1.1                          A bill for an act 
  1.2             relating to property taxation; requiring the 
  1.3             commissioner of revenue to conduct a study of the 
  1.4             metropolitan fiscal disparities program; appropriating 
  1.5             money. 
  1.6   BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 
  1.7      Section 1.  [STUDY REQUIRED.] 
  1.8      By February 1, 2002, the commissioner of revenue shall 
  1.9   conduct a study of the metropolitan revenue distribution program 
  1.10  contained in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 473F, commonly known as 
  1.11  the fiscal disparities program, and shall make a report to the 
  1.12  legislature consisting of the findings of the study and any 
  1.13  recommendations resulting from the study. 
  1.14     The study shall primarily address the question of whether 
  1.15  the program is achieving the purposes for which it was created.  
  1.16  Additionally, the study shall address the following questions: 
  1.17     (1) How has the program affected property tax disparities 
  1.18  across the Twin Cities metropolitan area? 
  1.19     (2) Is the formula for contributing tax base to the 
  1.20  areawide pool reasonable?  Should certain commercial-industrial 
  1.21  tax base continue to be exempt from contribution to the areawide 
  1.22  pool, such as tax base in existence prior to 1979, tax base in 
  1.23  tax increment financing districts established before 1979, and 
  1.24  tax base located at the Minneapolis-Saint Paul International 
  1.25  Airport?  Should contribution amounts be adjusted for 
  2.1   differences in sales ratios between communities? 
  2.2      (3) Is the formula for distributing tax base from the 
  2.3   areawide pool reasonable?  Should the formula reflect measures 
  2.4   of need in addition to population?  Should the distribution 
  2.5   formula be based on tax capacity rather than market value? 
  2.6      (4) Does the program help promote orderly growth and 
  2.7   encourage environmentally sound land use? 
  2.8      (5) Does the program reduce competition for 
  2.9   commercial-industrial tax base between communities?  Is reduced 
  2.10  competition for commercial-industrial tax base desirable? 
  2.11     (6) Do local governments derive sufficient tax revenues 
  2.12  from commercial-industrial property to cover the costs of 
  2.13  providing services to the property, considering the tax base 
  2.14  that must be contributed to the areawide pool? 
  2.15     (7) Could improvements be made in the administration of the 
  2.16  program? 
  2.17     <b>[EFFECTIVE DATE.]</b> This section is effective July 1, 2001. 
  2.18     Sec. 2.  [APPROPRIATION.] 
  2.19     $....... is appropriated from the general fund to the 
  2.20  commissioner of revenue in fiscal year 2002 to conduct the study 
  2.21  described in section 1. 
  2.22     <b>[EFFECTIVE DATE.]</b> This section is effective July 1, 2001.