- 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: The Metro Council declared war on the unincorporated area tonight
Posted on 5/15/14 at 7:34 am to redandright
Posted on 5/15/14 at 7:34 am to redandright
quote:
mediocrity that is known as the EBRP Public School System.
using the word mediocrity is much more of a compliment then the word I would use. We forget what this issue is or was all about. The failing EBRP school system.
1
Posted on 5/15/14 at 7:54 am to Kramer26
quote:
If they think the push to incorporate St. George was ended tonight they are dead wrong. It's not over, the battle has just begun. Go St. George!
Maybe so but you guys better find a new budget somehow. The only honest thing to do is tell the tax payers their property taxes are going to rise to pay for it. It's going to be just like Zachary and Central because they had no big businesses to fund the schools!
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:01 am to KLSU
I think people are underestimating a simple fact: paying higher property taxes >>>>>>> paying private school tuition
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:05 am to KLSU
quote:
Maybe so but you guys better find a new budget somehow. The only honest thing to do is tell the tax payers their property taxes are going to rise to pay for it. It's going to be just like Zachary and Central because they had no big businesses to fund the schools!
Honesty is the best policy, there's no doubt about that.
But when you talk about a budget that's where many people get screwed up. You really need to talk about two budgets; SG the city and SG the ISD.
First of all I believe that right now as things stand with the mall (not Sears, penny's etc.) going to the city; there is still plenty of revenues coming in to the SG to run the city as outlined by the SG leadership.
However, I am not convinced there is a enough revenues coming in to support a good ISD and ADD the necessary schools that would be required to take care of the anticipated enrollment as well as the enrollment of additional students as more people move into the district.
People need to understand the financial ramifications of the city and then the ISD. It's more than just a debate about the city.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:24 am to theunknownknight
quote:
I think people are underestimating a simple fact: paying higher property taxes >>>>>>> paying private school tuition
That's not the issue. The issue is the so called "leaders" of the SG movement routinely claiming they won't have to raise taxes.
I have no clue why anyone would believe a word out of their mouths anymore after the disgrace they showed themselves out to be yesterday.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:25 am to novabill
quote:You keep making this strawman's argument. I have not read a single post on this board where someone has stated if they get the required signatures on their petition SG residents should not be allowed to vote on it.
But opposed to those that are against allowing the people the opportunity to vote.
You support the people's right to vote if they can the signatures?
If you think someone has posted they don't have a right to vote even if they get the required # of signatures, please link to it.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:28 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
For the St. George leadership to argue in every possible venue over the last two weeks that the annexations would invalidate the St. George petition; to hold that position right through a council vote on those annexations, with dozens of speakers denouncing the Council in the strongest possible terms for supposedly interfering with the petition process; to do all this, and then turn around immediately after the vote and admit that “after meeting with out legal team over the last several days, we now believe this does not invalidate our petition."
This reflects what can only be considered duplicity and a basic lack of integrity.
The St. George leadership pretended to believe that the annexations would interfere with the petition, merely to influence the outcome of the vote in their favor, and then admitted immediately afterward that they were being dishonest simply as an attempt to gain a favorable outcome.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:40 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
For the St. George leadership to argue in every possible venue over the last two weeks that the annexations would invalidate the St. George petition; to hold that position right through a council vote on those annexations, with dozens of speakers denouncing the Council in the strongest possible terms for supposedly interfering with the petition process; to do all this, and then turn around immediately after the vote and admit that “after meeting with out legal team over the last several days, we now believe this does not invalidate our petition."
This reflects what can only be considered duplicity and a basic lack of integrity.
meh
It represents what obviously was a political move to attempt and halt/stall the incorporation. It didn't work.
For the opposition to have utilized the political gamesmanship and maneuvering that it has and then stand on a podium and call out St. George for something like this is humorous.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:43 am to LSURussian
quote:
You keep making this strawman's argument. I have not read a single post on this board where someone has stated if they get the required signatures on their petition SG residents should not be allowed to vote on it.
You mean, assuming it is within the newly proposed time limits to get signatures, and before the proposed moratorium on annexations, and prior to changes in the incorporation vote to include the entire parish?
