Measure 2 Supporters Unveil New Logo For Keep It Local ND

kilnd

Keep It Local ND is the coalition (with the unfortunate acronym of KIL ND) of unions, big government special interests and big business lobbyists formed to oppose Measure 2, which if passed on the June ballot would abolish property taxes for all North Dakotans.

One of the best arguments for Measure 2, I think, is the economic argument. It is indisputable that property tax exemptions help the state’s economy. That’s why those exemptions are a enshrined in state policy, from Tax Increment Finance Districts and Renaissance Zones to special economic development deals handed out to select businesses on a case-by-case basis.

The KIL ND folks don’t want all North Dakotans to get a property tax cut, because then the special economic development deals wouldn’t be so special any more. Which is the point made by this new logo created by Measure 2 supporters:

Looks perfect to me.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • whowon

    As usual the “Vote no” crew already has lawn signs out. Haven’t heard anything about Vote Yes signs!

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Well the “vote no” crew has piles of money to throw around.

      • headward

        Easy to do when you’re using property taxes to buy those signs.

      • http://voteyesmeasure2.tumblr.com/ VoteYesMeasure2

        Yeah, the NO-VOTERS do have a lot of money… Yep, and they already have their signs out… I’m doing my part to free us of our local city and county taxers….
        Spread the word: http://voteyesmeasure2.tumblr.com/

    • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

      They are lawns owned by all the slackers on the public payroll.

      • borborygmi

        actually saw a  couple by a realty company.

        • Ndconservative2011

          Which realty company and where.

      • Rick Olson

        How do you know that, Kevin?  Or is this post just being your old smart aleck self?

        • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

          Have you ever looked at my “Another slacker letter-to-the-editor” thread on valley deals or do you just read the sports section?

    • Drain52

      Sign up on the website: http://www.YesM2.com and you’ll get all the signs you want.

    • cdolson

      That shows exactly how desperate and worried they are about M2 passing. Also, the fact that they are starting this early is actually a very good sign. If they were smart they would ignoring a threatening truth, like the MSM would have taught them. By telling people to “OMG! Vote No on M2 or It’s the END!” it is will arouse curiosity and only benefit the cause of M2. The more people who seriously look at the measure, the more they understand the real benefit. 

  • Rick Olson

    Rob, even for you, I think this is hitting below the belt. 

    As the old saying goes, “If something looks too good to be true, it probably is.” That’s exactly what we have here in Measure 2.

    To preserve local control, we must defeat Measure 2 which seeks to amend the North Dakota Constitution by eliminating the property tax.

    It empowers the North Dakota Legislature to create new forms of revenue to replace property taxes, thus running roughshod over local cities, counties, school districts, park boards, township boards, etc.

    Measure 2 is a radical and reckless proposal that will force the greatest transfer of political power in North Dakota history.

    It will strip power from your elected city councils, school boards, park boards and county commissions and place the power in the hands of the state legislature. Measure 2 will force all local subdivisions to fight for every dollar that the Legislature will appropriate to them.

    Your local officials will stop being stewards of the taxpayers money and instead they’ll become lobbyists with their hands out, to make certain that your local governments are fully funded.

    Citizens will lose their voice over local issues.

    State government will become more powerful as one-size-fits-all government will be imposed on all North Dakotans.

    Measure 2 poses a direct threat to your local services, your school districts and your right to decide what is best for your community and your county.

    Measure 2 is unrealistic, unfair and unneeded.

    Vote NO on Measure 2.

    http://keepitlocalnd.com/

    • sbark

      depends who you think is “more local”……….the land and property owners who pay the taxes…………………..or the levels of govt under the state levels.———-who are controlled by the State Govt anyway.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Rob, even for you, I think this is hitting below the belt.

      Says the guy calling Measure 2 supporters extremists.

      It’s accurate.  All Measure 2 says is that neither the state nor the local government can collect revenues from a property tax, but that the state isn’t absolved of its constitutional funding obligations that have historically been funded by the property tax.

      Local governments have dozens other ways they can raise revenues, and again the state is obligated to fund certain things (always has been, that’s not changing).

      The big objection coming from our friends at KIL ND (though they won’t admit it) is that their special property tax deals won’t be so special any more if everyone gets the same deal.

    • headward

      What controll will be removed?  They will still get funding from the state and then the local government will decide on how to spend it. 

      School boards?  Doesn’t the fed and state controls what they teach in schools?

      “It empowers the North Dakota Legislature to create new forms of revenue to replace property taxes, thus running roughshod over local cities, counties, school districts, park boards, township boards, etc.”

      Why do we need a new form of revenue?  I always hear how we’re $2 billion surplus.

      “Your local officials will stop being stewards of the taxpayers money and instead they’ll become lobbyists with their hands out, to make certain that your local governments are fully funded. ”

      So then vote them out.  How is this any different than congress or the state legislature?

      “Citizens will lose their voice over local issues.”

      Are they going to stop holding public meetings and remove our voting rights?

      Bottom line:  Stop your FUD campaign and stop KIL[LING] ND.

      • Jerry

        “They will still get funding from the state and then the local government will decide on how to spend it.”

        Such naivete is difficult to fathom in the 21st Century.  If you really believe the state will open the coffers and write checks in any amount requested by local government, without questioning it whatsoever, please see me about some lovely beach property in Saudi Arabia.

        • Drain52

          What’s naive is thinking we can sustain a 7.7% annual increase in property tax. What’s naive is thinking farmers can thrive with a 30% increase in their taxes next year. What’s naive is thinking the $395 spent on “property tax relief” lowered anyone’s taxes. What’s naive is to think that any of the property tax mess will ever be cleaned up as long as businesses are lined up for exemptions and politicians are only too happy to hand them out because it gets them votes.

        • Guest

          The state is REQUIRED to open their coffers. It’s called the LAW. Stop being so ignorant.

