City leaders divided on tax use

‘Go Forward Pine Bluff’ money at center of contention

PINE BLUFF—In an effort to prevent the diversion of $2.1 million annually from downtown revitalization efforts, Mayor Shirley Washington plans to introduce an ordinance that will replace a resolution the council passed earlier this month and codify how funds are spent from a 2017 sales tax known as the “Go Forward Pine Bluff tax.”

The mayor’s proposal, which she plans to introduce to the council Monday night, would replace the resolution sponsored by City Council member Ivan Whitfield. Whitfield’s resolution allocates $300,000 annually to the Police Department, $200,000 to the Fire Department, $1 million for drainage improvements, $300,000 for youth and community and $300,000 for the city’s convention center.

The ordinance also would put into place an administrative process for evaluation of projects submitted for tax

funding to determine whether a project fits in with the overall revitalization plan of the city.

The discussions took place amid deepening divisions on the City Council over support for Go Forward Pine Bluff, a private-public partnership with the city that is the recipient of about $4.5 million a year. Voters approved a five-eighths cent sales tax in 2017 to revitalize downtown Pine Bluff and fund the partnership.

In two separate committee meetings last week, aldermen Whitfield and Steven Mays leveled accusations that Go Forward Pine Bluff is running a shadow government with no accountability to the city regarding how it spends its money.

Whitfield said the ordinance does nothing to assuage his reservations about Go Forward Pine Bluff, and he reiterated his opposition to allowing the entity to receive sales tax funds.

“This is dwindling down the responsibility of our elected officials for that to be passed,” Whitfield said.

Although the 2017 ballot initiative was marketed as a tax to revitalize the city’s downtown area and has often been referred to as the “Go Forward Pine Bluff tax,” Whitfield said the council is within its rights to re-purpose any or all of the funds generated. Despite the way the tax was described to voters, the ballot issue itself only referred to the tax as a general use sales tax.

“I have a copy of the ballot and if you look at the ballot, that’s what an alderman would have to look at,” Whitfield said. “When I pulled the ballot, because I was not an alderman at that time, this is what the ballot says. It’s a legal document.”

Asked if he was aware of how the issue was marketed to voters, Whitfield was equivocal in his response.

“I won’t say that’s how it was sold to the people,” he said. “I’ll say that’s what people called it.”

Mays, who voted in favor of Whitfield’s resolution, said he has opposed Go Forward Pine Bluff from the outset and still opposes allowing the organization to have any input in spending public funds.

“Go Forward actually is taking a lot of money from our citizens, and I don’t feel like they’re using it in the right direction,” Mays said. “I would call it a scam on the citizens of Pine Bluff.”

Glen Brown Jr., one of the three aldermen who voted against Whitfield’s resolution, said he supports the mayor’s ordinance and sees it as a good way to ensure funding for revitalization of the city’s crumbling downtown.

“We were already funding a lot of those line items that were in that original resolution, and so I feel like this ordinance sets things straight,” Brown said. “It lets the people know that we are handling the needs and priorities of the city.”

Whitfield’s resolution would divert $1 million of money from the five-eighths cent sales tax to address drainage issues that have plagued the city for years.

But Brown said the city doesn’t know how much it will cost to address those issues, and a study is currently underway to assess its needs.

“That’s a little premature, to put a million dollars toward our drainage when we have no idea what the actual cost will be,” Brown said. “I think that was some kind of knee-jerk reaction to get something passed, but a million dollars will not likely do very much toward our drainage situation.”

Win Trafford and Joni Alexander, who also opposed Whitfield’s resolution, said they support the mayor’s ordinance and plan to vote in favor of it.

Donald Hatchett voted for the resolution but said he will have to study the mayor’s ordinance further before he decides whether or not to support it.

Bruce Lockett , who voted in favor of Whitfield’s resolution, said he is still firm in his opposition to using the city sales tax to fund Go Forward Pine Bluff when it operates in a manner which, he said, lacks transparency.

“We can do a budgeting process where the council knows where the entirety of the five-eighths cents is going before the budget is approved,” Lockett said. “Right now, things are done in such a vague and ambiguous way that nobody really knows what they’re doing.”

Lockett also took issue with the Pine Bluff Urban Renewal Agency, which is funded through the sales tax and plays a major role in the plan to revitalize downtown. He said it often keeps council members out of the loop until the time comes to approve expenses.

“As they do projects and buy property, nobody can relate it to the plan and they don’t choose to relate it to the plan in a transparent manner,” Lockett said. “They maintain that you come to their meetings and you might know what they’re doing. But I maintain that, as an elected official, it might be nice to get a heads up every now and then in terms of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

Maurice Taggart, director of the Urban Renewal Agency, bristled at accusations that the agency he directs fails to keep the council informed of its activities.

“I can justify every expenditure of every major project we’ve got going on and correspond it directly to the urban renewal plan,” Taggart said. “We’ve made every effort to put it out there and let it be known when and where our meetings are held so I don’t know what the issue is in terms of transparency.”

Lloyd Holcomb, who voted in support of Whitfield’s resolution, did not return messages asking for comment on Thursday.

Washington ran her ordinance through two committees this week — the Development and Planning Committee and Ways and Means Committee — both of which decided to send the ordinance on to the full council with no recommendation for or against passage.

The mayor said she plans to run it through the Administration Committee on Monday prior to having it go before the full council Monday night.

“I wanted to run it through as many committees as I can,” she said. “I want to be sure that as many council members as possible can be exposed to it before it goes to the full council.”