Now that a couple of months have passed, and the dust has somewhat settled, since the conclusion of the extended 2001 Legislative Session, we think it is an appropriate time to assess the successes and failures of the past session.
While there are some positive aspects to the final results, we conclude that the 2001 Legislative Session was a disappointment, both in terms of outcomes as well as the manner in which it was conducted.
The hallmarks of the newly enacted biennial budget are sales tax rebates and property tax reductions. For the third consecutive year, virtually all Minnesota taxpayers are receiving a check from the State characterized as a sales tax rebate. In addition, in 2002 the vast majority of property taxpayers will see their real estate taxes decline from the amount paid in 2001. We applaud the Governor and the Legislature for increasing the State's share of school funding, which will reduce the burden on local real estate taxes.
Opinions differ as to whether the real estate tax changes constitute "durable, historic, landmark property tax reform," as characterized by Gov. Jesse Ventura and Republican House leaders, or "unfair and unsustainable" as described by Senate DFL leaders.
One puzzling, new twist developed in the area of real estate taxes on businesses and cabin owners. While owners of these properties will see immediate reductions in taxes, they will be subject to a newly created state property tax that is dedicated to education. There has not been a state property tax in Minnesota for decades, and it seems curious that the Legislature would see a need to create such a tax at this time, and it seems even perilous to dedicate the proceeds of this new tax to such an alluring purpose.
It is clear to us that the enacted budget is inadequate for the State's educational needs. Larger class sizes in elementary and secondary schools are certain, and we are already seeing double-digit tuition increases resulting from insufficient funding at our state colleges and universities. The issue of equity funding for many suburban and exurban districts, which addresses the need for a more fair distribution of state resources to local school districts, was not advanced in this budget.
As our highways become increasingly congested, it is disappointing that the 2001 Session produced no substantive transportation funding initiative. We were especially discouraged that efforts to secure state funding necessary to match federal dollars available for the North Star Commuter Rail project were unsuccessful.
The 2001 Legislature made no progress with the matter of a baseball stadium. We remain concerned that if major league baseball is to continue to be one of the amenities of this region, the state will need to be involved with a new baseball stadium, and that continued legislative inaction will mean the loss of that amenity.
The Legislature and the Governor are responsible for redrawing legislative and congressional district lines, based on the 2000 census, to be in effect for the 2002 election. Failure by the Legislature to act turns the duty over to the courts. It appears that during the past legislative session the Legislature and the Ventura Administration made little progress toward resolution of the disparate proposals, and they are unlikely to affect a final compromise before the Court takes jurisdiction.
House Majority Leader Tim Pawlenty described the special session as "ugly, difficult and bruising." We think that is an apt description of the entire six months from the early January beginning of the session, through the Constitutionally prescribed May 21st deadline, and the conclusion of the Special Session just hours before a looming shutdown of state government.
Much has been said about Minnesota's tripartite government over the past three years, but the 2001 sessions evinced an absence of executive leadership in concert with raw partisan politics supplanting reasoned policy-making in the legislative process. With all Senate and House seats, together with the Governor, up for election in 2002, next year's session has the potential to be even more politically charged. Nonetheless, we hope for a less contentious dialogue and a more reasoned outcome.
Editor's note: This editorial was a product of the ECM Editorial Board.
