- 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: Deal to replace PMAC arena could require LSU land, new tax. Public can't see the details.
Posted on 3/21/24 at 11:45 pm to WPBTiger
Posted on 3/21/24 at 11:45 pm to WPBTiger
quote:Better not be any Firm that had anything to do with the design of the pubic eyesore known as the South Endzone Upper Deck expansion.
TAF invited six developers and design teams to campus last year and narrowed down the group, behind closed doors, to two front-runners.
The off-centered "Great White Wall of Nothing" and those "FEMA Trailer" structures up at the top are embarrassingly inept and poor designs. (And multiple individuals at LSU had to approve that aesthetic shite before it was built)
There's no telling what kind of architechtural nightmare the "LSU Process" will yield for a new Arena design.....
1
Posted on 3/22/24 at 1:43 am to turnpiketiger
quote:The "community" and the "area" aren't the ones who might have higher property taxes. Those who have property in this district, which looks like it includes a few residential apartment complexes and condominium units in addition to businesses based on the map earlier in this thread, are the ones who might have higher property taxes. It's not just a use tax. It needs to be public information.
God forbid you approve a new tax for the greater good of the community to bring a modern arena and get big acts thus bringing money into the area.
I have property in this area, according to that map. I was not polled about and did not vote for any new property tax, potential or otherwise.
Posted on 3/22/24 at 5:19 am to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
Also not surprising that the government is lying about it/trying to hide it. Largest criminal organization in the country.
Posted on 3/22/24 at 7:25 am to semjase
It needs to be the developer that did the Battery for Atlanta braves. Just do it. It’ll change everything
Posted on 3/22/24 at 7:44 am to Tim Gambill
quote:
Also not surprising that the government is lying about it/trying to hide it. Largest criminal organization in the country.
The government has nothing to do with this project.
Posted on 3/22/24 at 7:48 am to CrazyTigerFan
The response here is exactly what Nola was gunning for and why they needed to shut the hell up.
There is zero concrete information and even if there was we need a new arena.
Take for instance your property. It’s about to have a huge increase in value due to its proximity to this but you are ready to put this thing away because your property taxes might reflect that
Extremely short sighted
There is zero concrete information and even if there was we need a new arena.
Take for instance your property. It’s about to have a huge increase in value due to its proximity to this but you are ready to put this thing away because your property taxes might reflect that
Extremely short sighted
This post was edited on 3/22/24 at 7:51 am
Posted on 3/22/24 at 8:48 am to CrazyTigerFan
quote:
I have property in this area, according to that map. I was not polled about and did not vote for any new property tax, potential or otherwise.
I don’t think it’s a property tax? It’s a sales tax in the district.
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:05 am to Adam Banks
quote:
Nola.com just needs to shut the hell up. This needs to happen.
Really?
So since you believe this project is necessary, it doesn’t need to be transparent or on the up and up?
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:08 am to Adam Banks
quote:In my particular situation, I do not really stand to gain any value from proximity to the University or any project built there. I own a condominium within another property, and I pay property taxes on the condominium, but I have no control over the management or operation of the larger property. The value of my condo has probably actually decreased over time because of the actions of the sequence of ownership of the larger property that has turned the place into essentially a Section 8 shithole.
Take for instance your property. It’s about to have a huge increase in value due to its proximity to this but you are ready to put this thing away because your property taxes might reflect that.
We have kept the property because we work at and have attended school at LSU, so the location is very convenient, but an increase in property tax won't provide me with increased property value unless another entity wants to purchase my condominium when they purchase the larger property.
But if you believe that the value will increase, I'll sell the condominium to you for what I purchased it for nearly 13 years ago. We're putting in a new AC unit when the parts arrive, so you'll have that added value to offset deprecation of the other appliances. You can pay the extra property taxes, and you will be able to reap all of that huge increase in value that you believe is coming. Quite the deal if you actually believe that the value will have a huge increase, and extremely short sighted to pass up such a great deal.
If, however, you're not willing to buy it and are just looking for someone else to pay for something that you want for yourself, you can take your typical Louisiana welfare attitude and shove it.
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:11 am to whoa
quote:There is, apparently, an optional property tax within the district, according to what other posters in this thread have said. Part of the problem, which doubled and others have pointed out, is the lack of transparency from officials blocking requests to the documents for us to find out the exact details. Other posters, like Adam Banks, want something that they won't have to pay into to the point that they think it's fine to hide those documents with the details of where the money comes from and goes to from the public.
I don’t think it’s a property tax? It’s a sales tax in the district.
ETA: Quoted from the article linked in the OP, bold emphasis my own.
quote:
The Legislature approved a new economic development district surrounding LSU last year that paves the way for potential financing of any new projects there, including the arena. Such districts allow private developers to receive public money, and they allow for new sales taxes of up to 2% within the district. New hospitality taxes or property taxes can also be imposed in the districts.
