Some authorities around here won, and big. Multiple propositions renewing nearly half of the projected revenues for the Caddo Parish Sheriff’s Office breezed by the voters by margins that make Russia look like a healthy democracy by comparison.
This is a testament to the leadership of Sheriff Steve Prator, whose tenure now of over a dozen years has featured putting a brake on spiraling costs while expanding services. He even did something seldom seen around these parts by governing authorities with property tax renewals – rather than renew them at their previous authorized millages, he put up to the voters the millages at which they had been rolled back.
The same success story goes for Caddo Parish, with a set of renewals
for operating expenses. The parish has benefitted greatly from the shale gas
boom, but those revenues largely have been one-time in nature and wisely socked
away. In recent years, it even deferred asking for authority to collect
revenues for bonds, paying for capital projects out of its burgeoning bank
accounts.
Yet the same fiscal bonanza, on steroids, may have doomed propositions
in De Soto Parish. With such huge sums coming into that parish with the
attendant economic activity that lifts other revenue sources, voters may have
felt a case of government overreach to renew a general purpose tax in
Mansfield, and renewing one dedicated to animal control for the parish. In
Sabine Parish, a new but small tax for water provision around South Toledo Bend
narrowly lost.
Then there were the property tax propositions put up by the Bossier
Parish School District. One essentially acted a like a renewal – taking an
existing 13.55 mill measure and reinvigorating it by allowing as much as $210
million worth of bonds with maturities as lengthy as 20 years to be financed
from it. This one went into effect in 2005 with a general overall increase in property
tax rates by the district and has stayed the same even as operating millages
were rolled back in 2008 to decrease overall mills paid to schools to 52.26.
One could argue the necessity of continuing at this rate while allowing
it to take on new commitments because it would not have to go higher and because
the district has engaged in a substantial building program. But also the facts
are the district because of rollbacks had excess capacity to let this expire
away with its bonds already sold, or a smaller amount could have been asked
for, perhaps going back to the 3.20 level of 2004. The increase requested creates
excess capacity, and that in the hands of elected officials provides the tools
in the devil’s workshop.
As in 2005, the same logic brought about to justify such an increase
was growth of the parish’s school population and thereby the need for more and
newer facilities. Since then, through 2010 the
student population has increased about 2,000 or just over 10 percent, but
district expenditures per pupil have shot up nearly 50 percent. Meanwhile, in
the 2007-11 period alone, the property tax revenue for the district, thanks to
healthy real estate value increases, went a third higher to about $43 million a
year.
Despite this relative affluence, in the past couple of years, the
district has taken to running a deficit. As a result, the district’s finances
have accelerated into a deteriorating position; in 2010-11,
over $17 million being eaten away from its total reserves, or over 20 percent
of the balance. While some of the extra costs have come from the state passing
along, because of a standstill Minimum Foundation Program formula, in essence
unfunded mandates, that represents only a fraction of those costs.
The remainder has simply gone to growing the school district beyond the
increase in students and tax revenues with little evidence this trend has
increased student achievement beyond the expenditure growth rates that would have
conformed to either of these levels. And avoided assiduously by the district’s
flacks in promoting this proposition was jurisdictions with such a healthy
increase in tax revenues had no business asking for this much more above and
beyond that. Expenditures rising because of “growth” should get matched by the upwards
push in real estate values caused by that; there’s no need to overshoot that.
In short, existing unused millages from other taxes should have been more than
enough to fulfill at least part of the ambitious plans made by a district which
has gotten into the habit of living beyond its means.
This proposition squeaked through the generally somnambulant Bossier
voting public, with its more-transient, less-long-standing residency
characteristics. But tax increases did not, which comprised the other two
propositions on the ballot, one for teacher salaries, the other for
technological enhancements. Much anguishing issued forth from district flacks,
about how other surrounding parishes offered higher average salaries than
Bossier, and how technology could put students on the cutting edge of
preparation.
But the fact remains, some of this could have been accomplished through
existing unused millages instead of asking taxpayers to fork over an additional
(combined) estimated $11 million a year. Or perhaps, given the deficit spending,
perhaps the School Board if it didn’t want to cut back on spending should have
had the guts to get rates to roll forward and at least address that matter
before asking for new commitments.
And this bodes poorly for its future. By the end of next year, the
district will have to come up with two renewals, and another by the end of
2015, for other operating revenues. The results of this election show a
skeptical Bossier public that may be willing to punish a profligate Bossier
Parish School Board if it doesn’t soon get to right-sizing its district.
"This proposition squeaked through the generally somnambulant Bossier voting public"
ReplyDeleteWe know you can use big words but how about writing an article we can read without having our dictionary beside us?