Wednesday, August 12, 2015

What These Monuments Stand For

So I actually have a nuanced and complex opinion on the monuments and street names in New Orleans that honor the mythology of heroes to the so-called Confederate States, the cause they fought for, and the cause these monuments were built to celebrate. But since so many of the folks who want to keep these monuments and street names and all they represent, who defend them with bombastic and hyperbolic statements as if this is some simple issue, I feel it is only right that I return the favor with my own oversimplified position.

Throw these things in the damn lake and let them be buried in the mud.

These are monuments and honorifics that celebrate people who took up arms against the United States of America and for four years of open warfare attempted to destroy our nation. They fought for the "rights" and "freedom" of some human beings to own and enslave other human beings deemed inferior due to the color of their skin.

The period of open warfare did not achieve these political goals, and instead  secured the Union, ensured emancipation, and provided for the expansion of civil rights to previously enslaved Americans. A period of insurgent warfare and terrorism followed, as adherents to the old system attempted to restore the old order of things, where the rights of newly freed citizens would again be diminished due to the color of one's skin. There are monuments celebrating this warfare as well, right here in this city.

These are not questionable assertions or theories. These are the facts backed up by the historic record, often written by the very hands of the men who fought to destroy the Union and the men who fought to destroy the rights of others after the Civil War ended. These writings and statements of purpose we considered so uncontroversial that the very organizations that would later hold these men up as paragons of Southern patriotism and pride would preserve the very writings and statements of purpose that make up this historical record. They would do so unashamedly.

They would be able to do so because the simmering and unending insurgency in the South became too expensive for white Northern sentiment to justify.  White Northern sentiment, after all, was not a monolith thrown behind support of civil rights. In the end, the old temptations of power and money conspired to undermine the projects of Reconstruction and civil rights. In the end, certain interests in both the North and South realized what could be achieved with white sectional reconciliation, and what material wealth could be gained by keeping millions of citizens just above the institution of slavery, in the strangling arms of Jim Crow.

That white sectional reconciliation, that return to something close to the old order, was something to be celebrated. And what better way to celebrate the eventual "victors" of an issue than by building grand monuments to them, in places of public note? What better way to honor them than to have grand thoroughfares graced with their names? What better way to enshrine their "restored" legacy than to name schools for them? All of these are the ways our culture and civilization celebrate the giants among men.

What better way to say "we told you so" than to place the losers of a war in the highest pinnacles of cultural honor and, in the process, legitimize and polish away the ugly motivations behind the cause they fought for and attach some higher civic meaning to the military loss?

And once that higher civic meaning was attached, and the ugliness of "they fought to own other human beings" was washed away from their legacy with stories of defense of home and hearth and question of rights, all white Southerners were encouraged to buy into the fantasy (or discouraged from challenging it too fiercely). Many could now double down on the belief that superiority of skin color was real, that forces for "good" might have lost on the battlefield but won out in the end. Whole cults of personality grew up around the mythology of these men and reinforced the social hierarchy with laws, social behavior, and violence if anyone got too far out of line.

When monument defenders talk about the "history" they so desperately want to preserve, that is the history they are preserving whether they want to believe it or not. There are no footnotes of fine print on these statues and street names that say "we know this is complicated, but..." If such footnotes existed, if such context was added, then this may not be such an emotional issue for so many.

Look at the opposition, after all. The most popular online petition in support of keeping these monuments to heroes of slavery's cause demand the Mayor "stop talking about them." That's because even the civic conversation itself is dangerous - the very discussion of why these monuments were built puts the lie to the heroic mythology. Uncomfortable truths aren't usually welcome, and many individuals in the South are deeply invested in the bedtime story of what these men on those monuments represented. They aren't interested in the real context, the real history, or facing how the legacy of that history still runs deeply within our civic DNA to this day.

And those who would scold us for "erasing history" by moving these monuments out of their places of public prominence to places where appropriate historical context can be provided? They are defending monuments that served specifically to erase a more accurate accounting of history. They are defending monuments used to rewrite the cultural narrative of the South and celebrate the violent failure of Reconstruction's nascent civil rights project. They are defending trophies of propaganda to the Lost Cause. There are no footnotes or fine print on those statues and street names, after all.

There are plenty of places to put truth to the lies these monuments tell. General James Longstreet of the Confederacy moved to New Orleans after the Civil War and became a strong civic leader in this town. He was one of the officers in command of the integrated Metropolitan Police when the White League attacked the State House in New Orleans in 1874. He was pulled from his horse and was shot and injured. His actions for the Reconstruction government of New Orleans and Louisiana did not endear him to those who believed in the Lost Cause. Despite all his investments in New Orleans, there is no monument to James Longstreet in this town. But there is a monument to those who attacked him and his men at the Battle of Liberty Place.

PGT Beauregard of the Confederacy returned to his home in New Orleans after the Civil War. While he was no fan of Reconstruction or social integration, he grudgingly accepted political and economic rights of newly freed citizens. In the interest of calming New Orleans - violence was bad for business - he spoke eloquently on the topic. These words were not palpable to the Lost Cause, so do not appear on his monument on Esplanade Avenue.

Finally, at the corner of Carrollton and Banks, there is another monument. It is a plaque at the base of a flagpole, dedicating Carrollton as the "Avenue of Palms" to veterans of a different war, a forgotten war, Desert Shield and Desert Storm in 1991. There is no proud US flag on the rusty flagpole, the plaque could use a good powerwashing to really make out the words, and the base itself is off-kilter and surrounded by litter.

You'd think that, with all these signatures and speakers loudly defending the history and deep meaning of New Orleans' monuments, at least of few of them would mention this humble bit of metal and concrete as worth of at least a little attention. But we know it isn't really about the monuments themselves, it is about what they represent. And uncomfortable truths aren't usually welcome.



Saturday, August 08, 2015

Letters to my Representatives: the Iran Deal

After reading that former Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu has come out against the Iran Deal, and seeing that sitting New York Senator Chuck Shumer is also making moves to scuttle President Obama's signature foreign policy achievement, I figured it was time to email my representative, Cedric Richmond of New Orleans, and let him know how I felt about the situation. 

Good afternoon, Rep. Richmond. 
Thank you for your work for Louisiana and New Orleans. 
I am writing to let you know I fully support the Iran Deal as negotiated through diplomacy by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry. 
While I realize the deal has flaws and limitations, I believe it is in the best interests of the United States of America to see this agreement becomes official. I believe that if Congress undermines this deal, the United States will be abandoned by our allies in Europe and by Russia and China over the issue of Iran. 
President Obama and Secretary Kerry have done an outstanding job keeping this strong coalition together and putting consistent pressure on Iran at the negotiating table. Undermining the agreement will only serve to undermine that important work and cause our nation to lose the credibility required to pursue diplomacy with our nation's rivals. If this happens, I believe the sanctions regime will crumble as the coalition does, and that the United States will be alone - and in a position of weakness - when attempting to keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons in the future. 
I also believe that, should the United States find itself in that weaker position, the chances of armed conflict with Iran is much greater. I fully support diplomacy over another military involvement in the Middle East, as our nation already remains engaged in several unresolved conflicts in the region. 
I am also keeping in mind that many of the loudest critics of the Iran Deal are also the very same individuals who promised that the Iraq War and Afghanistan campaigns would be "cakewalks" for the United States. And we all know how empty those promises and predictions turned out to be, and the terrible costs this country has borne because of that. 
Please support President Obama, Secretary Kerry, and our allied nations' hard work in securing this deal through diplomacy. 
Thank you. 
-Patrick

Saturday, July 11, 2015

The Lost Cause Winning Again

Welp. Now that South Carolina has brought the Rebel Flag down, our "national conversation" on race and American history is ready to be turned back over to modern day believers in the Lost Cause. The full power of our larger, 150 year fairy tale history is rearing its ugly head in defense of our plague of Ozymandian monuments to Santa Claus the Easter Bunny the Tooth Fairy assorted mythological personalities created in the aftermath of the Civil War.

Not to say everyone contributing to this handover is a believer in the so-called Confederacy. Far from it, in fact. Most of the folks ready to man the battlements in the defense of imaginary Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and the rest are simply holding on to the sentimentality of growing up in a region that cared more about heroic bedtime stories than it did with primary documents and evidence.

Others will appeal to the "history" - some to that of the South itself as if we are defined by 4 years of rebellion and 150 years of trying to cover up the real reasons for that rebellion, others as if the mere existence of a statue for a certain period of time should mean the thing itself is inviolate. Some defenders of the status quo are actually individuals who despise the so-called Confederacy and Lost Cause, but they dismiss any discussion of monuments and street names as "not focusing on the real problems," as if our larger social complexity is incapable of walking and chewing gum at the same time. As if so many of the larger social problems they'd rather we be talking about don't have their cultural roots in the fairy tale of the Lost Cause.

Meanwhile, the Lost Cause doesn't  care if its defenders actually agree with it or not, semantically. It just keeps plodding along as it has since 1865, waiting for its opponents to argue with each other or change the subject before it quietly slips over to the desk and writes its own history when no one is looking or doing any fact checking. Before you know it, Bobby Lee is building schools for the children of his previously enslaved-Americans, and would have seen them all become productive voting citizens if those pesky carpetbaggers and scalawags hadn't come in and forced the South to turn to Jim Crow laws. Or something. I haven't checked the comments sections in the past hour, so I'm not fully up to date on all the new magical things Lee and Davis and the gang did to selflessly fix the country they tried so hard to break after they tried to break it.

The most successful defenders of the Lost Cause are currently getting everyone caught up talking about statues and place names for George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson. We've even gone off the rails so far in New Orleans that there's a "serious" discussion over the meaning of the fleur de lis and whether the city should abandon the symbol.

How does it help the so-called Confederacy to talk about bad parts of slave-owners? Well, despite their complex and often troubling places in American history, Washington, Jefferson, & Jackson were all Presidents of the UNITED States of America. There is definitely a need to further scrutinize their mythological histories with their historical realities, but not when the topic of conversation is focused on the so-called CONFEDERATE States of America and the cultural legacy of the Lost Cause in the South. Suddenly, you're rhetorically defending men who tried to destroy the United States through rebellion by referencing men who all used their office to put down rebellions or respond to threats against the United States.

Furthermore, consensus history already includes a lot about George, Tom, & Andy's slave owning, Native American fighting, and general hypocrisies. New Orleans already took names of theirs off local public schools. Most of us learn that the story of George Washington & the Cherry Tree is apocryphal - it is one of our first lessons in the difference between what we tell children at bedtime and what is the real story.

The Lost Cause, on the other hand, is a bunch of people holding onto the so-called Confederate States equivalent of that cherry tree story, holding their hands over their ears and yelling LA LA LA when someone wants to tell them their Christmas presents aren't actually delivered down the chimney by a Coca-Cola marketing campaign. The first rule of the Lost Cause is you do not criticize the Lost Cause.

As far as the fleur is concerned, history is full of appropriations and assimilations of symbols one way or another. I'm fairly confident, based on my limited experience in New Orleans, that the fleur de lis symbol long ago ceased to be one associated with French colonial black codes, and became far more inclusive among a very diverse population associated with living and participating in the culture of this city. As with all things, there is good reason to explore the history behind the symbol. But we can accept, in many cases, that history is not static and things can change, over time, in a culture.

Just like the United States flag flew over centuries of enslavement and Jim Crow and terrible things done to many ethnic minorities, as a symbol it has grown through the years to be more inclusive as the reality and aspirations of the nation became more inclusive. There is a reason it was carried at the front of the column as the marchers entered Selma, there is a reason it was waving on the steps of the Supreme Court as same sex marriage was legalized, and there is a reason it was seen on the steps of the South Carolina capitol as the Rebel Flag came down on Friday. If you weren't watching the live feed, you may have missed the audio of the crowd chanting "USA, USA, USA!"

It was easy to feel, in that moment, that things were changing. How gloriously & naively hopeful. While we're watching that flag come down, the Lost Cause has snuck in the back and started deleting paragraphs in the story we're writing right now. Listen close and you can hear which words they're typing in place: First the Rebel Flag, next the US Flag! First the Washington NFL logo, next the Saints' fleur!  First Robert E. Lee's statue, next the Statue of Liberty! What about the black on black crime in Chicago? Which city will "they" burn to the ground next? The second rule of the Lost Cause is you do not criticize the Lost Cause.

Because that's what all this symbolism, the flags and the monuments, come down to. If Lee and Davis and the gang had spent as much real time on reconciliation as their mythology states, they might be worthy of the monuments and street names. They could have thrown themselves and their full clout into the project of Reconstruction, civil rights, and been remembered for building a better South and a better country after all, and it would have been in truth instead of in fantasy. Instead, they became the very symbols standing in the way of progress and reconciliation. The Rebel Flag was flown by rioting whites, the symbol of police dogs and firehoses, bombed churches and burning crosses, terrorism and night riders. Because of this, we've been going over the same old ground for 150 years, and the proof was in the pudding. Jim Crow won. The Lost Cause won. And we do not have the South the bedtime stories promised. We have nothing close, despite generations of work. So strong is the current we're working against.

