How is the OT Going to Vote on THRIVE?

Misspelled THRIVE twice. Nice work

WTF are you talking about? you sound crazy

quote:

---

WTF are you talking about? you sound crazy

---

You’re a shitty alter. What polling group/agency do you work for?

quote:

---

I'm not particularly happy about it, but the city/parish has some significant financial holes that need patching, and this seems to be the least bad of a host of worse options that have been proposed, so I'm a yes.

---

Maybe they should start by cutting out payments to all these community activists and their scam programs that are completely ineffective

Can somebody explain this to a non-native?

It sounds like a vote to redirect taxes to cover holes created by corruption.

This is to move money from the large balances held by the library and mosquito abatement into the general fund so the city can provide basic services - including the police. There is a massive budget shortfall with St George taking a large chunk. This just moves money around - not increase your taxes. If you vote no on this, the next option is to raise taxes. Please vote yes.

quote:

---

Oh, so it’s a vote to legally take library money

---

I know it sounds that way (and, well, it is), but the library and all staff is voting yes and asking people to vote yes as well.

They don't trust that there will be another renewal down the line if not.

But really, both sides have a point. Setting a precedent that the government can just take money from other services to pay off their poor planning is not good.

Like someone else said, voting no might just mean higher taxes down the line.

quote:

---

yes, however, council on aging doesn’t have a good track record, and I wouldn’t trust them with anything

---

My point is that it wouldn't make any sense for the C/P to go out of their way to eat a portion of their dedication only to give it back to them. I'm not saying it can't happen, but it strikes me as too odd to be concerned about.

With that said, if I vote no on any part of the Thrive plan, the rededication to the CoA would be my no vote.

ETA: While we're at it, here's the language of the propositions, just for ease of access:


Parishwide Proposition No. 1 of 3 - 11.1 Mills Ext. & Reded. - MC - 10 Yrs. (Select 1)
Shall the Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana (the "Parish"), be authorized to rededicate $52,400,000 to be used for Parish-wide general purposes, heretofore and hereafter received from the levy of an ad valorem tax (the "Tax") previously approved for public library purposes at an election held on October 24, 2015, and shall the Parish be further authorized to extend and rededicate the levy of said Tax at the rate of 11.1 mills on all property subject to taxation in the Parish for an additional 10 years, beginning with the year 2026, to and including the year 2035 ($67,432,500 is reasonably estimated to be collected from levying the Tax for an entire year), so that (a) proceeds heretofore and hereafter received from 8.30 mills of the Tax shall be administered by the East Baton Rouge Parish Library Board of Control and used to maintain and operate the public library system of the Parish, including collections, software, furniture, and equipment, and acquiring land and constructing new library facilities, and (b) proceeds heretofore and hereafter received from 2.80 mills of the Tax shall be used for Parish-wide general purposes (after paying reasonable and necessary expenses of collecting and administering the Tax)?


Parishwide Proposition No. 2 of 3 - 1.00 Mills Ext. & Reded. - MC - 10 Yrs. (Select 1)
Shall the Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana (the "Parish"), be authorized to rededicate $6,000,000 of proceeds heretofore and hereafter received from the levy of a special tax (the "Tax"), for Parish-wide general purposes, said Tax previously approved at an election held on November 4, 2014 for mosquito abatement and rodent control, and shall the Parish be further authorized to extend and rededicate the levy of said Tax at the rate of 1.00 mills on all property subject to taxation in the Parish for 10 years, beginning with the year 2027, to and including 2036 ($6,075,000 is reasonably estimated to be collected from levying the Tax for an entire year), so that (i) proceeds heretofore and hereafter received from 0.50 mills of the Tax shall be used entirely and exclusively to provide funds to purchase, maintain and operate machinery, facilities and equipment necessary in the eradication, abatement or control of mosquitoes, arthropods of public health importance and rodents, and providing for adequate administrative and support staff, and (ii) proceeds heretofore and hereafter received from 0.50 mills of the Tax shall be used for Parish-wide general purposes (after paying reasonable and necessary expenses of collecting and administering the Tax)?


Parishwide Proposition No. 3 of 3 - 2.25 Mills Ext. & Reded. - MC - 10 Yrs. (Select 1)
Shall the Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana (the "Parish"), be authorized to extend the levy of a 2.25 mills ad valorem tax (the "Tax"), on all property subject to taxation in the Parish ($13,668,750 is reasonably expected to be collected from the levy of the Tax for an entire year), for (10) years, beginning with the year 2027, and annually thereafter to and including 2036, and shall the Parish be further authorized to rededicate the use of proceeds of the Tax, heretofore and hereafter received, so that (A) 2.00 mills shall be used exclusively by the East Baton Rouge Parish Council on the Aging, Inc., or any successor thereto (the "Council on Aging") to provide funds to operate and maintain programs, services, and activities for elderly citizens in the Parish, including meals on wheels, senior centers, homemakers services, transportation, and nutrition, wellness, and recreational programs, to acquire, construct, operate and maintain facilities to serve elderly citizens in the Parish, and to otherwise fund the operating budget of the Council on Aging, and (B) 0.25 mills shall be used for Parish-wide general purposes (after paying reasonable and necessary expenses of collecting and administering the Tax)?

quote:

---

My point is that it wouldn't make any sense for the C/P to go out of their way to eat a portion of their dedication only to give it back to them.

---

lol - they will line their pockets with that money - none of it has to ‘make sense’