sb
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by sb on Oct 28, 2006 2:22:45 GMT -6
Oh and so what if you have had court orders signed in a bar. Aren't they allowed to be people outside of work just like the rest of us? (No offense intended )
|
|
dd
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Post by dd on Oct 28, 2006 5:57:44 GMT -6
How limited is road tax? 20 percent of tax dedicated to operation, maintenance Claire Taylor ctaylor@theadvertiser.com
City-parish leaders say the sales tax proposals on the Nov. 7 ballot for roads are the most restrictive local referendums ever placed before voters.
But the propositions, as they appear on sample ballots obtained from the Lafayette Parish Clerk of Court's Office, suggest there is room for other capital improvements to be funded with the proposed one-cent sales taxes if approved.
ADVERTISEMENT Voters in the city of Lafayette, unincorporated areas of Lafayette Parish, Carencro and Duson will decide on Nov. 7 whether to collect a 1-percent sales tax within their respective districts. Revenue generated by the tax will be used in the districts where it is collected. City-Parish President Joey Durel proposed the new sales tax as a means to fund new roads, extend and widen existing roads, and fund other traffic improvements.
The City-Parish Council adopted a feasibility report for the city and unincorporated areas listing projects that would likely be funded with the tax revenue.
Durel said Lafayette Consolidated Government is morally, but not legally, restricted to building those particular projects. He said government needs flexibility to change its priorities over time to accommodate growth and changes.
The council made changes to the resolution calling for the tax election to further restrict use of the money to streets, bridges, traffic and drainage.
The proposition also calls for at least 80 percent of the sales tax money to be "appropriated and expended for the purposes of purchasing, constructing, acquiring, extending, improving, equipping and furnishing streets, bridges, traffic and drainage public works or capital improvements" in the city.
"It's pretty clear from the feasibility report, the language on the ballot, minutes of the meetings and comments from the public that we're making this tax proposition as strict as possible in its dedication, to make this a road, bridge and traffic program," said Chief Adminis-trative Officer Dee Stanley.
As much as 100 percent of the money generated by the tax can be used on roads, bridges, traffic and drainage, but no more than 20 percent of the sales tax revenue can be used for other purposes, Stanley said.
Since that 20 percent is not dedicated to roads and bridges, it can be used for other capital purchases such as police cars, bush hogs or grass mowers, he said.
The intent is to use the 20 percent for operation and maintenance for roads, bridges and traffic, not for salaries, he said.
He admits that much of the criticism against the tax proposal is because of that 20 percent that can be used for operation and maintenance.
But for the Durel administration and present council, it's important to use the tax, if it is approved, as the proposition dedicates it, Stanley said.
"This is as restricted or more dedicated than anything we've ever done before," he said.
Durel could not be reached for comment.
+++++++++
So if the council wanted to use the 20% for better Mardi Gras throws, better dinners, and more travel, there is nothing in the measure to stop them?
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Oct 28, 2006 6:32:28 GMT -6
I know dd kinda scary to leave 20 % open to what they want to do with it. BTW: if you want to just copy and paste the link to the article on the advertiser website, or any other website, instead of the whole article like this: www.theadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061028/NEWS01/610280321/1002just let me know, if you dont know how, I'll help you, that way when someone clicks the link they go directly to the article and can leave comments at the bottom there too on the advertiser message board Like on this article you can see a picture of our visionary, oh and legendary, leader. Makes it a little easier too for readers on the board to read your comment about it instead of weeding all the way to the bottom of the already printed media.
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Oct 28, 2006 6:39:44 GMT -6
SB, WELCOME TO THE BOARD, ENJOY YOUR STAY!!!
|
|
|
Post by abbd on Oct 28, 2006 7:54:40 GMT -6
T, Ya know I disslike Kurt, but I am envious of the pic. Would you post a pic of "hogs (or pigs) feeding at the trough" below my name? I would appreciate it!
