The city’s finance director is pushing for a property tax increase again this year. I found this proposal interesting considering the mayor is increasing the budget next year for pools. The city can only use the money for OPERATING expenses. So while they CANNOT spend the money on capital improvements they can use the money to fix potholes and pay lifeguards.
2022 Property Tax $84.9 M – 37%
2022 Assessed Value, 80% Residential, 37% Commercial
ASSESSED VALUE OF SINGLE-UNIT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, $200K – $317.7K, 34%
As you can see, residential property taxes are the biggest chunk of property taxes paid. In other words we are OVERTAXING residential property owners to subsidize things like $25 million dollar parking ramps for condo dwellers.
When people talk about TIFs or rebates for large developers they claim there is this mysterious ROI, even though NO independent study has been done to show us what that ROI is. I would argue that a residential property owner actually has a higher ROI, besides the taxes they pay to help with street and curb and gutter improvements, they may hire a lawn care company or hire a contractor to do work to their property, creating actual jobs.
I have argued for a long time we have NO reason to increase property taxes each year because of natural growth. If we also started taxing commercial properties at their actual legal assessment (and not a reduced TIF assessment) we would also haul in millions in property tax revenue.
Once again, the city is sticking it to the little guy so the big guy has a small tax bill.
The city is simply submitting a warrant to the County treasurer to grab the extend of the “Tax” they are legally allowed to take. NO, the city does not have to grab the full amount. however, if they do not take the funds by Dec 31st, the money goes to the “State Treasury” allowing the Legislature to apportion it any which way it wants.
The crux of the issue here is the “Over-Evaluation” of the land values assessed by the County(s), which includes the land + real property values of the collective private property.
Do TIFS have anything to do with this? Yes and No. WE are engouracing Land Owners to develop their land, building out future developments within a district, which ultimately raises land values in the area, which is then, increasing the “property tax revenues”.
One of the tricks to using TIFS, is that ‘we’ promise the Landowner up to 25% reimbursement of the Increment back so long as they stick to the plan, and invest in “Public Roads, Water, Sewer, Infrastructure, etc”.
The reason ‘we’ are encouraging Landowners to invest in their own land, community, building development, is that it raises the “Net Position” of the City which creates a higher ‘rate’ of return should the City ever be dissolved in the future.
Another side note, is when “propertys’ go up i value, it raises the City’s DEBT Ceiling of what it can borrow in the future.
It is a catch 24, do we want people to invest in our city, or do we want to maintain the status quo…
The mayor’s 790 million budget is a 20% increase. Inflation is 8%. Growth maybe 5%. Where’s the other 7%? Surely the 2025 budget will be more than a billion dollars for a city of 200K. This needs a winning Powerball ticket without taxes taken out.
when we end up with surpluses at the end of the fiscal year, have a massive “emergency fund,” and can give money away to any “connected” schmo or developer that asks, we are being taxed too much. i don’t believe i’ve ever seen a council vote no on the property tax hike…ever…and it’s usually a unanimous vote.
Staggers, Stehly and Starr have NEVER voted for a property tax increase, that I can recall. It is greed, and with the setup of the business elite Arts Commission it is just going to get worse.
i’d forgotten staggers, stehly and starr votes. i believe they were the only “no” votes. so i stand corrected and amend my comment to “virtually unanimous votes.”
Just a few years back Mayor Hanson actually gave property tax rebates. He got some flack from the business elite in town, but it was praised by residents. He got crap because of what it cost to mail people checks, I think the rebate was $125 per property owner.
The Hanson administration was the last that was not owned lock, stock, and barrel by the developers that do what they want when they want.
i did get a rebate check from hanson’s administration.
however, hanson got us back by tying the washington pavilion to the convention center on that vote. my point was and still is, they up the tax grab every year, and they’ll continue to do so until we get a mayor who actually cares about the citizens and pressures the council to decline it.
For those of you who do not want the “City” to grab the maximum amount of Property Tax this year, where do you want the “money” go to, which was paid by “Sioux Falls Landowners, Property Holders”?
Each Year, ‘we’ agree as property holders to pay a % of our land and real property value to support Public Education, County Roads, Bridges, Infrastructure, Services, whereas a small portion that gets allocated back to the “CITY” of which you reside in…
By law, the MAYOR would be doing the “residents” an injustice if he failed to take the maximum amount we are owed.
Last Year, the City Council approved to take the maximum, then adopted a plan to give back to Low Income Persons” to help them fund housing improvements” by creating a “city program”.
If we do not take the money, the “MONEY” goes to the State Treasury, enabling the “Legislature” to do with it how they so wish…
The Mayor and City Council must work in the best interests of the “Community” and that means, taking the maximum funds to create citywide programs for the people.
IF they so wish, they could do what Hanson did, and refund the “monies’ back to the Property Holders.
A better solution here, would be to lobby your Legislative Rep, your County Rep, your Precinct Rep to promote the concept to “Lower” the Residential Property Tax Rate, which would do more to help low income families, let alone the the Economy,
or “WE” cold lobby the State to create new rules of which the COUNTIES have to follow to in the evaluation process of assessing property values…
What percentage of the infrastructure serves residential frontage vs. commercial street/infrastructural frontage? I’ll bet you it’s about the same split/proportion as the difference in sourcing/taxation.