HomeMy WebLinkAboutTNT Hearing Documents n
City of Oak Park Heights
2009 Annual Budget
Page 1
2009 Annual Budget
Table of Contents
City Officials 3
Budget Process 4
General Fund Revenues 6
General Fund Expenditures 8
Tax Levies, Tax Capacity and Tax Capacity Rate 10
Anticipated Changes to Preliminary Budget 12
Utility Fund Revenues and Expenditures 15
Debt Service Funds 16
Budgeted Projects Fund 17
Page 2
Oak Park Heights City Officials
Position Term Expires
Mayor David Beaudet 12/31/2008
Councilmember Les Abrahamson 12/31/2010
Councilmember Jack Doerr 12/31/2008
Councilmember Mary McComber 12/31/2008
Councilmember Mark Swenson 12/31/2010
Citv Staff
Eric A. Johnson — City Administrator
Judy Holst — Finance Director
Brian DeRosier — Police Chief
Tom Ozzello— Public Works Director
David Mol — City Auditor
Mark Vierling — City Attorney
Dennis Postler — City Engineer
Page 3
n
Budget Process
The annual budget process is a thorough review of all City revenues and expenditures for
the current and upcoming year. There are many uncontrollable factors the City must
comply with that affect both the amount of revenues the City receives and the amount the
City must expend in order to provide the current level of services. There are also numerous
unfunded mandates the City must comply with, such as:
Revenues
• Tax exempt property — City must still maintain police /fire protection, streets, etc.
• Limitations of local special assessments.
• Local improvement feasibility reports requirements.
• Limitation of maximum penalties and fines for ordinance violations.
• Truth in taxation requirements.
• Limitation on fees for licenses, i.e. off -sale and Sunday on -sale liquor, fireworks.
Expenditures
• Pay equity, implementation and reporting.
• Worker's compensation.
• Public pensions.
• Continuation of health and life insurance coverage.
• Prevailing wages paid on public contracts.
• Veterans preference.
• Mandatory binding arbitration for employee classes such as police and
firefighters.
• Various public safety requirements i.e. Peace officer standards and training,
confined space entry, suspense file reduction, tobacco compliance checks.
• Building code administration and limits to permit fees for minor improvements.
• Numerous environment requirements i.e., wastewater treatment standards
Wetland Conservation Act, recycling programs, waste collection practices,
drinking water standards, surface water management plans, Federal Clean Water
Act, Wastewater permit requirements, and storing of hazardous substances
reporting.
• Planning requirements for land use, zoning, building codes.
• Comprehensive plan updates.
• Conducting elections including paying judges, absentee ballots and recounts.
• Record keeping requirements for Data Practices Act and retention schedules.
• Competitive bidding.
• Open Meeting Law notices, agendas and minutes.
• Various financial reporting requirements, i.e. budget, audit reports, TIF reports,
Building Inspection fee reporting, business subsidy reports, outstanding debt
reports, Continuing Disclosure reports.
Page 4
Budget Process
The City Council and staff engage in a thorough budget process each year in order to
present a fair and balanced budget for the citizens of Oak Park Heights.
1. The annual budget process commences in July of each year with the Finance Director
distributing budget worksheets to the department heads for completion. The City
Council is requested to inform the Finance Director of any special requests they may
have for the budget.
2. The department heads determine the anticipated expenditures and budget requests for
the upcoming year. These requests are submitted to the Finance Director and
Administrator for review by the end of July.
3. The Finance Director compiles a draft of the preliminary budget and submits it to the
City Council.
4. The City Council schedules workshops for discussion and review of the preliminary
budget. There are usually 2 to 3 workshops held during the month of August and the
first week in September. All workshops are public meetings and the public is welcome
to attend.
5. After all input and requests have been considered, the Finance Director makes revisions
to the preliminary budget and submits it to Council for approval of the proposed budget
and tax levy. Per Minnesota State Statute this must be completed and certified to the
County no later than September 15.
6. The City Council sets the dates for the initial Truth in Taxation public hearing and the
date for the continuation hearing. The maximum allowable levy for 2009 to qualify for
exemption from the Truth in Taxation public hearing is 6.1943% increase over 2008.
The maximum increase in levy for the City to qualify for exemption is $3,576,072. The
City did not qualify for exemption from the TNT public hearing requirement. The dates
must be certified to the County no later than September 15.
7. Council conducts additional workshops to discuss any additional changes to the budget
due to updated revenue and/or expenditure information, i.e. insurance rates, contract
fees, etc.
8. The initial 2009 Truth in Taxation hearing is held. The City must announce prior to
adjournment of the initial hearing the date, time and place of a continuation hearing, if a
continuation hearing is needed, or the date, time and place of a subsequent hearing to
adopt the final tax levy and budget.
9. The final budget and levy must be certified to the County by December 29, 2008 and to
the Minnesota Department of Revenue after the levy adoption hearing is held.
Page 5
General Fund Revenues
An important change the City Council and the residents of Oak Park Heights should be
aware of is the trend towards relying more on the tax levy for the City's source of revenue.
