DULUTH - St. Louis County Board members were unanimous in their support for a maximum 7.23% property tax levy increase in 2025 — a jump from last year, but still a bit less than the increase in the property tax base.
St. Louis County OKs a 7.23% max tax levy increase; new development will blunt that
The tax base in Minnesota’s geographically largest county grew about $265 million in mostly residential construction last year.
The levy increase is more than $180 million, and more than half of the money is slotted into two categories: public health and human services and public safety. The county’s tax base grew with about $265 million in new construction last year, mostly residential. The levy is divided among property owners based on the property’s value and classification — including commercial, homestead and seasonal recreation.
“When I look at an increase like this, it is a daunting task to go in public and ask that,” Board Chair Keith Nelson said during Tuesday’s committee of the whole meeting at the St. Louis County Courthouse, adding that he fully supported it. He credited finance and budget chair Annie Harala, of Duluth, for her leadership on the project.
According to the county, a home valued at $400,000 will see a $10 decrease in the county portion of its property taxes compared to last year. Commercial properties are expected to see minimal impact. In Duluth, the county’s portion of the property tax bill is the highest. Forty-one percent of what residents pay goes to the county, while 27% goes to the city and a similar amount to the school district.
By law, counties in Minnesota must set a maximum property tax levy by the end of September. The amount can lower but it cannot increase as commissioners hone next year’s budget — which commissioners are expected to vote on Dec. 17. Meetings for public input on the levy and budget are at 7 p.m. Nov. 18 at the St. Louis County Courthouse in Virginia and Nov. 25 at the courthouse in Duluth. The latter meeting will stream live on Facebook.
The U.S. Steel site in northern Minnesota had previously asked for an exception to the standard the company is now accused of violating.