https://www.thenewsstar.com/story/ne...lm/2349140002/
Printable View
Hell NO!
Hey - if you can fleece the people to prop up your failing university, why not?
It's not are Ouachita Parish taxpayers ready for ULM millage.
Is Lincoln Parish ready for the same for Tech and GSU if this is copied. . . .
West Monroe just copied the Enterprise Zone hospitality/hamburger "recreation" sales tax from Ruston. All the Thomas Road restaurants, hotels, movie theater will be levying an ADDITIONAL 2 cents sales tax, beginning in March. . . to help "economic development" in that area. All was done by the new WM mayor and council and without a public vote, too.
If it comes to a vote, you can count me as a resounding "NO".Quote:
Originally Posted by Choudawg86
Absolutely not. Be sure to light up Scotty Robinson's phone.
The police jury has absolutely nothing to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by LTUIronDawg
He's just doing his policy jury duty by putting a vote request before the voters. If the library board wants to build new parish libraries, their request goes through the policy jury to place the millage before the voters.
(unlike these recent taxes passed by the city councils on behalf of their economic development districts. . . no vote by the people, just a ordinance approved by the council).
Why stop at Ouachita Parish? The great ULM is a regional university serving multiple parishes in northeast Louisiana. All, whatever it is, 12-15 parishes should have their property taxes increased in support of that school. That would include Lincoln Parish, although I can anticipate some angst with that.
(make sure your sarcasm meter is turned on and set at the Holy Chit alarm level, while reading this post.)
Scotty posted on FB immediately that he was only doing his job. He acts for the OPPJ who, as you know and DP has pointed out, must propose things to be voted on.Quote:
Originally Posted by LTUIronDawg
My property taxes went up this year, so I don't expect many voters will be in favor of another increase.
They are selling it as "economic development" but if you read closely it is nothing more than a general advancement fund for the school. This is so ULM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Choudawg86
From the news star article. The property tax would fund ULM Vision 2031.That's right. They want a property tax to fund scholarships for low-income locals (where is Delta on that?), in addition to academic and athletic facilities. In my opinion, this will backfire. We will see.
- The University of Louisiana Monroe leaders and supporters have made a plan of action that would expand the university's programs and facilities. To reach the goals set in the plan, ULM would need an additional source of funding supported by Ouachita Parish voters.
- According to a news release from ULM, the university's existing programs and services contribute $566.8 million to the economy.
- Goals of ULM Vision 2031 are:
- Establish ULM as a premiere destination for medical and health sciences.
- Provide GAP scholarships for qualified but low-income Ouachita Parish students.
- Attract matching funds for future projects.
- Expand doctoral programs.
- Modernize and expand Brown Theater, making it North Louisiana's cultural center.
- Update and expand Fant-Ewing Coliseum to make it an academic, entertainment and sports center.
- Enhance athletic facilities to attract more visitors
I wouldn't vote for something like this even for Tech.
So ULM.
ULM wants tax money going towards Fant-Ewing Coliseum expansion and renovation??? Why? Are folks crazy excited for ULM basketball? Also, Mayor Mayo wants a $90-100 Million downtown arena (see below).
https://media.myarklamiss.com/nxsglo....0_640_360.jpg
I'm hesitant to make fun of it until we know whether it fails or not.
It passing is precisely the problem. Not bc ULM gets money, but bc it is way outside the generally accepted purpose of a property tax on top of the forced giving aspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
That's what I was thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by touchdown123
How this went down is their student body said NO to their athletic enhancement fee. ULM went to plan B. Being sneaky, they repackage this as economic development tax to get athletes money for facility upgrade by local tax payers.
What's in the water over in Monroe? These folks are nuts.
Yea it seems like it is in the DNA of the institution at this point: faculty and alumni.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
There are quite a few buying the economic development argument right now. They take the economic development bait and miss that it really is a university advancement tax with no direct economic development attached to it. It is all indirect if at all (good school equals Monroe is more attractive to businesses). ULM supporters are all in on the economic development argument, and why shouldn't they be - they are already giving why not force others to give too? That is a helluva dealQuote:
Originally Posted by qng001
A vo-tech or community college providing degree and certification programs targeted to local workforce deficiencies would make a much stronger argument for an economic development property tax.