In 2001 the tax levy consisted of 66.3% of the City's revenue source. The proposed tax
levy for 2009 is 83.3% of the City's revenue source. There are several factors that
contribute to this trend. The intergovernmental revenue has decreased from 7.8% to 3.1%
of revenues in 2008. This was due to the discontinuation of HACA in 2002, Local
Government Aid cuts in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006, and the discontinuation of the
recycling grant from Washington County in 2004. There is an increase in
intergovernmental revenue in 2009 due to the City receiving a new Utility Transition aid for
the change in market value calculation for public utilities. The City also reduced the utility
fund administration fee from 10% to 7% in 2007.
The State has also limited the ability of Cities to increase fees for certain services, i.e.
Sunday on -sale license fees, sale of fireworks fees, and permit fees for minor
improvements.
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Taxes 66.3% 74.6% 70.8% 72.3% 71.2% 77.0% 80.8% 85.0% 83.3%
Licenses /Permits 9.3% 7.4% 11.9% 11.5% 11.7% 9.7% 4.6% 4.6% 3.0%
Fines and Forfeits 2.8% 2.6% 2.2% 2.9% 2.2% 2.6% 1.9% 1.8% 1.7%
Intergovernmental Revenue 7.8% 3.3% 3.0% 2.7% 3.3% 3.3% 3.1% 2.8% 6.3%
Charges for Services 8.6% 7.6% 8.0% 5.7% 6.9% 2.5% 3.9% 1.8% 1.7%
Other Revenue 5.2% 4.5% 4.1% 4.9% 4.7% 4.9% 5.7% 4.0% 4.0%
General Fund Revenues
100.00 % - :;:. _
90.00
.. ku• nR• � .6. r '"F ✓.:tL, .�p.: :a.F r . .`'#@.�. ra
/0
80.00
70.00 % - , : &. ®Taxes
60.00% ;s« _ >' p. ;. nc. ELicenseslPermits
50.00 _° :, Pa =�:'��t .: i' ,at` r a` K to-
/o ry ,:: �; fir. ..; ❑Fines &Forfeits
40.00° _
/o ❑Intergovernmental
30.00 % - 4 Revenue
EChargesfor
20.00° ,. PA Services
/o"i,�:".s`i5T
®Other Revenue
N ;x eta yt.. .'•- tQ,t ay �, K �:. ' A #", ..,.;�• �,..
10.00 % -
0.00%
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Page 6
The overall 2009 proposed revenue budget reflects an increase of $130,454 or 3.3% over
the 2008 revenue budget.
General Fund Revenue Summary
2008 2009 % Increase
Budget Budget (Decrease)
Taxes $3,387,480 $3,428,365 1.2%
Special Assessments $0 $0 .0%
Business Licenses - Permits $31,915 $31,520 (1.2 %)
Non - Business Licenses - Permits $152,375 $92,875 (39.0 %)
Fines & Forfeits $70,500 $70,500 .0%
Intergovernmental Revenues $111,056 $259,890 134.0%
Charges for Services $72,740 $70,400 (3.2 %)
Miscellaneous Revenues $160,000 $162,970 1.9%
Total Revenues $3,986,066 $4,116,520 3.3%
The chart below shows the anticipated revenues for budget year 2009.
2009
Revenue Distribution Distribution
Intergovernmental Charges brServices ®Taxes
Revenues 1'7%
F ines & Forfeits 8.3%
M iscel lan eou s Reven Lies EBusiness Licenses- Permits
1.7%
4.0%
QNon- Business Licenses -
Non- Business Licenses- Permits
Permks
2.3% [3Fines & Forfeits
Business L icen ses-
Permks Mintergoverrinental Revenues
0.8%
®Charges for Services
EMiscellaneors Revenues
Taxes
83.3%
While the City of Oak Park Heights is in good financial condition, the majority of our long-
term difficulties will be from outside sources. With current economic conditions, the City
is faced with the possibility of State Aid cuts after the budget and tax levy has been
certified to the County and State.
Page 7
n
General Fund Expenditures
The 2009 budget for expenditures is $4,127,980; which reflects in a 3.6% increase over the
2008 expenditure budget.
The chart below shows the expenditures for years 2001 through 2009. For the year 2009,
General Government accounts for 28.7% of all expenditures. Public Safety accounts for
33.2% of all expenditures. Other expenditures, which include financing of capital projects,
account for 38.1% of all expenditures.
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
General Government 41.1% 38.1% 34.8% 32.2% 29.5% 31.7% 31.2% 28.7% 28.7%
Public Safety 39.8% 42.6% 45.0% 44.6% 40.6% 39.8% 36.9% 34.0% 33.2%
Public Works 7.0% 5.7% 7.1% 6.8% 6.2% 6.1% 6.0% 6.7% 6.9%
Parks 5.1% 3.7% 4.2% 3.5% 3.5% 3.6% 4.3% 4.5% 4.4%
Sanitation 3.4% 3.8% 3.9% 3.6% 3.1% 3.0% 2.4% 4.1% 4.3%
Other Expenditures 3.6% 6.1% 5.0% 9.3% 17.1% 15.8% 19.2% 22.0% 22.5%
General Fund Expenditures
- 100.0%
®Ge neral
80.0%
Government
nPublic Safety
70.0°
60.0 " /0
[]Public Works
50.0% `
�g ❑Parks
40.0%
30.0% ■Sa nitation
t' 20.0% NOther
10.00/0 Expenditures
0.0%
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget
2001 2D02 2003 2004 2005 2006 2D07 2008 2009
The overall 2009 proposed expenditure budget would increase by $142,108 or 3.6% over
the 2008 budget. The main contributing factors to the budget increase are financing of
capital projects, salary increases, salary allocation changes, increase in sanitation costs and
general inflation.
