Panel recommends CATS tax

[Antrell Williams]

You again have this ancient belief that downtowns are imperative to a persons well-being, as if this is the 1940's.

You also seem to think that one day suburbs are going to become so awful that then and only then urban areas will reap the benefits. Funny how you're not suggesting any positive reasons people would come back.

So you don't live in EBR.. Why are you concerned about CATS?

Yes it's hilarious because you seem to be blind to anything Baton Rouge and everytime I mention something positive you blow it off, you do realize that this is a positive step for a better city right?

When the trend of urbanization begins the most significant reasons will be the now negative aspects of the suburbs which are evident now. My disdain for the suburbs would be different if the parishes had smart growth plans and policies in place. However, there isn't and the suburbs will remain a souless traffic congested, strip mall infected hotbed of inefficient suburbanites.

[cajun]

History hasn't proven this.

You'd have to have your head in the sand to not notice this. The initial suburbs experience blight, and eventually people move farther out. That's the nature of sprawl. It started because of cheap fuel and affordable housing. It continues because of cultural differences and a people valuing quality public education and safety over nearly every other quality of life measure.

You know how I know you don't live in EBR?

I moved from Baton Rouge to Atlanta metro when my wife got a job at Emory and I got a transfer.

I have never at any time lived in a Baton Rouge suburb....unlike you. I have, however, lived in suburban style area within Baton Rouge at one point.

Are you suggesting that people in EBR are going to support this? There is nothing innovative about failed urban programs demanding more funding. If it fails, and it will, it will make the suburbs just that much more appealing. The fact that they had to gerrymander the tax district just proves that even CATS knows that their proposal is weak and not likely to pass muster.

[itsjustme3]

So you don't live in EBR.. Why are you concerned about CATS?

You don't know anything about me. Maybe I own property in several parishes. Maybe you shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Yes it's hilarious because you seem to be blind to anything Baton Rouge and everytime I mention something positive you blow it off, you do realize that this is a positive step for a better city right?

What's the positive step? You mean stealing money from property owners is positive?

When the trend of urbanization begins the most significant reasons will be the now negative aspects of the suburbs which are evident now. My disdain for the suburbs would be different if the parishes had smart growth plans and policies in place. However, there isn't and the suburbs will remain a souless traffic congested, strip mall infected hotbed of inefficient suburbanites.

No offense but you're coming across as someone in denial, not to mention you're hatred for suburbs and the people who choose to live in them. But then again I'm sure there are people who run EBR parish who think like you. So that would explain why things are so bad.

[cajun]

So you don't live in EBR.. Why are you concerned about CATS?

Don't you live in Prarieville?

you do realize that this is a positive step for a better city right?

What makes his (or my) opinion any less valid that yours? In our eyes, this is a very negative step for Baton Rouge.

I don't know where you've been for the past 4 years, but austerity measures have been taken by the city and state and will probably have to eventually take place on a federal level. All of us had to belt tighten, and this is not the time for a "pie in the sky" gamble with tax dollars from people who have the means to leave town forever.

It is right to question a tax that will burden the citizens of Baton Rouge so far beyond the surrounding areas and will enlarge the disadvantage that the city already faces in attracting new residents. Population in the city is stagnant and has been for a while now. Raise taxes too high, and you'll start seeing a net loss in population.

This is a gamble with property owner's money to provide a service that few will use because of the development and demographic patterns in Baton Rouge. It is NOT irresponsible to be against this tax.

[Antrell Williams]

You'd have to have your head in the sand to not notice this. The initial suburbs experience blight, and eventually people move farther out. That's the nature of sprawl. It started because of cheap fuel and affordable housing. It continues because of cultural differences and a people valuing quality public education and safety over nearly every other quality of life measure.

I moved from Baton Rouge to Atlanta when my wife got a job at Emory.

I have never at any time lived in a Baton Rouge suburb....unlike you. I have, however, lived in suburban style area within Baton Rouge at one point.

Are you suggesting that people in EBR are going to support this? There is nothing innovative about failed urban programs demanding more funding. If it fails, and it will, it will make the suburbs just that much more appealing. The fact that they had to gerrymander the tax district just proves that even CATS knows that their proposal is weak and not likely to pass muster.

What initial suburbs? Shenedoah, Sherwood, Park Forest, and Monticello? The suburbs only had/have one period of growth in history and that is post-war to the present.

This trend will stop or we will have more road miles than grains of sand.

That was not directed at you.

No, most people think like you two. There also is nothing innovative about sitting by and letting the stagnation inflate like we have since the 80s. "Americas Next Best City" needs transit but I can tell the future so it won't work. If you know it will fail how do you feel about I-10? It won't help traffic and it was more expensive.

This mentality is exactly what keeps BR from being a better city.

