- 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 public forum, May 6 @ 6:30pm
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:42 am to LSURussian
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:42 am to LSURussian
You are still assuming. Residents against the breakaway is not biased at all LMAO.
Again, show:
1. Where the organizers said st.George cancelled
Or
2. Where st.George says they cancelled.
Neither happened, and the rest is you connecting dots exactly like the advocate wanted you to.
Again, show:
1. Where the organizers said st.George cancelled
Or
2. Where st.George says they cancelled.
Neither happened, and the rest is you connecting dots exactly like the advocate wanted you to.
1
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:43 am to Sprocket46
quote:WTF??? Of course they are biased!
You are still assuming. Residents against the breakaway is not biased at all LMAO.
Why do you think they call themselves "Residents Against the Breakaway"???
You just answered my earlier question. Thanks.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:48 am to LSURussian
quote:
You just answered my earlier question. Thanks.
So clever, the Russian. Almost smart enough to explain how 9+2-2=11.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:50 am to LSURussian
Russian,
I asked in the other topic from yesterday and didn't hear from you, so I figured I'd ask you here.
I'm not flaming on you at all, if you prefer to answer in the other thread that's fine by me.
What is your motive in the SG issue? What do you personally have to lose or gain if SG materializes?
You passionately sit here almost all day every day arguing pints related to this matter. Many legitimate points and also many ridiculous situations where y'all argue all day about how much tax revenue is here or there.
Our government is working, for or against any of you, it is working and the people will have a voice and decide. No one's TD posting will be used, but I do find all of the input educational at times, pre-school level at others.
What is your position on why you personally are against it?
My personal view from the outside looking in...Baton Rouge had all the time in the world to annex this area, why didn't they? Why weren't people like you out there everyday having rallies and such to make sure Baton Rouge did the right thing and annex the area? Only now, that the people of SG got tired of having their taxes go to a city that refused to annex them, and they try to organize themselves to better their area, is Baton Rouge all in a frenzy about trying to stop them?
I asked in the other topic from yesterday and didn't hear from you, so I figured I'd ask you here.
I'm not flaming on you at all, if you prefer to answer in the other thread that's fine by me.
What is your motive in the SG issue? What do you personally have to lose or gain if SG materializes?
You passionately sit here almost all day every day arguing pints related to this matter. Many legitimate points and also many ridiculous situations where y'all argue all day about how much tax revenue is here or there.
Our government is working, for or against any of you, it is working and the people will have a voice and decide. No one's TD posting will be used, but I do find all of the input educational at times, pre-school level at others.
What is your position on why you personally are against it?
My personal view from the outside looking in...Baton Rouge had all the time in the world to annex this area, why didn't they? Why weren't people like you out there everyday having rallies and such to make sure Baton Rouge did the right thing and annex the area? Only now, that the people of SG got tired of having their taxes go to a city that refused to annex them, and they try to organize themselves to better their area, is Baton Rouge all in a frenzy about trying to stop them?
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:50 am to Sprocket46
I just figured out what your previous two screen names are.
Did you get the admins' permission to create another alter?
Did you get the admins' permission to create another alter?
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:54 am to LSURussian
Sorry, you got the wrong guy, or gal.
Now back to 9+2-2=11....
Now back to 9+2-2=11....
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:55 am to GeeOH
LINK
So your statement is not only irrelevant, it's a complete strawman argument.
quote:It's obvious you don't understand the annexation process. The property owners in an unincorporated area must request via a petition to be annexed. I have not heard of any of the SG proponents asking for and being refused to be annexed. Have you?
My personal view from the outside looking in...Baton Rouge had all the time in the world to annex this area, why didn't they?
So your statement is not only irrelevant, it's a complete strawman argument.
quote:*sigh*
Only now, that the people of SG got tired of having their taxes go to a city that refused to annex them, and they try to organize themselves to better their area, is Baton Rouge all in a frenzy about trying to stop them?
Posted on 4/30/14 at 9:55 am to LSURussian
Lsurussian, are you going to attend the forum?
Posted on 4/30/14 at 10:10 am to LSURussian
So how come the folks at city hall are trying to recruit BRGH, L'Auberge, the Mall and all the other properties mentioned previously?
It seems to me that if it was all on the property owners then there would be no discussions of the Mall and the other businesses south of I 10.
Now I do realize Costco, Celtic and the credit union reached out themselves but they are partially in the city already. That is not the case with all the other entities discussed.
It seems to me that if it was all on the property owners then there would be no discussions of the Mall and the other businesses south of I 10.
Now I do realize Costco, Celtic and the credit union reached out themselves but they are partially in the city already. That is not the case with all the other entities discussed.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 10:11 am to doubleb
Why is Town Center not in Baton Rouge? Seems like it would be a great sales tax revenue generator for the city.
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 10:13 am
Posted on 4/30/14 at 10:28 am to dewster
quote:Why should they ask to be incorporated? They are already serviced by the Baton Rouge Fire Department and BR Police Department without having to pay the slightly higher city property taxes for that coverage. And they can avoid the CATS property tax now, too.
Why is Town Center not in Baton Rouge?
quote:Where do you think the city sales taxes which are collected there now go?