Thought Ouachita already had a few of those.Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Choudawg86
If this passes, I will move over to Squire and send my kids to Cedar Creek.
I might challenge the proposal and results as well. Will most likely go after the police jury for civil money penalties for allowing this to make it to the ballot.
Absolutely. This is a total city community college move. Everything about this is a wrongheaded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
Desperation.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
....isn't that what we're talking about here with ULM? :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
ULM has some boosters that are truly great people - they are so damn misguided at times.
ULM’s pharmacy department needs a major shot in the arm to regain its national perception. It is sinking - quickly.
Did I see where the physical structures at NLU are sinking as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by faninmonroe
I cant see this passing. SURELY people in Ouachita Parish are tired of paying outrageous taxes. Since I have to pay two different property taxes here, shouldn't I be able to vote twice?
This tax is about one thing and one thing only and that's to increase the athletic department budget at ULM. Yes, they'll take a few dollars here and there and fund a scholarship or two. They'll throw some dollars at Brown Theater at some point. But this is all about the athletic department.Quote:
Originally Posted by qng001
They know what's been rumored for several years now and that's the fact a faction of presidents within the Sun Belt wants a minimum budget standard. I suspect it's at a level ULM can't meet.
That's what the student fee was about and that's what this tax is about, plain and simple.
This. Not my circus, not my monkey, but I can't help but try to think about Tech proposing something like this for Lincoln Parish. I would be opposed to it for Lincoln, too. Property taxes are a crappy way to fund anything. Folks who don't own any taxable property get the pleasure of voting an increase on others, which really sucks when you think about it. Then, as most "property" is owned by businesses and corporations, it hits them the hardest, but trickles down to everyone in higher prices for goods and services. Property taxes actually have the OPPOSITE effect of "economic development".Quote:
Originally Posted by touchdown123
Just a quick question, what are the consequences for NLULM if this doesn't pass?
And how much would this new property tax generate per year?Quote:
Originally Posted by raam
Amen! This is the same reason I still believe one should own property and speak and write English in order to vote. And yes I'm serious!Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckK3
Touchy feely, tax loving and socialist liberals destroy cities, states and countries.
:D Ok I'm done.
The only failure of you logic about owning property is that renters indirectly pay property taxes. If the tax rate goes up so does their rent (eventually) unless they have angels for landlords. If they don't pay rent then they don't pay property taxes. Now of course this couldn't apply to people living in rent free or government housing projects of which there are many. So would you allow people who pay legitimate rent to vote?
Yep! In fact many renters are incredibly naive, thinking they are voting to raise taxes for the more wealthy when in fact they are raising it on themselves as well. This describes the Dems. base voters to a 'T'. Not only that but a large percentage can't speak, read or write English. They should get zero say on tax issues as well as national and state government votes IMHO ; especially the illegals. And I don't care if that's not PC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Houston Techsan
What would you say is the percentage of renters who cannot speak, read, or write English? How does that compare to the literacy rate among homeowners?Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
And you would fail -Quote:
Originally Posted by faninmonroe
If the taxing authority goes through the proper the procedures with the bonding commission and the state, the Police Jury has no option but to let it got to vote or face the wrath of the AG and Secretary of State in court - regardless of what kind of district it is - water, sewer, fire, levee, enterprise, recreation etal
You tell me my friend. Have at it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
I know many English-speaking folks who are clueless too. I have one vacant unit right now...had to renovate and repair the place after the former renters left it a mess, leaving during the holidays. A woman told me how much rent I should ask for. No thanks, I replied. She insisted saying she "knows" what the market is and demanded I accept her lowball offer. I said fine, go rent a place for that much with someone else then. Good bye. She called me back the next day ASKING ME if I knew other landlords and what was available. I didn't say what I wanted to say, but did offer, "well, since you're such an expert on the market, why are you asking me?" I can tell you with 101% certainty she won't find any decent place, anywhere, for what she is willing to pay. Better buy a cardboard box for herself.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Property taxes went up...again...in Natchitoches in 2018, for both city and parish. Insurance rates inched up as well.
