Minneapolis Property Taxes (neighborhood, property tax, money)

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Slig

The point is more obviously that my property has not increased in value and has likely lost some value yet my taxes are increasing 18%....it makes no sense.

It makes complete sense. The city needs X to get by. If tomorrow everyones value doubles, then everyones taxes rate will be adjusted in 1/2 so that people will pay the same total property tax.

So basically there was a ratio shift. Since your value held better than average, the burden shifted to you. If your value dropped more than the average percentage, then your taxes would have went down.

In both of my places, the assessed value dropped by a total of $75K. The 2011 proposed taxes are therefore about the same as they were in 2010. I'm sure the City is getting all kinds of people calling wondering why their taxes didn't drop. All I care about is to make sure my ratio is fair. Meaning if the assessed value is 3% under market, then the $1M home as well as the $70K home is 3% under market. The problem occurs when my lake home is assessed $50K more than I can sell it for while other city homes are assessed below market. That means I'm paying more than I should (which is the case).

The assessor who seemingly has class envy (long story) can point to the fact that he doesn't have good comps (only foreclosures) so he cannot adjust my value down. So while the state average went down 25% off peak (and even more for vacation homes) the lake owner is getting tagged for their unfair percentage. At least in my lake home township, values finally went down 12% after this year when the real amount is closer to 30%.

[Cruz Azul Guy]

You're making it sound like city income is completely dependant upon property tax. It is but one part of the equation.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Slig

You're making it sound like city income is completely dependant upon property tax. It is but one part of the equation.

Of course the MPLS city income isn't only dependant on property taxes. But my summary is accurate. The money needed by the city is divvied by you ratio as compared to others.

We all know that RT and the council are getting less from the state. But the largest reason for the double digit tax hike is years of politicians that wanted to fund those pensions. "Compassion" costs money. So be careful who you vote for in a couple of years or they will continue to spend spend spend. There is a point where you cannot keep on voting for compassion with other peoples money. Because one day they will come for your money. Considering all of the outrage that I have been reading about, it seems as if most citizens in Minneapolis figured that money only needed to grow on other peoples trees. You said the same thing as you wanted to push off all of the increases on the higher valued homes. So the way I read that is taxes are great so long as you don't have to pay your fair share.

It's not all bad news. My recommendation for you is to take the saved income tax (increases that Pawlenty refused to pass) from your left pocket and move it over to the right pocket.

[Cruz Azul Guy]

Plan would freeze neighborhood groups' funds | StarTribune.com (http://www.startribune.com/local/111498964.html?elr=KArksCiUnP:E8c7PiUiD3aPc:_Y yc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr - broken link)

I approve this proposal!

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by Slig

Plan would freeze neighborhood groups' funds | StarTribune.com (http://www.startribune.com/local/111498964.html?elr=KArksCiUnP:E8c7PiUiD3aPc:_Y yc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr - broken link)

I approve this proposal!

Well- you can pretty much say goodbye to the future of the CNO and/or the majority of their programming/ work. The NCR process has not been finalized and contracts are not in place- I assume this decision will delay the process leaving virtually zero funds for organizations to operate off of during the first few months of 2011. Not sure if some orgs will be shuttering their doors, opening lines of credit, or just blowing through any reserves they had- but considering the small amounts of monies most orgs will be receiving to continue operations through NCR for coming years, I think it's unavoidable that a lot of orgs will quit operating altogether or operate at a minute fraction of what they once were. The remaining Phase I/II dollars were helping to ease this transition for organizations and continue to operate programming on behalf of their neighborhoods (and many orgs had the equivalent of reserve funds being held by the city that it sounds like are being planned to be taken away as well)- this seems like the final death blow to NPR and likely a lot of neighborhood organizations.

I would have preferred for the city to have cut through staff in their own departments before enacting this measure.

To MN-Born- IMO, the taxes we pay are a drop in the bucket compared to the quality of life we enjoy here in MN, and are generally a fraction of what we donate to charities/nonprofits each year. If we needed to pull back on some of our donations to pay more in taxes each year, we'd have no problem doing so. This isn't because we make huge salaries (although not having kids helps), we just prefer to live modestly (or perhaps conservatively is a better term?)...in part because it allows us the ability to be philanthropic.

