Minnesota Proposals
STAFS’ first goal is to make options for moving Minnesota forward out of the current fiscal crisis widely available to policy makers and the public. The situation we're in raises the question: How can Minnesota get out of this mess?
Through whatever combination of four approaches is politically acceptable: cut, tax, grow and redesign. Cut means cutting spending. Tax means raising taxes. Grow means letting economic growth increase tax revenues faster than spending is increasing. Redesign means changing the way government works, so that Minnesotans get more value from the public spending dollar. Redesign appears to be essential.
Through whatever combination of four approaches is politically acceptable: cut, tax, grow and redesign. Cut means cutting spending. Tax means raising taxes. Grow means letting economic growth increase tax revenues faster than spending is increasing. Redesign means changing the way government works, so that Minnesotans get more value from the public spending dollar. Redesign appears to be essential.
Redesign of how its governments operate and provide public services appears necessary if Minnesota is to have a bright future. Understanding Minnesota’s Big Picture is essential to understanding whether options for change are sensible or not.
Crucially important to fiscally efficient redesign of Minnesota government is major change in Minnesota’s property tax and local aids system, which exhibits four problems so serious that Minnesotans should demand property tax and local aids system change.
Four overlapping proposals (collectively the “James Proposals”) developed by James are below. James Proposal Post-Unallotment Rejection was developed in May 2010 after the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected Governor Pawlenty's use of unallotment to balance the FY 2010-11 budget. James Proposal Light was developed on request in late January 2010 to provide policy makers with a way to get the most future leverage out of fairly simple changes. James Proposal Medium was submitted to the governor and legislative leaders in mid-January 2010 to provide a framework for ending the fiscal crisis without need for judicial resolution of the controversy over the governor’s unallotments made in June 2009. James Proposal Jumbo was submitted to the governor and legislative leaders in December 2008, and then in revised form in March 2009 as a result of further design work. Labeled “Change Minnesota,” it includes most, but not literally all, of the proposals in Light and Medium, and more.
Crucially important to fiscally efficient redesign of Minnesota government is major change in Minnesota’s property tax and local aids system, which exhibits four problems so serious that Minnesotans should demand property tax and local aids system change.
Specific Minnesota Proposals
The first options for moving Minnesota forward being made available are those developed by STAFS’ founder, John P. James. STAFS intends to make solutions proposed by others available as well, and to take people’s comments on proposed solutions into account in posting revisions to this website. Contact Us with your proposed solutions, or comments on solutions posted here.Four overlapping proposals (collectively the “James Proposals”) developed by James are below. James Proposal Post-Unallotment Rejection was developed in May 2010 after the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected Governor Pawlenty's use of unallotment to balance the FY 2010-11 budget. James Proposal Light was developed on request in late January 2010 to provide policy makers with a way to get the most future leverage out of fairly simple changes. James Proposal Medium was submitted to the governor and legislative leaders in mid-January 2010 to provide a framework for ending the fiscal crisis without need for judicial resolution of the controversy over the governor’s unallotments made in June 2009. James Proposal Jumbo was submitted to the governor and legislative leaders in December 2008, and then in revised form in March 2009 as a result of further design work. Labeled “Change Minnesota,” it includes most, but not literally all, of the proposals in Light and Medium, and more.
