> Vicky Heller: It's won't be a dead horse until Minneapolis residents > understand how their property taxes are calculated. If Ms. Becker's claim > is true, that only six people in the State know how the calculation works, > there is something VERY WRONG.
It isn't as bad as all that. It is just I glossed over many of the complexities of the system for pediogical purposes. Property taxes are much more transparent then say the federal income tax or corporate taxes. Probably more it is that most people don't care enough to learn. Overall property taxes are not as huge a bite of their incomes relatively speaking and the things that really impact their taxation levels like changes in classification rates are out of their direct control. In fact, I think more and more people are getting that if they are unhappy about their property tax levels or their level of services that they really need to be talking to their Legislators. > I am constantly amazed that Listmembers actually think that a dwindling tax > base can support more debt and more spending. Minneapolis has reduced its > payroll by 800 people and still can't pay its bills - doesn't anyone else > think that's odd? Am I the only person who wonders why Omaha (population of > 395,000) operates with $80 million of property taxes, while Minneapolis > can't make ends meet with $220 million? There isn't a dwindling tax base. There is just a system that has been rigged by the Legislature to reduce the tax base to give tax breaks to the wealthy and shift burden onto the poor and middle class. Many of us are optomistic that this can be reversed. And it simply isn't true to say that the City can't pay its bills. The city's budget is balanced every year by law. As to Omaha, I have to love it when I hear rhetoric put out by the ultra conservative "Center for the American Experiment" repeated. The reality is that Omaha isn't in any way similar to Minneapolis. Omaha MSA (that's census speak for the region) has about 767,000 people in it, on par with places like Tulsa, Toledo, Springfield, and Syracuse NY. Not Minneapolis, which has about 3 million, or about four times as many people. Regions that are equivalent are Seattle, Atlanta, Baltimore, Cincinnati and such. And second, Omaha has a city sales tax. Its property tax levels are about a third of Minneapolis's because it has a sales and use tax that raises twice as much money to its general fund as does its property tax. It's combined property and sales taxes going into its general fund (that's where you pay things like police and fire from) are projected to bring in about $151 M combined as opposed to the Minneapolis property tax which is projected to bring in $85 M into its general fund. Makes Minneapolis look like a veritible bargain given the additional costs of being a regional center and the concentrations of poverty. > All we hear from local politicians is that Minneapolis is in DIRE financial > need, but the credit rating agencies think that Minneapolis is in AAA shape. > I have trouble reconciling those opposite positions. Oh well, I guess > common sense is old-fashioned. The dire straits are much more on the side of the operating budget and only those directly supported by property taxes rather than the capital budget which is mostly supported by sources other than property taxes. > I agree that this is a very boring subject for those who can't do math. > Therefore, this is not the proper place to pursue the subject. I'll move on > to the rating agencies and the Legislature. Actually there are a lot of people who find this an interesting subject. And really this is about third grade math. We have been able to have this debate without even having to resorting to division yet. > In the meantime, you guys keep writing those checks to Minneapolis - even > though you have no idea what you're paying for. I think that people have a good idea of what they are paying for out there. I guess the frustrating thing is that Ms. Heller complains about the level of taxation but never gets to the real heart of the matter. It is very easy to snipe at taxation levels but the real work is identifying what services should be cut. Taxes are going to real services, not to send bureaucrats on vacation to the Bahamas. Here is my challenge back to Ms. Heller. On the operating side, property taxes go primarily to 1) police 2) fire 3) public works (street lights, pothole repair, street signs, etc) 4) parks 5) libraries 6) administration of government (i.e. the City Council, the Mayor, the Finance Department, the Human Resources Department, the Assessor - pretty much determined by the levels of other budgets). On the capital side, it goes to 1) street construction/street rehab/bridges (the majority) 2) maintenance/construction of buildings necessary for operating government (police stations, fire stations, park buildings, libraries, animal control building, etc). Which of these things should be cut? Which programs and by how much? This can then be translated into property tax levels and we can talk about what the tax savings will be to the average taxpayer. Then we can have a real debate. Carol Becker Longfellow 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