Seems like it would be a great sales tax revenue generator for the city.
Your lack of knowledge about BR is evident.....again.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 10:42 am to LSURussian
So they are not in the city but sales taxes generated there go to the city's expenses?
If they are getting police and fire protection solely from Baton Rouge, they should pay the same taxes as the rest of Baton Rouge and competing retail centers within the city limits.
If they are getting police and fire protection solely from Baton Rouge, they should pay the same taxes as the rest of Baton Rouge and competing retail centers within the city limits.
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 10:48 am
Posted on 4/30/14 at 11:03 am to dewster
They have friends in high places evidently and thst is one reason we have such a hodge podge of a city.
It's obvious Towne Center and the other properties around Towne Center that aren't in the city, like the current arrangement and unlike Celtic and Costco they don't seem to want in the city.
You would think Daniels and Kip would be negotiating with them too.
It's obvious Towne Center and the other properties around Towne Center that aren't in the city, like the current arrangement and unlike Celtic and Costco they don't seem to want in the city.
You would think Daniels and Kip would be negotiating with them too.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 11:21 am to dewster
quote:CONSOLIDATED FORM OF GOVERNMENT
So they are not in the city but sales taxes generated there go to the city's expenses?
Just like the sales taxes now collected at the Mall of Louisiana, Perkins Rowe and any where else in the unincorporated areas of EBR, those taxes all go into the EBR general fund to be spent as the CP Council votes. ETA: That same process is also followed for sales taxes collected within the BR city limits.
quote:They don't. St George fire department also services Towne Center. There is an agreement that allows the BRFD and BRPD to also cover Towne Center.
If they are getting police and fire protection solely from Baton Rouge
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 11:26 am
Posted on 4/30/14 at 11:22 am to doubleb
quote:Can you get any more paranoid?
They have friends in high places evidently
Posted on 4/30/14 at 11:57 am to LSURussian
quote:
*sigh*
Exactly! I don't know details. SO I will simplify it to ask..
What is your fight about in all of this? Why are you spending the better part of your life fighting against SG on this board and arguing to no end (with others doing the same) about the SG situation?
Is it effecting your personal life? Is it about your kids schooling? If so, would you be for the SG incorporating if it benefited your children?
I'm not against or for you, I'm just trying to figure out why you or so passionately against it while others feel so strongly for it. And I'm trying ot do this without all kinds of attachments to read or stats or monetary figures, etc..
Why are you against it?
Posted on 4/30/14 at 11:59 am to LSURussian
quote:
Just like the sales taxes now collected at the Mall of Louisiana, Perkins Rowe and any where else in the unincorporated areas of EBR, those taxes all go into the EBR general fund to be spent as the CP Council votes
...which apparently is on BR City Services to the tune of 50M+
Posted on 4/30/14 at 12:03 pm to GeeOH
I already provided a link answering your question.
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 12:45 pm
Posted on 4/30/14 at 12:38 pm to LSURussian
Where? Money G is the only one who responded in the other thread..
Its a simple question...why are you personally against it? Your situation, kids situation, family's situation?
Its a simple question...why are you personally against it? Your situation, kids situation, family's situation?
Posted on 4/30/14 at 12:53 pm to GeeOH
quote:
My personal view from the outside looking in...Baton Rouge had all the time in the world to annex this area, why didn't they? Why weren't people like you out there everyday having rallies and such to make sure Baton Rouge did the right thing and annex the area? Only now, that the people of SG got tired of having their taxes go to a city that refused to annex them, and they try to organize themselves to better their area, is Baton Rouge all in a frenzy about trying to stop them?
Know you asked Russian but I wanted to share my $.02 on why BR has not annexxed this area sooner.
Remember City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge is a consolidated government. The city is not a separate entity divorced from rest of the parish like how it is in most parishes of the state. I think Lafayette is also consolidated and NO is by default since the city boundaries are the same as the parish line.
So the Mayor of Baton Rouge and the Parish President are the same person. And there isn't a city council and a parish council/police jury: those are combined into a metrocouncil.
So given that there really isn't a reason to annex the Mall of LA as the consolidated government has access to those tax recipients anyway. It would raise a little extra revenue (since the taxes in the city are higher), but would also potentially drive up the costs at the mall and make Ascension a more attractive shopping area.
Why would they annex these areas?
And, it won't stop with the Mall and Perkins Rowe. Baton Rouge and St. George are intertwined. There will be a lot of competition for retail outlets to be on one side of the street or the other.
This isn't really a issue with Central, Baker or Zachary as they are "real" towns with clearer areas. No reasonable person is going to argue that the new Stake 'N Shake in Central is really being used by Baton Rouge residents and should be part of the city. I have yet to see a boundary of SG that has any real rationale behind it other than 'everything in baton rouge that isn't already incorporated.'
A large part of my opposition to the SG incorporation is that I am a fan of consolidated government. In larger metropolitan areas they work better. I think Indianapolis and Baton Rouge are national models. This will essentially through that out the window.
I don't mind little carve outs (for example there is the separate City of Speedway in Indianapolis; similar to Baker, Central and Zachary), but they very limited in scope and have some sense of being an actual 'place.'
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News