Page 8
n �
General Fund Expenditure Summary
2008 2009 % Increase
Bud et Budget (Decrease)
General Government 1,142,285 1,183,325 3.6%
Public Safety 1,357,155 1,369,455 .9%
Public Works 266,900 285,420 6.9%
Parks 180,232 181,280 .6%
Sanitation 162,300 180,050 10.9%
Other Expenditures 877.000 928,450 5.9%
Total Expenditures 3,985,872 4,127,980 3.6%
The chart below shows where the City will make the majority of its expenditures in the
2009 budget year.
2009
Expenditure Distribution
Other Expenditures
22.9%
General Government
28.7% ®General Government
NPu bf c S afety
aft b6 c W orks
QPa rks
Saritation
4.4% ■Sa nkatio n
®Offer Expendkures
Parks
4.4%
Public Works
6.9% Pubic Safety
33.2%
Page 9
Tax Levies, Tax Capacity and Tax Capacity Rate
Tax Levies
The proposed payable 2009 general levy for Oak Park Heights is $3,406,865. The City also
has a general obligation debt levy in the amount of $360,000 for construction of the new
City Hall. The total levy is $3,766,865.
As seen in the chart below, the City had a 24% increase in the tax levy for 2002, 1.3%
increase for 2003, .01 % decrease for 2004, 15.1 % increase for 2005, 14.2% increase for
2006, 12.7% increase for 2007, 20.7% increase for 2008 and a proposed 11.9% increase in
the total levy for 2009.
Tax Levy
4,000,000 T
3,500, 000
3,000,000
2,500, 000 -
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Tax Capacity
The City's estimated 2009 tax capacity value is $8,988,097. This represents a 2.8%
increase in tax capacity value over 2008.
Tax capacity value is market value of the property times the class rates. Class rates are
established by the State of Minnesota and have not changed since 2002.
The current class rates for residential property is I% of market value for the first $500,000
of value and then 1.25% on the remaining value of the property — Example of a $600,000
home —
1% of first $500,000 = $5,000
1.25% of Balance ($100,000) $1,250
Total Tax Capacity $6,250
The current class rates for commercial property is 1.5% of market value for the first
$150,000 of value and then 2% on the remaining value of the property — Example of a
$600,000 commercial business —
1.5% of first $150,000 = $2,250
2% of balance ($450,000) _ $9.000
Total Tax Capacity = $11,250
Page 10
n
The chart below shows the change in Tax Capacity Values from 2001 through Proposed
2009. The change in tax capacity values from 2001 to 2002 reflects the change in class
rates established by the State beginning with the year 2002.
9,000,000
8,000,000'
7,000,000'
6,000,000.
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000, k
2,000,000 : R
1,000,000
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Tax Capacity Value 6,795,389 4,773,711 5,569,968 5,622,052 5,964,352 6,448,195 7,356,891 8,742,105 8,988,0971
Tax Capacity Rate
The City's Tax Capacity Rate for the general levy for 2008 is estimated to be 35.867% per
$1,000 of tax capacity value. This represents a decrease of 1.3% from 2008 rates. The Tax
Capacity Rate for the general obligation debt levy is 3.79 %. The total Tax Capacity Rate is
39.657 %. This is a 9.1% increase in total Tax Capacity Rate.
An increase or decrease in the amount levied for taxes combined with an increase or
decrease in market value or tax capacity value, result in the tax capacity rate changes. As
you can see in the chart below, the combination of an increased levy in 2002 along with the
class rate changes resulted in a 76% increase in tax rate for 2002. Although there was a
huge increase in tax rates, it did not result in a huge increase in actual tax. This was due to
the decrease in tax capacity values.
Tax Capacity Rates
40 IrinYR .J'.
30
20—
10•
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006 2009
®Tax Rate 23.692 41.741 35.501 34,515 36.488 36.136 35.731 36.343 39657
The median increase in market value from 2008 to 2009 for the City is .7 %. Assuming a
.7% increase in value, the net effect in total City tax is 9.9% to 15.2% depending on the
market value of the home. A $200,000 home will experience an 11.3% or $71.94 increase
in tax. The increase in Tax Capacity Rate is due entirely to the general obligation debt
levy.
Page 11
n
Anticipated Changes to Preliminary Budget
The City discussed several changes to the revenue and expenditure budget at their
November 5, 2008 worksession. The changes suggested were due to updated information
received for 2009 revenues and expenditures.
Revenues increased $4,745. The following areas were adjusted:
1. Business Licenses - Permits decreased $1,255 due to the anticipated decrease in
licenses for businesses that have closed.
2. Other Refunds and Reimbursements increased $6,000 for estimated recycling
refunds for 2009.
With the changes discussed, the revenue budget would increase $135,199 or 3.4% over the
2008 revenue budget.
