Started By
Message

re: GP covers St George

Posted on 4/30/24 at 12:36 pm to
Posted by LegalEazyE
Madison, Wisconsin
Member since Nov 2023
2458 posts
Posted on 4/30/24 at 12:36 pm to
quote:


That the people living in the area "seceded" from the City of Baton Rouge. You can't secede from something you were never a part of. All that has happened is the people living in this unincorporated area of the parish have decided they want to incorporate into their own city.


So they were under no governance of BR at all? None of their taxes etc. were going to fund BR?
Posted by HeadSlash
TEAM LIVE BADASS - St. GEORGE
Member since Aug 2006
49796 posts
Posted on 4/30/24 at 12:39 pm to
quote:

I just wish they would get the story right - St. George didn't "secede" from anything.


Not sensational enough
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
26583 posts
Posted on 4/30/24 at 12:41 pm to
quote:

Secede


NOPE
Posted by AlwysATgr
Member since Apr 2008
16508 posts
Posted on 4/30/24 at 12:55 pm to
Maybe de-leeched themselves?
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
99063 posts
Posted on 4/30/24 at 12:57 pm to
Jesus Tapdancing Christ.

STG
DID
NOT
SECEDE

frick these idiots.
Posted by Alt26
Member since Mar 2010
28440 posts
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:50 pm to
quote:

So they were under no governance of BR at all?


They were not under the governance of Weston-Broome in her capacity as Mayor of the City of Baton Rouge. They are under her governance in her capacity as President of East Baton Rouge. Any governance specific to the city of of Baton Rouge (within the city limits) did not directly affect those living outside of the city limits. For instance, her appointment of the BR Chief of Police had no direct bearing on the St. George area because that area is serviced by the EBR Sherriff...not BRPD (though obviously the proximity of the two areas created a lot of indirect benefit/burden)

quote:

None of their taxes etc. were going to fund BR?


Of course some were. Which you know. Those parish taxes will still be paid. They (presumably) will now be allocated to cover parish-wide expenses only. Not placed in the general fund privy to cover exclusively BR city expenses.

But no one is "seceding". The St. George area will remain in EBR parish. Presumably the city/parish governance will continue (at least in the short term). St. George will now just become its own city within EBR like Zachary, Central, and Baker. The area that is now Baton Rouge wasn't always a city. It was an unincorporated area of land within the state of Louisiana. In 1817 the people living in that area formally incorporated as a city. St. George is just doing the same thing.
Posted by doubleb
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
36134 posts
Posted on 4/30/24 at 3:00 pm to
quote:

There was no succession however Baton Rouge was being tyrannical in trying to block the St George self incorporation.


This is also false.

The C-P government never voted to block SG.
The C-P Council never voted to block SG.

The mayor and one council person with the help from influential backers sued to stop the incorporation.

The official government wasn’t involved it was individuals, and the media hardly touched on this. They made it sound like parish was unified against SG when it was not.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram