The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal is running a well written article today, " Cities Try to avoid Tax Levy Limits." (www.jsonline.com). This week, Evansville and most other cities in Wisconsin have passed bond authorization resolutions that total up to $335 million in future borrowing. Milwaukee may pass similar resolutions for $336 million alone next week. Why? They have been told by their bond law specialists that these resolutions will get around any levy limits that the Wisconsin State Legislature may pass that could restrict levys for new construction to the rate of recent years which has been 2.6% Everything more than that would have to go to referendum.
Readers can see the problem immediately. For communities that like Evansville have delayed their big ticket capital improvements and are playing "catch up", the levy limits could be disastrous. Also, what many people do not realize is that some communities actually borrow money just to meet municipal payroll till the new tax levies are collected. As a housekeeping matter, the levy limit might make some communities have a referendum just to meet payroll---not a pleasant prospect.
What does it all mean? Maybe not much. It may just be political mind games. Both political parties want to posture themselves as for property tax freeze---however, the Journal Sentinal points out that in the last tax period it was school districts and not city governments that increased the expenditures by the most amounts. Such was the case in Evansville. In fact, the increase was zero as I recall for the city.
Evansville passed a resolution authorizing up to $15 million to be borrowed. The resolution, in the Evansille Review ,does NOT list the Lake Leota Project on the resolution dated 6-15-2005 but DOES list it on the resolution 6-14-2005 as one of the projects included in destination of these funds. I am at a loss what is correct and whether this is or is not an attempt to avoid a referendum on this issue.
The comment line is open.
The Evansville Observer Archive: The unofficial history of Evansville, Wisconsin from 2005-2013: Thousands of Video and Audio and Articles; Free: To Search scroll to the Search this Blog line and enter name of person, topic, or issue. Then scroll up to see all articles. Or use Google Search by topic. Enjoy.
Well, it does and does not list the dredging of Lake Leota, depending on which page of the Evansville Review you read! There are two descriptions of the resolution; the one on page 8 does not list dredging, the one on page 9 does. Can someone explain why this should be so? Printing error? Input from more than one person?
ReplyDeleteThank you wx_man. I have corrected the post and will wait to see what the city says.
ReplyDeleteI posted this one other time, but I think it is important. States and citys are losing funds due to federal budget cuts that take away revenue from state and local government that are a result of the Bush Tax Cut. This tax cut primarily benefits the ultra wealthy. What can you do about it? Write your state representatives and ask that they pass a progressive state tax to claim back that revenue that was a gift to the rich. States can use this money to pay for education, medicaid, etc. Education will particular benefit property tax payers.
ReplyDeleteFor more information on progressive state taxes see:
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0510-27.htm
You can get contact info for our state legislators that represent evansville from their websites listed below.
Jon Erpenbach
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/senate/sen27/sen27.html
Brett Davis
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/assembly/asm80/asm80.html
Mrs. Steinlein asked about the resolution the Commmon Council recently adopted authorizing the city to borrow up to $15 million. The city has not borrowed any of that $15 million yet. The city will borrow part of it this year, and other parts in later years. The $15 million figure is based on projects in the city's five-year capital plan for 2005-2009. Each year, the city will need to decide how much of that $15 million we can afford to borrow, and looking at the impact of the borrowing on the city's property tax rate will be an important consideration when making that decision. So right now, I cannot tell you what sort of impact this resolution will have on property taxes, because I do not know how much the city actually will borrow each year.
ReplyDeleteThe city passed this resolution now because it appears the state Legislature will attempt to enact levy limits on local governments, and the levies needed to pay debt service on debt authorized before the end of June 2005 will be exempt from the levy limits.
Bill Connors
Evansville City Administrator asked about the resolution the Commmon Council recently adopted authorizing the city to borrow up to $15 million. The city has not borrowed any of that $15 million yet. The city will borrow part of it this year, and other parts in later years. The $15 million figure is based on projects in the city's five-year capital plan for 2005-2009. Each year, the city will need to decide how much of that $15 million we can afford to borrow, and looking at the impact of the borrowing on the city's property tax rate will be an important consideration when making that decision. So right now, I cannot tell you what sort of impact this resolution will have on property taxes, because I do not know how much the city actually will borrow each year.
The city passed this resolution now because it appears the state Legislature will attempt to enact levy limits on local governments, and the levies needed to pay debt service on debt authorized before the end of June 2005 will be exempt from the levy limits.
Bill Connors
Evansville City Administrator
Sorry for the confusion about the resolution. At the Common Council meeting on June 14, the Council amended the resolution to increase the amount to $15 million and to add text about park development and dredging the lake. I revised the resolution and sent it to the Review for publication, but then realized in my haste that I had mis-dated it and had forgotten to include the added text. So I sent a new version to the Review. Unfortunately, my instructions must not have been clear, and the Review printed both versions. The one dated June 14 (the correct date) is the correct version.
ReplyDeleteBill Connors
Evansville City Adminstrator