Fire Municipal Service Taxing Unit millage rate
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
It is a stretch of the recording that this archive identified as a separate matter — a call to order, a recess, or something taken up that the agenda does not list. There is no official title, no staff recommendation and no disposition, because the county never recorded one. Everything below is inferred.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, Sep 3, 2025
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
The county’s minutes for Board of County Commissioners, Sep 3, 2025
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 5m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 79% of 39 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
I will now provide a summary of the Fire Municipal Service Taxing Unit Budget stating the tentative millage rate, the percentage change from the rolled back rate, and the reasons for the change. The Fire Municipal Service Taxing Unit Fund has a recommended tax levy of 2.1225 MLs. This represents a 5.62% increase from the rolled back rate of 2.0096. Taxable values. for this municipal service taxing unit increased 11.7%. The increase in property value results in
an additional $12.5 million in property tax revenue. The additional revenue will be used to fund wage increases for the firefighter union, four additional emergency medical services supervisors, and four additional fire arson investigators. I would ask the board to accept public comment and then vote on the Fire Municipal Service Taxing Unit Fund, military, and associated budget. The minimum vote for this tentative hearing is a simple majority or three votes. However, it will be a minimum of four votes for the final public hearing. Yeah.
Okay.
Does anyone wish to speak to the board regarding the Fire Municipal Service Taxing Unit? Known as an MSTU.
I do not have anyone signed up specifically for that one.
All right, is there a motion to adopt a military question, Chairman?
So uh my
Is this when rescues rolled up into this?
So no not yet. So the the intention is is before the end of this year is to bring back to the board uh changes in the current MSTU language to allow for rescue to roll up as well as the The board directed to bring back a law enforcement NST language as well. So we would bring both of those back. We're targeting about the November timeframe for that. So the the short answer to your question is no, it does not. But next year, when the board comes through and we do law enforcement, we do first
responders. We then can make global changes into how taxes are structured.
So so what change are you looking to make with fire that fire MST?
FIRE would allow for the rescue component uh to be uh included in the MSTU. Uh right now, currently it comes from your the the difference is made up. It's about a sixty-five, thirty-five split. So the fire budget comes from the general fund because your fire and a system is. The rescue portion. The rescue portion is right. I'm sorry, yes. The rescue portion comes from the general fund. So if we include it in the fire MSTU, it's basically a fire rescue MSTU and encompasses
all services that the fire rescue department covers. So it's no longer coming from two funding sources. The intent would be, I believe it's the board's intent, would be to make the a a commensurate reduction in the general operating millage to account For that movement, and then the fire rescue department will live in its own MSTU fund. Similarly, the sports direction was to come back with a law enforcement MSTU to handle the sheriff's budget and We it would be the same
the same concept.
Isn't there uh and I might be getting confused with something else, but on their their rescue side, don't they they lose money on Yes. So then be actually taking
money away from them.
So
why would we combine that? I I I'm I'm lost.
It's not a hundred percent. We we maybe recover a third. of those costs uh through through our bill recovery. So there's still um there's still makeup money that comes from the general fund currently for those operations. They're not wholly they're not They're not fully um
Yeah, I'm not a fan of that. Just for the for the
fan of moving
of combining them.
Okay, I mean currently it's subsidized to the general fund or it would be subsidized through the MSTU, um, which which puts pressure on your general fund.
Okay.
Well I don't know. I just
because she's does this doesn't have anything to do with it.
Oh yeah, that's okay. That's
that's why we're we're separating this. We want to bring this to you guys in November to have the discussion when all things MSTU. So it'd be law enforcement M STU and fire. And we can r we can list out the pros and cons, Commissioner, so I would love to you can make an informed decision on which direction.
We would all want pros and cons, yeah. Is
there a motion?
Um did did I already ask if anyone wanted to speak to this?
Yes.
Yes.
You did? Okay. Did you did
anyone get a m give
me a motion? It would you need to is there a motion to adopt?
Yeah. Is there a motion to adopt two point one two two two five mills for the fire M STU?
So
moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed?