re: MOP asks state SC to rehear St George case

quote:

---

But Pierson said the Supreme Court failed to address to major components of the incorporation: the city's official boundaries and date of incorporation. Both are up to the courts to decide, according to state law.

---

Date of incorporation, by law, is the date it was voted in IIRC.


Boundaries are what was in the petition which was voted up.



MOP is trying to muddy the waters here to delay this.

Problem is that I don’t think the state SC will allow a rehearing when the lower courts ignored the issues to begin with. That should have been settled even if they ruled against incorporation.

They need that money BADDDDDDDD. The city of BR is in bad shape without all the white people money

Pretty much this. They are scared shitless of what’s coming

Until they stop bringing this shite up and let sleeping dogs lie, I'm still a little concerned they can get their way. After them throwing out the first petition by 17 votes, then the courts ruling in favor of BR a few times, it's tough to accept the W.

I did not expect the outcome the SC gave us. Of course I was overjoyed by it, but I'm still a little in shock. I've had the rug pulled out from under me before.

quote:

---

I don't know why they're so anxious to get involved in this," Pierson said of St. George's organizers. "They don't understand that this case is not over yet." But Pierson said the Supreme Court failed to address to major components of the incorporation: the city's official boundaries and date of incorporation. Both are up to the courts to decide, according to state law. Pierson added these issues will likely need to be remanded to a lower court to resolve. "It's just going to be a mess," Pierson said.

---

I’m on the fence about St G and this ticks me off.

She’s essentially admitting they want this tied up in litigation for another decade and hopes that the organizers will just give up,

quote:

---

Pierson said there were several other issues they took with the Supreme Court's ruling, including their determination that St. George could operate with a balanced budget, but that she would not provide further details at this time.

"Those people are going to be broke on day one," Pierson said.

---

Now let's use the same logic with the City of Baton Rouge, when one of their arguments was that they couldn't balance their budget without the money pilfered from the St. George area. Let's also talk about that $200-$250M that is owed to St. George.

I’ve seen the books. It ain’t gonna be pretty. I could see BroomHilda campaigning on this (we need continuity to keep this waste of money rolling). Lipsey and Enquist and others must be grifting some serious dollars to keep underwriting this wild goose chase.

quote:

---

I’ve seen the books. It ain’t gonna be pretty. I could see BroomHilda campaigning on this (we need continuity to keep this waste of money rolling). Lipsey and Enquist and others must be grifting some serious dollars to keep underwriting this wild goose chase.

---

Broome and Cole are public officials. They are privately suing to stop St, George.

It’s obvious these people are paying the legal fees of these two individuals,

Why aren’t the donors on the public record? We the people have a right to know who is donating and how much they are donating. I find it hard to believe the ethics commission allows private citizens to pay the private bills of elected officials in secret.

quote:

---

“Money is a two-way street,” she said. “If you want your money back, well, give us our assets back.”

---

Is she talking about the state of the art public schools, CATS bus stop benches, pot holed streets, unsynchronized lights, non-functioning water pumps that would not even be necessary if they didn’t approve overdevelopment of areas of natural swamp drainage.

Also, I would love to see an itemized list of what’s been given to StG in the 10 years of starting the project. A simple spreadsheet to show that the money used in our community was more than that attended.

Also, glad to give those things back with a full refund of what it’s worth now.

quote:

---

I didn't realize you could just ask for a do-over without some new information coming to light.

---

rehearing is reargument . retrial is new evidence. don't need anything for the former, the latter has rules about new evidence and whether it's new/admissible