But, a much bigger issue looms. The whole pending A/C crisis with the outlawing of R22 is now one year away, effective 1/1/20 unless Congress....ooops, never mind on that. I have been slowly changing to the new system, and still have 4 units to go. Will cost me about $30,000 to replace all 4 this year. But will cost me closer to $40,000 or maybe even $50,000 if I wait til 2020. Just watch what's gonna happen to rent when these big rental property owners...those with apartment complexes and/or 20, 30, or more separate units...HAVE to replace A/C units. One woman here, a retired school teacher, owns 78 rent houses. Some of them have just window units, but well over 50 of her houses have central units. Hello!
Exactly! But I bet I know what party she votes for year after year raising her own taxes and getting dorked on "Obama's Affordable Healthcare" and watching her low income friends, black and white, lose jobs to illegals and well as personal property probably.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Ok -- roughly 14% of adults in the US cannot read. Another 7% cannot read above a 5th grade level.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Around 19% of adults in the US speak a language other than English at home, but about 60% of these also speak fluent English.
So, depending on how you count them -- it's probably safe to estimate somewhere around 1 in 5 people in the US cant read so good, and about half of them (about 10% of US population) no speak-a zee English either.
Homeownership, on the other hand, which had peaked around 70% before the recession, seems to have stabilized around 65%.
Sooooo --- about 1/10 of the population cant read or write English, but around 1/3 of the US rents their home. We know that illiteracy is strongly associated with poverty. We canwe can speculate, however, that there are probably some wealthy individuals who rent their home, as well as some poor families who own one.
But how is that 10% of non-English speakers correlated with the one-third of renters? I regret I couldn't find any research in a 10 minute search on my lunch. Were you able to find any studies linking English proficiency with homeownership?
14% of US adults can't read? Do you have a link?
Taken at face value....who the heck are these people? 14%! that's like 47 million people! Please tell me that's a mistake. Maybe it's actually 1.4%.
Im on my phone now. But it was a Bing search for “US literacy rate”Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent (1 in 7) of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read. (as of Jul 7, 2017)Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...n_3880355.html
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-li...ate-in-America
Of course, this has nothing to do with the literacy rate of HOMEOWNERS, which was your initial question. That info is very hard to find. But for obvious reasons, I guarantee you the literacy rate of homeowners will be much higher than the general public's.
While I did find info stating that the most illiterate city in America is Bakersfield, CA, it seems almost impossible to find out exactly WHO the illiterate are in America. Are they mostly native hispanic people who speak Spanish (likely)? Are they white hillbillies from Appalachia? Are they renters? No documents seem to want to identify WHO the illiterate are in America. I suspect this is for political and stigmatization reasons. Good luck finding data on that.
US Census Bureau: https://www.census.gov/popclock/
328 million x .14 = 46 million
So, 46 million American adults can't read? That seems too high to me. Do they mean "functionally illiterate"? That's a little different than "purely illiterate." Still, that's bad enough. And, how was this study conducted? Did they randomly select 100 adults from across the country and found 14 of 'em couldn't read? What was the actual sample size of the study?
I find this impossible to believe. 14%? I agree with Hogdawg on the PC aspect of this. If someone knows, they ain't gonna say.
Stigma aside....how is this even possible? Even the poorest of our poor have smart phones. How do you "function" on a smart phone not being able to read? Is this an indictment of our public education system? (has to at least play a role in it). Is this an indictment of our social welfare system? (has to at least play a role in it).
Quote:
Originally Posted by HogDawg
.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
I think the difference between the 32 million (14%) and the 46MM is the 7% of adults who are functionally illiterate. (below 5th grade level)
Is a ad valorem tax proposal an admission of failure by an institution's alumni association and foundation?
