Readers Write: Public project costs, health care, primaries vs. caucuses (startribune.com)
This spring, the Minnesota Legislature is on a path to finance millions of dollars for many capital projects — new public buildings like convention or sports facilities and park amenities — proposed by cities and counties competing for this state support. These funds pay for the brick-and-mortar portion of these public projects, when property taxes dollars aren’t enough.
Legislators have a difficult job selecting from among so many great projects. But one criterion should be the proposers’ financial capacity to rehabilitate or replace these projects, once built, over time.
State Rep. Fue Lee’s legislative proposal to evaluate the long-term public cost of extending the life of these publicly funded projects is spot on. We were pleased that Lee acknowledges that the bonding bill doesn’t just award cash prizes but that these investments are only the beginning of a decadeslong financial commitment from localities to protect that asset.
That’s why we write to recommend that consideration also be given to the costs to operate and maintain the facility once it opens its doors — and throughout its useful life. As former public officials, we know that taxpayers are unaware and underinformed of the cost of these new obligations, typically covered by an increase in the local property tax levy.
Legislators and taxpayers expect their local leaders to maintain facilities and not let them fall into disrepair. A great example of this failure to maintain public assets is the recent approval for the city of St. Paul’s new 1% sales tax to pay for neglected maintenance of its public facilities — roads, bridges and recreation centers. Yet right now, St. Paul is at the Legislature seeking millions of bonding dollars for new public facilities — even when it has a backlog of maintenance needs for its current assets.
Legislators need to ask: How does St. Paul intend to pay for the ongoing staffing, operating and maintenance costs of these proposed assets when it couldn’t pay for the existing ones?
Although the details of local projects to receive state bonding have not yet been announced, we support the provision, including guarantees requiring any public facility built with state bonding money or local sales tax revenue include a plan to adequately fund proper maintenance of the new assets over their useful life and to be clear about the amount and source of funding to staff, operate and maintain them.
Jane Prince and Carl Michaud, St. Paul
Prince is a former St. Paul City Council member, and Michaud is a former Hennepin County Public Works director.