AG: CATS tax is homestead exempt

The 10.6-mill parish bus tax approved by voters in Baton Rouge and Baker last month qualifies for homestead exemption, contrary to CATS officials’ earlier claims that it was ineligible, according to an opinion issued Wednesday by Attorney General James “Buddy” Caldwell.

The homestead exemption shields homeowners from being taxed on the first $75,000 of their assessed property value.

The application of homestead exemption means property owners will be paying less on their property tax bills than was originally stated when the Capital Area Transit System was campaigning for the bus tax. It also means CATS will be shorted about $3 million in annual tax revenue for service improvements.

Caldwell issued the opinion Wednesday, in response to a query by state Rep. Alfred Williams, D-Baton Rouge. The homestead exemption does not apply to municipal taxes but Caldwell said in his opinion that the CATS tax does not fit the definition of a municipal tax.

“A ‘municipality’ means an incorporated city, town or village. Since CATS is not a city, town or village, it is the opinion of this office that any special ad valorem tax levied by it is subject to the homestead exemption,” Caldwell said.

The opinion is not legally binding, but parish Assessor Brian Wilson said he will abide by the opinion as property taxes are collected, unless the courts determine otherwise.

CATS board President Jared Loftus said he does not expect bus system officials to challenge the opinion.

Loftus also said the decision was beneficial to taxpayers and will not “affect our ability to bring a quality transit system to Baton Rouge.”

“Our riders depend on the homestead exemption, it’s beneficial for a lot of people in Baton Rouge,” Loftus said. “It’s important to remember that we did not seek to do away with the homestead exemption. That was how we understood, but now that we know otherwise there is no reason for us to fight that.”

CATS originally estimated it would receive about $17.2 million from tax revenue, without the homestead exemption, from property owners in Baker and Baton Rouge.

Voters in the city of Zachary rejected the city-wide proposal.

But Wilson said the newest revenue projections based on 2012 reassessed property values show CATS would have collected $19 million from the two cities without the exemption.

Now that the homestead exemption is in effect for the tax, CATS will receive about $16 million, Wilson said.

Loftus said the net result is that CATS will only be working with about $1 million less per year than what the agency originally projected.

“I don’t see this affecting our ability to bring transportation reform to Baton Rouge,” he said. “It may limit some service levels. But the routes we suggested, those can all still happen.”

CATS officials had said throughout their tax campaign that the property tax would not be eligible for homestead exemption because it only applies to homeowners within the city limits of Baton Rouge and Baker, and municipal taxes are not eligible for the homestead exemption.

Opponents of the tax have for months called into question the agency’s ability to levy a tax that is ineligible for the homestead exemption, since it is not a municipal agency.

“This is a victory for tax payers,” said Elizabeth Dent, co-founder of Taxbusters.us, a grassroots anti-tax group. “But there is still a concern out there that ... the CATS board did not do their homework like we’d expect them to do to foster more accountability for our tax dollars.”

She said Taxbusters and other frustrated residents are researching options for “legal recourse,” including the “feasibility of filing suit” to further dismantle the tax.

Loftus said CATS was advised by its board attorneys when determining whether the homestead exemption would apply.

Loftus said while CATS calls the boundaries of the election, it is ultimately up to the Assessor’s Office to determine whether the homestead tax exemption would apply. Loftus said he did not know if the assessor’s office was ever consulted before the tax election was called.

Wilson, the assessor, said he was never consulted.

Loftus said he thinks the CATS board did its due diligence in trying to resolve the issue before the election was announced. He noted that the tax would have been more palatable to voters if it had been presented as homestead exempt from the beginning.

“That was never a favorable position for us to take by claiming it wouldn’t apply,” he said.

Williams, who made the inquiry to the Attorney General jointly with CATS, said he’s glad that issue has finally been cleared up.

Williams, who is also an attorney, said he did not think the change should merit a legal challenge to the whole tax.

“I don’t foresee that being a problem at all,” Williams said. “The way it was written on the ballot was very clear. Folks voted based on the ballot language, and now we can move forward even though it’s with less money than folks thought was available.”

Voters will see the new tax on their bills this December. CATS officials campaigned for the tax to drastically revamp the parish bus system by expanding routes, adding buses and reducing wait times from an average of 75 to 15 minutes.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (40)


1) Comment by SuzanneMS - 01/06/2012

DMJ (and jobo), you're a better man than I am, Gungha Din.

