Letter to the Editor: Utke explains opposition

I am personally opposed to Measure 4.

I don't think that it is a good solution for our residents.

First of all, it is an incomplete package. Widespread concern about real estate taxes is real, but this measure does not specify how this revenue would be replaced. I don't think our residents want to see drastic cuts to services, so another method would be needed to replace the lost revenue. This would still have to come from North Dakota residents, directly or indirectly. $1.575 billion would be needed annually for our state, counties, cities, townships, school districts and other agencies to provide equivalent services.

Supporters of Measure 4 have told me that North Dakota has the money to replace the current system. North Dakota does not have a diverse supply of revenue sources. Our state has relied heavily on our energy industry, but no one can guarantee the long term viability of that industry.

The Legacy Fund has been mentioned to replace the revenue lost. Our citizens deserve credit for voting the Legacy Fund in as a means of financial security in an uncertain future. This security could be lost with Measure 4. Projections using estimated rates of return say that this fund could be used up within eight years if no additional revenue is added.

The North Dakota Constitution includes guidelines for use of the Legacy Fund. A constitutional amendment would likely be needed if Measure 4 passes.

I support maintaining the Legacy Fund for our future.

The taxpayer base would also change. In Foster County in 2023, six out of the top 10 real estate taxpayers reside out of state and nine reside outside the county. It seems certain to me that our residents would face an increased burden with any method used to replace the lost revenue. I don't know how a resident wanting to start a farm or business could compete with out of state entities that would not have the tax burden.

North Dakota residents have always supported local control. We are fortunate that numerous people do their best to serve on local boards. I believe that they are best informed to make decisions for their citizens. I am concerned how the state would prioritize revenue for public projects such as school buildings and road projects in place of the local boards. I don't know how small counties, cities and schools can compete for these funds.

The Keep It Local Coalition includes individuals and agencies across the state sharing concerns about Measure 4. This group includes over 100 major associations representing agricultural, natural resources, energy, health care, public safety, education, real estate, nonprofit organizations and chambers.

The concerns with reliance on real estate taxes need to be addressed. I cannot support replacing the current system without knowing that we will get an improved alternative.

I hope that our citizens become well informed on what Measure 4 could mean for our future.

David Utke

Glenfield, N.D.