Two years ago, after a prolonged state budget process, Wisconsin municipalities were allowed to increase their tax levies by 3.86 percent - nearly double the 2 percent normally permitted under state-imposed revenue caps.
The City of Monroe, after preparing a budget plan with a 2 percent tax levy increase, opted to collect a higher amount after Gov. Jim Doyle eased the cap on municipalities. Aldermen ultimately raised the tax levy by 3.8012 percent for its 2008 budget.
"I'd be shocked if there isn't a city in the state that doesn't take advantage of this," then-Alderman Mike Capesius said at the time.
Alderman Thurston Hanson, who's still on the council, called it "bad policy."
Two years later, Wisconsin municipalities have another opportunity to exceed the usual tax levy cap. The state budget process didn't go long this year, in fact it was completed on schedule for the first time in 32 years. But the state budget reduces funding for local governments - for Monroe it's more than $51,000 for the 2010 budget, according to state Rep. Brett Davis, R-Oregon. To compensate, the budget allows municipalities to increase next year's tax levy by 3 percent, rather than 2 percent.
What the state did was take money away from local governments to help balance its own budget, then provided a mechanism for local governments to regain their losses, and then some, through increased property tax collections. Keep that in mind the next time there is a claim that the state government passed the budget without raising your taxes.
So, two years ago the City of Monroe was allowed to collect more tax dollars, and it did.
What will the city do this year?
Mayor Ron Marsh seemed to indicate during last Monday's Board of Public Works meeting that the city ought not be considering spending the extra money.
"That's the last money we should be spending," Marsh said of the additional allowable tax levy.
Hopefully, faced with a similar decision as two years ago, city leaders will decide differently. Granted, financial times are tougher for city government now than they were two years ago. But they're also now much tougher and more precarious for the city's taxpayers.
Given that, it's the responsibility of aldermen and the city administration to keep the tax levy increase to as close to 2 percent as possible. They need to make the appropriate cuts in operating expenses to make that happen.
Will they?
The City of Monroe, after preparing a budget plan with a 2 percent tax levy increase, opted to collect a higher amount after Gov. Jim Doyle eased the cap on municipalities. Aldermen ultimately raised the tax levy by 3.8012 percent for its 2008 budget.
"I'd be shocked if there isn't a city in the state that doesn't take advantage of this," then-Alderman Mike Capesius said at the time.
Alderman Thurston Hanson, who's still on the council, called it "bad policy."
Two years later, Wisconsin municipalities have another opportunity to exceed the usual tax levy cap. The state budget process didn't go long this year, in fact it was completed on schedule for the first time in 32 years. But the state budget reduces funding for local governments - for Monroe it's more than $51,000 for the 2010 budget, according to state Rep. Brett Davis, R-Oregon. To compensate, the budget allows municipalities to increase next year's tax levy by 3 percent, rather than 2 percent.
What the state did was take money away from local governments to help balance its own budget, then provided a mechanism for local governments to regain their losses, and then some, through increased property tax collections. Keep that in mind the next time there is a claim that the state government passed the budget without raising your taxes.
So, two years ago the City of Monroe was allowed to collect more tax dollars, and it did.
What will the city do this year?
Mayor Ron Marsh seemed to indicate during last Monday's Board of Public Works meeting that the city ought not be considering spending the extra money.
"That's the last money we should be spending," Marsh said of the additional allowable tax levy.
Hopefully, faced with a similar decision as two years ago, city leaders will decide differently. Granted, financial times are tougher for city government now than they were two years ago. But they're also now much tougher and more precarious for the city's taxpayers.
Given that, it's the responsibility of aldermen and the city administration to keep the tax levy increase to as close to 2 percent as possible. They need to make the appropriate cuts in operating expenses to make that happen.
Will they?