          • Jerry

            Reading comprehension isn’t your strong point, is it?  Yes, the state will be required to fund local services.  Just don’t expect a no-strings-attached block grant from the state.  They’ll want to micromanage the crap out of everything.  Welcome big brother as he encroaches ever deeper into your life.

          • sbark

            oh you mean like in addition to property taxes,  the Left also micro-manageing private property via EPA,  Enviro wackos’, animal rights groups……..smoking laws, soda pop laws, cell phone laws…you name it.

            The Left already wants to micro-manage the crap out of everything…….and we have to pay them to do it via property taxation……

            Welcome big brother as he is you.

          • Jerry

            After being presented with facts and logic, your arguments break down to incoherent babbling.  That’s all I need to know.  Thanks.

          • $8194357

            Nothing “incoherent” was written, Jerry….

            Just shows you don’t understand what he is saying is all…..

            I understood it well…..
            More statist fascist “control”….
            Sheesh you folks are “educated” ?

          • two_amber_lamps

             Educated in the statist ideology…  all else “does not compute”

          • $8194357

            Yup

        • sbark

          No the lower levels will have to submit “budgets”…………….

          gasp what a novel concept…….but it is one Obama Reid, Pelosi and Conrad have not been able to grasp over the past 3 plus years….

          ….a govt entity having to live under and be constrained by  a budget……a Leftist nightmare in their minds,  because in their minds everyone’s property is to be available for the good of the State, because if the “state” benefits….it must be good for the Indiv. also…..

          • Jerry

            Local governments currently have budgets.  They discuss and pass those budgets at public meetings.  Maybe you weren’t aware of that.

          • sbark

            so then they could run a photcopy and submitt………maybe you werent aware of that technology? Maybe have to change the date and fluff them a little so they get what they actually need in the end like any govt budget.

          • $8194357

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak

            Quote:
            Kulaks (Russian: кула́к, kulak, “fist”, by extension “tight-fisted”; kurkuls in Ukraine, also used in Russian texts in Ukrainian contexts) were a category of relatively affluent farmers in the later Russian Empire, Soviet Russia, and early Soviet Union. The word kulak originally referred to independent farmers in the Russian Empire who emerged from the peasantry and became wealthy following the Stolypin reform, which began in 1906.
            According to the political theory of Marxism-Leninism of the early 20th century, the kulaks were class enemies of the poorer peasants.[1] Vladimir Lenin described them as “bloodsuckers, vampires, plunderers of the people and profiteers, who fatten on famine.”[2] Marxism-Leninism had intended a revolution to liberate poor peasants and farm laborers alongside the proletariat (urban and industrial workers). In addition, the planned economy of Soviet Bolshevism required the collectivization of farms and land to allow industrialization or conversion to large-scale agricultural production. In practice, these Marxist-Leninist theories led to disruption of agriculture as government officials violently seized kulak farms and murdered resistors.[1

          • $8194357

            Starve the beast as he grows fat on our labor and money…

          • sbark

            Starve the Beast so he does NOT grow fat on our labor and money…..

    • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

      Earlier your comments might have been legitimate issues, but by now you should surely know better.  Now they are a pack of fly-blown lies.

      • Jerry

        Is that all you’ve got?  Weak.  Very weak.

        • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

          Is that all you’ve got?  Weak.  Very weak.

    • Roy_Bean

      I don’t like measure 2 but they have a point.  If property taxes are necessary then lets end the exemptions.  If exemptions are good then lets give them to everyone.  I don’t like the way this is written but it’s getting hard to argue with the logic. 

    • JurisC

      Rick’s comment is a good sign that Measure 2 will pass. It is a good sign if the opposition must use specious speculations to convince someone. And now the truth is considered as hitting below the belt. 

      Measure 2 is the most significant tax reform in the last 99 years. It will abolish the archaic assessor driven tax. No longer will the people be told by the assessor how wealthy they are to pay the property tax. No longer will people find themselves in a position where the property tax payments exceed the mortgage payments. No longer will people have to fear of losing their home after they pay the mortgage.  No longer will the government overtax people and then issue relief checks.

      Measure 2 was initiated by the taxpayers and not by politicians or government bureaucrats. Nobody in their right mind would initiate anything to hurt themselves.

      Measure 2 takes away all the nasty side affects of property tax that the taxpayers feel, but not the government. Measure 2 does not take away any other local taxing authority. But the opponents of Measure 2 want every body to believe that if property taxes are abolished, then all future local taxing authority is abolished. That is simply not true. The same constitutional powers can be used to implement other local taxes in the same way as the original property tax was.

      The opposition’s mentality and rhetoric is like the “Flat Earth Society’s” thinking. Please join the real world and vote YES for Measure 2 on June 12.

    • sdlawrence

       Actually, it’s accurate, because that is precisely the motive of the ND Chamber, which actively lobbies and is a champion of special privileges and local exemptions, and won’t have those particular time-share vacations to sell when Measure 2 passes.

      “hitting below the belt” would be things like scaring people into thinking fire police services will disappear, roads won’t be fixed, or that veterans and the elderly will suffer, and any other of the outright non-sequitur lies used by the anti-M2 ilk that employ them.  Stuff like that.   

  • $8194357

    The taxpayer supplied HOG trough….
    The fewer the pigs…
    The bigger the HOG…..
    Still results in no feed seed for the taxpayer…
    Starve the BEAST…Keep your own money…

  • Brenarlo

    Every tax on my is a needle in my arm drawing blood… I will ALWAYS vote for one of those needles to be removed.

    • sbark

      Agree,  if we cannot Starve the Beast from the Fed level downward,   its then best to cut off revenue to them from the bottom up………and that is property taxation.

      Its a spending problem……..if money goes to a govt entity it will be spent—-Its whats Govt do, they grow, they add beuracrats, they breed inefficiency.  Its Genetic to them.

      The In state funding will take care of itself,   Sure there will be some disagreements and publized squables, but it will work itself thru.  

