Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board told IP facility closure would cut school property-tax revenue by about $2.36 million
Summary
Staff presented tax-assessor figures showing the planned demolition or decommissioning of an IP industrial facility would remove a large taxable base, reducing parish- and district-level property-tax revenue and producing sharp drops in several school funding lines, particularly in District 7.
Miss Palmer opened the finance, facilities and insurance report to review the budgetary effect of a planned closure and demolition of the IP facility, and staff described figures provided by Tax Assessor Yolanda Reed.
The presentation said the IP property’s taxable value was reported as $56,562,000. Using existing millage rates, staff said the closure would reduce parishwide general-fund property-tax receipts from roughly $5,375,000 to $4,000,716, a roughly 12% reduction. District 7 would see much larger proportional losses: staff presented a $1,696,860 figure tied to District 7 levies that, when reallocated across line items, produces about a 60% reduction to building-repair-and-equipment (BRE) funding in that district.
The report broke out several line-item impacts presented to the board: BRE funding was shown dropping from about $1,132,000 to $454,000; bond-service support from roughly $755,000 to $302,000; and a local mill identified in the presentation as producing about $944,000 falling to roughly $378,000. Staff summarized the total reduction across all affected tax lines as about $2,355,000. The presentation also said IP (referred to in the report as “IP KNP”) paid roughly $5,743,000 in total property taxes and that 41% of those collections had been flowing to the school board under current levy allocations.
Board members asked timing and valuation questions. A board member asked whether the change would affect the 2026–27 school year; staff replied that current-year collections remain in place for the year ending in June and that the tax loss would show up in collections after the property ceased to be taxable (the presentation said taxpayers are billed in November and pay in December). Staff acknowledged some uncertainty around the timeline and the precise residual taxable value during any multi-year demolition or deconstruction process; Tax Assessor Reed, staff said, declined to give a firm estimate of residual value during deconstruction.
The presentation and Q&A made clear the figures were staff calculations based on the assessor’s numbers, not a final budget action. No formal motion or vote was recorded on the item; board members said the numbers would require further adjustment to the district budget and planning.
Board documents provided at the meeting were reported as the source of the figures and were cited during the discussion.
