Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Rate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
KEARNEY R-I board sets tax levy after public hearing, officials describe modest homeowner impact
Summary
The KEARNEY R-I board held a public hearing and moved to set the district tax levy after a presentation on assessed valuation; district officials described a modest tax increase equal to roughly $68 on a $250,000 home and noted the levy change reflected a non‑reassessment year and TIF adjustments.
The KEARNEY R‑I School Board held a public hearing and moved to set the district tax levy after a presentation on assessed valuation and tax-rate impact.
Superintendent Dr. Miller presented a PowerPoint explaining that the district is in a non‑reassessment year and that combined assessed valuation numbers reflect more AV from Clay County than Clinton County. "We're up to, 454,831,629," he said, noting that figure is adjusted by about $8,000,000 for a tax-increment financing (TIF) arrangement and that the district's total assessed valuation rose 1.4 percent overall. Dr. Miller said the district budgeted for a 3 percent AV increase but actual AV rose less, and the operating levy was adjusted slightly to remain near revenue neutrality.
The superintendent laid out how property tax is calculated and showed a sample homeowner impact: "we will see a modest increase of $68" for a home with a market value of $250,000, reflecting a small operating-levy change and recapture of new-construction revenue. He also noted additional new revenue from debt service and new construction totaling roughly $382,552.
Chair called for a roll call on the motion to set the levy; the transcript records affirmative responses from Matt Baker, Lehi Broughton, John Kern, Nick Vasquez and Darlene Bailey. The motion was seconded during the public hearing; no members of the public spoke during the hearing.
Why it matters: the board's decision sets district revenue available for operations and debt service for the coming year and affects local taxpayers; the superintendent said the board may revisit tax policy in a future work session.
The board proceeded with the rest of the meeting after the levy motion and roll call vote. No further public comment was recorded on the levy during the meeting.
