Adjudicated Properties Discussed at Last ABS Meetinng

In attendance: Loren Demerath, Feico Kempff, Lee Jeter, Peter Moncrief, Garrett Johnson, Susan Keith, Cynthia Keith, David Aubry, Brian Salvatore, Malcolm Stadtlander, Bonnie Moore, April Dahm, Murphy Cheatham, Robert Trudeau, Maurice Loridans

As usual, the radio show “Time for ABetterShreveport” was broadcast at 5:00 on 91.3 preceding the 6:00 meeting. This week, the topic on the radio show was adjudicated properties featuring guests, Malcolm Stadtlander (who, as Property Management Administrator for the city is in charge of adjudicated properties), Bonnie Moore (who, as Director of Community Development for the city, has put adjudicated properties to use for communities), and Monty Walford (who, as a former city councilman, has experienced the difficulties with handling adjudicated properties, and mentioned on air how the city's ordinances need some teeth). The meeting was devoted to the same topic.

ADJUDICATED PROPERTIES

The discussion started with it being noted how fewer adjudicated properties tend to exist in wealthier communities; it is remarkable from DDA Director Liz Swaine's email how many (over 280) exist downtown.

Jeter, a director of the Fuller Center, asked about getting access to adjudicated properties. Getting the property transferred for the benefit of reconstruction is sometimes a problem. Stadtlander said the law has changed such that the city is no longer making donations to non-profits. BUT, if no one else is interested in it the non-profit can make a minimal offer because there is no minimum bid, and if the city government decides it is a surplus, it can be awarded. Moore said most of the non-profits get their properties from Community Development and that that city office incurs the cost and provides that service. Typically they've been the vehicle that has transferred the property. In the past there was no restriction on what it could be used for; but it now needs to be used for housing if its being donated. But the city is no longer donating properties because there's no minimum bid. You can buy it for a dollar if the property is declared a surplus by the council.

It was noted there is still in place the policy that property owners adjacent to adjudicated properties can buy the property for a dollar if the buyer has maintained it for one year. Dahm asked if there was any way to know if anyone else is bidding on the property. Stadtlander would know if the application goes through the city; whatever body is taking care of the sale would know. You find out from them what's being sold.

There is a $300 dollar application fee that's required to buy even a $1 property; and it's refundable if you don't win the property in the auction. Community Development (CD) does not have to pay that fee. CD does make an annual plan each year and a non-profit's project has to be part of that plan for CD to donate property to them. There's a huge problem with not being able to get clear titles. When the city seizes the property there are no fees and you can get clear title; but you pay appraised value and the city has to then pay it. (In subsequent email exchanges after the meeting, it was noted a solution to this solution problem should be pursued, such as asking council members if there is a particular solution for which they need to generate political support. This will be a item in the agenda of ABS' next meeting.)

When asked about appropriation of property, Stadtlander noted that the city does occasionally expropriate property but it has to pay market value for it.

Steph Pedro asked Bonnie and Malcolm how they feel about the Baton Rouge Redevelopment Authority. Moore noted that there's no equivalent in Shreveport; it would maintain the property, develop it, etc., and that it's a tremendous tool for redevelopment. What they're doing in Baton Rouge and New Orleans is phenomenal, she noted.

Pedro also asked about their opinion of the environmental court in those cities. Bonnie said those kinds of things are absolutely necessary. Asked if this city administration knows what they are, Bonnie said they do and just need to meet with the courts. Pedro asked Moore and Stadtlander if this group could support that kind of idea, and also if they like land trusts. Bonnie said its an educational process to teach people that they won't be run over by a trust or an environmental court.

Trudeau asked about Concordia Place and Moore brought out maps showing how they'd pieced together adjudicated and undeveloped land to create a development that added value to that area. 69 lots in Stoner Hill and they are adding to it. They're going to go down the block to do in-fill development as well. It was noted that a lot of old growth trees were cut down to make that development, lower the value of what it would otherwise be, and how we need a tree ordinance. (Later is was noted that the firm contracted to design it was not one that included urban planning.)

Moore noted that the city, though, is trying to get out of the development business; they'd like non-profits can take over; it's onerous for the city. Congress was trying to change the culture of housing authorities; you'll see a lot of mixed income and mixed used projects; also, now you can use Section 8 vouchers for home ownership. The people that buy the homes in Concordia Place are largely first time home owners or close to it—first home within the last three years. The low income threshold is $42,000 per year for a family of four.

The non-profits that CD might donate properties to could be lots of different things that allign with their interests.

Dahm asked about a property that is adjudicated on Texas Avenue, the corner lot of Cotton and Texas; how is that involved?

It was noted that community planning needs to be emphasized for that area. There's been a concern about not involving residents and stakeholders sufficiently. Moncreif mentioned there will be planner who will be working with the stakeholders. It will not be Free who is not a planner. Moncreif (also on the board of SRAC in addition to working with the Fuller Center) doesn't think all the details of the common have been put together so it'd be good to probably “hold your powder” until more comes together.

