HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981 11-11 3M again withholds taxes THE REVIEW 3M again withholds taxes /91-/
By JONATHON CLYDE GLASS Hal Norgard.While the case drags on,the Evans itemized eight city expenditures
Staff Writer company has its money well-invested and that have been cut but could be reinstated
it only pays a small penalty if it even- if the city acquires the company's
Nearly$3.2 million in county, school tually loses the case,he explained. withheld taxes.They include$280,000 for
district and Maplewood city revenues equipment replacement,$253,000 for the
rides on the outcome of a tax dispute LOU MCKENNA and Roger Vik, asphalt overlay program,$110,000 park.
between the county and 3M Company. director and assistant director in the development fund,$16,000 for a police
Arguing that the property valuation of its county's Property Taxation Department, dispatcher and other funds for main-
Maplewood facility is far above its actual defended their assessments as accurate. tenance programs.
market value, 3M has withheld one- They also noted that a negotiated set-
quarter of its property tax payments,or tlement rather than a long court case is OWEN ENGEN,Director of Business
$1.7 million,for the second year in a row, still a possibility. Affairs in School District 622, said the
bringing the total to$3.2 million. As evidence of the over-valuation of the district also planned on not receiving the
Maplewood residents feel the greatest 3M property,company spokesperson Will 3M portion of its revenues.The money
impact of the withholding because they Shapira pointed out that the company could be tied up for years,he noted.
are affected at all three levels: city, facility is valued nearly as highly as The impact of the loss of revenue is
county and school district. Maplewood downtown St.Paul. spread across the board of the
itself will lose$310,000 in 1982 while the According to Vik's figures,in 1980 3M educational programs financed through
legal case continues.The North St.Paul- was valued at $174 million, while St. the general fund, Engen said. The
Maplewood-Oakdale School District will Paul's central business district had a total district's capital expenditure and long-
lose $623,000 and the county will not value of$244 million.Most people do not term financing are not seriously harmed,
receive$532,000. realize just how extensive the 3M complex but the withholding does hurt the
3M is acting according to a state law is,he noted.Its total acreage is larger district's cash flow position,he continued.
which allows property-owners protesting than that of downtown St.Paul,he said. The district may have to sell tax an-
their valuations to withhold 25 percent of Maplewood planned its 1982 budget ticipation bonds,as it did last year,which fI{
their taxes pending the outcome of their without counting on the money being will enable it to pay its bills until tax
legal cases.3M went to court in May 1980 withheld by 3M,which represents almost payments are received,he explained.
after the county in 1979 had assessed its 10 percent of the city's property taxes, While the district has managed without
Maplewood facility at $142 million. according to City Manager Barry Evans. the money so far,the withholding could
Company officials said$100 million was a The 3M withholding has not yet placed a have a serious effect if it continues next
more realistic figure. burden on local taxpayers because the year,according to school board chairman
There is no end in sight to the legal city has decreased servicesrather than Jerry Bell.The district has already cut
battle,which has become complicated by increasing the tax rate to compensate, several million dollars in educational
legal maneuvering. Evans said. If 3M had paid its full programs and closed three schools in
property tax assessment, however, the recent years,he said,If the case has not
Legal maneuvering takes time, "and city would not have had to make some of been settled by next year,there will be no
time is what 3M can afford,"noted John those cuts,he added. choice but to increase class sizes, he
Vanella, aide to County Commissioner In his introduction to the 1982 budget, explained. 8