|
Minneapolis StarTribune Article:Proposed taxes raise a clamor at Minneapolis city hall
Minneapolis City Council budget hearing was a tug of war among the wants and the can'ts.
By STEVE BRANDT, Star Tribune Last update: November 19, 2009 - 10:11 PM
Minneapolis City Council budget hearing was a tug of war among the wants and the can'ts.
The proposed 2010 Minneapolis city budget shifted Thursday night from the usual dry presentations of bureaucrats to debate by the public over how much the city can afford to spend.
While some advocates spoke for more money to house the homeless or low-income renters, others in a crowd of about 40 told the City Council at a public hearing that they can't afford the tab.
Among the latter was Naoma Estes, who said that her property tax bill has quintupled to $3,000 since she moved in 40 years ago to a home near Minnehaha Park.
"I come before you to plead that you consider the senior citizens of the city," she said, citing their fixed incomes and medical costs.
Deanna Ross said her assessment took a big jump and the tax bill on her home near Lake Nokomis rose 17.5 percent, despite no improvements. "You gotta be accountable to us," she told the council.
Mayor R.T. Rybak has recommended an 11.3 percent property tax increase in his $1.3 billion 2010 budget. The city said that translates to a 6.6 percent increase on a typical house.
For every tax opponent speaking, even more people showed up to urge that spending be retained for causes such as affordable housing, police and fire response times, administrative help for the city's senior ombudsman, and keeping an arts and culture worker on staff.
David Lilly, board chairman for the Plymouth Church Neighborhood Foundation, said that group couldn't have started its pending Creekside Commons and Nicollet Square housing developments without city money that he said is leveraged numerous times over by other sources.
"Not all families who had owned will be able to own in the future," said Steve Cramer, executive director of the nonprofit Project for Pride in Living, describing the impact of foreclosure on the need for affordable rental housing.
Those who spoke up have an advantage they've lacked in previous years -- the council is listening to them before its budget committee makes recommendations on the mayor's budget instead of just before the council adopts it. It is scheduled to hear once more from the public on Dec. 7 at 6:05 p.m. in room 317 City Hall just before voting on the budget.
David Sadler, whose home fronts Lake Harriet, argued that city taxes are compounding at a rate that property owners can't afford. "They simply won't be able to stay in the city," he said. "It'll destroy the residential fabric."
He noted that the city has the highest property tax burden among 117 metro-area communities, and he called for merging municipal functions such as firefighting and parks across city lines to cut costs.
Steve Brandt • 612-673-4438
|
Top of Page
|
LakeShore Weekly News:Property Taxes
November 19, 2009
To the Editor:
State and local government leaders continue to pay lip service to the increasingly unaffordable property tax burden around the state. Meanwhile, a growing number of ignored and worn-out homeowners, who could once manage their tax bill, can barely hang on now.
In the past, all attempts to reduce unrealistically high property taxes by homeowners who have reached their breaking point have been met at every turn by stubborn resistance and ill-advised political action. Ending the limited market value program, which kept in check many otherwise ruinous tax bills, was one such response.
State and local officials (as members of the local government aid (LGA) study group) have been gearing up all summer to make increased LGA the focus of the legislature. It would appear our politicians have now decided they have weathered the latest round of homeowner protests and such matters can be safely put on the shelf in favor of more pressing problems - the need to raise even more tax money to fund government budgets at all levels.
Instead of reforming the dysfunctional property tax system, something that will actually help solve the budget problems everyone is facing, politicians continue down the same dead-end road of services at all cost. Our elected officials are helping us to death. Breaking the budgets of the people to operate government budgets is a proven recipe for disaster.
The months since the end of the last legislative session have been long and dismal for cash-strapped and frustrated homeowners looking to save their homes. Whether Republican or Democratic party members are in control, no matter what political promises are made to weary taxpayers, this self-destructive status quo remains.
It's an unsustainable, self-destructive political game that has to end sometime. The longer homeowners and politicians wait, the harder it's going to be on every one.
- Charles de Rondeaux
|
Top of Page
|
Minneapolis StarTribune Editorial:Let's make sure the watchdog has teeth
(Last update: November 4, 2009 - 6:47 PM)
Voters said "Keep it." Now the BET must perform.
The Minneapolis Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET) lives. The effort begun by retiring City Council Member Paul Ostrow almost a year ago to reorganize and streamline decisionmaking in the state's largest city came down to a single charter amendment question on Tuesday's ballot, to allow the City Council to take over the BET's role. The ballot question failed. (This newspaper recommended its passage.)
Yet, in one sense, it succeeded. As a result of the charter change move, more Minneapolis voters now know that the City Council and mayor don't make taxing and spending decisions alone. Rather, the city's tax ceiling is set by the BET after hearing recommendations from the mayor, the council and the Park and Recreation Board. Two BET members are elected at-large; the other four members of the estimate board are the mayor, the City Council president, the chair of the council's ways and means committee and a Park Board member. Greater voter understanding of this process should lead to more scrutiny and accountability, and ultimately better performance. In fact, the city's voters should insist on it.