Salvatore imagined it was a delicate balancing act to make your properties affordable but also to provide taxable revenue. They're not going to go over $100,000 in assessed value. They do provide revenue, but not to the parish, if they're at $75K. The higher assessed values cause higher taxes. The crime rate goes down with fewer adjudicated properties; there is more reinvestment in those neighborhoods. The income levels of the target population for the Fuller Center is in the $20,000 per year range. They believe in mixed income developments.

Jeter said Fuller Center really doesn't compete against anyone with the large number of people who live at low income levels and the large amount of adjudicated property. It was asked if people have to be Christian to participate with the Fuller Center. Jeter explained that it began out of the Habitat for Humanity. Home owners and volunteers do not have to be Christian but it is a faith-based organization and a ministry. The principle of sweat equity is part of it and paying off the house's value. That makes for the personal investment in the property. Owners go to first time home buyers class. The only thing that restricts the numbers of homes they build is properties. They build based on need. It they have the property with clear title they can build. (But getting clear title, as noted, can be a huge problem. Again, how ABS can contribute to the solution will be an agenda item at the next meeting.)

Aubry announced that he talked to Shreveport Times about the bond issue. He serves on a volunteer basis on the board. The article on Sunday misrepresented reality. Burke Klienpeter received $500K not $1.5 million. The other firm received no money from the city. In 2010 they received $31K, not $500K. Brad Graff is part of a local firm that is working on the Youree-King's intersection. The city pays for the design and the state pays for the construction. Planning for meeting that intersection need goes back to 1988. The information the Times used was from the budget made in 2009, well before the actual spending that occurred later; they should have checked to see what was actually spent. Mike Strong had asked Liz to make the video, not the Mayor. And, as noted, she did it pro bono, only the photographer was paid, and Burke Klienpeter had no editorial control but were listed in the credits.

Aubry bemoaned the fact that two local people have been attacked with misinformation because someone wants to derail the bond issue. When Aubry complained to the Times they said he was the only one who had complained. ABS moved to send a letter to the Times.

Salvatore suggested we use one of Trudeau's and Keith's former Marget High students, now a professor of ethnomusicology, Tracy Laird, to research a corner on the west edge along Common to see what Ledbelly's history is there.

On April 11th Sabra Hicks and Misty Alexander of the YMCA and Camp Forbing will come to talk about how ABS might help with promoting the Fit Cities Challenge. (They'll also be guests on the radio show that day.)

The next meeting (Monday, April the 4th) will cover a range of issues, including:

• a report on the grants being written by Pedro and Majors for an area system of bike “lanes,” and for planning for how the Coates Bluff greenway would link to more neighborhoods.
  
• a meeting that took place this week between ABS and representatives of Centenary College about linking the Coates Bluff greenway and trail to surrounding neighborhoods. Demerath, Pedro, Caroline Majors and Kim Mitchell met with President David Rowe, Vice President of Finance Bill Ballard, and Environmental Studies professor Jeanne Hamming to discuss Centenary's role in taking the lead in convening the potential partners to move ahead on the project and develop a vision for it.
  
• a meeting Demerath had with Barbara Davis, a professor of accounting at Centenary to help file our non-profit status.
• how ABS can contribute to a solution to the problem getting clear title on adjudicated properties
  

Information on the Bond from the Mayor

The following is from Mayor Glover and was forwarded by Monty Walford, who noted there's some misinformation that's been circulating:

Here are the facts regarding the upcoming city bond proposal and tax implications: The three propositions will require some 14 mills to leverage against the support of the $175 million bond. Where some are off base is failing to recognize the need for no millage (tax) increase in that the current city general obligation bond debt of $143 million is the lowest since 1992 and has provided the ability to add the current $175 million package without an increase. How?

- The current millage rate for bonds (debt services) is 26.56 (lowest since 1990), which is part of the overall city 44.54 ad valorem millage (lowest since 1989) and is projected to generate $37 million from current property tax payments in 2011.

- Of that $37 million, the city will only require $22 million of that amount to pay on the existing $143 million bond debt note. That is a use of only about 14 of the current 26.56 mills. Leaving some 12 mills to for new bonds. That combined with a fund balance at the end of 2010 in debt services of $50 million will easily cover the 14 mills as stated in the Council resolutions without causing an increase.

The language in the resolution is simply a statutory requirement that mandates a listing of how many mills it will take to cover the issuance of the bond. In this case its 14 and those 14 are already available within the existing 26.56 mills property owners are already paying, through their ad valorem tax, into debt services for bond payments. Thus, no increase. In fact, according to Finance, the city could issue up to $288 million in new bonds without an increase but wanted to leave a residual as an emergency contingency.

