CC_Minutes_2003_0428 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

state. tra- dition been an integral our social, community political fabric for a long time. I am mindful traditions and history. I not proposed a fundamental in course. proposal increases bv rnore the previous simply seeking to rate gro\'Vth of to about the rate of is a request in these times. Even if Iny budget were wholesale. remain one , taxed, spending states the nation. I\1y comrnon-sense ap- proach has been met near hysteria by saIne, including !nany newspaper ,editorial boards. Meanwhile, the senti- lTIent of' the silent majority of rvHnnesotans agree with approach has largely ignored in the budget discus- sion, UsHent majority" tends not to protest, show up at staged town meetings or nlake lunch political noise . In an attack on common sense, last week DFt legislative leaders responded to the bud- get crisis by proposing one of the largest tax increases in Minnesota history. ' To make IDatiers worse, tax increases DFLers propose to fall the hardest on aver- age- and !uodest-income Min- nesotans. Part of the DFt plan m- increasing taxes on Min- nesota businesses. SOfie Minnesota's most promising and valued job providers have these types of changes would be job killers. At a time when thousands of Minneso- tans are losing their jobs, at- tacking those who create jobs is moving in exactly direction. We need more paying jobs Tax increases will also alle- viate pressure for government to reform There is a great need for such reform, and the I G-ovem- ment Aid program was origi- nally designed to help cornrnu- nities did not have dent population or tax capaci., ty to pay for their own services locally. Over the decades, it has been politically Iuanipulated, and we now have state taxpay- ers routinely paying 20-70 per- cent of many city operating budgets. This takes place even in successful cities. This is sim- I" ply not fair. Spending in many of these dties escalates in part because someone else is pay- ing the bill and local taxpayers are insulated from the conse- quences of the spending deci- sions. We can't afford the pro- gram at its current level or in its current fonn. Both of these exam.ples highlight a fundamental truth: We can't afford to keep doing all the things we have done in the same way we have always done them. The world has changed and Minnesota gov- ernment needs to change as welL like most organizations in these changing state government needs to be more innovative, creative effi- cient with taxpayer donars. Minnesota's private sector has demonstrated ability to streamline operations and still provide quality service. is no reason government can't do the same. Mi~esota's past can be a guide to our future. We re- main a high-government-'ser- "rice state. However, it has to \vithin reason and our means.