- 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 haters getting caught in lies again
Posted on 10/1/19 at 5:34 am to LSUFanHouston
Posted on 10/1/19 at 5:34 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
the more I think their "leaders" have no clue what they are doing, except tapping into a desire for change. But to think they can actually run said city? yeesh.
Relax, this is just the marketing team. They will not automatically assume control. There will still need to be elections for every position.
quote:
these Together BR types are absolute trash, and are acting like thugs. It is disgusting. I want the St George effort to pass... just to give these clowns a giant FU.
True
1
Posted on 10/1/19 at 7:12 am to JohnWicksDawg
quote:
I'm sure it's been asked, but why are people from out-of-state (not to mention outside of BR) arguing against (or for) SG ??
I helped on the first petition drive and my family still lives in StG.
We own land in StG and would strongly consider moving back from Houston to be close to family, although at the moment we enjoy a LOT of benefits in Houston.
This is a solid question to ask, though.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 7:19 am to SlackMaster
quote:
This is actually what baffles me. There is currently one pot of money of let's say 'x' amount. Currently, it pays for one city-parish government. If StG passes, this same pot of money will be split and supposedly pay for an additional layer of government (separate from the parish govt. under which it sits) including mayor, road works, and other StG administration, PLUS a newly formed police force, as required by state law.
There is no new “layer” of govt. in this sense.
For instance, there’s a pothole on our street, we call the C-P line and report it. We are put on the list and hope it is addressed. The C-P fixes it.
With the new city we call, we get on the list and hope it gets fixed. The city fixes it.
If the city had to call the parish then yes there would be another layer, but that won’t be the case.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 7:20 am to Huck Finn
I hope that St George not only happens, but that it leads to kids actually going to neighborhood schools because they are good schools. Obviously this is a separate issue from this ballot, but to me it seems clear that this incorporation keeps people in Baton Rouge with the hope of a better city for their families and keeps people from moving to outlier cities/areas. Local government is the way to go. Local candidates have more reason to go to fight for the areas they live in. Smaller local government representation, better use of taxes. St George 2019 LET'S GEAUX!
This post was edited on 10/1/19 at 7:23 am
Posted on 10/1/19 at 7:24 am to SlackMaster
quote:
What I meant was that the "leaders" of the StG movement have generally shouted down anyone who disagrees with them.
I believe you mean SWB, TBR and the general democratic party here. Anyone that wants StG to happen are labeled a racist immediately. I've also seen people try to deny other people's opinions because they don't live in the area and cannot vote on the matter. When you point out people like SWB, M.E. Cormier, Dadrius Lanus, Together Baton Rouge, etc. don't live in the area and cannot vote on the matter, all of a sudden their opinions matter. Basically, if you disagree with the opposition, your opinion does not matter.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 7:46 am to SlackMaster
quote:
Agree. But respectfully, you are not addressing my point. The LSU professors, the per capita budgets of Zachary and Central, and the logic I outlined above consistently indicates that StG will not have enough budget to operate.
Wrong
Central budget indicates the opposite.
LSU prof used the BR budget as a model. It’s bloated. It is a bigger govt. than what SG wants.
Look at Central. It’s more in line with what SG wants, it has roughly the same services and it’s right here in the parish.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 7:51 am to SlackMaster
quote:
This is actually what baffles me. There is currently one pot of money of let's say 'x' amount. Currently, it pays for one city-parish government. If StG passes, this same pot of money will be split and supposedly pay for an additional layer of government (separate from the parish govt. under which it sits) including mayor, road works, and other StG administration, PLUS a newly formed police force, as required by state law.
The state law requires a police chief. We won't be paying for 2 road repair departments just like we won't be paying for 2 fire departments. Also, when you talk about duplication, consider that tax money from the unincorporated area which uses St George Fire Dept and East Side FD, is gobbled up by the city-parish which pays for the Baton Rouge Fire Dept and the Baton Rouge City Police, neither of which serve the people outside of the city, IE St George. None of the idiots opposing SG in the city mention this. Ever.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 8:16 am to LSUTigerFan247
It’s obvious to people who have lived in the unincorporated areas. Unfortunately not all of the unincorporated area is in STG so some people will still get screwed. Baton Rouge government is about to find out what it’s like to lose tax revenue, a tax base and any political cover for the decrease in services and performance of the government.
After the first STG elections, you’ll have the mayor/president of Baton Rouge elections. Just think of a mayor of STG going directly against the incumbent idiot we have now. She’s toast.
After the first STG elections, you’ll have the mayor/president of Baton Rouge elections. Just think of a mayor of STG going directly against the incumbent idiot we have now. She’s toast.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 8:25 am to JohnWicksDawg
quote:
I'm sure it's been asked, but why are people from out-of-state (not to mention outside of BR) arguing against (or for) SG ??
I still have family and friends in BR, and I want to see BR (as a metro area) become a better place. I probably won't ever move back, but it would be great to move back to a better place if it were to happen.
I was in the initial St. George boundary, but then was in no-man's land when the lines were redrawn. I do wonder if that area will look to be annexed into St. George later on.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 8:31 am to LSUBoo
In my case, I grew up in a neighborhood that will be in St George which was in an area where the city carved around it. My parents and sister still live there in fact.
