The Ocean Shores City Council on Monday again tabled a proposal to increase local property taxes 16 percent for one year in 2017 to make up for revenue that fell short of expectations due to previously lower than anticipated property values.

The Council was presented an ordinance stating the city “has determined that there is a substantial need for a regular levy in the amount of $3.035 million, which includes an increase of $425,304” to come from the one-year increase.

The city is required by Nov. 30 to adopt a property tax ordinance specifying its general property tax levy, EMS special levy and 2002 special levy for treatment facilities.

One proposal was to recover the funds through the one-time increase and use the money to bring the Ocean Shores Library back into the general fund portion of the spending document, thus eliminating the future need for another library levy lid lift.

Finance Director Angela Folkers said the city has received new preliminary assessed values from the county that show an approximate 4 percent increase over 2015, which equates to about $38 million in added assessed value ($973.9 million total), with about $19 million in new construction. “Of all the neighboring cities, we have the highest growth,” Folkers noted to start the budget discussion with revised revenue figures. She also presented comparison charts that show Ocean Shores residents pay less in total levy amounts (for schools, the Port of Grays Harbor, the hospital district, and for emergency services, etc.) than other cities in the county.

The new values revise the city’s 2017 budget projections on the “estimated impact on (an) average homeowner” with property valued at $150,000 for the city’s combined planned 2017 levies and levy lifts. Folkers said that the cost per month would now be $3.76 per month, as opposed to $6.11 per month under the old assessed values.

The ongoing budget process was the subject of pointed comments during a public hearing and comment session, and the council decided to take no action on the proposed one-year property tax adjustment before the full agenda of the meeting was approved.

During the initial comment period, Resident Susan Conniry sharply criticized the idea of taking the tax increase: “Since the budget discussions began this year, not once have you asked, ‘How do you control spending? How do we cut spending and control costs?’ Instead, you ask, ‘How do we increase revenue?’”

While the proposed 2017 budget does contain a $1.5 million ending surplus (up from $1.08 million), resident Don Williams said the increase “is on the backs of the citizens of Ocean Shores.”

“You are considering a large percentage increase in property tax. You played with water rates and settled on an increase for low-volume users. You propose a Transportation Benefit District to increase vehicle tabs or a sales tax. An Erosion Taxing District is being considered,” Conniry said, noting that seniors on fixed incomes get no net increases in their tight budgets.

The council will hold a second budget study session Nov. 1, and a second public hearing on Nov. 14 during the regular council meeting.

Resident Randy Peck noted that Ocean Shores pays comparatively high levy amounts with other cities except that the North Beach School Levy is less because it is a much smaller district.

“That is where your difference is,” he said of the comparative charts presented by Folkers.

Resident Don Williams also questioned the need “to shoot for a $1.5 million ending balance” in the budget for next year, with the city already starting the year with a surplus of $1.08 million.

“That increase of $419,000 is on the backs of the citizens of Ocean Shores,” Williams said.

Ocean Shores Mayor Crystal Dingler said the one-time property tax hike is a one-time opportunity the council could choose to take, and Folkers said the council also had the choice to take the full amount or something less.

The city does have a process where low-income residents can get relief, the mayor noted.

“If we take it and do something constructive with it and take down in another area,” that’s what the administration is proposing, Dingler said. “It will a one year bump, and I get that, and I know it will be a hardship on some people, but some some people don’t pay the full tax either because they can show it is a hardship.”

Councilwoman Holly Plackett also questioned if the council would be committed to use the funds for the library, and the mayor told her that wasn’t the case.

“Our job is to recommend what we thing it the best thing for the city, and that was our recommendation — to not do a library levy and bring the whole thing back down to a more reasonable level,” Dingler said.

Folkers added: “It’s two totally separate decisions.”