This November, three candidates — Eric Harris Bernstein, Steve Brandt and Bob Fine — will vie for two seats on the Board of Estimate & Taxation (BET). Brandt is the incumbent. According to the City of Minneapolis, the BET “coordinates various taxing and borrowing power for the City” in various ways, including setting maximum tax levies for City funds and participating in debt management.
The Northeaster reached out to Bernstein, Brandt and Fine with four identical questions. The candidates were requested to answer each question with a maximum of 150 words. Their responses have been edited for clarity.
As a member of the BET, what issue would be your top priority? How would you address it?
Eric Harris Bernstein: My top priority is the long-term stability and effectiveness of our city budgets. Public investments in parks, safe streets, after school programs and other services are what make Minneapolis a great place to live. Unfortunately, this legacy is under threat from falling downtown property values and other shifting economic trends. I am running for BET to help protect our shared resources and ensure they can be funded for future generations to come.
To do this, we will need new revenue sources, more support from the state and new strategies of encouraging sustainable development. There are lots of interesting ideas to explore but they all start with bigger-picture thinking and a longer-term vision. As a member of the BET, I would seek to bring stakeholders together to discuss the challenges ahead and introduce policies that are working in other cities and countries.
Steve Brandt: My top priority will be to diversify the city’s revenues so we are less dependent on property tax increases to balance the budget each year. I’d like to expand the decades-old boundaries for the downtown liquor and restaurant taxing district, especially in the North Loop, so they more accurately reflect current entertainment areas. This is discretionary spending, much of it captured from suburban visitors. I’d also like to examine the feasibility of a city income tax solely on high-earner households. This is a more progressive source of taxation than the regressive sales and property taxes. I’m already making headway with the City Council on scrutinizing the possibilities. I stand ready to assist in helping city staff to advance these ideas at the state Capitol, since legislative authorization would be required.
Bob Fine: Having served 16 years on the Board of Estimate & Taxation (including as past President) with a degree in Mathematics, I have unique insight into financial issues with the City and the Park Board. It is important to consider the budget and plans to deal with the upcoming levies long before it becomes necessary to set the maximum tax levy. Having served four terms on the Park Board and my understanding of the city, I am well-prepared to analyze the situation.
This summer, City Assessor Rebecca Malmquist said Minneapolis has “a shrinking commercial tax base and a relatively flat or increasing residential base… There will be a shift to residential property owners.” How would you address this discrepancy?
Eric Harris Bernstein: The shifting tax burden onto residential property is the greatest fiscal challenge facing the city right now. While there are no easy solutions, I believe there is opportunity in thinking bigger and more creatively. The remedy for rising property taxes is the same as the demands of more vibrant communities — we need more housing and usable commercial space that will enhance our neighborhoods.
We can accomplish this through several avenues. The city should incentivize the productive use of space by levying higher vacancy fees and exploring land value taxation, which shifts the property tax burden onto speculative investors. Minneapolis should also follow the lead of cities like Copenhagen and take a more active hand in maintaining and developing housing and a healthy tax base. Some of these are new ideas. I believe a brighter fiscal future requires a break with the status quo that led us here.
Steve Brandt: This shift governed by state-mandated assessment laws has been in progress for several years. I’ve responded by trying to limit property tax increases. For example, last year I persuaded the mayor to use a greater share of the budget reserve to buffer the budget increase, and to devote more of the city’s sales and special tax collections to the General Fund to avoid an even bigger increase. The commercial tax base is healthy outside of downtown and Uptown, but regaining valuation downtown will depend on refilling office vacancies and resulting higher leasing rates, both of which are multiyear propositions dependent on market forces.
Bob Fine: The shift to residential property taxpayers is a function of many financial issues that include the pressures economically downtown. This would be an opportune time to review budgets carefully and to seek alternative sources such as Local Government Aid, which in 1998 was $123 million and is now $42 million. The city is a net contributor to the state and we must press this issue before the legislature. Some people advocate a city income tax, which may cause additional issues. It could result in loss of persons moving in or out of the city which can affect overall assessed values. The city could face increased tax burdens by loss of values, as has been true with downtown.
Mayor Jacob Frey has proposed a 7.8% property tax increase for 2026; he claims this is necessary to maintain core city services. How would you approach property taxation?
Eric Harris Bernstein: Although I have many critiques of Jacob Frey’s leadership, I appreciate his efforts to maintain core services despite the political difficulty of a significant property tax increase. Recent encampment shootings serve as a heartbreaking example of the pressing social challenges demanding our attention and resources. These will only worsen if we resort to austerity budgeting.
However, even the most ardent supporters of public investment must admit that recent levy increases will be unsustainable over the long run. City leaders must therefore find alternative revenue sources and discover more effective uses of funds. I applaud the city council for beginning to explore new revenue options, and I would be eager to engage in that discussion. But we cannot solve the problem with revenue alone. We need policies aimed at creating sustainable growth and ensuring cost effective management of city assets. This will be a major focus for me on the BET.
Steve Brandt: I view the BET’s setting of the annual property tax limit as balancing the needs of the city against the ability of taxpayers to pay. I consider these factors before voting on a proposed levy: how many people will see their taxes go up or down and by how much; the purposes of the proposed increase; growth in the tax base; the economic health of the city and its residents; how much the School Board and the Hennepin County Board are asking for their shares of a resident’s tax bill; and what bond-rating agencies are saying about city finances. The mayor’s proposed 7.8 percent increase translates to about 12 percent for most residential taxpayers. That’s too much and I intend to support a lower figure.
Bob Fine: As indicated, a proper review is to analyze what is necessary core services and what can be used to help the situation. I have had a background in dealing with tough situations.
How would this position impact
residents’ day-to-day lives? Why are you qualified for this role?
Eric Harris Bernstein: If I am successful, you will feel the impact through improved services and public spaces. I hope that we will also benefit from a more productive conversation about taxes and the city budget. That’s a good segue for why I feel qualified for this office.
I love talking and thinking about taxes, and I have a lot of experience discussing them with a wide range of Minnesotans. I have been a tax policy wonk and organizer for over 10 years and am well versed in the issues.
I am motivated by my belief in the foundational importance of the things our tax dollars pay for — good infrastructure, safe streets, and popular amenities like parks. I want to bring my enthusiasm to the BET, and I know there is a lot we need to do to prove the case for the value of our collective resources. I’m up to the task.
Steve Brandt: The BET’s annual decisions on property tax increases have a direct effect on the household budgets of Minneapolis residents and property owners. I keep that foremost in mind when considering this important tax-limiting decision. The BET’s decisions on issuing bonds help us to pay for the parks, roads, sewers, water mains and other infrastructure we all use. Financing these facilities over a longer term helps to spread the cost between today’s residents and those who will use these improvements in future years. I’m uniquely qualified because I’ve studied the city budget, served on the city’s capital budgeting task force, and bring a retired reporter’s questioning mindset to city finances.
Bob Fine: What obviously impacts citizens is the tax increase and the burden it may be on so many. The focus on returning local government aid and analysis of just what is the focus would be carefully reviewed. I have had this experience over the broad 16 years I have already served. (Fine served on the BET and the Park Board from 1997-2013.) My background is very much in line with the impact, as well as my four terms on the Park Board, including time as president.