You don't know anything about me. Maybe I own property in several parishes. Maybe you shouldn't jump to conclusions.

What's the positive step? You mean stealing money from property owners is positive?

No offense but you're coming across as someone in denial, not to mention you're hatred for suburbs and the people who choose to live in them. But then again I'm sure there are people who run EBR parish who think like you. So that would explain why things are so bad.

Why can't you answer the question man? It sounds like you don't own property in EBR and are mad because you don't like the city or parish.

Yes, stealing money from people is positive when it has a chance at a better QOL. Just like the Green Light Plan that you also (maybe) don't pay a tax on.

I'm in denial of what? I don't hate suburbs or people in them, umm I grew up in one. Although I'm not blind to the fact that the current growth patters will put them in a worse state than urban areas. Can you actually reply to the points in my post instead of always beating around the bush. Why can't we ever have a meaningful discussion.

[cajun]

What initial suburbs? Shenedoah, Sherwood, Park Forest, and Monticello? The suburbs only had/have one period of growth in history and that is post-war to the present.

You are out of your mind if you think this trend will stop with the rise in fuel prices. People will demand more fuel efficient cars and keep moving out. At some point....the large employers move away with them.

Yes, stealing money from people is positive when it has a chance at a better QOL. Just like the Green Light Plan that you also (maybe) don't pay a tax on.

You are stealing from one to provide for another......and in the same breath, you attack people who sell out and move away because they are being robbed blind.

The hypocrisy would be funny if it wasn't so prevalent in this country.

[cajun]

However, there isn't and the suburbs will remain a souless traffic congested, strip mall infected hotbed of inefficient suburbanites.

Inefficient? They moved there because it was more economically feasable than the city.

[Antrell Williams]

Don't you live in Prarieville?

What makes his (or my) opinion any less valid that yours? In our eyes, this is a very negative step for Baton Rouge.

I don't know where you've been for the past 4 years, but austerity measures have been taken by the city and state and will probably have to eventually take place on a federal level. All of us had to belt tighten, and this is not the time for a "pie in the sky" gamble with tax dollars from people who have the means to leave town forever.

It is right to question a tax that will burden the citizens of Baton Rouge so far beyond the surrounding areas and will enlarge the disadvantage that the city already faces in attracting new residents. Population in the city is stagnant and has been for a while now. Raise taxes too high, and you'll start seeing a net loss in population.

This is a gamble with property owner's money to provide a service that few will use because of the development and demographic patterns in Baton Rouge. It is NOT irresponsible to be against this tax.

No, I live in Houston.

As of now, your speculation is negative. There is no way to forsee the future. However, new buses and etc will be at least a short term improvement. I'm not saying it will work but it's a little annoying to see " No. It won't work!"

Eventually? The feds should have done that 10 years ago.

People who want city amenities will pay taxes just like they do now. See there goes the idea that it will be an instant failure, that is not fair for this argument. If I were to suggest that CATS were going to gain 50% ridership in 1 year you would all think I'm crazy, well thats how I'm looking at you two.

To provide a service that you think few will use because style of development isn't the end all to public transit and demogrphic patters are ripe for some forms of public transit.

It is not irresponsible to be against this tax, but without logical reasoning as to why, you may as well flip a coin and vote that way. The idea that it will tax and abrubtly fail is not acceptable.

[itsjustme3]

Can you actually reply to the points in my post instead of always beating around the bush. Why can't we ever have a meaningful discussion.

Meaningful discussion? You question my statement that I own property in EBR. You admit you have disdain for the suburbs. You admit stealing from people who have money to pay for a broken service that benefits a small few is ok.

And you wonder why we can't have a meaningful discussion?

[cajun]

It is not irresponsible to be against this tax, but without logical reasoning as to why, you may as well flip a coin and vote that way. The idea that it will tax and abrubtly fail is not acceptable.

You'd be gambling with taxpayer money...and not providing innovative ideas. Tax more and expand an unpopular, failed public service is not innovative. It doesn't make cities "great".

This proposal is strictly over the road buses. Even in cities that love public transit, buses are the red headed step child of means of transport. Busing is to public transit as Ole Miss is to SEC football.

To clarify....I never said it would abruptly fail. I'm sure there will be many new routes, new buses, and significant pay raises for CATS employees. This will make CATS solvent. A $2 million injection from city coffers would have done the same and costs way less.

In this case, my argument is the irresponsibility of this tax will translate to a less desirable city for people who actually own property......all for a nominal increase in riders and significantly more service to areas with a suburban development pattern.

You can't bleed a city dry over night. Memphis, Detroit, Cleveland.....all in different stages of failure that will take a painful 30 years or more.

