The Wisconsin Alliance of Cities' hands were tied in advocating for or against a new shared revenue formula passed by 75 Republicans (and two Democrats) in the Legislature.

The effect on Alliance  members — despite an infusion of $20 million additional into the shared revenue pot — is that 12 members would lose $17.8 million more than they would under the budget bill introduced by Gov. Jim Doyle, and 26 would gain $11.9 million over the original version of the bill.

That's not including revenue stemming from normal growth in property tax base that would be lost under the proposed property tax freeze. And the long-term trend is even more money for 26 of our members, and even less for 12.

We have analyzed the proposed shared revenue plan, however,  in the context of the Wisconsin Metropatterns report that our educational and research arm, Wisconsin Sustainable Cities Inc., published last year with the help of a foundation grant. And we discovered some remarkable things.

Among the findings:

• Cities, towns and villages with the lowest tax capacity per household in seven metro areas — i.e. with the lowest ability to finance local services without inordinate tax rates — would lose $15.2 million compared with Gov. Doyle's budget.
• Cities, towns and villages with the highest tax capacity per household in the seven metro areas — those with the greatest ability to finance local services without making taxpayers scream — would gain $4.9 million compared with Gov. Doyle's budget.

In Wisconsin Metropatterns, Myron Orfield and Tom Luce mapped high tax-capacity communities in seven metro areas in blue, and low tax-capacity communities in red. (They also mapped a lot of other things, including sprawl, school poverty and the effects of tax-base sharing. Their full report is available on the Metropolitan Area Research Corp.'s website, here. A hard copy should be available at your local library.) These data were readily available to legislators as they crafted the new revenue-sharing plan.

Of course, there are many cities, towns and villages between the highest  tax capacity — or bluest  — communities in the state and the lowest tax capacity  — or red  — communities. In Myron Orfield's palette they are orange and light blue.

It's important to recognize that Red Land, Orange Land and Blue Land as described here are relative terms, their values specific to each region. But, relative to their neighbors, they indicate how wealthier communities rate against poorer ones in the seven metro areas. The scorecard on how big an increase (or decrease) they get under  the Legislature's shared revenue formula compared with the reductions the governor recommended:

In Metropolitan Milwaukee, urban policy consultant David Rusk told local leaders in 2001, Orange Land contains 18% of the region’s households but only has 15% of local tax capacity. In the region, Orange land would gain $2.3 million compared with Gov. Doyle, but Light Blue Land, which Rusk described as classic bedroom communities of suburbia, would do even better: a $4 million gain over the governor's budget.

Light Blue Land is home to 31% of the region’s households, but only 9% of its poor households (less than one-third of its proportionate share). It has 37% of the region’s local tax capacity, and coincidentally would pocket a 36.7% increase in shared revenue compared with the governor.

Rusk says Blue Land is what the color implies: "blue-blood land."

"These are the suburbs that are really doing well," he told local officials in 2001. "Blue Land is where the new regional malls are built, (where) the prestigious new office parks (are built), the region’s signature new industrial locations."

With 12% of the Milwaukee metropolitan area's population and just 2% of its poor residents, Blue Land's share of local tax capacity was reduced from 23% to 17% by state aid under the existing shared revenue formula. It would do far better under the Legislature's version of the state budget bill: a 77% increase — $4.9 million more — compared with Gov. Doyle.

"It's a real blow to the communities with the great bulk of the state's low-income households  — including many minority households," Rusk said of the Legislature's plan. For more on Rusk's view of the Milwaukee Metro area, look here.

One of the recommendations that Orfield, Luce and Rusk made to deal with inter- and intra-regional inequities in tax capacity presaged the cornerstone recommendation of  the Task Force on State and Local Government appointed by former Gov. Scott McCallum: regional tax-base growth-sharing. We looked high and low, and we couldn't find it anywhere in the Legislature's package.

