Smiley, the current president of the Ouachita
Parish Police Jury, will face off in November as the only alternative to
Democrat incumbent Foster Campbell
after another Republican withdrew. Campbell
survived a challenge to his candidacy over his current three-term service
given constitutional term limits, but remained on the ballot through a loophole
permitting those in office prior to 2009 to serve an unlimited number of terms.
Although the district routinely votes for
Republicans, with almost half a century in elected offices Campbell has dug in his
influence deeply throughout the district. Personally wealthy and with ample
fundraising ability, with his haul in no small part from the companies the PSC
regulates, Campbell makes for a formidable foe against a relatively unknown
Republican like Smiley who has no proven fundraising history and who will have
to campaign at the top of his game to win.
Which is why the recent stumble made by the Jury
may prove so costly to Smiley. In its last August meeting, the Jury decided to roll
forward almost every property tax rate, thereby increasing taxes. Worse, Smiley
tried to justify the decision in a dissembling manner.
A statewide reassessment of property values occurs
during quadrennial presidential election years by parish assessors. They may do
one any other year as well, but after the statewide version in the year after a
governing authority can’t increase nor decrease taxes collected because of the resulting
change in the value of the tax base. However, the governing authority can get
around this constitutional restriction by a supermajority vote to “roll forward”
rates up to the maximum permitted – which can be below, at, or even above the
rate initially approved (above, if a past reassessment resulted in a lover
overall value).
With Ordinance 9346, this rolling
forward the Jury proceeded to trigger on all but one of its seven parishwide taxes
(which includes the lower rate tax paid by municipality property owners). This
represents a tax increase on parish residents of over $219,000 for 2020.
Which then Smiley tried to deny. “It should not be
perceived as a millage or tax increase,” he said, and was half right as
millages stayed the same as in 2019. But the fact is, somebody with an asset
that hasn’t changed in any way from last year will owe more on it in taxes this
year. For somebody on a fixed income, it means fewer after-tax dollars for
them, and is especially inopportune for those suffering economic losses because
of the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic.
Worse, Smiley tried to justify the moves by saying
parish government needed to feed its maw. “In an effort to protect the current
millage rate, the jury decided to roll them forward this year,” Smiley said.
“Rolling forward the millages does not mean the jury will levy them at the
maximum amount. It secures the millage at the amount approved by voters.”
What kind of double-speak is this? So, to prevent
the parish from losing out on potentially keeping future taxes as high as
possible, you make them as high as possible this year? Sure, the Jury could
vote to lower millages in future years as values creep higher through sales and
reclassifications, but why not start now? He didn’t present a justification for
increased parish need for money, where revenues organically go higher as do assessed
values without any need to hike rates.
And then there’s this whopper from Smiley: “We
have a number of millages that are not being levied at the same amount
originally approved by voters.” Actually, in 2019 of the five needing voter
scrutiny, four
were held at their voter-authorized levels.
Granted, the job of public service commissioner involves
mainly regulation and not so much fiscal matters like fee-setting. And we know
with Campbell we get an old-school Louisiana politician with archaic class warfare
views and a conspiratorial mindset that when translated into policy have made the
state chronically underachieve in providing its people economic opportunity while
overachieving in the size and reach of government.
But Smiley’s views on taxing just to tax and his attempt
to explain that away must raise questions in the minds of conservatives of just
how much of an upgrade he would be over Campbell.
(NOTE: To clarify, although he spoke favorably about the roll forward and defended it, Smiley was absent at this meeting.)
No comments:
Post a Comment