[buckett5425]

Urban > Suburban

I've talked with many of my young progressive friends. While all of them support and would like to utilize an efficient mass transit system in Baton Rouge, they all agree that the tax is poorly written. They also agree the city and local supporters have done very little in educating the public about this proposal. While I will vote for the tax based on merit, I do not believe it will be passed. But in the mean time, CATS will still exist and provide poor services until the time comes that people are ready to make a positive step towards mass transit.

[itsjustme3]

Urban > Suburban

But in the mean time, CATS will still exist and provide poor services until the time comes that people are ready to make a positive step towards mass transit.

By "people" you mean who??

The people that don't want another tax?

The people that have run CATS into the ground?

The few people who use the bus?

The mayor?

[buckett5425]

By "people" you mean who??

The people that don't want another tax?

The people that have run CATS into the ground?

The few people who use the bus?

The mayor?

The citizens of East Baton Rouge Parish. I.E you.

[itsjustme3]

The citizens of East Baton Rouge Parish. I.E you.

Oh ok. It's good to know that it's my responsibility for busses to run on time, to be clean, with friendly drivers, and the bus systen managed correctly.

LOL

[Antrell Williams]

Urban > Suburban

I've talked with many of my young progressive friends. While all of them support and would like to utilize an efficient mass transit system in Baton Rouge, they all agree that the tax is poorly written. They also agree the city and local supporters have done very little in educating the public about this proposal. While I will vote for the tax based on merit, I do not believe it will be passed. But in the mean time, CATS will still exist and provide poor services until the time comes that people are ready to make a positive step towards mass transit.

I'm afraid that that time will never come.

You'd be gambling with taxpayer money...and not providing innovative ideas. Tax more and expand an unpopular, failed public service is not innovative. It doesn't make cities "great".

This proposal is strictly over the road buses. Even in cities that love public transit, buses are the red headed step child of means of transport. Busing is to public transit as Ole Miss is to SEC football.

To clarify....I never said it would abruptly fail. I'm sure there will be many new routes, new buses, and significant pay raises for CATS employees. This will make CATS solvent. A $2 million injection from city coffers would have done the same and costs way less.

In this case, my argument is the irresponsibility of this tax will translate to a less desirable city for people who actually own property......all for a nominal increase in riders and significantly more service to areas with a suburban development pattern.

You can't bleed a city dry over night. Memphis, Detroit, Cleveland.....all in different stages of failure that will take a painful 30 years or more.

Innovative ideas? In this city?!! What kind of innovation are you speaking of? I'd love to see what you mean by that, this city is not mentally ready for something innovative or progressive.

Buses are the base on the totem pole, the bottom feeder but also the backbone. No sucessful public transit system can operate as they do without buses.

You can't bleed a city dry overnight-unless you stab it repeatedly and let it bleed.

I wonder why CATS isn't pushing the new jobs?

Meaningful discussion? You question my statement that I own property in EBR. You admit you have disdain for the suburbs. You admit stealing from people who have money to pay for a broken service that benefits a small few is ok.

And you wonder why we can't have a meaningful discussion?

It was never a statement. Why couldn't you just say yes or no the first time I asked? So, therefore you probably don't own property in EBR, if you did, I don't see why you couldn't just say "yes" or "no."

I disdain the way suburbs are managed, or rather unmanaged.

I steal from people? I admit that citizens of a city should pay for a service they are provided. Just like the taxes you pay for big companies to locate there.

[itsjustme3]

I'd love to see what you mean by that, this city is not mentally ready for something innovative or progressive.

So now people are stupid, eh?

And yet you wonder why you can't have a meaningful discussion.

[Antrell Williams]

So now people are stupid, eh?

And yet you wonder why you can't have a meaningful discussion.

I must be stupid because I don't know how you got to that conclusion from that sentence.

It's a play on conservative attitudes.

[buckett5425]

Oh ok. It's good to know that it's my responsibility for busses to run on time, to be clean, with friendly drivers, and the bus systen managed correctly.

LOL

Did I say that?

LOL

[cajun]

Out of curiosity driven by this thread, I actually contacted an old friend the who works as a transit consultant in the bay area... to pick his brain. His firm's clients are public entities that seek to address a variety of needs.

He's earned an undergrad in urban planning from a west coast school and an MBA from LSU about 7 years ago. He's better with statistics than anyone I know and is probably the most level headed advocate of urban living that I've ever met (he's as much of a numbers guy as any MBA which is sometimes rare in his field) ....meaning he is aware of the social and economic problems in the 21st century and is actually paid to see these systems work- not just to market and package some socialistic agenda as "progressive" or "innovative" so that GM can sell buses or Siemens can sell rail infrastructure to flyover cities.

I spoke with him about the CATS issue today and he did help me shape some opinions on it.