I’ve been very well versed in the fricky boundaries of the city limits as a result. This particular neighborhood was small enough to be thrown into a different HS district every time Judge Parker’s magical formula was reapplied, so I’ve been wanting the area to be under a non-EBRPSS school district for decades.
Knowing that we always had to pay for St George FD, private water service, EBR sheriff, etc, also meant I was well versed on all the bullshite arguments TBR et all are making for why the area should “stay” and know they are completely full of shite.
I’ve been very well versed in the fricky boundaries of the city limits as a result. This particular neighborhood was small enough to be thrown into a different HS district every time Judge Parker’s magical formula was reapplied, so I’ve been wanting the area to be under a non-EBRPSS school district for decades.
Knowing that we always had to pay for St George FD, private water service, EBR sheriff, etc, also meant I was well versed on all the bullshite arguments TBR et all are making for why the area should “stay” and know they are completely full of shite.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 8:36 am to Lickitty Split
If an unincorporated area is adjacent to SG they can apply for annexation.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 9:35 am to doubleb
NVM, currently suffering reading comprehension issues, need more coffee...
This post was edited on 10/1/19 at 9:37 am
Posted on 10/1/19 at 9:44 am to LSUTigerFan247
quote:
They will not automatically assume control. There will still need to be elections for every position.
Are there other people waiting in the wings to run?
Posted on 10/1/19 at 9:49 am to doubleb
quote:
There is no new “layer” of govt. in this sense.
For instance, there’s a pothole on our street, we call the C-P line and report it. We are put on the list and hope it is addressed. The C-P fixes it.
With the new city we call, we get on the list and hope it gets fixed. The city fixes it.
If the city had to call the parish then yes there would be another layer, but that won’t be the case.
Yes and no.
When it comes to some services, you will have city taking over what the parish was doing.
But the city will have to have their own mayor and city council, whom I am sure will want some sort of salary. The city will have to build a city hall or have some sort of office / meeting space it rents. It will have to have it's own tax collection system (at least for property taxes). There are other duplicates that will be required.
From what I have read, the "no new taxes" idea comes from the thought that so much extra money is being paid to the parish that would now be kept by the city, that the money should cover the additional expenses. Makes sense to me... will have to see if that's reality.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 9:51 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
Are there other people waiting in the wings to run?
Oh I'm sure there are. Should make for a good first election.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 9:58 am to LSUTigerFan247
quote:
Also, when you talk about duplication, consider that tax money from the unincorporated area which uses St George Fire Dept and East Side FD, is gobbled up by the city-parish which pays for the Baton Rouge Fire Dept and the Baton Rouge City Police, neither of which serve the people outside of the city, IE St George. None of the idiots opposing SG in the city mention this. Ever.
Not to mention getting out from under the massive amount of pensions being paid out to retirees from the city.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 10:03 am to tonydtigr
quote:
Not to mention getting out from under the massive amount of pensions being paid out to retirees from the city.
This won't happen. Rest assured that StG will carry its share of the retirement burden for both the city-parish and school system, even though it isn't in the budget.
Like it or not, the area has been governed under the city-parish forever and has no legal argument for shedding its share of the retirement commitments, however poorly conceived they may be. I'm telling you, very few people truly understand what they are voting FOR.
This post was edited on 10/1/19 at 10:12 am
Posted on 10/1/19 at 10:11 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
When it comes to some services, you will have city taking over what the parish was doing.
Maybe you can answer this question, I’ve asked of anti-SG people. Exactly which services will the parish no longer provide to SG once it becomes a city?
quote:
But the city will have to have their own mayor and city council, whom I am sure will want some sort of salary. The city will have to build a city hall or have some sort of office / meeting space it rents
True, that would involve more administration, but not another layer in that the SG mayor will provide city services to citizens. But your point is correct. There is a cost.
quote:
It will have to have it's own tax collection system (at least for property taxes). There are other duplicates that will be required.
The sheriff collects property taxes, that won’t change. But yes there will be a finance dept. and it won’t be free.
quote:
From what I have read, the "no new taxes" idea comes from the thought that so much extra money is being paid to the parish that would now be kept by the city, that the money should cover the additional expenses. Makes sense to me... will have to see if that's reality.
Keep in mind that we are already paying for C-P administrators now. We pay part of Broome and her administration’s salaries. We pay for people in finance, etc.
And if you look at the services we expect from SG and what we are paying the C-P for those services now and you review what Central has done to date; SG should be fine.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 10:13 am to SlackMaster
quote:
This won't happen. Rest assured that StG will carry its share of the retirement burden for both the city-parish and school system, even though it isn't in the budget.
Like it or not, the area has been governed under the city-parish forever and has no legal argument for shedding its share of the retirement commitments, however poorly conceived they may be.
Do you believe SG has an obligation to pay the pension of employees of the city? The cops, the fire men, and other city employees? I don’t feel any obligation at all.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 10:15 am to doubleb
quote:
Do you believe SG has an obligation to pay the pension of employees of the city?
No, not cops and firemen. But yes for city-parish workers and school officials. My point is that this is not in the budget.
This post was edited on 10/1/19 at 10:16 am
Page 12 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News