School Tax voter demographics

The April 29 property tax election districts are unique in their makeup, as they reflect school attendance zones and have no relation to other political boundaries of Lincoln Parish – municipal, school board/police jury districts, fire districts, etc. They also have their own set of voter demographics which can sometimes predict voting patterns.

Ruston School District No. 1 will vote on the re-imposition of an expiring 20 year, 17.75 mil property tax to pay for $65 million of borrowing for new construction in the district.

The Simsboro School District No. 3 will vote on the re-imposition of an expiring 20 year, 5.55 mil property tax, plus 5.75 mils of new taxes to pay for $10 million of debt for that district’s new construction.

The new construction projects are detailed in our 2/8/2023 news story



26 Responses to “School Tax voter demographics”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    Can we please just get a tax break rather than close perfectly good schools?

  2. Anonymous Says:

    I am assuming the purpose of this post was to inform people that while the tax vote on April 29 is for Ruston/ Simsboro schools you don not have to live inside the city limits to vote on them.

    If you want lower taxes- vote NO. If this does not pass your property taxes will decrease and the quality of the educational system in those school districts will remain the same.

    If you vote YES, your property taxes will remain high for the next 20 years and the quality of the educational system in those school districts will remain the same.

    • Anonymous Says:

      I like the way you explained it. This is about tax money, not the quality of our kids’ education.

    • Anonymous Says:

      Tax is in the SCHOOL DISTRICT, not city limits or police jury district.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    This is the school related portion of my tax bill:

    SB Parish Constitutional Tax 3.91
    SB Parish Special Maint & Oper 4.92
    SB Parish Special Repair & Equi 4.92
    SB Parish Wide M & O 8.48
    SB Parish Wide Maint & Oper 9.44
    School District #1 17.75
    School District #1 M & O 2.33

    I pay 51.75 mills of school related taxes (which is the majority…say 62% of my entire tax bill excluding the fire fee). I believe the 17.75-mill tax is the only one up for vote, but it certainly isn’t the only tax money the school board is receiving as many people may believe. What is the other 34 mills funding? How long has the 17.75-mill tax been in effect? I assume 20 years. What was its original purpose? I know that information would help me make a more informed decision about renewing the 17.75-mill tax. As of now, I’m a “no” due to the lack of transparency about the school consolidation. I don’t take kindly to be railroaded by a shady plan masquerading as a must-pass tax.

    • Walter Abbott Says:

      You have raised some valid questions. Here was what Ruston School District No. 1 voters passed April 17, 2004:

      “Shall Ruston School District No. 1 of the Parish of Lincoln, State of Louisiana, incur debt and issue bonds not exceeding Thirty Three Million Dollars ($33,000,000), to run twenty (20) years from date thereof, with interest at a rate not exceeding eight per centum (8%) per annum, for the purpose of acquiring and/or improving lands for building sites and playgrounds; including construction of necessary sidewalks and streets adjacent thereto; purchasing, erecting and/or improving school buildings and other school related facilities within and for the District, including, to the extent feasible, those specific school projects set forth in the “Capital Improvements Plan” approved by the Lincoln Parish School Board on February 3, 2004, and acquiring the necessary equipment and furnishings therefor, title to which shall be in the public; which bonds will be general obligations of the District and will be payable from ad valorem taxes to be levied and collected in the manner provided by Article VI, Section 33 of the Constitution of the State of Louisiana of 1974 and statutory authority supplemental thereto?”

      It passed with a 56% to 44% margin, with 2826 votes cast.

      Voters authorized borrowing money for new construction only which has since been completed and is in use. A millage levied paid off that “mortgage” and will soon expire.

      The other millages on your tax bill are for repair, equipment, maintenance and operations. That would be supplies, buses, building repair, school supplies, etc. Operations would include fuel, utilites, etc.

      Notice that some of your property tax levy is for use parishwide, and others for the Ruston School District only. Property owners in other school districts (Simsboro, Choudrant, Dubach) also have millages for their districts only.

      • Anonymous Says:

        thank you for some clarification…i will be voting “no”…as i see it, 17.75 mills is a massive amount for an unvetted consolidation plan (and sports facilities)

  4. Anonymous Says:

    Public education wasn’t created to benefit children.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    Also voting no. I wouldn’t mind a tax for school maintenance and repair but $75 million for expanding two schools after you close two perfectly good schools is ridiculous. 800 kids in an elementary school is crazy!

