Before I explain why I am running for the District 12 Metro Council seat, I need to state that many of my answers to the ranked statements do not clearly reflect my position on the issues. To clarify my position, I will post short statements on my website regarding question numbers 3, 4, 5 & 7. Please follow this link to read those statements: https://www.tanianyman.com/news
Regarding why I’m running for Metro Council, for the past eight years, I have been involved in community advocacy in East Baton Rouge Parish, and I believe the knowledge I have gained from that work would be an asset to the people of District 12 and East Baton Rouge Parish as a whole. My advocacy work has been focused primarily on public education, but I also have worked with a variety of organizations that provided me with a greater understanding of issues that regularly go before the Metro Council.
To read more about my qualifications and why I’m running, follow the link to my webpage: https://www.tanianyman.com/why-i-m-running
As a Metro Council member, I will evaluate tax proposals by considering the following:
a) The nature of the tax. Is it shared equitably as opposed to equally by residents? I will likely oppose regressive sales taxes which fall disproportionately on the poor and working class and whose volatility create an unstable source of funding and reduce bond ratings.
b) The merits of the project or objective. Is the proposal in the best interest of the community and is it sufficiently detailed to ensure the approval of the tax will provide the service promised?
c) The duration of the tax. Most dedicated taxes should be returned to the ballot at regular intervals in order to allow voters the opportunity to accept or reject the millage. There should be a compelling reason to extend the term for renewal beyond 10 years.
I’m not certain what services would be at my disposal as a Metro Council person to inform constituents about such matters, but I will certainly reach out to neighborhood associations and other community leaders. It should also be easy enough to post a press release to the website and host town halls to discuss.
What should be taken into consideration when making appointments to boards and commissions is the needs of the particular board or commission. Such bodies benefit when their members have a shared purpose—to ensure the department or organization fulfills its mission—and can provide a variety of skills and viewpoints. To ensure such diversity I would consider the skills and viewpoints of the existing members to determine which candidate offers the skills or views currently lacking or most in need on the board or commission. Please know that I am not speaking solely about racial or gender diversity. That is important, but so is a diversity of perspective. If, for example, the board members are racially diverse but are all beholden to, say, a particular business agenda, then the lack of diversity in perspective will inhibit the board’s ability to make the best decision for the community as a whole. I don’t imagine balancing such considerations is easy.
In regard to removing an appointee accused of misconduct, I believe an appointee should be granted the same right to due process as any citizen accused of misconduct or a crime. They should not be removed when merely accused. They should be removed only if it is determined they are guilty of misconduct and the misconduct is egregious enough to warrant their removal.
I don’t believe it is possible to do what is best for one’s district without considering what is also best for the parish as a whole. Our well-being is intertwined. The challenge is to raise awareness about this interconnectedness and articulate a vision for a better quality of life for all that can inspire unity rather than division.