That still doesn't stop the bedtime story from winning the day. The Lost Cause is upstairs putting the kids to sleep with it, while the other adults are still downstairs at the dinner table, arguing amongst themselves.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Proof of Life

It is that time of year again.

There are tropical waves in the Atlantic basin. Rising Tide 9 has opened registration for this year's conference. UNO is seeking submissions for a book on post-Katrina writing.

“If you wrote, or remember reading, blogs/posts that should not be missed—because they crystallized the particular challenges of post-Katrina life, or maybe even inspired action for addressing them—I want to hear from you,”- Cynthia Joyce

That's how it starts. Scrolling through the Rising Tide archives and catch glimpses of Ashley fighting with the sound board, Greg chuckling at his own subversive (and wildly inappropriate) jokes, and Morwen's soft and resolute lines of questioning. Trying to recall who all took shots off that ski in the yacht club. Dusting off that copy of A Howling in the Wires - the first real attempt at an anthology I was aware of - thinking of that night at Mimi's where it seemed everyone got a turn at the microphone before anyone believed a noise ordinance might really shut the music down.

Times like these are for going back through the archives. Bouncing from weblog to weblog, finding out which ones are still active, which ones still have links going all the way back. There are posts there you remember reading the day they published, there are posts there you see for the first time. See how many have changed over the years.* Those that are already gone provide some scope of how easy it is to lose our own history, how fragile it is to capture.

I wish Ms. Joyce well. I think it is important work.

For myself, when I do this, around this time every year, I usually start as far back as possible. Back when I didn't really have the sense of how to pay attention to stuff like this. That's where I find the most work I missed - that time where so much of the writing sounded like it was looking for or giving proof of life.

After a catastostrophic event and the ongoing catastrophic aftermath, bathing in the nude in front of the house is quite liberating after the first few minutes... I don't recommend this for all catastrophic events - preferably one where most people have evacuated... pick and choose your event carefully. - Gulfsails, September 2005 
These people have shocked me out of my delusional complacency, we are not fine down here. All is not well - but there are these bright pockets where, with no better way to put it and apologizing beforehand for the mellodrama... God sleeps on a cot in a Winn-Dixie parking lot caring for kittens.  - Gulfsails, October 2005 

Of Men in Trucks & Mardi Gras:
They run red lights and stop signs and turn in front of you like you’re not there. They have no use for civil society. I’m glad they’re here–a nice pair of them gutted my mama’s house–but I can’t wait ’til they’re fucking gone. - G-Bitch, December 2005  
I love Mardi Gras only slightly less than Jazz Fest. My priority today was not grading the 23 essays I received Friday. (to clear my plate for the 20 I receive Monday) or the 4 lesson plans I need by Monday morning or getting my office computer to my office space or the pre-midterm alerts to students at risk of failing—it was getting to the grocery store, before parades trap me in my home, to lay in supplies for a weekend of parades and grilling and drinking. I’m a New Orleanian with New Orleanian priorities. - G-Bitch, February 2006
Prescient visions of Dizneylandrieu:
Imagine if you will a New Orleans without Mardi Gras Indians; without neighborhoods where young boys actually want to learn to play the trombone, so they can march proudly at the head of the parade; without the little neighborhood restaurants where Creole cooking was perfected before we gave it to the world; without the little bars where every generation of musicians have played for a circle of friends and neighbors before they took our music into the world. - Wet Bank Guide, September 2005
Hardships
Hearing about seven fatal stress related heart attacks, in people ranging from 83 to 20, over the course of three days is overwhelming. These seven came from every ethnic and socio-economic group. The stress is an equal opportunity killer, it seems. When you see all the reports about structures and dollars, please remember the humans involved. They seem to be getting lost in the shuffle now that they're off the roofs and off your TV screens. - NOLA Slate, March 2006
This picture. Christmas 2005.

When people visited. This could have been written at any time in the last 9 years.
I managed to hold it together enough to communicate how difficult it was for people to rebuild in these areas that the city, the state, the country was willing to write off before I dropped my charges off at the edge of the French Quarter. I’ve been racking my brains ever since for the reasons why this particular tour felt different from many others I’ve given since we moved back to New Orleans in 2006. Not too long ago, I complained that New Orleans since the levee breaches had become a cause, not a city. I think now that I was wrong. - Liprap on Humid City, April, 2012
Song references.
Emmylou Harris once said on "A Prairie Home Companion" that she wrote to Pete Seeger when she was much younger, telling him she didn't feel she could be a folksinger because she hadn't suffered enough. 
Seeger's one word response was, "Wait." - Liprap, November 2006



(*What the heck is this?)

Thursday, July 03, 2014

Hurricane Arthur & Storm Surge

What a difference two years makes. For those of you keeping score at home, two of the biggest weather forecast misfires of 2012 involved the storm surge of Hurricanes Isaac and Sandy. They were both Category 1 storms, but their Category 3 size storm surges did most of their damage. It seems even when weather predictions go out of their way to warn of surge, when it is associated with the words "category" and "one," folks are more likely to think they can ride out the storm ("hunker down" being the term of art in Louisiana).

But as we learned, Cat 3 size water packs one hell of a punch. If you're going to hunker, you better make sure you're behind some big levees or on higher ground. If not, you'd better make a plan to get there.



So nowadays, NHC has experimental storm surge inundation maps. They've also got rainfall totals estimations, because flash flooding is like the tornado of flooding, and shows up often without much advance warning. And in places that have functioning drainage systems and less rain than New Orleans (we deal with flash flooding on a sometimes hourly basis), the people may not be used to any flooding, so that's also a big upgrade.

To demonstrate the power of storm surge, the attached screenshot is the NHC's potential storm surge inundation map of St. Simons Island and Glynn County. For reference, this location is now a few hundred miles behind Hurricane Arthur. But the power of that Category 1 storm was enough to forecast high water up into the Marshes of Glynn, and from North Florida all the way to the Chesapeake. You can see why they ordered the evacuation of Hatteras Island in North Carolina if you click on the NHC surge forecast and scroll over to the Outer Banks. Coastal living is glorious, but it comes at a price.

If you're looking for other resources to follow during #hurricaneseason in the Atlantic and Gulf, here are some good clicks (if you aren't already). Feel free to leave any good ones I've missed in the comments:

@NHC_Atlantic
@NHC_Surge
National Weather Service Storm Prediction Center

Eric Holthaus who is also live-blogging Hurricane Arthur at Slate

Weather Underground

The Weather Channel Breaking

And of course, your local NWS spots, government accounts, and Emergency Management offices. Mine include:

@NWS_NewOrleans
@NOLAReady
@NWSJacksonville
Glynn County (GA) Government



Thursday, June 05, 2014

The Prisoner Exchange Problem

It is well that war is so terrible, else we should become too fond of it.” – General Robert E. Lee

You know what I don’t like? I don’t like seeing those Taliban guys hugging each other after being released to their folks in Qatar. I don’t like to see those smiles on their faces, knowing that they helped run an organization that resisted American & NATO soldiers with force of arms. I don’t like thinking about the fact that these guys may have literally shot the guns that killed American soldiers. Letting them go even though they did that sucks, and there’s no two ways about it.

But I’ve read more than five minutes worth of real history in my life, not the bullshit version Hollywood or Fox News wants us to think of as “history,” and I know that Americans getting killed and hurt is part and parcel of any American national decision to go to war. Part of the thing about seeing the enemy as a human enemy, despite how distasteful I find their politics or reasons for fighting, is the acceptance that they will fight when we send men and women with guns into their country. Both sides of that coin are why decisions to go to war should never be taken so lightly.

Taking such decisions lightly means you're voluntarily giving up the context you need to judge decisions made when it comes to fighting a war. You'll let your emotions rule your decisions instead of looking at the bigger picture. Right now, we're seeing this in a big way in the controversy regarding a prisoner exchange. Now, there's a lot going on with this right now, but this is about the "controversial" issue of prisoner exchange. Because apparently, we have to go over this again.

Do you know why prisoners are taken during an armed conflict? Do you know why they are supposed to be treated humanely while in captivity? Do you know why they are supposed to be allowed to return to their families and communities as the fighting comes to an end? Do you know why we have international laws on matters such as these?

These are serious questions. Over the past 13 years, we seem to have lost the answers as a nation. Some people would have you believe that the reason to capture enemy fighters is to torture them, that's just what these "enemy combatants" deserve, amirite? Others decry those of us who believe in humane treatment and end of conflict exchange as "coddling" or "unwilling to offend" terrorists. While the urge to punish those who take up arms against our nation is a natural one, there are real reasons not to go down that path, and these reasons are all in American national security interests.

There is a very tangible, tactical reason for humane treatment of prisoners. If an enemy believes they will be mistreated, killed, or tortured if taken prisoner, they will resist all the harder against our troops. They are more likely to fight to the last man. On the other hand, if it is widely known that being taken prisoner means humane treatment at the hands of the enemy, and eventual release back to family and communities, that makes it more likely the enemy will surrender to our troops. And if there is less enemy to fight, the more likely our side is to win the conflict with fewer casualties.

Furthermore, think about what happens when the war is over, or winding down. Hopefully, America will be on the side that has won the war, and has killed or captured more of the enemy than our own side has sustained. Hopefully, those numbers mean you ARE exchanging prisoners at 5 to 1 rates or higher. And here's the hard part: you have to be mature, taking war seriously, and accept the fact that at the end of an armed conflict, we are going to release people who have shot at our soldiers. It is a tough pill to swallow, but that’s what we do because it means they are releasing our people who shot at them.

Because the very real alternative is that the other side institutes a TAKE NO PRISONERS attitude, and simply kill wounded or surrendering soldiers on OUR side, or tortures and mistreats them once captured. The expectation that both sides will behave in such humane ways to people who have been shooting at them isn’t done because we like to “coddle” or “not offend” the enemy – the expectation is they will extend the same courtesy to OUR people who we have CHOSEN to send into HARM’s WAY. That is also why people who violate those norms while in possession of prisoners are usually considered war criminals. Usually.

That's the math, boys and girls. That's why we can't sink to an enemy's level. While those gut reactions and a desire for retribution are completely natural, when you make a national decision to invade another country, you shouldn’t dehumanize an enemy so significantly that you take it as a personal insult, far away from the front lines, that the people who live in the place we are invading may choose to resist the invasion with force of arms.

That end-of-conflict trade, that rules-of-war thing that the last administration and their cheerleaders spent so much time making fun of, that practice is founded in the critically real understanding that sides in an armed conflict take prisoners in the first place, treat them humanely in the second, and release them at the end of the conflict.

Pretending prisoner exchange is some new thing cooked up by a President you don't like is simply an ignorant, Fox News and Hollywood fueled misunderstanding of American military history. I can't imagine what today's toxic media culture would make of American treatment of German prisoners.


Thursday, May 29, 2014

Short Term Solutions

So it seems there are a lot of NOLA culture warriors who have discovered the existence of short term rentals, and point to this practice as if it were both new and one of the root causes of the housing affordability and scarcity problem in New Orleans.

For me, short term rentals can pose a very real problem in certain contexts, but there are pros and cons to the practice. In general, I find the cons arise as mainly as a symptom of a larger structural problem that isn’t nearly as sexy to talk about.

Property tax policy.

If you think you’ve heard tune before on Hurricane Radio, that’s because you have. All the talk of “gentrification,” “development,” “luxury apartments,” “blight,” and “short term rentals” can sound like a bunch of complex and intractable problems that have no solutions. It can make you want to throw up your hands (metaphorically or physically) in frustration. That’s something that happens when you focus on the symptoms of a larger problem – you’re trying to fix what’s broke without trying to break what doesn’t need fixing. Focus on the root concern, even with a little bit of non-expert attention, and you’d be surprised what solutions you start to see. That’s where empowerment comes from, because there is something tangible you can start to advocate for in making a change.

Taking current property tax policy into consideration (at least that which I can research online), here are some ideas I came up with that might mitigate the short term rental crisis through policy in less than 5 steps: 

1. Have a high property tax rate, but allow the property owners to apply for itemized deductions.

2. Have a huge homestead exemption tied to a percentage of assessed property value as opposed to a set amount.

3. Generous (and possibly increasing) property tax deductions based on proof of long term renters, or low rent charged.

4. Smaller property tax deductions based on self-identification of short-term rental usage.

5. Proven violations of housing ordinances result in revocation of all deductions; finding of demolition by neglect allows assessment to look at property’s market value as if not neglected.

Done.

Now, I’m no expert on these matters, and some of these ideas may not be good ones. I’m not addressing how the assessor’s office comes up with property assessments, because I can’t seem to find that online. But some of these ideas may be workable. They sure help me think about short term rentals, land use, and gentrification in different ways. Lord knows, it sure beats complaining about how “hipsters” ruining New Orleans.

