- 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 Organizers Sue City-Parish over Unlawful Annexations
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:26 am to rowbear1922
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:26 am to rowbear1922
quote:
There will be after all the litigation is done; the people voted it in.
I think the issue here is that the area in question (United Plaza) is all businesses. Obviously business didn’t get a vote in the St. George vote as it’s based on primary residence. So all of these businesses were forced to be in St George but had zero say in the matter.
Yes they could have petitioned to be in the City of Baton Rouge and then they wouldn’t be in St George now. But what if they didn’t want to be in any city and wanted to remain in an unincorporated area? They literally had no say in the matter.
Someone please correct me if my understanding is not correct.
2
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:29 am to tommy2tone1999
St. George should be done by now. This is fricking outrageous. frick SWB
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:29 am to Tony The Tiger
OK, let me rephrase. Why did they request to be annexed into BR?
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:30 am to LSURussian
quote:
Why would they be voided if property owners have followed the law to be annexed by BR?
The suit maintains the C-P Council did not follow the law.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:30 am to MikeBRLA
quote:
I think the issue here is that the area in question (United Plaza) is all businesses. Obviously business didn’t get a vote in the St. George vote as it’s based on primary residence. So all of these businesses were forced to be in St George but had zero say in the matter.
Yes they could have petitioned to be in the City of Baton Rouge and then they wouldn’t be in St George now. But what if they didn’t want to be in any city and wanted to remain in an unincorporated area? They literally had no say in the matter.
Someone please correct me if my understanding is not correct.
You aren't wrong. I think this lawsuit is more an FU to Broome and her puppets. This whole thing is ugly. You have an approved city suing business for not wanting to be a part of it, a parish president suing her own constituents because she didn't like the result of a valid election, and a power struggle between those in charge and those wanting more control over their neighborhoods.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:31 am to Huey Lewis
quote:
So St. George is now suing to force property owners to pay into their city even if they don't want to be apart of it. Interdasting.
Nailed it.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:32 am to MikeBRLA
quote:
Someone please correct me if my understanding is not correct.
There are ways under the law to become unincorporated again. They could follow the law and do that.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:35 am to rowbear1922
The suit claims that the City-Parish did not follow the law in its annexation. They are not sueing the businesses
This post was edited on 2/11/20 at 8:37 am
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:35 am to rowbear1922
quote:
You aren't wrong. I think this lawsuit is more an FU to Broome and her puppets. This whole thing is ugly. You have an approved city suing business for not wanting to be a part of it, a parish president suing her own constituents because she didn't like the result of a valid election, and a power struggle between those in charge and those wanting more control over their neighborhoods.
The suit in the OP isn't against the businesses, its against BR, EBR, the C-P Council, etc. for not following the law.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:38 am to doubleb
Jambalaya Lunch for St. George’s legal defense fund:
Friday February 21 11:30am-1pm at Woodlawn Baptist Church 5805 Jones Creek Road. $10 a plate
Friday February 21 11:30am-1pm at Woodlawn Baptist Church 5805 Jones Creek Road. $10 a plate
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:39 am to Kramer26
quote:
Jambalaya Lunch for St. George’s legal defense fund:
Friday February 21 11:30am-1pm at Woodlawn Baptist Church 5805 Jones Creek Road. $10 a plate
Wish it was this Saturday!
I'll be in town looking at some property in Glorious St. George.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:40 am to Huey Lewis
quote:
So St. George is now suing to force property owners to pay into their city even if they don't want to be apart of it. Interdasting.
You hate to see it.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:42 am to LSURussian
quote:
Something changed their mind. The SG spokesman has been saying all along that any anyone who wanted to be in Baton Rouge rather than SG was free to go with their blessing. Just like anyone who wanted to leave Baton Rouge and be part of SG should be allowed to move.
I wonder what changed?
They were probably just lying. They have done a lot of that.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:44 am to BeepNode
quote:
So, let me get this straight.
St. George organizers are suing to keep property owners from leaving St. George?
That's rich.
Yes. This is two Spider Men pointing at each other to a tee.
In both instances, Baton Rouge and St. George were trying to use a technicality to prevent property owners from making their own decision primarily because it deprived them of tax revenue.
I supported St. George, but this is the pot calling the kettle black.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 8:59 am to southdowns84
quote:
Yes. This is two Spider Men pointing at each other to a tee. In both instances, Baton Rouge and St. George were trying to use a technicality to prevent property owners from making their own decision primarily because it deprived them of tax revenue. I supported St. George, but this is the pot calling the kettle black
First, I have no issue with the property owners along Essen following the law and doing what they want to do, but you have to look at the big picture here.
The SG organizers do not believe that the anti-SG people have followed the law in this case, or in the bigger case which Broome, Cole, and the others filed to prevent SG from forming.
It's my opinion but the Mayor-President has abused her power by asking civic leaders to donate to her private lawsuit. Leaders who do business with C-P Govt. and who depend on her support yo make money.
It's my opinion that the same people do not follow the law, but instead they gin up reasons to block the will of a majority of voters in SG to form their own city in order to dominate the folks of SG and use their tax dollars as they see fit.
In the suit in the OP, SG organizers maintain laws were not followed. To let that slide leads to another situation and another situation and sooner or later these people will incorporate every major thoroughfare in SG into BR and by using the power of their office they will try and cut out SG from the inside.
As a resident of the SG area, I'm glad the SG organizers are putting my donation to their legal fund to good use, and are fighting back. I'm sorry Mr. Landry and his buddies on Essen are caught in the crossfire. I suggest that they like the rest of us in SG, wait to see how it all plays out and then they can follow the law and become unincorporated if they so wish.
This post was edited on 2/11/20 at 9:12 am
Posted on 2/11/20 at 9:03 am to tommy2tone1999
ODD, until they actually verify the election and allow St. Goerge to officially exist and collect taxes, how can they determine the boundary of the entity to begin a contiguous annexation?
Posted on 2/11/20 at 9:08 am to PhilipMarlowe
No, they are suing the illegal process. You can't sue to stop St. George from existing and at the same time annex portions.
St. George won the vote but the Governor and the Mayor are holding the process up that makes it impossible for St. George to be official.
You cannot annex out of St. George right now because there is no legitimate entity aside from the vote. If the mayor would end her suit and the Governor would move forward legally then you would have a legitimate entity, THEN the areas could move forward with the process. It is the same thing with any areas wanting to annex into St. George right now, THEY Can't.
St. George won the vote but the Governor and the Mayor are holding the process up that makes it impossible for St. George to be official.
You cannot annex out of St. George right now because there is no legitimate entity aside from the vote. If the mayor would end her suit and the Governor would move forward legally then you would have a legitimate entity, THEN the areas could move forward with the process. It is the same thing with any areas wanting to annex into St. George right now, THEY Can't.
This post was edited on 2/11/20 at 10:46 am
Posted on 2/11/20 at 9:11 am to doubleb
It seems petty to me. Drew Murrell said publicly that they would let anyone who wanted to get out to do so. Why then sue to make the property owners jump through additional hoops by de-annnexing then annexing into Baton Rouge again.
And from the property owner's perspective... would you want to rely on a St. George city council to keep the word of Drew Murrell? He said they could get out, why are they being blocked now? This suit indicates they won't just let property owners out.
And from the property owner's perspective... would you want to rely on a St. George city council to keep the word of Drew Murrell? He said they could get out, why are they being blocked now? This suit indicates they won't just let property owners out.
Posted on 2/11/20 at 9:13 am to BlackAdam
quote:
It seems petty to me
Petty like say, the parish president suing her own constituents because she didn't like the result of the election?
Posted on 2/11/20 at 9:17 am to BlackAdam
quote:
It seems petty to me. Drew Murrell said publicly that they would let anyone who wanted to get out to do so. Why then sue to make the property owners jump through additional hoops by de-annnexing then annexing into Baton Rouge again. And from the property owner's perspective... would you want to rely on a St. George city council to keep the word of Drew Murrell? He said they could get out, why are they being blocked now? This suit indicates they won't just let property owners out.
Drew Murrell spoke out for the organizers. He didn't speak out for me.
And I can certainly understand why Mr. Murrell would change his mind. Can't you? After all the C-P, Broome, and the others haven't followed the law. Why should they let them keep doing it?
Right now the property owners are in limbo JUST LIKE I AM. I'm paying taxes to the same tax authorities I was before the election. So are they. Nothing has changed, they aren't being harmed. They can do what they want once this thing is settled.
The property owners on Essen have been unincorporated for years now. If they had wanted in BR they had every opportunity to do it legally. One of the property owners led the charge to get the MOL into BR. Why didn't he take that opportunity and get his own property in BR?
I don't feel sorry for him. He's no worse off than I am.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News