Report filed on Little Rock property tax campaign | Arkansas Blog

Friday, September 7, 2012

Report filed on Little Rock property tax campaign

Posted By on Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 5:56 AM

The committee promoting a continuation of a three-mill property tax for Little Rock streets and drainage work has begun accounting campaign finances.

I won't fully rehash my long history of agitating for full disclosure in ballot issue campaigns. Typically, the campaigns (in Little Rock and statewide — see the highway tax campaign, particularly) have disclosed only payments to professional campaign managers, who in turn have parceled out the money in ways that have NOT been specifically disclosed as the law clearly intends. (The Ethics Commission has decided inadequate drafting didn't make that specific disclosure mandatory and plans to seek changes in the law in 2014 to require it.)

Gary Smith, treasurer of the campaign, and representatives of the Markham Group, again managing the campaign as it managed the city sales tax campaign over which my ethics complaint arose, had said previously there'd be specific disclosure in this campaign.

Having looked, I'm not ready to provide a standing ovation.

Here's the latest filing from the committee Keep Building Little Rock's Future. Through early this week, it had raised almost $60,000 and spent about $31,000. Top contributors were 50 for the Future, $9,600, and, at $5,000 each, the Friday Law Firm, Stephens Group, McGeorge Contracting and First Security Bank.

On the expenditure side, apart from a $1,000 payment to a campaign staffer, all payments are again listed to the Markham Group. They are labeled as to purpose — push cards, printing, postage and the like. But if these costs went to pay sub-contractors, none is listed. Given what's been spent so far, I agree that not much useful information would necessarily be revealed in deeper disclosure. But the principle is key. Think of campaigns where broadcast advertising and get-out-the-vote workers are employed. These are the sorts of things worth knowing. Indeed, even the names and hometowns of direct mail contractors are of interest, particularly to local business people. Did a government seeking a property tax increase, for example, bypass a local taxpaying business to place work in another city?

There's a move toward more disclosure in this report, yes. I also should note that the Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce isn't serving as administrator, headquarters and puppeteer of this campaign, as in the sales tax campaign. Of course, this tax doesn't include a $20 million-plus gratuity for a Chamber pet project (tech park), as the sales tax did.

Tags: , , , ,

From the ArkTimes store


Comments (4)

Showing 1-4 of 4

Add a comment

Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-4 of 4

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

Readers also liked…

  • The long and winding road: No exception yet for 30 Crossing

    The Arkansas highway department's representative on the Metroplan board of directors told the board today that the department is requesting an exception to the planning agency's cap on six lanes for its 30 Crossing project to widen Interstate 30 from six to 10 (and more) lanes.
    • Jun 29, 2016
  • Sarah Huckabee Sanders becomes White House press secretary

    Sarah Huckabee Sanders, daughter of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, is the new White House press secretary.
    • Jul 21, 2017
  • Satanic Temple: Make Rapert pay for Ten Commandments monument

    A petition drive has begun to encourage a demand that Sen. Jason Rapert pay for the legal fees in defending his Ten Commandments monument proposed for the state Capitol grounds. It's more work by the Satanic Temple, which has fought church-state entanglement around the country.
    • Aug 28, 2016

Most Shared

Most Recent Comments



© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation