Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Duluth councilors weigh keeping a 4.13% max levy against leaving room for unexpected expenses
Summary
Councilors debated whether to raise the city—s maximum levy beyond 4.13% to preserve flexibility for unanticipated needs, with some urging caution about further tax increases and others requesting more departmental detail before committing.
City councilors discussed whether to expand the proposed maximum property-tax levy beyond the administration—s 4.13% recommendation to preserve flexibility for later budget needs and board or commission requests.
Councilor Auwel said she was "struggling a little bit to vote on the max levy" without a department-by-department breakdown and expressed concern about tying the council—s hands in December. She asked whether colleagues would consider moving the levy by "1 or 2% just to give us a little wiggle room."
Councilor Randolph opposed increasing the maximum levy, saying he trusted the mayor to present a balanced plan and noting that the city has already kept levies relatively low in recent years. "I would vote no on any increase at this point," he said.
Other councilors cited the risk of tapping dedicated funds or reserves. Councilor Auwel asked whether the council would use reserves, affordable-housing trust funds, or CIT funds to bridge budget gaps, and urged the administration to present options. Councilor Nephew urged caution given rising property values and potential pressure on homeowners and renters, and suggested pursuing new-growth strategies and public-private partnerships to grow the tax base rather than increase taxes.
Councilor Randolph and others noted the city had delivered several low levies in recent years (1.5% and 2% in prior years) and that prior reductions had required cuts elsewhere. "If we wanted to fund all of our services through property tax levies, we would be looking at a 16% levy," one councilor said, citing earlier budget modeling discussed by the administration.
Councilors agreed that setting a maximum levy on Monday would not prevent later budget adjustments; staff and the mayor could propose using reserves or reallocate funds during the budget process. Several council members asked the administration for a clearer department breakdown and signaled they would review alternatives at upcoming budget meetings, including the October 31 budget retreat.
The council did not take a formal vote on the max levy during the meeting; members agreed to continue the discussion at an upcoming session.
The levy topic arose while the council was considering multiple resolutions and budget-line items read into the record, but the meeting ended without a final levy decision.
