The URL can be used to link to this page

Memo- 2012 Budget HearingCITY OF HOPKINS FINANCE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM Date: December 6, 2011 To: Mayor & City Council From: Christine Harkess, Finance Director Subject: 2012 Budget Hearing The December 6, 2011 council meeting will include discussion of the city budget and will allow the public to comment. This is a continuation of the change in the process implemented last year allowing a budget hearing rather than a formal truth -in -taxation hearing. An announcement was made at the September 6 meeting setting December 6`'' as the date we would accept public comments on the 2012 budget. This information was forwarded to Hennepin County to include on the parcel specific notices that were mailed in mid November. For the budget hearing we have established the following agenda: 1. Power point presentation 2. Questions from council . 3. Questions from public 4. Close the budget hearing r� U 0 Public Hearing for the 2012 Levy and Budget December 6, 2011 Taxation Process • Preliminary Levy was set in September • Proposed tax notices mailed • Public hearing for final proposed levy and general fund budget. • Final adoption of budget and levy December 20th council meeting. Tax Levy Changes General Levy Increase $245,027 Capital Levy 25,000 Special Levy Decrease (222,850) (For MVHC unallotment) Debt Levy Increase 65.400 Total Levy Change $112,577 Purpose of Budget Hearing • To discuss the City's budget • To discuss how the city budget impacts the city portion of your taxes • The focus of the hearing is on the budget and levy, not property valuations . Property valuation discussions are held each spring 2012 Proposed Tax Levy E. F2. .11 p 4 RoNnd n1 op...... GGe-1 Fund 8 e. 1"' 41 Cephel Lery S S B 00 S $,S3g05. f 5,005,135 S S,SOD,O% 9p.cl.�l La N.. 35500 35500 VHC M SSbLON.I Sptl.l L.N..-Oq.r S 3Y, S 3;500 5 35,500 fL2B GO lm prp+RSw g BOnEs - 2. 21010 �0]Gepi151lmprwement BaNss ]74,000 2�0OA GO B.- t00, o Su5br.1 3p.c1.1 L.— 5 ,. $ 1P.— T— —1- , T --15s 510.135.414 S10pWF335 S,o,35a.50t Increase -001 Y..r S 313.]3e $ —,— I ....... -r (—) ,071parte....-r(Bea)-Tool 3.111 3.0]% 2012 Proposed General Fund Budget and Levy General Fund Budget $10,470,526 This is an increase from the 2011 budget of 1.66%. Tax Levy $10,250,991 This is an increase over the current year's levy of $112,577 or 1.11 % and a.96% decrease from the preliminary certified levy. • 9 Revenue Budget Expenditure Budget 2011 2012 % General Fund Budget Budget Incr/(Derr) Property Taxes $ 8,630,564 $ 8,887,591 2.98% Intergovernmental Revenue 442,070 512,370 15.90% Licenses, Permits & Fees 544,790 487,115 -10.59% Charges for Service 161,200 245,150 52.08% Miscellaneous Revenue 314,900 313,300 -0.51 Interest Earnings 75,000 25,000 -66.67% Use of 2009 Savings 130,803 173,091 -100.00% Total Revenues $ 10,299,327 $ 10,470,526 1.66% Expenditure Budget General Fund Budget Three Year Comparison Year Budget Incr/Derr % Change 2010 $ 10,073,003 $ (2,489) 0.02% 2011 $ 10,299,327 $ 226,324 2.25% 2012 $ 10,519,463 $ 220,136 2.14°/n Change over three year period = 4.43% Average change over three years is approximately 1.48% per year The rate of inflation from 2010 to 2011 was 3.8% General Fund Revenues lhaeges ln� Miuellaneou5 Service Revenue 11G 1%` Intfrest Licenses. Earnings Ponnll5 IntergaW'I Revenue 5% Properly Ewes NS% GF Expenditures Other General Recreation 1% Government 5% 11% Community Services Puhl2Works 10% 21% Public Safety 52% Analysis of Average Valued Home • 2012 Home Valued at = $225,000 • Assuming constant market value • 2011 City Taxes $1,252 • 2012 Proposed City Taxes $1,334 . Increase of $82 from 2011 .2012 Revised City Taxes $1,319 . Decrease of $15 from preliminary levy 2011 2012 Budget % General Fund Budget Budget Incr/(Derr) City Council $ 71,547 $ 68,697 -3.96% Administrative SeMces 451,670 469,132 3.87% Finance 203,243 209,726 3.19% Legal 135,000 135,000 0.00% Municipal Building 294,818 296,863 0.69% Receptionist 44,172 44,846 1.53% Assessing 167,236 173,091 3.50% City Clerk 99,415 109,970 10.62% Inspections 616,607 613,167 -0.56% Police 4,484,387 4,530,032 1.02% Fire 838,258 855,424 2.05% Public Works 2,174,400 2,198,677 1.12% Recreation 199,721 205,099 2.69% ActiNity Center 333,471 323,765 -2.91% Planning & Zoning 125,182 126,837 1.32% Other Financing Uses 60,200 110,200 83.06% Total Expenditures $ 10,299,327 $ 10,470,526 1.66 General Fund Budget Three Year Comparison Year Budget Incr/Derr % Change 2010 $ 10,073,003 $ (2,489) 0.02% 2011 $ 10,299,327 $ 226,324 2.25% 2012 $ 10,519,463 $ 220,136 2.14°/n Change over three year period = 4.43% Average change over three years is approximately 1.48% per year The rate of inflation from 2010 to 2011 was 3.8% General Fund Revenues lhaeges ln� Miuellaneou5 Service Revenue 11G 1%` Intfrest Licenses. Earnings Ponnll5 IntergaW'I Revenue 5% Properly Ewes NS% GF Expenditures Other General Recreation 1% Government 5% 11% Community Services Puhl2Works 10% 21% Public Safety 52% Analysis of Average Valued Home • 2012 Home Valued at = $225,000 • Assuming constant market value • 2011 City Taxes $1,252 • 2012 Proposed City Taxes $1,334 . Increase of $82 from 2011 .2012 Revised City Taxes $1,319 . Decrease of $15 from preliminary levy • • RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TAX CHANGES FROM 2011 eu�no� zona, .,son ,9..vn arnm •IOOK i.9n •)�n«M mw l:.slnm •50n-9.9% 1. ssxo, Where My Taxes Go spec... Taxing DW.ts 8% snow ON County Market Values :,.000.m0.oao - -- - :o 11102 1000 10DI 10D0 2000 2002 200! 200➢ 1010 261 Property Tax Breakdown on Home Valued at $225,000 • City $1,334 ♦County $1,097 •School District $ 657 •Special Districts 272 Total Taxes $3,360 This does not include referendum market value taxes levied by the school district(s) or reduction for the market value homestead exclusion which is new for 2012. Budget Challenges • Loss of significant revenue sources • Inspection revenues • Decline in investment income • Change in Homestead Credit Program • PERA rate increase — state mandated • Inflation • Energy costs Fuel & fuel related projects Property & liability insurance MVHC vs MVHE • Market Value Homestead Credit • After tax credit • Direct reduction of taxes • Market Value Homestead Exclusion • A portion of your home value is excluded from being tax • Value is reduced before taxes are calculated �J • Theoretical Illustration •Average Tax Rate Illustration $12,0__ Old Law New Law r Credit Exclusion Estimated Market Value $116,000 $116,000 Exclusion $0 $26,800-' Taxable Market Value $116,000 $89,200 Class Rate 1% 1 Net Tax Capacity $1,160 $892 Tax Rate 105.81% 110.92 Gross Tax $1,227 $989 Credit $268 $0 Net Tax Capacity $959 $989 Fiscal Disparities • Spreads commercial growth among all metro cities and benefits cities that are not experiencing commercial growth • Hopkins had been a net "gainer" — we received more than we contributed • Hopkins is now a net "contributor" — meaning we contribute more that we receive • Results in higher tax rate Responses to Budget Challenges • Smart Growth and Development • Innovation • Savings and Efficiencies • Grants • Debt Savings/Refinancing • Delayed hiring of vacant positions • Eliminated capital items Fiscal Disparities Changes a Changes in the Fiscal Disparities Program affects the tax rate for Hopkins properties. Net Year Contribution Distribution Gain/ Loss 2012 3,092,328 2,650,437 (441,891) 2011 3,324,078 2,645,025 (679,053) 2010 2,858,921 2,913,208 54,287 2009 2,766,202 2,840,070 73,868 2008 2,450,063 2,405,483 (44,580) 2007 2,116,466 1,997,455 (119,011) 2006 1,952,996 1,836,753 (116,243) 2005 1,526,509 1,673,106 146,597 Smart Growth and