Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 7 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
City council to vote on $14.78 million budget
Proposal includes general fund tax levy
Published Saturday, September 6, 2008
Victoria Simonsen
With increases in the costs of health insurance, fuel and utilities coming from every angle, the Albert Lea City Council will vote Monday on whether to approve a proposed $14.78 million budget, a number which is about $400,000 more than 2008.
The proposed budget includes a general fund tax levy of about $4.75 million, which equals out to an estimated annual tax of $359 to a home valued at $100,000.
City Manager Victoria Simonsen said the need for an increase is based on a 9.3 percent increase in health insurance, wage negotiations for four bargaining units, state mandated increases, and increases in costs of fuel and utilities.
“Unfortunately at a time when the ‘small guy’ needs a break, the city’s costs are going up at the same pace,” Simonsen wrote in her letter that prefaced the 2009 budget. “After four years of tightened spending, there is little left to give. For the first time in my tenure, we are faced with difficult decisions of decreasing services or cutting staff.”
One noticeable cut included in the proposed 2009 budget is closing the Albert Lea Public Library on Sundays.
This would result in a savings of 15 hours of staff time that would roll back to the other six days, along with savings to utility costs, custodial costs and snowplowing costs, Library Director Peggy Havener said.
“The Sunday closing is not an option we wanted to do, but at this place in time, I think this is something we need to do,” Havener said.
The closing on Sunday comes in light of an increase in circulation, public access computers and expanded children and adult classes in the library.
In 2009, Albert Lea will see a $100,000 increase in local government aid from the state. LGA is still the city’s main source of revenue, with 37 percent of the general fund being dependent on it. In 2005, it accounted for 44 percent of the general fund.
Simonsen thanked city staff for being willing to give up needed items within their departments and for being creative with their spending, while still providing good public service.
The levy can be lowered between now and December, but it cannot be raised.
Look to the Tribune for more details of the budget.
During the Monday meeting, the council will also:
- Have a public hearing about whether to establish a tax increment financing district for the redevelopment project at 405 N. Eighth Avenue. The property is being developed into Prairie Senior Cottages, an assisted living/memory loss facility, which will be about 10,000 square feet.
It would consist of 18 private units and would employ about 25 full-time and part-time staff, generating an annual payroll of $380,000.
It will be at the site of the former West Clinic, previously owned by Albert Lea Medical Center.
Under the proposal, the existing vacant building at the location would be demolished and then replaced with the assisted living facility.
- Vote on whether to approve the authorization of a grant agreement with the state for the Albert Lea Airport improvement project, which involves the relocation of Plaza Street and the construction of a bridge over Bancroft Creek.
Under the agreement, the cost for the relocation of Plaza Street would not exceed $1.185 million, of which 95 percent will be reimbursed by federal funds and 5 percent will be local costs.
The cost of the bridge would not exceed about $970,000 with the federal share being 95 percent and the local share being 5 percent.
If the resolution is passed, the agreement would state that the city operate the airport as a licensed, municipally-owned public airport for 20 years after receiving final reimbursement.
- Vote on whether to call a public hearing on proposed assessments for several city projects.
Projects include the street reconstruction of Amelia Avenue, Amelia Place, Hoffman Avenue, Oregon Street and Hershey Street; the street reconstruction of the 2008 water main Loop Construction; the street and underground utility improvements to Pilot Road, Hi Tec Avenue and Algon Street; and the 2007 Sanitary Sewer Lift Station Contract at Pearl Street and Elizabeth Avenue.
- Vote on the deadline for 2009 discretionary fund applications.
Under the proposal, the city will appropriate $50,000 in discretionary funds to support eligible organizations, and if the resolution passes, the applications will be due by 5 p.m. Oct. 17. The funds would be designated Nov. 10.
- Vote on the dates for the truth-in-taxation hearings required by Minnesota Statute.
The proposal is that the initial hearing be Dec. 1 at 7 p.m. and the continuation hearing be Dec. 8, at 7 p.m., if necessary.
- Hear a request to waive building permit fees for the Small Cities Development Program Owner Occupied Rehab Program.
Albert Lea Housing Redevelopment Authority Executive Director Jon Ford is submitting a pre-application to continue the program and is hoping to be approved for an additional 20 units of assistance in the southeast part of the city.
The estimated amount that was asked to be waived is $6,750.
- Hear a request to waive $300 in fees for the use of Snyder Field on Sept. 13-14 for the Ryan Truesdell Memorial Softball Tournament.

Comments
Posted by sophie (anonymous) on September 7, 2008 at 12:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Too bad they did not take the time to get more information to the public before doing this.
Posted by SRO (anonymous) on September 7, 2008 at 9:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why doesn't the city cut other things than just the library? They have 5 guys changing one light bulb on main street...Snow plows do not do their job...We are a family of 4 basically in a poverty state, working as hard as we can to make ends meet. And the only bills we have are our basic needs. I feel the city needs to bring in more than just higher taxes. They need to bring in hundreds of jobs. Our generation of people will be leaving soon if something doesn't change. They need to be thinking about the long term. They may not care though since the average city worker probably makes $60,000 a year.
Posted by realtree (anonymous) on September 7, 2008 at 11:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
they should cut mayor erdman that would have saved a
couple million on say a certain Bank building!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but what do they care its not there money.
Posted by mayberry (anonymous) on September 7, 2008 at 1:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
5 guys changing a lightbulb. thats funny, they must have been short handed that day!!!!
Posted by jderickson (anonymous) on September 7, 2008 at 2:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There are many choices made by a few that affect the many. We provide these few the power to make these difficult choices through elections. This city is trying to grow; a concept that has been avoided for many, many years. We are giving great tax breaks to businesses and are now forced to make up for that "growth effort" by establishing higher tax basis for the people who are supposed to benefit from these new businesses.
There are valid pros and cons for tax breaks and levys. There are an egual, if not higher, emotional reactions. The city needs to evaluate the tax breaks it has given in recent years, review assessments used to cover some (or all) of the associated costs, and determine which were good choices in order to repeat them in the future. But, more importantly, the city needs to learn from the ones that were clearly bad choices and avoid them in the future.
I don't know if the city sends an assessment team out to assess bunt out lightbulbs, And then a team to change a light bulb determined to be defective. But, if they do, it must be necessary because if not the local people and businesses that provide the supports needed to keep the library open on Sundays are going to be expected to pay higher taxes with less income. Something the city expects its' people to absorb in the wake of its' higher costs.
Posted by SRO (anonymous) on September 7, 2008 at 4:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Anyone want to explain to me exactly what this means?
" the need for an increase is based on a 9.3 percent increase in health insurance".....
Who's health insurance? The city workers??
If so, why do WE tax payers pay their health insurance when some of us can't even get health insurance through employers. My husband works here in town and they want $1000/monthfor health insurance...who pays that? We are a family of 4 & we can't afford to pay that...but we don't ask our neighbors to pay our health care costs....Maybe I just don't understand. If someone could explain this I would appreciate your input...thanks
Posted by sophie (anonymous) on September 7, 2008 at 7:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I read the story several times. It looks like a huge levy increase.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)