These are the facts and are detailed in a clear and understandable manner. They are not political as some would try and make out - they are what they are and however the citizen's vote on April 2nd is their right. However, citizens have a right to have correct information to make an educated decision. All the city administration, Council, and Citizen's Bond Committee who selected the projects - made up of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike are doing on April 2nd is asking the citizens for permission to place the current level of tax dollars they are paying toward addressing critical infrastructure needs. Please visitwww.shreveportbond2011.com (http://www.shreveportbond2011.com/ for more information on this issue.

An Example of Increasing Taxes to Make Services Sustainable

Instead of taking out a bond (which admittedly can make sense for a city with a such an excellent rating as we have; borrowing is cheap for us) we could do what Kenner may do.

To quote one ABS member: "now THAT'S a tax increase!"

But mightn't we have to do it, at some point?

In a chat with Ian Webb this morning, he said his water bill is about $20, while a friend's in Bossier is well over $100. Is that irresponsible of us? Are we as addicted to credit as a city, as many of us are as individuals? Should we be more like Bossier? Or like Kenner?

But are tax increases too tough for a politician to sell, especially in today's climate?

That said, some of our most loved leaders have asked us to sacrifice. Indeed, mightn't one be admired for being realistic and asking people to sacrifice, however unpleasant it is to do that for the leader? After all, there's research that shows sacrifice can be valued; e.g., people like being part of groups more if they've been asked to sacrifice to get into them.

Property Taxes, the upcoming Bond Election, KSLA story, Swain videos

A Better Shreveport a photo by trudeau on Flickr.

In attendance: Ryan Rebouche, Meredith Mighell, David Aubry, Brian Salvatore, April Dahm, Loren Demerath, Theron Jackson, Steph Pedro.

As promised, we talked about property taxes, and also about the bond issue coming up. Elliot Stonecipher's recent appearence on LPB's "The State We're In" had created some confusion about property taxes, and by implication about the bond. Pedro was in communication with Stonecipher and had invited him to the meeting and also asked to see the data he used to draw conclusions that Shreveport was over-taxed, but he said he wasn't able to share it. Stonecipher also said a lot of Shreveport's problems are "demographic".

There has been a lot of discussion at ABS about the bond issue in recent weeks, and people generally seem to be in favor of it.

However, at our meeting last night, Murray Lloyd said he'd also like to see the city council form a committee that deals with the long term sustainability of maintaining our water and sewer system. Others agreed with that idea.

There seems to be a consensus at ABS, though, that something has to be done. This KSLA story by Adria Goins shows some of the need: raw sewage in our streets! And this excellent short video by Liz Swaine shown at an earlier ABS meeting gets at more of the details. (And here's another where she explains more about deciding on a bond over higher taxes or fees.)

Shreveport has an excellent bond rating, so it's a relatively good deal for us to borrow money to fix our water and sewer system. But, if one votes against the bond, is the presumption that we're better served by paying higher fees or taxes? Surely we can't neglect the problem, can we?

One person noted at our meeting last night that when you consider our garbage fees, and sewer and water fees (or lack of them), our lowest in the state sales tax of major cities, and other factors, Shreveport may not be over-taxed, as implied by Eliot Stonecipher recently, but under-taxed.

A fuller version of the notes of the meeting:

The group briefly chatted about I-49; it was said that won't go up over wet lands, and no land has been officially reserved for it.

On the radio show “Time for ABetterShreveport” earlier that afternoon (5-5:45) they talked about the bond issue with Monty Walford (as well as with Mr. Barrett about the Burton Foundation).

Murray Lloyd works in conflict resolution and suggested we adopt rules of engagement for the group. Ed Morrison's group had general the rule there would be no personal attacks. It was agreed that ABS should adopt the following rule for that evening's meeting, and the organization can consider adopting it formally at the next meeting: The rule of engagement is as follows: In ABS discussions we communicate civilly, we do not characterize individuals and their motives, but focus on ideas and information.

Examples of least inferring personal motives were discussed, which can offend people. Examples included ABS email, as well as radio shows that aired earlier that day (though not “Time for ABetterShreveport”).

It was noted that getting personal might be the norm in most discourse, but also that ABS should try to meet the standard of truly civil discourse. It was also noted that generally when the rules are put in place they're self-enforcing; people are taken aside and talked to privately if they violate the rules—perhaps unintentionally.

PROPERTY TAXES:

The group then discussed property taxes and the conclusion of Eliot Stonecipher on LPB that our taxes are inordiantly high. It was noted that our bond rating is actually excellent. Caddo Parish was the top in the state for a bond rating. Salvatore said Shreveport can borrow money cheaper than almost any city in the state. The Parrish is AA, and the city is A+

Theron Jackson said there was confusion about it the bond and that the spin on it depends on who you talk to. As a context for discussion Jackson noted that we could make the decision to be the lowest taxed city in America but it might not make us competitive; its value might depend on one's ideological point of view.

Jackson noted that the city says we've got a 1.5 billion dollar deficit in need in funding (not debt) for infrastructure. This administration has unwound swaps and closed the debt that was increased in the previous administration.

