,880 (8,820) - 10.93%
Contractual Services 259,329 236,850 131,519 270,850 34,000 14.36%
Materials & Supplies 1,600 4,300 1,007 3,850 (450) - 10.47%
Fixed Charges 16,425 34,115 12,404 31,930 (2,185) -6.40%
Capital Outlay 128 1,250 0 5,250 4,000 320.00%
Other Expenses 97,762 95,300 22,000 94,360 (940) -0.99%
Total Sewer 481,993 452,515 210,217 478,120 25,605 5.66%
Storm Sewer:
Personal Services 331 25,950 10,261 23,875 (2,075) -8.00%
Contractual Services 753 21,250 9,452 18,600 (2,650) - 12.47%
Materials & Supplies 251 1,475 410 1,675 200 13.56%
Fixed Charges 14 8,825 2,521 7,965 (860) -9.75%
Capital Outlay 0 1,750 0 0 (1,750) - 100.00% \
Other Expenses 0 10,750 5,375 5,300 (5,450) - 50.70% }
Total Storm Sewer 1,349 70,000 28,019 57,415 (12,585) - 17.98%
Sanitation & Waste:
Personal Services 500 0 500 0 0 0.00%
Contractual Services 146,947 146,800 63,889 158,700 11,900 8.11%
Materials & Supplies 82 0 109 100 100 100.00%
Other Expenses 21,680 15,280 7,640 16,540 1,260 8.25%
Total Sanitation & Waste 169,209 162,080 72,138 175,340 13,260 8.18%
Total Expenditures 915,960 978,120 401,007 1,042,550 64,430 6.59%
11/29/00 Page 4 Proposed 2001 Budget Overview.xls
PUBLIC WORKS - SNOW REMOVAL
1998 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001
FUND ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED EXPENDED REQUESTED AUTHORIZED
PERSONNEL SERVICES
101 -42020 -101 SALARIES OF REGULAR EMPLOYEES $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 $0
TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 $0
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
101 -42020 -212 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $49,211 $57,652 $63,250 $30,390 $42,480 $0
TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $49,211 $57,652 $63,250 $30,390 $42,480 $0 `
MATERIAL & SUPPLIES 1
101 -42020 -311 OTHER MATERIAL & SUPPLIES $0 $606 $2,500 $608 $3,500 $0
TOTAL MATERIAL & SUPPLIES $0 $606 $2,500 $608 $3,500 $0
FIXED CHARGES
101 - 42020 -403 RENT OF EQUIPMENT $0 $0 $0 $181 $18,000 $0
101 - 42020 -409 PERA CONTRIBUTION $0 $0 $0 $0 $130 $0
101 - 42020 -410 FICA CONTRIBUTION $0 $0 $0 $0 $190 $0
TOTAL FIXED CHARGES $0 $0 $0 $181 $18,320 $0
CAPITAL OUTLAY
101 -42020 -505 MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT $0 $0 $4,000 $0 $4,000 $0
TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $0 $0 $4,000 $0 $4,000 $0
TOTAL SNOW REMOVAL $49,211 $58,258 $69,750 $31,179 $70,800 $0
2001 PRELIMINARY BUDGET PAGE 53
� r
City of Oak Park Heig
Memo
November 6, 2000
To: Tom Melena, City Administrator
From: Judy Holst, Deputy Clerk/Finance Director
Re: General Fund Balance History
Per you request on fund balance history for the general fund, I have reviewed the fund starting
with 1996.
City policy on fund balance has been to designate 50% of the tax levy to cash flow and 15% of
the ensuing years budget to contingency. We also have designations for contingent employee
benefits, capital improvements, and employee insurance benefits. The contingent employee
benefits are vacation, severance and sick time. The capital improvements are the excess TIF
payments made in prior years which were designated to be transferred to the Street
Reconstruction Fund. The funds were transferred up until 1997, but are now being held as a
designation and should be transferred this year. The employee insurance benefits are 20% of the
maximum amount of health insurance the city could pay.
