Local property taxes are levied by local boards and must be reduced by those same local boards if true property tax relief is to come about.

Each of 54 Counties has the statutory responsibility to prepare, collect, and distribute the tax dollars for the respective taxing political subdivisions within their county. During December of each year, property owners receive their property tax statements from their county auditor, detailing the separate property tax levy for of each of the governing bodies of taxing political subdivisions within a county, including City, County, School District, Park District, and others ("others" are usually very small amounts for services such as Fire, Ambulance, Airport, Water Management, County Park, County Library, Recreation, Soil Conservation, Weed and Vector Control that are controlled by a separate local board relating to each). This discussion will consider only the top four local taxing authorities, City, County, School District, and Park District.

Everyone has likely heard or read an economist’s commentary on the efficiency of the economy. Yet, economic efficiency remains one of the least understood concepts. This is particularly troublesome when assertions are made such as, “Policy X may not be efficient, but efficiency shouldn't be the only concern.” Red flags should go up immediately, but alas, this type of statement is generally accepted as not only correct, but actually more nuanced and philosophical than the seemingly superficial efficiency concerns that economists fret about. Typically, the “other concerns” that allegedly trump the concern for economic efficiency are vaguely-defined notions of “equity” and other, similarly high-sounding goals such as “providing stability”. So, given that people have so many different goals, why is economic efficiency a top concern of economists? The question essentially answers itself, but only once it is understood what economic efficiency entails.

According to the Grand Forks Herald, the city government of Michigan, ND, recently received a Rural Business Enterprise Grant (RBEG) through the United States Department of Agriculture’s Rural Development program and a grant from the Nelson County Job Development Authority through the Red River Regional Council for the purpose of acquiring ownership of the town’s only grocery store. Despite the strong efforts of the mayor – he has helped to raise a lot of money in voluntary donations from the community to keep the store open – the city is having trouble finding someone to own or even just operate the grocery store (note: the city is also offering subsidized zero-percent startup loans and free rent to anyone interested). Though surely just about everyone in Michigan wants to keep the store going, the town’s population was estimated in the 2000 Census to be only 345 people and so the economic environment facing prospective owners or operators of the store (e.g., very low salaries for full-time employees and slim profit margins under the rosiest projections) is very dim. But, hopefully, with the extra help from taxpayers across the United States and northeastern North Dakota, Michigan will soon have a grocery store up and running again. Some questions remain, however, such as how long will this solution work and at what cost? These are never easy questions to ask, because the answers may very well be unpleasant, but they need to be asked nonetheless.

On June 20th, the North Dakota Policy Council (NDPC) outlined the reasons why Burleigh County should demand the nearly $1000,000 back it is paying SRF Consulting to update the Burleigh County Comprehensive Plan. Those reasons were:

• Effective comprehensive planning is impossible.
  
  
• SRF skipped crucial steps that make up the rational planning model.
  
  
• SRF is promoting a fad called "smart growth," instead of making the plan specific to Burleigh County.
  
  
• The Draft Plan is little more than regurgitated plans SRF has completed in the past for other counties.
  
  
• SRF completely ignored public input that they were paid to collect and use.

In June 2007, Burleigh County hired SRF Consulting (SRF) to update the Burleigh County Comprehensive Plan.  The contract would pay SRF almost $100,000.  Planners, such as those at SRF, use a “rational planning model” to write long-range plans.  Rational planning identifies problems, establishes criteria to evaluate alternatives, creates alternatives, and chooses one. 

There are few economic principles that are fully grasped by the average person. After all, economics is a science that often leads to counterintuitive observations and so it is unsurprising that economic principles are generally not correctly applied. It also happens to be unnecessary for most people to understand much of economics in order to economize successfully and do well for themselves in their day-to-day lives. However, understanding economics becomes significantly more necessary once a community is asked to vote on public policy proposals.

SRF, the private consulting firm hired to update the Burleigh County comprehensive land-use plan, says its goal is to “reduce sprawl.” But why, in a state that is 99 percent rural, has sprawl become such an overriding problem?

The planners say it costs more to provide infrastructure and services to far-flung developments. Yet they admit they have no evidence this is true in Burleigh County. UPS, FedEx, electricity, and telephone companies manage to cover their costs serving low-density developments. Burleigh County should also be able to do so.

The planning profession uses a “rational planning model” to address issues like this one. Rational planners identify goals, develop alternative ways of achieving those goals, and estimate the benefits and costs of each alternative. Only then do they put together a plan that attempts to achieve the greatest benefits at the least cost.

Contrary to what the Green Grand Forks committee would have citizens believe, it is working hard to ensure that land use restrictions become tighter and tighter in Grand Forks and the surrounding area.  The committee and planners are trained in "sustainable development" and "smart growth."

