Judge: CATS tax suit moving forward

Advocate staff file photo by Patrick Dennis -- Buses operated by the Capital Area Transit System, going in and out of the central terminal on Florida Boulevard in July of 2011. Show caption
Advocate staff file photo by Patrick Dennis -- Buses operated by the Capital Area Transit System, going in and out of the central terminal on Florida Boulevard in July of 2011.

A state court judge ruled that he will not toss out a lawsuit against the Capital Area Transit System seeking to invalidate the results of the April property tax election and is allowing the case to move forward to trial.

In July, businessman Milton Graugnard, a Cajun Industries executive, filed the lawsuit alleging the CATS tax violates federal and state equal protection rights. A second petitioner, William L. Smith Jr., has since signed on as a plaintiff.

The crux of the plaintiffs’ argument is that the tax was levied within the city limits, yet some areas outside the city limits, such as the Mall of Louisiana and Perkins Rowe, will receive service without having to pay a tax.

On Oct. 15, CATS attorneys argued in state court that the lawsuit should be dismissed because it was filed after a state deadline to challenge election results.

Under state law, opponents have 60 days to challenge an election once the results have been promulgated, or officially declared. The lawsuit was filed on May 18 — 70 days after the tax election results were promulgated.

Graugnard’s attorney Kyle Keegan argued — and Judge Todd Hernandez agreed, that the 60-day provision doesn’t apply to their case because a state law cannot “limit the rights that a plaintiff has in a federal claim.” The plaintiffs have asserted that the tax election violated their equal protection rights under both state and federal law.

“Therefore, the court finds that the (lawsuit) does successfully state a cause and a right of action,” Hernandez wrote in his Oct. 29 ruling that was not made public until Thursday.

A trial has not yet been scheduled.

Jared Loftus, CATS board president, said CATS disagrees with Hernandez’s ruling and will ask the appellate court to review his decision.

“It is important to note that this decision has no bearing on whether or not we will receive the tax revenues for 2013,” Loftus said. “We will continue to move forward with our planning and preparation to provide the best possible services for transit reform in Baton Rouge.”

Keegan said he will file a motion for summary judgment and ask that the tax be thrown out before the end of the year because he wants the case to be decided before property tax bills are sent out in December.

“That’s our goal, but it’s an aggressive goal given the time frame,” he said.

He said if the summary judgment is denied, he expects the case to go to trial during the first half of next year.

Ultimately, it will be appealed, he said, which will likely tie the case up in the legal system for an extended period of time.

“This was a potential hurdle, although we didn’t expect to lose,” Keegan said of the initial hearing. “We are looking forward to getting to the merits of this election.”

Brian Wilson, East Baton Rouge Parish tax assessor, said the unless a court rules otherwise, the CATS tax will by on the tax rolls this December and CATS will begin to receive revenues early next year.

It remains unclear whether the tax proceeds would have to be reimbursed if the tax is thrown out or if the tax revenue will be withheld from CATS in an escrow until a final ruling on the case is handed down. The attorneys in the case and the East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff’s Office, which handles tax collection, are all looking into the issue.

In April, residents in the city limits of Baker and Baton Rouge approved a 10.6-mill property tax to expand and improve the bus service.

The cash-strapped CATS was running out of money and faced a possible shutdown this year unless it secured a new source of revenue.

The tax was also on the ballot in Zachary, where it failed.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (32)


1) Comment by Mr. T - 10/11/2012

It really isn't that unusual for a bus system to run outside its taxing district to locaions where people want o go. The New Orleans bus system runs regular toutes to the airport, which is in anoher paris and city. Same deal in Los Angeles and New York City. Time for the opponents to get over it, and move on. By and large, it is the same group that opposes construction of a new downtowm library, even though oters approved it.

2) Comment by brcitizen2010 - 10/11/2012

Did anyone happen to read the list of supporter for the CATS Tax “Paid Advertisement” in the Baton Rouge Advocate printed on the Sunday before it was to be voted on? It reads like “Who’s Who” to Downtown Development. What’s really going on here is an attempt by the Smart Growth Coalition to free up even more of the city’s general funds, which have been allocated toward miscellaneous programs like CATS, so they can channel more taxpayer money toward the City’s only real concern, “Downtown Development.” Why would individuals like Walter Monsour, President/CEO of the East Baton Rouge Redevelopment Authority, Michael A. Polito, CEO, of MAPP Construction, LLC, Elizabeth “Boo” Thomas, President/CEO Center for Planning Excellent, Christine Nichols, President, Downtown Development, Davis Rhorer, Executive Director of the Downtown Development District, and Matt McKay, Chairman of the East Baton Rouge Mortgage Finance Authority, among others, be so eager to jump on the bandwagon for an already failing system, unless they were to benefit from this in some way? Please enlighten me.