General Fund Balances
1996 1997 1998 1999
Cash Flow (50% of Levy) 724,000 760,000 702,000 733,000
Contingent Employee Benefits 197,308 120,814 101,617 135,153
General Contingency (15% of
Ensuing Year Budget) 245,823 308,000 326,000 285,526
Capital Improvements (Excess TI F) 72,962 0 6,204 12,011
Employee Insurance (20% of Maximum) 0 0 25,091 25,391
Ensuing Year Budget Deficit 61,000 0 0 0
Comp Plan 11,500 0 0 0
Undesignated 0 54,477 23,127 0
Total Unreserved Fund Balance 1,312,593 1,243,291 1,184,039 1,191,081
15% Ensuing Year Operating Budget 310,138 307,917 326,282 337,979
Over (Under) 15% Contingency (64,315) 83 (282) (52,453)
In 1996 the General Fund 15% contingency was approximately $64,000 short. This was an
anticipated reduction due to the fact that the Council decided not to put the debt levy on the tax
� n
September 28, 2000
General Fund Balance History Memo
Page 2
rolls for the 1995 bonds. We had the reduction in the contingency fund balance but did have a
designation for a deficit in the ensuing years budget. This deficit was made up for in 1997.
The 1997 fund balances were right on target. We did have an undesignated fund balance (extra)
of $54,477. This was a result of an increase in actual revenues received over budgeted revenues
for that year.
In 1996 we paid approximately $140,000 in costs for the Junker lawsuit. In 1997 the Council
decided to repay fund balance for the lawsuit costs effective January 1, 1998. The fees were to
be charged to the residents over a period of 5 years. The first year of collection was used to
cover expenditures for 1998 and was not designated to repay fund balance. Commercial and
large apartments were exempt from the fees as they paid a settlement over and above the City
settlement. The City collects between $27,000 and $28,000 per year that is now being applied to
fund balance.
In 1998 fund balances were pretty much on target. The contingency fund balance was at 15%
and cash flow at 50 %. We did have an undesignated fund balance of $23,127. This was a result
of the Junker lawsuit fees.
In 1999 the 15% contingency was short $53,000. This was a result of actual revenues being
under budgeted revenues and actual expenditures being over budgeted expenditures. The
monies collected in the years 2000, 2001, and 2002 for the Junker lawsuit will more than
compensate for the shortfall in 1999.
� r
City Ofoak OWN- Heights
Memow
November 30, 2000
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Judy Hoist, Deputy Clerk/Finance Director
Re: Utility Update
In February 2000 Springsted Inc. completed a water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer
utility rate study for the City. Springsted comprised a 5 -year plan for rate increases based
on projected revenues and expenditures through 2005. The projections for the water
department include funding of 2 new wells and the looping system. The projections for
the sewer system include recovering the deficit we have been experiencing and building
sufficient revenues to bring this department to where it is operating in the black again.
Transferring the depreciation on both the water and sewer systems to the
Renewal/Replacement Fund was also taken into consideration.
The Springsted utility rate study points out the shortage in the Sewer Fund and takes
steps to gradually decrease this shortage over 5 years. As of April 1, 2000 Council
approved a 7.75% increase in the sewer rate for the balance of 2000. The study
recommends a 6% per year increase for the next 4 years to reduce the shortage in the
Sewer Fund.
As of September 30 revenues in the Water Fund are more than anticipated for the year
2000 and expenditures are less than anticipated for the year. The Springsted study
recommends a 6% increase per year for the next 4 years based on the assumption the City
will be bonding for 2 new wells and a looping system. This rate increase may or may not
be appropriate based on Council action regarding the wells and looping system.
The study will be updated annually for any changes in projections. Any increase in rates
will have to be approved by Council.
I anticipate the Sanitation Department to be $5,000 to $9,000 short of revenues out of a
$162,000 budget for the year 2000. This shortage can be taken out of the unallocated
interest the entire utility fund collects for the year. I do not recommend this practice on a
continuing basis. The rates will either have to be increased or the subsidy from the
General Fund will have to be increased in the future. I anticipate we will have a deficit
for the year 2001 also. I would recommend amending the proposed budget to increase
the subsidy from the General Fund to the Sanitation Fund by $8,000. The General Fund
contingency could be reduced by $8,000 and the General Fund transfer increased by
$8,000.
Attached to this memo is a comparison of utility rates with other cities in our area.
November 30, 2000 Water Rate Survey
Example
Per 1,000 Gallons Quarterly Bill
Minimum Charge Over Minumum 15,000 Gal.
