re: watch kip holden lie.....

quote:

---

The city leaders in BR were/are absolutely terrified of the SG movement. Actions speak MUCH louder than words. They know that if the SE portion of the parish ("city") were to incorporate then it would be extremely bad news for BR proper as there are many in that area which contribute little to no revenue to the funding of the local govt.

---

It scares me too. Which is why I am glad they are doing whatever the can to stop it. If SG doesn't give a frick about the damage they will cause BR, why should BR care about SG? Again, did Rainey and company think BR was just going sit back and let a massive hole open in the city-parish budget?

quote:

---

The question is how cab the SE portion of the city get an ISD. The legislature refuses to let it happen through that process. Now the area is trying to appease the mandates of the legislature only to have the city of BR (understandably on their part) step in to insure it won't happen from that angle either. Serious, non-biased question, what is the alternative?

---

You are confusing a mandate with a rhetorical device. Even if SG becomes a city, that does not guarantee you an ISD. Maybe getting a few more votes in the legislature is a crappy reason to start a city. Especially one the size and scope that SG is proposed to be. Especially when it has the potential to do significant harm to a neighboring area.

Alternatives? There are several. But not worth discussing until the heat from the incorporation dies down.