The central focus of the meeting was the approval of the preliminary 2025 tax levy. A resolution, identified as 2025-10, solidified the proposed increase of 4.97% over the previous year. This figure was notably higher than anticipated, as prior discussions targeted a 3% increase, necessitating an additional $110,000 in revenues or budget cuts. The council acknowledged that approximately $85,000 in additional revenues remain unspecified, with projected increases in liquor revenues yet to be incorporated due to insufficient operational history at the new facility. The council anticipates a clearer picture of revenue projections by December, following a full busy season.

Council discussions also delved into how utility charges should be restructured in light of the new building’s occupancy. With a portion of city hall’s space attributed to utility functions, adjustments in cost allocations across various funds were deemed necessary. Current budget allocations for these purposes remain nominal, but increases are expected as the Public Utilities Commission evaluates rates. Concerns were raised about future expenses, particularly labor costs, with a 3% increase budgeted but labor contract negotiations still ongoing. These factors contribute to budget uncertainties, although there was a cautious optimism regarding the preliminary levy as a starting point.

One member inquired about the rationale behind the proposed increase compared to previous years and suggested reviewing preliminary and final levy figures from past years to contextualize the current proposal. The previous year’s preliminary levy was higher than the final figure, sparking discussions on transparency in budget setting. It was noted that higher preliminary levy numbers in past years were necessary to accommodate new debt payments, particularly for the new city hall. The council emphasized the importance of presenting a conservative estimate to the public while ensuring it is realistic and achievable.

The council agreed that many preliminary figures are based on projections and aim to refine these numbers as more information becomes available, especially regarding seasonal revenues and new expenses. A review of the three-year projection is planned to address future liabilities and ensure the budget remains manageable.

Following the tax levy discussion, the council addressed liquor license renewals for 2025-2026. A motion to approve the list of renewals was made, seconded, and unanimously passed. However, it was noted that additional paperwork might be required for at least one licensee.

Attention then turned to resolution 2025-11, which called for a public hearing on Third Street improvements. Proposed enhancements include pavement widening, curb and gutter installation on one side, and utility extensions for a specific block. The improvements depend on an existing development agreement related to the Peters development plan. The public hearing, crucial for resident input on the scope of improvements, was rescheduled to avoid a conflict with a House Bonding Committee visit. The council unanimously approved the motion to modify the hearing date.

Council reports followed, providing various updates. A member shared positive financial news from the local golf course, reporting a $30,000 revenue increase from the previous month. Revenue at the recreation park also rose by 2.6% this year. The Greater Minnesota Regional Parks and Trails Commission recently visited to evaluate a potential new bathhouse location, with grant application results due in November.

Another update came from the library board meeting, where new bylaws and a conduct policy were adopted. The policy aims to maintain order and foster a respectful environment among patrons by setting behavioral expectations.

The Tac Harbor advisory committee was also discussed, with applications now open for community members interested in participating. The committee will meet twice a month from October to March, focusing on gathering information rather than making binding decisions. A council member emphasized the need for representation from Cook and Lake County.