Special hearing outlines city’s tax levy

     Prior to the 6 p.m. regular Monticello City Council meeting on April 1, the city held a special public hearing at 5:30 p.m. on the proposed FY 2025 property tax levy.

   This hearing is required by a new state law.

   No public was present at the hearing to offer comments; just those from the council members themselves.

   For FY 2025, City Administrator Russ Farnum noted that property taxes will be due on Sept. 30, 2024; and March 31, 2025.

   The proposed property tax levy for FY 2025 is $2,278,238.

   “It’s an increase of $79,475 from last year,” noted Farnum.

   The proposed levy rate is $15.80224.

   “That is $.00079 greater than last year; or less than eight one-hundredths of a cent more,” added Farnum.

   The state property tax rollback also impacts the tax levy. The state rollback this year was increased to 46.3428 percent.

   “What that means is if you have a $100,000 house, you’re only taxed on $46,342.80 of that,” explained Farnum. “That is an increase from the previous year of just over 8.3 percent.”

   The taxable value for the City of Monticello itself is $140,984,974, an increase in value of $5,113,176 over the current fiscal year (2024).

   “For FY 2024, we did ask for $2,198,763,” noted Farnum.

   Other FY 2024 tax statistics:

   • Current levy rate is $15.80145

   • State rollback was 54.65 percent

   • Monticello’s taxable value, $135,871,798

   “What all that means is we have about $5 million in increased value this year that is taxable,” Farnum said. “However, the rollback is higher, taking more of our taxable value away. Our levy rate went up just a smidge; the total amount we’re asking for went up about $79,000 last year.

   “If your taxable value remains the same for next year, you would have to be above a $10 million commercial valuation before you’re going to be paying more in taxes next fiscal year than you pay this year, at least as far as the city’s levy,” he continued. “If your property value increase was less than 18 percent, you will actually see a reduction in the city portion of your tax bill. The closer the increase gets to 18 percent, less of a reduction you will see. If you did have an increase over 18 percent, you would see an increase in the city portion of your property tax bill.”

   Farnum offered an explanation of the FY 2025 property tax statement that the county mailed out recently. He said it’s quite confusing, no fault of the county’s though. The information contained within the mailing is state mandated.

   “This mailing has caused a lot of upset people a lot of headaches,” commented Council member Dave Goedken. “It seems to indicate that property taxes are going down, but taxes will be going up.”

   “It’ll take a while for people to figure it out,” Council member Mary Phelan added, saying she’s actually visited with the county auditor for an explanation.

   Phelan said taxpayers won’t notice a real change on their tax bill until the statement comes out in September.

   Goedken said he’s received “quite a few” comments from city residents regarding the city’s proposed taxes.

   “I won’t support a tax increase,” he said sternly, “even if it’s very minor. We’re headed toward a non-sustaining path. If we can’t live within our budget, we need to make some adjustments.”

   Phelan said she challenges city departments and staff to continue to reduce their budgets, wanting to see at least $80,000 reduced yet from the overall city budget.

   “We need to hold the line every year,” she encouraged.

   Goedken said residents are still expressing concern with the cost of the city’s new waste water (sewer) treatment facility. He indicated that utility rates will still have to go up to help with the cost of the project.

   “But it needs to be done incrementally,” he said of increasing rates, “versus an astronomical amount.”

   Mayor Wayne Peach offered that the city’s proposed levy rate will only change people’s taxable valuation by 1.6 percent. Phelan said that would only be accurate if everyone in Monticello paid the same tax rate.

   “We all pay different taxes,” she said. “I just don’t see why we can’t scrub a little more (from the budget) to hold it flat. Every it’s gone up and up and up. I don’t want to nickel and dime people to death.”

   “It’s not sustainable,” Goedken said.