General Fund Revenue Summary
2008 2009 % Increase
Budget Budget (Decrease)
Taxes $3,387,480 $3,428,365 1.2%
Special Assessments $0 $0 .0%
Business Licenses - Permits $31,915 $30,265 (5.2 %)
Non - Business Licenses - Permits $152,375 $92,875 (39.0 %)
Fines & Forfeits $70,500 $70,500 .0%
Intergovernmental Revenues $111,056 $259,890 134.0%
Charges for Services $72,740 $70,400 (3.2 %)
Miscellaneous Revenues $160,000 $168,970 5.6%
Total Revenues $3,986,066 $4,121,265 3.4%
The chart below shows the anticipated revenues for budget year 2009 with the proposed
adjustments to the preliminary budget.
2009
Revenue Distribution ®Taxes
bib rg)vammer� I R evanues
8.3% charges
f,T% .Business Licenses Permits
Fines & Fafel6 MI scsl kneoue Revenues
1.7% at% QNon- Business Licenses-
Permits
Non Buainess2 rsesParnits QFineS 8 Forfeits
EIrtergoverrrnental Revenues
Business uaenaesPamNs
Q7% ®Charges for Services
EMiscellaneous Revenues
Tapes
832%
Page 12
Expenditures increased $19,390 in the following departments:
1. City Administration increased $1,835 for adjustment to approved salary increases.
2. General Management increased $320 for an increase in dues for Minnesota
Association of Small Cities and the Youth Service Bureau grant request.
3. Finance increased $1,785 for adjustment to approved salary increases.
4. Audit increased $1,500 for the actuarial valuation required for OPEB.
5. City Insurance decreased $2,050 for updated estimates from LMCIT for 2009
premiums.
6. Sanitation & Solid Waste increased $16,000 for possible change in recycling
vendor.
With the changes discussed, the expenditure budget would increase $161,498 or 4.1% over
the 2008 expenditure budget.
General Fund Expenditure Summary
2008 2009 % Increase
Budget Budget (Decrease)
General Government 1,142,285 1,186,715 3.9%
Public Safety 1,357,155 1,369,455 .9%
Public Works 266,900 285,420 6.9%
Parks 180,232 181,280 .6%
Sanitation 162,300 196,050 20.8%
Other Expenditures 877,000 928,450 5.9%
Total Expenditures 3,985,872 4,147,370 4.1%
The chart below shows where the City will make the majority of its expenditures in the
2009 budget year with the proposed adjustments to the preliminary budget.
2009
Expenditure Distribution
0 her Expenditures General ovemm ant
22.4% ■General Govemment
28.6%
■Public Safety
Public Works
Sanitation
4.7% OParks
Parks
■Sanitation
4.4%
■athe r E xpen dRUre s
Public Works
6.9% Public Safety
33.0%
Page 13
The 2009 Proposed budget, with the above mentioned adjustments, will require expenditure
reductions of $26,105. There are several areas of the budget that could be reduced to
balance the budget:
1. Reduce Mayor and Council - Travel, Conference Schools $11,500 for the National
League of Cities Conference.
2. Reduce Transfers to Budgeted Projects. There is $60,850 scheduled to be
transferred to Unallocated for possible costs for the Osgood Ave. Tunnel and Trail,
$50,000 for Swager Park Playground Equipment, and $15,000 for the Valley View
Park Shelter. These transfers could be reconsidered for the 2010 budget.
Utility Funds Revenues and Expenditures
Page 14
Utility Funds Revenues and Expenditures
The Water Utility Fund revenues are anticipated to increase 6.9% for the year 2009. The
increase in revenue reflects an increase in water rates and an increase in water sales due to
new construction.
Expenditures in the Water Utility Fund are anticipated to decrease .5% for the year 2009.
The decrease is due to a reduction in funds needed for current and future rehab of the water
towers and wells.
The Sewer Utility Fund revenues are anticipated to decrease 3% for the year 2009. The
decrease in revenue reflects a decrease in the estimated revenue from customer collections
for sewer service and a decrease in estimated interest earned.
Expenditures in the Sewer Utility Fund are anticipated to decrease 1.4% for the year 2009.
The decrease is due to a decrease for funds needed to purchase equipment to monitor the
water and sewer system.
The Storm Sewer Utility Fund revenues are anticipated to increase .9% for the year 2009.
The revenue increase is due to an increase in customer collections and estimated interest
earned.
Expenditures in the Storm Sewer Utility Fund are anticipated to increase 11.3% for the year
2009. The increase is due to an increase in capital purchases.
Utility Funds Revenues Summary
2008 2009 % Increase
Budizet Budget (Decrease)
Water Utility Fund $530,240 $566,980 6.9%
Sewer Utility Fund $731,200 $709,000 (3.0 %)
Storm Sewer Utility Fund $80.200 $80,950 .9%
Totals $1,341,640 $1,356,930 1.1%
Utility Fund Expenditures Summary
2008 2009 % Increase
Budget Budget (Decrease)
Water Utility Fund $660,960 $657,510 (.5 %)
Sewer Utility Fund $719,125 $708,730 (1.4 %)
Storm Sewer Utility Fund $59.935 $66.685 11.3%
Totals $1,440,020 $1,432,925 (.5 %)
Page 15
n n
Debt Service Funds
As of December 31, 2008 the City will have outstanding debt, including interest, in the
amount of $9,655,902 for the G.O. Capital Improvements Bonds of 2008.
