The Bloomington City Council on Monday approved the city’s 2025 tax-levy estimate, voting 8–2 to adopt staff’s Option 1 — a rate change to about 0.95 that staff said would produce roughly $3,000,000 to be directed to police, fire and parks.

City Manager Lance Jurgens told the council the estimated total assessed value for the city rose from roughly $2.4 billion last year to about $2.6 billion, and that the estimate published now will be followed by a truth-in-taxation hearing and a final levy vote at the council’s Dec. 15 meeting. “We are trying to catch up and our Council has a policy to get those a100% funded by 2040,” Jurgens said of public-safety pensions.

The action followed a staff presentation that laid out three options: the recommended option (about $3 million in additional levy revenue, rate ≈0.95), a larger option that would add roughly $1 million more (targeting pensions), and leaving the rate flat (yielding about $1.7 million due to higher assessed values). Jurgens framed the choice as a balance between preserving services and addressing persistent cost drivers including pension obligations, equipment and construction inflation, and higher utility and health-insurance costs.

Finance Director Scott Rathbun summarized revenue trends and cautioned that recent upticks — notably online sales-tax receipts — improve the outlook but do not fully close a budget gap driven by rising costs. Rathbun said staff included an additional $6,000,000 in one calculation to reflect this year’s online-sales uptick and described an approximate 3–4% annualized revenue increase since 2019. He also said the city entered FY26 expecting an approximate $5,000,000 deficit before the uptick in revenues was realized.

Council member Sheila Montney pressed staff on revenue context and whether state-provided revenue changes were included; Rathbun replied that they were and reiterated the city still faces a gap because of pension and capital-cost increases. Montney noted the $3 million represents less than 3% of the general fund and questioned whether new state-driven revenue sources might obviate the need to raise the levy. Rathbun responded that while additional revenue helps, it did not fully close the shortfall.

Supporters of the recommended option said it was a measured approach that would fund urgent public-safety needs without dramatically increasing the city’s overall tax burden. Opponents said the council should proceed cautiously given the impacts on residents.

There was some procedural confusion during the motion and roll-call exchange about which member formally moved and seconded the motion; the clerk recorded the final roll call and announced the item passed with two nays — Council member Montney and Council member Lee.

What happens next: staff will publish the estimate in the newspaper; the council will hold a truth-in-taxation hearing on Dec. 15 and take a final vote on the levy at the same meeting. The council’s action tonight sets the published estimate, not the final levy.