Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Budget Taxing topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Nampa council votes to use 1% "foregone" levy option, mayor breaks tie

5415685 · July 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Nampa City Council voted to use 1% of its foregone levy authority — about $468,000 — to help cover immediate budget shortfalls and public safety priorities. The measure passed after a 3–3 split and the mayor cast the deciding vote.

The Nampa City Council voted Wednesday to use 1% of its foregone levy authority, a move that adds roughly $468,000 to the city’s available recurring funds for fiscal 2026. Council members debated the tradeoffs before the final tally ended in a tie; Mayor Kling cast the deciding vote in favor.

The foregone allocation increases the property-tax burden by an estimated $2.80 per $100,000 of taxable value, finance staff said. Using Nampa’s median taxable value, staff estimated the additional annual cost for the typical household would be roughly $7–$9, depending on assumptions about taxable vs. resale value.

Council members pressed for detail on how the money would be used. Finance Director Doug (last name in transcript) and staff said the funds could be directed to public-safety needs (police staffing), legal/prosecution costs, or to help stabilize other operating lines, but that specific allocations would come back to council for approval.

The council discussion repeatedly returned to public safety: several members argued that incremental, predictable revenue is preferable to a larger single levy override in the future. Others warned that the foregone option is a short-term measure that does not solve longer-term structural revenue gaps, particularly given reduced new-construction tax receipts and portions of growth occurring inside Urban Renewal areas.

Council roll call on the foregone motion: Rodriguez — no; Jangula — yes; Haverfield — no; Griffin — no; Bills — yes; Reynolds — yes. Mayor Kling broke the 3–3 tie by voting yes, which produced a final outcome of approved.

The council directed staff to show the foregone amount in the final budget numbers and to bring back an allocation plan for council approval. Staff also noted the council could choose not to spend the full foregone amount and that any reallocation of fund balance or capital reserves would be brought back as a separate amendment if needed.