- 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: St. George: Donations for Legal Fees
Posted on 11/6/19 at 9:51 am to mindbreaker
Posted on 11/6/19 at 9:51 am to mindbreaker
quote:
I looked at their plan, it was shitty, it's always been shitty.
begging for money after the fact proves that.
All you'd have to do is switch names of cities out in all of this and the "outrage" would be the opposite.
Any other area or city runs this through and the very people on this board defending this would be screaming about how so and so didn't get their ducks in line and their i's dotted and t's crossed and are getting what they deserve.
Glass houses and such.
This post was edited on 11/6/19 at 9:52 am
1
Posted on 11/6/19 at 9:52 am to moneyg
dead in the middle of it
Posted on 11/6/19 at 9:55 am to stapuffmarshy
quote:
All you'd have to do is switch names of cities out in all of this and the "outrage" would be the opposite.
St. George is EXACTLY what government should be...localized governmetn created from the people for the people.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 9:57 am to moneyg
quote:
You seem upset that St. George isn't a bunch of rich people who have so much money that they can pay for the inevitable lawsuits that occur. The St. George effort was grass roots. The average picture of the St. George resident is middle class (not the "snobby rich" as some idiot here said).
No I'm upset that after the election they are asking for money knowing full well this was going to happen before the election. Not one presentation, political ad, person that came by my house knocking on my door said anything about this before the election.
And I'm not an uninformed voter. I knew this was going to happen back in March. Hell the city of Baton Rouge did a question and answer session with public broadcasting that is on You tube at the beginning of the year saying they had the lawsuits ready to go in case they lost.
Did St George mention that, nope not once. That's what I'm upset about. Organizers only sold the good and the utopia of what they expected ST George to be without mentioning all of the legality and burden of what it would take to get there
Posted on 11/6/19 at 9:58 am to lsu2006
quote:
When and by what Court?
Several years back in the Central case, and by the La. State Appeqals Court.
The clause is in the state constitution to protect the civil rights of minorities. Acie Belton, wanted Scotlandville to be a city. Woody Dumas fought it. Dumas passed an ordinance to prevent a fourth city in EBR Parish. Belton overcame that by putting in a clause in the state constitution of 1974 that permitted multi incorporations in EBR Parish.
Edited to correct court.
This post was edited on 11/6/19 at 10:13 am
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:01 am to mindbreaker
quote:
No I'm upset that after the election they are asking for money
They who? St. George isn't a thing yet. This is still the incorporation "effort" asking for money which has been funded from grass roots efforts from the beginning.
quote:
And I'm not an uninformed voter. I knew this was going to happen back in March. Hell the city of Baton Rouge did a question and answer session with public broadcasting that is on You tube at the beginning of the year saying they had the lawsuits ready to go in case they lost.
Everyone knew. You think the St. George organizers didn't know? That's retarded.
quote:
Did St George mention that, nope not once
Liar. I googled and in the first article found this:
quote:
St. George said it anticipated a lawsuit being filed and will fight any court filing.
This has been known forever. They are trying to raise money because it's expensive.
quote:
Organizers only sold the good and the utopia of what they expected ST George to be without mentioning all of the legality and burden of what it would take to get there
Liar
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:06 am to doubleb
quote:
Several years back in the Central case, and by the La. State Supreme Court.
When exactly? I'm trying to dig up this case and coming up empty.
My understanding is that there was a Parish-wide vote to amend the plan of government to include Central. I don't remember the provision actually being ruled unconstitutional by the La. Supreme Court, but maybe it was.
ETA: I see where the 1st Circuit ruled it unconstitutional. That's persuasive but not binding. I'm sure that'll be raised by St. G in response to the suit.
This post was edited on 11/6/19 at 10:10 am
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:11 am to lsu2006
quote:
When exactly? I'm trying to dig up this case and coming up empty.
The Advocate had an article on it Monday I believe.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:12 am to moneyg
quote:
This has been known forever. They are trying to raise money because it's expensive.
let's get the vote first and raise money later. yeah that makes all the sense.
quote:
Liar
and we are on to ad hominem attacks. have fun wasting your money to get your utopia. Oh don't worry you'll get mine too in taxes eventually I'll just wind up paying less than you because St George donations can kiss my arse.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:12 am to tommy2tone1999
I had a St. George organizer knock on my door yesterday around dinner time asking for help in their lawsuit defense. Said they needed cash donations to fight against Baton Rouge and their big city attorney teams.
I said sure thing, St. George man. How much are y'all trying to raise? And do you know what he said?
"I need about tree fiddy."
