- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 6/25/18 at 11:28 pm to The Boat
I live in the proposed SG area and would probably stand to benefit from it financially (higher RE values; better public schools driving down private school tuition costs, etc.). Further, I support the right of self-determination of the people of the proposed SG.
That all said, I oppose it on the grounds that cities thrive on cultural enrichment, cultural enrichment requires population density as a feedstock, and promoting growth further and further away from the areas most suitable for density will undermine the ability of GBR to grow. Suberbs tend only to be as attractive as the cities they surround, and we need more investment and more population closer to the center a la the European model, not less.
That all said, I oppose it on the grounds that cities thrive on cultural enrichment, cultural enrichment requires population density as a feedstock, and promoting growth further and further away from the areas most suitable for density will undermine the ability of GBR to grow. Suberbs tend only to be as attractive as the cities they surround, and we need more investment and more population closer to the center a la the European model, not less.
This post was edited on 6/25/18 at 11:29 pm
Posted on 6/26/18 at 5:02 am to RedStickBR
Here is the reality.
Our taxes will go up anyway to supplement BR.
The problem the unincorporated areas pay for parish services which we all use while the leaches in The City of BR do not pay for these services. They use a lot more of these services than we do as they have more crime and population. They do not pay for these services, why? We all use these services and every EBRP Resident should pay for them yet inside the city they do not.
- district court
- DA’s Office
- coroners Office
Until they separate the parish Govt from The City of BR Govt they will take more and more from our tax base to supplement their lack of fiscal responsibility while not taking in residential areas around these businesses.
Taking away the unincorporated areas tax base also hurt services we pay for such St george Fire dept which since the metro council controls fire districts even though we have a fire board. This dept services areas inside the city to make up for their failure to provide fire stations close to the annexed areas. The city of BR keeps a class 1 rating while we pay taxes and get our dept we pay property tax for stretched thin.
In the consolidated Govt model it shows it does not work. Lafayette Parish also has a similar issue and have been talking about doing away with this form of Govt. This form of Govt has shown to fail the people on one side or the other. In the metro councils case all the unicorporated areas get screwed while the city of BR uses these areas to plug holes in a bloated city parish Govt.
Eventually if we do not separate we will pay taxes to a bloated city government to supplement their services.
The unicorporated areas need to incorporate such as Brownsfiled between Baker and NBR as they have enough mfg and retail establishments to survive on their own.
Our area needs to incorporate.
Pride area also needs to look at this.
If they do not their taxes will eventually go up for pay for BR’s lack of being a fiscal responsible Govt.
We pay 10% sales tax just like they do.
We do not get the same level of service in this area.
This should show that there is something wrong and the unicorporated areas are supplementing the city.
This needs to stop or all of the unicorporated areas will suffer while we pay more taxes with nothing to show for it.
Our taxes will go up anyway to supplement BR.
The problem the unincorporated areas pay for parish services which we all use while the leaches in The City of BR do not pay for these services. They use a lot more of these services than we do as they have more crime and population. They do not pay for these services, why? We all use these services and every EBRP Resident should pay for them yet inside the city they do not.
- district court
- DA’s Office
- coroners Office
Until they separate the parish Govt from The City of BR Govt they will take more and more from our tax base to supplement their lack of fiscal responsibility while not taking in residential areas around these businesses.
Taking away the unincorporated areas tax base also hurt services we pay for such St george Fire dept which since the metro council controls fire districts even though we have a fire board. This dept services areas inside the city to make up for their failure to provide fire stations close to the annexed areas. The city of BR keeps a class 1 rating while we pay taxes and get our dept we pay property tax for stretched thin.
In the consolidated Govt model it shows it does not work. Lafayette Parish also has a similar issue and have been talking about doing away with this form of Govt. This form of Govt has shown to fail the people on one side or the other. In the metro councils case all the unicorporated areas get screwed while the city of BR uses these areas to plug holes in a bloated city parish Govt.
Eventually if we do not separate we will pay taxes to a bloated city government to supplement their services.
The unicorporated areas need to incorporate such as Brownsfiled between Baker and NBR as they have enough mfg and retail establishments to survive on their own.
Our area needs to incorporate.
Pride area also needs to look at this.
If they do not their taxes will eventually go up for pay for BR’s lack of being a fiscal responsible Govt.
We pay 10% sales tax just like they do.
We do not get the same level of service in this area.
This should show that there is something wrong and the unicorporated areas are supplementing the city.