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Oct 28, 2006 13:38:27 GMT -6
I can do that B if you really want it, , hows this one, if you dont like it find another pic and send me the link and can change it again btw, my pic is for when Rusty ran the 2, I havent picked anyone yet to go with
|
|
|
Post by abbd on Oct 28, 2006 18:46:52 GMT -6
Oh man tytyty that picture so reminds me of our lcg and it's cronies LOL
|
|
sb
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by sb on Oct 28, 2006 22:35:28 GMT -6
That pic is awesome!!!!
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Oct 29, 2006 6:11:16 GMT -6
Glad your happy B, wish I could have found one with a few more hogs next to that one, but I think it gets the point across, Joey never looked better.
|
|
dd
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Post by dd on Oct 31, 2006 10:54:43 GMT -6
|
|
quest
New Member
Posts: 49
|
Post by quest on Nov 1, 2006 6:45:01 GMT -6
Joey and Thomas can say anything they want. If the tax were for a courthouse, than the ballot should say so.
“Court house complex” is a loop hole that has been for years to fund the “Parish Government Building” at 1010 Lafayette Street and the “Correctional Center” on Lafayette Street. The tax used to say “Courthouse and jail” before the new buildings were built across the street. The problem is, the parish built buildings with no money to support them, so they slightly changed the wording on a millage renewal, thus “Court house complex” was born. The millage is insufficient to support 3 buildings but 1010 was where the Parish Council and President had offices, so they got whatever they wanted and the Sheriff screamed louder than the other people in the Court House so he got what he wanted, thus, the court house suffered.
If the money collected for the court house was actually spent on the courthouse, there would be no problem today.
If a new tax reads the same way, you can bet that those funds will be dispersed as needed to support those other buildings, too.
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Nov 1, 2006 7:14:33 GMT -6
|
|
quest
New Member
Posts: 49
|
Post by quest on Nov 1, 2006 7:38:04 GMT -6
In the Advocate today,
“But another compelling argument is that Lafayette’s millage and sales tax rates are lower than any of the other metropolitan areas of the state — and will be even if all the taxes are approved by voters.”
Lower property taxes and lower sales taxes were once reasons to move into a community, a selling point.
Now, lower sales taxes and lower property taxes are an argument to raise them?
Our elected officials have clearly gone bonkers.
|
|
fubar
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by fubar on Nov 1, 2006 21:27:21 GMT -6
Random thoughts on the tax proposals 1) Anyone been on Camellia Drive recently - the d**n thing is falling apart, always being repaired, who sections at that. Wonder if the original contractor is still footing the bill for repairs. I doubt it, so it looks like we, the taxpayer, did not even get close to OUR money's worth on that road - I understand that it will just have to be repaired continuously. City has not sued anyone for the shoddy work as yet as far as I know. 2) concerning the court house tax - an attorney friend of mine said that the Clerk of Court just jacked up his fees again(over 15% increase). They usually wait until after a tax vote to do something like that. He must be running out of money to pay all of his excess staff. Anyway that cinched it for me. No! on the court house tax. Do the computation as to the proposed square footage and the cost - almost as much as the Federal Taj Mahal that was just built. It is unfortunate in that we do need a new one. The junk heap that was built in the 60's (to replace a nice looking WPA style courthouse) is ugly and useless, but the Government made that mistake not us. Let them eat cake now and then. out of here.... fubar
|
|
sb
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by sb on Nov 1, 2006 23:03:48 GMT -6
Just a little a-side about the Clerk and his excessive staff. In the last couple of years the Clerk sold the Judges a big line about providing them with internet and hosting their internet. AFTER it was voted to accept, the COC decided what the charges were really going to be for maintenance/troubleshooting calls. He added two tech guys to his staff. They charge for every second that they make a call, even if the problem is being caused by their end of the deal!
|
|
|
Post by Dorothy on Nov 2, 2006 20:59:09 GMT -6
I am no engineer, but am very puzzled about the "dips" in the Camellia road right before the bridge. Could it be there is an inadequate foundation ? Is this the kind of shoddy construction we are to expect from a road 25 years in the making ?
