Failure to Thrive
Why I will vote "No" on Mayor-President Sid Edwards' tax propositions
Early voting for the November 15th election begins tomorrow, November 1st and will continue until November 8th (excluding Sunday, Nov. 2nd). In East Baton Rouge Parish, Mayor-President Sid Edwards’ Thrive Plan will be on the ballot. It consists of three tax propositions affecting the millages and fund balances of the East Baton Rouge Parish Library, Mosquito Control, and the Council on Aging. The Library faces the most immediate threat as its millage, unlike those of the other two agencies, is set to expire at the end of this year.
I love the library system in East Baton Rouge Parish. I marvel at the myriad of ways it meets the community’s needs. I have relied on our libraries for meeting space, programming, and of course, research. The EBRPL is a testament to the good a public institution can provide a community when it is well-funded. And yet I will vote “No” on Thrive.
The Library’s precarious situation breaks my heart, but the Thrive Plan is less likely to ensure the Library’s continued success than it will ensure its inevitable demise. As it is designed, the tax proposal Mayor Sid Edwards has imposed on the Library as well as Mosquito Control and the Council on Aging, is effectively a kickback scheme which allows the Mayor to avoid the appearance of raising taxes though he effectively does. And by raising taxes indirectly in this manner, the Mayor-President is able to obscure the real harm caused by the Louisiana Supreme Court’s flawed 4-3 decision to allow the City of St. George to incorporate.1 If that harm is obscured, there is little chance to remedy the harm or at least ameliorate it. That does not bode well for the parish as whole, but especially for the City of Baton Rouge, and ultimately for the Library system.
How the Thrive proposal passes legal muster is beyond me. I may not be an attorney, but still, this is one of those occasions when the only explanation appears to be: “Only in Louisiana.” Only in Louisiana could a mayor sabotage a beloved public institution’s ability to renew its dedicated millage in order to extort tax revenue for other purposes. General purposes, to be precise, in direct contradiction of the language in the state’s constitution which distinguishes between “Parish Tax for General Purposes” and “Millage Increase Not for General Purposes.”2 Seriously. In order to get the Library renewal on the ballot, Library officials had to agree to allow the Parish to:
Rededicate $52.4 million from the Library’s fund balance “to be used for Parish-wide general purposes”;
Request a higher millage than the Library originally planned. (In February, the Library requested their 10-year renewal be set at 10.5 mills. The Mayor’s Thrive Plan sets the renewal at the maximum allowed of 11.1 mills.)
Stipulate tax proceeds from 2.8 mills of the 11.1 mills shall be used not for the Library but for “Parish-wide general purposes.” In other words, the Library Control Board has to kick back tax proceeds from 2.8 mills of their 11.1 mill “dedicated tax” to the Parish for general purposes.
A renewal? It is not a straightforward renewal of the ballot measure passed 10 years ago. The proposition levies 2.8 mills for general purposes.
A dedicated tax? The three Thrive propositions clearly state some of the tax proceeds will be used for general purposes, which contradicts the language in the state constitution delineating the rules for a dedicated tax.
Then is it a tax for general purposes? If so, it is not a renewal.
It would be one thing if the proposition simply allowed the Mayor to raid the fund balances of the three agencies, but clearly that is not all it does. Depending upon how one estimates the final tally, the Mayor’s proposition results in an overall tax increase of either 0.19 mills or 0.44 mills. Modest, really. But the gain for “general purposes” is significant at 3.55 mills. That’s in addition to the $58.4 million the propositions authorize the Parish to “rededicate” from the fund balances of the Library and Mosquito Control. The end result is that if the Thrive propositions are approved, the taxpayers will pay more in taxes for general purposes.
Is this the only means the Mayor-President and the Metro Council have to raise funds for “general purposes”? Certainly not. The state constitution allows the governing authority of a parish (the Metro Council in East Baton Rouge Parish) to levy an ad valorem tax of 4 mills. Currently, EBR’s Parish millage is levied at only 2.96 mills. The Mayor-President could have asked the Metro Council to restore that millage to 4 mills without a vote of the people. That would have garnered the City-Parish general fund an additional 1.04 mills.