He made it clear that almost every mass transit system in the US is in the red. They almost always cost far more to implement and maintain than planned- especially rail, which is rarely done correctly. He also mentioned growing legacy costs including pensions and insurance that make some systems a disaster- especially in the some sprawling metro areas in California. Of course, he pointed out that America's highway system is very difficult to compete with.

Despite this, he tells me that truly good transit ideas sell on their own merit. He believes they there is a significant benefit to taxpayers to reduce congestion on major arterial roads. Buses are the cheapest way to do that, but have a significantly bad stigma associated with them which isn't exactly undeserved. They are the lowest common denominator transportation, and never popular in car-dependent cities. They would never be competitive with other forms of transit if the fares reflected the true cost of operation.

He sold me on the idea that the proposed route changed may actually increase ridership within 5 or 6 years, but it is likely some of those proposed routes would have to be changed, which is understandable.. Buses have proven to find use in low density areas with grid pattern streets even without parking constraints, which shocked me.

He pointed out that the proposal is probably not a bad move from a service standpoint for a city the size of Baton Rouge. Although not particularly costly per capita, it is disturbingly high given the low average income within the city limits. He was dissapointed when he found out that this was a city proposal and not a tailored tax district that crosses city boundaries.

On the other hand, when asked if he would support it at the voting both if he lived in town, he said "absolutely no way in hell".

As someone who studies the development patterns in urban areas, his concern was that this proposal could perform just as well with a lower, less destructive tax rate in a district that actually includes all areas serviced in the proposal. In other words, he shares my opinion that the proposal is flawed based on what info the public has out of the social and economic consequences of increasing the tax burden of the urban core.

He pointed out that transit like this should have cooperation regionally. It is unfair to expect Baton Rouge taxpayers to shoulder 100% of this tax burden when the proposal clearly provides service to areas beyond city limits.

Since this is someone whose opinion I trust, I should say that I may have been wrong on the skepticism that CATS would not find riders to justify this new service. However, I still feel vindicated that someone more qualified than me also thinks this proposal would be an overall negative for the city- and by extension, the region.

I would like to see this exact proposal canceled and resubmitted in November with expanded tax district lines tailored to include the areas serviced by the proposal. (April is municipal district only). With more tax base, the tax rates can be lowered and still provide the same level of funding because it includes more taxpayers.

There is a tremendous risk that when this fails, and it probably will, CATS will continue on as is and won't readdress their issue for decades. This would also be a negative for the region.

Not trying to sway anyone's opinions on the issue....just trying to illustrate my concerns.

[Antrell Williams]

Damn Cajun.

I agree with him wholeheartedly. I never knew the only taxable base was within city limits. I don't understand why they would do this..? If the proposed express routes served Livingston and Ascension then they would be taxed as well. The tax base would more than double, cutting the impact on tax payers in half, if passed.

[cajun]

Damn Cajun.

I agree with him wholeheartedly. I never knew the only taxable base was within city limits. I don't understand why they would do this..? If the proposed express routes served Livingston and Ascension then they would be taxed as well. The tax base would more than double, cutting the impact on tax payers in half, if passed.

They couldn't put a proposal together last year in time for November, I guess.

Unless something changed, the vote is going before the city limits of Baton Rouge (which as you know stopped annexing when the Parish and city merged government), Zachary, and Baker.

The routes proposed very clearly go well beyond the city limits.

This tax, if passed, would severely inhibit other public entities from passing taxes to cover their needs. It extends the rate pretty far beyond what is taxed in unincorporated parts of the parish....which will make property in the city harder to sell and make large scale residential projects more difficult to justify from a developers standpoint.

People will expect to pay less for a condo downtown when annual property taxes add significant costs to their mortgage . If you are a developer, why invest in an area that will be a tough sell?

Keep in mind that municipal taxes don't have the benefit of homestead exemption. If you are on fixed income (like a state worker, retired person, working poor, or unemployed), this tax will hit especially hard.

CATS is stupid to bet the house on something like this with such a flawed proposal. I don't think Holden or the council has the guts to deprive them of funding out of the city budget to keep them running until November.

Holden is up for re election. He's going to take flack for the crime problems. Letting CATS fail would kill his political career.

[cajun]

CATS may have barely passed in Baton Rouge. Baker appears to be firmly supportive.

Looks like it failed in Zachary by a wide margin.

WAFB'a initial report appears to have been wrong. They reported failure at first.

[richyb83]

Yeah a few min ago saw that Yes was 53% & No 47%.... with 95% precincts reporting

[itsjustme3]

Yay! Now there will be even more empty buses.

You know what they say, the only way to fix a problem is by throwing other peoples money at it.

Poor schools, crime, and now higher property tax. It will just give people another reason to flee to the suburbs.

[Antrell Williams]

We'll see what happens.