Thanks to David and Bob for their postings. David pointed out one problem with simply deferring tax increases based on age. Another would be for those with significant wealth. To pick on Pohlad, if such a system were in place, he would have had about twenty years of not paying higher taxes.
Bob is correct in saying that there is a difference between the change in the assessed value and a change in the amount levied, depending on the mill rate. In addition to David's discussion of city income taxes, it seems to me that a replacement for part of the property tax would need to be a county income tax, not just a city tax, or in addition to a city tax, due to the portion of taxes that flow to the county. Of course, with Ramsey county wanting to buy the union depot and take it of the tax rolls, so as to have it be a "hub" for a never-coming Amtrak revival, you can see how the idea of not increasing taxes automatically just isn't attractive to those who spend the taxes. Remember that California fixed taxable value at the time of purchase and it never changes until the house is sold. The famous Proposition 13 that has helped to lower the quality of the state's schools. Bruce Gaarder Highland POark Saint Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