Development • LA Fitness • Excelsior Crossing Phase III • Hopkins Health & Wellness Center Expansion • Marketplace & Main Apartments • Pizza Luce hift $12,0__ ....... $10,0tt $8,0'. u2007 u 2008 $6,0-- :—� ■zoos $4,0_ ❑z010 ozotz $2,0 11 dus Apartments Values Fiscal Disparities Changes a Changes in the Fiscal Disparities Program affects the tax rate for Hopkins properties. Net Year Contribution Distribution Gain/ Loss 2012 3,092,328 2,650,437 (441,891) 2011 3,324,078 2,645,025 (679,053) 2010 2,858,921 2,913,208 54,287 2009 2,766,202 2,840,070 73,868 2008 2,450,063 2,405,483 (44,580) 2007 2,116,466 1,997,455 (119,011) 2006 1,952,996 1,836,753 (116,243) 2005 1,526,509 1,673,106 146,597 Smart Growth and Development • LA Fitness • Excelsior Crossing Phase III • Hopkins Health & Wellness Center Expansion • Marketplace & Main Apartments • Pizza Luce r� u U • Innovation *Partnerships • Hopkins School District • Hennepin County • Minnetonka — Joint Recreation Program • Other Neighboring Cities • Three Rivers Park District • Watershed Districts. etc. Grants - Police • Bullet Proof Vests - $32,945 • Operation Nitecap - $16,862 • Glen Lake Optimists — school patrol and project alert - $4,000 • ISD 270 — One Voice Grants - $2,000 • SAFR/Alcohol Enf Grant - $3,682 • Recovery Justice Assistance - $39,900 Grants - Fire • HazMat Grants - $526,300 • Firefighters Assistance Prevention — State and Private - $37,500 • MN Resuscitation Consortium - $5,000 • MBFTE Training - $4,000 • CERT Grants — State and private - $16,100 • FM Global — Sparky Costume - $1,740 • Donations from individuals - $1,150 Savings & Efficiencies *Go Green • Implemented police vehicle fuel monitoring system to save on fuel costs • Building and Facility Changes have saved over $15,000 annually • Organics recycling • Scanning of documents to digital storage • Paperless Packets Grants — Police (cont.) • Met Life — Community Police Partnership -$20,000 • COPS Grant 2008-2010 - $73,050 • COPS Grant 2011-2015 - $242,266 • Hopkins Crime Prevention Fund — rifles & bait car training - $26,762 • Fed CEDAP — night vision goggles - $5,432 • Indiv & Community Groups - $6,200 Grants — Public Works • 9 Mile Creek — anti -icing machine - $5,400 • Federal ARRA — boiler grant - $75,000 • Refuse Fund • Hennepin Co Recycling Grant - $121,420 • Hennepin Co— Organics Grant— $27,750 5 • 0 0 Grants — Economic Devel. • DEED & Met Council — clean up grants - $3,004,650 • Hennepin Co — TOD Grant - $875,000 • Hennepin Co. — Active Living - $16,670 • Hennepin Co. — Blake Road Sidewalks -$240,200 • MRAC — Art Street - $10,000 • Hennepin County - Grocery Market Study Grant - $11,700 Grants - Recreation • Park Bench donations - $5,900 • HYHA Donation - $1,500 • Hennepin Co. Youth Sports Grant— Shady Oak Beach Play Area - $62,500 • Developers — Park Dedication Fees - $385,475 • LISC — Cottagevile Park - BB courts and soccer goals - $12,000 Grants — Art Center • MSAB Grant - $33,629 • Friends of the Hopkins Center for the Arts - $64,700 • Corporate and Individual sponsorships - $15,120 Grants — Econ Devel. (cont.) • Hennepin Co — Blake Rd Pedestrian Study - $6,000 • Hennepin Co — Bike Racks - $5,125 • HRA/DOW Towers • ROSS Grant - $446,648 • Federal Stimulus - $128,120 • County Stimulus - $200,000 • MHF — Elevator Grant - $200,000 Grants — Depot Coffee House • General Mills Foundation - $30,000 • Park Nicollet Foundation - $100,000 • McKnight Foundation - $20,000 • Hennepin Co. — Composting Grant - $9,500 • MRAC - $12,700 (2 grants) • DNR — Solar Grant - $87,000 • Individual Donations - $12,375 Value for Taxes • 24 -Hour Police and Fire Protection • Emergency medical treatment and management services • Well Maintained Streets, Trails, and Sidewalks • Elections • Boulevard Tree and Forestry Program • High Quality Recreation programs • Hopkins Activity Center and Hopkins Depot • Hopkins Center for the Arts • Community and Economic Development • Housing Services and Programs • Building Inspections, Licensing, and Code Enforcement • Beautiful Parks and Open Space r� • CJ CITY OF HOPKINS 2012 PROPOSED TAX LEVY Pu General Operations General Fund Capital Levy Special Levies: PERA Levy MVHC Levy Subtotal Special Levies - Other Debt Levies: 2002B GO Improv Revolving Bonds 2003 HRA Revenue Bonds 2007B GO Improv Revolving Bonds 2007 Capital Improvement Bonds 2010A GO Improvement Bonds 2010B Refunding Bonds Subtotal - Debt Levies Subtotal Special Levies TOTAL LEVIES Increase over prior year Percentage Incr (Decr) - Total 2012 Net Levy 2011 Proposed $ 8,539,064 $ 8,881,428 100,000 $ 125,000 $ 8,639,064 $ 9,006,428 35,500 35,500 222,850 - $ 258,350 $ 35,500 59,000 - 200,000 220,000 172,000 184,500 710,000 765,900 100,000 77,000 w I,- 15ww .5-w-,-Ww $ 1,499,350 $ 1,341,900 $10,138,414 $ 10,348,328 $ 212,729 $ 209,914 2012 Net Levy Revised $ 8,784,091 $ 125,000 $ 8,909,091 35,500 $ 35,500 220,000 184,500 765,900 77,000 59,000 $ 1,306,400 $ 1,341,900 $10,250,991 $ 112,577 2.14% 2.07% 1 1.11% CITY OF HOPKINS PROPOSED GENERAL FUND REVENUE BUDGET 2011 2012 % Department Budget Budget Incr/(Decr) Property Taxes & PERA Special Levy 8,630,564 8,887,591 2.98% Intergovernmental Revenue PERA Aid 20,510 20,510 0.00% MVHC unallotment 135,000 0 -14.81% Police - Federal Grant 0 0 -12.93% Police - State Aid 177,700 177,000 -0.39% Police - POST Reimbursement 10,000 9,000 -10.00% Police - Misc Grants 4,000 86,000 2050.00% Police - 911 Service Fee 24,860 24,860 0.00% Fire - State Aid 85,000 70,000 -17.65% Fire - County 0 0 -10.59% PW - State Aid 120,000 125,000 4.17% Total Intergovernmental Revenue 442,070 512,370 15.90% Licenses, Permits & Fees 5,200 5,750 10.58% Court Fines 135,000 115,000 -14.81% Building Permit & Inspection Fees 283,100 246,500 -12.93% Business Licenses 7,500 5,000 -33.33% Administrative Citations 6,000 8,000 33.33% Liquor, Animal Licenses & Penalties 95,900 98,700 2.92% Fire Licenses & Permits 5,300 3,500 -33.96% PW - Licenses & Permits is P&Z - License & Permits 9,490 2,500 9,415 1,000 -0.79% -60.00% Total Licenses Permits & Fines 544,790 487,115 -10.59% Charges for Service Finance Department 5,200 5,750 10.58% Municipal Building 2,500 2,500 0.00% Assessing 1,000 1,200 20.00% City Clerk 11,100 0 -100.00% Inspections 43,450 71,950 65.59% Police 43,500 40,000 -8.05% Fire 6,200 70,000 1029.03% Public Works 2,250 2,750 22.22% Activity Center 46,000 49,500 7.61% Planning & Zoning 0 1,500 -0.51% Total Charges for Service 161,200 245,150 52.08% Miscellaneous Revenue Franchise Fees 290,000 290,000 0.00% Unallocated Misc 500 0 -100.00% Finance Department 4,800 4,800 0.00% Elections 0 0 Police 500 1,000 100.00% Fire 0 0 Public Works 2,100 4,000 90.48% Acitivty Center 17,000 13,500 -20.59% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 314,900 313,300 -0.51% • Interest Earnings 75,000 25,000 -66.67% Use of 2009 Budget Savings 130,803 Total Revenues $10,299,327 $10,470,526 1.66% CITY OF HOPKINS PROPOSED GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE BUDGET 2011 2012 Budget % Department Budget Budget Incr/(Decr) Fity Council 71,547 1 -3.98% Administrative Services Administration 167,300 171,090 2.27% Personnel 43,924 44,405 1.10% Wellness 2,000 2,000 0.00% Information Services 238,446 251,637 5.53% Total Administrative Services 451,670 469,132 1 3.87% Finance 19,360 16,822 -13.11% Budget 23,066 26,249 13.80% Debt Management 0 0 0.00% General Accounting 129,448 133,402 3.05% Payroll 46,729 45,075 -3.54% TIF Administration 0 0 0.00% Utility Billing 4,000 5,000 25.00% Total Finance 203,243 209,726 3.19% Legal 135,000 135,000 0.00% Munici al Building 294,818 296,863 0.69% Rece tionist 44,172 44,846 1.53% lAssessing 167,236 1 173,091 3.50% City Clerk City Clerk 19,360 16,822 -13.11% Records Management 29,833 32,273 8.18% Elections 50,222 60,875 21.21% Total City Clerk 99,415 1 109,970 1 10.62% Inspections Building Code Inspections 252,170 268,598 6.51% Fire Inspections 38,205 34,494 -9.71% Heating & Plumbing Inspections 90,400 91,358 1.06% Housing Inspections 134,680 135,597 0.68% Restaurant & Hotel Inspections 23,309 1,160 -95.02% Misc. Community Inspections 75,143 79,260 5.48% Vacant Property Management 2,700 2,700 0.00% Total inspections 616,607 613,167 1 -0.56% Police Police Administration 480,615 486,499 1.22% Patrol 2,360,705 2,466,299 4.47% Heat Team 73,298 58,906 -19.63% Reserves 33,620 24,467 -27.22% Investigations 499,148 430,357 -13.78% Metro Drug Task Force 105,737 105,292 -0.42% Pawn Shop 3,436 3,493 1.66% Outreach 80,804 84,036 4.00% Fire Fire 833,587 851,559 2.16% Emergency Preparedness 4,671 3,865 -17.26% Total Fire 838,258 855,424 1 2.05% Public Works 2011 2012 Budget% • Department Dispatch Budget 526,782 Budget 553,145 Incr/(Decr) 5.00% Reception -Records 255,560 252,356 -1.25% Systems Management 64,682 65,182 0.77% Total Police 4,484,387 1 4,530,032 1.02% Fire Fire 833,587 851,559 2.16% Emergency Preparedness 4,671 3,865 -17.26% Total Fire 838,258 855,424 1 2.05% Public Works 274,008 59,463 264,914 58,851 -3.32% -1.03% PW Building 33,692 32,739 -2.83% Equipment Services 78,446 86,229 9.92% Administration 26,478 27,442 3.64% Engineering 137,802 132,267 -4.02% Street & Alleys 853,812 859,205 0.63% Snow & Ice Removal 205,615 197,550 -3.92% Parks 628,101 652,465 3.88% Tree Service 210,454 210,780 0.15% Total Public Works 2,174,400 2,198,677 1 1.12% Recreation 274,008 59,463 264,914 58,851 -3.32% -1.03% Playground 20,198 21,034 4.14% Ice Rink 12,284 12,192 -0.75% Park Service 12,518 12,810 2.33% • Joint Recreation 147,000 152,000 3.40% Skate Park 7,721 7,063 -8.52% Total Recreation 199,721 205,099 2.69% Activity Center Act Ctr - Community Use Act Ctr - Maintenance 274,008 59,463 264,914 58,851 -3.32% -1.03% Total Activity Center 333,471 323,765 -2.91% Planning & Zoning 125,182 126,837 1.32% Tuition Reimbursement 10,200 10,200 0.00% lContingency 50,000 1 90,000 80.00% Total Expenditures 10,299,327 1 10,460,526 1.57% Other Financing Uses Transfers to other funds 0 10,000 Total Other Financing Uses 0 1 10,000 Grand Total Expenditures $10,299,327 1$10,470,526 1.66% Total Revenues $10,299,327 1 $10,470,526 40 Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures $ - $ Why did my property value drop so much? This year, homeowners saw a steep drop in the property values listed on their tax notices. The continued decline in housing prices ay be part of that drop. But in many cases, the decrease is due to a new type of tax break called a homestead market value clusion. This graphic offers a look at how the new system differs from the old one. Of course, many factors affect the final property tax bill. To better clarify the most recent changes, this explanation looks just at residential property values. In the beginning ... Tax Bill $$$$ $$$$ a) Assessors b) The homeowners c) They then paid their bill, valued a property. received a property tax bill and the money went to based on that value. local governments. Giving taxpayers a break: State legislators decided to give certain homeowners a reduction in property taxes for the homes they lived in. So they created a market value homestead credit. ax $ $ $ $ 4*0 $$$$ a) The credit subtracted money b) This took money away c) So the state reimbursed right from tax bills — peaking from local governments local governments for the at $304 for a $76,000 home. — not the state. lost money. Budget shortfalls: The state cut most of those reimbursements as its own budget got tighter—eliminating payments to Hopkins starting in the second half of 2008. => $ $ $ $ $$$$ a) Homeowners still b) But local governments got less