The G.O. Capital Improvement Bonds of 2008 were issued in 2008 to provide financing for
the construction of a new City Hall. This bond is scheduled to be repaid by a General
Obligation Debt Levy. The bonds are scheduled to retire in 2028.
Page 16
.--IN,
Budgeted Projects Fund
The Budgeted Projects Fund was established to fund capital purchases for public works,
police, administration, etc. The revenues received in this fund are transfers in from the
General Fund and the Utility Fund. Revenue received for tree replacement and
occasionally revenue received as donations are also deposited in this fund.
For the year 2009 the City has budgeted transfers in from the General Fund Preliminary
Budget in the amount of $521,450 and transfers in from the Utility Fund in the amount of
$31,650.
The anticipated expenditures for 2009 are for sealcoat/crack seal, park and trail
improvements and maintenance, police vehicle, public works vehicles, computers,
document imaging, and public works equipment.
Page 17
s—�
2008/2009 Revenue Comparison
2008 % Total 2009 % Total
Property Taxes $3,387,480 85.0% $3,428,365 83.3%
Business Licenses/Permits $31,915 .8% $31,520 .8%
Non - Business Licenses/Permits $152,375 3.8% $92,875 2.2%
Fines & Forfeits $70,500 1.8% $70,500 1.7%
Intergovernmental Revenue (Aids) $111,056 2.8% $259,890 6.3%
Charges for Services $72,740 1.8% $70,400 1.7%
All Other $160,000 4.0% $162,970 4.0%
Total Revenues $3,986,066 100.0% $4,116,520 100.0%
2009 Revenues
IMSrgovernn ental Revenue Charges br Services
6.3% MProperty Taxes
AN Other
Flns s Forteiti
4.0% ■Busin
1.7% Licenses
[]Non- Business
Non - Business LkensealftwAs Licenses/Permits
22%
❑Fines 8t Forfeits
Business LlkensesPermltd ■i ntergove mmental
0.8% Revenue
Charges for
Services
MAII Other
openly Taxs
asa%
n
2008/2009 Expenditures Comparison
2008 % Total 2009 % Total
General Government
Mayor & Council $99,510 2.5% $107,580 2.6%
City Administration $234,490 5.9% $253,310 6.1%
Legal $30,000 .7% $30,000 .7%
General Management/Building $90,700 2.3% $95,000 2.3%
Elections $11,940 .3% $940 .0%
Finance $228,035 5.8% $239,805 5.8%
Computer $23,000 .6% $23,000 .6%
Audit $21,450 .5% $20,000 .5%
Insurance $332,710 8.3% $333,740 8.1%
Assessing $22,000 .6% $21,300 .5%
Planning & Zoning $31,650 .8% $31,650 .8%
Engineering $16.800 .4% $27,000 .7%
Total General Government $1,142,285 28.7% $1,183,325 28.7%
Public Safety
Building Inspections $127,350 3.2% $132,895 3.2%
Police $1,083,500 27.1% $1,083,500 26.3%
Civil Defense $5,100 .1% $5,100 .1%
Fire $139,555 3.5% $146,310 3.5%
Animal Control $1.650 .1% $1.650 .1%
Total Public Safety $1,357,155 34.0% $1,369,455 33.2%
Public Works
Street Maintenance $61,245 1.5% $63,465 1.5%
Snow Removal $97,500 2.5% $117,000 2.8%
Street Lighting $60,800 1.5% $64,600 1.6%
Tree Removal/Planting $47.355 1.2% $40.355 1.0%
Total Public Works $266,900 6.7% $285,420 6.9%
Sanitation & Waste $162,300 4.1% $180,050 4.3%
Parks $180,232 4.5% $181,280 4.4%
Miscellaneous Expenses
Council Contingency $10,000 .2% $10,000 .2%
Transfers Out $867.000 21.8% $918.450 22.3%
Total Miscellaneous Expenses $877,000 22.0% $928,450 22.5%
Total Expenditures $3,985,872 100.0% $4,127,980 100.0%
1009 Expenditures
Miscellaneous Expense
22.5%
General Government
28.7%
fflGeneral
Government
■Public Safety
Parks []Public Works
444%
❑Sanitation
Sanitation
4.3% ■Parks
Public Works
6.9 % Miscellaneous
Expense
Public Safety
33.2%
n
n
2008/2009 Revenue Comparison
With Proposed Adjustments
2008 % Total 2009 % Total
Property Taxes $3,387,480 85.0% $3,428,365 83.2%
Business Licenses/Permits $31,915 .8% $30,265 .7%
Non - Business Licenses/Permits $152,375 3.8% $92,875 2.3%
Fines & Forfeits $70,500 1.8% $70,500 1.7%
Intergovernmental Revenue (Aids) $111,056 2.8% $259,890 6.3%
