Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Tax Rate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clinton council certifies tax rate, schedules final budget adoption after public hearing
Summary
After a public hearing on the final 2026–27 budget, the Clinton City Council certified a tax rate of 0.001985 and scheduled formal budget adoption for next week; council and staff also answered public questions about sales‑tax projections, credit‑card fees and street funding.
The Clinton City Council on June 22 certified the city's fiscal‑year 2026–27 tax rate at 0.001985 after a public hearing on the final budget and pledged to return next Tuesday to adopt the budget formally.
Mayor Marie Doherty opened the hearing and Finance Director Corey Christiansen outlined adjustments to the tentative budget, including a downward revision of ambulance revenue, higher administrative and credit‑card processing costs, a $220,000 motor‑pool allocation intended to help fund a future fire truck, and the council's decision to defer a $350,000 transfer for slurry street maintenance from this fiscal year. City Manager Trevor Cahoon told the council that reorganization in the community development department produced roughly $70,000 in wage savings that helped close shortfalls.
Cahoon said the city relied on state sales‑tax distribution data through April to set sales‑tax projections and that the local RAP (zoo/arts/parks) tax is accounted for separately. He reported new‑growth property tax of about $85,000, higher than an internal estimate of $60,000, which reduced the rate the city must certify to raise the same revenue as the prior year plus new growth.
Council member Chris Danson moved to adopt Resolution No. 16‑26 certifying the tax rate at 0.001985; the motion, seconded by Council member Spencer Arvey, carried on a roll‑call vote with four yeses and one no. The mayor said the council will take final action to adopt the full budget at its next meeting scheduled for Tuesday.
Members of the public used the hearing to press staff on assumptions behind sales‑tax forecasts and on administrative charges. Cameron Frick and Brandon Sanger both spoke during public hearing comments: Frick asked whether the police coordinated threat assessments with state or neighboring agencies and questioned an estimated $130,000 credit‑card fee line in the budget; staff responded that the city weighs whether to charge processing fees directly to utility customers or to build the cost into rates, and noted lower processing rates when fees are absorbed by the utility billing system.
The city emphasized it balanced the budget without a property‑tax increase, relying in part on fund balance reductions and cuts of about $1.2 million in proposed new expenditures. City leaders cautioned that continued use of reserves is not a sustainable long‑term strategy and said the council will revisit options for diversifying revenue, including potential property‑tax or utility‑fee approaches and a discussion next week on street funding.
The council also directed staff to provide follow‑up answers to specific questions raised during the hearing, including sales‑tax calculations and the structure of the administrative services line.