It was noted that comparing taxes in cities as Stonecipher did on LPB, and then comparing schools and saying the funds are misused is an overly simplistic model ignoring the effects of a knowledge-economy, a creative class, the state capital, and tourism that distinguish Baton Rouge and New Orleans from Shreveport.

It was also noted that Glover Administration had declined to appoint an infrastructure committee; or was it the council who didn't? Lloyd and Jackson appeared to disagree on that point.

Lloyd pointed out that the annual upkeep costs in water and sewage is 75 million dollars per year. The amount of money in the bond issue for infrastructure is for maintenance. There's no step two to make it sustainable. We'd have to increase rates 100% to raise just $50 million. Theron said we've become entitled that way. We've given people a $1.50 in service for a .25 cent contribution. The state's homestead exemption is like that as well. And the garbage fee isn't sustainable either; we're underpaying our taxes. Pedro noted that using fees instead is worse, because they're not tax deductible. Pedro said “I want a garbage tax not a fee. A fee's not deductible.”

Pedro said the feeling of entitlement extends to the built environment; if you build a mixed-use development you make 10% on your investment, vs. 25% in targetted developments, so developers feel entitled to be able to profit at higher rates but at the expense of the community which benefits more from mixed-used developments.

It was noted that in other communities there doesn't appear to be the resentment towards government that there is here. In Bossier there was a franchise fee was increased from 2 to 5% percent. There was no objection to it. One person noted that in other communities they appear to simply vote for improvements, raise the fees, and move forward.

As an aside it was noted that we've got LSUS that held back in its funding because of competition with institutions downstate; we have no Ph.D. Program at LSUS (or in the entire metro region).

It was noted that the millage rate is not projected to increase because its providing more money than the debt serviced.

A complaint about the bond was that there's no strategy to make it sustainable in the future. Champion Lake has a force main that's so many feet long and it blew and they fixed and that happened over and over again.

It was claimed that in the past city officials haven't been able to talk about it lucidly and had no argument about why they weren't going to do it. Others agreed with Lloyd that we have to make it sustainable, but didn't know what the city is going to do about it in the future.

Lloyd said he knows they've been playing kick the can all the way down the road and that he's been yelling it at the rafters the whole way. There's only a few ways to raise the revenue: property taxes and sales taxes unless you want to go to fees.

Steph said it's a line item; the wate water system master plan is 3 million dollars; this is to update it; and they don't have the plan to make the decisions. It was noted you have to parcel out the funds a bit at a time; the councilman have to choose a few streets to repair out of the big book of streets that need repair.

Rebouche said of course the city can't do everything it needs to do because of higher expenses. It was noted that the city council agreed to tie on more houses to our water and sewage lines, and another today outside our city limits. We need to budget all of it. The projects are named. If you go on Daucett's web site there are a number of projects listed.

The law suits are threatened by the EPA on how water and sewage have been leaking up through the ground for years and we haven't been responsible enough to do anything about it.

Lloyd's proposal is that we ask the council to put together a plan for what they're going to do. But they may have to be from out of town because people in town are not trusted.

It was also noted at the meeting that one's response to all this might one's theory of economic growth: is it like a garden for which you need to buy fertilizer? Or is it like a forest that grows best unimpeded?

Pedro wants to look at other cities' fees and taxes. David Aubry does too and distributed the 2011 annual operating budget that appears to demonstrate the city's good bond rating.

Jenkins said he'd lower the millage if the bond doesn't pass. This shows we've got a good bond rating and the reserve is increasing. The money that hasn't been used can go to cutting the rate.

The next meeting will be on adjudicated property.

The group briefly chatted about I-49; it was said that won't go up over wet lands, and no land has been officially reserved for it.

On the radio show “Time for ABetterShreveport” earlier that afternoon (5-5:45) they talked about the bond issue with Monty Walford (as well as with Mr. Barrett about the Burton Foundation).

Murray Lloyd works in conflict resolution and suggested we adopt rules of engagement for the group. Ed Morrison's group had general the rule there would be no personal attacks. It was agreed that ABS should adopt the following rule for that evening's meeting, and the organization can consider adopting it formally at the next meeting: The rule of engagement is as follows: In ABS discussions we communicate civilly, we do not characterize individuals and their motives, but focus on ideas and information.

Examples of least inferring personal motives were discussed, which can offend people. Examples included ABS email, as well as radio shows that aired earlier that day (though not “Time for ABetterShreveport”).

It was noted that getting personal might be the norm in most discourse, but also that ABS should try to meet the standard of truly civil discourse. It was also noted that generally when the rules are put in place they're self-enforcing; people are taken aside and talked to privately if they violate the rules—perhaps unintentionally.

