Secrets of the City

Is Savage drowning in Minneapolitans wanting to enjoy their parks, golf courses, museums, libraries, sports stadiums, and government offices?

Wasteful or not, Minneapolis has some heavy taxes to cover the operating expenses of a featureful, growing city with a shrinking student population, and all that’s asked in return is a 0.5% sales tax. Is it crazy to suggest increasing that rate and handing out annual rebates to residents (scaled by income/property tax paid) ?

Is Savage drowning in Minneapolitans wanting to enjoy their parks, golf courses, museums, libraries, sports stadiums, and government offices?

No, and I think that was the point of the article. Without looking at the charts, I’m pretty sure Savage gets $0 in LGA, but I’m also pretty sure Savage residents (god I love typing that) don’t get any sort of Your-city-doesn’t-get-LGA-so-the-state-will-tax-you-less-accordingly tax break, mostly because no such tax break exists. That’s what I hear the most complaints about, the inequity in who pays and who receives.

Phil Krinkie says it better than I do, including making the case that LGA really no longer achieves its original purpose.

I don’t know that I buy Krinkie’s rationale, Kevin. Even apart from the fact that he’s part of a group with a very specific agenda that would seem to run counter to him being an impartial source on LGA, his reasoning is flawed on at least one point — no one actually expects property taxes to drop as a result of LGA distribution. The point of LGA, according to my understanding, is to hold down the increases. During the lean years early in the decade, when LGA was slashed, property taxes took a turn for the dramatically worse. The hikes in property taxes, now that some of that aid has been restored, are significantly better.

Without getting into the Berlin Wall discussion we had a while back, there has to be a way to pay the cities for the services they provide so many people coming in to them. LGA isn’t perfect, but until someone comes up with a better idea, I don’t think we can afford to drop it and expect Minneapolis and Saint Paul to remain functional urban areas.

The hikes in property taxes, now that some of that aid has been restored, are significantly better.

Even in cities that receive $0 LGA.

Essentially, that exposes what is probably the biggest problem with LGA – that it is nothing more than state-subsidized local government spending. It encourages local governments to spend by insulating recipients (taxpayers) from the cost. Then, when the subsidy is cut the local government can point at the state and say, “It’s their fault! They took our LGA!” But the state can say “Us? Why don’t you learn to spend a little better, huh?” They’re both right, but in the end, your taxes still go up. More spending and less accountability are NEVER good bedfellows in government, but that’s exactly what LGA has led to.

Kevin, I’ll tell you why I’m not sure I buy what the anti-LGA folks are selling, even when you compare the property tax figures to those of a suburb that receives no LGA — because comparing a suburb and an urban center like Minneapolis or Saint Paul is an apples to oranges deal. Hell, it’s monkeys/t-rexes.

When the Savage suburbanites stop coming to my neighborhood in tiger-striped party buses, and stop buying crack on the North Side, and stop picking up prostitutes in Frogtown, and start doing all of their bad business in their own towns, they can have all the LGA funding they want.

National Beer Wholesalers Assn, you dissapoint me.

2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION WEEKLY POLL

http://www.votenic.com

Results Posted Tuesday Evening.
FREE, NON-BIASED