The BET has a lot to improve. Its defenders say it's positioned to play the role of taxpayer watchdog, restraining the spending appetites of the City Council and the Park Board. Maybe so, but evidence suggests that the BET does little barking about taxes, and very rarely bites. Not once in this decade has the BET authorized a tax ceiling lower than the mayor and council sought. It's likely no coincidence that the latest annual ranking of city property taxes by the Citizens League showed that Minneapolis has the highest property tax burden among 117 metro-area communities. At 0.59 percent, its effective tax rate is almost double that of St. Paul.
High taxes are putting Minneapolis at risk of losing its middle class -- and that risk will intensify if the BET does not more effectively stand up for taxpayers' interests.
The BET also needs to do a better job overseeing internal auditing. A report issued last week said that with only one internal auditor on its staff, Minneapolis is at serious risk of fraud. By comparison, Hennepin County, with a budget only slightly larger than the city's, employs 11 auditors to review its departments' spending practices. The BET cannot allow this situation to continue.
Change should begin immediately, with practices that make the BET's work more visible. Its meetings have not been televised, and its agendas and briefing materials are not consistently available to citizens in advance. They should be. The budgets the BET reviews should be presented in formats easy for citizens to find and follow.
Having decided to preserve the BET, the voters aren't finished. Since the demise of the Minneapolis Library Board almost two years ago, the BET has been a six-member body. That situation risks 3-3 tie votes that would stop decisionmaking in its tracks. A seventh member should be added to the board.
City voters in 2010 should be presented with a charter amendment adding a third at- large, elected member to the board. Those who voted Tuesday to preserve the current division of powers at City Hall owe their city a vote next year creating a third at-large BET seat. It would give this unusual governing structure a better chance to function well.
|
Top of Page
|
Minneapolis StarTribune Editorial:Editorial: Wiser heads prevail at Park Board
(Last update: November 6, 2009 - 10:14 AM)
The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board stepped up and did the right thing this week by postponing a vote to extend Park Superintendent Jon Gurban's contract another year. That decision belongs to the newly elected board, which will be seated in January. The issue must stay tabled until then.
Current commissioners will have to keep vigilant over the next two months lest colleagues more sympathetic to Gurban try again to usurp the new board's authority and push the contract extension through before the end of the year. That may be a challenge. While vote tallies in Park Board races are still being sorted out, it appears that the new board would be far less likely to approve an extension than current commissioners. The superintendent has several ardent and wily supporters on the current board. They'll be tempted to maneuver this through before January and have plenty of time to try.
The board's lack of transparency in handling the extension vote underscores concerns about back-room deals over the next two months. Commissioners abruptly pulled the scheduled vote from Wednesday's meeting agenda, apparently after a ßurry of last-minute behind-the-scenes talks. Not one word of explanation was given to the public gathered for the 5 p.m. meeting. After the quick adjournment, Board President Tom Nordyke said little about the matter, other than that commissioners didn't want a lot of "fireworks" around the issue. A previous Star Tribune editorial was critical of the contract extension.
Nordyke and Commissioner Jon Olson did praiseworthy work in heading off this vote. The board appeared poised to extend the contract; Gurban earns $139,817 annually, plus a $500 monthly car allowance. At a recent meeting, six commissioners, including Olson, indicated their support for doing so. But on Wednesday, according to a story by Star Tribune reporter Steve Brandt, it was Olson who wanted to remove the matter from the board's agenda, saying the matter should wait until the new board takes office on Jan. 6. More transparent decisionmaking would inspire confidence that this issue really is shelved until the new year, as it should be.
Gurban deserves prompt action on this issue by the new board. His contract is up at the end of June. If he will not be staying on, courtesy demands letting him know as soon as possible so that he can plan accordingly. Other issues also deserve high-priority placement on the new board's agenda.
Chief among them is a recommendation made by Nordyke and City Council President Barb Johnson last summer. As the battle escalated over Park Board independence, they, along with City Council members Lisa Goodman and Scott Benson, proposed a commission to "forge solutions that could include streamlining our operations and bringing greater efficiencies to both the Park Board and City enterprises." This compromise helped convince the Minneapolis Charter Commission to back off from a proposal to fold the Park Board into city operations.
Far too little work has been done to identify these cost savings, and with Nordyke unlikely to return to the board, there's a real danger that this work will fall further behind. The new board absolutely cannot let this happen. Minneapolis residents face the highest property tax burden among 117 metro-area communities, according to a new Citizens League ranking. The new board can no longer view itself solely as a guardian of the parks; it must also protect taxpayers. Working with the City Council to find efficiencies and cost savings would be a good start.
|
Top of Page
|
 |
|
 "Click to see large view.")
