I sold my property in Minneapolis over three years ago, and let’s just say property taxes played a big role in that decision. My property tax bill—thanks to a lovely mix of taxing authorities and city service fees for garbage, recycling, composting, and water and sewer—was actually higher than my federal tax obligation. As I geared up for retirement, it felt financially insane to keep owning property in a city that had been my home my entire life. Plus, it was pretty clear that commercial property values were headed south, and with federal and state funding likely to dwindle, the writing was on the wall. For folks like me living in one of the more economically advantaged neighborhoods, it seemed inevitable that we’d end up footing an even bigger bill through skyrocketing property taxes and city service fees.
Are there any city services you feel could be cut to prevent further tax increases? For more revenue, the idea of a city income tax is being considered. What are your thoughts on that?
City of Minneapolis employees often earn more than their state counterparts.
* Minneapolis City Council Member: $109,846
* Minnesota State Senator: $51,750
The salaries of top Minneapolis executives are also notably high:
* City Coordinator: Up to $228,000
* Chief of Police: $250,000 - $300,000
* Mayor: $140,814 (just under the Minnesota Governor's salary of $149,550)
With the average Minneapolis resident earning a median household income of about $81,001 and a per capita income of $53,072, a 1% to 3% pay cut for city staff could be a reasonable consideration.
Listening to Carol explain the City and various other ethnicities that have the ability to increase property taxes explain that EVERY entity raised taxes on property owners more than the rate of inflation. City Minneapolis raised taxes more than double inflation. Few people receive pay increases annually that are double inflation. The city is putting regular people in a tough position.
These cities are all comparable size to Minneapolis and here is the salary of their Mayors.
Seattle, Washington: The salary for the Mayor of Seattle is approximately $100,577. Some sources, however, indicate higher ranges.
* Denver, Colorado: The salary for the Mayor of Denver is approximately $69,208. It's important to note that this can vary, and top-earning mayors could make more.
* Madison, Wisconsin: The salary for the Mayor of Madison is approximately $89,641.
Minneapolis Mayor and our City Council is paid more than all these jurisdictions.
* Seattle, Washington: The median household income is approximately $121,984 (as of 2023). This is significantly higher than the national median, largely due to the concentration of high-paying tech jobs in the city.
* Denver, Colorado: The median household income is around $91,681 (as of 2023). Denver's per capita income for the county is also quite high, around $116,530, showing a strong economy.
* Madison, Wisconsin: The median household income is approximately $86,827 (as of 2023). This is higher than both the Wisconsin state and national medians, reflecting a strong job market and a highly educated population.
The average income in all of these jurisdictions is higher than Minneapolis residents while their Major and City Council are paid less.
I’m probably going to need to write something more in-depth about this subject.
I look forward to reading your piece. I’m also curious about how many council members they have. Is our representation commensurate? For example, I think we have one member per about 35k residents plus their aides. Do those cities have any at-large council members?
Here’s what I do know. When I worked on state legislative issues for Nonprofits a decade ago. Multiple state legislators staffers who worked for Committee Chairs or in fairly high ranking positions then said, “I should really try to get a job with the city of Minneapolis if I want to increase my income.” That was a 2000s - 2015ish or more than 10 years ago.
I guarantee city staffers also make more than people working at the state legislature or for various agencies.
It seems shocking to me that they can legally vote themselves a raise in such a sneaky way. Even so it is certainly unethical and depressing to think of how much the quality of the councilors has declined.
I'm just going to have to rain on this parade! City officials' salaries are NOT the problem, and, in fact, it would not be a bad idea (though perhaps not necessary) to RAISE them. It is a real problem in Minneapolis that candidates who are mature but still-young people (say, 30-55 years old) who have actually DONE SOMETHING in their professional lives (run a small business, risen to a level of responsibility in a corporation, held some other office here or elsewhere) are hard to find. I live in Ward 11, where actually having more than one person seriously run for City Council is a relatively new thing. A major part of the reason for this is that running for office takes time and money, and someone with the credentials I would like to see our candidates have can make more money - sometimes MUCH more money - continuing on the career path they are on. Note that in my list above, I did NOT include having worked for or even run a non-profit or an activist group. That is NOT the experience we are short of. However, if we DECREASE salaries, that is the skill-set we will get more of... If we want accomplished people to take the risks involved in running for office, or even to take the "hit" to their progress in their current careers that would come with doing any of the major city appointed jobs for a number of years, there needs to be attractive reward in the form or salary.
You’re right; individuals who are highly skilled and earn significantly more, but are primarily focused on their income, are unlikely to leave their jobs to run for city council. However, many people in Minneapolis, particularly those earning below $100,000 a year(which is the vast majority), would be enthusiastic about running for office. Additionally, there are others who earn more but prioritize serving their community over making money. While this group doesn’t encompass everyone, it certainly represents a significant portion of the population in Minneapolis.