[Cruz Azul Guy]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

Well- you can pretty much say goodbye to the future of the CNO and/or the majority of their programming/ work. The NCR process has not been finalized and contracts are not in place- I assume this decision will delay the process leaving virtually zero funds for organizations to operate off of during the first few months of 2011. Not sure if some orgs will be shuttering their doors, opening lines of credit, or just blowing through any reserves they had- but considering the small amounts of monies most orgs will be receiving to continue operations through NCR for coming years, I think it's unavoidable that a lot of orgs will quit operating altogether or operate at a minute fraction of what they once were. The remaining Phase I/II dollars were helping to ease this transition for organizations and continue to operate programming on behalf of their neighborhoods (and many orgs had the equivalent of reserve funds being held by the city that it sounds like are being planned to be taken away as well)- this seems like the final death blow to NPR and likely a lot of neighborhood organizations.

I would have preferred for the city to have cut through staff in their own departments before enacting this measure.

Yeah it's a shame but we'll survive without it.

[MplsTodd]

One issue that perpetually is raised regarding Minneapolis tax obligations is the City's responsibility for its fire/police pensions. Most, if not all, other municipalities have their pensions funded through a statewide pool. I know that there have been several proposals to merge the City of Mpls's pension pool into the statewide system, but these don't seem to pass.

Anybody know much about this?

* How much money is at stake?
* What's been the hold-up, or obstacle, to a merger?
* Why did the city go it alone?

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by Slig

Yeah it's a shame but we'll survive without it.

The mayor, City Council, and City staffers are all doing a great job making all of this sound like they're responding to resident concerns and enacting a sustainable solution- implying in a very misleading fashion that city government is taking a hit vs. the residents, when in fact this move is a giant f*** you to city residents and the the organizations generally representing them at City Hall. The city is not tightening its belt here nor making itself sustainable- far from it, they are robbing the coffers of money that was long-ago granted to local neighborhoods and the organizations that represent them (and strategizing ways to breach contracts). Literally decades of planning work and prudent decision-making by a broad-based constituency of Minneapolis residents and neighborhood organizations has been written off within a hasty 3 day period in actions that were neither transparent nor really communicated to the general public.

And we're supposed to thank our elected leaders for this because we're saving $42 a year? I don't know what to be more offended by- the city's short-sighted/unethical decision-making or residents who think this is some kind of victory.

[audadvnc]

That's too bad that RT and his administrators must resort to that kind of shenanigans. I've met him a few times and he seemed on the up-and-up.

Of course, that's what any politician wants you to believe...

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

To MN-Born- IMO, the taxes we pay are a drop in the bucket compared to the quality of life we enjoy here in MN, and are generally a fraction of what we donate to charities/nonprofits each year. If we needed to pull back on some of our donations to pay more in taxes each year, we'd have no problem doing so. This isn't because we make huge salaries (although not having kids helps), we just prefer to live modestly (or perhaps conservatively is a better term?)...in part because it allows us the ability to be philanthropic.

Camden. You said it best earlier. You want the City to cut staff versus cutting programs. I will bet that is what everyone in MPLS wants. They won't do that. So why won't they cut staff? It seems that when you give any government agency $$'s, they don't spend it wisely. That's human nature. In just one example, how did the City managing those pensions??? Now you trust them with more of your $'s??

Giving money to the government represents inefficiencies. The Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP) had $400M run though its fingers with plenty of waste. Even according to NRP, too many neighborhoods have wasted money on unsustainable projects as well as a sense of entitlement has sprung up. Just look at all of the infighting going on and neighborhood groups have been arguing for years. It's a money grab and the City holds the purse strings / power.

I'd predict most of the Cities improvement from the 80's till now was a result of the economy NOT because of the $400M that was extracted and then given back with inefficiencies. You don't need NRP to save Elm trees. OF COURSE there was a lot of good from the $400M. Even if they wasted $380M of the $400M (as an EXTREME example to show a point) you can show a lot of positive things from just $20M.

Now it seems that many people in your fine city have woken up and don't appreciate forced philanthropy (a.k.a. taxes). Kudos!! Personally, this down economy has forced me to run my business more efficiently as well as my personal budget. I have looked into what I get for my money in all kinds of situations. And you know what, I learned that many of the things that I thought were important really were not. But God forbid if you force a city or state to go through that exercise. They will make painful cuts (while covering their own butts). They don't want to let lose of that money because it represents power.

So for me, there is a ton of waste. I'd bet if you measured the benefit of that $400M of NRP money it would go down like most other government spending; inefficient. $400M of power has a way of bringing out the worst in people.