A state‑required tax notice is causing confusion in Storm Lake—showing a property‑tax increase even though the city is proposing no change to its levy.
That disconnect took center stage during a public hearing yesterday, as the Storm Lake City Council set the maximum levy for the 2026–27 fiscal year.
The hearing is required under House File 718, and the notice was published March 20 before being sent to all property owners through the county’s new levy‑information letter.
City Finance Director Tyler Gibbons walked the council through how the state‑mandated notice is structured and why it doesn’t reflect the city’s actual proposal. He said the city is holding its overall levy rate flat at $15.17 per $1,000 of taxable valuation, the same as this year—but the notice still shows an increase.
He said those assumptions come from the state and county—not the city. The notice is based on an assumed 10 percent increase in assessed valuation and a new statewide rollback percentage. In reality, Storm Lake’s taxable value growth is just 1.41 percent, meaning the city will see only $49,959 in additional revenue—less than a 1 percent increase.
Gibbons broke down each levy component that makes up the city’s total rate. The Consolidated General Fund Levy remains at its statutory maximum of $8.10 and will generate about $54,000 in new revenue for essential services including public safety, library operations, recreation, and airport functions.
The city’s insurance levy will rise by nearly $40,000, reflecting higher liability and property insurance costs. Police and fire retirement contributions will increase by about $52,600, and FICA and IPERS obligations will rise by roughly $10,700. Meanwhile, employee benefits will decrease by nearly $98,000, driven by a slight drop in health‑insurance costs—the first decrease since 2006—though other benefit categories are increasing.
Debt service remains essentially unchanged.
Gibbons emphasized that many of these levy components are mandated or tied to outside providers, leaving the council little discretion.
The hearing also prompted a brief discussion about the Lakes Preservation Association’s shoreline rearmoring project request—an item the council previously supported with in‑kind services. New engineering estimates show the total project cost could reach $260,000 to $300,000, far above the $123,000 figure initially discussed. Council members said they want to stay within the original commitment level until the LPA clarifies its grant plans and funding sources.
Although no residents voiced concerns at the public hearing, City Manager Keri Navratil noted she recently met with a resident who had questions about valuations and water rates, and said the conversation underscored how much the city accomplishes with limited resources.
[7:21] Navratil: “Once he sat down and we went through all of the presentations, he was surprised that we did so much with so little.”
The city will hold its full fiscal year 2026–27 budget hearing on April 20.