        I’m more worried about the Massive Under Funded mandates coming downward from ObamaCare, Porkulus Medicare, Welfare that most states will simply have to push down and onto their property owners.   The masses in Fargo, Bis, GF and Minot will be happy to push the taxes onto the minority large property owners…Kulaks

      • $8194357

        (Its a spending problem……..if money goes to a govt entity it will be spent—-)

        Whoop their it is….STARVE THE BEAST……It grows fat and bloated….

  • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

    “Local control” is a red herring.

    • Jerry

      The concept that our property rights will be reserved by eliminating property tax is a red herring.  Oil money won’t pay the bill forever.  By the way, thanks for pay all of that state income tax.  Be prepared to pay more.  And more federal income tax.  And more sales tax.  And more fuel tax at the pump.  And more value-added local taxes.  And more specials.  We can do this all day.

      • two_amber_lamps

        What difference does it make? 

        You refer to consumption taxes which IMO are a lot more fair than property taxes which are levied merely for the “honor” of owning a home in ND. 

        Nice fear mongering though….

        • Jerry

          The difference is M2 supporters buy into the fallacy that they will have more money in their pockets if they don’t pay property taxes. 

          • two_amber_lamps

             Again…  consumption taxes are fair…

            Arbitrarily applied property taxes ARE NOT. 

          • Jerry

            So you concede you may not save any money if M2 passes.  And that will be fine with you because then everyone else will be paying more “consumption” taxes, too.  What about the low income folks?  Is it okay if they pay higher consumption taxes?

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            You think poor people aren’t paying the property tax?

            Even renters pay the property tax, as a portion of their rent.

            Yes, consumption-based taxes are much better.

          • Jerry

            You think rents will decrease if landlords no longer pay property tax?  Renters will get no breaks, and will still pay the additional consumption taxes.

          • two_amber_lamps

             Lol…  you’re killing me Jerry…  a tax is a tax.  If they drive up property tax, the poor will have to pay it via their rent.  If sales tax goes up, the poor will have to pay it as well.  Statism is what statism does, but nice try to play the sympathy game.  How about a redirect to reality rather than trying to turn this into a convoluted sob story for the poor?  Obviously if there is a surplus there is something significantly wrong with the current tax structure… rather than take steps to fix it you’d rather we keep scamming the hardworking citizens of ND so statist bureaucrats can dole it back out as they see fit.  Perfect system, hey Comrade?  Why change that? 

            Sorry Mr. Alinsky, go tote your “social justice” schtick someplace else.

          • Jerry

            Name calling is a clear sign of your arguments breaking down under the weight of truth.

          • two_amber_lamps

             Clear?  Transparent?  The only thing clear is your support for statism and the ND brand of crony capitalism. 

          • $8194357

            (Statism is what statism does,)

            WHOOP !

            Forests momma was one smart ole gal…

            It is what it is and not what ever they choose to call it at the moment…

          • cdolson

            It does not matter if M2 supporters believe they will be lowering overall taxation or not. What matters is that M2 gives people the option of living free in property that truly belongs to them. Is the state our landlord? Are we peasants who must return a measure of our labor to the count or the king? 

            Consumption taxes can be avoided. Property taxes are a form of indentured servitude. 

            And the BIGGEST problem is that property tax is not apportioned evenly! Do you have any idea how many special deals are made allowing well connected corporations and individuals to get away “scot-free” without paying the land tax to the Duke? 

            The peasants are getting angry Jerry. 

          • Drain52

            I wish you would read or listen to what M2 supporters say. Gov. Schafer said taxes don’t need to go up. OMB says we have $1+B in unallocated surplus. NDPC says there is $1B in waste. BHI and other economic studies say that income and sales tax revenues will increase dramatically.

            But since no one–M2 supporters or opponents has a crystal ball, let’s concede that the legislature can’t cut one single dime of waste, AND they spend all the surplus on special interests AND returning property tax money to citizens doesn’t generate a single dime of additional revenues, then yes, we will all have to pay an increase in other taxes. But (and this is key) the additional tax we pay will be the same for everyone (unlike PT) and it will not go up faster than income (unlike PT) and it won’t be able to manipulated so some people get favorite treatment (unlike PT.)And no one will be forced out of their homes.

      • Guest

        Do explain the red-herring Jerry. Please. You are about as ignorant to the measure as anyone posting in months.

      • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

        Heaven forbid the state from having to spend less, eh?

        • sbark

          Thats the issue that isnt being focused on here…………its a Govt Spending problem

          Look at the growth in N.Dak Govt Spending that Rob has focused on….

          for the Left its always a revenue problem,   Spending is never the issue

          Starve the beast from the bottom up if necessary,   because the Dem’cat voting states will never let the Fed Govt spending be cut.   The Welfare masses will vote to get money from somewhere, they dont care if its property owners in N.Dak………it will be gotten and transferred.

        • $8194357

          Yowser…

      • sbark

        your quote………The concept that our property rights will be reserved by eliminating property tax is a red herring……….

        ……..so what are you saying——–that eventully if the Govt, at whatever level, and after what idiotic spending decisions it makes…………needs funding,  private property and all its wealth is available to them?????

        Russian Kulaks google it, study it…………..history repeats…….

        The real fallacy is that Liberals are “intellectuals”,   therefor bigger govt must also be “intellectual”………….

        Liberalism itself is simply the problem, the rest of the stuff is day to day b.s. that Indiv would take care of themselves if govt stays out of it.

        • $8194357

          (Russian Kulaks google it, study it…………..history repeats…….)

          By jove I think youve got it..

          Revisionist history useful idiots
          falling for the same ole lies
          perhaps re-branded under a new name..
           
          Marxist indoctrinations into main stream America via:

          Revisonism

          Marxist Academic outcome based education

          Central planning soviet steering commitee
          majority consensus matriarchail men above the rule of law olagarchy..

          Created several generations of indoctrinated brain washed useful idiots and cause advocate lemmings for “STATIST TYRANY” huh?

          10X

  • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

    As can be seen from the Measure 2 vote-no trolls above, this one stings and stings hard!  It’s beautiful, true, and if ever a picture was worth a thousand words, or even five thousand, this is it!

    • Jerry

      Cartoons?  Still weak, dude.  Come on, you can do better than that.

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        Hi, hanni!

  • whowon

    The North Dakota Chamber will:
    Support efforts to reduce property taxes when coupled with safeguards of no significant future increases to other taxes.Support efforts to maintain North Dakota’s compliance with the streamline sales tax agreement.Continue to support reducing the income tax burden on North Dakota businesses.Support using tax dollars to assist self-sustainable projects that will increase North Dakota’s tax base.Oppose unjustified tax and fee increases on businesses.From their site…

    • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

      Do you wear a supporter?

    • whowon

      I think they lied on their site.

      • Guest

        They lie all day long. Of course they are lying on their site. They’ve admitted to lying about their positions on M2. What are you really this stupid – or do you just work for the worthless pieces of crap at the Chamber?

  • Jimmypop

    board of higher education and ndus.

    if measure two passes, we will have this issue with everything from dog catcher to city hall secretary. worse, state government MUST expand on a MASSIVE scale to make these choices.

    • Innocent Bystander

      I think that’s the “$64 billion dollar question” in a nutshell.  Every last local government entity in North Dakota will all of a sudden have to go to Bismarck and fight for every penny of funding that the Legislature would care to dole out.  As I said before, your local government officials (mayors, city council/city commission members, county commissioners, school board members, township board members, park board members, etc. will stop being stewards of the taxpayers’ money.  Instead, they will become nothing more than lobbyists fighting for every last dime they can get their hands on to run their respective government entities with.  It will become one heck of a chaotic mess, and it will do so very quickly.

      Measure #2 is a solution that’s in search of a problem.  Vote No on Measure #2.

      • headward

        How is that any different than congress or state legislature?  The local governments already lobby the state and feds for money.

        • Jason Odegaard

          They will have a lobby for much more of their budgets than they do today. Why make the problem worse by outlawing property tax?

          • sbark

            So…..now in Lefists speak, submitting a budget is Lobbying.

            So thats why Obmaa’, Reid, Pelosi, Conrad have not submitted one in 3 yrs…….they dont want to be accused of being lobbyists?

          • two_amber_lamps

             They’d prefer to be post-constitutional….

          • $8194357

            Its in “vogue” now, huh….

          • sbark

            that …..that, well that just sounds “progressive” doenst it……..

            Its why they are intellectually elite i guess

          • Truther

            you’re missing the fact that Obama’s budget got voted down..which means he submitted a budget…which means you are full of crap

          • sbark

            I’d say something that gets zero votes in a Dem. held Senate was a joke…….not a budget proposal……

            you can call it what you want……..have at it

      • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

        A solution in search of a problem?

        In 2008 North Dakotans considered another Measure 2, that one to cut the state’s personal and corporate income tax.  Most of the same coalition opposing this Measure 2 came out against that Measure 2 because – get this – they claimed that if we passed income tax cuts we wouldn’t get property tax relief.

        North Dakotans voted no because they wanted property tax relief.  North Dakotans still haven’t gotten property tax relief, which is why this Measure 2 is on the ballot.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      This is utter bunk.

      All Measure 2 does is say that the state/local government cannot collect a property tax, while re-affirming that the state’s obligations for education, etc. are not nullified.

      Local entities have plenty of options for collecting local revenue.  You’re fear-mongering.

      • Jimbert50

        They have a sales tax. What other options are there? A county income tax? Come on, this isn’t New York.

  • Guest

    Here’s my prediction if Measure #2 passes … you think we got a mess on our hands with the Fighting Sioux fiasco?  If Measure #2 passes, you’re going to see lawyers falling over each other to be the first to beat a path to the nearest courthouse to be the first to file a lawsuit to have Measure #2 declared unconstitutional. 

    If it gets to the N.D. Supreme Court, all it takes is four of the five justices to declare it unconstitutional, then it’s gone.  Vote of the people be darned, it would seem.

    I still intend to vote no.  Come the end of the day, when Measure #2 has been defeated, don’t come crying to me.  There will always be next time.   

    • headward

      M2 amends the ND constitution.  Good luck on that case.

      • Guest

        Not if the courts say no, genius!!

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          Care to tell us what the premise of the lawsuit overturning Measure 2 would be?

          Measure 2 amends the state constitution, and there’s nothing in the national constitution which says that a state must use the property tax.

          I think maybe you have no idea what you’re talking about.

          • sbark

            Probably about the same “premise” the Leftists in Black Robes overturned the citizens direct vote on Calif Prop 8 recently.

            The left dont care who votes,  they either just want to control who counts the votes, or who can legally decide if the voters were correct in the 1st place…..

            Just think if Obama gets to place another 3 SCOTUS Judges over another term, with 3 of them near 80 yrs old at present.

          • two_amber_lamps

             

            Just think if Obama gets to place another 3 SCOTUS Judges over another term, with 3 of them near 80 yrs old at present.

            This nation will be doomed.

          • $8194357

            Doomed to the destruction of the Constitution and submission to “International Law…

            It “IS” the agenda and has been for a very long time 2lamps..

          • Rick Olson

            How about Article I, Section 18 of the North Dakota Constitution:

            “No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligations of contracts shall ever be passed.”

            To me, if Measure #2 is adopted, this amounts to it being an ex post facto matter.  If down the road, we find out that Measure #2 winds up being a huge mistake, it’s going to be extremely difficult to rectify the situation.