PROPERTY TAXES:

The group then discussed property taxes and the conclusion of Eliot Stonecipher on LPB that our taxes are inordiantly high. It was noted that our bond rating is actually excellent. Caddo Parish was the top in the state for a bond rating. Salvatore said Shreveport can borrow money cheaper than almost any city in the country. The Parrish is AA, and the city is A+

Theron Jackson said there was confusion about it the bond and that the spin on it depends on who you talk to. As a context for discussion Jackson noted that we could make the decision to be the lowest taxed city in America but it might not make us competitive; its value might depend on one's ideological point of view.

Jackson noted that the city says we've got a 1.5 billion dollar deficit in need in funding (not debt) for infrastructure. This administration has unwound swaps and closed the debt that was increased in the previous administration.

It was noted that comparing taxes in cities as Stonecipher did on LPB, and then comparing schools and saying the funds are misused is an overly simplistic model ignoring the effects of a knowledge-economy, a creative class, the state capital, and tourism that distinguish Baton Rouge and New Orleans from Shreveport.

It was also noted that Glover Administration had declined to appoint an infrastructure committee; or was it the council who didn't? Lloyd and Jackson appeared to disagree on that point.

Lloyd pointed out that the annual upkeep costs in water and sewage is 75 million dollars per year. The amount of money in the bond issue for infrastructure is for maintenance. There's no step two to make it sustainable. We'd have to increase rates 100% to raise just $50 million. Theron said we've become entitled that way. We've given people a $1.50 in service for a .25 cent contribution. The state's homestead exemption is like that as well. And the garbage fee isn't sustainable either; we're underpaying our taxes. Pedro noted that using fees instead is worse, because they're not tax deductible. Pedro said “I want a garbage tax not a fee. A fee's not deductible.”

Pedro said the feeling of entitlement extends to the built environment; if you build a mixed-use development you make 10% on your investment, vs. 25% in targetted developments, so developers feel entitled to be able to profit at higher rates but at the expense of the community which benefits more from mixed-used developments.

It was noted that in other communities there doesn't appear to be the resentment towards government that there is here. In Bossier there was a franchise fee was increased from 2 to 5% percent. There was no objection to it. One person noted that in other communities they appear to simply vote for improvements, raise the fees, and move forward.

As an aside it was noted that we've got LSUS that held back in its funding because of competition with institutions downstate; we have no Ph.D. Program at LSUS (or in the entire metro region).

It was noted that the millage rate is not projected to increase because its providing more money than the debt serviced.

A complaint about the bond was that there's no strategy to make it sustainable in the future. Champion Lake has a force main that's so many feet long and it blew and they fixed and that happened over and over again.

It was claimed that in the past city officials haven't been able to talk about it lucidly and had no argument about why they weren't going to do it. Others agreed with Lloyd that we have to make it sustainable, but didn't know what the city is going to do about it in the future.

Lloyd said he knows they've been playing kick the can all the way down the road and that he's been yelling it at the rafters the whole way. There's only a few ways to raise the revenue: property taxes and sales taxes unless you want to go to fees.

Steph said it's a line item; the wate water system master plan is 3 million dollars; this is to update it; and they don't have the plan to make the decisions. It was noted you have to parcel out the funds a bit at a time; the councilman have to choose a few streets to repair out of the big book of streets that need repair.

Rebouche said of course the city can't do everything it needs to do because of higher expenses. It was noted that the city council agreed to tie on more houses to our water and sewage lines, and another today outside our city limits. We need to budget all of it. The projects are named. If you go on Daucett's web site there are a number of projects listed.

The law suits are threatened by the EPA on how water and sewage have been leaking up through the ground for years and we haven't been responsible enough to do anything about it.

Lloyd's proposal is that we ask the council to put together a plan for what they're going to do. But they may have to be from out of town because people in town are not trusted.

It was also noted at the meeting that one's response to all this might one's theory of economic growth: is it like a garden for which you need to buy fertilizer? Or is it like a forest that grows best unimpeded?

Pedro wants to look at other cities' fees and taxes. David Aubry does too and distributed the 2011 annual operating budget that appears to demonstrate the city's good bond rating.

Jenkins said he'd lower the millage if the bond doesn't pass. This shows we've got a good bond rating and the reserve is increasing. The money that hasn't been used can go to cutting the rate.

The next meeting will be on adjudicated property.

City Recycling Discussed at Last Meeting

In attendance: Michael Hughes, Maurice Loridans, David Aubry, Oliver Jenkins, Brian Salvatore, Jon Soul, Loren Demerath, Steph Pedro. (Other regular members with dogs were at a rally for the dog park at the park near Stoner Boat Launch being held at the same time.)

