- 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 Opposition Committing to Lawsuits
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:48 pm to doubleb
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:48 pm to doubleb
quote:
Why now? Why not a couple of years ago?
You know the answer to your question. After the first petition effort failed the La. legislature passed a bill that prohibits any area which is included in an incorporation petition process from requesting to be annexed by another city while the incorporation/petition process is going on.
That law was passed to prevent a similar situation as the annexation of the Mall of Louisiana, the casino, that LSU acreage out River Road, etc., that happened while the first petition was being circulated.
As you pointed out in that other thread today, Siegen Market Place did get their petition and annexation done before the current annexation effort started a couple of years ago and they were annexed by BR under Broome as mayor-president.
Those neighborhoods that voted in the majority against the incorporation didn't know they were going to be included in the second annexation petition process until AFTER that second petition process started and the map of the proposed incorporation area had been disclosed..
By then it was too late for them to request to be annexed by Baton Rouge because those neighborhoods, by law, were not allowed to petition to be annexed by Baton Rouge once the second petition process began.
We've discussed that several times on here and I recall someone, not me, even posted that new law a few years ago after the first SG incorporation process failed with a comment something like, "Well, at least BR won't be able to poach our land again once we start another petition."
I'm no lawyer (thank goodness!!) but I now wonder is the "petition process" now considered completed since the election is now over?
And if so, does that mean areas are again free to petition to be annexed by Baton Rouge before they become part of the new city of St. George?
I guess we'll find out.....
4
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:48 pm to BR Tiger
St George needs Rispone to win and then a Republican elected Mayor-President in 2020 bigly.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:49 pm to doubleb
quote:On this we are in agreement.
The country is losing more and more when leaders refuse to follow our laws and accept our election results.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:53 pm to LSURussian
quote:
And if so, does that mean areas are again free to petition to be annexed by Baton Rouge before they become part of the new city of St. George?
I would argue they are now part of St George. There are still some formalities to be done (certifying the election) but the vote has occurred and St George is here. There have been no legitimate legal arguments raised that would undo the election. In my mind, the initial boundaries of the new city are set. But I’m sure this will get drug up to at least the state SC.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:54 pm to udtiger
quote:
1) St.G formally incorporates
2) Neighborhood petitions to unincorporate (revert back to unincorporated area)
3) Petition to join BR
If history has taught us anything, they will not approve the incorporation of these residential areas into BR though. They can't afford it. They need people paying for some of the services that they don't use in order to fund it for others.
We have been down this road. BR only annexed businesses that would be a net gain for their budget. They liked the unincorporated area just the way it was, paying for BRPD, BRFD, etc. but not being provided any services from them.
That said, I could see SWB doing something dumb like bringing them all in (to prove some stupid point) only to find out later all taxes in BR have to be raised in order to continue paying for the now expanded services. How awesome would that be?
I don't want to be part of SG, let me out so I can be part of BR.
BR can I be part of you?
YAY, I'm in BR...wait you want to raise my taxes to pay for stuff I was already paying for but not getting?
I don't want to be part of SG, let me out so I can be part of SG. SG, NOPE
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:54 pm to LSURussian
You are right, but I’m speaking towards the time frame between the failure of the initial petition and the beginning of the second petition. It was about a two year plus period.
Surely folks in those areas must have thought about starting their own petition.
Surely folks in those areas must have thought about starting their own petition.
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 4:55 pm
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:57 pm to LSURussian
quote:
And if so, does that mean areas are again free to petition to be annexed by Baton Rouge before they become part of the new city of St. George?
Yes, that’s why they have lawyers and they have judges.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:58 pm to LSUengr
quote:
Two thousand people should not be able to decide the fate of everyone in Baton Rouge,” Engquist says. “This fight is just starting
LOfrickingL
Because those 2k are the breadwinners in the relationship and they should just shut up and support their partner?
frick BR, so glad I got out of that shithole
Posted on 10/15/19 at 4:59 pm to Lsut81
Engquist is just looking after his own pocketbook. H&E just built a nice new building right in the middle of St. George and believes higher property taxes will occur once the ISD is formed.
He also has a number of high-end developments in BR proper that could see less interest with the formation of an ISD.
He also has a number of high-end developments in BR proper that could see less interest with the formation of an ISD.
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 5:03 pm
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:00 pm to udtiger
quote:Nah, that's fake news.
His brother is the Senator-elect for the seat that includes a large part of what is now St. George.
Here is the description of his senate district:
quote:Gardere area low income neighborhoods were removed from the second incorporation petition after the SG organizers had a low percentage of signatures from that area on the first petition.
Senate District 14 is located entirely in East Baton Rouge Parish, covering much of the Southern University and LSU campuses as well as the State Capitol and downtown Baton Rouge. The district also includes the low-income neighborhoods next to the petrochemical plants in north Baton Rouge as well as the Gardere area in south Baton Rouge.
You may be thinking about his information regarding Cleo:
quote:LINK
Smith argued Fields primarily relies on a second home near the Country Club of Louisiana off Highland Road in a wealthy part of southeast Baton Rouge, far from his official residence in north Baton Rouge on Hollywood Street, where he claims his homestead exemption.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:02 pm to BR Tiger
I can tell you that there are more than one group already organizing to get some new STG areas OUT of STG. Both of my sisters are working with one group in 70809 and there is at least one group in 70810 also planning a secession!
If these people and businesses are successful, the most valuable property in the new STG will be exiting in Year One of STG. Gonna be interesting.
If these people and businesses are successful, the most valuable property in the new STG will be exiting in Year One of STG. Gonna be interesting.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:03 pm to GeorgeWest
how about you tell us which sections as I’m curious.Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:04 pm to LSURussian
Trust me on this one, Cleo will represent a significant part of SG as state Senator.
The map of Senate 14, Fields’ new district includes U Club, Harveston, all the subdivisions along Bluebonnet extension, areas along Burbank and even extends to part of the Oak Hills area.
The map of Senate 14, Fields’ new district includes U Club, Harveston, all the subdivisions along Bluebonnet extension, areas along Burbank and even extends to part of the Oak Hills area.
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 5:15 pm
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:05 pm to LSURussian
Would it not be a conflict of interest for any judge that resides in this parish to hear the case?
If this affects that whole parish and they live in the parish it seems it would affect them also in some way, shape, or form.
If this affects that whole parish and they live in the parish it seems it would affect them also in some way, shape, or form.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:06 pm to GeorgeWest
quote:
If these people and businesses are successful, the most valuable property in the new STG will be exiting in Year One of STG. Gonna be interesting.
At the rate it’s going, they will be out of SG before I get in!!!!
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:07 pm to The Rodfather
quote:Stop trying to post things you know nothing of. The primary funding that SG will "take" from the EBR general fund is a 2% sales tax. All parish property taxes will continue to be the same for people in St. George or outside of St. George.
. They need people paying for some of the services that they don't use in order to fund it for others.
There a very few retail businesses in and around those residential neighborhoods who voted in the majority against being incorporated into St. George so the loss of sales taxes for the EBR general fund will be very little if they get included in St. George.
As President W. Bush once said, "This ain't rocket surgery...."
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:08 pm to LSURussian
After reading everything you just posted, I have a question for you because you seem knowledgeable on this whole ordeal.
I am under the impression that none of the areas annexed in the last few years during both incorporation efforts have been residential. The reason being that the city can't afford to take on areas that would be a burden on the city. Even though those areas were already paying taxes for the services, the city could not afford to provide those services. That is why they only took businesses. Business pay a whole lot more into the system than a residential spot of the same size, while required less services back.
Have any residnetial areas been annexed (of size, not one or two houses here and there, but hell even that too I guess) since the first effort started?
I understand your point here, but these areas HAD to know that there was going to be another effort made. And they HAD to know that it would be a possibility. If they were so dead set against being part of the new area, why didn't they push for BR incorporation when they had the chance? Obviously they are ok with being part of BR proper if they are asking now.
It's not like they are asking to be unincorporated from SG and stay that way. They are requesting to be brought into BR, which they never where part of to begin with.
I am under the impression that none of the areas annexed in the last few years during both incorporation efforts have been residential. The reason being that the city can't afford to take on areas that would be a burden on the city. Even though those areas were already paying taxes for the services, the city could not afford to provide those services. That is why they only took businesses. Business pay a whole lot more into the system than a residential spot of the same size, while required less services back.
Have any residnetial areas been annexed (of size, not one or two houses here and there, but hell even that too I guess) since the first effort started?
quote:
Those neighborhoods that voted in the majority against the incorporation didn't know they were going to be included in the second annexation petition process until AFTER that second petition process started and the map of the proposed incorporation area had been disclosed..
I understand your point here, but these areas HAD to know that there was going to be another effort made. And they HAD to know that it would be a possibility. If they were so dead set against being part of the new area, why didn't they push for BR incorporation when they had the chance? Obviously they are ok with being part of BR proper if they are asking now.
It's not like they are asking to be unincorporated from SG and stay that way. They are requesting to be brought into BR, which they never where part of to begin with.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:09 pm to LSUengr
quote:
John Engquist
Big Rispone donor.
And so it begins.....
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:14 pm to doubleb
quote:Why would they know they were going to be included in the second petition after the SG organizers had announced they were going to shrink the SG footprint for the second petition drive more than a YEAR before the second drive's area was revealed?
Surely folks in those areas must have thought about starting their own petition.
They didn't necessarily want to be in Baton Rouge either. They wanted to remain unincorporated.
That option doesn't exist now apparently, unless some judge says it does.
And don't call me Shirley....
Posted on 10/15/19 at 5:20 pm to The Rodfather
quote:That's an inaccurate assumption.
I am under the impression that none of the areas annexed in the last few years during both incorporation efforts have been residential.
There were some small residential areas also annexed by BR during the first petition drive but the commercial annexations got almost all of the headlines because that was where the big tax money was lusted after by both sides was located.
quote:
. If they were so dead set against being part of the new area, why didn't they push for BR incorporation when they had the chance?
I've already answered that. I refuse to keep repeating myself. Sorry.
quote:Is that an option for them now? I'd really like to know the answer to that question.
It's not like they are asking to be unincorporated from SG and stay that way.
quote:Again, I've already addressed that. Not going there over and over again.
They are requesting to be brought into BR, which they never where part of to begin with.
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News