At a work session that began at 6:00 p.m., Gardner City Council members and staff discussed whether to lower the city's mill levy and reviewed possible revenue options, including a rental-license program and raising a fine for commercial trucks.

The exchange centered on rising property valuations, pressure on service levels and parks maintenance, and the city's use of incentives to attract large development. Council members repeatedly emphasized that property-tax collections have risen primarily because market values have increased, and they debated whether a modest mill-levy cut now would force deeper service cuts later.

The discussion mattered because speakers said recent increases in home valuations are driving higher tax bills for many residents. One councilmember urged caution about moving small amounts between funds, saying the potential loss of funds could hurt parks and trails and other planned projects. Another councilmember argued the city must continue to pursue large commercial projects near interstate interchanges to grow revenue rather than implement steep service cuts. Staff and council also discussed how incentives, tax increment financing and payments in lieu of taxes affect the city's long-term revenue picture.

On revenue proposals, city staff presented three options pulled from internal suggestions. Staff identified one-time and ongoing spending on information-technology transitions to the cloud, noted a proposal to implement a local rental-license program (described in similar Johnson County jurisdictions as mainly paying for inspections), and said a suggestion had been made to raise the fine for prohibited large trucks from $200 to $1,000. The presenter said the prosecutor opposed using traffic enforcement primarily as a revenue source and recommended caution on pursuing fines as a revenue strategy.

Councilmembers said a rental-license program could help the city enforce standards for properties that are not on city water, sewer or electric and that staff should explore program details. Staff said examples seen in other jurisdictions charge about $30 per house per year or a small fee per square foot for apartment complexes and that implementing such a program would require up-front inspection capacity.

Several councilmembers stressed the trade-offs of cutting the mill levy now. One councilmember said cutting the levy could reduce available bond capacity needed for planned infrastructure near new developments. Another warned that repeatedly cutting the levy is not sustainable if expenses continue to rise. A repeated point was that if valuations stagnate or decline in future years, the city might face a need to cut services or raise taxes later.

By the end of the session, participants said the working consensus was to keep the mill levy at its current level for now and to continue exploring revenue growth and cost-management options. No formal motion or final vote on the mill levy occurred during the work session.

The council directed staff to further explore the rental-license option and to return with more information, including expected inspection needs and fee structures, and to continue evaluating development incentives and revenue opportunities around interstate interchanges.

Clarifying details discussed in the session included staff's note that rental-house permits in other Johnson County jurisdictions can be about $30 per year and that apartment complexes sometimes are charged by square foot; a staff-proposed no-truck fine increase that would raise the current $200 penalty to $1,000; and an example calculation cited by a councilmember that a mill-levy reduction being discussed would equate to about 83 cents per month for the owner of a $300,000 home. The group emphasized that any licensing program would have start-up inspection costs before revenue from permits would fully offset expenses.

The council also discussed the city's strategy with incentives, saying that incentives are targeted to close financing gaps on major commercial projects and that incentive decisions are analyzed case by case. Multiple members said the city needs to be aggressive in pursuing large developers and infrastructure partnerships to expand its tax base.

No ordinances, resolutions or votes were adopted in the work session; items discussed will come back to council with staff analysis for future formal consideration.