Well it was about this time I noticed that this St. George organizer was about 8 stories tall and was a crustacean from the protozoic era!
I said sure thing, St. George man. How much are y'all trying to raise? And do you know what he said?
"I need about tree fiddy."
Well it was about this time I noticed that this St. George organizer was about 8 stories tall and was a crustacean from the protozoic era!
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:13 am to mindbreaker
quote:
let's get the vote first and raise money later. yeah that makes all the sense.
I mean, people want proof of concept before they just start handing over money. That's not unreasonable.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:17 am to mindbreaker
quote:
and we are on to ad hominem attacks
You are being dishonest. Pointing that out is reasonable.
quote:
Oh don't worry you'll get mine too in taxes eventually I'll just wind up paying less than you because St George donations can kiss my arse
Utopia? You can't discuss this without creating this strawman. Stop and think about that. That's embarrassing.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:21 am to Huey Lewis
quote:
St. George: Donations for Legal Fees
I had a St. George organizer knock on my door yesterday around dinner time asking for help in their lawsuit defense.
If a SG organizer really did that they need to quit. That stuff offends people and is ripe for fraud and abuse. You don't need to do that.
I believe in the SG movement, and I understand why private citizens who have already spent hours of their time and probably a lot of their own dollars need help.
After all this is a grassroots organization, and the workers are volunteers.
I'm going to help them. If you don't support SG, then you shouldn't help them. But never before have I seen the full weight and power of the mayor thrown against individuals in a grassroots organization like this in order to prevent them from exercising their constitutional right to incorporate.
If you want SG and believe in SG then I suggest support these individuals, and if you are ambivalent or you oppose then don't.
It's not complicated.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:25 am to ProjectP2294
quote:
I mean, people want proof of concept before they just start handing over money. That's not unreasonable.
People donate loads of money to campaigns all the time
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:27 am to lsu2006
quote:
When exactly? I'm trying to dig up this case and coming up empty.
I found this from the 1st Circuit Court of appeals
Devall v Starns
quote:
In the 2002 lawsuit, the plaintiffs served the Council Administrator for the Metropolitan Council of the City/Parish. The attorney general was not served with a copy of the lawsuit and did not participate therein. The City/Parish answered the lawsuit and admitted that Section 1.05 of the Plan of Government was unconstitutional and violative of state law. On November 14, 2002, the trial court rendered judgment decreeing Section 1.05 of the Plan of Government to be unconstitutional and contrary to state law, and therefore, null and void. Starns v. Metropolitan Council of the Parish of East Baton Rouge and the City of Baton Rouge, Docket No. 500,675 (19th JDC 10/18/2002) (hereafter referred to as “Starns I?”).
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:31 am to tommy2tone1999
Yeah, I just read the case itself. Appellate decisions, while persuasive, aren't binding law, so that Section hasn't technically been ruled contrary to the state's constitution. However, that is definitely a persuasive argument that St. G should raise and one which I imagine Morvant would be receptive to. But it would also be foolish of counsel for Broome, et al, to NOT bring up the existing Plan of Government and force St. G to argue it is contrary to the state constitution.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:32 am to tommy2tone1999
quote:
If you're inclined to help the new city with its mounting legal fees, you can click HERE to make a donation. Stop those who would deny democracy and the will of the voter.
They didn't prepare for a legal challenge that was almost 100% going to happen. Off to a great start.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:33 am to moneyg
quote:
Utopia? You can't discuss this without creating this strawman.
because that is how it was sold to me pre-election. We are going to create a city that will be run like a business and be more efficient than any city has ever been run in Louisiana before. That isn't a lie I was told that when I had questions by an organizer.
Maybe people that didn't have a F baton rouge and their shitty politics (which is accurate) we need to get away at all costs didn't see it the same way you did.
And there in lies the difference I didn't agree with the "at all costs" part.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:34 am to lsu2006
quote:
Yeah, I just read the case itself. Appellate decisions, while persuasive, aren't binding law, so that Section hasn't technically been ruled contrary to the state's constitution. However, that is definitely a persuasive argument that St. G should raise and one which I imagine Morvant would be receptive to. But it would also be foolish of counsel for Broome, et al, to NOT bring up the existing Plan of Government and force St. G to argue it is contrary to the sta
If I were the judges and EBR came back to me with the same argument I'd already ruled on; I would have the red arse.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 10:35 am to MLCLyons
quote:
They didn't prepare for a legal challenge that was almost 100% going to happen.
quote:
They didn't prepare for a legal challenge that was almost 100% going to happen.
They retained a lawyer before the suit was filed.
Your statement is incorrect.
Page 8 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News