MINOT -- In the waning days of his time in office, former Gov. Doug Burgum named his biggest regret, and it had to do with property taxes. He told reporter Michael Achterling that he wishes the state hadn't been so focused on solving rising property taxes by dishing out money to local governments.
"There still is a belief that it's the state Legislature's responsibility to drive these subsidies where we take some people's tax money and send it to local political subdivisions," he said.
I hope the new governor, Kelly Armstrong, paid attention to these comments because Burgum is right.
He's right to identify property taxes as one of the most significant issues of his term in office. Strip away high-profile, culture-war ephemera like book bans, and what you're left with as the most consequential and confounding policy question to face North Dakota leaders over the last decade is property taxes.
A steady river of tax revenues driven by the oil and gas industry has allowed statewide leaders to plow billions upon billions of dollars into various schemes to blunt or obscure the rise in property taxes. Not surprisingly, Burgum and the Legislature have not been able to spend our way out of this quagmire.
Armstrong should take note. He will be under enormous pressure from local government lobbyists to do more of the same. Not because the proponents of the status quo approach think it will work. It's just that the alternative is unappealing.
The solution to rising property taxes isn't for the state to buy up local spending. It's probably not reforms, though the Legislature can and should consider tax caps.
The solution is for local taxpayers to accept the trade-off between spending and taxes.
If we want property taxes to go down, local spending must go down. "But where can we cut spending?" local leaders will cry. There's undoubtedly some fat on the bone (depending on which local taxing entity we're talking about), but the locals will have a point. Lower spending is going to mean some trade-offs. Maybe fewer park amenities and city services.
It may also mean that locals must accept a different approach to development in their communities. Spacious neighborhoods may be what homeowners want, but all those big houses, surrounded by wide roads and sprawling lawns, create thousands of miles of roads and other infrastructures that must be built and maintained.
Burgum has been singing that tune since he first discussed running for governor with me in the winter of 2015. He never got traction because the voters and the people they elect to local government don't want change. They want big local government and low property taxes.
Armstrong ought to be familiar with this phenomenon. He just came from Washington, D.C., where, for generations, Congress and the various presidents have given Americans what they want: expansive government and low taxes subsidized by massive budget deficits.
In North Dakota, we've been doing the same; only we balance our budgets with tax revenues from oil and gas development.
For Armstrong and this Legislature to do something meaningful on property taxes, they may have to make the voters put away the candy and eat a plate of broccoli.
Good luck. If they fail, another stupid ballot measure may be looming.