Dann Dobson writes: > "Subd. 3. Requirements for adoption, use, termination. > (a) Imposition of a local sales tax is subject to approval by > voters of the political subdivision at a general election." > > The legislature, in their wisdom, put this law in place to protect taxpayers from crazy > schemes, such as the Hennepin County Board has proposed for the Twins Stadium and the > insane proposal of the Anoka County Board to raise the sales tax up in their county by .75% > to pay for a new Vikings stadium.
Dann is absolutely right, but with a couple of caveats. 1. The state law he cites is not in the Constitution - it's a legislative act that the current legislature and governor can undo or grant exceptions to. Such exceptions happen all the time, and are perfectly legal. 2. The act Dann cites was enacted as part of the "Minnesota Miracle." The Miracle's goal � for those of you who don't go back to the good old days when Wendy Anderson and the big fish appeared on the cover of Time � was to push spending onto the progressive, statewide income tax and away from regressive local property and sales taxes. To keep localities from undoing the state's policy, the referendum requirement was added, to make it harder to institute such a tax. Trouble is, the Miracle has been steadily gummed to death over the years - especially recently, when the state has refused to fund spending via the income tax, pushing costs onto localities whose only revenue-side tools are the property tax and sales tax. Therefore, the philosophical underpinning for the higher sales tax hurdle - the referendum - basically no longer exists. (I'm betting many sales tax referendum proponents would oppose a referendum requirement for property taxes - which I think is logically inconsistent. Both are regressive taxes.) Personally, I don't see why the city of Minneapolis should go to the state to raise the sales tax, as they have to in the recent initiative to fund more cops & firefighters. Since the state has put us in this box, they need to give locals unfettered taxing power to get out. In other words, the referendum question is bigger than the stadium. I think the referendum requirement is pass� - even if the stadium wasn't the issue. Do I think increased use of the sales tax is good public policy? No. I like the Miracle and believe the progressive income tax should be raised at the state level, Local Government Aid should be restored as a way to equalize property-tax wealth. That means for cities such as Minneapolis, local property taxes (primarily education-related) would be allowed to fall. However, going back to that philosophy means changing the Guv and Legislature - which can't happen until 2006 (if then). Sales-tax referenda may seem great now, but I'd argue they no longer make sense and deny us an alternative to the property tax. David Brauer Kingfield REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
