Bond proposal about perspective – Editorial

East Baton Rouge Parish voters who insist it’s a no-brainer that they are for or against Mayor Kip Holden’s $901 million bond proposal aren’t looking at the whole picture, and as such, risk more than missing the whole point of this historic election.

They risk handing the future to forces that are more vocal or simply more willing to ponder the consequences.

The Nov. 14th vote will be historic for the Baton Rouge community. While it proposes to address in one swoop four decades of neglected infrastructure and basic services—as well as create a signature riverfront tourist attraction—it’s also a vote that will be taken at a time when voters are weary from recession fatigue and bailout disgust.

On one level, the mayor’s plan pits younger voters who crave progress at any cost against voters who don’t have the same stomach for risk, and who see real peril in raising taxes now.

The proposal has stirred up emotions between voters in and around Central, Baker and Zachary communities—who’ve shown a propensity of late to set their own course and who’ve generally opposed new taxes—and residents to the south who live or work nearer downtown, which is to be home to the new Alive attraction.

Some people say they oppose the plan out of hand because it will mean higher taxes. This includes conservative-minded people whose traditional Republican principles say “cut taxes and shrink government.”

Still others see the potential for historic progress for the whole community. Some see the Alive riverfront attraction as the proposal’s crown jewel, the long-overdue correction of this river city’s blatant disregard for the magnificent Mississippi River on which it was built.

Opponents say downtown already has too much public support, that a tourist attraction there should be developed by the private sector rather than financed with taxes.

On yet another level, some say they oppose the proposal on tactical grounds. They say the Alive component should have been a separate proposal on the ballot to allow voters the chance to articulate precisely what they support and oppose. In the end the mayor insisted on presenting the package as one plan, rolling the dice that the measure stands a better chance if presented as one.

There are probably a dozen other ways to carve up the proposal and the parish.

Which is precisely our point. The vote we take Nov. 14th is as complex and challenging as any in recent memory for this community. It’s a referendum not only on where we stand as a community, but where we go from here.

It will require that we ask and answer some difficult questions, not simply “what will it cost me?” or “what will I get out of it?”

Rather than merely comforting ourselves with some random bit of rhetoric we choose to cling to, we should consider all the facets of this thing, weigh various pros and cons and think it through properly. We all have about 45 days to do just that.