3) Comment by Whatchange - 09/11/2012

If CATS had the money to operate properly as public transportation I believe people would use it. Having been in other cities similar in size as BR and seeing and using public transportation that is being funded and ran the right way, it's a pleasure, the buses are full, they run on time, heck sometimes there are two or three buses at the same bus stop. Not having to rent a car for for a week is a huge plus also, you fly in, take a bus or train from the airport almost to the front door of your hotel, catch a taxi to your appointment/job, man its great and cheap. Open your eyes BR, but then again we are the south, so you might be right DMJ, here in the south we like things the way they are, we don't want things better, we don't even want things better for our kids. After all, a majority are fine working a job for $20 an hour with minimal benefits if any, while in the north, people doing the same job are making twice the pay with far better benefits and the cost of living is no higher, just better.

4) Comment by tradewinns - 09/11/2012

based on ridership, cats is unneeded and unwanted.

5) Comment by 8point6 - 09/11/2012

Relax, my "progressive" friends. CATS isn't going anywhere when this tax is repealed. CATS will have to either file bankruptcy and reorganize, or, privatize. The "faith-based" comunity pushed really hard for this tax. Now, when the above is repealed, then, the "faith- based" community can step in and donate "X" amount of dollars per month from their collections to keep CATS afloat. After all, that's helping the poor like it should be. Oh, and yes, I tithe to my church to help the poor. The comments should be good.

6) Comment by DMJ - 09/11/2012

parish-wide, I meant

7) Comment by DMJ - 09/11/2012

Well...at least Whatchange offers alternatives instead of whining. As for the "service outside the taxed areas," I think this is so people within the taxed areas can get to work - lots of employees out on Bluebonnet, you know. Something to think about. And I'd be on board with a .5 cent sales tax increase....but considering our already high sales taxes (which compensate for our relatively low income and property taxes), I doubt the majority of voters would approve, especially if the tax was state-wide. Perhaps it would be good for CATS to simply go away...the problem with that is...what do we replace it with? Not a lot of private companies lining up to take on public transit in EBR. None, in fact. Another question....why is the commercial corridor of Bluebonnet outside the city limits? This seem weird to anyone else?

8) Comment by Chucky - 09/11/2012

Last commit on this, my heat and A/C cost is going up , my medical is up my gas is up my car ins. is up so why pay for others transportation ? Oh I know DMJ its the right thing to do, Pay more tax and all will be good in the World. I am being taxed by every Company so they can pay their tax.

9) Comment by Whatchange - 09/11/2012

DMJ; I don't care what our tax rate is, a 1/2 cent tax is the only smart thing to do. Make it parish wide, everybody pays it, it is collected year round and can be paid to CATS in quarterly payments. You don't limit it to BR city limits and the Mall Of Louisiana, it is a parish wide tax, do you understand that "Parish Wide", you service the parish. Right now only property owners within BR city limits and Baker city limits pay the tax, CATS should not service outside of these areas, no matter what. Want the areas outside the City limits serviced, pass a parish wide tax. I have always said and strongly believe in public transportation, it is stupid for a city the size of BR not to have it, it just needs to be funded the right way and fares alone will not fund it, I don't care how high the fees, get them to high and nobody rides. You say a 1/2 cent sales tax won't pass for CATS, I say its a 50/50 chance, get everybody out to vote and change the minds of people such as yourself who believe property taxes should fund everything and it has a chance, by the way, I believe property taxes should also be included in the CATS funding. All major cities with a successful transportation system use a sales tax and a property tax to fund the system. They also really need to restructure CATS starting at the top and working down, salaries to high, no need for company cars and car allowances, no need for the secretary to have a secretary, too much waste in the upper office, and we won't even get started on the service they provide or should I say don't provide.

10) Comment by DMJ - 09/11/2012

Bighug, yes I have. Stand on Highland Road anywhere between downtown and LSU and you'll see full buses. Stand anywhere on Florida, Govt, Foster or Perkins and you'll see them more than half full. I'm really sick of hearing that "no one rides the bus." It's simply not true. And I have yet to hear a viable alternative or a solution from anyone. Look... CATS isn't perfect. Nothing is. But it's what we have and it's the only organization actually trying to provide public transit. Instead of snidely and wrongly claiming that we don't need public transit, how about offering something constructive for a change? Well?

11) Comment by Duckyluve - 09/11/2012

No more tax money for cats......they are proving that they cannot keep their word and I do not want to give them another dime. Live within your means

12) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 09/11/2012

Most of the comments here explain why things never improve.

13) Comment by phil - 09/11/2012

The gerrymandering comes into play because a parish-wide tax was originally presented and it failed. Then actual voting results could be used to form a new district that would probably pass the tax. You can call it what you want to, but I call it manipulating tax districts to get more YES votes.

14) Comment by phil - 09/11/2012

should have been "pig in a poke" and not "pig in a pole" in my previous comment. Sorry for the typing error.

15) Comment by Bighug - 09/11/2012

DMJ, how do you figure that a car with one or two passengers is more of a traffic problem than a huge bus with one or two passengers? Has anyone seen one of these busses anywhere close to full? Half full? Three riders?