How many students from outside of Ouachita Parish attend ULM? Ouichita Parish would be subsidizing those students. This could be a major issue which could be raised by those against the tax. What next? Will they be charging OUT OF PARISH TUITION?
I think you could argue that either way. It depends largely on one's expectations of what alums are "supposed" to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgpix
D80 was calculating 14% of ALL Americans. His 328 includes children. HD was using 14% of Adults.Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
Who is the taxing authority in this case? I really don't know. My uninformed take is that the police jury could kill it if they wanted to. I agree faninmonroe would not have a case if the police jury puts it on the ballot and it passes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden
Or an admission that they are a low level local college with limited to no regional support and/or worth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgpix
I copied it straight from the Dept of Education site. It specifically said 32 million adults can't read. It didn't say 46 million. Of course, as usual, we have a bunch of smarty pants folks on this board who want to nitpick stuff. :icon_roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by sportdawg
Right...thanks for clarifying that.Quote:
Originally Posted by sportdawg
Regardless, how can 14% of adults in America be illiterate?
The Police Jury can not kill it from the "district" perspective without legal consequences - it would be a "district tax" but the tax has to be "placed" on the ballot via a vote of the Police Jury per state bonding commission regs/rules - just like a fire district tax, levee district, hospital district, sewer district etal since allow of those "districs/taxing authorities" are legal component units of the Parish i.e. Police Jury whose boards are appointed by the Police Jury in nearly all casesQuote:
Originally Posted by touchdown123
I guess while socialist liberal Dems push for 90% taxes and to change our voting process per no electoral college and only going by popular vote count; conservatives should rally around that only those allowed to vote are American citizens whom speak and write english and are tax paying property owners. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by HogDawg
I visited with the OPPJ l,egal counsel this week at our civic club’s meeting. Two points:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden
—The nlulm “auxiliary enterprises” body (all unis have such a 3rd party to come up with projects, like dorm Apt. Buildings, get tax bonds to finance their construction) can be turned down by the Police Jury.
—nlulm is pushing for a spring vote where turnout would be limited and the only ones voting would be usual core of five supporters and students who would be threatened with higher tuition if they don’t support and boost the turnout to pass the vote. If the referendum were delayed voting until the fall there would be a higher level of opposition voting against the tax due to more elections attracting voters.
Not gonna lie, pretty clever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgpix
The spring vote appears to be a good move, for the reason stated. But, it can also motivate folks to get out to vote against it. If there's opposition to this tax...and there should be!...then it shouldn't take much of an organization to motivate those in opposition. And then for the same reason given for the "yays" to have been successful the "nays" should be.
I vote NO on every tax that appears on a ballot. And, we, my bunch, haven't missed a single election in more than, well, forever!
They better do a registration drive. Young people are not registering to vote. I'd think a 20% turnout for ages 18 to 24 to be outstanding. In Ouachita Parish that might equal 2000 votes total. Not all of those will vote yes. Nothing to see here.
So it's NOT a separate taxing district calling for the tax?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgpix
No
New Article on the issue. Also, a Facebook group created stand against ULM's proposal.
ULM asks Ouachita Parish Police Jury to put a property tax on the ballot
myarklamiss.com | Jan 15, 2019
https://www.myarklamiss.com/news/loc...lot/1704553244
OPPJ Accountability Partners | Facebook Group
https://www.facebook.com/OPPJAccountability/
With the public climate against any new property taxes and it being a re-election year for Police Jurors - I'm interested to see how this plays outQuote:
Originally Posted by qng001
To me a motel/hotel sales tax on tourism would of been the way to go
The student fee was the way to go, and ULM students emphatically said NO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden
That's the 4th or 5th student fee ULM students have rejected in the last several years.
Why should the community be forced into footing the bill for projects ULM's own students and alumni don't want?