Charges for Services $72,740 1.8% $70,400 1.7%
All Other $160,000 4.0% $168,970 4.1%
Total Revenues $3,986,066 100.0% $4,121,265 100.0%
2009 Revenues
Charges for Services
Inlargovernmental Fieveme .A/o
63% 1 Property Taxes
AI Qher
4.1% ■Business
Fines & Forkks �p
1.7% Licenses/Permits
❑Non - Business
Non- Wainess LiceiseelPernts ° +, Licenses/Permits
2.3
❑Fines & Forteits
Business L @ensesiPemits
Mintergovemmental
0 . 7 % Revenue
Charges for
Services
■AII Other
operty Taxes
832%
2008/2009 Expenditures Comparison
With Proposed Adjustments
2008 % Total 2009 % Total
General Government
Mayor & Council $99,510 2.5% $107,580 2.6%
City Administration $234,490 5.9% $255,145 6.2%
Legal $30,000 .7% $30,000 .7%
General Management/Building $90,700 2.3% $95,320 2.3%
Elections $11,940 .3% $940 .0%
Finance $228,035 5.8% $241,590 5.8%
Computer $23,000 .6% $23,000 .6%
Audit $21,450 .5% $21,500 .5%
Insurance $332,710 8.3% $331,690 8.0%
Assessing $22,000 .6% $21,300 .5%
Planning & Zoning $31,650 .8% $31,650 .8%
Engineering $16,800 .4% $27.000 .6%
Total General Government $1,142,285 28.7% $1,186,715 28.6%
Public Safety
Building Inspections $127,350 3.2% $132,895 3.2%
Police $1,083,500 27.1% $1,083,500 26.1%
Civil Defense $5,100 .1% $5,100 .1%
Fire $139,555 3.5% $146,310 3.5%
Animal Control $1,650 .1% $1,650 .1%
Total Public Safety $1,357,155 34.0% $1,369,455 33.0%
Public Works
Street Maintenance $61,245 1.5% $63,465 1.5%
Snow Removal $97,500 2.5% $117,000 2.8%
Street Lighting $60,800 1.5% $64,600 1.6%
Tree Removal/Planting $47,355 1.2% $40,355 1.0%
Total Public Works $266,900 6.7% $285,420 6.9%
Sanitation & Waste $162,300 4.1% $196,050 4.7%
Parks $180,232 4.5% $181,280 4.4%
Miscellaneous Expenses
Council Contingency $10,000 .2% $10,000 .2%
Transfers Out $867,000 21.8% $918,450 22.2%
Total Miscellaneous Expenses $877,000 22.0% $928,450 22.4%
Total Expenditures $3,985,872 100.0% $4,147,370 100.0%
n
2009 Expenditure..
Miscellaneous Expense
22.4%
General Government
28.6%
General
Government
■Public Safety
[]Public Works
Parks
44%
[]Sanitation
Sanitation
4.7% ■Parks
Public Works Miscellaneous
6.9%
Expense
Public Safety
33.0%
n
Propo_ _d Pay 2009 Property Tax Impact ^ orksheet
Taxing District: 1700 Oak Park Heights - GENERAL LEVY
Step 1- Calculate the Taxing District' s Tax Rate - General Levy only
Actual Proposed;:.. 9b .
Item Pay 2008 Pay, 2009-, tliange ;
_ ...- ..... _._. 3 . .:
1. Levy before reduction for state aids $3,367,480 $ ,585,255 6.5%
2. State Aids $0 $178,390 0.0%
3. Certified Property Tax Levy $3,367,480 $3,406,865 1.2%
4. Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy $190,353 $183,070 -3.8%
5. Local Portion of Levy $3,177,127 $3,223,795 1.5%
6 Local Taxable Value $8,742,105 $8,988,097 2.8%
7 Local Tax Rate 36.343% 35.867% -1.3%
Step 2 - Calculate the Impact of the Taxing District's Rate on Residential Homestead Taxes:
8. Assumes a 0.7% change in market value from 2008 to 2009, which is the city median change
(D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I) j
Taxing Total Taxing Taxing
Taxable District Mkt Value District District
Market Tax Gross Hstd share of Net
Value. Capacity Taxing Credit Credit Tax
Actual Pay 2008
500,000 @ 1.0% (B7 x E) + 76,000 @.40%
rem @ 1.25% I (B12 x D) I rem @.09% I (G) x % I (F) - (H)
9. Estimated Tax District rate as % of total rate: 44%
10. 99,300 993 $360.89 $283.03 $124.53 $236.36
11. 149,000 1,490 $541.51 $238.30 $104.85 $436.66
12. 198,600 1,986 $721.77 $193.66 $85.21 $636.56
13. 248,300 2,483 $902.40 $148.93 $65.53 $836.87
14. 297,900 2,979 $1,082.65 $104.291 $45.89 $1,036.76
15. 397,200 3,972 $1,443.541 $14.92 $6.56 $1,436.97
16. 496,500 4,9651 $1,804.43 $0.00 $0.001 $1,804.43
17. 744,800 8,0601 $2,929.25' $0.001 $0.00 $2,929.25
Proposed Pay 2009