Also….Given the stagnant housing market and low amount of home sales data available to the assessor’s office over the past few years, you have to question how accurate any individual assessment can be especially for homes that haven’t been on the market in many years. It would be interesting to learn more about the technicalities of real estate assessment, especially for owner occupied single family homes.
So many houses being sold for redevelopment is a huge problem right now, land value often exceeds house value making it near impossible for people to buy a starter home. The development is replacing the more affordable homes with either million dollar homes or rentals.
Carol Becker, and many others, are really tearing it up at Minneapolis Times. They are bringing their hearts and HEADS to this mighty effort to try to help Mpls.
I read ( and listen to) everything Better Mpls/ Terry White and Minneapolis Times puts out weekly. It keeps me up on all, helps me to know when and how to take action, and finally, it helps me to feel hopeful about Mpls, seeing this level of commitment to our city. ❣️
Carol is brilliant as well as being very good on explaining the processes. She should not only be on again but should maybe appear on a broader platform for people to learn from.
For starters, post-COVID employees need to be back in their desks downtown. That includes the City, Target, banks and insurance companies, and everyone in between. If commercial buildings and "rental" (?) buildings are losing value, why should my property tax increase? If rent was affordable and neighborhoods were safe and thriving, they'd be rented. Right?
The Met Council really should not be running the transit system. It takes different skills to plan for a far future than it does to run a cost effective necessary system. They are building and running a transit system for future needs and wants rather than current needs and actual use. They have no actual concept as to the needs of someone that does not have an affordable 2nd option of transportation. It's good to plan for the future but it does little for those that want and need to use it now.
They Met Council failed to understand the biggest consequence of shutting down a needed system, knowledge that the transit system was not dependable. Add to that the implication that transit is not safe for both physical and health reasons. They even completely shut the system down for a snow storm without notice leaving people out and about stranded when many of the main roads were perfectly drivable. How could there be no plan for reduced service as well as a failure to notify the public of the pending closure. It's not like a snow day at school, many people have to go to work regardless of weather and others can't afford to lose the income.
I believe the lack of understanding extends to the drivers. They do not feel heard and I bet most feel stuck between two unhappy entities, management and the customers. The driver scheduling seems weird these days and all the detours make them behind schedule. Then there is the reduced stops for people they know can barely walk. I don't know if they like transporting the teenagers to school but I doubt they enjoy being temporary housing for the homeless during bad weather. The transit seems to be a cure-all for everything these days.
I sold my property in Minneapolis over three years ago, and let’s just say property taxes played a big role in that decision. My property tax bill—thanks to a lovely mix of taxing authorities and city service fees for garbage, recycling, composting, and water and sewer—was actually higher than my federal tax obligation. As I geared up for retirement, it felt financially insane to keep owning property in a city that had been my home my entire life. Plus, it was pretty clear that commercial property values were headed south, and with federal and state funding likely to dwindle, the writing was on the wall. For folks like me living in one of the more economically advantaged neighborhoods, it seemed inevitable that we’d end up footing an even bigger bill through skyrocketing property taxes and city service fees.
Are there any city services you feel could be cut to prevent further tax increases? For more revenue, the idea of a city income tax is being considered. What are your thoughts on that?
City of Minneapolis employees often earn more than their state counterparts.
* Minneapolis City Council Member: $109,846
* Minnesota State Senator: $51,750
The salaries of top Minneapolis executives are also notably high:
* City Coordinator: Up to $228,000
* Chief of Police: $250,000 - $300,000
* Mayor: $140,814 (just under the Minnesota Governor's salary of $149,550)
With the average Minneapolis resident earning a median household income of about $81,001 and a per capita income of $53,072, a 1% to 3% pay cut for city staff could be a reasonable consideration.
Listening to Carol explain the City and various other ethnicities that have the ability to increase property taxes explain that EVERY entity raised taxes on property owners more than the rate of inflation. City Minneapolis raised taxes more than double inflation. Few people receive pay increases annually that are double inflation. The city is putting regular people in a tough position.
These cities are all comparable size to Minneapolis and here is the salary of their Mayors.
Seattle, Washington: The salary for the Mayor of Seattle is approximately $100,577. Some sources, however, indicate higher ranges.
* Denver, Colorado: The salary for the Mayor of Denver is approximately $69,208. It's important to note that this can vary, and top-earning mayors could make more.
* Madison, Wisconsin: The salary for the Mayor of Madison is approximately $89,641.
Minneapolis Mayor and our City Council is paid more than all these jurisdictions.
* Seattle, Washington: The median household income is approximately $121,984 (as of 2023). This is significantly higher than the national median, largely due to the concentration of high-paying tech jobs in the city.
* Denver, Colorado: The median household income is around $91,681 (as of 2023). Denver's per capita income for the county is also quite high, around $116,530, showing a strong economy.
* Madison, Wisconsin: The median household income is approximately $86,827 (as of 2023). This is higher than both the Wisconsin state and national medians, reflecting a strong job market and a highly educated population.
The average income in all of these jurisdictions is higher than Minneapolis residents while their Major and City Council are paid less.
