Talks resurface on Terrebonne levee tax

Tri-Parish Times

Nearly a month later, debate over the proposed on-cent sales tax that voters opposed in September is still a fervent issue in Terrebonne Parish.

Debate sparked by public address continued for close to an hour during Wednesday’s regular Terrebonne Parish Council meeting regarding the primary “no” vote and the situation the parish’s hurricane protection is now in.

The conclusion: council members may return to the drawing board to rehash the sales tax. This time around, the council would take a serious look into adding a sunset clause.

“I do believe strongly that this issue is so very important that we try to come up with another proposal that would incorporate some of the ideas that have been discussed tonight and resubmit it to the people,” said District 6 Councilman Harold Lapeyre.

Hurricane protection is a continuing need throughout the parish, especially in the five fingers of the southern region, the areas where wetland loss and flooding potential remain a great risk. Storms pushing southern tides during the weekend of Oct. 15 flooded parish roads and several homes further proving the vulnerability of low-lying areas.

“Land in the southern parish won’t be there 25 or 30 years from now,” said District 7 Councilman Clayton Voison, heatedly, about the need for levees and lock at the Houma Navigational Canal. “Go down to Grand Isle and look to your right and you will see cows grazing on land, land that is there because of levees that were built. And I promise you in two weeks people in Lafourche Parish will pass for another penny’s worth of protection.”

Only 21 percent of Terrebonne’s registered voters cast a ballot; the tax measure failed by 208 votes.

“If we were to get another hurricane in 2007 or 2008 before we can get some protection put up I think this parish is in grave danger,” Voison said. “It is the wish of this council member and the majority of this parish to save their lives and property.”

Although levee protection is a continuing concern for residents, the tax proved to be an unacceptable avenue of funding.

“I think it is incumbent upon us to come up with an alternative. I don’t think that this (tax proposal) should die at all. I think we should take what we have learned, go back, and come up with something and give it back to the people because that’s who is affected and that’s who is speaking to us,” said District 4 Councilwoman Teri Chatagnier Cavalier.

Cavalier admitted that she voted “no” to the tax. Based on feedback from her contingency and family members, Cavalier thought the additional one-cent would become too burdensome for many residents.

“No, I don’t think that was the best we could do. But at the time, that is what we were offering to the people and if the people would have all voted ‘yes’, I’d sign right along with everybody else and pay my one-cent sales tax. But they didn’t vote yes.”

Council Chairman Peter Rhodes (District 8) said that he initially pushed for a sunset clause within the proposal, seemingly a primary concern of parish residents, and therefore, he is 100 percent for re-discussing the tax.

The council did not include a sunset date to the tax initially because of the price of legal work included; now members are thinking it may have been worth it.

Cavalier also suggested that the council consider a property tax/sales tax combination, providing some relief to low-income families, something that fellow Councilman Alvin Tillman (District 1) expressed before the polls opened.

Although the council made no formal motion to move on the issue, a majority voiced agreement that the issue is by no means dead.

“It is ultimately up to the people and their vote. If we can generate enough confidence in the people and let them know that we are concerned, that we want to make this thing work and do whatever it takes to make a proposal that’s acceptable, I think we ought to start right now,” said Lapeyre.