- 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: Once again the powers try to change the rules in midsteam. More SG politics,
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:37 pm to Mickey Goldmill
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:37 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:You are just plain wrong. Annexation is solely at the prerogative of the annexing authority. Those being annexed have no say in the matter. The members of the Metro Council who voted in favor of annexation are saying they did it because the businesses requested it, but that was totally unnecessary.
I don't think you know how annexation works. The metro council has to be approached by the citizens or businesses that want to be annexed. The Mall would have never even considered annexation before because it's likely that their property taxes will go up.
2
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:37 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Taxes collected from within the city limits also go towards the 19th JDC, the BR Metro Airport, DA's office, Tax Assessor, Sheriff.
And why shouldn't they??? These are all parish wide agencies except for the airport which is inside the city limits.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:38 pm to doubleb
quote:
I believe the question was whether or not the outlying areas had services provided by the city that the city did not also enjoy.
Not what I said at all.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:38 pm to kingbob
quote:
Also, city and parish roads are maintained by the same body
Yes
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:40 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Not what I said at all.
when you said money was used from the city to run areas outside the city, that's how I took it. Sorry.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:40 pm to Poodlebrain
quote:
You are just plain wrong. Annexation is solely at the prerogative of the annexing authority. Those being annexed have no say in the matter. The members of the Metro Council who voted in favor of annexation are saying they did it because the businesses requested it, but that was totally unnecessary.
What?
LINK
quote:
To be annexed into the city, property owners must submit a petition with signatures from 50 percent of the property owners in that area to be annexed. The council would then have to approve an ordinance allowing the annexation.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:41 pm to doubleb
quote:
when you said money was used from the city to run areas outside the city, that's how I took it. Sorry.
quote:
And there are services operated by the "city" that serves the entire parish.
I thought that was clear since the city limits are within the parish.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:45 pm to BigJim
quote:
“For me, it's all about giving people options,” Delgado said. “If you’re now in unincorporated Baton Rouge and you don’t want to be part of St. George, if that vote happens a majority of people’s votes will dictate your property rights.”
Apparently Delgado, a big anti SG guy, was upset that people in the proposed SG area might not want to be in SG; yet the people on his side want to tell people in SG that despite the wishes of the SG majority; the wishes of the entire parish are more important.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:47 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
thought that was clear since the city limits are within the parish.
The preceding paragraph confused me. See below.
quote:
For years it was the other way around, fwiw. And there are services operated by the "city" that serves the entire parish.
sorry
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:52 pm to doubleb
quote:
The preceding paragraph confused me. See below.
quote:
For years it was the other way around, fwiw. And there are services operated by the "city" that serves the entire parish.
It confused everyone in this thread.
Mickey, what point were you making with that statement?
Posted on 4/24/14 at 3:58 pm to moneyg
The point was made that tax revenue collected from outside the city limits are going towards services 'for the city'. I was making the point that for years, money was flowing the other way. And also that the revenue that is coming from the city itself is serving the entire parish in many cases.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 4:07 pm to Mickey Goldmill
I recall when Central did this, there wasn't anything like the whining and crying about STG.
But of course it's about community and not money....right?
But of course it's about community and not money....right?
Posted on 4/24/14 at 4:08 pm to lsushawn
Yeah I don't remember a big fuss like this then either.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 4:15 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
The point was made that tax revenue collected from outside the city limits are going towards services 'for the city'. I was making the point that for years, money was flowing the other way. And also that the revenue that is coming from the city itself is serving the entire parish in many cases.
quote:
The point was made that tax revenue collected from outside the city limits are going towards services 'for the city'. I was making the point that for years, money was flowing the other way. And also that the revenue that is coming from the city itself is serving the entire parish in many cases.
Are you talking about parish wide services that are used by those within the city limits...or services that are used only by those NOT within the city limits. If it's the former, of course city money should pay for them.
What's happening now, is that the non-incorporated bucket of money is being used to fund city services.
I think that's why people are confused. You seemed to be countering the point that non-incorporated funds are paying for city services by saying the money flows the other way as well.
This post was edited on 4/24/14 at 4:27 pm
Posted on 4/24/14 at 4:18 pm to doubleb
This bill is ill conceived and poorly timed. It should be defeated.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 4:22 pm to LSURussian
+1
Posted on 4/24/14 at 5:13 pm to Poodlebrain
quote:
Annexation is solely at the prerogative of the annexing authority. Those being annexed have no say in the matter.
This is 100% incorrect. The property owners representing 50%+ of the value and in number of the total property being annexed must start the process via a petition to be annexed.
quote:. LINK
SECTION 1.09 Additions to the Boundaries of the City of Baton Rouge
Whenever a majority in number and amount of property tax payers, as certified by the Assessor, in any compact body of land adjoining the City of Baton Rouge but not part of an industrial area, shall petition the governing body of the city to be included in the boundaries of the City of Baton Rouge the said body shall fix a time, not less than ten nor more than thirty days after the filing of such petition, at which it shall hold a public hearing on the proposal to so extend the boundaries of the City of Baton Rouge. Notice of such hearing and of its time, place, objects and purposes, shall be given by publication twice in the official journal of the parish, which publication shall be completed not less than five days prior to the hearing. The valuation of the property owned by each of the signers of the petition shall be certified by the Parish Assessor as the valuation of such property appears in the last completed assessment of property, provided that he shall take account of subsequent change of ownership and if in any case the property of the present owner has not been specifically assessed the Assessor is authorized and directed to estimate the value of such property. After the conclusion of the hearing the governing body of the city may in its discretion add by ordinance, without additional public hearing, such body of land to the boundaries of the City of Baton Rouge and as such it shall become part of the City of Baton Rouge. Such ordinance shall be published in accordance with law and shall not go into effect until the thirtieth day following its final passage. During such period any citizen of the city or the area proposed to be added thereto may file and appeal therefrom in the District Court in the manner and with the effect provided by law. After the conclusion of such period the ordinance shall not be contested or attacked for any reason or cause whatever. (As amended October 20, 2007)
This post was edited on 4/24/14 at 5:33 pm
Posted on 4/24/14 at 5:26 pm to LSURussian
Good info there
Was this procedure followed for Costco and Celtic? It must have been , so if others want to be annexed it would not be a surprise.
Thxs for sharing
Was this procedure followed for Costco and Celtic? It must have been , so if others want to be annexed it would not be a surprise.
Thxs for sharing
Posted on 4/24/14 at 5:31 pm to doubleb
You're welcome but fwiw this is the third time I have posted the EBR annexation ordinance in a St George thread.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 5:33 pm to doubleb
I hope that every individual in the St. George area decides to up and leave.
Page 5 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News