2) Comment by deanwelles - 01/06/2012

I work 3.6 miles away from my house, according to google directions. However, I can not ride my bike or take the bus from my house to work without going about 8 miles out of the way or transferring several times. I think this gets at the reason people get so frustrated about CATS. People who actually go to work can't use it because it's not a viable option yet must fund it for people who "need transportation". We all "need transportation" but I guess my need isn't as great their need. I probably wouldn't mind paying for it if it either cut down traffic or I could use it. It will do neither, but will provide transportation for those who "need it".

3) Comment by DMJ - 01/06/2012

Thanks, jobo. It's a fool's errand, but I try...

4) Comment by quirkmaguirk - 01/06/2012

@Dawson: I was answering a specific question when I used that example. To answer your question "what's the difference between... when your employer cuts your pay or when the government keeps reaching in your wallet?" I would have to say that I can see many, positive, direct impacts that a good public transit system would provide to the community, that would not come from my employer cutting my pay but will come from a slight tax increase. Baton Rouge is on the verge of becoming a great American city, but we still have many things that have to be accomplished first, one of those being a reliable public transit system. I would prefer CATS to pay for itself, and hopefully after a few successful years it will, but it has to start somehow and it isn't going to if people aren't utilizing what is available. The first step in getting more people to use the bus system is to improve the system to be a reliable form of transportation.

5) Comment by nimby? - 01/06/2012

as the waters clear more deception will appear ....

6) Comment by arin - 01/06/2012

@buzz, the CATS position made people who have property valued above and beyond the HE think that the tax would be paid by all property owners. And do you think section 8 housing tenants would pay more in rent? Govt subsidizes their rent. They vote for any tax increase because it doesn't affect them. If it cost more they get more assisstance

7) Comment by 8point6 - 31/05/2012

@Dawson: My "progressive" friends never met a tax they didn't like. Especially, when the "think" it doesn't affect them.

8) Comment by Dawson - 31/05/2012

@quirkmaguirk...whats the difference in struggling on a tight budget when your employer cuts your pay or when the government keeps reaching in your wallet? Either way your quality of life suffers at the expense of you being forced to pay someone else's way. I voted against the CATS tax for the simple reason that the users should subsidize it. It makes sense to have the users pay higher fares instead of forcing non users to pay higher fares on behalf of the users.

9) Comment by jobo - 31/05/2012

Whew! DMJ, my hat's off to you for dealing with the ignorance in these article comments day in and day out.

10) Comment by quirkmaguirk - 31/05/2012

foldgers: 1) I have a house, a truck, a bike, and a smart phone. I also voted for this tax. I hope that one day I can utilize the GPS tracking to leave my truck at home, ride my bike to a bus stop, and be dropped off reasonably close to my office, all in a timely manner. However, many of the people that utilize the bus system as it is now might not be able to utilize the GPS features, but they will still use the transit system. I am more likely to use the system with the GPS technology. 2) I could get by on less money than my employer pays me, I would not be happy about it, and my quality of life would suffer. Then, my work output would suffer from the added stress from dealing with a smaller budget. So, while CATS will operate with the funding they have, some aspects of the expected service may be diminished.

11) Comment by DMJ - 31/05/2012

Also, they don't means test you when you get on the bus. You don't show them your W2. Unless you have some kind of pass or voucher, you pay $1.75 whether or not you make $10K/year or $10 mill. Everyone pays $1.75. Have you never ridden the bus?

12) Comment by DMJ - 31/05/2012

1. Who says they can't? 2. I suspect that getting 80-90% of what they originally planned for will mean they'll improve service significantly, but not as much as they'd (we'd) like. I'm guessing this will translate into a few less routes, slightly longer wait times or fewer shelters but will still be a marked improvement on the status quo. Besides, the tax is based on property taxes; it's an estimate. It was always an estimate. Sure, I'm disappointed they'll be shorted 3 million/year, but like I said, it doesn't seem to be a deal breaker.

13) Comment by foldgers - 31/05/2012

DMJ: Two questions: 1) If someone can afford a smartphone and the $100 or so a month that comes with having one, why can't they afford small increases in all fares, even monthly passes ALONG with smaller increases in property taxes? 2) If CATS can get by with less money than what they initially asked for, then why did they ask for the original large amount? Just answer those please. That is all we are asking here. I have a bus stop in my yard (as is evident by all the trash the riders leave in my yard daily) and trust me, I know wait times are long. I rarely see the bus driving by.

14) Comment by DMJ - 31/05/2012

Folgers, The GPS isn't for people without computers and smartphones, obviously. It's for people who might want to take the bus but don't because they don't know how long they'll have to wait. Go the LSU website and check out how it works- lsu.transloc.com. It's goal is to attract new ridership, which will increase revenue from fares. One of the main obstacles in trying to use CATS (trust me) is unreliability. If the wait time is an hour or more and you just missed the bus, you could be waiting an hour, which is impractical. If you had the GPS locator app, you wouldn't miss the bus in the first place because you can track its movements in real time. Ambulances, trucking companies and companies with vehicle fleets use it all the time. Plus, the data can be used to analyze and improve the routes. The GPS is a great tool, which is relatively inexpensive. Lots of other cities' transit systems have them.

15) Comment by jaredloftus - 31/05/2012

@Being_Stupid You seem to have no problem calling me out on a regular basis, yet I've never heard from you in person. If you want to actually discuss any of these things - please get in touch with me. Otherwise, keep Being_Stupid.

16) Comment by foldgers - 31/05/2012

This whole thing stinks. I just truly do not like the whole GPS thing. Seems a waste of money. Upgrade the buses, fine. Upgrade the bus stops, fine. Upgrade the routes, fine. To me, that is all that is necessary.

17) Comment by phil - 31/05/2012

I think there a lot that is being told in this article and a lot that is not being told. I believe someone needs to question in detail (perhaps in a court of law) exactly how all of this went down I think. I give Attorney General Caldwell credit for giving the correct opinion on this issue, especially with all of the possible political pressures involved. Note that the actual tax proposition for the CATS tax did not even include the words "homestead exemption" or "municipal tax" in it, but it was widely advertised that the tax was a municipal tax and that the homestead exemption would not apply. Now that everyone is being cornered on this issue many people involved seem to be suggesting that they had nothing at all to do with how this tax was presented to the public. Think about it. Now to the next step. I believe the outcome of the election could have been different if voters had known the homestead exemption would apply. Therefore, I believe the entire CATS tax should be declared null and void and I think someone in government should actually do whatever is legally required to make that happen. By the way, did anyone notice the BRTP position about this that was published in the newspaper prior to the election?

18) Comment by Being_Stupid - 31/05/2012

Jared Loftus and his Self-Appointed Blue Commissars and the Democrat Party Elite won't dare challenge AG Buddy Caldwell's ruling in a court, because they know full well that the whole thing is unconstitutional and will likely be thrown out.

19) Comment by foldgers - 31/05/2012

Well, Hello Baton Rouge! I agree with you and I as well also wondered why these poor bus riders would find the GPS locating service useful. But, you do know eventually that EVERYONE will be entitled to a government paid smart phone as well, right? Because everyone has the right to a smart phone also! :) NOW, I have said in the past, I would be willing to pay some extra taxes to help the system, as I am NOT against it, but I also felt that the bus riders should ALSO pay a little extra as well. Especially when I heard of stories where the drivers let people ride for free as it is...

20) Comment by Hello Baton Rouge - 31/05/2012

I find it particularly dumb that homeowners (most if not all of which do not use the service) were called upon to come out of pocket to keep the bus service running, rather than doing something totally insane like make the people riding the bus pay extra fares to keep it running. One genius stated that 'these people were strapped for money and having a hard time making ends meet. They cannot afford an extra dollar here or there to ride the bus". However, the day after the tax passed (maybe 2 days), CATS announced the purchase of a million dollar satellite tracking system to outfit the buses with. Whats it for you ask? Its so that the poor, broke bus riders will be able to track when the next bus will arrive... ON THEIR SMART PHONES... Yes, so broke and so poor that an extra dollar per bus ride would break them, yet they have $499.99 telephones with $100.00 a month service. Gimme a break. This city is a cesspool.

21) Comment by foldgers - 31/05/2012

No DMJ, it is not clearer. They obviously did not NEED those millions, yet they claimed the end of the world if they did not get them. Well, it is obvious they are OK and still able to do most of what they wanted to do...so, why did they ask for that much to begin with? If you were in college and they wanted to raise tuition $1000 a semester, but in the end only raised it $500 because they realized the original amount was not really NEEDED, you will feel better about the $500, but still ask, why did they originally ask for $1000. At least I would hope you would ask. That is the beauty of our country, we can and are supposed to ask these questions when it comes to tax dollars. Why did they ask for so much, if they did not NEED it?? Please, answer me that. Or maybe you do not pay these taxes so you could care less...

22) Comment by tradewinns - 31/05/2012

only the ignorant and the stupid voted for the cats tax. the AG is trying to alleviate the pain so the next time it will not be remembered so badly.

23) Comment by DMJ - 31/05/2012

The 3 million will obviously be missed, but it's not a dealbreaker. Clearer now?

