re: Can someone summarize the St. George thing for me

This is the last time I'm going to address Spricket's lies:

quote:

---

38 million
9+2-2=11
Bodi White withdrew his bill
The annexation is a done deal
Rainey is getting paid
$100k raised
Signatures for 2 years
No SG paperwork filed
BRPD will no longer have mutual aid with Sheriffs

---

"38 million" -NOLA.com ran an article months ago which gave a % of the sales taxes for EBR parish that was paid in the Mall of Louisiana/Perkins Rowe retail district. I went to the EBR budget and found how much in total sales taxes were forecast for 2014. I did the math. It came out to $38 million. I relied on the % figure given by NOLA.com. Recently a report was released that said the MoL (only) collected $9 million in sales taxes. I've never seen how much the rest of the retail stores around the Mall collect nor have I seen specifically what Perkins Rowe collects. So the numbers are still not clear.

"9+2-2=11" - moot point. Bodi White's bill never made it out of legislative committee. The way I read it, it seemed to me there was going to be a temporary transitional additional 2% sales tax for SG if SG incorporated. Others who read the bill say I was wrong...and I may have been wrong about it. But again, it's moot. The bill was killed in committee 4-1. LINK

"Bodi White withdrew his bill" I'm not sure which of White's bills Spricket is referring to. If it is this one ( LINK), then he did indeed withdraw his bill, or technically, he "shelved" it.

If it is the transitional bill White proposed, I said White put his bill "on hold" quoting the headline in the article I linked at that time.....which he did. (LINK) He revived the bill about a week later. It was voted down. (see above)

"The annexation is a done deal" - It is. ( LINK)

"Rainey is getting paid" I posted that Rainey is or will be paid for his services and anyone who believes differently is being naive. I stand by that statement. We don't know if he is being paid already because the SG committee refuses to disclose where the money they've raised has gone.

"$100k raised" I was quoting Rainey. LINK

quote:

---

St. George organizers are not yet required to disclose their financial reports, which means donations are being made anonymously and there’s no way to know how many dollars have been raised or spent for the incorporation effort. The financial disclosure is only required once the issue is placed on the ballot for voters. Rainey, who says he is working for free, estimated that as much as a $100,000 has already been spent out of the pockets of St. George supporters in the past two years for legal fees, lobbyists, signs and other services linked to the breakaway school district effort.

---

"Signatures for 2 years" I have no idea where Spricket got that from. You'll have to ask him to provide a link.

"No SG paperwork filed" In a thread discussing the fundraising by SG organizers I wrote we don't know where the money has been spent because no financial disclosures have been made by them and quoted the article I've already linked above. Spricket twisted that to suit his lying.

"BRPD will no longer have mutual aid with Sheriffs" Currently BRPD provides backup and support to the sheriff based on a resource sharing agreement between the two law enforcement groups. I wrote there is no way taxpayers in BR would want BRPD to be involved in another city (SG) if SG happens. For some reason Spricket seems to think I'm wrong about that.

And just in case anyone doesn't know about how the agreement works, here is an article regarding how it's handled in Towne Center shopping center which is in an unincorporated area. There is also an agreement where BR Fire Department also assists the other fire departments in the unincorporated areas.

quote:

---

Towne Center is technically covered by St. George Fire Department, but Heck said the shopping development has an agreement so that Baton Rouge Fire Department and city police can serve the area.

---

LINK

Additional discussion of the mutual aid agreement: LINK

quote:

---

The Sheriff’s Office has jurisdiction “over every square inch of this parish,” Pierson said. “There’s not a place he can’t respond, and the city police operate primarily in the city, but mutual response agreements operate all over the parish when needed.”

---

Again, I don't believe BR taxpayers would want BRPD responding to and having to pay for BR city police working in another city.

quote:

---

Even with half the millage rates, the Sandy Springs resident would pay almost double the property tax

---

It's hard to compare. Assuming Sandy Springs is near Atlanta? Property values are probably way higher. La has pretty low property values, and low taxes. My uncle in TX pays about $7500 a year in property taxes on a $300K house south of Houston. F pays around that same amount in CA, though the property values in CA are astronomical, for way less house. TX has no personal income tax, while CA is 10%, and they're still broke.

quote:

---

Thank you for clearing that up. I knew it was a lot less, but I guess I was wrong about the details.

In that scenario, in Louisiana, you would pay nothing, while in Sandy Springs, you would pay taxes on $170,000 worth of property.

Using a $300,000 recently assessed at half its value in Louisiana would go like this:
75,000 taxable vs 270,000 taxable. Even with half the millage rates, the Sandy Springs resident would pay almost double the property tax.

---

Cities and towns are not subject to the homestead exemption. That only applies to parishes. So a city or town can tax property without worrying about the exemption.

quote:

---

you assume what BR people want,

---

It's called having an "opinion" not an assumption.

quote:

---

you refuse to provide a link

---

LINKYou just KNEW the petition was complete and going to be submitted the day before the annexation vote was scheduled to block the vote. No doubt about it. You thought they had the 18,000 signatures back in May. And you were WRONG.

Second WRONG on your part about the petition: May 7
I wrote:

quote:

---

I suspect they are no where near their 18,000 goal.

---

You replied:

quote:

---

You couldn't be more wrong.

---

But I was right. If, as Rainey claimed, they were getting 500 signatures/week back then and if just two days ago said they have 17,000 signatures now, that means they only had between 12,500 and 13,500 signatures on May 7. It was YOU who couldn't have been more wrong.

I've spent enough time messing with you blatant lies.

quote:

---

now you are backing out of all your other claims by saying they were "opinions".

---

I'm not backing out. They were opinions. Just like if I said my opinion is you are one of the dumbest posters on this board.

Actually, that's a bad example.....because that's a fact.

quote:

---

we shall all stand around and laugh at you

---

This is at least the 10th time you've displayed your insecurity by hiding behind what you think other posters think of me. I don't care what you or other posters think. I'm confident in myself.....unlike you. You need the reassurance. I don't.

quote:

---

In no way have I ever stated a #,

---

And I never said you did. I said you claimed the petition had the signatures needed. You said I was wrong when I wrote they were a long way off from 18,000 signatures back in May. But it turned out I was spot on. And you were wrong.

As usual.