Bruno's latest BS is that it is not for athletics but to promote ULM as a research university. MeTooU
KTVE Facebook post, like every comment is a big fat "No" for the proposal.
https://www.facebook.com/20343644635...3489170352311/
From the Ouachita Citizen:
http://www.hannapub.com/ouachitaciti...2a57f9fa1.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Italian
Reading through many social media posts, mostly all are against it. Even folks who are ULM supporters are against this tax.Quote:
“Speaking from my experience and conversations with other police jurors, we’ve had an overwhelming amount of negative feedback to this proposed millage,” Smiley said. “There’s been very little positive response given to the police jurors.”
My sides hurt from laughingQuote:
Hope Young, public relations director at ULLM, said the university believed the VCOM medical school would draw more students, though specific enrollment estimates would remain unknown until the medical school opened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden
Don’t bet against me
That said not all actions are set in motion to collect a win.....if you catch my drift.
Things operate much differently this side of the Ouachita....
That attorney has never been at a bond closing then. They are not tax bonds - they are lower floater bonds - purchased by institutions with an underlying letter of credit as collateral.
The police jury has no ovesight in this arena. The ULS system grants approval then the state bond commission. Tax payers are not on the hook for lower floater debt.
ULM probably preflighted more lower floater bond debt, were turned down....then came up with the tax plan. It is a brilliant plan but they lied when they said the “medical school” would cost nothing. And it is a cover for the repeated failed student fees for athletics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgpix
Update: Bruno tells faculty that a 'no' from OPPJ is 'denying you your right to vote'
Police Jury looks opposed to this tax:
https://www.thenewsstar.com/story/ne...al/2608577002/
The OPPJ voted, and they voted not to waste tax payer money holding an election that is doomed to fail, and that represents a departure from what the PJ manages, and a usurping of the intent of property taxes. Otherwise anyone, any entity can demand an issue be put on the ballot "just because" it would benefit a select few.
I know a fellow who is well-connected in the arena of higher ed in the state. He's a former VP at several state universities, in semi-retirement right now, but still active in the politics of higher ed in Louisiana, and is often consulted by state legislators for guidance on issues. He and I will be in a meeting this week. And! he has sung the praises of Bruno saying he is a no-nonsense manager. I don't know all that much about Bruno....I have been privy to some decisions he has made due to my associations, and I admit, in the past he's made some sensible decisions as prez of ulm...but, this???? I'll be interested in my friend's take on how Bruno is pushing this tax issue.
One more thing....you can bet every university prez is following this issue unfolding in Ouachita. If it passes there, then every prez will propose the same property tax in their school's home parish. And, as I already mentioned, why stop at just the parish where the university is physically located? Surely neighboring parishes benefit from the presence of the school. So, they should contribute to the cause too. Raise property taxes in every parish in the region.
Just taking this insanity to its logical conclusion.
They haven't voted yet. Updated article says Bruno declined to delay the vote, is pushing for a vote Tuesday, and emailed all employees pressing them to contact their police jury. Told them a no vote is denying ULM employees their right to vote. Wow. Total shakedown of the good people of Ouachita parish!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Italian
Several of our posters like FIM and DFM have told us over the years that nlulm was in a serious bind and that the public would never hear about until it was too late to fix it. This proposal not only saves them on the backs of Ouachita Parish property owners, but it kicks the can far enough down the road that the next couple of generations will be stuck fixing it.
it boils down to one key item - allocation to a limited group of universities. We need
Louisiana State University
Louisiana Tech University
University of New Orleans
Univeristy of Louisiana - Lafayette
The remaining universities would serve non traditional students as satellite campuses. LSU will need to get their heads around SE in the near future.
To see LSU, ULL and Tech bust their butts to have high improving academic standards and be pawns in the political system is so frustrating.
If I was a ULM booster, I would be pushing the same agenda.....because it is the last hand I have left to play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Would we all be opposed to a tax like this if Tech tried to pull this stunt?
We've never been this desperate. Think Lincoln Parish property taxes vs. Ouachita Parish. Then they preach to the PROPERTY OWNERS that ulm is vital to the economy of Ouachita Parish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
I can count the number of ulm employees I know on one hand.