Bayport $10.00/1,000 $2.50/1,000 $45.00
Lake Elmo $15.00/2,000 $1.50/1,000 $34.50
Mahtomedi $5.25 Base Fee $1.71/1000 $30.90
No. St. Paul (as of 1 -1 -01) $14.25 Base Fee $1.10 1,000 to 15,000 $30.75
$1.31 16,000 to 75,000
$1.47 76,000 to 150,000
$1.63 over 150,000
Oakdale $7.50 Base Fee $1.04 up to 35,000 $23.10
$1.12 36,000 to 50,000
$1.21 over 50,000
Oak Park Heights $22.50/15,000 $1.17 16,000 to 48,000 $22.50
$1.47 49,000 to 99,000
$1.76 over $99,000
St. Paul $19.78/10,000 $1.58/1,000 $27.68
St. Paul Park (as of 1 -1 -01) $17.72/10,000 $1.62/1,000 $25.82
Stillwater (as of 1 -1 -01) $13.50/10,000 $1.40/1,000 $20.50
White Bear Lake $11.23/10,000 $1.12/1,000 $16.83
Woodbury $8.30/8,000 $.72 up to 30,000 $13.34
$.97 over 30,000
November 30, 2000 Sewer Rate Survey
Example
Per 1,000 Gal. Water Quarterly Bill
Minumum Charge Used Over Minumum 15,000 Gal.
Bayport $10.00/1,000 $2.75/1,000 $48.50
Lake Elmo none
Mahtomedi $4.46 Base Fee $2.34/1,000 $39.56
No. St. Paul $50.79 Base Fee $.71 1,000 to 15,000 $61.44
$.87 16,000 to 75,000
$1.03 76,000 to 150,000
$1.19 over 150,000
Oakdale $15.00 Base Fee $2.14/1,000 $47.10
Oak Park Heights $37.35/15,000 $2.32/1,000 $37.35
St. Paul $3.24 to 75,000 $48.60
$3.20 76,000 to 299,000
$3.12 300,000 to 324,000
St. Paul Park (as of 1 -1 -01) $25.40/10,000 $1.82/1,000 $34.50
Stillwater (as of 1 -1 -01) $39.00/10,000 $2.10/1,000 $49.50
White Bear Lake $16.80/6,000 $2.81/1,000 $42.09
Woodbury Residential Area A
$26.40/8,000 $1.62/1,000 $37.74
Residential Area B
$28.40/8,000 $1.62/1,000 $39.74
Commercial Area A
$29.70/9,000 $1.62/1,000 $39.42
Commercial Area B
$31.92/9,000 $1.62/1,000 $41.64
Novemuer 30, 2000 Garbage Rate Survey
Bayport Senior $7.19 /mo.
30 Gallon $9.28/mo
60 Gallon $11.14/mo.
90 Gallon $13.69/mo.
Lake Elmo None - Private Hauler
Mahtomedi None - Private Hauler
No. St. Paul None - Private Hauler
Oakdale None - Private Hauler
Oak Park Heights Senior $5.75/mo.
35 Gallon $6.05 /mo.
65 Gallon $7.10 /mo.
95 Gallon $8.70 /mo.
St. Paul None - Private Hauler
St. Paul Park None - Private Hauler
Stillwater Senior $9.00 /mo.
30 Gallon $11.45 /mo.
60 Gallon $13.24/mo.
90 Gallon $15.10/mo.
White Bear Lake Senior $8.00 /mo.
30 Gallon $9.50 /mo
60 Gallon $10.60 /mo.
90 Gallon $12.15/mo.
Additional $2.00 per can
Woodbury None - Private Hauler
elo-
Pay 2001 Proposed Taxes
Tax Lew. Tax Rates. Market Values
The City's proposed tax levy increased 10.3% this year, but will maintain approximately
the same tax capacity rate as the year 2000. The increase in tax capacity rate is 0.038%
over the year 2000. This is also about the same tax rate as it was in 1996. If Council
wishes to have the same tax rate as 2000, the levy will have to be reduced by $3,000.
Reducing the expenditure budget for General Fund Contingency would offset this
reduction by $3,000.
