The Legislature created the Council on Local Results and Innovation (CLRI) in 2010 and in February 2011 the CLRI created ten performance measures for counties and cities that are meant to measure resident opinions of service delivery and determining the actual effectiveness of those services. Participating counties and cities are offered financial incentives of $.14 per capita in LGA (up to $25,000) and elimination of any levy limits which may be in effect for a particular year.
Only a handful of South Metro cities as well as Dakota County itself chose to participate:
- The cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Savage, and Dakota County
Based on what was submitted by Apple Valley, who chose to provide almost no information aside from a half-sheet of metrics which they apparently felt met the reporting requirements, it apparently does not take much to get up to $25,000 in government aid back nor get levy limits raised for a city.
Levy limits are meant to provide property tax relief for citizens. While some have argued the limits themselves push cities to levy the maximum amount, with the changes at the state level, counties and cities are opting to raise taxes more to cover their loss in aid rather than make cuts.
Citizens are continuing to suffer a relentless assault on their home values and the inevitable brilliance of city councils who see this as an opportunity to effectively raise taxes without affecting the dollars coming out of the citizens’ pockets. However, if property values fall by 50%, so should the tax rate paid. We all must share in the suffering of our current economic situation and this means service level cuts, staff job losses, etc. It’s incredibly disturbing that the State has created an office which allows cities to provide almost no useful or relevant requested information to gain acceptance into a program which eliminates levy limits meant to protect the public.
Should cities and counties be provided an apparently easy way to get more aid from the state and eliminate limits imposed to help reduce the tax burden on citizens? Looking at the data provided by the participating local cities and the expectations of the program, do you think Apple Valley should receive credit for their work or do you think more should have to be provided as a minimum? Knowing what other cities collect on a regular basis and what the cities here provided, are you surprised your local city (Farmington, Hastings, Lakeville, Rosemount) weren’t accepted/didn’t participate?
Dakota Complaints Map
Dakota Inmate Dashboard
Loading ...
September 17th, 2012 at 11:32 pm
Your comment that if property values drop by 50%, so should the tax rate paid reflects a misunderstanding of how the property tax system works. Property values by themselves are not how taxes are determined. Rather, they only determine the relative share of the property tax to be paid. If your value dropped by 50%, and so did everyone elses, your share remains the same.
In other words, the local government unit sets its budget. Your property is a certain percent of the total property valuation, and thus you owe based on that percentage.
The property tax rate is one way to compare relative levels of taxation, but it is not how the taxes on an individual property is determined.
Levy limits are the result of a control freak state government that wants to tell locals what to do, but not pay for it and take away the mechanisms to do so.
We elect our local officials to make budget decisions. Empower them to do so, and vote them out if you don’t like what they do.
September 18th, 2012 at 7:14 am
I don’t see why the state government needs to get involved with what should be a local government decision. We have a check on this already — it’s the voting booth.
September 18th, 2012 at 10:20 am
I have to agree with what has already been stated. Levy limits were a mistake and simply shouldn’t exist. Local government should have an opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot just like State and Federal government does. If we don’t like what they are doing we can vote in someone we do like.
Granted, that’s a problem, considering the options these days are thin picking.
September 19th, 2012 at 3:58 pm
The problem in Burnsville is local government could blow their legs off and the voters would not be aware. We have an active lobby group that puts their supoort and influence behind a mayor and two minions to get things their way.
In my opinion, there are others who would run but will not because they know they cannot win without the backing of this lobby organization and this is why we have “thin picking”.
Our system only works when we have an informed public and I do not see that happening soon!