Local government aid — the state financial-assistance program known as LGA that serves about 85 percent of Minnesota's cities — has been a sore subject at the Capitol for more than a decade.
Its tilt toward DFL-dominated big cities and exclusion of many Republican-leaning suburbs has made it a favorite GOP target for budget cuts. Its unreliability has pinched city budgets and foiled the best efforts of city officials to run orderly operations. Its complexity has invited suspicion that it goes to the wrong places for the wrong reasons, and that it fuels inappropriately high city spending.
Some of those complaints go with the LGA territory. They're the questions that are bound to arise about any state effort to narrow the big variations that exist between Minnesota cities' needs for public services and their capacities to pay for those services with local property taxes alone.
But a better distribution formula ought to go a long way toward satisfying LGA's critics. One promising possibility emerged at the Capitol this week, backed by cities both large and small, metro and outstate.
It's the handiwork of the nonpartisan policy wizards in House Research and the indirect byproduct of a bipartisan effort launched last year by Gov. Mark Dayton and led by Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak and St. Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis.
Among the new formula's virtues:
• It's need-driven: Cities with the largest gap between calculated need and current LGA support would have first claim on additional LGA money. That hasn't always been the case under current law.
• It's size-sensitive: The old formula put cities into two categories — populations above and below 2,500. Grow or shrink a little, and a small city could face a big change in state support. The new approach creates small, medium and large city categories and a formulaic glide path from one category to another to ease transitions.