Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kearney aldermen approve 2025 municipal tax levy; finance director cites senior tax relief uncertainty
Summary
The Kearney Board of Aldermen on Sept. 15 adopted a 2025 municipal property tax levy totaling 0.5021, with officials noting possible reductions in revenue from new senior tax relief legislation but no firm estimate yet.
An ordinance levying municipal property taxes for 2025 passed unanimously at the Sept. 15 meeting of the Kearney Board of Aldermen. Finance Director Stephanie Harris said the citys proposed levy totals 0.5021, with a general revenue rate of "0.4521" and a general obligation bond rate of "0.05."
Why it matters: the levy establishes the citys mill rates that fund municipal services and debt payments; officials said the new state senior tax relief program could reduce revenue but the magnitude is uncertain.
At the meeting, Stephanie Harris, the citys finance director, told the board the total levy figure was based on final assessed valuations supplied by Clay County and constrained by the Hancock Amendment. "The calculation came out to be, this year, 0.4521 for general revenue," she said, and added that the general obligation bond rate "stays at 0.05 for a total levy value of 0.5021."
Harris also warned the board that recent state legislation establishing a senior tax relief program may reduce the citys property tax growth. She cited preliminary county analysis and the fiscal note accompanying the bill, saying county estimates suggested about $45,000,000 of property value could be affected and that Kearney might see "about $7,300 less in property tax revenue growth" under initial estimates. Harris said the actual impact will depend on how many homeowners apply for the program.
Board members noted the proposed levy is lower than last years figure of 0.5264, reflecting a rollback. After two readings by title, Alderman Jeri (mover) and Alderman Ashton (second) advanced the ordinance; roll-call votes were unanimous, and the ordinance passed on the second reading.
Discussion versus decision: the meeting record shows informational discussion by staff about valuation and the senior credit; the board took formal action by ordinance vote to set the levy. The board did not adopt any additional direction to staff to model alternative levy scenarios at this meeting.
Looking ahead: Harris told the board the city does not yet know the final revenue effect of the senior credit and that further clarification from Clay County or state agencies may be needed to refine budget projections.
