- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Let's get back on track, why SG people are fighting (very long)
Posted on 3/25/14 at 2:23 pm to kingbob
Posted on 3/25/14 at 2:23 pm to kingbob
quote:
A vote from the metro council and the signature of the mayor-president along with a vote by the residents of those areas. Since no one lives in the areas they'd be annexing, the election would be moot
Now wait a minute. Do the property owners get to vote, even if there is no residence there? How gerrymandered can the city council be in drawing these areas to be annexed?
There certainly are houses and apartments in those areas. Would the election be decided by the 100 or so people who reside in the area?
Could the area to be annexed be so small that they carve out every single resident? Could they split the Perkins Rowe development, for instance, to make sure that only the shops are included in the annexed area and not the apartments?
1
Posted on 3/25/14 at 2:23 pm to kingbob
quote:Nope, a referendum is not required for any unincorporated area to become part of the city.
along with a vote by the residents of those areas.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 2:24 pm to LSURussian
quote:
Nope, a referendum is not required for any unincorporated area to become part of the city.
Thanks for the info.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 2:26 pm to Jimbeaux
Posted on 3/25/14 at 2:26 pm to LSURussian
quote:
Nope, a referendum is not required for any unincorporated area to become part of the city.
It seems down right unconstitutional for a city to annex an area, ANY AREA, in the borders of the parish without the approval of the property owners in that area.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 3:55 pm to Jimbeaux
quote:Why?
It seems down right unconstitutional for a city to annex an area, ANY AREA, in the borders of the parish without the approval of the property owners in that area.
The vast majority of our laws/ordinances are passed at the local, state and national level without a direct vote of the people.
And the link I gave earlier explains that a majority of property owners, either in number or by assessed value of the property in the area under consideration, must petition the council just to have a public hearing on an annexation request.
In the Mall of Louisiana's case, if the mall's owner wants to be annexed, that owner probably would be the majority property owner by assessed valued, assuming the mall is one unit of property and is owned by one entity. The same for Perkins Rowe. The same for the L'Auberge casino.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 5:26 pm to Jimbeaux
quote:Good question. I know one side of a road can be inside the city limits while the other side is not.
Could the area to be annexed be so small that they carve out every single resident? Could they split the Perkins Rowe development, for instance, to make sure that only the shops are included in the annexed area and not the apartments?
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News