Sadly, we are still far away from this. I watched the BET public testimony, and only one person said the levy was too high. Most speakers defended the Park Board's levy request. But when a significant number of homeowners see their taxes go up 15%-20% (and renters see similar rent hikes), resistance may occur.
They won’t. They’ll grumble when tax statements come out next winter, but then they’ll promptly forget. Minneapolis has become very bifurcated in terms of income, with homeowners largely on the “haves” side and renters largely on the “have not” side. The “haves” will just write the check and the “have nots” will also write their checks and the number of people moving out to the suburbs will increase.
After decades of property tax increases exceeding the rate of inflation, the city has jumped the shark this year. We desperately need some fiscal conservatives in local government.
They say you get the government you vote for. Unfortunately, none of the current council members know anything about fiscal restraint nor do they understand the unintended consequences of their actions. By the way, thanks for bringing this to our attention Terry!
Eric Harris Bernstein really threw taxpayers under the bus. He actually proposed this super max levy—giving in to both the city’s and the parks board’s demands—after both refused to significantly compromise on a budget that would scale back just a little bit of the fat. Some negotiator, that Harris Bernstein. I wonder if he negotiates with his own money in the same way.
I want to add that it’s really hard not to wonder if the fix wasn’t in from the beginning. Both Mayor Frey and Park’s Board chair Tom Olson must have known that if they just hold their line Harris Bernstein would rubber stamp their max request rather than default to the old budget. Booo.
My impression is that EHB's only demand was to give the Park Board what they wanted and to get the Mayor and City Council to agree to place financial restraints on the police department so MPD savings could fund other priorities. At the meeting, he was urging a unanimous yes. He does seem to understand that the city's bond rating is at risk.
I don't agree with what I've seen as EHBs approach to this, but as the MPD are the largest overspender it may be appropriate to put the emphasis on that department.
That said, it does disappoint me to see Minneapolis displaying these “blue city” governance issues. By that I mean being unable to prioritize, or adapt spending to economic conditions.
Let’s assume the CC does restrain the police department’s spending. Do you think the CC will also restrain other city department spending? Or will the “fine tooth comb” be reserved for the police budget while other departments get a pass?
We’ve had city budgets that exceed the rate of inflation for the past few years and while the city population is stagnant. We know that salaries for city workers, which determine future retirement benefits, are escalating faster than inflation and health care costs are increasing rapidly too. We also have a number of contracts that are poorly managed. I suspect that’s just the beginning.
Sadly, I don't see the CC working over other departments as they will in MPD. It will be a rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul situation. I don't think the majority of the CC sees the tax hike as a real problem yet.
It's notable that the BET members and the Park Board President were endorsed at the controversial MPLS DFL convention in July of 2025 and fairly certain they did not support Frey is the mayor's race. Frey's budget is not above criticisim but the question is: Will there be a healthy compromise between the mayor and council members since the ball is now in their court? I'm not holding my breath...
The park board president was endorsed, as was Steve Brandt and Bob Fine for BET. Eric Harris Bernstein joined the race after the convention and ended up winning along with Brandt.
when will Minneapolis voters begin to reject all of this?
Sadly, we are still far away from this. I watched the BET public testimony, and only one person said the levy was too high. Most speakers defended the Park Board's levy request. But when a significant number of homeowners see their taxes go up 15%-20% (and renters see similar rent hikes), resistance may occur.
They won’t. They’ll grumble when tax statements come out next winter, but then they’ll promptly forget. Minneapolis has become very bifurcated in terms of income, with homeowners largely on the “haves” side and renters largely on the “have not” side. The “haves” will just write the check and the “have nots” will also write their checks and the number of people moving out to the suburbs will increase.
After decades of property tax increases exceeding the rate of inflation, the city has jumped the shark this year. We desperately need some fiscal conservatives in local government.
They say you get the government you vote for. Unfortunately, none of the current council members know anything about fiscal restraint nor do they understand the unintended consequences of their actions. By the way, thanks for bringing this to our attention Terry!
Eric Harris Bernstein really threw taxpayers under the bus. He actually proposed this super max levy—giving in to both the city’s and the parks board’s demands—after both refused to significantly compromise on a budget that would scale back just a little bit of the fat. Some negotiator, that Harris Bernstein. I wonder if he negotiates with his own money in the same way.
I want to add that it’s really hard not to wonder if the fix wasn’t in from the beginning. Both Mayor Frey and Park’s Board chair Tom Olson must have known that if they just hold their line Harris Bernstein would rubber stamp their max request rather than default to the old budget. Booo.
My impression is that EHB's only demand was to give the Park Board what they wanted and to get the Mayor and City Council to agree to place financial restraints on the police department so MPD savings could fund other priorities. At the meeting, he was urging a unanimous yes. He does seem to understand that the city's bond rating is at risk.
I don't agree with what I've seen as EHBs approach to this, but as the MPD are the largest overspender it may be appropriate to put the emphasis on that department.
That said, it does disappoint me to see Minneapolis displaying these “blue city” governance issues. By that I mean being unable to prioritize, or adapt spending to economic conditions.
Let’s assume the CC does restrain the police department’s spending. Do you think the CC will also restrain other city department spending? Or will the “fine tooth comb” be reserved for the police budget while other departments get a pass?
We’ve had city budgets that exceed the rate of inflation for the past few years and while the city population is stagnant. We know that salaries for city workers, which determine future retirement benefits, are escalating faster than inflation and health care costs are increasing rapidly too. We also have a number of contracts that are poorly managed. I suspect that’s just the beginning.
Sadly, I don't see the CC working over other departments as they will in MPD. It will be a rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul situation. I don't think the majority of the CC sees the tax hike as a real problem yet.
Unsustainable! First thing that comes to my mind is a taxpayers strike.!
It's notable that the BET members and the Park Board President were endorsed at the controversial MPLS DFL convention in July of 2025 and fairly certain they did not support Frey is the mayor's race. Frey's budget is not above criticisim but the question is: Will there be a healthy compromise between the mayor and council members since the ball is now in their court? I'm not holding my breath...
The park board president was endorsed, as was Steve Brandt and Bob Fine for BET. Eric Harris Bernstein joined the race after the convention and ended up winning along with Brandt.
Political posturing and finger pointing is not helpful. It's time to govern.