This needs to stop or all of the unicorporated areas will suffer while we pay more taxes with nothing to show for it.
Posted on 6/26/18 at 7:06 am to RedStickBR
So you believe the current strategy which had pushed thousands of families down I-10 or I-12, and has led to the current situation where the growth in BR proper is stagnant should be continued?
Man, the current system is the problem.
Man, the current system is the problem.
Posted on 6/26/18 at 7:26 am to doubleb
No, the current strategy is wrong, and this strategy is also wrong. We need mass European-style gentrification of our urban core. Push the blight and crime into the suburbs (as with Paris’ banlieues), not the productive classes. And before anyone wants to call gentrification racist, there are untold working-class minorities who would also benefit.
Cities who have gotten it wrong:
Memphis, Houston, Jackson, Atlanta
Cities who have gotten it right:
New York City, Paris, London, Madrid, Barcelona
The difference between those categories is that there is less rot in the city center in the latter. I worry SG will accelerate Baton Rouge’s going the way of a Memphis or Atlanta where you have abandoned downtown areas. This will in turn promote suburban sprawl, fail to provide the environment you need for cultural enrichment, and make for this counter-productive dynamic (as with Germantown vs Memphis or the Woodlands vs Houston or Alpharetta vs Atlanta) where you have a bunch of suburban dwellers who hate the actual cities they border.
I’m not defending the current model or the current leadership. Both have failed us. I just worry the SG idea will only make things worse in the long run. As I’ve mentioned before, who really wants to live in a nice suburb of a really shitty city?
I will give credit where it’s due to all
of those who’ve been involved in the current restoration of downtown. There’s a long way to go, but immense progress has been made over the past ten years. We need more of that, not less. We need more people inhabiting the areas closer to the center, not fewer.
Cities who have gotten it wrong:
Memphis, Houston, Jackson, Atlanta
Cities who have gotten it right:
New York City, Paris, London, Madrid, Barcelona
The difference between those categories is that there is less rot in the city center in the latter. I worry SG will accelerate Baton Rouge’s going the way of a Memphis or Atlanta where you have abandoned downtown areas. This will in turn promote suburban sprawl, fail to provide the environment you need for cultural enrichment, and make for this counter-productive dynamic (as with Germantown vs Memphis or the Woodlands vs Houston or Alpharetta vs Atlanta) where you have a bunch of suburban dwellers who hate the actual cities they border.
I’m not defending the current model or the current leadership. Both have failed us. I just worry the SG idea will only make things worse in the long run. As I’ve mentioned before, who really wants to live in a nice suburb of a really shitty city?
I will give credit where it’s due to all
of those who’ve been involved in the current restoration of downtown. There’s a long way to go, but immense progress has been made over the past ten years. We need more of that, not less. We need more people inhabiting the areas closer to the center, not fewer.
This post was edited on 6/26/18 at 7:54 am
Posted on 6/26/18 at 7:35 am to seeinspots
quote:
You won't leave. Noone with a dog in this fight will leave. Baton Rouge is a nice place to live. Better together. And you know it.
A: Troll
B: Moron
C: Ignorant
[D]: All the Above
Posted on 6/26/18 at 8:43 am to RedStickBR
I think you are missing the big picture, it's education.
You can have a nice Downtown, but if the schools are bad prople with families are going to go where they have good schools.
SG is closer to Downtown than Prairieville and Walker are, and are in the same parish.
Folks in the SG would pay for parish services while folks in Ascension and Livingston will not.
Besides comparing BR to NY, Barcelona, Atlanta and Madrid doesn't make sense. We aren't in that class.
Compare BR to comparable size cities. What do they do well and what do they do wrong?
Eta: while you commend the success Downtown (I do too) you do reslize BR has lost population during this same time frame. Folks aren't moving back to the center.
You can have a nice Downtown, but if the schools are bad prople with families are going to go where they have good schools.
SG is closer to Downtown than Prairieville and Walker are, and are in the same parish.
Folks in the SG would pay for parish services while folks in Ascension and Livingston will not.
Besides comparing BR to NY, Barcelona, Atlanta and Madrid doesn't make sense. We aren't in that class.
Compare BR to comparable size cities. What do they do well and what do they do wrong?
Eta: while you commend the success Downtown (I do too) you do reslize BR has lost population during this same time frame. Folks aren't moving back to the center.
This post was edited on 6/26/18 at 8:47 am
Page 10 of 10
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News