16) Comment by phil - 09/11/2012

People were sold on a tax that was supposed to be a municipal tax and also that the homestead exemption would not apply. Now we find after the election that the tax that passed is not a municipal tax and the homestead exemption DOES apply. For me this is a simple case of bait and switch and voters have every reason to expect that this tax be repealed and declared null and void. CATS will not go broke and that is a "the sky is falling" tactic. They will have just as much money as they had before the tax election and the city-parish government can keep giving CATS about $3 million a year instead of the city parish using that money for possible pet projects. In addition, if the tax is declared null and void, CATS can come back with another tax proposition that is not a pig in a pole and voters could have more input on what they really think CATS should do. I hope the lawsuit overturns the tax, but I am not sure the right argument is being used in the lawsuit..

17) Comment by DMJ - 09/11/2012

Folgers, a rate hike WAS part of the deal. And Sandy, you're probably right...but that's not what they did. It's not like they extended the tax past the service area; they did the opposite, mostly so people inside the service area could get to work. The question is...if the tax is overturned, what next? I have yet to hear a real answer to this question, a solution that is actually realistic.

18) Comment by Sandy - 09/11/2012

They should have created a taxing district that matched their service area. Then it would have been fair. However, they knew it wouldn't pass, so they limited the vote to an area that would pass it, even though the area of service was completely different. It was pretty stupid of them to think no one would sue them to stop this.

19) Comment by foldgers - 09/11/2012

If the buses go to the mall and Perkins Rowe, then people in that area should also pay some of the tax. ALSO, why on earth can't they raise the fare by 25 cents or so?? Obama and the democrats are willing to cut spending, but will only do so if they get to raise taxes on the wealthy a "little." So, here I am, willing to, not wanting to, but willing to pay the CATS tax, but only if they raise the fares... a "LITTLE." If we are all in this together, then we are all in it together. I am sure people riding the bus can find an extra 50 cents a day or so to ride it. It is not the fault of homeowners that gas prices went up, which is the main reason for the increase. Like flying planes, the fares EVERYONE pays all went up to cover the extra cost, not just the fares of those in first class. Oh, but they are a private company and can do that I guess.

20) Comment by Chucky - 09/11/2012

Let the 19 citizens pay for it.

21) Comment by DMJ - 09/11/2012

We already have among the highest sales taxes in the nation. And you know darn well that if the entire parish votes on a tax increase for CATS, which will only service BR city limits (and mall of LA and Perkins Rowe) that it will be defeated. But I guess that's the point, right? Look... If the CATS tax is overturned, they'll be broke by the end of the year and there will be no more public transit in EBR, which would be a most embarrassing distinction to have as a capitol city. No future tax election would ever pass, especially since it, apparently, has to be parish-wide. No private company would come anywhere near BR knowing it wouldn't have a dedicated source of revenue. No public transit system in the world runs on fares alone. What are the people who use public transit supposed to do if the buses disappear? Are they all supposed to get cars? That should really help the traffic situation, having an additional 10,000 cars on the roads every day. Well, naysayers....what say you? (other than "nay")

22) Comment by Whatchange - 09/11/2012

1/2 cent sales tax, make it parish wide and all this is over with.

23) Comment by DMJ - 09/11/2012

It seems we've reached a new era in American politics where if you don't like the results of an election, you do whatever you can to reverse the results, instead of working together to make things work. Say whatever you will about CATS, but if we fight every election results with lawsuits, and those results are overturned by judges of certain political leanings, we've lost a functioning democracy. It's the same with Jindal and refusing to cooperate with the Medicare expansion in the ACA. He didn't like the results, so he's just not going to obey them. This won't do.

24) Comment by Hello Baton Rouge - 09/11/2012

Why not try something totally revolutionary like making the people who use the service pay more for the service? I'll tell you why, because barely anyone uses the service! It gets old making those who have a little money have to pay for those who don't. If you can't afford a slightly increased fare to ride the bus (yet enjoy countless hours of playing on your $499.00 smart phone), perhaps you should buy a bicycle.

25) Comment by Being_Stupid - 09/11/2012

Abolish all Non-Municipal Taxing Districts including CATS and "Crime Prevention" Taxing Districts. No more Self-Appointed Feel-Good Special Interest Groups / Property Collectives stealing property from Individual Property Owners.

26) Comment by tradewinns - 09/11/2012

whatever it takes! this is a bad tax. this tax was passed on those who pay it by those who don't have to pay it.

27) Comment by Cousin Dave - 09/11/2012

Not sure how anyone can seriouly argue that using the city limits for a taxing district is gerrymandering. But then, I am one of the lucky ones who live in the unincorporated area that don't have to pay this stupid tax.

28) Comment by tball - 09/11/2012

Don't worry!! We are all moving "FORWARD' Can't go wrong!!

29) Comment by Chucky - 09/11/2012

Out dated and a bad idea.

30) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 09/11/2012

The reason this type of action is a permanent fixture in the LA landscape is due to the fact there is never any consequences for the offending party's actions. Hit them in a personal capacity with punitive damages.

31) Comment by Hello Baton Rouge - 09/11/2012

CATS needs to go. Lets get a competent company in here that knows what they are doing

32) Comment by 8point6 - 08/11/2012

"Judge rules CATS tax challenge can go forward" Let's see if this will be the front page headline tomorrow. Let's get this unfair tax repealed ASAP!