Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Carmel City council approves 2026 tax levy at 4.99%; moves to executive session
Summary
Mount Carmel City council completed a second reading and approved a proposed 2026 tax levy at a rate of 4.99% by roll call; immediately afterward the council sought to enter an executive session, though the transcript does not record the executive-session vote tally.
Mount Carmel City council completed a second reading and approved a proposed tax levy for 2026 at a rate of 4.99% during a regular meeting. The item was presented as unchanged from the previous Monday and was approved by roll call.
The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and roll call. An unidentified speaker described the agenda item as 'a second reading of the tax levy for 2026 at a... rate of 4.99%.' After asking for questions or comments and receiving none, a motion to adopt the levy was made and seconded; the transcript does not identify who moved or seconded. The clerk conducted a roll call: Commissioner Weeks answered 'Yes'; a person transcribed as 'Mister Eichmeier' was marked absent; Commissioner Meador answered 'Yes'; the remaining commissioners present earlier in the meeting (Commissioner Meek, Commissioner Metter, Commissioner Sealy) answered 'Yes' when called. Commissioner Wagner and Commissioner Eickemeyer/Eichmeier were recorded absent earlier in the meeting. Based on the roll call responses in the transcript, the council approved the second reading of the levy.
Immediately after the levy vote, the council moved to consider an executive session. A speaker asked for a motion to enter executive session 'for consideration of a certain topic'; the transcript records a motion and an affirmative response but does not include a formal roll-call tally or clear record of the executive-session vote in the provided excerpt. The meeting then paused as members prepared for that closed session.
No other ordinance numbers, specific budget line items, fiscal impact breakdowns, or statutory citations were included in the provided transcript. The transcript also shows inconsistent spellings for one commissioner (transcribed as both 'Eickemeyer' and 'Eichmeier'); that inconsistency is noted below. The council offered no additional public comment or debate about the levy in this excerpt.
The most recent procedural step recorded in the excerpt is the council preparing to enter an executive session; the transcript does not record any further public action or the outcome of the executive-session motion in this excerpt.
