On 4/23/04 9:10 AM, "Victoria Heller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not only is a little bit of information dangerous, it can be embarrassing > too. Mark Snyder writes: ""I found this hard to believe so I looked up the > actual property tax rates in the state statutes."
I love it when people talk big and don't back it up... > Good sleuthing Mark, but it's only a tiny piece of the property tax > calculation in Minneapolis. A better source for you would be the > Minneapolis Tax Assessor's office. They will actually E-mail to you the > spread sheets so that you can see the calculations for yourself. Of course > you'll need to learn about the "tax capacity" calculation with fifty > different "classifications", etc. You will find that my numbers are > correct; I would never risk my credibility by making an arithmetic mistake. Vicky was claiming a 4% tax rate on commercial property vs. 1% on residential. What I shared was the correct classification rates, which are set by the state. And I don't need to go to the city tax assessor, because there's a nifty online calculator developed by the League of Minnesota Cities: http://www.lmnc.org/library/propcalc.cfm I had some fun with this and ran a property tax comparison for a business in Minneapolis. Using that $200,000 figure that Vicky suggested, I learned that in 1997, such a business would have paid about $2,711 in city property tax. In 2003, that number dropped to $2,080. Meanwhile, for a house worth $200,000 during that same period, the city tax rose from $1,170 to $1,201. Regardless of the method you choose for comparison, the difference is not 400% like Vicky keeps claiming. And again, Minneapolis business owners whining about property taxes right now should really consider shutting the hell up given the trends on tax burdens right now... Oh, by the way, there's twelve classifications, not fifty - http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/273/13.html What am I supposed to be embarrassed about now? > Snyder: "It's worth noting again that the property tax rates are set by the > state,not the city." > > Heller: Someone should tell Mayor Rybak so he won't keep capping the > increases at 8% annually. Umm, someone needs to recall the difference between a "rate" and a "levy." Rates, which are based on classifications, as Vicky notes, are set by the state. Levies, which is the amount of money that must be collected from property taxes to operate local government programs and services each year, are set by the city. Here's a nice overview that was shared with me: http://www.lmnc.org/pdfs/proptax101.pdf It's also important to note that half that 8% LEVY increase goes towards paying down the mistakes of the past. As anyone who ever ran up a credit card knows, you don't get yourself into that kind of mess overnight and you don't get yourself out of it overnight. It takes some commitment and some patience to get back on track. Rather than ripping the current city leadership, they should be commended for making tough budget decisions that will help get the city's debt under control. > Heller: I don't think math has a political party designation, though I do > think Republicans are slightly better at it. That's questionable. I believe it was Republican leaders that recently sold us a $400 million dollar Medicare expansion that actually cost $530 million. Oops. Or given the details surrounding that issue, maybe Republicans really are better at math, they're just worse at being truthful. Regardless, those "word problems" you had to do in math? That's what budgeting is like. No matter how good you are at cracking out numbers on your calculator or memorizing equations, you have to select the correct inputs and put them in the right place in order to get the correct result. Republicans do a rotten job of selecting inputs. That's why we ended up with a state budget that doesn't take inflation into account and subsequently hides a shortfall for 2006-2007 that could be as much as $1 billion. I'd love to hear the rationale for ignoring inflation from an accountant's standpoint because the last two state finance commissioners have essentially called it the height of stupidity. Wouldn't it be interesting to see the response at a print shop when they open up the paid bill from some state agency and it's 2% less than what was charged, with a little note or sticker enclosed that states "inflation is being ignored this biennium" or something to that effect? That ought to go over big... By the way, I apologize for not providing Minneapolis-specific examples of Republican financial mismanagement, but since us Minneapolis residents been too smart to elect any in recent years, I hope I can be cut some slack. > Heller: Please explain the State's "responsibility" to pay Minneapolis' > bills. I thought Minneapolis is the great financial engine of the State - > spewing forth cash for everyone else. Did you know that only 15% of the > budget in Minneapolis comes from plain old property taxes? In fact, "other > income" is 18%. Here's an arithmetic quiz: The total budget is $1.2 > billion. How many million is "other income"? Um, I think it's the other way around. I seem to recall that Ms. Heller likes to talk about how cities are supposed to provide only basic services like police, fire and public works and she uses that to decry all the "extras" that the city is involved with. Part of those "extras" are things like health and family support, which is stuff that the state and county are supposed to be doing. Unfortunately, they seem to be run by descendents of Marie Antoinette (of "let them eat cake" fame) and the city gets left holding the bag because ignoring the need doesn't make it go away. Perhaps our state and county leaders should take heed of what eventually became of ol' Marie... And yes, Minneapolis is indeed a great financial engine. What some people need to recall is that much of the work done by this engine doesn't get to stay in Minneapolis - it goes over to the state budget. The only thing that keeps me from wanting a tax code that lets each city keep what it generates is that as much as I'd like to see some of the exurbs start to pay their own way, our rural cities would all die out in about a year. As for the "other income" question, I did some more of that sleuthing and came across the current city budget: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/city-budget/2004adopted/Sec3_FinOverview.pdf Now, there is a pie chart on page 6 of this document that shows "other" at 19%. However, there's also a table on page 7 of this document that provides a more accurate breakdown. The "other" in the chart includes stuff like rents, interest income, federal money and "local government" - which I presume is from Hennepin County. Take those out and you'll see that the actual "other" is only about 8.5% and breaking out the reading glasses, you can see from the fine print that "other" is defined as: gains, contributions, proceeds from long-term liabilities and other miscellaneous revenues. And that adds up to $105.6 million. If the city is guilty of anything, it's oversimplifying a pie chart. Throw those bums out! We can't have shenanigans like that in our fine city! > Snyder: "Let's play a word game and rephrase: If you don't like [affordable > housing developments], you don't have to [live] there, but don't > force your prejudices upon others." > > Heller: Wrong again Mark. I am a big fan of affordable housing - too bad > Minneapolis hasn't produced any. You are confused about my criticism of > real estate developers who rip off the Minneapolis taxpayers to build > expensive housing while the City Council looks the other way. When I made my comments about affordable housing, I wasn't thinking so much of the criticism of developers since I agree with most of what Vicky has said about them over the years - there's certainly been some scuzzy business taking place. However, I was thinking more of the residence in fancy North Oaks. I bet there's a lot of "affordable housing" there. Especially when vacant lots sell for a mere $250,000 per acre, as reported on that to that keen North Oaks Co. web site [see http://www.northoaks.com/otherlots.htm] mentioned by my neighbor, Sean. (Thanks, buddy!) So tell us, Vicky, what percentage of the housing in North Oaks meets affordability standards based on 50% of the MMI? Or not to pick on North Oaks specifically, but how does the percentage of housing in Minneapolis that meets the 50% standard compare with any of the 'burbs? Mark Snyder Windom Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