Residents will see an increase in tax due to the increase in market values. Market values
countywide increased by 12 %. The average citywide increase was 7.9 %. This increase
is attributable to new construction and inflationary growth on existing property.
There was no change in the maximum Education Homestead Credit this year, which also
contributes to a modest increase in tax.
Class Rates
The class rate formula did not change this year. Residential homestead class rates had
been decreasing in recent years, contributing to tax reductions or modest increases.
1997 first 72,000 @ 1.00 %, remainder @ 2%
1998 first 75,000 @ 1.00 %, remainder @ 1.85%
1999 first 75,000 @ 1.00 %, remainder @ 1.70%
2000 first 76,000 @ 1.00 %, remainder @ 1.65%
2001 first 76,000 @ 1.00 %, remainder @ 1.65%
Fiscal Disparities
In 1971, the state of Minnesota instituted a program of commercial- industrial tax base
sharing within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, which is referred to as the fiscal
disparities program. This program was implemented in 1975 and includes Anoka,
Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington counties. The purpose of the
program is to improve equity in the distribution of fiscal resources and promote regional
planning objectives. The fiscal disparities law requires each taxing jurisdiction to
contribute 40% of the growth in its commercial- industrial property tax base since the
1971 assessment to an areawide pool. The distribution of the net tax capacity from the
areawide tax base is determined by a distribution index based up relative fiscal capacity.
Fiscal capacity is defined as equalized market value per capita.
We contribute more to the pool than we receive therefore the properties within our
jurisdiction will pay more tax than the amount levied. In the year 2001 our contribution
will increase $138,513 or 17% over the year 2000 while our distribution will only
increase $45,448 or 15% over the year 2000.
Despite being a net loser in the fiscal disparities pool, the City has been able to maintain
the same tax capacity rate as in 2000.
WASHINGTON COUNT �
.- AUDITOR- TREASURER'S OFFICE
14949 62ND STREET NORTH P.O. BOX 6 - STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 5508'0006 aVG I 1998 / I
��r.yp06P
FAX: (651) 430 -6178
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL: (651) 430 -6195 EMAIL: HeImJ @co.washingtoti.mn.us
Administration Elections Finance- Taxation Land Records
430 -6181 430 -6188 430 -6175 430 -6183
August 3, 1998
Judy Hoist
Finance Director
City of Oak Park Heights
14168 57`" Street North - P.O. Box 2007
Oak Park Heights, MN 55082
Judy:
The Auditor - Treasurer's Office has processed 2 annexations this year involving property annexed from
Baytown to Oak Park Heights. Both annexations provided for a phase in of the tax rate over 6 years, but
did not give a specific schedule for accomplishing this. I came up with one that would phase in the rate
from Baytown's Pay 98 tax rate to Oak Park Heights' Pay 98 tax rate in approximately even increments
over 6 years. I would like you to review it and see if what I came up with is what the city intended:
Baytown Pay 1998 Tax Rate 5.479%
Oak Park Heights Pay 1998 Tax Rate 26.363%
Baytown rate as a % of Oak Park Heights 21%
Annual % increase to reach 100% in 6 years 13%
Proposed Tax Rate Phase in schedule: 1999 34%
2000 47%
2001 60%
2002 74%
2003 87%
2004 100%
I thought it might also be helpful to go over how this phase in affects the tax rate calculations. Basically,
the value of the parcels in the annexation area is multiplied by the phase in percentage to arrive at an
adjusted value. The adjusted value is used to calculate the tax rate for all funds except debt. The tax rate
is then multiplied by the adjustment factor to come up with the tax rate for the annexation area parcels.
This adjustment is only done for non -debt funds; there is no reduction for debt levies. I have enclosed a
spreadsheet which gives an example of the calculations (values are hypothetical).
I hope this isn't too confusing! Please give me a call if you have any questions, or if you would like to
make a change to the phase in schedule.
Sincerely,
Joanne Helm
Property Management Program Coordinator
LICENSE CENTERS: Forest Lake 430 -8280 • Stillwater 430 -6176 • Woodbury 731 -5780
Washington County does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, and handicapped status in employment or the provision of services.
V
Impact of Phase in of Tax Rate due to Annexation
on Tax Rate Calculation
Example of impact on values
Values are compiled by "unique taxing area" and adjusments
are made for annexation phase ins.
