Mason City Council Special Meetings – Public Hearing on Tax Levy and Budget Hearing Date Setting – March 24, 2026

Two consecutive special meetings of the Mason City Council were held on March 24, 2026 at 7:00 PM in the Mason City Room at the Mason City Public Library. The first meeting was a public hearing on the proposed maximum property tax levy for the city. The second meeting set the date for the final hearing on the proposed 2026–2027 city budget. Council members present were Adams, Massan, Simmons, Yusheski, and Heinz; Councilmember Latham and Mayor Lee were absent. Councilman Adams chaired the meetings.

Public Comments & Testimony

• First speaker (former council member and retired teacher): Expressed strong opposition to the proposed property tax increase, particularly citing a 29.07% increase listed on the state-mandated notice for the Mason City School District. Argued the school district should live within its means, noting declining enrollment, low test scores, and expensive facilities that did not attract new families. Stated the school board appears to view taxpayers as an "endless supply of cash."
• Robert Beasing (2771 Rainbow Court): Opposed the city tax increase, noting his property taxes rose from $3,800 in 2019 to a projected $6,233 in 2026 – a 64% increase. Questioned the financial feasibility of multiple city projects (mall renovation, convention center, parking garage, movie theater), warning that such spending will lead to higher future taxes. Urged the council to "say no" for the sake of taxpayers.
• Larry Zilge (rural Mason City): Agreed with previous speakers. Reported that his business properties’ assessed values increased by $76,000 with no improvements, and that one parking lot was assessed as having a building when only a dumpster exists. Demanded accountability for assessment methods, warning he may sell his business if tax burdens continue.

Discussion Items

• Councilman Hines (teacher at the high school): Defended the school district, stating test scores have actually increased. Explained that state funding formula changes and the voucher system have reduced school revenue, forcing staff cuts (e.g., two fewer science teachers) and the closure of Harding Elementary. Argued the tax increase is needed to compensate for lost state funding, not due to overspending.
• Councilman Adams: Clarified that the city council sets only the city levy (about 40% of a property tax bill); the school, county, and other levies are set by separate boards. Noted the state-mandated property tax notice is misleading because it does not account for the residential rollback (dropped from 47.4% to 44.5%) or assessment changes. He reported contacting state legislators Senator Campbell and Representative Hermanson to reform the notice template.
• Finance Director Brent: Provided detailed explanations:
  • The notice’s 6.42% city increase is based on an assumed $100,000 to $110,000 valuation; it does not reflect the rollback. For a typical Mason City home with unchanged assessment, the city levy would actually decrease by 2.77%. With an average assessment increase of 2.89%, the effect is roughly a wash.
  • For commercial properties, the actual increase is about 2.7%, matching the December CPI-U for the Midwest.
  • This year’s city levy increase is the first in five years, driven by state-mandated costs for police and fire pension benefits.
  • The budget includes $2.9 million for interior demolition and roof replacement ("white-boxing") of the former Yonker space at the mall, and $600,000 for parking lot repairs near the hotel – total $3.5 million in mall-related spending. These are part of a five-year capital plan.
  • Property assessments are conducted by the city assessor (independent of the council) and must align with market value per state code. Errors can be appealed to the assessor’s office.
• Councilman Simmons: Emphasized that the state-mandated notice is not controlled by the city and that assessed value does not directly equal taxable value due to the rollback. Affirmed the city’s financial management has been strong, and that spending decisions are made responsibly to avoid burdening taxpayers. He stated that the $3.5 million mall investment is more prudent than letting the building deteriorate.
• Councilman Yusheski: Sympathized with taxpayers but reiterated that assessment increases (which drive higher tax dollars) are set by state rules, not the council. He defended the city’s efficient use of funds for essential services (streets, police, fire).

Key Outcomes

• No action on the tax levy: The public hearing was informational only. The council will set the final levy after the budget hearing.
• Hearing date set for proposed 2026–2027 budget: The council unanimously approved (5-0) setting the final budget hearing for Tuesday, April 21, 2026 at 7:00 PM during the regular city council meeting. This will be the second meeting in April.
• Directive to state legislators: Councilman Adams urged taxpayers to contact their state representatives about reforming the misleading property tax notice and property tax system overall.
• Appeal process for assessments: Residents with assessment concerns were directed to contact the city assessor’s office to review and appeal if necessary.