BusinessReport.com

The Stelly Man

To the publisher:

While I enjoy your publications and usually your column, I must take exception with your comments in the current issue regarding the Stelly Plan (Business Report, May 22). Where in the world did you get your facts, Rolfe? Did you do any research at all?

I’m looking at reports from the Legislative Fiscal Office dated Nov. 9, 2004 and April 7, 2005 that indicate a net loss in tax revenue of $19.9 million in fiscal year 2003 and a net gain of $12.5 million in 2004 due to the Stelly Plan. Where’s the “millions more the first year of the Stelly Plan” that you allude to? A call to Dr. Jim Richardson at LSU could confirm this.

With regard to other steps to reform our tax policy, are you aware that the tax on business debt, and the sales tax on business equipment are currently being phased out? Bills to do these much-needed reforms were tried time and time again to no avail before the Stelly Plan eliminated state sales taxes on food and utilities. Once the unfair taxes on the necessities of life were eliminated, the business tax reforms followed soon after. I’m sure a call to Dan Juneau at LABI could confirm this.

As a sidelight, Rolfe, are you aware that the passage of the Stelly Plan was a major factor in Louisiana being the only state in the nation to receive a bond rating upgrade in March 2004? To put this accomplishment in perspective, at the same time, 22 others states suffered a bond rating downgrade.

Immediately upon receiving the upgrade, state Treasurer John Kennedy refinanced over $600 million in outstanding state bonds at a savings to the Louisiana taxpayer of over $20 million. A call to Kennedy could confirm this.

Add to that the fact that governors no longer need to spend $35 to $50 million on pork-barrel projects to get the two-thirds vote in the Legislature to renew the 16-year “temporary sales taxes” every two years. A call to Commissioner Jerry Luke LeBlanc could confirm this.

All the above noted facts are as I proposed to you in your office five years ago. Bottom line is: Rolfe, I told YOU so.

Vic Stelly

Lake Charles

Pinnacle afterthoughts

To the editor:

I read about Pinnacle not being interested in the downtown area (Daily Report, June 13). Here are some interesting details that Pinnacle lobbyist Billy Rimes conveniently forgets:

Pinnacle’s original plans placed the proposed casino on 35 acres at the end of Bluebonnet at Nicholson. They purchased this property and submitted several plans to the Gaming Control Board in November 2006; they are verbally denied.

Five months later, mid-April, Pinnacle announced their BIG plans to move down the road a bit and set their eyes on the 500-plus acres of the original Longwood Plantation. It wasn’t until then that Pinnacle launched their campaign for a casino and resort. This is when we got word of their intentions for a golf course, gated community, expanded retail shopping, larger-than-life venues for entertainment and even more restaurants. Their motivation for prompting this maneuver was to be located on a less controversial site due to surrounding residential areas. The original opposition from residents has never been limited to only the residents along Bluebonnet, Nicholson, Gardere and River Road. Some may not believe this, but there are those who are just completely against having a third casino altogether for whatever reason they choose.

Has anyone given real thought to the idea of resort? I don’t see Baton Rouge with any pristine sandy beaches. Nor do I think the local businesses or tourist attractions will benefit. The resorts I have stayed in do provide retail shopping, golfing, fine dining and many choices for entertainment. But then again, those resorts were all different—secluded islands with the purpose of providing everything to eliminate the need or desire to leave the compound.

I did attend the DDD meeting (June 13), and I’m thrilled the board approved the concept to reach out to Pinnacle to possibly consider the downtown area. Perhaps the DDD and other merchants wanted to do something that could benefit Baton Rouge by placing a business idea in a suitable, less controversial area. If Pinnacle claims to attract the so-called record-breaking numbers, then why shouldn’t they be downtown within the grasp of the proposed entertainment district? The mayor, Metro Council, DDD and other individuals have been working extremely hard to revitalize the roots of the city by making the necessary changes to attract outside businesses and tourists.

And to comment on Billy Rimes’ statement, “I don’t think going downtown was something that was ever envisioned,” maybe he needs to be reminded that Pinnacle did try to buy the Belle of Baton Rouge’s license from Penn National Gaming and was DENIED. The license was sold to Columbia Sussex. I could be wrong, but the Belle is considered to be downtown. Here’s a thought: Maybe the real motivation for Pinnacle IS to put one or more of the existing boats out of business just for spite and reap their profits primarily collected from the Baton Rouge residents.