Oak Park Heights now has 7 "unique taxing areas" due to
the combination of watershed districts, storm sewer district, and
annexation tax rate phase ins:
Local Pay 1999 Adjusted
Tax Annexation Tax
District Code Capacity Adjustment Capacity
(A) x (B)
(A) (8) (c)
6101 Oak Park Heights 1,910,676 100% 1,910,676
6102 Oak Park Heights/VBWS 18,610 100% 18,610
6103 Oak Park Heights•Stm Swr 048.354 100% 3,048,354
6104 Oak Park Heights /BCWS 418,926 100% 418,926
6105 Oak Park Heights Annx/VBWS 101,702 34% 34,564
6106 Oak Park Heights Annx/BCWS 37,572 34% 12,769
6107 Oak Park Heights Annx 5,000 34% 1,699
City Total 5,540,840 5,-145,598
(A) is used to calculate the tax rate for debt funds
(C) is used to calculate the tax rate for all funds
except debt
Example of Tax Rate Calculation:
% of fund Fiscal Local Tax Pay 1999 Annexation
Fund Levy to total Disparities Levy Value Rate Annexation Area
(E) x FD$ debt: (A) Adjustment Tax Rate
total (D) - (F) all other: (C) (G) I (H) nondebt: (B) (1) x (J)
(D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (1) (J) (K)
General $1,440,637 94.5271% $73,367 $1,367,270 5.145, 8 25.108% 34% 8.533%
Storm Sewer $25,000 1.6404% $1,273 $23,727 3.448.354 0.778%
Debt $58,410 3.8326% $2,975 $55,435 5,540.840 1.000% 100% 1.000%
Total $1,524,047 100.0000% $77,615 $1,446,432 26.886% 9.533%
Class Rate Schedule
Property Type Payable Payable
1999 2000
Residential Homestead:
<S76,000' 1.00% 1.00%
>$76,000 1.70 1.65
Residential Non - homestead:
Single unit:
<S76,000' 1.25 1.20
>$76,000 1.70 1.65
2 -3 unit and undeveloped land 1.70 1.65
Market -rate Apartments:
Regular 2.50 2.40
Small City 2.15 2.15
Low- income Apartments:
Title II
Farmer's Home Administration
New Class 4d 1.00 1.00
Commercial /Industrial /Public Utility:
<$150,0002 2.45 2.40
>$150,000 3.50 3.40
Seasonal Recreational Commercial:
Homestead resorts (lc) 1.00 1.00
Seasonal resorts (4c) 1.80 1.65
Seasonal Recreational Residential:
<$76,000' 1.25 1.20
>$76,000 2.20 1.65
Disabled Homestead ( <$32,000) 0.45 0.45
Agricultural Land & Buildings:
Homestead:
<$115,000 0.35 0.35
$115,000 - $600,000:
<320 acres 0.80 0.80
>320 acres 1.25 0.80
>$600,000:
<320 acres 0.80 1.20
>320 acres 1.25 1.20
Non- homestead 1.25 1.20
Education Homestead Credit:
Rate 66.2% 83%
Maximum $320 $390
Education Agricultural Credit:
Homestead - 54%
Nonhomestead - 50%
'First tier limit was $72,000 for payable 1997, $75,000 for payable 1998 and 1999.
'First tier limit was $100,000 for payable 1997.
2001 Proposed Tax Calculation Rates by Governmental Entity
The total tax capacity rate for a property in Oak Park Heights is comprised of several
units of government; County, City, School District 834 and other Special Taxing
Districts. All entities are proposing no significant increase or a decrease in the tax
capacity rate for their district. The major reason for a tax increase is the increase in
market value. The following is a schedule of tax capacity rate comparisons for year 2000
and 2001.
2000 2001
County tax rate 28.129% 26.052%
City tax rate 23.620% 23.658%
School District 834 tax rate 50.695% 50.566%
Special Taxing Districts tax rate 6.609% 6.564%
Total Tax Capacity Rate 109.053% 106.840%
Special Tasting Dist.
