J - Monroeville

has only a small reserve from which to draw if Council and Staff adhere to the 10 percentreserve policy.REVENUE DISCUSSIONRevenue comparisons for 2012 and previous years are presented in summary and detailed formunder other sections of this budget document. A summary comparing major revenue categories inthe 2012 Budget versus 2011 Budget is as follows:$ Change 20112011 % Change Yr. End EstimateRevenues: Budget 2012 Budget 2011-2012 to2012 BudgetGeneral Government $20,789,793 $20,622,818 -.80% $(166,975)Public Safety 464,042 456,640 -1.60% (7,402)Public Works 200,407 154,499 -22.91% (45,908)Human Services 336,613 332,140 -1.33% (4,473)Community Development 139,700 123,200 -11.33% (16,500)Sewer Tap Lien 250 250 0% 0Interest/Transfers 4,675,359 1,664,168 -64.41 % (3,011,191)Cable TV Franchise 510,000 650,000 1.56% 10,000Liquid Fuels 640,000 525,000 2.94% 15,000Total General Fund $27,756,164 $24,528,715 -11.63% ($3,227,449) \/Cable TV Revenues 233,832 232,159 -.72% (1,673)Total All Reserve S2V189.996 S2.-4,7JiQ,874 -11,54% IS3.229,1221The three most significant components of current revenue continue to be taxes which include realestate, earned income tax and business taxes (mercantile and business privilege). Together, thetaxes will account for $14,065,000 or about 57.3 percent of the Municipality's revenue generated in2012. In 2012, one mill of real estate tax should generate approximately $2,045,454 in revenue.One-tenth of one percent of earned income tax will generate about $400,000 in revenue. Theproposed 2012 Budget maintains the current municipal earned income tax rate at 1.5 percent, thecurrent business privilege tax rate at 4 mills with a 100 percent calculation basis, and the currentmunicipal mercantile tax rate at 1.5 mills wholesale and 1.75 mills retail.Real Estate Tax Real estate assessments by Allegheny County were revised in 2001 and again in2002. For most properties the assessed values were increased substantially. However, recentassessment reductions, especially on commercial properties, have negated many of the newconstruction increases. The recent assessed valuation history is as follows:2009 -- $2,115,284,8202010 -- $2,090,352,7822011 -- $2,089,249,4202012 -- $2,089,249,420 EstimatedTraditionally, assessed valuation increases are due to new construction and increasing values ofexisting property. Even though the assessment provider, Allegheny County, has locked in 2002assessments, Allegheny County has a court order to reassess all properties in the county by 2012.The county has stated during the summer of 2011 that they will not be able to meet this deadline.- 4 -