Winn Police Jury, Taxes and Inflation

Winn Police Jury, Taxes and Inflation

Posted in the Winnfield Forum

why

Pineville, LA

#2 Jan 6, 2013
Why have a SPECIAL election with all the added expense?
No Taxes

Sarepta, LA

#3 Jan 8, 2013
Shame on the paper editor Crain for his lack of journalism on this very important matter. No interview of the president of the police jury or any jury member? Is this a NEW TAX????? Seems to be a new tax and this seems newsworthy in these economic times.

I am sure that the good ole jurors will claim that this is a tax we are already paying but I don't buy it. I've heard that our Sheriff is supporting this so that he can get his new jail built. He said in the paper that he wanted to build a new jail and I'm sure that the courthouse portion of this tax will go to this construction.

SHAME ON YOU POLICE JURY AND SHAME ON YOU SHERIFF JORDAN!!!!!

VOTE NO TO NEW TAXES!!!!!!! LOCAL BUSINESSES AND CITIZENS CANNOT AFFORD SUCH AN INCREASE!!!!! IT ISN'T A WONDER THAT PEOPLE SHOP ONLINE TO AVOID THESE HIGH SALES TAXES!!!!!
concerned with inflation

Pineville, LA

#4 Jan 8, 2013
No Taxes wrote:
Shame on the paper editor Crain for his lack of journalism on this very important matter. No interview of the president of the police jury or any jury member? Is this a NEW TAX????? Seems to be a new tax and this seems newsworthy in these economic times.
I am sure that the good ole jurors will claim that this is a tax we are already paying but I don't buy it. I've heard that our Sheriff is supporting this so that he can get his new jail built. He said in the paper that he wanted to build a new jail and I'm sure that the courthouse portion of this tax will go to this construction.
SHAME ON YOU POLICE JURY AND SHAME ON YOU SHERIFF JORDAN!!!!!
VOTE NO TO NEW TAXES!!!!!!! LOCAL BUSINESSES AND CITIZENS CANNOT AFFORD SUCH AN INCREASE!!!!! IT ISN'T A WONDER THAT PEOPLE SHOP ONLINE TO AVOID THESE HIGH SALES TAXES!!!!!
It is a new tax in that it is replacing an expiring tax. Editor Crain made it clear that the new tax is to be in lieu of the existing 1% sales tax previously authorized to be levied through February 28, 2014.( then the present tax expires) A vote is to be taken on a new tax to replace the expiring tax. It is the same percentage and for the same term of existence as the old tax, but with inflation we will pay more for the reason everything has increased in price and what did cost us, as an example,$100.00(with tax of $1.00) before the present estimated inflation now cost us $109.12 for the same goods with the resulting 1% tax being $1.09. That's where the increase comes in and I don't think taxpayers should bear all the burden of inflation. The Jury should reduce the tax to a fraction of 1% and give taxpayers a break and government share the inflation burden.
NO NEW TAXES

Walker, LA

#5 Jan 9, 2013
Well I don't think Crain explained anything well enough for your average citizens to understand about this NEW TAX. Why do we need this now? Why not wait till the fall of this year just before the other tax will expire?
concerned with inflation

