- 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
re: Who here is against St George?
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:22 pm to LSURussian
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:22 pm to LSURussian
And I wonder how many of those moving to the parish went to Zachary, central, or other unincorporated areas? Unless something showed that metro BR was attracting those people it means squat.
1
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:24 pm to Rickety Cricket
quote:
Rich coming from a St. Georgian. Why don't you provide everyone with a reliable estimation of all the tax increases required to initially establish St. George and then to operate it going forward.
There won't be any tax increases. The current budget shows a $20.5 million dollar projected surplus.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:26 pm to dragginass
quote:
There won't be any tax increases.
AHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:27 pm to dragginass
My family currently lives in the proposed St. George city and we're looking to move to Central. We make decent money but to stay where we are at would mean private school. I'd rather move to Central, send my kids to a good public school than have to stay in BR and pay for private school. Having one kid in private school wouldn't be bad, but having 2 or possibly more would cost a lot.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:27 pm to dragginass
quote:
There won't be any tax increases. The current budget shows a $20.5 million dollar projected surplus
Which budget is this? They change from day to day, depending on who they're trying to convince
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:28 pm to lsu2006
Facts? If we are taking so much money from BR, why can't we be self sustaining. Some of you are sucking on both ends of the straw:)
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:28 pm to dragginass
quote:
There won't be any tax increases. The current budget shows a $20.5 million dollar projected surplus.
You realize, of course, that faux surplus is "pledged" by the SG leaders to reimburse Baton Rouge for legacy costs, right?
There is no "surplus." And there WILL be tax increases.
Get your head out of the sand.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:28 pm to magildachunks
The same one thats been posted for months.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:29 pm to LSURussian
Wrong. The surplus of $20.5million is calculated after having paid legacy costs. It would be more if those weren't paid.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:31 pm to dragginass
quote:
Facts?
"Facts" that have been forced down your throat by St. Georgians. Do you REALLY think there will be no tax increases? I hope you don't.
quote:
If we are taking so much money from BR, why can't we be self sustaining.
As stated previously, the 5 biggest property taxpayers in EBR will not be in the proposed St. George, that includes the Mall/Town Center.
This whole thing has disaster written all over it for every party involved and I'm glad the people proposing it are such clowns and it'll never pass.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:33 pm to lsu2006
Just because the top 5 are in BR METRO has absolutely no gravity when 60% of the total revenue comes from St.George.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:33 pm to dragginass
quote:Because the taxes SG is counting on comes primarily from the sales taxes collected by merchants in the Mall of La and Perkins Rowe. Almost half of SG's budgeted revenues come from that source.
If we are taking so much money from BR, why can't we be self sustaining.
St George will NEVER see those taxes go to it. BR will either incorporate those areas into the BR city limits prior to the SG incorporation or those funds will be contractually dedicated to BR, both of which have already been discussed in public forums.
You really need to inform yourself of what has already happened before you make ridiculously incorrect statements.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:37 pm to LSURussian
quote:
Because the taxes SG is counting on comes primarily from the sales taxes collected by merchants in the Mall of La and Perkins Rowe. Almost half of SG's budgeted revenues come from that source.
St George will NEVER see those taxes go to it. BR will either incorporate those areas into the BR city limits prior to the SG incorporation or those funds will be contractually dedicated to BR, both of which have already been discussed in public forums.
If that happens , is that fair?
also why did metro council table that vote if they are so sure it is going to happen? Didn't you say that the majority of the council members have at least a part of their district in SG? (if so, i would not count your chickens before they hatch, the vote might surprise you)
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:38 pm to LSURussian
Additionally, the Costco site and the Celtic Media Center are looking to be annexed into BR proper. And I'd wager that Mike Wampold will do everything in his power to keep the CB&I/Shaw building out of the new St. George.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:38 pm to LSURussian
quote:
Because the taxes SG is counting on comes primarily from the sales taxes collected by merchants in the Mall of La and Perkins Rowe. Almost half of SG's budgeted revenues come from that source.
St George will NEVER see those taxes go to it. BR will either incorporate those areas into the BR city limits prior to the SG incorporation or those funds will be contractually dedicated to BR, both of which have already been discussed in public forums.
You really need to inform yourself of what has already happened before you make ridiculously incorrect statements.
I thought we were sticking to facts? The laws are on our side. You can hope all you want that BR can annex sales areas, but your wishes don't have any place in a discussion on facts.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:42 pm to LSURussian
To annex those areas would need a majority of property taxpayers in the area to petition the council to make the change. Also, the area has to be contiguous with the city. They can't just annex a certain area. I highly doubt the city would be able to do this.
And I don't think just because the council contractually dedicates the tax from a area it will be valid if the area forms a city.
And I don't think just because the council contractually dedicates the tax from a area it will be valid if the area forms a city.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:44 pm to RyseofRome
Can we move this to the poli board? I feel like it would fit better over there.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:46 pm to paddys pub
And taxes in the incorporated area are 11mils higher. So not only do you need a majority, you need a majority willing to pay higher taxes to the city.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:47 pm to LSUAfro
The very least y'all could have done is choose a less WASPy name for the new white city you're planning. St. George? Jesus.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 12:47 pm to dragginass
quote:
When I saw the giant LED stick Kipster bought for new years I was pissed.
That was donated to the city by the event sponsors. Hope you didn't get too upset.
Page 15 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News