It’s never easy to ask someone uncomfortable questions.

There are seemingly some journalists, and I use the term loosely (I’m mainly referring to cable news talking heads) that live to make others feel stupid or awkward.

As a 14-year veteran of community newspapers — where you live by and know just about everyone who appears in the newspaper — there is never a time when I enjoy asking someone to go on the record about an awkward or difficult subject.

However, it’s part of the job and a standard you, the readers, should always hold L’OBSERVATEUR to.

The same goes for public officials.

Whether you’re a parish president, sheriff, district attorney, parish council member, clerk of court or so on, you’ve accepted a responsibility to lead and represent your community. That comes with accountability and, sometimes, that accountability means answering difficult questions.

The most recent difficult subject is the matter of St. John the Baptist Parish Government’s proposed 7-mill property tax.

If approved, Parish officials said it would generate approximately $3 million in its first year and be first assessed on taxes collected in January 2018.

Widespread support will take work after voters, just three months ago, approved a parishwide .25 percent sales tax increase to benefit St. John the Baptist Parish Public Schools.

The School District’s measure, having already failed once in 2016, passed Dec. 10 by a tight 4,594 to 4,513 margin.

My hat goes off to Parish President Natalie Robottom, who sat down for a lengthy interview with L’OBSERVATEUR, answering all matter of questions concerning the tax.

Much of that interview will be shared in Wednesday’s newspaper edition as part of a special two-part series that began on today’s front page.

Also included in next week’s edition is where St. John the Baptist Parish Council members stand on the issue.

For more than two weeks, our news team has reached out by phone, text and email with two simple but important questions.

1: Are you in favor of the tax?

2: Were there any other options, like rolled back milages, possible to generate these funds?

Although, I would have preferred each Council member to pick up the phone on the first ring and answer each question off the top of his or her head in detailed fashion, I understand that is not always possible.

Some asked us to call back or called us back after giving the questions some thought. Others preferred to send emails.

Each of those alternatives provides communication and demonstrates a willingness to share their thoughts on an important issue.

What baffles me is those who refuse to respond, and in this case, we still have a couple holdouts. I feel such tactics fall short of the social contract elected leaders sign in relation to their representation responsibilities.

It could be blowback — one responding Council member expressed to L’OBSERVATEUR — following our newspaper’s reporting on January’s Registrar of Voters approval.

In that case, Council members’ approval of a new Registrar of Voters included three nominations, two contested votes and some hard feelings. In our follow-up to the vote, each Council member was asked to share his or her thoughts on the process.

I understand if some Council members were uncomfortable through that reporting, but that is something shared by all of us who work in the public sector of a small community.

So, thank you Parish President Robottom and those Council members who answered some tough questions on the record, adding clarity to a tax proposal that will impact every single member of our community.

Stephen Hemelt is publisher and editor of L’OBSERVATEUR. He can be reached at 985-652-9545  or stephen.hemelt@lobservateur.com.