Why Property Tax Caps Are Right For North Dakota

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Monday Rob did a post about two bills in the ND house that are designed to limit future property tax increases in exchange for more funding from the state. Rob disagreed with the concept but I think it’s the best thing that can come out of the legislature this year.
My understanding is that Rob doesn’t like the idea because we shouldn’t be bailing out the local school districts in the first place. But even if we do, it’s against his principles to limit them. He compared it with Obama wanting to limit executive pay for companies that accept bailout money. He thinks two wrongs don’t make a right.
I disagree with him reluctantly on the executive pay thing, and disagree with him forcefully (but respectfully) on the matter of property tax caps.
First of all the state government has every right to limit property taxes that are charged by political subdivisions. After all these subdivisions are creations of the state. There’s no question of legality here.
The question is what’s right and in that case the school districts (and other local entities) are in the wrong when it comes to property taxes. For the most part the school boards and city governments raised taxes because they could, not because they had to. What we saw in the last few years is that as property taxes rose the taxing entities used that as an excuse to go on a spending spree.
They acted that the fact that your house might be worth more was an excuse that they should spend more. Nothing could be further from the truth. If they would have held the line on spending then your property tax bill wouldn’t have shot through the roof. It’s that simple, it’s the spending.
What really gets me is that the school boards have been using the line that if you don’t want to pay more than you must not like children. What a load of garbage. The money didn’t go to help kids. In Grand Forks at least a ton of the money went to administration. As far as teacher pay I don’t see the kids being better off because teacher can afford a bigger boat.
So eventually after years of rising our property tax bills by two or three times the rate of inflation there started to be an outcry. Rather than admit what they did, the school boards and their allies falsely blamed the state legislature which was being responsible. Think about it. The state’s been increasing their spending per pupil at a rate slightly above the rate of inflation. How could the state be to blame for property tax bills that have nearly doubled?
It’s the local entities that raised our taxes, not because they had to, but because they wanted it to.
Last November the public very clearly decided that they wanted property tax relief. So we’re going to get property tax relief probably along the lines of the $300,000,000 that’s in the Governor’s budget. In addition the school districts will probably get another $100,000,000 in new funding.
The school districts got around the same $100,000,000 in new funding in 2007. Was that enough? Were they satisfied? Not at all. They have been trotting out the same “it’s for the kids” BS stories as they have ever since I was old enough to notice.
So do you think that they’ll be satisfied with this hundred million? No flippin’ way. They’ll be out to spend more just as soon as they can.
Without property tax caps it’ll be easy for them to start the whole process of raising property taxes all over again. They’ll figure that if your taxes were $2000/year and now are $1200/year you surely owe it to the to pay $1350. The next year it will be $1450 and the next year. I’ll bet that within six years your taxes are just as high as they are now (adjusted for inflation) even while they keep that money coming in from the state.
Don’t forget the school districts have been increasing their budgets by a very high percentage every year. (Even while enrollment’s been dropping.) They have a sense of entitlement that their budgets must increase by 8% every year. Anything less is a “cut.”
But it actually gets worse. If I understand it right, John Hoeven’s plan is for that $300,000,000 in property tax relief is supposed to come out of the oil trust fund. What happens if we don’t have the money coming in? What if the local school district has raised their property taxes back up. Do you think that they’ll accept a cut in their standard of living or do you think they’ll want to take it out of yours? If recent history is any guide, they don’t give a damn about your lifestyle. All you’re supposed to do is support them at ever higher levels.
If you want true property tax relief than you have to support the idea of Property Tax Caps. The same thing goes for future tax increases.
We need to control local school spending. The school boards have failed and gone hog wild. The only thing to do is to put a limit on the damage they can do.
The most important thing to remember is that you won’t be hurting the schools. They’ll be getting fully funded for the amount that your property tax bill goes down. They will get another one hundred million dollars in additional funding. Why in the world would the education cabal be against this unless they were planning on turning around and taking away YOUR property tax relief that you need?

Tags:


«
»
  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Sorry Whistler… you’re wrong.

    I guess that’s it then.

  • wlegend14

    Rob and I don't disagree about much. However, I do disagree with him on this one. I also don't believe that the state should set limits on local governments. Local government is still the best government. Except….
    1) Our local governments have all shown that they cannot control their own spending.
    2) Voters keep electing the people who levy their property taxes. Not because they like high taxes and out of control spending, because they don't realize that the spendaholics who they keep electing are the one's that are responsible.
    3) The state by getting involved in property tax relief is nothing short of it's own bailout.
    4) If the state is going to bail out local spendaholics, there needs to be strings attached.. like caps.
    5) Once the local municipalities are capped, and they realize that YES, they can still function without raising property taxes 10% annually, then the caps can be removed.
    6) Once voters around the state become educated on all of this and start electing some new people to local boards, the message will be complete.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    good points all.

  • http://Array jimmypop

    2) Voters keep electing the people who levy their property taxes. Not because they like high taxes and out of control spending, because they don't realize that the spendaholics who they keep electing are the one's that are responsible.

    THIS is exactly why things should be let alone!!!! if the voters liek it, leave it alone!

    As I posted in the other thread… if you guys have a problem with local folks, when will you press for spending caps for the fastest growing portion of our government…. that being, the state. How can anyone here or the douches in bismarck say, 'the locals are spending too much!' while they spend the $1B surplus now and increases spending LAST session 23%?!?!?!?!? these hypocrites need to be called out.

    maybe even more important; the republicans keep wanting to centralize EVERYTHING. What the 'f' is that about? essentially they are saying the locals are too dumb to figure any of this it out… while at the same time these same morons want to spend billions on the state level. seriously? how are the big government republicans not front page news?

  • brenarlo

    Sorry Whistler… you're wrong.

  • Brent

    Whistler, I agree with your point of view, but I doubt the effectiveness of the proposal.

    These caps, even when they are passed by the voters through ballot measures, never seem to actually stop the growth in spending when it comes right down to it. I imagine that a governor and a legislature that is willing to throw hundreds of millions of new dollars at local school districts every other year will just end up ponying up more money when the local governments have the additional excuse of being "handicapped" by the legislature's property tax cap.

    Sure, it won't make sense… but when does it ever?

  • http://wizbangblog.com/ Jay Tea

    May I introduce you fine folks to Massachusetts' Proposition 2 1/2?

    Several years ago, the people of MA — in a rare case of sanity — passed a ballot initiative that capped property tax rate increases to 2.5% per year without a public referendum. Yes, the state's still a shithole politically and financially, but it's put a few brakes on the handcart to hell.

    No, tax caps aren't a panacea. But they do help.

    J.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    It seems that the state will soon not have the hundreds of millions to throw around.

    I still don't see the state being excited to raise taxes. Nor do I see the citizens excited to raise taxes to build a school in another district.

    I'm not saying this is perfect. But given that the money is going to be spent it might as well accomplish what they say it will.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    I'm glad you posted this, Whistler, so that we could get both points of view out there.

    This is a tough issue. When you say that local officials have demonstrated that they clearly can't handle their budgeting, you're not wrong. But I think, rather than caps, denying them a bailout from the state is the proper solution.

    But if we're going to bail them out, I still don't think that justifies a property tax cap.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I see your point, but we're going to be bailing them out. (called property tax relief.)

    I think we need to make sure that we keep said relief.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development