- 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 7:20 pm to The Rodfather
Posted on 10/15/19 at 7:20 pm to The Rodfather
(no message)
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 7:22 pm
0
Posted on 10/15/19 at 7:32 pm to LSUengr
Posted on 10/15/19 at 7:40 pm to LSUengr
Haven't read through the entire thread to check for any discussion of this, but how will St. George's atty fees and costs be funded at this early stage?
Posted on 10/15/19 at 7:53 pm to doubleb
Why now? Because they just voted to incorporate
Posted on 10/15/19 at 7:53 pm to LSUengr
If this is allowed in the courts then all over the state watch people ask to leave the city they are in due to typically higher taxes in the cities versus unincorporated areas.
Then if a development or business was on the LA & TX state line or near it could they annex into Texas for tax reasons.
This could open a big can of worms.
Then if a development or business was on the LA & TX state line or near it could they annex into Texas for tax reasons.
This could open a big can of worms.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 7:55 pm to LSUengr
quote:
St. George Opposition Committing to Lawsuits
BR litigation machine:
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 7:58 pm
Posted on 10/15/19 at 7:58 pm to Kramer26
Did you get a map of the defined area?
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:08 pm to LSUengr
The supporters of St. George would be smart to spread the story of their struggle to every corner of the state. Giving it a high profile statewide may come in handy later.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:11 pm to doubleb
[link=(Did you get a map of the defined area?)]LINK[/link]
Nope, I was just curious what their petition looked like. I don’t see how this petition drive is even legal.
Nope, I was just curious what their petition looked like. I don’t see how this petition drive is even legal.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:12 pm to Eightballjacket
quote:
The supporters of St. George would be smart to spread the story of their struggle to every corner of the state. Giving it a high profile statewide may come in handy later.
We need to attach JBE to this.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:29 pm to Kramer26
quote:
[link=(Did you get a map of the defined area?)]LINK[/link]
Nope, I was just curious what their petition looked like. I don’t see how this petition drive is even legal.
Who knows what’s legal anymore?
We just went through the prescribed process and people are coming from everywhere to reverse the outcome.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:32 pm to doubleb
quote:
As of mid-morning, volunteers with One Baton Rouge, which has opposed the St. George incorporation effort, had prepared annexation petitions for six neighborhoods that voted against the measure in Saturday’s election, according to M.E. Cormier, lead organizer of One Baton Rouge.
They have to get 50% of the registered voters in the area to sign the petition, not 50% of the people that voted. Even if they get all of the no votes to sign the petition in these neighborhoods that voted against, it still wouldn't be enough because turnout was just under 60%. Then they have to have enough extra signatures for those that are rejected (which Ms. Cormier should know all about). They then have to hope they have the votes on the Metro Council to accept it. And all of that has to be done in a month.
If people didn't care enough to get out and vote, especially in a gubernatorial election, are they going to care enough to sign this petition? I have my doubts.
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 8:34 pm
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:34 pm to LSUengr
quote:
“Two thousand people should not be able to decide the fate of everyone in Baton Rouge,” Engquist says.
Can we take anyone opposing StG seriously in the future if they promote "democracy"
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:37 pm to Brummy
quote:Nope. For annexation it’s 50% of the property owners and 50% of voters.
They have to get 50% of the registered voters in the area to sign the petition
And the combined property value of those 50% property owners must be greater than 25% of the total property values in that area.
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 9:49 pm
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:42 pm to Upperdecker
quote:
I would be mad as hell if my neighborhood is one of the ones supposedly trying to get into BR now
the irony is that these people are the ones who incorrectly claimed StG was "breaking away"
now they're actually trying to break away from StG
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:43 pm to LSURussian
quote:
Nope. For annexation it’s 50% of the property owners not voters.
And the combined property value of those 50% property owners must be greater than 25% of the total property values in that area.
Yes, and it is interesting in that you can be a registered voter and not have a voice or you could have a voice and not be a registered voter.
But if I had to guess most properties in the area being discussed will have one or more registered voters domiciled in the dwelling.
This process is entirely different than the incorporation process when you think about it.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:45 pm to Kramer26
quote:
Here’s a link to Cormier’s petition:
i don't think EBR can annex white areas into the city b/c it will dilute black representation. it will be hilarious if EBR has to defend legitimately racist policies in order to combat the alleged racist St George
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:55 pm to LSURussian
quote:
For annexation it’s 50% of the property owners not voters.
I was basing what I said off of this:
quote:
State law requires 50% of residents plus one in an area that is seeking annexation must sign a petition in order for the request to be considered by the Metro Council.
Was assuming this meant voters. So would the owner of business property be able to sign as well? Interesting. I still think they've got a tall hill to climb - a lot of people are exhausted of this whole process and ready for it to come to an end.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 8:58 pm to LSUengr
Engquist develops in Zachary, central, and Ascension parishes. He doesnt want the threat of another good school district hurting his honey holes. frick him.
I dont live in BR or St. George but I'm down to boycott every business owner that has called this movement something that it's not, spread fear, and refuses to accept the will of the people.
I dont live in BR or St. George but I'm down to boycott every business owner that has called this movement something that it's not, spread fear, and refuses to accept the will of the people.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 9:10 pm to doubleb
quote:It’s not difficult to understand nor is it particularly “interesting.’
Yes, and it is interesting in that you can be a registered voter and not have a voice or you could have a voice and not be a registered voter.
It’s property that’s being annexed not people.
A hundred voters might rent in an apartment complex but they come and go. The property stays there.
So, it’s the property owner who requests his property to be annexed, or not annexed, not the renters who might also be voters. Or, not voters.
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News