            Cities, counties, townships, school districts, park boards, etc. most certainly have implied contracts (not necessarily written contracts) with the people who live within their juridsdictions.  Among these contracts are that basic needs such as fire and police protection, water and sewage service, garbage pickup, proper education for our children, properly maintained roads, streets and infrastructure shall be provided for.

  • Rick Olson

    Keep it local… Vote No on #2
     
    http://www.keepitlocalnd.com

    • headward

      You mean ‘KIL ND… Vote No on #2′

      Own your own land… Vote Yes on #2

      • $8194357

        We will own if two passes, but……

        They will still control it with EPA regulations regardless…
        EPA is unconstitutional power not granted the Feds….

        Enviromentist regulation IS the vehicle they are useing to drive their agenda of state ownership and control headward…Local and on a global scale as well..

        The lefts secular religion of mother earth worship is fascist in intent….

    • Sludgewarehouse

      Keep it more local…Vote yes on #2

      • Rick Olson

        You mean vote no on #2, correct?  Keeping it local means voting down #2.  Voting yes on #2 transfers all control to the state government.

        • Drain52

          Um…Keep it more local–vote Yes. Because there’s nothing more local than a family.

  • LErickson


    One of the best arguments for Measure 2, I think, is the economic argument. It is indisputable that property tax exemptions help the state’s economy. That’s why those exemptions are a enshrined in state policy, from Tax Increment Finance Districts and Renaissance Zones to special economic development deals handed out to select businesses on a case-by-case basis.”

    Temporary property tax exemptions may be helpful to a local economy because they are “temporary” and when they come off abatement status there is higher valued property to tax.    Despite what the M2 crowd says there is a very small percentage of property in temporary abatement at anyone time.   The Tax Departments estimates are 3-4% of the taxable properties are in temporary discretionary abatement at anyone time.   If “big unions” “special interests” and such are running all over the people with temporary abatement programs they sure aren’t doing  a good job of it based on the small percentage that is actually in temporary abatement.   And when businesses come off temporary abatement status they are taxed at a higher rate than residents are.   I have been wondering:  People that own businesses also own homes.  In a non-conspiracy theory world, why would business owners want their homes taxed at higher rates because businesses were transferring property tax burdens to homeowners?   Or, in the tinfoil hat world of this issue, do the same business owners that get a temporary abatement for a new business also have some “juice” with their local officials so they can also escape property taxes on their homes?

    Also, only in some fictional world of made up computer models at the Beacon Hill Institute (that don’t model reality) is M2 good for our economy.   The reason 80 plus groups  are against M2 is because it is bad fiscal and economic policy despite the wishful ideological dreams of it’s sponsors.    

    • Jerry

      Great points, but unfortunately over the heads of most of these drones.

      • Guest

        Idiot boy – The arguments are bogus – just as the rest of KIL ND’s arguments are. Ladd is talking out of class as usual. He’s only referring to ONE type of property tax exemption – as this is easily verifiable via the state. Also, the exemption aren’t “temporary” and Ladd knows this – again – as the entire KIL ND knows this as well. It is just another lie. The exemption Ladd refers to may temporarily end for “said” business, but the EXEMPTIONS don’t go away – the get LARGER and cost taxpayers more each year.

        • LErickson

          You’re very confused.   I have the spreadsheets or the percentages of   temporary tax abated property in  Fargo, Valley City, Bismarck, and Mandan.    Those are the cities that the Depower the Taxpayer folks were making the most fabrications about, so I requested them .    I also have the information from the state.   “Exemptions don’t go away – they get larger and cost taxpayers more each year”….That is false.   

          Anyone can go to your city or county and get a list of temporary abatement’s and they will give you the date that they expire.    For example, on Valley City’s  list  there are about 19 properties with 5 coming out of abatement this year and two I was told by their assessor are new and have not been put on the list.     The Depower crowd likes to claim is that V.C.  has 40-50% tax abated properties in their never ending fabrication efforts to manufacture justifications for M2.    

          This is an email from the Fargo city assessor to one of the rabid M2 people:
           I assume this is the information you were requesting                                               since I have not heard back from you. I hope it helps in   whatever you are researching. It, as you can see, is drastically different than what is being portrayed on talk radio. I have heard that discretionary exemptions in Fargo amount to upwards of 30% of the tax base and all exempt property represents 50%. When, in fact, discretionary (not including relief for disabled veterans and low income elderly) is a little over 4% and total exemptions are under 20%.  

          I have a bunch more emails like this where the M2 crowd gets the facts and then continues to make false claims on the radio about a particular city.   One of their (your) tricks is to include homestead or veterans tax credits in your stats to try and enlarge the issue and take things out of context and then they try and frame the Chamber and other business groups .as getting away with something because they are opposed to M2.     The homestead and vets tax credits make up a major of the tax exempt property in Fargo’s 20% total exempt or abated properties, Valley City’s, and other towns – but those programs  don’t transfer any property tax burdens to any other property owner because the state pays for those credits per state policy..    

          I have a good idea.  Why don’t you respond to this with more of your made up nonsense and I’ll be happy to post more emails that show the difficulty the M2 people have with 3rd grade math…….

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            I made an open records request to the state’s four largest cities, requesting the total amount of property value granted discretionary abatements, and the total was nearly $900 million.

            In four cities.

            But I suppose we’re making that up too.

            Why do you oppose all North Dakotans getting the same special deal the Chamber of Commerce cronies get?