Pineville, LA

#6 Jan 9, 2013
NO NEW TAXES wrote:
Well I don't think Crain explained anything well enough for your average citizens to understand about this NEW TAX. Why do we need this now? Why not wait till the fall of this year just before the other tax will expire?
The new tax will not be collected until the old tax is dead/expired, no longer collectable. Seeing the old tax will not expire until 2014
(according to Crain) there was no need to call a SPECIAL ELECTION which cost all us taxpayers extra dollars. Government entities always seek tax elections when the fewest people go to the polls, a time when no other important issues are on the ballot. Why? Then because of voter apathy, primarily only those government workers and others and their families who stand to gain from the tax go vote. It's very important to those who reap the most personal benefits to go vote. Our elected bodies, are not good stewards of tax dollars when they spend unnecessarily the money they take from us to put one item on an elections that cost thousands of dollars when it could be on a ballot with other issues.
It will be OUR ELECTED ONES that will tell us , as they always do,
" this tax won't cost you any more than you pay now, so vote ,"yes". As has been pointed out that is a LIE! Oh, sure the rate is the same in the new as the old, the time frame is the same in the new as the old, BUT all who are managing a household budget know it takes more dollars each week , as our dollar becomes less valuable, to replenish our daily needs. We are not buying extra, but are spending more money for the same things. When it takes more money, we pay more taxes.
The Federal Reserve, which is not "Federal" and certainly not a "Reserve" continues to weaken our economy by printing more dollars, and each time making our dollar less valuable which takes more dollars to buy the same thing. The individual taxpayer shoulders ALL the burden of inflation, while our elected ones never represent us in lowering the percentage of tax they seek to collect, therefore they are taking more and more of our money as we struggle to replenish our basic needs. I suggest all voters get out an vote "NO' on this new tax and urge the Police Jury to lower the percentage, so they won't be profiting from inflation that is plaguing all of us. We know government must be funded through taxes, but we also know they waste tax dollars to call a SPECIAL ELECTION. Let them learn to use taxes wisely and consider the taxpayer they are supposed to represent.
Jack

Sarepta, LA

#7 Jan 9, 2013
Seems like a whole lot of smoke and mirrors to me! Reduce spending and then you won't need new taxes!
Jack

Sarepta, LA

#8 Jan 9, 2013
Is the existing 1% tax split the same way? The article really doesn't expound upon any of the questions a reasonable citizen might be want to know.

I really think Mr. Crain doesn't have the experience needed to be the editor of a paper. Maybe he will follow up with some further explanation about this tax. I certainly hope so.
disappointed

United States

#9 Jan 10, 2013
Jack wrote:
Is the existing 1% tax split the same way? The article really doesn't expound upon any of the questions a reasonable citizen might be want to know.
I really think Mr. Crain doesn't have the experience needed to be the editor of a paper. Maybe he will follow up with some further explanation about this tax. I certainly hope so.
Never going to happen, he is in with the powers that be and he will not "report" like a true reporter would do.
smar tass

Powhatan, LA

#10 Jan 10, 2013
even tho MOST people complain about taxes and swear they will never vote for another one to pass, i think this tax will pass with ease. I think we are already taxed enough, but those are my thoughts on this subject.
Bravo

Pollock, LA

#11 Jan 10, 2013
Jack wrote:
Seems like a whole lot of smoke and mirrors to me! Reduce spending and then you won't need new taxes!
Bravo, Jack! You have hit the nail on the head. Instead of constantly asking the money strapped citizenry for more, more, more, government needs to cut spending, cut expensive "benefits" for government employees...get in line with the working people of the parish. Quit spending EXTRA money for a SPECIAL ELECTION . Winn budgets roughly $10,000 for elections, if I remember correctly. This expense could be cut and the same purposes be achieved with less cost by having a tax proposition on the ballot with other things. I'm tired of ever increasing taxes when there is waste all around.
Bravo

Pollock, LA

#12 Jan 10, 2013
Jack wrote:
Is the existing 1% tax split the same way? The article really doesn't expound upon any of the questions a reasonable citizen might be want to know.
I really think Mr. Crain doesn't have the experience needed to be the editor of a paper. Maybe he will follow up with some further explanation about this tax. I certainly hope so.
Winn Paper , January 2, 2013, Page 2A Col 4,5
The tax proposal is printed in Crain's article that the tax will be for a period of 10 years at tax rate of 1%, commencing July 1, 2013.
It is to tax upon the sale at retail, the use, the lease or rental, the consumption, and the storage for use or consumption, of tangible property and on sales of services in the parish for an estimated $1,774,000 per year. Proceeds to be allocated as follows: 60% for the purposes of constructing, acquiring, maintaining, improving, operating and /or providing for solid waste collection and disposal for the Parish, including facilities and equipment for the purpose of maintaining and supporting the Winn Courthouse, and 40% to maintaining public roads.
Note: The article states collection will begin July 1, 2013, but at the end of the article it states this tax is to be in lieu of existing tax authorized to be levied through February 28, 2014. I have questions about this.??? I don't think the two taxes can be collected simultaneously.
Resident

