- 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 organizers fail to get enough signatures for Nov vote
Posted on 7/23/14 at 6:55 pm to Mickey Goldmill
Posted on 7/23/14 at 6:55 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
What money has been spent by BR to "stop SG"? Other than being forced to defend a lawsuit filed by Woody Jenkins
They are paying MOP $175 hr, and she isn't just working on Jenkins defense.
0
Posted on 7/23/14 at 6:56 pm to magildachunks
He has no point.
Anti SG groups aren't releasing financial information.
It's not an issue at all, just an obvious attempt to muddy the water
And what if you mean by releasing a budget statement in terms of ethics and fundraising?
Anti SG groups aren't releasing financial information.
It's not an issue at all, just an obvious attempt to muddy the water
And what if you mean by releasing a budget statement in terms of ethics and fundraising?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 6:59 pm to Mickey Goldmill
The assessor commented as to all the city people who have be in his office efforting to learn who owns various properties and then you have Kip's lawyer out there telling the world the city plans to sue to stop any election.
She is on retainer.
She is on retainer.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 7:03 pm to doubleb
She was going to be on retainer regardless thanks to Jenkins lawsuit.
All the properties, whether they initiated it or were approached, have the right to petition for annexation into the city limits to avoid being absorbed by a new city that they don't want to be a part of.
It's just funny that every time there is a news release about a new annexation, SG supporters get all upset.
All the properties, whether they initiated it or were approached, have the right to petition for annexation into the city limits to avoid being absorbed by a new city that they don't want to be a part of.
It's just funny that every time there is a news release about a new annexation, SG supporters get all upset.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 7:04 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 7:11 pm to Mickey Goldmill
Mary Olive is paid by the hour with parish money .
And second I have no problem with the last two annexations that were proposed except to say its a poor business decision by the city if they decide to annex these areas.
But neither is key to the Lauberge problem for the city. If the city takes these properties in means nothing really.
ETA the city already had an attorney working on the Jenkins case who was working pro bono. They didn't need Mary Olive.
And second I have no problem with the last two annexations that were proposed except to say its a poor business decision by the city if they decide to annex these areas.
But neither is key to the Lauberge problem for the city. If the city takes these properties in means nothing really.
ETA the city already had an attorney working on the Jenkins case who was working pro bono. They didn't need Mary Olive.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 7:13 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 7:15 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
It's just funny that every time there is a news release about a new annexation, SG supporters get all upset.
Upset is relative, but you can certainly admit tensions are high on both sides of the issue. Hell we had a metro councilman call us terrorists......not exactly "cool and calm".
ETA: SG has said publicly they have non problems with annexations done properly.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 7:17 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 7:25 pm to doubleb
quote:
First you come on here and post that SG people are unethical and they dupe people into signing their petition and next you sat they are organizing a campaign to solicit money for an election they really don't want to happen so they can spend the funds they raise.
You say this without anything to support your allegations .
You seem like a nice guy but if you can't follow along with the very simple things I've written, I'm not sure I can help you very much. Which is my end game goal. This is very vexing to me.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 8:46 pm to Barrymanalow
A petition is a request. The language on the petition itself refers to it as a "proposal" by the residents.
State law requires that if enough people make this REQUEST, an election will be held to determine if it is the will of the majority.
This is really pretty simple and you are trying to make it complicated.
State law requires that if enough people make this REQUEST, an election will be held to determine if it is the will of the majority.
This is really pretty simple and you are trying to make it complicated.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 8:54 pm to RidiculousHype
All of the things you said are true. And it goes hand in hand with the things that I said.
Signing that petition declares support for the things listed on the left hand side of the paper. There is no such section called "bring it to a vote".
That is a small, but magnificently important difference when approaching people to give signatures.
Signing that petition declares support for the things listed on the left hand side of the paper. There is no such section called "bring it to a vote".
That is a small, but magnificently important difference when approaching people to give signatures.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 9:19 pm
Page 6 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News