I am not sure how I feel about Security Districts in general and Improvement districts in particular, but at this point, I feel as if our state senator (for whom, incidentally, I voted) is not doing a very good job of representing the people who put her in office. I don't think that Senate Bill No. 568 is a good bill for the following reasons.
1. The name pensiontown is pejorative, and I think that it is wrong to force the name on the residents of the neighborhood. The only argument I have heard in favor of the name is that historically, most of the area was called "pensiontown" or "pidgeon town." I suppose by that logic, if it had historically been called "Deliverance Village," that, too should be forced upon the neighborhood, whether or not we have purty lips.
2. This additional tax will be levied for an initial term of NINE YEARS! Call me crazy, but wouldn't three years be enough time to determine if this legislation will have its intended purpose? Or is the extremely long life of this bill an attempt to disguise the fact that it is really wealth redistribution?
3. This legislation is not creating a "Security District, " it is creating an "Improvement District." While security is an element of the legislation, it is not the whole purpose of the legislation. In an improvement district the board may use the money on anything that will achieve "overall betterment" of the district. In other words, a good portion of the funds collected will likely be diverted away from security, which, at least for me, is a far more important issue than "beautification" or "betterment," whatever that means.
4. I cannot foresee that the people paying the bulk of this tax for the next nine years will reap the bulk of the benefit or even an equal amount of the benefit, particularly given that some people appear to be exempt from paying this tax at all.
Anyway, I welcome your comments, particularly if you can help me pin down the term "overall betterment."
3 comments:
I understand that the powers that be have drastically changed this legislation. I will get back to you this evening with more info.
PENSION TOWN'S ARTIFICIAL BOUNDARIES.
One knowledgeable Afro-American life long resident who is a history buff has received more than one recount of the days when there was a place called Pension Town. According to this info, it was located on the up river side of Leonidas, not the downriver side, and the Leonidas downriver neighbors were reluctant to enter Pension Town, for reasons I hope our historian can recount to the those interested at a future meeting. One interesting bit is that there was jass in PT and some wild living. Who knows, it may have been the Carrollton version of Storyville. What I'm suggesting is valid historical documentation
on the boundary of Pension Town before a Pension Town Neighborhood Association is created.
To create a neighborhood association, with the proposed boundaries, and call the area from the Parish line to Carrollton Ave. is historically incorrect. The intent of extending it to a wider area may be advantageous to future developers who wish to capitalize on a wider area, and use the tax money from another neighborhood to line their pockets. These initiatators are apparently using crime as an incentive to get agreement for some of the Improvement money to be used for Security Patrols, but how much is uncertain.
Another benefit to developers and realtors consists of the marketing of the Pension town hopefully improved properties in the light of a wider already improved Carrollton/Palmer Park area. In a couple of years from now, can't we just see ads in the Real Estate Section of the Picayune with a picture of Carrollton Ave and Palmer Park advertising properties in Pension Town. How misleading!
Proponents who wish to create a Pension Town Association would gain credibility if the proposed boundaries were accurate. Rather than inventing boundaries, give evidence of the historic boundaries, and avoid criticism for either their ignorance or their cunning lucrative development goals to market a large segment of Carrollton as Pension Town. If they cannot find historical documentation to support their claim or valid Pension Town boundaries, why not speak to those who have. Transplanted residents may not be aware of this, however, the truth is never hidden.
Using artificial boundaries would be like changeing the boundaries of Harlem in New York and incorporating into it the Upper East and West Side neighborhoods of New York City. Plus they could create an Improvement district using the tax dollars of the Upper East and West side, without offering adequate Security Patrols. Is anyone naive enough to believe this could happen?
Yay! I got my very first comment! And it was edifying. THANK YOU CARROLLTONIAN!
Post a Comment