Dry Prong, LA

#13 Jan 10, 2013
This tax will get beat!! It is not a renewal. The Police Jury is showing their greed and going back on the deal with The City of Winnfield. If this passes, folks in town will have to pay for garbage service and many employees will be laid off.
The partnership between the city and parish has woked well for the past 10 years, but ole Jack is showing his true colors. SHAMEFUL
Bravo

Pollock, LA

#14 Jan 10, 2013
Actually the Louisiana Constitution nor our laws have any provision for a "renewal" tax, but politicians have long tried to brainwash us by telling us "the tax is just a renewal and you won't be paying anymore than you do now". That is their LIE!
When a tax is voted on by the people, it is always for a specific time period and a set rate. When its life time is over that tax is DEAD, OVER WITH, NO LIFE LEFT IN IT and no taxes can ever be collected by it again.
It cannot be "renewed". A new tax to replace it ( if it is to be replaced)has to be voted on by the people.
The NEW TAX PROPOSAL the jury is to have for the people's vote has a specific life time an a set rate. We can veto it or pass it.

All consumers are acutely aware of ever increasing inflation. The goods we paid $100 for 10 years ago now cost at least 109.12, using gasoline prices as an inflationary guideline. Therefore for the SAME goods and services we paid $1.00 in taxes ten years ago, we now pay $1.09.

Until our jury can cut out waste like paying for a SPECIAL ELECTION for one issue-a new tax, and reduce their benefits, and take some responsibility for the burden of inflation, by reducing the asking percentage rate, I believe this tax should be vetoed as too costly for Winn residents. They should consider a 2/3 of 1% or some other fractional amount to keep our tax burden about the same as it is now. If we veto this they will be back with another proposal and until their asking rate is lowered, lets veto it.
The Jury, as a part time job, was never meant to have tax paid retirement and health care benefits paid for by their fellow taxpayers. The jurors need to have some compassion for those who honored them with the job of serving the parish and its people and bear the burden with us for the inflation that is getting worse everyday.
Garbge Man

Dry Prong, LA

#15 Jan 11, 2013
I heard the City Council has voted to fight this tax because the Jury is screwing the citizens in the City. People in town will be mobilized to defeat this tax.
Wake up Jury Members. Most of you represent the City too. TAKE IT OFF THE BALLOT.
Wake up voters Do you want to pay for your garbage again. Just send your bill to your Jury Member.
MaCnulty

United States

#17 Jan 11, 2013
Bravo wrote:
Actually the Louisiana Constitution nor our laws have any provision for a "renewal" tax, but politicians have long tried to brainwash us by telling us "the tax is just a renewal and you won't be paying anymore than you do now". That is their LIE!
When a tax is voted on by the people, it is always for a specific time period and a set rate. When its life time is over that tax is DEAD, OVER WITH, NO LIFE LEFT IN IT and no taxes can ever be collected by it again.
It cannot be "renewed". A new tax to replace it ( if it is to be replaced)has to be voted on by the people.
The NEW TAX PROPOSAL the jury is to have for the people's vote has a specific life time an a set rate. We can veto it or pass it.
All consumers are acutely aware of ever increasing inflation. The goods we paid $100 for 10 years ago now cost at least 109.12, using gasoline prices as an inflationary guideline. Therefore for the SAME goods and services we paid $1.00 in taxes ten years ago, we now pay $1.09.
Until our jury can cut out waste like paying for a SPECIAL ELECTION for one issue-a new tax, and reduce their benefits, and take some responsibility for the burden of inflation, by reducing the asking percentage rate, I believe this tax should be vetoed as too costly for Winn residents. They should consider a 2/3 of 1% or some other fractional amount to keep our tax burden about the same as it is now. If we veto this they will be back with another proposal and until their asking rate is lowered, lets veto it.
The Jury, as a part time job, was never meant to have tax paid retirement and health care benefits paid for by their fellow taxpayers. The jurors need to have some compassion for those who honored them with the job of serving the parish and its people and bear the burden with us for the inflation that is getting worse everyday.
Nicely done.
audit

Pollock, LA

#18 Jan 11, 2013
Bravo wrote:
<quoted text>
Winn Paper , January 2, 2013, Page 2A Col 4,5
The tax proposal is printed in Crain's article that the tax will be for a period of 10 years at tax rate of 1%, commencing July 1, 2013.
It is to tax upon the sale at retail, the use, the lease or rental, the consumption, and the storage for use or consumption, of tangible property and on sales of services in the parish for an estimated $1,774,000 per year.
Notice the published Police Jury's "estimated" figure of $1,774,000 per year they will take from the people's pockets with the 1% sales and use tax. They LIE to us, again! Their own audit for the years 2009-2011 reveal tax collections are rising every year and the trend is not likely to stop because inflation is not slowing down. Their audit of 2011 revealed the 1% sales and use tax garnered $1,842,000 for their coffers, up from the two previous years and all the while our population is decreasing.
There is a difference of $68,000 less in what they estimate and the actual figure of 2011. This is now 2013 and inflation has risen more in those 3 years since 2011. Are they afraid to admit to a more accurate figure for fear it won't pass? We have cold, hard figures that show their estimate falls short; they will be getting far more from us each year for the next ten years as long as inflation keeps exploding. The people are getting left with less and less as taxes continue to go up.
The jury has to be funded, but a lot of waste needs to be cut before we give them all the money they ask for. IF they were prudent, they would not have a SPECIAL ELECTION FOR ONE ISSUE ON A BALLOT AND THAT A NEW TAX!! They should see to the people's needs and insure government shares in the burden of ever increasing costs. Reduce the size of government -personal benefits, special elections, and other areas that could be operated leaner and ask for a fraction of 1% tax for the next ten years.
bravo

Pollock, LA

#19 Jan 11, 2013
MaCnulty wrote:
<quoted text>
Nicely done.
Thank you.
not good stewards

Pineville, LA

#20 Apr 6, 2013
why wrote:
Why have a SPECIAL election with all the added expense?
The Jury we elected just show they are not good stewards of our tax dollars. McFarland said an election cost $30,000 ( in a past election)
other parish

Pineville, LA

#21 May 6, 2013
Jackson Parish citizens are fed up with their Police Jury voting themselves health coverage at taxpayer expense. So they became involved , attended jury meeting and expressed that part time elected officials should not have their insurance paid for by taxpayers who have to pay their own insurance. The Jury got the message ( but still tabled the proposal--it's not over) but Mr. Treadway pointed out that – Winn,( and some others) made insurance available to jurors that was at least partially funded by the taxpayers. Lincoln Parish jurors can buy insurance on their own at the group rate, said Treadway. Shame on Winn Parish Jurors for bilking the hard working taxpayers of this parish for their personal gain. Remember this next election!!They are intent on serving themselves, not the ones who elected them. Read more about this at LINCOLN PARISH NEWS ONLINE.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Winnfield Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
William Admire 6 hr dooky ray 3
it's very sad !! 11 hr a town going down... 2
Mother Jones Article on Winn Correctional Center 11 hr intheknow 5
Add a word drop a word (Feb '10) Fri PeanutButtercup 2,113
vote librtarian Thu Liberty 4
Enjoy Yourself Jun 23 Walker 25
8,000 post wins. (Feb '13) Jun 23 Hatti_Hollerand 3,488
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Winnfield Mortgages