In order to raise the remaining 2.51 mills to reach the apparent target of 3.55 mills, the Mayor-President could have asked the Metro Council to put a straightforward tax proposition for general purposes on the ballot. He opted not to.
Maybe Mayor Edwards understandably feared voters would reject such a tax, even if it were accompanied by assurances from the other agencies that they would reduce their millages by a commensurate amount. Nonetheless, that does not justify taking the other agencies’ millages hostage and demanding ransom. Especially because it allows all of us to avoid an uncomfortable conversation about East Baton Rouge Parish’s history and the manner in which its governance structure has been manipulated to maintain an inequitable taxing structure, one that since the creation of the Metro Council in 1983 has been particularly detrimental to the City of Baton Rouge. The creation of the Metro Council subjected city residents to a governing body increasingly dominated by members elected from the areas outside of city limits and who did not have the City of Baton Rouge’s best interests at heart.3
Now with the Louisiana Supreme Court’s questionable decision to allow St. George to incorporate, it appears the City of Baton Rouge is being set up to be the next Flint, Michigan. Flint was pushed into bankruptcy and then subjected to an emergency manager who made a tragic decision that poisoned the city’s water supply. There are some wealthy and powerful people as well as certain industries which would benefit from such an outcome here in East Baton Rouge Parish, especially if it maintains the current tax structure and preempts any meaningful discussion about the ongoing threat to EBR’s drinking water ahead of contract renegotiations with the Baton Rouge Water Company. (If you are unfamiliar with this issue, then please learn more at: https://www.saveourwaterbr.com/ )
Yes, as hard as it is to imagine, there are some people and industries who would benefit from bankrupting Baton Rouge. But the vast majority of us would suffer. And so would the Library. The EBR Parish Library has enjoyed the greatest support from those who live within Baton Rouge city limits. Their fates are inextricably intertwined. We must make a conscious effort to genuinely save both. Unfortunately, the Thrive Plan is unlikely to save either in the long run.
Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
For more information read the dissenting opinions of the Louisiana Supreme Court’s decision re: the incorporation of the City of St. George. Justice C.J. Weimer’s dissent begins on p. 23. Justice J. Crichton’s dissent begins on p. 35. Supreme Court of Louisiana Decisions. Mayor-President Sharon Weston Broome, et al, vs. Chris Rials, et al. April 26, 2024. https://www.lasc.org/opinions/2024/23-1108.C_23-1118.C.OPN.pdf
Louisiana Constitution, Article 6 Section 26. https://legis.la.gov/legis/Law.aspx?d=206498
The Metro Council was not created until 1983. Prior to the creation of the Metro Council, the consolidated government of the City of Baton Rouge and East Baton Rouge Parish was governed by two separate but overlapping councils. One was a city council whose members were elected by those who lived in Baton Rouge city limits. The second was a parish council which consisted of the city council members as well as two representatives elected by the rural areas.
The parish council oversaw parish business. The city council oversaw city business. City revenue could only be spent within city limits. If an area outside the city wanted to benefit from city revenue or city services, it had to be annexed into the city limits. That changed after the Metro Council was created in 1983. At first, city revenue still could only be spent in city limits. But with the creation of the Metro Council and the manner in which its districts were drawn, the voting strength of the people within city limits was diffused, and within 10 years, the rule stipulating that city revenue could only be spent within city limits was changed. City revenue was redirected from investments in infrastructure within city limits to infrastructure in the unincorporated area, including the Mall of Louisiana, Seigen Lane Marketplace, and Perkins-Rowe among others. City revenue went towards the infrastructure—roadways, sewerage, lighting—that allowed for these projects. The population growth followed the construction of the infrastructure and retail outlets, and over the years the area became “urbanized.” This created the possibility of the proposed City of St. George. Investing city revenue into the rural unincorporated area without requiring the area to be annexed into the city limits “urbanized” that large swath of the unincorporated area and made it vulnerable to efforts to create a new municipality. The City of St. George would never have been possible without those changes, beginning with the creation of the Metro Council.
Interesting perspective!
I love the library as well .
I won't be pushed into supporting bad government and plutocrats .
St. Fraud is the reason for this .