got the break on their money, too. In 2011, Hopkins will property taxes. see a shortfall of about $233,000. Closing the gap: The state didn't have the money to resume payments, and local governments didn't like the state forcing them to forgo the tax revenue. But legislators also didn't want to simply remove the credit because that would have been a sharp tax increase. So they created a new break called the homestead market value exclusion. Tax'Bill $$$$=> ( AL a) Now, a portion of a home's value is artificially reduced for tax purposes. b) This lowers the property's tax bill. c) And it still allows cities and other local governments to collect their entire levy. d) But properties that don't get the exclusion must pick up the tab. Patch http://hopkins.patch.com What does this mean for my property tax bill? 10 The new market value exclusion provides comparable benefits to the old market value homestead credit — but it's hardly an exact match. Furthermore, differently valued homes see different benefits because both the credit and exclusion peak for a $76,000 home — declining from there until they disappear altogether for homes worth $413,800 or more. Here's a comparison of how various homes fare under the two systems. What does this mean for other taxpayers? Sharing the burden: Property taxes aren't like an income tax or sales tax — which both give the government a set percentage off the total. Instead, local governments levy a specific dollar figure and collect all of that — only using property values to determine each taxpayer's share of the levy. Local governments will collect that entire levy whether property values are worth $10 billion or $10 million. In other words, values don't dictate the size of the pie; they determine how that pie is divided. Commercial/ Apartmen" sl Homes . Industrial Non-exclusion homes Decreasing values: The market value exclusion caused residential values to shrink significantly. Factoring in the change, Hopkins' residential tax capacity dropped close to 20 percent. But remember how local governments collect their entire levy — whatever happens to property values? That meant the lower home values left a hole someone would end up filling. Commercial/ $76,000 $150,000 $300,000 $450,000 Market value $45,600 $126,260 $289,760 $450,000 after exclusion Tax after $505.80 $1,400.48 53,214.02 $4,991.40 exclusion Market value $304 $237.40 $102.40 $0 homestead credit Tax after $500.16 $1,349.75 $3,071.90 $4,761.45 credit What does this mean for other taxpayers? Sharing the burden: Property taxes aren't like an income tax or sales tax — which both give the government a set percentage off the total. Instead, local governments levy a specific dollar figure and collect all of that — only using property values to determine each taxpayer's share of the levy. Local governments will collect that entire levy whether property values are worth $10 billion or $10 million. In other words, values don't dictate the size of the pie; they determine how that pie is divided. Commercial/ Apartmen" sl Homes . Industrial Non-exclusion homes Decreasing values: The market value exclusion caused residential values to shrink significantly. Factoring in the change, Hopkins' residential tax capacity dropped close to 20 percent. But remember how local governments collect their entire levy — whatever happens to property values? That meant the lower home values left a hole someone would end up filling. Commercial/ Apartments/ Industrial Non-exclusion homes Filling the hole: Consequently, the difference had to be made up by those properties that didn't receive the market value exclusion — commercial, industrial, apartments and homes that aren't eligible for the break. In other words, this shifted the tax burden. Commercial/ Homes Apartments/ Industrial Non-exclusion homes Patch http://hopkins.patch.com