          • LErickson

            Rob – You’re numbers are more than a bit high.  Here is the Tax Department’s numbers for the whole state, not just four cities, and they are way less than your numbers:

            Roughly $2.5 billion in statewide taxable value is subject to property tax.  Approximately $16.4 million, or roughly 0.65 percent of the taxable amount, is exempt due to discretionary exemptions provided under state law (N.D.C.C. Chapter 40-57.1) to promote new and expanding businesses.   Another $58.4 million, or 2.3 percent, is exempt by local discretion or charitable status under certain sections of state law (N.D.C.C. Chapter 57-02).  Chapter 57-02 includes several other exemptions that are not discretionary, some of which are shown above. Property that is exempt according to the builders’ exemption is also subject to local discretion but is not included.  However, it makes up a relatively small portion of taxable value. Tax increment financing accounted for $20,586,930 of taxable value in 2011.  That property is not exempt from property taxation, but the taxes generated go into the tax increment fund of the city in which it is located. So, between the discretionary exemptions for new and expanding businesses (N.D.C.C. Chapter 40-57.1) and other exemptions available via local discretion or due to charitable status (N.D.C.C. Chapter 57-02), exempt property across the state makes up just under $75 million in taxable value, less than 3% of the statewide taxable value.  Even if you added in the taxable value associated with property subject to the builders’ exemption, which we don’t have figures for, it would increase the percentage of exempt taxable value marginally. *           Based on 2011 Abstract of Exempt Property as submitted by County Auditors, and summarized by the Office of State Tax Commissioner. 

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      The Tax Departments estimates are 3-4% of the taxable properties are in temporary discretionary abatement at anyone time.

      This is the same Tax Department which claims that the sales tax and the income tax will both double if Measure 2 is passed?

      Excuse me if I’m not taking anything Cory Fong says about Measure 2 very seriously these days.

      • LErickson

        Rob – Fong never said “sales and the income tax will both double if measure 2 passes” if you are referring to the spreadsheets he put out.    As you know those issues are up to the legislature and he doesn’t speak for them.   His work was to show a comparison with other tax rates to replace PT revenues and current levels.    

      • Jerry

        When the numbers don’t add up to support your preconceptions, you simply smear the messenger.  Classy.

  • Ratbite

    This insult only further alienates me when it comes to abolishing the property tax. Talk about childish. If that’s the mentality of the folks pushing measure #2 count me out.

    • Guest

      The insults have been levied 24/7 via KIL ND and Andy Peterson since day one against the measure. If you think responding to constant lies and insults with an insult from time to time isn’t fair or deserved – and you are going to use that as a reason to vote No – you weren’t going to vote Yes to begin with. Just keep funding special interests. It’s your choice, side with the corrupted.

      • Rick Olson

        However, you all seem to have no problem with attacking and insulting people who have legtimate questions and concerns about Measure #2.

        It’s like the proponents of Measure #2 are bound and determined to get this passed come hell or high water, and the best interests of their fellow North Dakotans be damned.

  • Jimbert50

    I don’t like Measure 2. Removing property taxes will just centralize government power in Bismarck, rather than letting local governments raise their own revenue for their own projects.

    Cutting taxes is great, but eliminating local government revenue like this will set back the efficiency and effectiveness of government overall.

    • Rick Olson

      Exactly. I’m all for restraint and efficiency in government. Measure #2 reinvents the wheel. If you are in favor of an even bigger state government bureaucracy, then vote for Measure #2. I want to think that most folks are all for cutting taxes, but Measure #2 is way too radical of a way of going about it.

    • sbark

      your quote………..will set back the efficiency and effectiveness of government overall.

      wow……..that is a oxymoron in itself…………

      I see our local County Auditor, who by law is only required to be in her office maybe 2 days a month……….use that to the fullest extent possible, and yet draw full salary.

      I see employees in the local courthouse are sending out anti-measure 2 emails during work hours,  and that is after getting the emails from a state level employee also on work hour time.

      I see road crews having to drive their trucks to Valley City and lounge around all day because they are not allowed to change oil locally……

      ……efficiency and effectivness of govt…………not the place to go in this discussion

  • ladyknownas lou

    Before you idiots decide to vote “no”, consider that in the next 10 years you will be required to pay 77% more property tax than you do today.  The only way to avoid this insurmountable tax is to vote “YES!” and stop the hemorrhaging.  This property tax is literally putting the least wealthy out of their own homes, homes they have invested in for 30 years and more – investments that had been touted as the “one thing” that would hold s value – trouble is they never OWNED it to begin with and never will.  They are mere tenants.  And the tens that are called tenants are paying it – don’t kid yourselves.  Measure 2 guarantees that the expenses covered heretofore by these statist property taxes will be covered by other revenue sources.  WILL BE COVERED.  And no one loses his home for property taxes.  And investors will have a reason to come to ND, and we will dispose of the corruption that is part and parcel of the cronyism that proliferates when government and quasi-government agencies are empowered to hand out “special” tax abatements to cronies – that the rest of ND pays for.  This is obscene. VOTE YES ON MEASURE 2 – this could be your last chance to avoid a 77% tax hike in the next 10 years

    • Jerry

      Talk about fear mongering.  M2 opponents have nothing on you.

      • $8194357

        Property taxes on the same house jerry, four, or five years apart…

        60,000 dollar house now 350,000 valued in a small town selling citly lots for a dollar apiece 5 years ago….Same empty lot today 40,000 plus…..

        You don’t think these “government folks” see a “windfall”
        coming their way for their own growth, benifit and “control”….

        Whats fearful about the truth other than it grows the BEAST while costing the taxpayer more?

  • LErickson

    As long as you’re making up numbers like “77%” increase in PT’s 10 years, why not make up 100% or a 1000%?

    • Guest

      The Lady may be inaccurate but I’m sure it’s an honest mistake. However she’s indirectly just following KIL ND’s lead – make it up as you go. Mislead the public from day one and use the state tax commissioner’s report as completely false – This isn’t that tough – Vote Yes end property tax abuse. As Ed Schafer has stated – the state can handle M2 without raising a single tax. Or, vote No, never truly own your home, watch other states eliminate property tax (PA, TX and others) and watch business leave faster than lightning. But hey, the world is going to end if M2 passes right?

      • Guest

        Ed Schafer will step up to a podium and tell you anything you want to hear…for a price! Whoever can wave the most cash under his nose at the right time, he’ll gladly be your spokesperson.