Yes. As are quite a few ULM non-employee supporters I know. Outside of it being ULM, this is just terrible policy locally and state-wide for so many different reasons. Throw ULM in as the instigator and the fact that school leaders are personally publicly pushing it, it's peak ULM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
This is what's most disturbing about this story. As they've taken more and more heat about their plan, they've changed it and then acted as if nothing's happened. I mean, you can't make this stuff up. :laugh:
https://www.thenewsstar.com/story/ne...al/2608577002/
The plan keeps changing
ULM will celebrate its centennial in 2031, hence Vision 2031 is meant to launch the institution into the next 100 years of its future by enriching facilities, expand health science programs and funding scholarships. Advocates started presenting Vision 2031 to business and community groups late last year. Bruno and a contingent of supporters came to the OPPJ meeting Jan. 17 to support the introduction of the issue, but no one spoke about the proposal at the time.
At that meeting, ULM representatives provided the media with a detailed written copy of the plan. While presentations since then have a seven-point initiative, there have been revisions to the seven points. Notably, the mid-December information included updates to athletic facilities including Malone Stadium, Warhawk Field, the ULM Softball Complex and the the youth baseball park. That version of the plan mentioned updates to campus faculties as part of making ULM a medical and health sciences hub, but it did not specifically cite Caldwell and Sugar Halls. In a Jan. 3 presentation at the ULM library, the plan called for enhancements to "other academic and student facilities" but not the ball fields or Malone Stadium. Upgrades to Caldwell and Sugar Halls were part of expanding the university's health sciences appeal.October: ULM alumni center is testament to decades of devotion, friendship.
On Tuesday, Bruno presented a Vision 2031 to the media during a round-table discussion.He told our media partners at KTVE: "It doesn't go to the medical school. It doesn't go to the university's operation, it does not go to athletics. It is purely an investment in facilities to expand the programs and number of students we can operate as well as scholarships."
It nothing but an avalanche of lies now - the truth is coming out. Next we will learn the money is to service cash flow for existing bond debt. They are in a damn mess.
I hope the OPPJ files a formal complaint against Bruno with the ULS system.
Matter of fact, I am going to heavily persuade that Bruno be publically reprimanded for stunt filled with lies.
I think the police jury meet tonight?
Yes -Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
And this comes from a parish administrator
Property taxes have it's place if done correctly and for the right purpose, which parishes tend to fail at the vast majority of time in my book
I would have no problem with a sales tax proposition for university support on motel/hotel/entertainment districts since they benefit most from the captured audience that the university provides from students, visitors etal
Name me a school with worse alumni/community relations than ULM.
The JUCO asked the police jury to pull the property tax proposal from the agenda and will reintroduce it at the "next best opportunity" after they convince Ouachita voters that they were previously misinformed. :laugh:
http://media.graytvinc.com/documents/Letter+to+OPPJ.pdf
They are gonna try to sell this crap again. They wanted to invest $32 Million on Fant Ewing! Geez.
I had hoped the answer was yes - I don't want to be hypocritical about stuff like this. Easy to put my foot in my mouth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden
Maybe Me-Too can now go the Capital Outlay route . . . just like Tech did on this last go-round of, what, $100 million in projects.
This stunt hurt their relationship with the community.
Is there a Level 0?Quote:
Originally Posted by qng001
Based on my information - the university was TOLD it would be in their best interest to pull the proposal because the votes were not there....Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg06
Worst possible timing for the university with police jurors/parish commissioners up for re-election this fall
If I'm advising the school, I go create a Ouachita economic empowerment zone that includes the parish and maybe a few neighboring parishes that include a vast array of advancement projects that's more transparent
Personally - I think no NEW millages or sales tax propositions should be allowed on the spring election cycle -
That cycle should ONLY serve for two purposes - RENEWALS and/or the filing of vacant elected offices due to untimely deaths or resignations
That's it - nothing else should be allowed
And I'm speaking as a Parish Administrator
Amen. It is chickenshit to put tax measures on the Spring ballot just because they know turnout will be lower.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden
I noticed ULM took down their Vision 2031 facebook page.
They need to make it to 2021 before worrying about 2031.Quote:
Originally Posted by qng001