Murda, He Wrote: Voters have spoken: Big ideas have no place in BR

Voters went to the polls last weekend to determine the fate of East Baton Rouge Parish Mayor-President Kip Holden’s $901 million bond proposal. Most of the proposal sought funds for improving Baton Rouge’s decrepit infrastructure through improved drainage and municipal buildings, but it was heavily criticized for its inclusion of the $225 million Audubon Alive project.

Borrowing words from our eloquent former president after his party’s sound defeat in the 2006 midterm elections, “It was a thumpin’.” Thirty-six percent voted in favor, 64 percent were opposed.

Holden had attempted to run a slightly larger bond issue back on the same ballot as the 2008 presidential election. Defeated narrowly in a less than 1 percent margin, Holden cut nearly $100 million. But, with the leaner bond proposal as the only item on the parish-wide ballot, the result was resounding defeat.

The measure was widely supported by the Baton Rouge community. Besides groups like the police union, who had clear direct benefits from the proposal, the measure even gained support from the conservative editorial page of the Business Report.

But while those closest to Baton Rouge supported the measure, they didn’t vote in the numbers they did in November of last year. The story of this election was the suburban white vote. They came out in droves, while urban areas didn’t make it to the polls.
Where is Barack Obama when you need him?

It wasn’t just the fact some people felt they were being taxed for something from which they weren’t going to benefit. The failure of the bond proposal was a direct result of the “do nothing” mentality increasingly espoused by the more conservative elements of our society.

They say no to new taxes, whatever the reason.

It’s true we shouldn’t be instituting new, long-term taxes at the whim of our elected officials.

But few would say the majority of the improvements in the new bond proposal are
unnecessary expenses. Rainy days flood the city’s inadequate drainage system, and the current state of our municipal buildings ­­­— particularly the police stations and jails ­­­— is embarrassing.

But detractors jumped on the included Alive project as an overly ambitious theme park ungrounded in detail ­­­— “tax and spend” pork.

Of course, they were blind to the reasoning behind the whole proposal (and the fact Alive only accounted for a quarter of the total cost).

First, it’s clear ­­­— one way or another ­­­— something must be done to improve Baton Rouge’s infrastructure. No one enjoys new taxes. But as things stand right now, it’s clear the city government is unable to provide basic needs. We have to fix these things some time, and the money isn’t coming out of a hat.

Instead of offering a proposal that would only drain the government’s coffers, the mayor wanted economic development included in the package to help pay them off early. Holden cited economic projections that said Alive’s attendance could help pay off the bonds in 12 years.

Holden’s proposal ­— Alive and all ­­­— offered to shorten the payment time for these improvements, spur economic growth and leave Baton Rouge’s fledgling downtown district with a world-class museum.

Now, when the bond issuance comes up again next year (as it must, given the city’s dire need), politicians will give us the debt without any plans to pay it off early or make Baton Rouge a desirable place to live.

I guess we’ll just have to continue to attempt to lure tourists with the USS Kidd, some mediocre casinos and a substandard convention center (which was also supposed to be revamped in the proposal).

The bond measure wasn’t just a missed opportunity ­­­— it was a referendum. Voters who showed up at the polls were clear in their message: We don’t like taxes, and we’re happy
with the status quo.

Mark Macmurdo is a 22-year-old history and economics senior from Baton Rouge. Follow him on Twitter @TDR_mmacmurdo.



----
Contact Mark Macmurdo at mmacmurdo@lsureveille.com

3 comments

Gary

Thu Nov 19 2009 12:41

Typical Liberal "Blame it on the conservatives" mentality. I swear, Reveille, where do you find columnists like Mark MacMurdo and Steve Schmitz. You need to find more like Albright and Boyd.

Lets get started, shall we? First of all, while Audubon establishments in New Orleans do draw tourists, not one division has drawn a profit. While the "tourists" who would have suddenly descended out of the heavens to visit Alive may have drawn more revenue for downtown hotels and restaurants, none of that revenue would do anything to help pay off the bond.

Next, said River Center renovations were also ill-advised. While I was not flatly against it, it is a fact that the convention business has been shrinking every year. Large convention destinations like New Orleans and Vegas are not feeling the pinch, but there is simply less and less demand for smaller city conventions.

You also ignore all the polls that showed most voters would have voted yes if the risky Alive project was separated from the rest.

Perhaps it's not that the suburban white voters are opposed to progress, perhaps they are just drawing on their ability to think critically. They are, after all, the most educated demographic in the area.

Your name

Thu Nov 19 2009 12:29

Although your article is well written, it mixes several important things regarding Alive and paying back the bond early. First, early payment is based on the assumption that the City could obtain title to the land from the railroad company, which is of course, not a certainty. However, this fact was brushed off by the supporters of alive, including Mayor Holden, Mike Futrell and others. Second, paying the bond of early made the assumption that (based on an economist's opinion) that over 600,000 people would visit Alive a year. However, LASM downtown only averages roughly 100,000 or 150,000 a year. So, where would these others be coming from? We are talking about 1,600 visitors per day to reach the 600,000+ figure. I don't see that happening. If you take out these assumptions (which appear to be best case scenario assumptions), then the success of Alive and repayment of the bond in 17 years are a lot less certain than proponents would like everyone to believe. As for me, there was just too much uncertainty surrounding this project to vote for it.

jwrig22

Thu Nov 19 2009 01:42

Right on! This stupid Tea Party Movement is completely destroying any chance at BR becoming a tourist city. I can tell you this: as soon as I graduate, Im leaving this state for good. The Teabaggers can have it!

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Enter the characters in the image above:

log out