      • sbark

        I doubt that if we could look ahead, that she would be inaccurate.   Just look at what property taxs have done in Williston area alone,  if anything she’s low.

        Hopefully Measure 2 passes, and we never have to find out.

        • $8194357

          property taxes and real estate prices along with “rent” are driving locals out who aren’t mineral owners…
          The “state profits” and the people are weakened in many ways from costs at the grocery store to the taxes on the same house trippling…

      • Drain52

        Actually, she’s using Corey Fong’s numbers and she’s still underestimating the increase. Corey Fong said that PT goes up 7.7% a year, compounded that means that PT will increase 110% in 10 yrs.

  • The Fighting Czech

    while this measure would eliminate the state’s right to collect Property tax….Would this prohibit local governments from enacting a property tax of their own???

    • Jason Odegaard

      Exactly. This hampers local democracy and small governments.

      • two_amber_lamps

        Absolutely…  social democracy fixes everything.  Look at the wonders it’s doing in Euro-land?

        Sbark had it right… with leftists it’s never a spending issue, it’s a revenue issue.  Now they find themselves awash in tax dollars?  Oh whatever shall the statists do?

        Unprecedented spending such as ND has never seen… that’ll fix that problem in a jiffy!

        End the government-tax-entitlement addiction… we can nip this thing in the bud before we even let them have the opportunity to turn ND into a WI, an IL, or a CA….

        • $8194357

          STARVE THE BEAST

      • Roy_Bean

        Right now I plan to vote against Measure 2 but I do have one question.  Every time some town is trying to attract a new business they offer a property tax exemption as an incentive to build.  In opposing Measure 2, would you be willing to have legislation introduced to outlaw property tax exemptions?  Can you explain why a business should be exempt from paying taxes that an 85 year old retired couple on a fixed income has to pay? 

        I think our property tax system is in need of some serious fixing but I’m not convinced that Measure 2 is the right fix. 

        • Fredlave

          Property taxes are not in themselves a bad thing but their application has turned them into the most unfair and regressive tax we have. I’m going to vote for M2. If the result is bad, the measure can be reversed by legislation.

          • Rick Olson

            Actually, no it cannot. The state constitution trumps statutory law in all matters. In general theory at least, the provisions contained in the Constitution of North Dakota constitutes much of the basis of the various statutory laws in the North Dakota Century Code.

            Of course, the general basis of law in 49 of the 50 states as well as federal statutory laws eminates from British Common Law. In the State of Louisiana, in general their basis of law comes from French Napoleanic Law, otherwise referred to as the napoleanic code.

          • $8194357

            They find “numerous” ways around our Federal Constitution…(general welfare clause)

            Your Democratic ACLU lawyer party of marxist critical thinkers will not rest until “rule of law” is dead and soviet olagarchy steering committee rules above us all Rick…

            “UNDER” the rule of law statist tyrrany and fasciism are chained…Olagarchy soviet steering committee rule of men above the law allows those twin dragons of tyrrany and fascism to fly free over our Republic along with keeping state soverignty and individual liberties a “non issue” for “progressive agendas”, son…

            Old timers knew there shit….they were “educated” before “UNESCO marxist revisionism”…

            Go figure huh?

          • boborygmi

            So you are saying you don’t trust our state legislature from acting any different then the Fed. Gov’t?

          • $8194357

            Maybe your catching on fart bubble…

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            If there are signs of fiscal trauma (which there won’t be) an initiated measure petition can be begun on June 13, right after the votes are in.  30,000 signature will get it on the next ballot.

          • VocalYokel

             Property taxes ARE in themselves bad things.
            They prevent you from being the real owner of the property.
            Any tax that is confiscatory in nature would seem to me to be so unconstitutional as to have absolutely no legal footing.

            Imagine if you buy a television and each year you get a bill from the government demanding payment on what they think the television is worth.
            You tell them to pack sand…they come and take your TV.

            Who owns ‘your’ television?

        • The Fighting Czech

          I think the taxpayer will get screwed either way,  Pass it,  M2 will be all the justification Bismarck will need to increase every other tax known to ND citizens for years to come…  Vote it down,  Bismarck will  resume “business as usual” operations.  Spend more,  Tax more,  Reform nothing. 
          Really the term ” Public Servant” doesnt define a politicians service to its citizens,  it describes the citizens service to its politicians. 

        • Rick Olson

          “I think our property tax system is in need of some serious fixing but I’m not convinced that Measure 2 is the right fix.” 

          I don’t think anyone can argue with that line of reasoning.  I have no doubt that the property tax system is in need of some serious fixing.  However, with Measure #2, you really are throwing out the baby with the bath water. 

          • $8194357

            With demand due to oil field, real estate is “windfall profits” due to inflationary pricing….

            Those against #2 know excacly why they don’t like it…

            It would stop their ever growing thirst for more government and control by limiting the “windfall”….

            Directing more and more into “their coffers”, Rick…

            Its our property and our money and they want more and more of it untill the “Soviet” owns it all…

          • Roy_Bean

            Here’s the way I see it.  In my little corner of the state this isn’t a problem.  In lots of places it is.  If it’s a big enough problem in a big enough chunk of the state then we’re going to be landscaping with a bulldozer.  Some times it comes to that. 

    • Rick Olson

      Good point. Good question.

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        Yes, indeed—take heed.
        It’s what you need.

      • $8194357

        The windfall government on all levels are all tingly about like lottery winners waiting to go forward with the winning ticket, what will be demanded of us if “government” don’t get the message
        LOUD AND CLEAR….
        Folks are “sick and tired” of paying for their personal and collective growth agendas…..

    • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

      Good question.  I tend to doubt it, but might be possible under Home Rule Charter.  The practical consequences would be interesting … internecine warfare?

      • Rick Olson

        Cities and counties that have Home Rule Charters can already levy local sales taxes.  There has been discussion relative to Measure #2 that these home rule entities could start levying a local income tax, and now the question has been raised about possibly, a local property tax. 