I’m probably going to need to write something more in-depth about this subject.
I look forward to reading your piece. I’m also curious about how many council members they have. Is our representation commensurate? For example, I think we have one member per about 35k residents plus their aides. Do those cities have any at-large council members?
Here’s what I do know. When I worked on state legislative issues for Nonprofits a decade ago. Multiple state legislators staffers who worked for Committee Chairs or in fairly high ranking positions then said, “I should really try to get a job with the city of Minneapolis if I want to increase my income.” That was a 2000s - 2015ish or more than 10 years ago.
I guarantee city staffers also make more than people working at the state legislature or for various agencies.
Interesting…this makes sense considering the clandestine approach the council took to giving themselves a raise back in 2017. (https://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2017/12/minneapolis-city-council-approved-10000-raises-new-council-mayor/).
It seems shocking to me that they can legally vote themselves a raise in such a sneaky way. Even so it is certainly unethical and depressing to think of how much the quality of the councilors has declined.
I'm just going to have to rain on this parade! City officials' salaries are NOT the problem, and, in fact, it would not be a bad idea (though perhaps not necessary) to RAISE them. It is a real problem in Minneapolis that candidates who are mature but still-young people (say, 30-55 years old) who have actually DONE SOMETHING in their professional lives (run a small business, risen to a level of responsibility in a corporation, held some other office here or elsewhere) are hard to find. I live in Ward 11, where actually having more than one person seriously run for City Council is a relatively new thing. A major part of the reason for this is that running for office takes time and money, and someone with the credentials I would like to see our candidates have can make more money - sometimes MUCH more money - continuing on the career path they are on. Note that in my list above, I did NOT include having worked for or even run a non-profit or an activist group. That is NOT the experience we are short of. However, if we DECREASE salaries, that is the skill-set we will get more of... If we want accomplished people to take the risks involved in running for office, or even to take the "hit" to their progress in their current careers that would come with doing any of the major city appointed jobs for a number of years, there needs to be attractive reward in the form or salary.
You’re right; individuals who are highly skilled and earn significantly more, but are primarily focused on their income, are unlikely to leave their jobs to run for city council. However, many people in Minneapolis, particularly those earning below $100,000 a year(which is the vast majority), would be enthusiastic about running for office. Additionally, there are others who earn more but prioritize serving their community over making money. While this group doesn’t encompass everyone, it certainly represents a significant portion of the population in Minneapolis.
I really enjoyed hearing Carol’s thoughts.
Also….Given the stagnant housing market and low amount of home sales data available to the assessor’s office over the past few years, you have to question how accurate any individual assessment can be especially for homes that haven’t been on the market in many years. It would be interesting to learn more about the technicalities of real estate assessment, especially for owner occupied single family homes.
So many houses being sold for redevelopment is a huge problem right now, land value often exceeds house value making it near impossible for people to buy a starter home. The development is replacing the more affordable homes with either million dollar homes or rentals.
https://minneapolistimes.com/
Carol Becker, and many others, are really tearing it up at Minneapolis Times. They are bringing their hearts and HEADS to this mighty effort to try to help Mpls.
I read ( and listen to) everything Better Mpls/ Terry White and Minneapolis Times puts out weekly. It keeps me up on all, helps me to know when and how to take action, and finally, it helps me to feel hopeful about Mpls, seeing this level of commitment to our city. ❣️
Thank you for reading/listening. Your support means a lot.
Carol is brilliant as well as being very good on explaining the processes. She should not only be on again but should maybe appear on a broader platform for people to learn from.
I would love to see Carol run for mayor.
For starters, post-COVID employees need to be back in their desks downtown. That includes the City, Target, banks and insurance companies, and everyone in between. If commercial buildings and "rental" (?) buildings are losing value, why should my property tax increase? If rent was affordable and neighborhoods were safe and thriving, they'd be rented. Right?
The Met Council really should not be running the transit system. It takes different skills to plan for a far future than it does to run a cost effective necessary system. They are building and running a transit system for future needs and wants rather than current needs and actual use. They have no actual concept as to the needs of someone that does not have an affordable 2nd option of transportation. It's good to plan for the future but it does little for those that want and need to use it now.
They Met Council failed to understand the biggest consequence of shutting down a needed system, knowledge that the transit system was not dependable. Add to that the implication that transit is not safe for both physical and health reasons. They even completely shut the system down for a snow storm without notice leaving people out and about stranded when many of the main roads were perfectly drivable. How could there be no plan for reduced service as well as a failure to notify the public of the pending closure. It's not like a snow day at school, many people have to go to work regardless of weather and others can't afford to lose the income.
I believe the lack of understanding extends to the drivers. They do not feel heard and I bet most feel stuck between two unhappy entities, management and the customers. The driver scheduling seems weird these days and all the detours make them behind schedule. Then there is the reduced stops for people they know can barely walk. I don't know if they like transporting the teenagers to school but I doubt they enjoy being temporary housing for the homeless during bad weather. The transit seems to be a cure-all for everything these days.