24) Comment by foldgers - 31/05/2012

My thoughts to people like DMJ are with this person's comment, “I don’t see this affecting our ability to bring transportation reform to Baton Rouge,” he said. “It may limit some service levels. But the routes we suggested, those can all still happen.” ---- if they are able to basically do what they need to do to improve with a million less a year than they thought they were getting, why on earth did they ask for MORE than they needed in the first place??? It goes to show that they were asking way too much and why a lot of property owners voted against it. We knew that they did not need so much to begin with!

25) Comment by DMJ - 31/05/2012

Yes, even though people will pay less than they thought, they're still complaining. Surprise, surprise...

26) Comment by buzz - 31/05/2012

arin, you miss the whole point. The CATS position before the election made voters less likely to vote for it. The tax would have passed by a bigger margin if this had been known beforehand

27) Comment by buzz - 31/05/2012

arin, you miss the whole point. The CATS position before the election made voters less likely to vote for it. The tax would have passed by a bigger margin if this had been know beforehand.

28) Comment by arin - 31/05/2012

EM you see nothing wrong, unjust or unexpected with being lied to just to pass a tax? Sometimes I wonder about you.

29) Comment by Elderly Man - 30/05/2012

I expected this. I see nothing wrong, unjust, or unexpected about it.

30) Comment by MissCotillion - 30/05/2012

I'm with BeingStupid on this one, and hoping this terrible tax will be declared unconstitutional.

31) Comment by nimby? - 30/05/2012

sorry Mr. T , more deception will be revealed , yours to get over .....

32) Comment by gtinla - 30/05/2012

Good point, Being_Stupid.

33) Comment by Mr. T - 30/05/2012

The CATS tax passed easily, despite attempts by Woody, Elizabeth Dent and the jerks at the Advocate to kill it with misleading statements and misstated facts. Why don't you losers show a little class for once in your miserable lives, and accept defeat gracefully. It is the will of the people - get over it with your crummy comments to the advocates's half- baked coverage. This reporter should have checked this out a long time ago - she had to know that CATS attorneys are *****

34) Comment by Being_Stupid - 30/05/2012

This is NOT a win for tax busters. There is a reason why Jared Loftus and his self-appointed Blue Ribbon Commission will not challenge the homestead exemption ruling by AG Buddy Caldwell. The Blue Ribbon Commissars and Democrat Socialists want this homestead exemption so they can stick it to the Business Owners, and exempt their Democrat Constiuents who would otherwise balk at the property tax increase and kick themselves for voting for it. More unconstitutional municipal taxing districts will now be passed onto EBR Business Owners, once the Democrat Socialists realize that they will be exempt from the taxes they can pass onto the Investment and Business Property Owners operating inside their district. This is like Br'er Rabbit begging Br'er Bear to not throw him into the sticker bush, when that is exactly what he wants Br'er Bear to do.

35) Comment by 8point6 - 30/05/2012

Where are all my "progressive" friends on this??! "Loftus also said the decision was beneficial to tax payers and will not “affect our ability to bring a quality transit system to Baton Rouge.”" What?!! Um, loftus. You were singing a different tune for the past year/year and a half, wanting this tax passed. No where did you say anything about this tax being "beneficial" to tax payers. If it were beneficial to tax payers, why only limit the vote to property owners within the br city limits? Give me a break!

36) Comment by Being_Stupid - 30/05/2012

The Municipality is the Unconstitutional District itself that was voted into existence by the stupid voters, and has nothing to do with CATs. CATs is the Beneficiary of the Municipality, not the Self-Appointed Municipality itself that was voted in unconstitutionally by the voters. As wrong as Buddy Caldwell is about this issue, he is right at the same time. Which is why this practice of imposing Political Taxing Districts (Crime Prevention Districts, CATs Districts, etc) onto neighborhoods or certain boundaries setup by self-appointed blue ribbon commisars and neighborhood collectives via the State Legislators needs to be declared unconstitutional by the Louisiana Court System once and for all.

37) Comment by nimby? - 30/05/2012

so the muddy water of the CATS proposal becomes clearer . between this and the racially motivated blockage of the south east Baton Rouge school district , of which comments aren't being allowed , expect further migration from B R ...

38) Comment by Whatchange - 30/05/2012

CATS Officals knew this going in, just more lies. More free hand outs

39) Comment by Being_Stupid - 30/05/2012

This should also apply to Neighborhood Associations that impose Crime Prevention Districts onto their neighborhoods. A Neighborhood Association is not a Municipality either. Therefore all these Political Taxing Districts that have been imposed onto property owners needs to be declared homestead exempted.

40) Comment by Being_Stupid - 30/05/2012

Does this mean that all those Crime Prevention Districts are now tax exempt too?