Pay 2007 MV 500,000 @ 1.0% (B7 x E) + 76,000 @.40%
X 1.007 I rem @ 1.25% I (B12 x D) I rem @.09% I (G) x % I (F) - (H)
18. Estimated Tax District rate as % of total rate: 44%
19. 100,000 1,000 $358.67 $282.40 $124.26 $234.42
20. 150,000 1,500 $538.01 $237.40 $104.46 $437.00
21. 200,000 2,000 $717.35 $192.40 $84.66 $632.69
22. 250,000 2,500 $896.68 $147.40 $64.86 $831.83
23. 300,000 3,000 $1,076.02 $102.40 $45.06 $1,037.86
24. 400,000 4,000 $1,434.70 $12.40 $5.46 $1,429.24
25. 500,000 5,000 $1,793.37 $0.00 $0.00 $1,793.37
26. 750,000 8,125 $2,914.22 $0.00 $0.00 $2,914.22
Percentage Change from 2007 to 2008 Increase /Decrease
27. 0.7% 0.7% -0.6% -0.2% -0.2% -0.8% -$1.94
28. 0.7% 0.7% -0.6 %' -0.4% -0.4% 0.1% $0.34
29. 0.7% 0.7% -0.6% -0.7% -0.7% -0.6% -$3.87
30. 0.7% 0.7% -0.6% -1.0% -1.0% -0.6% -$5.04
31. 0.7% 0.7% -0.6% -1.8% -1.8% 0.1% $1.10
32. 0.7% 0.7% -0.6% -16.9% -16.9% -0.5% -$7.73
33. 0.7% 0.7% -0.6% 0.0% 0.0% -0.6% - $11.06
34. 0.7% 0.8% -0.5% 0.0% 0.0% -0.5% - $15.03
n
Proposed Pay 2009 Property Tax Impact Worksheet
Taxing District: 1700 Oak Park Heights - DEBT LEVY
Step 1- Calculate the Taxing District's Tax Rate - Debt Levy only
Actual: Proposed
Item Pay 2008 Pay 2009 Change,
1. Levy before reduction for state aids
$360,000
2. State Aids $0
3. Certified Property Tax Levy $360,000
4. Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy $19,345
5. Local Portion of Levy $340,655
6 Local Taxable Value "Pay 2009 is a ROUGH ESTIMATE" $8,988,097
7 Local Tax Rate 3.790%
Step 2 - Calculate the Impact of the Taxing District's Rate on Residential Homestead Taxes:
8. Assumes a 0.7% change in market value from 2008 to 2009, which is the city median change
(D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I)
Taxing Total Taxing Taxing
Taxable District Mkt Value District District
Market Tax Gross Hstd share of Net
Value . Capacity Taxing Credit Credit Tax
Proposed Pay 2009
500,000 @ 1.0% I (B7 x E) + 1 76,000 @ .40% I
rem @ 1.25% (B12 x D) rem @.09% (G) x % (F) - (H)
9. Estimated Tax District rate as % of total rate: 44%
10. 100,000 1,000 $37.90 $0.00 $37.90
11. 150,000 1,500 $56.85 $0.00 $56.85
12. 200,000 2,000 $75.80 $0.00 $75.80
13. 250,000 2,500 $94.75 $0.00 $94.75
14. 300,000 3,000 $113.70 $0.00 $113.70
15. 400,000 4,000 $151.60 $0.00 $151.60
16. 500,000 5,000 $189.50 $0.00 $189.50
17. 750,000 8,125 $307.94 $0.00 $307.94
n
Proposed Pay 2009 Property Tax Impact .Jorksheet
r
Taxing District: 1700 Oak Park Heights - GENERAL LEVY & DEBT LEVY
Step 1- Calculate the Taxing District's Tax Rate -Total General and Debt Levy
Actual Proposed % +
Item Pay 2008 Change .
before reduction for state a $3 x 17
- - -... (
W ids
1. Le ..._..
.2%
2. State Aids $0 $178,390 0.0%
3. Certified Property Tax Levy $3,367,480 $3,766,865 11.9%
4. Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy $190,353 $202,415 6.3%
5. Local Portion of Levy $3,177,127
$3,564,450 12.2%
6 Local Taxable Value $8,742,105 $8,988,097 2.8%
7 Local Tax Rate 36.343% 39.657% 9.1%
Step 2 - Calculate the Impact of the Taxing District's Rate on Residential Homestead Taxes:
8. Assumes a 0.7% change in market value from 2008 to 2009, which is the city median change
(DF' IE.) (F) (G) (H) (�)
Taxing Total Taxing Taxing
Taxable District Mkt Value District District
M_ arket _ Tax Gross Hstd share of Net
value.. Capacity Taxing Credit Credit . Tax
Actual Pay 2008`
1 500,000 @ 1.0% I (137 x E) + 1 76,000 @ .40%
rem @ 1.25% (612 x D) rem @.09% (G) x % (F) - (H)
9. Estimated Tax District rate as % of total rate: 44%
10. 99,300 993 $360.89 $283.03 $124.53 $236.36
11. 149,000 1,490 $541.51 $238.30 $104.85 $436.66
12. 198,600 1,986 $721.77 $193.66 $85.21 $636.56
13. 248,300 2,483 $902.40 $148.93 $65.53 $836.87
14. 297,900 2,979 $1,082.65 $104.29 $45.89 $1,036.76
15. 397,200 3,972 $1,443.54 $14.92 $6.56 $1,436.97
16. 496,500 4,965 $1,804.43 $0.00 $0.00 $1,804.43
17. 744,800 8,060 $2,929.25 $0.00 $0.00 $2,929.25
Proposed Pay 2009
Pay 2007 MV 1 500,000 @ 1.0% I (137 x E) + 1 76,000 @ .40% I I
X 1.007 rem @ 1.25% (612 x D) rem @.09% (G) x % (F) - (H)
18. Estimated Tax District rate as % of total rate: 44%
19. 100,000 1,000 $396.57 $282.40 $124.26 $272.32
20. 150,000 1,500 $594.86 $237.40 $104.46 $490.41
21. 200,000 2,000 $793.15 $192.40 $84.66 $708.49
22. 250,000 2,500 $991.44 $147.40 $64.86 $926.58
23. 300,000 3,000 $1,189.72 $102.40 $45.06 $1,144.67
24. 400,000 4,000 $1,586.30 $12.40 $5.46 $1,580.84
25. 500,000 5,0001 $1,982.87 $0.00 $0.00 $1,982.87
26. 750,000 8,1251 $3,222.17 $0.001 $0.001 $3,222.17
Percentage.Change from 2007 to 2008 Increase
27. 0.7% 0.7% 9.9% -0.2% -0.2% 15.2% $35.96
28. 0.7% 0.7% 9.9% -0.4% -0.4% 12.3% $53.75
29. 0.7% 0.7% 9.9% -0.7% -0.7% 11.3% $71.94
30. 0.7% 0.7% 9.9% -1.0% -1.0% 10.7% $89.71
31. 0.7% 0.7% 9.9% -1.8% -1.8% 10.4% $107.90
32. 0.7% 0.7% 9.9% -16.9% -16.9% 10.0% $143.87
33. 0.7% 0.7% 9.9% 0.0% 0.0% 9.9% $178.44
34. 0.7% 0.8% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% $292.92
n
loo J °y
Proposed Pay 2009 Property Tax Impact dorksheet
Taxing District: 1700 Oak Park Heights - GENERAL LEVY & DEBT LEVY
l�
Step 1- Calculate the Taxing District's Tax Rate -Total General and Debt Levy
Actual Proposed", 96 "-
Item Pay 2008 'Pay 2009 Change I
1. Levy before reduction for state 3367480 $ ,
to aids , , 3 845,255 14.2%
2. State Aids $0 $178,390 0.0%
3. Certified Property Tax Levy $3,367,480 $3,666,865 8.9%
4. Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy $190,353 $202,415 6.3%
5. Local Portion of Levy $3,177,127 $3,464,450 9.0%
6 Local Taxable Value $8,742,105 $8,988,097 2.8%
7 Local Tax Rate 36.343% 38.545% 6.1%
Step 2 - Calculate the Impact of the Taxing District's Rate on Residential Homestead Taxes:
8. Assumes a 0.7% change in market value from 2008 to 2009, which is the city median change
(D) (E) (F) (V) (H) (l) '
Taxing Total Taxing Taxing
Taxable . District Mkt Value District District
Market Tax Gross Hstd share of Net
,1%alue'. Capacity Taxing Credit Credit Tax
_ Actual Pay 2008
I 500,000 @ 1.0% (137 x E) + 76,000 @ .40%
rem @ 1.25% I (1312 x D) I rem @.09% I (G) x % I (F) - (H)
9. Estimated Tax District rate as % of total rate: 44%
10. 99,300 993 $360.89 $283.03 $124.53 $236.36
11. 149,000 1,490 $541.51 $238.30 $104.85 $436.66
12. 198,600 1,986 $721.77 $193.66 $85.21 $636.56
13. 248,300 2,483 $902.40 $148.93 $65.53 $836.87
14. 297,900 2,979 $1,082.65 $104.29 $45.89 $1,036.76
15. 397,200 3,972 $1,443.54 $14.92 $6.56 $1,436.97
16. 496,500 4,965 $1,804.43 $0.00 $0.00 $1,804.43
17. 744,800 8,060 $2,929.25 $0.00 $0.00 $2,929.25
Proposed Pay 2009
Pay 2007 MV 500,000 Cr) 1.0% (131 x E) + '76,000 @ .40%
X 1.007 ( rem @ 1.25% I (1312 x D) I rem @.09% I (G) x % I (F) - (H)
18. Estimated Tax District rate as % of total rate: 44%
19. 100,000 1,000 $385.45 $282.40 $124.26 $261.19
20. 150,000 1,500 $578.17 $237.40 $104.46 $473.72
21. 200,000 2,000 $770.90 $192.40 $84.66 $686.24
22. 250,000 2,500 $963.62 $147.40 $64.86 $898.77
23. 300,000 3,000 $1,156.35 $102.40 $45.06 $1,111.29
24. 400,000 4,000 $1,541.79 $12.40 $5.46 $1,536.34
25. 500,000 5,000 $1,927.24 $0.00 $0.00 $1,927.24
26. 750,000 8,125 $3,131.77 $0.00 $0.00 $3,131.77
Percentage Change from 2007 to 2008 Increase
27. 0.7% 0.7% 6.8% -0.2% -0.2% 10.5% $24.84
28. 0.7% 0.7% 6.8% -0.4% -0.4% 8.5% $37.06
29. 0.7% 0.7% 6.8% -0.7% -0.7% 7.8% $49.68
30. 0.7% 0.7% 6.8% -1.0% -1.0% 7.4% $61.89
31. 0.7% 0.7% 6.8% -1.8% -1.8% 7.2% $74.53
32. 0.7% 0.7% 6.8% -16.9% -16.9% 6.9% $99.37
33. 0.7% 0.7% 6.8% 0.0% 0.0% 6.8% $122.81
34. 0.7% 0.8% 6.9% 0.0% 0.0% 6.9% $202.52