On Thursday, November 8, the Green Grand Forks committee met for the first time.  According to the Grand Forks Herald, the committee met with Mayor Mike Brown's approval.  The committee task is to "chart the way" towards a "greener" Grand Forks.

In early September, the North Dakota Policy Council released a report detailing the dangerous agenda that "professional" city planners are promoting entitled "smart growt," a global land grab scheme aimed at increasing land regulations and decreasing the number of privately held acres of land.

To download the handout, click HERE.

October marks the 273rd anniversary of the birth of Daniel Boone.  Remember him?  He's the guy who headed out West and settled in Kentucky.  He became one of America's first folk heroes. 

His world is very much different than today's...

The Bismarck Metropolitan Organization (MPO) is a Bismarck Municipal Division whose purpose is transportation planning for the Bismarck/Mandan area.  MPOs are designated in metropolitan areas with a population of at least 50,000 people.  To receive federal funding, the MPOs must adhere to federal guidelings.  MPOs are directed by members of the American Planning Association (APA).  The Bismarck MPO is no different than other MPOs in that they are subject to federal guidelines (they received $560,300 in federal funding) and are directed by an APA member, Steve Saunders. 

The United State is the richest country on Earth for one reason: capitalism.  Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman said that "history suggests only that capitalism is a necessary condition for political freedom."  In other words, for a people to be free and for a people to be able to choose its representatives, those people must have economic freedom.

Ducks Unlimited (DU) "conserves, restores and manages wetlands and associated habitats for North America's waterfowl."  It was created by sportsmen during the Dust Bowl era (1937) because they feared that waterfowl was disappearing too rapidly.  DU has been around for awhile and they have the membership and funding to go with it.  As of January 1, 2007, DU has a membership of 774,022 and a budget of $160.2 million.

Earlier this week, the NDPC alerted the public as to what Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) wants to do to get you out of your own house. 

Now, it turns out that Rep. Dingell wants to make energy MORE expensive.

On Sunday September 23, Fargo Forum editor Mathew Von Pinnon wrote a column in the paper entitled Public-private partnerships have downside on campuses.  Here is a quote from that letter:

The two universities’ alumni foundations will pay for the new homes, and as usual, supplement the presidents’ public salaries of $290,000 to $325,000. To what level alumni will supplement the salaries, we don’t know.

WIth the unfortunate collapse of the Interstate 35 bridge in the Twin Cities, the debate about infrastructure has been renewed.  What happened in Minnesota could also happen to one of the bridges in North Dakota.  The danger to North Dakota's bridges is not only on the major overpasses in Fargo or the bridges that span the Missouri River, but in the small bridges taht have to withstand farm machinery, as well.  The fact is that every bridge in North Dakota is a bridge worth maintaining.    

The North Dakota Policy Council has released Sunshine on Schools, a plan that would require all school districts to put all of their budgeting information on a searchable website.  Because understanding how schools are spending money is essential to understanding how much money they actually need, more people need to gain that understanding.

The Chairman of the North Dakota Farm Bureau Political Action Committee, Eric Aasmundstad, has called the Dakota Resource Council (DRC) a "fringe environmental group."  A closer look at how the DRC is organized and where it receives its money reveals that Aasmundstad was spot on.

With the tragedy in the Twin Cities unfolding over the last couple days, North Dakotans have been digging into their own government's activities regarding basic infrastructure and public safety.  A close look at North Dakota's recent past suggests that some in power have been using transportation funds for pork projects under the supposed guise of "economic development."

The Declaration of Independence states that all Americans have “certain unalienable Rights.”  Among those Rights are “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”  Those Rights were bestowed upon the people by their “Creator.”  In other words, there is no government that can take those Rights away; there is no government that can restrict those Rights; and, there is no government that can be legitimate without the “consent of the governed.”

There is a new North Dakota-based organization that is helping the fight against government takeover of private property, the North Dakota Policy Council (NDPC). The NDPC is a non-profit educational corporation dedicated to free-markets and private property.

The House version of the Energy Bill contains some pretty interesting sections pertaining to landowners. 

Imation, an Oakdale, MN manufacturer of floppy disks, has recently announced that they are closing their plant in Wahpeton leaving over 350 people without jobs.  Immediately, talking heads Ed Schultz and Vern Thompson on their show News and Views railed against Imation for their decision to close the plant.  One issue that has particularly irked Schultz and Thompson is the fact that Imation has received $10.5 million in grants, tax breaks, and other incentives from city, state, and federal sources, and now they are taking that money and leaving.  This begs a larger question: why did Imation get the money in the first place?

The State of North Dakota has chosen ethanol and biodiesel as a cure all for creating economic growth and ending rural stagnation.  Large-agribusiness and professional politicians at the national level have successfully convinced the people that the subsidization of ethanol and biodiesel is good for rural economies, national security, and global warming.  Those noble goals often blind ethanol and biodiesel supporters to the adverse side affects that government’s interference will inevitably create.