6%
County
24%
;.'i' 1 dd�:d'" t:. .aa;r .•al!;ak'a:,ri
School Dist. 83
48%
ii0l s1'ilij a,I:i
T" l:OI I1 i!'iF
'1,Ll viii .ii i;iji 'i'f:l ±i:i:i:� city
5i�'.i��'{t ±.;.i•j'.`Ii!a "G:r 22%
Example of Property Tax Impact - Total General and Debt Levy
Actual Proposed
2000 2001
Gross Levy 1,519,783 1,668,038
Less State Aids (79,583) (79,603)
Certified Levy 1,440,200 1,588,435
Less FD (70,515) (80,831)
Local Levy 1,369,685 1,507,604
Taxable Value 5,793,637 6,369,021
Tax Rate 0.2362 0.23658
Example - residential home with 0% market value increase.
2000 - $119,300 2001 - $119,300
1st 76,000 @ 1% 760.00 1st 76,000 @ 1% 760.00
1.65% over 76,000 714.45 1.65% over 76,000 714.45
Tax Capacity 1,474.45 Tax Capacity 1,474.45
x Tax Rate 0.2362 x Tax Rate 0.23658
Total Tax 348.27 Total Tax 348.83
Increase in Tax 0.16% 0.56
The impact the change in tax rate has on the taxes is .16%
Example of Property Tax Impact - Total General and Debt Levy
Actual Proposed
2000 2001
Gross Levy 1,519,783 1,668,038
Less State Aids (79,583) (79,603)
Certified Levy 1,440,200 1,588,435
Less FD (70,515) (80,831)
Local Levy 1,369,685 1,507,604
Taxable Value 5,793,637 6,369,021
Tax Rate 0.2362 0.23658
Example - residential home with increase in market value from $119,300 to $129,400. 8.5% market value increase.
2000 - $119,300 2001 - $129,400
1st 76,000 @ 1% 760.00 1st 76,000 @ 1% 760.00
1.65% over 76,000 714.45 1.65% over 76,000 881.10
Tax Capacity 1,474.45 Tax Capacity 1,641.10
x Tax Rate 0.2362 x Tax Rate 0.23658
Total Tax 348.27 Total Tax 388.25
Increase in Tax 11.48% 39.99
The impact the change in market value has on the taxes is 11.32%
Property Class(es):
RESIDENTIAL - HOMESTEAD Taxable Market Value for Taxes Payable in 2000: 119,300
Taxable Market Value for Taxes Payable in 2001: 129,400
Addresses for ( (2) (3) (4) Budget Hearing
2000 Increase or Increase or Proposed 2001
Correspondence Property Tax Decrease Due to Decrease Due to Property Tax Dates and Locations
Spending Other Factors
WASHINGTON COUNTY $ 416.80 $ 31.32 $ 18.53-$ 429.59 BOARD ROOM
14949 62ND ST N PO BOX 6 DECEMBER 7, 2000
STILLWATER, MN 55082 7 :00 PM
651 - 430 -6175
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS 348.16 37.99 2.08 388.23 OAK PARK CITY HALL
14168 OAK PARK BLV N 14168 OAK PARK BLV N
OAK PARK HGTS, MN 55082 7:00 PM DEC.4, 2000
651 - 439 -4439
School District: 0834
1875 GREELEY ST CENTRAL SVC BUILDING
STILLWATER, MN 55082 1875 S GREELEY
651 - 351 -8321 7:00 PM DEC. 14. 2000
State determined levy: 129.63 0.00 27.23 156.86
Voter approved levies: 305.71 11.33 5.21 322.25
Other Incal I _vi _S : 73.96 1824 40.84 133.04 l
SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICTS l
METRO. SPECIAL TAX DISTS: 84.39 8.49 0.74 93.62 6 :00 PM DECEMBER 6, 2000
MEARS PARK CENTRE MEARS PARK CENTRE
230 EAST FIFTH STREET 230 EAST FIFTH STREET
ST. PAUL, MN 55101 ST. PAUL, MN 55101
651 - 602 -1446
Other Spec. Tax Districts: 11.35 1.48 0.42- 12.41 NO MEETING REQUIRED
Tax Increment Tax: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NO MEETING REQUIRED
Fiscal Disparity Tax: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NO MEETING REQUIRED
Total: $ 1,370.00 $ 108.85 $ 57.15 $ 1,536.00
Percent change (proposed 2001
total tax over 2000 total tax): _ 12.1%