CAPITALIZING ON TRAILS

Salvatore asked about access to the nature trail on Savier St. by Montessori and wondered about the lock, but Soul said that's just to exclude motor vehicles, the entrance is around the post with a small sign there. It was noted that the ownership is not known of certain sections. Most of it is owned by the city, and all of it was likely navigable in 1912, which would mean the state has rights over it; the city established a right-of-way shown by the manholes that access sewer lines. Some if it is in Bossier Parrish; the school board has some of it; and there are two others private owners that own the slope that goes to the bottom and possibly a small amount of the flat portion that is the trail; one of those private owners is now Community Renewal. About the liability issue: anyone can use unimproved land for recreational use and there is an immunity to liability suits unless you just about build a trap to hurt people; if you make improvements on your land it's a different question and you can be sued for not considering potential harm that could come from using your improvement.

The mountain bike trails by the Stoner Boat Launch can't be signed by the city as an amenity without policing them and putting up netting and warning, etc. It was noted, though, that there is kayaking and four-wheeling in parks where there's no one supervising. But, you can't stop people from suing the city; accidents will happen. How much investment would it take in liability safeguards and warning signs and proper structure for the city to be able to claim.

PROBLEMATIC DOWNTOWN OWNER?

There was discussion of the front page article in the Sunday Shreveport Times on the Arlington Hotel interviewing Jody Harms in California; it was noted she'd only been to Shreveport once in her life. She wants the windows of the Temple it is said, because they're very valuable.

GREAT SUCCESS IN CLEANING HOPEWELL CEMETERY AND COATES BLUFF

For the record, Hughes and Soul reported that Saturday's cleanup resulted in 9,540 lbs of scapmetal salvaged, not including the trash that the city picked up in tires and glass and other materials. Not much large scrap metal left; but probably another ton of trash that was picked up.

CITY RECYCLING DISCUSSED

The problems were noted first: there's no market for the glass; after sorting the glass out, Pratt sends it to the landfill. They say there's no market for the plastic but we don't know what they're doing with it. There is a market for metal and paper. There's a market for some of the plastic but not all of it.

Hughes, Jenkins, and Michael Corbin had talked at length about this some time ago. You can mix certain kinds of plastics together and find a market for it. Pratt has two separate facilities; a recycling side and a paper mill side; there was so much in one container, it was probably only 30% glass and the rest was plastic and other materials. Corbin called Hughes to see if there is a way to move the glass. Pratt's glass is so mixed with so many other materials no one would accept it as it's currently processed. But if Pratt segregated their glass into three colors it could be moved to a place within 200 miles easily. Hughes would need a facility to handle it; it's not very profitable, but it could be moved. Labels and metal tops don't matter. Places where its not sorted by color are not worth it; they don't pay enough for it. The cost of transporting and depositing in the land fill has to be considered.

Hughes said for a commercial enterprise he would transport it if it was sorted. When the contract is renegotiated the city could add someone like Hughes to be involved in that way. There's no margin for the glass the way they have it today. In the future they might be able to sort it in such a way that there is a market. Unless you've been in the business you won't know what they can do, necessarily. Hughes can help educate the city as to what's possible and give information for the next contract negotiation.

Loridans noted that when the city first announced the contract many of us were delighted. It was known to be a single stream system and there were disadvantages to that. For a while glass was marketable. It was noted that Pratt was clear in stating that it wasn't recycling glass in the Times and it was written up several times. But it was also noted that the implication in the practice of taking the glass is that it's being recycled. People that would prefer to have it recycled could take it to a place like Hughes Recycling at 1105 Fullerton St. instead of leaving it for Pratt's curbside pickup.

Pratt has recycling facilities up north that recycle glass, but it must not be economically feasible to take it there.

Jenkins noted that more people are doing recycling now than earlier; and that progressively more have been since the beginning of recycling curbside pickup; but we've also seen a decrease in the volume of recycling; that's what Allied reports that picks up the recycling for Pratt. That's reduced the load on the city trash pickups. Maybe people know more now about what's recyclable and what isn't. Maybe we're consuming less in newspaper, etc. Hughes has had people take stuff to him with comments that they're doing it because they don't think it's all being recycled at Pratt. Hughes' numbers have gone up exponentially. What he received in one year when he first started (just before Pratt) he now does in one week. Hughes also processes materials that aren't economically profitable just to keep them out of the landfill. Hughes said much of what is said to not be recyclable is recyclable. This is a step; we're better off than we were.

Jenkins and others supported the idea that things that don't fit in the bin could paid for with a fee that could go on your bill.

The next meeting (March 21st) will concern property taxes, and the meeting after that (March 28^th) will be on adjudicated properties.

Coates Bluff Trail team expands: Deborah Coleman, Murray Lloyd, Kim Mitchell, Jeff Wellborn

A Better Shreveport: Deborah Coleman, Murray Lloyd, Kim Mitchell, Jeff Wellborn a photo by trudeau on Flickr.

Lending expertise and aid to A Better Shreveport in the efforts to stabilize the future of the Coates Bluff Nature Trail are attorney / conservationist Murray Lloyd, architect / planner Kim Mitchell, and community activist / conservationist Jeff Wellborn.

Support is also being provided by Deborah Coleman and Grace Peterson from the community garden movement in Shreveport.

