About the Author
Front Page
Scott Neal, February 7, 2012 | Posted in Scott Neal
Link: Front page of today’s Minneapolis Star-Tribune
This was the first story I read in today’s paper. I did a TV interview about it with KARE-11 early in the afternoon and just got off the phone with Joe Soucheray’s “Garage Logic” radio show. There’s always lots of loose ends to a story like this. When one media source starts it, we often have to clean it up.
The story leaves the reader with the impression that – out of nowhere – the City zapped an unsuspecting property owner with a big bill that they weren’t expecting. That’s not exactly true. It’s true that the pending special assessment is sizeable, but it’s also true that the City provides at least a year, and typically two years, advance notice that a project is coming to a neighborhood. Unless it’s an emergency, it’s never a surprise – if you’re paying attention.
The other detail of the story that seems to be complicated for us to explain, and therefore complicated for the media to re-explain, is that residents who live along a road that is part of our street reconstruction program do not pay 100% of the costs related to project. The Star-Tribune gives readers the opposite impression.
Here’s the complicated part. Yes, adjacent residents pay for 100% of costs related to replacement of the street. However, the costs of the replacement of the street are not 100% of the project’s total cost. The total cost of the project includes the costs of the gutters, curbs, storm sewer improvements, water utility lines and sanitary sewer lines. Of these non-street related costs, adjacent residents pay 0%. These costs are born by other funding sources, such as the City’s Storm Water Fund, Utility Fund, or other capital funds that have been accumulated over the years from lots of miscelleanous sources.
The mathematical result is that adjacent residents of a project often pay about half of the total project cost and the other half is carried by the City, which in this case, is a proxy for all the other taxpayers/residents in town.
Is that fair? That’s not a question that I can really answer. It’s a question for our elected leaders. At the moment, they are hearing many voices saying it’s not fair. I’m certainly open to other ideas about how to fund these public infrastructure projects, but in the end, we really need to do them. Putting them off because we can’t decide how, or if, to change our funding formula is not good stewardship for our future.
6 Responses to Front Page
Leave a Reply
City Blogs
241 posts
38 posts
27 posts
79 posts
49 posts
21 posts
28 posts
The City of Edina
4801 W. 50th St., Edina, MN 55424
mail@EdinaMN.gov 952-927-8861
The cavalier tone with which you approach this blog post is the same cavalier attitude with which this city has approached spending millions of taxpayer dollars. To imply that Edina citizens aren’t paying attention is rude and disrespectful. At the very least you owe the couple in the Star-Tribue article an apology.
The only thing more reprehensible is that you quickly point the finger at the elected officials (yes they share some of the blame here) but its likely they are depending upon paid “professional” staff to make recommendations.
So before you start talking about who isn’t “paying attention”….you might want to remember who is “paying your salary”.
Unless the residents along the road are the only ones who drive on it, the policy is unfair. Did the residents on 70th street pay for the useless bike lanes that interfer with automobile traffic, or did the taxpayers get fleeced for that waste of money? The bicyclists didn’t carry any of that cost. If Edina expects taxpayers to pay for bike lanes that will be used by non-taxed bicylces at the rate of maybe 5 a day, the city should certainly pay to maintain roads that are used by vehicles that have already paid taxes to have roads maintained. Common sense is not common.
Really? You are going to play the “who pays your salary” card? Come on grow up. The issue is complex and yes maybe at some point “staff” made a recommendation and ” elected” leaders followed it but do you really think this current City Manager had anything to do with that policy? I live in Richmond Hills and I’m not happy about the policy but that is currently they way it works. So now what, we switch to a levy or city based tax system and those of us who pay this assessment pay for others? This bus left years ago on this issue because past Councils and Staff did not think ahead.
BTW the appalling thing on the 70th street project is that they live on a State Aid road so their assessment for all that work was in 3k range per house. We all paid for their beautiful improvements and the 25 mph speed limit on a major road…..
Chris-
I will play the salary card issue, because anyone who works with clients would knwo that whoever pasy their bills does not speak so rudely to them. I grew up long ago but thanks for your concern.
That attitude of “thats the way it works” is exactly why we all got screwed by this. But hey…we all have to feel good with how we treat others. Enjoy.
I applaud the city manager and the council for re-visiting this issue and having the courage to bring this conversation to residents for dialogue and input.
From my perspective, our transportation system is a network that everyone taps into. As a driver, pedestrian and bicyclist, I use many different parts of that system — not just the one in front of my home. I should help pay the costs for building and maintaining that network. It seems more fair for that to be spread out among residents – the reality is that we have aging infrastructure in the city and it is a basic responsibility for the city to maintain that infrastructure. The question is – what is the most sensible and fair way to pay for it?
And as for the “useless” bike lanes – I respectfully disagree. 70th Street is home to Cornelia Elementary, and the children who attend that school are not drivers. They are residents too, and should be supported in our transportation system as well as those of us who drive. To be a competitive city in the 21st century, we need to be designed to support the transportation needs, health and safety of all residents, including kids and our aging population. Further, I am not a confident bike rider and having the extra protection of the bike lane on 70th will be extremely helpful for me. I’m looking forward to using it this spring, summer and fall.
I think what has most residents of the area (myself included) upset is the seeming disingenuousness of City Staff. Yes, we were notified of the impending assessment quite a while ago but the figure was ridiculously incorrect. We were told to plan for the expense but when the true figure was announced the man stating it took a very condescending attitude towards the assembled residents. And yes, we do pay his salary. If I made an error of that size in my business I would be severely reprimanded if not fired!
At least he should have been somewhat apologetic in informing us that the previous amount was off by nearly $10,000.