Thought I’d take a minute or two to expand on County Assessor Robert Thompson’s informative article addressing the convoluted topic of Fiscal Disparities (November 23 issue). Thompson states, “The purpose of the program is to aid Taconite Tax Relief cities with a small commercial/industrial tax base by giving them a share of property taxes from other communities with more property wealth.”
One could theorize the program was designed to share revenues according to a local governments’ ability to pay.
Let’s just say, here’s one of those occasions when theory is ambushed by reality.
Consider:
1) The 2020 area wide pool, aggregated from among the seven participating counties in the Iron Range Fiscal Disparities program, will amount to $20.3 million. Cook County taxpayers will contribute nearly a million ($939,124) to this pool and receive $122,641 in distribution. This leaves taxpayers to pick up a tab of $816,483, an amount that equates to nearly 8 percent of Cook County’s 2020-projected levy.
2) St. Louis County, on the other hand, will contribute approximately $7.8 million to the pool and receive $13.5 million in distribution, meaning St. Louis County taxpayers will see their tax bill reduced by $5.7 million.
So, which local government, Cook County or St. Louis County, do you suppose has the greater ability to pay?
The fact that the formula used to determine “who gets the money” is based on a jurisdiction’s market value of all property (Fiscal Capacity) divided by its population, one could rightfully conclude small communities like Cook County are disproportionally overburdened.
For this reason, 19 years ago, the small community of Cohasset “challenged the validity of the 1996 Iron Range Fiscal Disparities Act in district court,” as noted in Assessor Thompson’s article.
Thompson’s article also pointed out that the Iron Range program excludes the urban areas of Duluth and Hermantown. The reason has something to do with school district boundaries used as a yardstick by legislators who contrived the program in 1996.
And which county claims Duluth and Hermantown as a ward of their jurisdiction? St. Louis County, of course.
Consider:
Category Cohasset Cook County Hermantown
Population 2,731 5,398 9,603
Median age 44.3 yrs 52.1 yrs 41 yrs
Median household income $61,923 (2.42% growth) $51,903 (0.21% growth) $70,082 (5.57% growth)
Median property value $203,700 $241,400 $221,800
Poverty rate 5.16% 13% 5.17%
Number of employees 1,343 (0.67% decline) 2,636 (2.69% decline) 4,734 (4.83% growth)
Data provided by the US Census Bureau
So, having perused these figures, let’s once again circle ‘round the premise of the fiscal disparities program: “A community with below-average property value per person receives a somewhat larger share of the area wide pool of tax base. A community with an above-average property tax value per person receives a somewhat smaller share.”
Using the misguided fiscal disparities formula for distribution of tax dollars from the pool, how do you figure a community with a high median property value divided by a small population will ever receive “a somewhat larger share”?
Imagine the direct effect on the program were Duluth and Hermantown to “join the club.” Especially considering Hermantown has been the only city in St Louis County to report population growth. Much of the area’s residential and commercial expansion occurs there.
A significant contributing factor:
Cook County Auditor Braidy Powers suggests, “The problem for us is the population, the five-thousand of those of us who live here all year long. Our market value is determined by the value of all property within the county (including the seasonal recreational property owners) referred to as our Fiscal Capacity, divided by only five thousand residents.”
According to 2014 figures from the MN Dept. of Management and Budget, Cook County ranked highest in the state at 29.4 percent total exported taxes, nearly triple that of St. Louis County.
In other words, a significant portion of the market value of all property in Cook County comes from nonresident “cabin” owners …who, by the way, are not included in our population denominator.
It’s a double whammy!
Justin Marlowe, Endowed Professor of Public Finance and Civic Engagement at the Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy & Governance at the University of Washington posed the question, “Is this old-school tool up to today’s challenges?” in a February 2018 article in Governing magazine (Considered the nation’s leading media platform covering politics, policy and management for state and local government leaders).
Marlowe admits, “One of the lessons we have learned is that, ‘It’s no picnic.” He concedes, “Wealthier jurisdictions have good reason to oppose equalization. They can become perennial ‘donors’ that give up substantial tax base with little tangible reward. Equalization also largely ignores the actual cost to deliver services. For these and many other reasons, critics have routinely challenged these programs in court.”
Marlowe suggests, equalization programs like Fiscal Disparities should be viewed as “a journey, not a destination.”
I would suggest we check the roadmap–at least every once in a while–on this convoluted fiscal disparities journey.
Former Cook County Commissioner Garry Gamble is writing this ongoing column about the various ways government works, as well as other topics. At times the column is editorial in nature.
Leave a Reply