I could go into long-winded detail on almost all of them, but I'll focus this on how the Homestead Exemption (HE) is right now calibrated too low to help anyone with a house that's worth more than $100,000.

And you don’t have to take my word for it, you can go directly to the New Orleans Assessors’ Office to see how this works. Right now, here are the two basic property tax equations used to estimate your tax, as published on their website.

10% of property value = assessed value.
(Assessed value - $7500 HE) * .14706 + modifications = Your Property Tax

Do you see where the problem is here? The example uses a $100,000 home, and by that measure, the $7500 Homestead Exemption seems very reasonable. That’s because $7500 subtracted from $10,000 is a 75% discount. Looking at property value history of almost any property on Zillow, you can see how stable property values were right up until the flood. When this HE was adopted in the 80s (I think), it was probably very reasonable for most of the homes in NOLA.

Using The Lens Property Tax Calculator, a homeowner with a HE pays $450.45 on a $100,000 home.

But THESE days, median property values in NOLA are FAR higher than $100,000, especially for in-demand neighborhoods. What does that HE look like for a $300,000 home? Still $7500. But this time, subtracted from $30,000 assessed value. That’s only a  25% HE discount.

Again to our calculator, we find that if your home is now worth $300,000, you're paying $3425.85.

That may sound “progressive” from a taxation standpoint – the more your property is worth, the less percentage your discount is – but it isn’t calibrated to protect middle class and working class property owners who have seen their home values jump from $100K to $300K in the last decade without an associated increase in wages. In this way increasing home values added to inflation collude to increase tax liability on homeowners. This is especially true at the low end of the home ownership scale – as those properties have seen the biggest increase, percentage wise, in tax liability. In effect, those who already lived in the grand dames of New Orleans homes haven’t had a tremendous increase as percentage, because that $7500 discount already didn’t mean much to their property tax liability.* But folks who bought or moved or lived here 15 or more years ago because regular home values and rents were affordable have been the hardest hit with these increases. Heaven help those folks who are on a fixed income.

And as with all things, if you’re renting at an affordable rate 10-15 or even 5 years ago, and the value of that property goes up and increases your landlord’s property tax liability, they’ve got to raise your rent. It doesn’t matter that neither you nor your landlord’s other wages have increased. They’re paying more so you’re paying more, and if you can’t afford it you have to find somewhere else to stay. If they can’t afford it, they’ve got to sell or renovate the property as a new luxury apartment.

Wait.

I thought we were just talking about short term rentals, not why people are getting priced out of the places they’ve lived for 20 years? Isn’t that more the gentrification issue? Exactly – when the root cause of these issues is founded in the same policy, addressing the root policy will address multiple issues.

Short term rentals are in demand because NOLA is such a destination. Property owners facing these high percentage property tax increases in recent years have to make money on their property or sell. Here' we're not really talking about HE anymore, we're talking about rents going up and up and up while affordable housing options become scarce.

With short term rentals, they stand to make more money on their now high-tax-liability investment by competing directly with the overpriced hotels and legal B&B’s. While it is risky, a potential return of $2000 for a week is far greater than long term renting at $1400 a month. You only have to STR 8 weeks a year to make as much as you would with one long term renter at those prices, which means that you’ve got 44 more weeks of the year to simply put money in your pocket. That’s a CRAZY market incentive, and one reason you see people coming to NOLA, buying $300K homes in cash, and just leaving them on the STR market year round. It is one of the best investments anyone can make anywhere under the current land use policies in NOLA.

The fact that the city government actually benefits more from that arrangement, both in terms of property taxes collected and tourist money spent on something other than hotel rooms (where most of the money goes to the state), and ALL your market and government incentives are set up to promote the current state of affairs. Of course the city isn't interested in cracking down. If you want to change that state of affairs, you’ve got to address how property taxes are handled in this city.

Especially now that the Louisiana legislature has voted to put even more property tax hikes on the ballot this year.

*If my math is right (and it may not be), HE on a $750,000 property is a 10% discount, while a HE on a $900,000 property is just over a 9% discount. While that could translate to a few thousand dollars, that’s barely a 1% difference, and the demographic that owns homes at that price is the one best able to handle such an increase.

On the other hand, If your home went from $100,000 to $300,000, you’re HE discount on property tax has completely inverted from 75% of assessed value to 25%, and that's happened to the population least likely to be able to pay for that increase.