- 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 on track to collect signatures needed to be put on ballot
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:33 am to Amadeo
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:33 am to Amadeo
quote:
It's only the government seat of the most conservative state in the country.
Sigh.
And I'd wager that Utah is the most conservative state in the country.
0
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:35 am to ColeCoushCoush
quote:
And it will cost MORE money to start a new city
Or the money they are already paying now. According to several articles the average income in the proposed area of St. George is $90K a year. Not a tax person, but that's like the 25%-28% (6% LA) tax bracket. The average income of the new EBR is $35K a year which is like 10%-15% (2-4% LA) a year. So, St. George people pay for themselves and part of EBR.
As far as schools go; Yeah most people in St. George send their kids to private school, but are paying for public schools (with their taxes) as well. They don't mind paying taxes if they can see some sort of benefit from it.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:45 am to Golfer
quote:
Well one of the morons you listed in an earlier post actually represents St. George. And the mayor you've listed as well won South BR precincts by a higher margin than NBR in the 2008 election.
"Represents" is a strong word. And want the 2008 election a good while before we really saw what a snake Kip was with all this St George stuff?
And to the other fella's point, I totally support someone's business decision to decide to be annexed. But I want them to do it in line with the laws at have. If they don't want to do it legally, then I kind of don't have their back.
But back to the real issue: who is still defending the status quo EBRPSS? And why are they doing it?
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:46 am to LSU8654722
quote:
. They don't mind paying taxes if they can see some sort of benefit from it.
They are actually getting more in return for what their paying.
If they really cared about schools, they'd become more active in the school board.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:51 am to magildachunks
quote:
They wouldn't know this bc they have never gone to a school board meeting and don't even know what member represents them. It amazes me they think an ISD would be better when they don't even participate now.
I've nevee been to NYC, but I know there's a Statue of Liberty, an Empire State Building and Yankee Stadium.
I haven't been to a school board meeting, but I know our system is substandard, poorly run, and the only ones happy with it are the fortunate minority who proclaim we are better gether(sic), but who elect not to send their children to anything but a magnet or gifted school.
You live in BR and are scared your life may change because the city might have to raise your taxes to compensate for your city services or you might lose your precious magnet school or why else would you worry about us idiots out here in the suburbs?
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:51 am to Huck Finn
quote:Again with the ad hominem. I've now asked you several times to elaborate on what made the annexations illegal, but you clearly are just parroting something you heard at an SG rally without fully understanding the logic of your accusations. I'm legitimately curious as to what laws were broken.
If you think she's a good quality judge, I can't help you.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:51 am to Huck Finn
quote:
And to the other fella's point, I totally support someone's business decision to decide to be annexed. But I want them to do it in line with the laws at have. If they don't want to do it legally, then I kind of don't have their back.
I love this.
SG was trying to kidnap them into its city to be, and the businesses asked BR to annex before that happened.
Of everything that's come out during this, the only thing that has been proven to be illegal has been on SG's side ie: the forgeries.
And Kip and BR didn't get involved and lawyer up till Celtic asked to be annexed and SG threatened the annexation.
Once that happened, other businesses jumped on the annexation train.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:51 am to Loubacca
quote:
Question: If St George gets it's own city, what is the plan if they don't get there own school district? It's my understanding that the issue would be brought to a statewide vote. What if that vote failed?
Then they'd try again.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:52 am to The Boat
quote:
Kip is a Democrat but the Green Light Plan is about the best thing that's ever happened to Baton Rouge.
It certainly has done a lot of good, and it is Kip's crowning achievement.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 11:57 am to magildachunks
quote:
I love this. SG was trying to kidnap them into its city to be, and the businesses asked BR to annex before that happened. Of everything that's come out during this, the only thing that has been proven to be illegal has been on SG's side ie: the forgeries. And Kip and BR didn't get involved and lawyer up till Celtic asked to be annexed and SG threatened the annexation. Once that happened, other businesses jumped on the annexation train.
I was disappointed some elected out of SG, but that's their right.
But don't act as if the city didn't actively lobby to get them to apply for annexation because they did. The city even sent people to St. Louis to pursue L'auberge.
And so far nothing has proven to be illegal. There have been allegations on both sides, but to date I have not seen anyone found guilty of anything.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:09 pm to doubleb
quote:
But don't act as if the city didn't actively lobby to get them to apply for annexation because they did. The city even sent people to St. Louis to pursue L'auberge.
So what? You're upset bc the city asked if they wanted to join?
Tell me: did SG bother asking them before just including them in the new city?
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:13 pm to magildachunks
I'm absolutely 100% in favor of the Celtic studios annexation. They had every right to and it made sense.
As for the others, the annexations violate R.S. 33:172 if you're actually curious. I'm also skeptical of the way the city used railroad land in building their tax bridge with the hospital, but that's a whole other Bible study.
Again, this is about getting decent freaking schools. I and 98% of the St George supporters would abandon the city thing today if we got our isd. And I sincerely hope that law passes that facilitates creating an isd in our area. I really don't want to move.
As for the others, the annexations violate R.S. 33:172 if you're actually curious. I'm also skeptical of the way the city used railroad land in building their tax bridge with the hospital, but that's a whole other Bible study.
Again, this is about getting decent freaking schools. I and 98% of the St George supporters would abandon the city thing today if we got our isd. And I sincerely hope that law passes that facilitates creating an isd in our area. I really don't want to move.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:14 pm to Huck Finn
quote:
"Represents" is a strong word. And want the 2008 election a good while before we really saw what a snake Kip was with all this St George stuff?
Does a MC member not represent a district voted on by its residents?
And Kip won nearly every precinct in 2012 too...
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:14 pm to Huck Finn
quote:
Again, this is about getting decent freaking schools. I and 98% of the St George supporters would abandon the city thing today if we got our isd. And I sincerely hope that law passes that facilitates creating an isd in our area. I really don't want to move.
When was the last school board meeting you attended?
quote:
ay the city used railroad land in building their tax bridge with the hospital, b
What can I say? The hospital didn't want to get railroaded into the new city.
This post was edited on 4/29/15 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:31 pm to magildachunks
Look back on page 4, about 2/3 of the way down. I listed the two major problems EBRPSS is experiencing. Tell me which of those would be addressed with our school board. We need to break up this district if we're going to have any shot at fixing the problems because they're two different worlds of problems. The school board will just keep rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:34 pm to Huck Finn
So....never.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:37 pm to magildachunks
Nope... They never will be able to tackle the two elephants in the room.
Glad you're catching on.
Glad you're catching on.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:39 pm to Huck Finn
David Tatman isn't exactly hard to track down and chat with, FYI.
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:40 pm to Huck Finn
quote:
Nope... They never will be able to tackle the two elephants in the room. Glad you're catching on.
You are absolutely clueless as to what's going on in EBRPSS. You have no idea what they are trying to do now that they are not under that ridiculous federal ruling.
How is an ISD going to combat the "elephants" better than EBRPSS?
Posted on 4/29/15 at 12:41 pm to SuperflyLSU
lee high will change things
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News