AUBURN – Councilors will consider a slightly slimmer education department budget when they meet tonight.
The latest draft of the budget would trim $150,000 from the school department, according to City Manager Pat Finnigan. That would be enough to do away with a proposed middle school foreign language program and technological support for teachers.
Councilors are scheduled to vote on that draft budget during the regular meeting at 7 p.m. A second reading of the budget and final passage is scheduled for the regular meeting on June 19.
In all, the budget calls for $39.7 million in property taxes – $23.8 million for municipal services and $15.9 million for the schools.
That’s an $801,000 increase in property taxes compared to last year’s budget. With an estimated $32 million in new property value growth, the city’s property tax rate would actually go down. Based on 2005 values, the city’s tax rate would be about $30.35 per $1,000 of value, about 13 cents less than last year.
“This is holding the budget about as steady as we can,” Finnigan said. The city faces about $820,000 in unavoidable costs. Those include $438,000 in wages and benefits, $135,000 in higher fuel costs and $119,700 in capital investments.
“Without those costs, the budget would actually go down,” Finnigan said. “Our biggest goal is to hold onto those core services, the ones that people really expect.”
But final tax bills and the city’s ultimate tax rate won’t be known until June 19, the council’s second reading of the budget. That is when tax assessors are scheduled to finish work on the citywide property revaluation. An audit by the International Association of Assessing Officers is due then, Finnigan said.
Preliminary values, released in October, were estimated at more than $1.8 billion.
The budget also shifts $6,600 out of a Lewiston-Auburn 911 contingency fund into the general assistance account for fuel.
“The city of Lewiston had already cut that contingency money for 911, and we wanted to keep things even,” Finnigan said. “We also felt that these are difficult budget times, so we needed to save where we can.”
All other social service agency spending has been cut, however.
Comments are no longer available on this story