City government is guilty of the same kind of overspending that goes on at the state and federal levels of government. And it is nearly impossible to get a change without some serious amount of pain inflicted upon the taxpayers. Glad I don’t live there, but sad that I don’t have a desire to even visit simply because of the cost and the implied safety concerns.
Brandt is reasonable and level-headed even if I don't agree with all of his proposals (a wealth tax won't work for many reasons). I do agree with him that we need to lower the levy overall. He also does his homework and knows his facts.
I am left wondering just what it takes to exert enough pressure on the Mpls government leadership to cause them to reduce spending. These increases are unaffordable and unfair, and I am unconvinced Frey and the council are willing to made hard decisions. Writing wrathful emails to Frey and the council has little impact…..can anything else be done? If not, this all continues until next time…when they will need even more to hang on to everything just as it is.
This is jaw dropping. Last year the hike was 8.3%. An 11% hike is unjustified. The city spends how many $$$$$$$ on bollards that no one wants, changed road patterns with concrete medians that no longer allow for firetrucks or emergency vehicles, have a reduced police force, and yet they continue with special interest funding. My mortgage payment which went up $300 @ month between taxes and insurance will soon become unaffordable. As it is, many people in the city couldn't afford to buy their own homes at current market rate. Didn't the city add over 5000 new rental units that are paying taxes? The city has to curb unnecessary spending. We all talk about 'affordability,' but hand outs, and special interests are costing homeowners, not corporate titans. When do tax payer home owners get to see, much less vote on city spending?
Any meaningful income tax on high earners is completely self defeating. The exit costs are low and as it is we are getting a lot from high earners in property taxes. Make it clear that we only see them as a revenue source for foolish spending and plenty will get the message.
Yes. A healthy city needs some high earners and high property tax payers in the mix to keep the city well funded and vibrant. However, there seems to be a growing contingent that would actually prefer these folks leave the city.
City government is guilty of the same kind of overspending that goes on at the state and federal levels of government. And it is nearly impossible to get a change without some serious amount of pain inflicted upon the taxpayers. Glad I don’t live there, but sad that I don’t have a desire to even visit simply because of the cost and the implied safety concerns.
Brandt is reasonable and level-headed even if I don't agree with all of his proposals (a wealth tax won't work for many reasons). I do agree with him that we need to lower the levy overall. He also does his homework and knows his facts.
I am left wondering just what it takes to exert enough pressure on the Mpls government leadership to cause them to reduce spending. These increases are unaffordable and unfair, and I am unconvinced Frey and the council are willing to made hard decisions. Writing wrathful emails to Frey and the council has little impact…..can anything else be done? If not, this all continues until next time…when they will need even more to hang on to everything just as it is.
This is jaw dropping. Last year the hike was 8.3%. An 11% hike is unjustified. The city spends how many $$$$$$$ on bollards that no one wants, changed road patterns with concrete medians that no longer allow for firetrucks or emergency vehicles, have a reduced police force, and yet they continue with special interest funding. My mortgage payment which went up $300 @ month between taxes and insurance will soon become unaffordable. As it is, many people in the city couldn't afford to buy their own homes at current market rate. Didn't the city add over 5000 new rental units that are paying taxes? The city has to curb unnecessary spending. We all talk about 'affordability,' but hand outs, and special interests are costing homeowners, not corporate titans. When do tax payer home owners get to see, much less vote on city spending?
Any meaningful income tax on high earners is completely self defeating. The exit costs are low and as it is we are getting a lot from high earners in property taxes. Make it clear that we only see them as a revenue source for foolish spending and plenty will get the message.
Yes. A healthy city needs some high earners and high property tax payers in the mix to keep the city well funded and vibrant. However, there seems to be a growing contingent that would actually prefer these folks leave the city.
The Mn Constitution gets in the way of an income tax. The State got an amendment for income taxes and would oppose extension.