And why do the workers put cones for 1/2 mile past where they are working ? Is the idea to inconvenience and frustrate drivers so they will endorse the tax propositions ?
I am very opposed to the courthouse tax, even though a new courthouse is inevitable. Why must a tax on property owners be the only option ? And $70 million is more expensive than the Cajundome. Is that realistic ? How many square feet in building ? How much marble and granite ? Will there be a private garden on the roof ? Maybe a swimming pool too ? Spa and whirlpool to relax our stewards after a stressful day at the dangerous courthouse.
|
|
|
Post by coolboy on Nov 4, 2006 5:18:35 GMT -6
I have solutions to the internet, asbestos, and lack of space issues at the courthouse: A big factor with the internet service at the courthouse is that those folks are unable to run wires through the building. The answer? Create a secured wireless network throughout the entire courthouse. This alleviates the need for wires and minimizes installation. This technology can also be used for telephone services by using VoIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol). This essentially means that calls can be made over this same wireless network and will save thousands of taxpayers' dollars in phone services. You're probably saying this can't be done...well here's an article of a courthouse in New Mexico that did it: www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/wifi/story/0,10801,95215,00.html The article references the fact that the wireless implementation cost $150,000. I can't believe the consultant didn't bring this up as an option. Also, the folks at the courthouse are complaining that they have too many files and documents that are taking up space. My suggestion? Put all of the documents online and allow people to complete them electronically. The paper documents currently housed in the courthouse building should be scanned and saved in a central database. How much room would that create? As I've stated before, Lafayette High had an asbestos problem 20 years ago. The asbestos was cleaned out over a summer. Why can't the asbestos at the courthouse be cleaned out as well? There are cost-cutting measures we can take for now. That is why I'm voting NO next week.
|
|
|
Post by Taureau on Nov 4, 2006 13:58:45 GMT -6
The LCG probably told the "consultant" that rehabbing or modifying the court house in any way, was not an option. A new court house or nothing. They have been watching too much court TV.
|
|
|
Post by coolboy on Nov 4, 2006 17:01:24 GMT -6
Taureau, you're right. No one wants to hear about not getting a new courthouse. They do plan on renovating the old one if this tax passes, and build a new one. I wonder what will be housed in the old renovated courthouse if the new one is built?
Also, I just watched a piece on President Bush's speech recently in Colorado. He said, "A vote for Democrats is a vote for higher taxes. A vote for Republicans is a vote for lower taxes."
Please come to Lafayette and tell that to the Republicans here, Mr. Bush!
|
|
quest
New Member
Posts: 49
|
Post by quest on Nov 5, 2006 11:49:23 GMT -6
There is an advertisement in today’s paper asking voters to support all of the propositions on the ballot Tuesday. The full page color ad was paid for by Acadian Ambulance Service.
I am sure that Acadian will file the proper disclosure reports as required by law with the Louisiana Board of Ethics and Campaign Disclosure concerning this ad.
The nice orange, white and blue yard signs, “Your Court House, Your Vote, Vote Yes” do not indicate who paid for them on the bottom of the sign.
I am sure also, that whoever paid for these signs, I believe the local Bar had them printed, will file the proper reports also.
...And the Acadian Home Builders Assoc, they have been running lots of radio. They will file reports too.
18:1483(9)(a) "Expenditure" means a purchase, payment, advance, deposit, or gift, of money or anything of value made for the purpose of supporting, opposing, or otherwise influencing the nomination or election of a person to public office, for the purpose of supporting or opposing a proposition or question submitted to the voters, or for the purpose of supporting or opposing the recall of a public officer, whether made before or after the election.
In as much as campaign laws also apply to propositions placed on the ballot, I would sure hate to see such community advocates charged with campaign law violations!
|
|