The Hopewell Historic Cemetery / Coeates Bluff Watershed community clean-up is to be held Sat, March 12, 9 am to noon. Lunch and entertainment at Montessori School for Shreveport.

New Schools and School Board Requirements Discussed at Last Meeting

In attendance: Loren Demerath, Michael Hughes, Brian Salvatore, Maurice Loridans, Scott Hughes, Theron Jackson, Sara Galloway, Greg Andrews, Rob Rubel, Feico Kempff, Monica Gerhig, Karen Wissing.

The meeting began by people introducing themselves to each other, including first-time ABS attendants, Theron Jackson and Scott Hughes, who were earlier guests on the radio show, and Monica Gerhig, Greg Andrews, and Karen Wissing, who work at Sciport. Gerhig and Wissing noted that they've recently moved back to Shreveport after growing up here and were surprised and enthusiastic about the changes that appear to be coming about in the city.
The theme of the meeting for the evening was education, and Salvatore noted that many of us have passion about the

issue. Salvatore began the meeting noting that his daughter's University Elementary School is undersized for the population it serves, and many of the buildings are trailers on blocks. One of the issues is expansion of the schools; are we growing the city at the expense of the core?

Scott Hughes noted that Caddo operates 74 facilities with a total capacity for 70,000; but they are not nearly filled. The city has grown west and south. Bigger schools are needed because of the new locations of populations. Walnut Hill has 1800 kids, and it’s a big problem. Caddo Parish hasn’t built a new school since the 80’s. People shift around and we haven’t moved the city. Interestingly, the city is shrinking in the number of school-aged kids. It used to be much higher, but the number is now its down to 40,000. The University Terrace school shouldn’t have more than 800 kids, but has more than that. You can’t even gather in it. But the school board doesn’t want to vote to build a new school because it will mean shutting down an old school to which there’s attachment.

Loridans noted it used to be that people would move for better schools, not away from them. It was noted that the Magnet schools have worked to prevent white flight because they are bringing in middle class kids into the core city. The charter movement isn’t doing well in Louisiana because of that program. Caddo has a great “choice network”. Because people can send their kids to magnet schools, it’s allowed movement outside the core city, as part of sprawl that reduces walking and biking opportunities, and to places where there are really no schools.

Jackson said he talked with an official who's a Yale graduate and not a native of Louisiana and she didn’t understand the political realities of the state. He said if you were starting from scratch, you’d lay out the university system differently. But the previous system of racial segregation created a educational system that is now inefficient. Our 74 schools are partly a function of that history. The possible merger down-state between Southern and UNO is an example of grappling with those inefficiencies. Katrina has helped speed up the reform, but history and emotions can get in the way of direct reform. We've seen desegregation, said Jackson, but not integration.

Galloway agreed with a lot of what Jackson said, and reminded people of focusing on girls as well boys, citing the focus of the radio show, and the need to give students high expectations. Salvatore mentioned we talked about Title IX on the radio and how it legislates fairness. Hughes said there’s data that shows same sex settings for minority kids can be particularly effective. Jackson said research that’s been done in the U.K. shows both genders are helped by these settings; single sex classrooms have been shown to help both sexes; art, drama, and history for males, math and science for girls. Hughes noted that Fairpark High School has had some success with single-sex classes.

Salvatore said this is where our school board is failing. They should be taking up these issues; they’re afraid of losing schools to the state, and then the state eliciting charter schools. Jackson noted the school board is more important the city council in terms of what they directly impact: our future and our children. But it’s at the bottom rung of politics. Our students become victims of people who are not necessarily as committed to education as they are to politics. Jackson suggested we strip salaries away and find out who’s actually committed. Demerath agreed with Jackson's overall point, but wondered if people would object to stripping salaries, claiming it would mean only upper-middle class people could afford to be on the school board. Jackson also suggested that there be some continuing education requirements, where school board members learn about the history of education in American, budgeting, etc. There may even be a conflict of interest in the structure of the school board. The largest employers in the city are those in construction and education run by the city itself, yet it is administered by 8 people with 800 votes apiece. Often ex-teachers are running it, and they're not necessarily qualified to administer a huge budget with 6000 employees; the people who presiding over the system often have no qualifications to do so. Some noted that the school board should have requirements.

Karen Wissing asked if we have charter schools, and Hughes answered that we’ve had three. It was noted that Ronnie Banks has run for school board again after apparently unsuccessfully administering one of the charter schools. That failure has given the school board ammunition to say charter schools don’t work. Linwood was located well, and Linear never had the organizational experience. But it was noted that the charter system hasn’t proved to be the be-all end-all. You have to have a school that values the education, that has strong leadership, and where there are advocates each student, be they parents, or mentors from outside an immediate family. Anyone who's “adopted” them and cared enough to take them to school can suffice. Truancy is often the real issue. “Low achieving” schools get zero’s in their scores for kids that don't attend and eventually drop out. After 8th grade is the biggest drop-out period in Louisiana, the first time when they can drop out legally. High schools in the areas where they live get zeros for those kids for the next 4 years.

