Am I hearing about a possible proposal to change state government?

Hummm, it isn’t since a certain group moved here is it????

OT: David Brooks lays out how the Brit conservatives are coming back – and how the US conservatives could, too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/opinion/16brooks.html?ref=opinion

1. Treat voters like adults.
2. Straight talk – no rants, no empty social clap-trap.
3. Fiscal conservatism.
4. Embrace necessary government – “we the people” are not the problem.
5. Cut or let unnecessary government sunset or expire – especially programs conservatives liked but that do not work.

There are several appointed seats that I would like to see as elected offices.

Jon, US conservatives are not willing to do any of the things on your list.

Secretary of Agriculture is a position that is often mentioned as an elected position. Traditionally Democratic legislators are the ones that propose the elected Sec. of Ag. thing.

But my money is on the the Board of Regents or Sec. of Education. This would be right up the alley of some of the right wing nuts. They want to change education to reflect their views of the world.

Nick –

Apparently you’re channeling Hillary today, and invoking her “vast right wing conspiracy.”

I will note you’re starting to get warm in part, but way off on another.

So are you narrowing it down to the Sec. of Ag.?

Pat, I don’t know what positions you are talking about but electing a cabinet position is unwise. It would eliminate that department from having a forum to get other departments to cooperate and would isolate that department on so many day-to-day activities which 90% of what any department does. As one who was in state government, if one cares about a particular area of state government and thinks that electing the head is good for it, I think you are mistaken.

However, this did spark an idea maybe war college posters could help flesh out.

Elect the Board of Regents and give them taxing authority.

1) Combine five legislative districts and create a “regential district” and elect the chairman state-wide. Thus, we would have seven regents from across the state and one at large member.

2) For funding, in the initial stage, take their current budget and divide it in two. Convert 50% of their budget into a sales tax and convert 50% into a property tax mill levy.

For instance (example is for easy math), assume that 50% of their current budget equals a penny of the sales tax. They would have the ability to raise sales taxes up to 1.25 cents but have no down side on what they can assess against reciepts.

And, assume that 50% of their budget equals 1,000 mills on property taxes. They would have the ability to go up to 1,250 mills or drop it down as far as they want.

Finally, to insure that the new assessment against property doesn’t result in a tax increase, the amount of property tax revenue is immediately added to the k-12 school aid budget so long as the school district agrees to an equal drop in property tax assessment.

This does three things:

1) Adds accountability direct to the citizen taxpayers on the product they are delivering.

2) Gives them the flexibility to increase their revenue or decrease their revenue based on the public’s view of #1.

3) Gives them flexibility to adjust their revenue source between sales and property.

This is just an idea. I don’t know if I’ve thought out all the ramifications but your thoughts might help me do so.

Troy, I’m not prepared to argue the merits of your proposal but I doubt it could pass. There is a lot of inertia to overcome in order for something of this magnitude to pass. A popular governor willing to spend political capital might get it passed. I don’t see that happening.

Troy my thoughts on the first reading of your post combined some blue smoke and kool-aid. On the second reading only kool-aid came to mind and that for the folks now trying to grasp the new Production Value Property tax, begging for anything remotely called fair and balanced in it’s outcome. With this method of funding higher education we would add yet another level of property taxes upon our people while not fully understanding what the new changes are going to do? I would vote no friend unless the outcome could in effect end up costing less statewide and we could lower taxes elsewhere in seeing it to fruition.

And I’ll put my name behind that last post to be sure everyone knows where I stand on taxes and the production value method of producing property tax.

10:38

I’m trying to make the property tax portion “neutral”. I might not have made myself clear. Whatever portion of the “regential property tax” would be offset by an injection from the state general fund (currently being used to fund higher education).

Same thing on the sales tax. Currently, the Regents recieve money from the general fund. They would just get whatever percentage of the sales taxes 4% that the current appropriation equals.

Clear?

What can we do about the new (fair, or just more taxes) prp tax Charlie?

Les I think our only avenue right now is to sit back and wait to find out what exactly the County assessors are going to do to the various pieces of ag land in their respective counties relevant to either raising the assessed value or lowering it per quarter section. In my mind this is an almost unbelievable job for anyone to do fairly and correctly without a set postulate given for putting the numbers into a formula without having to make judgement calls. I see land owners hiring attorneys to help them try forcing the assessed value of their respective land lower in cases where the value is above any similar land selling locally in recent sales. The largest problem I have with the entire scope of changing the way we tax property is we had it right before the 150% rule came into existence; then with the 150% rule we gave tax breaks to wealthy land barons and out of state land buyers. We have thrown the baby out with the bath water and now hope to fill up the tub again and find a nice new shiny baby in rural land owners vs. urban sprawl land owners. More to come but I just want to make sure to everyone in who owns land that I am not in any way shape or form associated with this new progressive production property tax scheme; for the majority of South Dakota’s land owners are going to be shocked when they get their 2011 tax statements.