  6. Anonymous Says:

    This misbegotten puppy is going to fail.
    IMO it is the best “bad plan” the administration could come up with, to eliminate the stigma of an otherwise noteworthy school system which has one or two elementary schools with less than desired performance: close the schools and move the students into other schools.
    Fine but it hangs an enormous and unnecessary bill onto the taxpayers (who seem to be expected to shoulder whatever burden arises).
    I recommend local governments do what we have to do: get by best you can with what you have.
    Can’t you let us actually get something paid for and let us have a little relief?

    • Anonymous Says:

      AMEN! Between inflation and never-ending tax increases, our income has gone down not up. Oh, you say it’s a renewal? The dirty little secret in Lincoln Parish is that they reassess of the value of our property every chance they get and with the higher value comes higher taxes. They don’t have to pass a new tax, just reassess your property to get more money. And it’s futile to protest it; no one ever wins that battle. My property being valued higher does me no good. I can’t eat my house.

  7. Anonymous Says:

    Already tired of hearing “but it’s for the children” all over town. I work to feed and house my children as well. This plan is outlandish, expensive, and unnecessary.

    • Anonymous Says:

      I wish this hadn’t become a race thing. This stupid plan has nothing to do with race, it’s just stupid.

  8. Anonymous Says:

    This is not a new tax. It is a renewal. If it does not pass in addition to not having funds to do renovations necessary to consolidate schools, I believe that this tax renewal also covers maintenance of existing schools/facilities and other things/services. So before you cut your nose off to spite your face, you might want to do some research and find out what else is included in the renewal. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but even if the consolidation doesn’t take place, how are we going to maintain our buildings without this tax money?

    • Walter Abbott Says:

      This is NOT accurate. The plan as approved by the LPSB on 2/7/23 was for almost ALL NEW construction.

      The Ruston School District No.1 $65 million wish list has the word “New” in every category. Oxford defines “new” thus: “not existing before.”

      The Simsboro School District No. 3 $10 million wish list shows about 2/3 of the projects as “new.”

      Here’s the document:

      Click to access capital-plan.pdf

    • Anonymous Says:

      i believe you’re mistaken…you should read the comments above about how the numerous school taxes are divvied up

    • Anonymous Says:

      Technically, a “renewal” of this tax but it paid for numerous existing construction projects that should last us a while. No new construction is needed, thus this tax is not needed. If the LPSB wants a maintenance tax, then present that and we’ll vote on it. We don’t need a tax, new or renewal, to build onto schools because we are crazy enough to close three perfectly good schools (Early Edu, Ruston Elem, Cypress Sprs).

      • Anonymous Says:

        It is a new tax, in that the bonds the existing tax was paying off are about paid, after which the tax stops.
        The LPSB is seeking to take advantage of the situation by coming up with a huge new project to vote in a new tax at the same rate.
        Ask yourself: what is the voter going to be paying in 5, 10, or 20 years, when the state and federal money the school board has become dependent on, stops coming?
        Two local public budgets in Lincoln parish , Ruston and the school board, are together about $150 million a year. Do you think this costs you anything? Some voters seem to believe in Magic Money: it comes from … somewhere.

    • Anonymous Says:

      Do we need $75 million in new construction. I think not! Property owners need a tax break, though. Our schools are in good shape. Come back in 10 years or so when there’s a real need.

  9. Anonymous Says:

    Anonymous Says:
    03/29/2023 at 2:27 pm | Reply
    I wish this hadn’t become a race thing. This stupid plan has nothing to do with race, it’s just stupid.


    • Anonymous Says:

      yep…closing any two of the schools is stupid…closing the two schools in minority communities is even more stupid due to the optics (even if the other two schools have more room to expand, which is the current talking point)…there are plenty of reasons to vote “no”…pick one, and tell your friends to pick one…this certainly isn’t “for the children”

  10. Anonymous Says:

    Damn this website sucks. Guess Walt hired Chris Hyde to run it.

  11. Anonymous Says:

    Saw a news article where the school board supposedly met with teachers and principals for their input on this plan. Notably absent was any attempt to involve parents in the process. The article says this is all about reducing the number of schools a student goes through from pre-K to 12th grade. Can that issue not be solved without spending $65 million to reconfigure school buildings?

    • Anonymous Says:

      Forget the race issues, the unbelievable amount of money they want to spend on construction, and consider this:

      increasing student population of an elementary school to the level planned—-
      —-will result in more disciplinary problems
      —-will result in less personal attention to students
      —-will result in a “just a number” environment
      —-will result in traffic congestion at the schools
      —-will result in an continuing excessive tax burden

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: