Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Superior council approves revised 2012–2013 general fund budgets, proposes 3.8% levy for 2013

3867322 · June 19, 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 City of Superior City Council approved revisions to the 2012 and 2013 general fund budgets and advanced a 3.8% levy for 2013, with staff citing flat revenues, a boosted contingency after lower-than-expected health insurance costs and potential FEMA/state disaster debt.

The City of Superior City Council approved revised 2012 and 2013 general fund budgets after a staff presentation that recommended a 3.8% levy increase for 2013 to cover service costs and maintain contingency funds.

Finance Director Vito and budget staff presented adjustments that reflect largely flat revenues and modest cost increases. “Each 1% of levy increase provides $113,000,” Finance Director Vito said during the presentation. Staff said reductions in positions and service realignments have helped hold overall spending but that without a levy increase further cuts would be necessary.

Budget staff told the council they originally estimated a 10% health insurance increase for 2013 but later reduced that to 5% based on claims experience and then learned rates could be held flat. “We can actually hold those rates the same for 2013,” Jean said, adding that the change frees about $160,000. Council staff adjusted the contingency line from $81,000 to $243,000 and asked the council to retain the larger contingency as a buffer against unexpected 2012 and 2013 costs.

The presentation included fiscal context: the general fund has been essentially flat since 2008, with an average annual increase of 1.59% over the last 14 years and debt service for 2013 projected at 6.4% of the budget. Staff said the capital improvement program has received new dedicated revenue from a terminal tax, which reduced the general fund transfer to CIP for 2013 and allowed some projects to be deferred because of flood-related emergency work.

Councilors asked for clarification about several items: which capital projects were delayed (Central Avenue work was cited as deferred while flood response took priority); the split of a planned $614,007 contract between stormwater and wastewater funds (staff said roughly $500,000 related to wastewater headworks and the remainder to stormwater); and the likely tax impact to property owners (staff said the 3.8% is the city portion and estimated about $30.80 per $1,000 of assessed value for the city portion only, but that final bills depend on school and county levies and assessed values).

Staff also noted separate disaster-recovery planning: the city has a state trust fund loan application to issue up to $5,000,000 for flood-related repairs if needed and will work with FEMA to recover eligible costs; any debt service tied to that borrowing would appear in future budgets. The environmental services report and forthcoming discussions on wastewater and stormwater were flagged as likely to bring additional rate and budget proposals to the council in the fall.

After discussion, a motion to approve the revised 2012 and 2013 budgets passed on voice vote.