ETA: The image of the district from the first page of this thread. Why is the relatively new Nicholson Gateway development directly adjacent to campus and the area where this new arena would be built excluded from this district when the lakes and properties surrounding the lakes on the other side of campus from where this new arena would be built are apparently not included? Those are the properties that stand to gain the most from a new arena, but they won't be assessed the special taxes used to fund it? That seems like some typical LA bullshite.
More ETA: The Law School, the new dorms that replaced Kirby Smith, and Greek Row are also selectively outside of this district, even though most of those areas are completely surrounded by it. (Upon even closer review, that may not be the Law School, or not just the Law School... that may be Barnes & Noble, ECA, and some of the dorms.)
This post was edited on 3/22/24 at 10:14 am
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:19 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
I just don't understand how someone can be upset about a tax only applied in a new development, which without said tax the development wouldn't even exist. Either way, you don't have to frequent said development if you don't want to pay for it.
I would argue it's the government picking winners and losers.
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:35 am to WPBTiger
This is just very typical Baton Rouge lack of transparency. And rest assured, if Charles Landry is involved (he's the guy that got the College Drive Walmart project approved, and then got Rouzan through the Planning Commission after the Spinosa fiasco), there are endless political deals being made behind the scenes. There are just too many unknowns at this point, and the dollars are so big that we'll never get the whole story about what is being approved. You know the budget will be exceeded, and new tax streams needed to offset this. I promise you there will be language in the agreement protecting "the developer" should the planned tax revenue fall short.
quote:
“It will not have any impact on taxpayers,” Keli Zinn, LSU’s executive deputy athletic director, recently told The Advocate. “It will be financed all through the developer.”
But according to Charles Landry, the lawyer shepherding the deal with TAF, several streams of public money may be needed to make the project work, including new sales taxes that the developer could use to help pay for it.
The Legislature approved a new economic development district surrounding LSU last year that paves the way for potential financing of any new projects there, including the arena. Such districts allow private developers to receive public money, and they allow for new sales taxes of up to 2% within the district. New hospitality taxes or property taxes can also be imposed in the districts.
This post was edited on 3/22/24 at 9:37 am
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:45 am to WPBTiger
We don’t need no stikin bridge, we just need a new sporting arena.
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:49 am to CrazyTigerFan
You posed a really good question. How was this district created such that not all of LSU is in it? Who is benefiting from being out of it and how are they benefiting?
This is no accident.
This is no accident.
This post was edited on 3/22/24 at 10:05 am
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:53 am to doubleb
Looking more closely at the district map, I think my particular property falls outside of it so I wouldn't be as directly impacted by a property tax. But I still think it's total BS to withhold information from the public if there are taxes involved, whether they be use tax or property tax.
And like Jroyce1 said above, that kind of selective districting is picking winners and losers.
And like Jroyce1 said above, that kind of selective districting is picking winners and losers.
This post was edited on 3/22/24 at 9:54 am
Posted on 3/22/24 at 9:59 am to doubleb
Your just scratch the surface in the outline.. I also have property in the area.. our actual units are excluded… our common area is in it.. duhhhh
if you look close you will find other buildings next to each other .some in ..some out.. as in my previous comment the vape shop on chimes is out.. the vape shop behind it on state is in.. the all the weird grabbing of things like Fred’s and omission of things like Nicholson where torches is (?)
And business in northgate taxed to support competition on the other side of campus .. the area was clearly a tax base grab … it worms all over the place..
This is the concern…. if we are already discovering things like this ( which where planned and snuck through a year ago)… what other things are behind curtain..
This is Louisiana politics and planning.. we know “what is going on”
if you look close you will find other buildings next to each other .some in ..some out.. as in my previous comment the vape shop on chimes is out.. the vape shop behind it on state is in.. the all the weird grabbing of things like Fred’s and omission of things like Nicholson where torches is (?)
And business in northgate taxed to support competition on the other side of campus .. the area was clearly a tax base grab … it worms all over the place..
This is the concern…. if we are already discovering things like this ( which where planned and snuck through a year ago)… what other things are behind curtain..
This is Louisiana politics and planning.. we know “what is going on”
Posted on 3/22/24 at 10:07 am to Thecoz
They haven't even chosen a developer yet. I think some of y'all are kinda jumping the gun here in getting all upset. If taxes are going to be used at all, they have to make that public by law. If a developer hasn't even been chosen, those decisions have likely not even been made yet.
This post was edited on 3/22/24 at 10:08 am
Posted on 3/22/24 at 10:10 am to doubleb
quote:
I am for the new arena, but when I see the same types involved that ran the IBM scam, that worked to stop SG, and my antenna goes up.
THIS
Posted on 3/22/24 at 10:16 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:Who drew the lines for this special entertainment district, and who approved it?
The government has nothing to do with this project.
Posted on 3/22/24 at 10:36 am to CrazyTigerFan
The legislature last session.
Pretty much.
As it stands right now, TAF doesn’t have to answer any questions. They should tell this Landry guy to stfu tho
quote:
I think some of y'all are kinda jumping the gun here in getting all upset.
Pretty much.
As it stands right now, TAF doesn’t have to answer any questions. They should tell this Landry guy to stfu tho
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News