Kelly Stutes

Baton Rouge

The dark side of NIMBY

Lord Ball,

Gee, where to begin? First, you are wrong in most of your assertions. There is factual evidence—traffic studies—that prove the traffic on Glenmore is a problem. What makes you the expert about traffic on my street (“Traffic is not, I repeat not a problem on Glenmore.”)? You never actually lived on Glenmore, but I do, and I invite you to come have an adult beverage on my front porch to watch the show! Many former non-believers have done the same.

There is a new hope, though. What you don’t know is that our neighborhood is coming together with a common purpose. Most neighbors have now acknowledged our traffic problem. Today, after another meeting with the block captains, many of those angry NIMBY folks are reconsidering their opposition to the half-closure because, unlike you, they have attempted to inform themselves. They have taken the time to learn the facts, have examined the DPW traffic study and have talked with their neighbors who actually live on Glenmore. These same neighbors watch out for each other’s children and pets and pick up newspapers when someone’s out of town. We all value the safety of our families above the loss of a convenient cut-through.

Did you know that on my street, there are 4,200 cars per day on average? Did you know that 70% of them are speeding? You wouldn’t know because you stand in judgment without seeking facts. Listen to yourself saying that only a few people use it as a cut-through. You are wrong. You demonize a good person, Ingolf Partenheimer, without knowing anything about him. Sounds like maybe YOU are the Dark Lord, trying to influence people towards your selfish ways. Shame on you.

And shame on those neighbors who continue to fight against a safer neighborhood for us all.

Brian Kronenberger

Baton Rouge

To the editor:

What a great article! It seems you’ve “been there, done that.” I especially love your insightful ending. “If these arguments don’t persuade the city to change its policy, then let’s go with the standard NIMBY arguments: It will create a flooding problem and negatively impact property values.” As one who is in the business of unfortunately seeing the true NIMBYs in action very frequently, I truly do appreciate the sarcasm in this statement.

NIMBYs are truly a detriment to the type of growth that could make our city among the best in the nation.

Murray L. McCullough, P.E.

Baton Rouge

To the editor:

Let me tell you, in the three years I have lived in this city I have heard some idiotic ideas when it comes to traffic, but this one takes the cake. I have long said a huge chunk of our traffic problem was the fact we lacked a sufficient grid. What exactly are these people, who get paid with our tax dollars, thinking? Instead of adding more streets to somewhat create us a grid in this madness, they intend to cut off what “grid” we already have. WAY TO GO! You have really solved our traffic problems with this one; I applaud you. Maybe we should all get together and start protesting the city/parish government, demanding resignations across the board starting with our useless Metro Council, who seem to not be able to find their own heads out of their “you know whats.” You did the right thing by joining this NIMBY. I would be more than happy to join that same group.

Clint M. Grow

Baton Rouge

To the editor:

I live in the area. I saw the proposed closure. My first thought was that it would create a hazard for the families with children on Woodside, unnecessary traffic on Glenmore for those turning around, and careening cars as they tried to negotiate their way through the surrounding neighborhoods once they were stopped at this closure and had to find their out again, and we all know Baton Rouge drivers try to find the fastest route available.

Charlotte Wilson

Baton Rouge

To the editor:

Once again, the “affluent whites” are looking for ways to avoid contact with “anyone that’s not,” whether it’s through blockading their streets, gating their subdivisions or sending their children to private schools. We now live in a city with horrible street gridlocks, a maze of Angola-like subdivisions and schools that only the Paris Hiltons in town can afford.

Stephanie Triche

Baton Rouge

The eye of the beholder

To the publisher:

Thanks for running the entire LSU poll on perceptions of Louisiana outside of our state. The findings are quite interesting because they suggest our biggest image problem is not really corruption (most people think their state is corrupt as well, and even more think the feds are totally corrupt) but the failure on all of our parts to identify to the country and the world what we do down here when it comes to products. The best we can do is spices and hot sauce! I was amazed.

It appears to me that we have such self-esteem problems as a state that we focus on all the wrong things when it comes to the outside world. While honest, good government is morally a necessity, it is by no means the catalyst for improving Louisiana’s fortunes. I am very surprized (sic) by this finding.

Roy Fletcher

Baton Rouge