
Comparison of selected points of
Sheehy Task Force recommendations
and the Alliance agenda
Task Force |
Alliance |
||
| "Regional tax base growth-sharing laws should be enacted to support metropolitan and rural regional growth and cooperation... The increase in property values would contribute to the tax sharing pool." | "Wisconsin's regional economies ... stand to gain from cooperative economic development strategies of the sort encouraged by tax-base sharing [but] tax-base sharing cannot replace state aid entirely, or ensure that all places are capable of providing some minimum standard level of services." | ||
| "...Encourage and support economic planning that reaches beyond the borders of local governments and counties. This can happen in connection with regional development strategies, growth-sharing decision-making or smart growth discussions." | "Organiz[e] task forces to...jointly create a sustainability scorecard to measure the strengths and weaknesses of their regional economies ... and report to the governor and the Legislature..." | ||
| "Align planning, regional economies and fiscal incentives to promote efficient land use, services and infrastructure that contribute to the state growth strategy, using data that benefit all parties in making and implementing decisions." | "Collect and analyze demographic and economic data. Analyze economic trends. Create regional plans to reach sustainability. The regional plans should incorporate goals, measurable objectives, implementation strategies and a work plan." | ||
| "Laws authorizing fees against property owners and/or developers should be expanded to more easily allow for recovery of direct service costs to affected property..." | Amend S. 66.0627, Stats, to provide that "... the
governing body of a city, village, |
||
| "Correct the shared revenue formula to support basic service equity ... with a special focus on those property-poor communities that depend in great part on shared revenue to fund basic services." | Require counties to "levy taxes, as specified by law, the revenue from which the counties shall distribute, as specified by law, to the cities, villages and towns that are located in the county in order to reduce the property tax base disparity between those cities, villages and towns." | ||
| "The Legislature's well-intentioned action that set aside $45 million in shared revenue funds to support local government consolidations and mergers should not be implemented." | "Repeal the $45 million consolidation incentive program established in 2001 Wisconsin Act 109 (the budget repair bill) and have all the funds remain in the shared revenue program." | ||
|
|||