Greg Andrews asked why not have the parent or guardian punished for not taking the kids to school. Hughes said one juvenile judge refused to do it, apparently because those parents were his constituency. But, there is a new D.A. now who has said truancy is important and there's also a new judge who apparently will enforce it.

Hughes noted that Fairpark has 103 zeros and Byrd has none. But they have to do something like that or the school will end up pushing out the low achieving kids to increase its score averages and its overall rating. Otherwise they'll just abandon those kids. It's a way of hold the schools accountable.

Monica Gerhig noted that the kids are basically being pushed out if no one’s being there to go get them. Hughes noted that some schools have tracked them successfully, but it's hard to track high poverty kids. Moreover, its often seen as a more “efficient” use of school resources to give up on the worst students and concentrate on the mid-level students instead. For the lowest, the school has to teach them to read and then moving them up three more levels before the school can get credit for them.

On the hope for enforcing truancy, Greg noted that if you get enough speeding tickets you’ll eventually slow down. But Hughes noted that there should be a way of not just penalizing the parents, but penalizing the kids as well.

It was asked why don’t they send them to a residential school, and Hughes said there's been success with residential schools. Demerath noted that Centenary, like most residential colleges, is relatively unused during the summer. Jackson noted that charter schools would be better if they were more innovative; not just same curriculum. He believes in Garnder's theory of multiple intelligences, and there is a need to allow students to manifest those other intelligences in the course of their education. Others agreed, noting that would make the educational experience more fulfilling.

Jackson noted that Louisiana leads the country and world in incarceration rates; so education should be of particular value for us. We’re talking about adding pods to prisons, and closing schools. Wissing noted that Washington D.C. has the lowest literacy rates, and wonder about schools being used to track students into their expected class statuses. Jackson noted that teachers unions that can protect teachers at the peril of the students. Everyone has a representative except the students. There is a new bigotry of low expectations; put them in lower tracks because they’re not expected to achieve to do better. Hughes noted that perhaps a teacher’s pay should be based on a student's progress. Gerhig says she hears all the time at Sciport that students say school is boring. Mightn't that be the teacher's fault? The teacher may need to get innovative to tap into what interests the students but parallels with what they need.

Jackson noted that we may need to design centers of excellence, and to intervene at the lower level; put lots of resources at K-3 or K-5. They need to learn to read before they’re abandoned. We have some good middle schools, but the school board need to get that quality at all the schools. Most of all, Jackson noted, if we don’t change the way we make policy in our district, the schools will never get better.

MISCELANEOUS:

Maurice thanked Brian for the photography of the Shreveport Commons tour. Shreveport Commons was the group putting it on. ABS can help publicize those things but we didn't know about it, though others part of Shreveport Commons didn't know about it either until just before.

On April 23^rd is the cleanup for TACA, and on the 30^th is the Maker’s Fair, jointly occuring with Asiana Festival and there will be a trolly used to transport people to ArtBreak at Convention Center (though it is pleasant walk there).

The last night of the Aspen Festival is Thursday, sponsored by the Community Foundation, and Paula Hickman reminds us that. Joel Klien will be on the film about education, and there will be a panel afterwards.

Magnet Shreveport: geography class Coates Bluff Trail hike

Magnet Shreveport: geography class Coates Bluff Trail hike a photo by trudeau on Flickr.

Some 100 geography students and 4 parents took their first walk on the Coates Bluff Nature Trail today, said Caddo Magnet teacher Robert Trudeau.

They learned to identify the typical riparian items from our region:
hackberry, cottonwood and sycamore trees, Virgina Creeper and poison ivy, muscadine vine, armadillo burrows, canebrakes, fungi, egrets, turtles and a beaver lodge.

One group met a class of 4 year-olds from Montessori School for Shreveport. Teacher Jon Soul, developer of the trail, said they were "Looking for signs of spring."

Students will be composing essays on their experience next week.

"They adored it," said teacher Robert Trudeau. "These teens were excited to be able to identify flora and fauna and to be able to photograph themselves in the woods. There were smiles and laughter everywhere."

New report shows bike and pedestrian projects create more jobs

Velo Dendro Shreveport, 2010
Originally uploaded by trudeau

Suggested by Stephanie Pedro:

New report shows bike and pedestrian projects create more jobs
By Chelsea Allinger, on January 24th, 2011

USDOT Secretary Ray LaHood blogged recently about the significant job creation that results from bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects when compared to typical roadwork. LaHood writes:

In this case-study, “Estimating the Employment Impacts of Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Road Infrastructure,” the Political Economy Research Institute compiled data provided by the city of Baltimore. They found that on-street bike lanes and pedestrian measures created more direct jobs, more indirect jobs, and more induced jobs per dollar than either road upgrades or road resurfacing.