The Waverly City Council received an overview of the city’s fiscal picture and the forces shaping the 2025 budget during its Jan. 25 meeting. City administration said Waverly’s 100% valuation climbed substantially in the most recent assessment cycle, but state “rollback” rules reduce the share of valuation that local governments can tax — creating uncertainty for multi-year planning.

City Administrator James, who opened the budget briefing, told the council the city’s total (100%) valuation moved above $1.1 billion and that the taxable share after rollback increased but by far less than the 100% figures suggest. He said the city saw a roughly 15% valuation growth that was effectively reduced to about 12% after state adjustments and rebracketing linked to House File 718; the council was warned that the state’s rollback mechanism has produced large year‑to‑year swings and complicates long‑range planning.

City staff described how the rollback treats residential property differently from commercial and industrial property and called out the 47% assessment figure for residential property (the share of assessed value subject to local taxation), while commercial/industrial property is taxed on a higher share. The presentation showed that the general‑fund levy cap (the 8.10 levy, which currently reads about 7.99 in the city’s preliminary numbers) is a fixed rate that interacts with the taxable valuation; staff said that while Waverly’s growth helped the budget this year, the rollback and recent legislative changes left the city unable to count on that pattern continuing.

The council approved the meeting agenda by unanimous voice vote at the start of the session.

The budget presentation reviewed how tax dollars are distributed by service area (police, fire, public works and leisure services among the largest segments) and walked through department‑by‑department expense categories and capital plans that staff will bring back for council decisions in upcoming hearings. Staff encouraged residents to attend the public hearings and noted the budget publication and notice deadlines that govern the council’s timeline.

City officials emphasized that some policy choices — including how much to rely on fund balance, whether to accelerate capital projects, or whether to seek additional revenue sources — are decisions for the council and will be discussed in scheduled budget work sessions and public hearings.

Votes at a glance: the only formal vote recorded in the transcript excerpt was an initial voice approval of the meeting agenda (unanimous).