Follow the Realtors
Poll Provided GOP Freeze Script

By Rich Eggleston

A public opinion poll financed by the Wisconsin Realtors Association presaged the property tax levy freeze approved by the Legislature  last week — and preceded by four days a freeze plan unveiled May 22 by Assembly Republicans, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. 

The Realtors hired the Tarrance Group of Arlington, Va., a heavy-duty polling firm with extra-heavy-duty Republican ties. The poll came up with the not-very-surprising finding that people would like their property taxes frozen. The folks who were polled also had a lot of faith in local governments: about half said local government could weather a freeze without cutting services.

I don't know if the Tarrance Group polls kids on Christmas morning, but I bet that if they did, the kids would  overwhelmingly say they believe in Santa Claus.

We at the Alliance heard stories of legislators waving the poll around as they argued privately for a property tax freeze.

Anyway, the Wisconsin Realtors Association's Mike Theo declined comment on the poll to the Journal Sentinel's Tom Kertscher, saying the results were supposed to remain confidential. Well, if the Realtors don't want to share a poll on a public issue with the public, the Alliance of Cities is more than willing to fill the vacuum. See a summary of the findings, also published by wispolitics.com, by clicking here.

Legislators Adopt More Than Budget

By Rich Eggleston

The Senate Thursday  passed SB 44, the $51 billion state budget  bill, on a 17-16 vote. The Assembly followed suit the next day.

The two houses were doing more than shepherding state government through another chapter of its continuing fiscal crisis, however. Republicans and Democrats were laying the ground work for the 2004 elections. The budget is always the most partisan bill a Legislature passes in any given session.

Republicans called the budget bill a fair attempt to balance the state budget in tough fiscal times. They called it a taxpayer's budget. Democrats said the Republicans were balancing the budget at the expense of poor communities, senior citizens and public schools. Expect to hear those refrains again and again.

Defectors from party ranks on the final Senate roll call were Sens. Michael Ellis (R-Neenah) and Rob Cowles (R-Green Bay), who voted against the bill, and Sen. Gary George (D-Milwaukee) who provided the 17th vote for passage. The lone defector from party ranks in the Assembly was Rep. Bob Ziegelbauer (D-Manitowoc).

Before the vote, Mayor Fred Schnook of Ashland had soundly criticized the shared revenue distribution formula and property tax freeze added by Republicans to the state budget as a time bomb that threatens to destroy economic development in Ashland, cut services to Northern Wisconsin citizens and dramatically harm the quality of life of families throughout his region.

Mayor Schnook pointed out that under the GOP shared revenue plan, Ashland would receive a larger cut in shared revenues than Madison. See his news release here.

"What did the city of Ashland do wrong?" Sen. Robert Jauch (D-Poplar) asked his colleagues during debate. "Have they been getting too much?"

Our city leaders say the freeze would prevent many communities from refinancing existing debt — and saving taxpayers money.

Senate amendment 121 to the bill provided a July 1 effective date for the levy freeze to apply to new debt. That caused several of our cities to scramble to authorize by June 30 normal borrowing that cities do day in and day out  — borrowing that could be nearly impossible if the levy freeze were enacted, borrowing that can save taxpayers money because of low interest rates.

Sprawl personified: the town of Suamico in Brown County (Dark Blue Land, by the way) is the latest town in Wisconsin to seek to evade Wisconsin's incorporation laws. The town spun off its more urban area, which became the village of Suamico. Now the remainder of the town, which doesn't meet the density standards for a village, wants to consolidate with the village. It's a trend that started in Marathon County with the town of Kronewetter. See the Green Bay News Chronicle story here.

Donsia Strong Hill, secretary of the Department of Regulation and Licensing, visited Marinette to criticize the Legislature's budget plan that is heading to Gov. Jim Doyle's  desk. Hill particularly criticized the budget's re-written shared revenue formula. See the Marinette EagleHerald story here.

Assembly Speaker John Gard took some flak for the disparate fates of Peshtigo, his voting residence, and Sun Prairie, where he owns a home and lives much of the time, under the Legislature's shared revenue plan. See a Green Bay Press-Gazette story here.