        There was discussion, I forget where it was, Grand Forks maybe about a “Wheels Tax.”  Essentially, a wheels tax would involve an extra percentage surcharge on every vehicle sold and/or registered within the city.  It didn’t make it out of the city council to be placed on the ballot in a municipal election. 

        My understanding is that in all home rule cities and counties, any proposal to increase a tax is subject to voter approval.  In the city of Fargo, all municipal tax questions must be approved by a 60 percent supermajority in an election called for that purpose.

        The question is would home rule cities and counties be permitted to levy such local taxes?  In general, jurisdictions with home rule can enact ordinances that are stronger than state law. 

        A case in point would be the smoke free workplace ordinances that are in place in a number of North Dakota cities that are stricter than present state laws. In a number of cities in North Dakota, including Bismarck and Fargo, smoking in bars is prohibited, while smoking in bars is not prohibited currently under the state indoor workplace smoking ban in the Century Code. 

        It would be an interesting question for an attorney general’s opinion.  “Can a home rule city or county impose a local jurisdiction income tax or a local jurisdiction property tax?”  Perhaps there is a state legislator out there who would like to formally request an opinion on the subject from Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem? 

        Cities, counties and school districts presently impose a mill levy, which is included in your property tax bill from the county, if my understanding is correct.

        • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

          Section 1 of the measure states…”the legislative assembly shall be and all political sub divisions are prohibited from raising revenue to defray the expenses of the state or political sub divisions through the levying of a tax on the assessed value of real or personal property.”

    • Jimmcy342

      It’s a constitutional measure. It prohibits taxing of property within the state. You can’t tax property. It’s as simple as that. Vote YES!

    • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

      Section 1 of the measure states…”the legislative assembly shall be and all political sub divisions are prohibited from raising revenue to defray the expenses of the state or political sub divisions through the levying of a tax on the assessed value of real or personal property.”

      • RCND

        Hypothetically speaking, if M2 passes and they can no longer levy taxes based on assessed value, can they decide to levy taxes on property based on another measurement, like appraised value?

        • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

          Good question.  I have heard of a one-time tax at time of sale being proposed, and I know that Hawaii has some sort of “transfer tax.”  Those might be options.  It would get rid of the eternal rent payments to the government if one pays off one’s home, and the government would get a piece of the action.

  • Fredlave

    I was ambivalent about M2 when I first heard about but the more I thought about it the more I’ve decided to vote for it.

    • $8194357

      10X  Fred

  • Rick Olson

    This ain’t Chicago, people … You know the well known joke about the motto of the City of Chicago: “City of Chicago — Vote early and vote often.” Voting once is more than sufficient. 

    (Gotta put a little humor into this thing!)

  • Rick Olson

    Regarding Measure #2…

    How about Article I, Section 18 of the North Dakota Constitution:

    “No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligations of contracts shall ever be passed.”

    To me, if Measure #2 is adopted, this amounts to it being an ex post facto matter. If down the road, we find out that Measure #2 winds up being a huge mistake, it’s going to be extremely difficult to rectify the situation.

    My understanding of ex post facto is that it isn’t necessarily limited to criminal matters. In this case, if property taxes are abolished, and one day the Constitution is re-amended to repeal what Measure #2 seeks to do, it would be difficult if not impossible to once again levy a property tax, directly or indirectly because of an ex post facto barrier. Does that sound reasonable?

    Cities, counties, townships, school districts, park boards, etc. most certainly have implied contracts (not necessarily written contracts) with the people who live within their jurisdictions.

    Among these contracts are that basic needs such as fire and police protection, water and sewage service, garbage pickup, proper education for our children, properly maintained roads, streets and infrastructure shall be provided for.

    As you know, many smaller communities contract for services such as police protection and solid waste removal and disposal. Cities that are too small to employ their own police forces may contract with the county sheriff’s department for law enforcement protection. Many cities that are too small to offer their own garbage pickup service will contract with a larger waste hauling service such as Waste Management, who will provide door to door trash and recycling pickup in said community, of course for a contracted fee.

    If Measure #2 passes, wouldn’t the loss of property tax revenues be a potential precipitating cause for a breach of said contracts? If so, I assume litigation could be brought by the aggrieved party.

    • sdlawrence

      There are three reasons that’s not even possible:

      1) Property tax is only one “type” (not source) of funding.  There is nothing in Measure two that prohibits taxes on the actual people in a jurisdiction (not just property owners selectively). It just can’t be based on property value. 

      2) Measure 2 takes the “implied contract”, as you called it, with “the people who live within their jurisdictions” (no such contract exists – people are free to fund or not fund local government as they see fit) and creates for the first time an EXPRESS contract between local governments and The People of the State (there is no such thing as “the State” except We The People who ordained the constitution that created it). 

      3) The bulk of local funding already comes from the State, and since the State would be required to “fully and properly fund” local governments, and already has the funding to do so, local governments — for the first time — have actual legal recourse to the State through the courts. Recourse that was severely limited before, constrained only to what was explicit in the Constitution. For example, the State has ALWAYS been required by the constitution to fund K-12. Even now. The fact that they pushed part of this off onto local governments by giving them the authority to levy property taxes was absolutely incidental, and did not relieve the State of its constitutional responsibility.

  • localize

    North Dakota state university’s student government just passed a resolution opposing measure 2 claiming it would be too hard to get funding.

    • Rick Olson

      Not surprising.  I was a member of the NDSU student government for a period of time when I was going to college there.  I was a member of the Student Senate to fill a vacancy. It should be pointed out that resolutions of the student senate are largely advisory upon the university administration.

    • Ofnir

      Let it be known that only one student senator voted against the resolution formally opposing measure two. So it was not a unanimous decision, but pretty darn close.

  • RCND

    I was hoping this one would break 200 comments … just to see it happen. Oh well.

Top