- 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: Recall councilmen who vote for annex of mall of LA
Posted on 5/5/14 at 10:42 pm to Kramer26
Posted on 5/5/14 at 10:42 pm to Kramer26
quote:
then your ignorant
Always a classic!
quote:
Sure the mall of LA and BR General just happened to ask at the same time.
I don't believe you have the concept of how petitions work down......
0
Posted on 5/5/14 at 10:47 pm to LSURussian
Hence, the phrase "trying."
I thought you elite MENSA folks could crack that code. Is this where I insert an emoticon to drive home the point?
I thought you elite MENSA folks could crack that code. Is this where I insert an emoticon to drive home the point?
Posted on 5/5/14 at 10:53 pm to Huck Finn
Just as St George has the right to try to incorporate themselves into a city, businesses on the city limits have the right to ask to be annexed into the city.
I'm no expert on the annexation laws... but it does kind of suck that if one or more properties on the edge get annexed by another city - and thus are no longer able to be in the new incorporated city - that you would have to re-write the petition. Of course... the St George people could have chosen a smaller area with some buffer between it and the city of BR... but surely they wanted the tax money just as much as the city of BR does.
I'm no expert on the annexation laws... but it does kind of suck that if one or more properties on the edge get annexed by another city - and thus are no longer able to be in the new incorporated city - that you would have to re-write the petition. Of course... the St George people could have chosen a smaller area with some buffer between it and the city of BR... but surely they wanted the tax money just as much as the city of BR does.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 10:56 pm to Kramer26
quote:
We are pretty good at getting signatures. If the council votes to annex mall of LA which then negates the St. George petition action must be taken. The people will be heard loud and clear. They deserve the right to vote on St. George whether they are for it or against it.
If your issue is denying SG the right to hold an election for incorporation, then your fight is with the State Legislature. Not the Metro Council.
It would be very hypocritical of the Metro Council to deny these businesses the right to choose which city they want to be in. The Metro Council isn't taking away any rights of SG. The State Legislature is looking at some bills that may. We will see.
Maybe Rainey shouldn't have included the Mall to begin with, then this issue would have never been brought up.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 10:56 pm to LSUFanHouston
If they drew it up any other way, they would have surely been racists.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 10:57 pm to Kramer26
It makes total sense for those properties to stay in Baton Rouge. The devil you know is better than the one you don't.
Why are you against private landowners looking out for their economic best interest?
Why are you against private landowners looking out for their economic best interest?
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:01 pm to Huck Finn
quote:You can insert anything you want to you know where.....
Is this where I insert an emoticon to drive home the point?
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:03 pm to boosiebadazz
If they want annexation that's fine but it shouldn't invalidate the St. George petition. The metro council should either vote no or defer the request.
This post was edited on 5/5/14 at 11:05 pm
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:05 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:I suspect you well know why the MoL was included in the SG area. Without the sales taxes collected there along with the property taxes paid by the property owners, SG's cash cow dries up.
Maybe Rainey shouldn't have included the Mall to begin with, then this issue would have never been brought up.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:07 pm to Kramer26
quote:Those are contradictory statements.
If they want annexation that's fine
The metro council should either vote no or defer the request.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:07 pm to Kramer26
What I'd do if I were the people in St. George is boycott the mall.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:08 pm to Kramer26
Why not? The people who signed the petition did so with the understanding that those properties would be a part of the new city and a part of the tax base. If they are no longer part of the proposed St. George, that's a material change in circumstances and those signatures now don't mean the same as they did before the properties asked to be annexed.
Maybe the organizers of the petition should have consulted the big tax revenue properties and got some sort of commitment before just assuming they'd want to be a part of something new.
Maybe the organizers of the petition should have consulted the big tax revenue properties and got some sort of commitment before just assuming they'd want to be a part of something new.
This post was edited on 5/5/14 at 11:10 pm
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:10 pm to Kramer26
quote:
If they want annexation that's fine but it shouldn't invalidate the St. George petition. The metro council should either vote no or defer the request
It invalidates the petition because people signed a petition with a specific geographic definition. The annexation invalidates that definition. It would not hold up in court. Blame the law, and the St George braintrust, who didn't anticipate counterattack #1.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:10 pm to boosiebadazz
Forget SG, who is that in your avatar?
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:11 pm to LSURussian
Haha her name is Whitney Port. She's like a D-list celeb but I've always had a thing for her
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:15 pm to boosiebadazz
If someone who signed the petition changes their mind, they can always vote no at the polls.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:17 pm to Kramer26
quote:
If someone who signed the petition changes their mind, they can always vote no at the polls.
The petition has to show clear boundaries that people consented to supporting. Those boundaries may change now, thus rendering the petition invalid.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:17 pm to Kramer26
Why not just write a petition that I want to give free ice cream and $1,000,000 to everyone and then change it to whatever real purpose once I have the required number of signatures to get it on the ballot?
The fact is the St. George organizers were thinking checkers while the BR establishment was thinking chess.
The fact is the St. George organizers were thinking checkers while the BR establishment was thinking chess.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:18 pm to boosiebadazz
I'd sign that petition.
Posted on 5/5/14 at 11:19 pm to burdman
And once Kramer26 changes the substance after your signature, you'd have signed a petition seeking to reinstate the Holocaust.
After all, if you disagreed, you could just vote against it at the polls.
After all, if you disagreed, you could just vote against it at the polls.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News