It's dishonest to pretend that there hasn't been a very coordinated effort to prevent St. George residents from voting on this.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:44 am to Kramer26
quote:
The Metro Council declared war on the unincorporated area tonight
If the unincorporated area wanted St. George, they would already have the signatures. There has been plenty of time.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:44 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
That's not the issue. The issue is the so called "leaders" of the SG movement routinely claiming they won't have to raise taxes
They won't have to raise taxes for the city of SG.
I'd question them harder on the schools, however. But that's not what the petition is about is it? It's the city, right?
quote:
have no clue why anyone would believe a word out of their mouths anymore after the disgrace they showed themselves out to be yesterday.
From what I saw of the Council meeting, I thought everyone on both sides handled themselves nicely. The mayor did a great job, and no one on the council made an arse of themselves.
I didn't see all the speeches, but nothing in the paper tells me anyone acted the arse.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:44 am to moneyg
quote:For once, Rainey lying didn't work? Okay, I got it. Thanks.
It represents what obviously was a political move to attempt and halt/stall the incorporation. It didn't work.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:45 am to moneyg
quote:No, I mean "You keep making this strawman's argument. I have not read a single post on this board where someone has stated if they get the required signatures on their petition SG residents should not be allowed to vote on it."
You mean,
What is so difficult for you to understand what I wrote?
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:47 am to LSURussian
quote:
No, I mean "You keep making this strawman's argument. I have not read a single post on this board where someone has stated if they get the required signatures on their petition SG residents should not be allowed to vote on it
Let's see what happens once we get the required signatures. Let's see who tries to block the vote.
I bet someone or some group does and some here back that play.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:49 am to doubleb
quote:
Let's see what happens once we get the required signatures. Let's see who tries to block the vote.
What's taking so long for them to get the signatures? And how close are they?
Everyone who would want to sign has had ample time to do so.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:51 am to doubleb
quote:
I have not read a single post on this board where someone has stated if they get the required signatures on their petition SG residents should not be allowed to vote on it
quote:What the frick does that have to do with what people have posted on this board?!? The poster I replied to who was using the strawman argument was accusing posters on this board of denying SG residents a vote if they got the signatures on the petition. Have your reading comprehension skills gone to ZERO???
Let's see what happens once we get the required signatures. Let's see who tries to block the vote.
I bet someone or some group does and some here back that play.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:53 am to theBeard
quote:
We forget what this issue is or was all about. The failing EBRP school system.
No kidding. If only someone had warned that this was a giant distraction.
But this isn't the fault of the Kip Holden. The St. George leaders (ie Rainey) are much more focused on 'winning' the incorporation that they took their eyes off the prize.
He could have suspended the incorporation effort to work out some sort of deal on the schools while things were still looking good. Instead he wanted to go head to head with the forces that run Baton Rouge and he got his hat handed to him.
He needs to step down from this effort and let someone that actually cares about the people involved (you know someone who lives there) take over.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:56 am to LSURussian
quote:
What the frick does that have to do with what people have posted on this board?!? The poster I replied to who was using the strawman argument was accusing posters on this board of denying SG residents a vote if they got the signatures on the petition. Have your reading comprehension skills gone to ZERO???
You are behind the curve, I didn't disagree with anything you said; I was predicting that once the signatures were in we'd see opposition to a vote That's all. Catch up man, you're way off your game and using profanity here makes you look even worse. Nobody else here is doing that.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 8:57 am to BigJim
quote:
No kidding. If only someone had warned that this was a giant distraction. But this isn't the fault of the Kip Holden. The St. George leaders (ie Rainey) are much more focused on 'winning' the incorporation that they took their eyes off the prize. He could have suspended the incorporation effort to work out some sort of deal on the schools while things were still looking good. Instead he wanted to go head to head with the forces that run Baton Rouge and he got his hat handed to him. He needs to step down from this effort and let someone that actually cares about the people involved (you know someone who lives there) take over.
Good take sir, I think the city thing has taken the emphasis away from the school situation.
And I think Rainey/White have become issues instead of the merits of the city and the school ISD.
Posted on 5/15/14 at 9:01 am to moneyg
quote:
meh It represents what obviously was a political move to attempt and halt/stall the incorporation. It didn't work.
For the opposition to have utilized the political gamesmanship and maneuvering that it has and then stand on a podium and call out St. George for something like this is humorous.
So you totally skipped over the fact that Rainey and company blatantly lied to the entire city and parish about the effects of the annexation? Then immediately after the vote, decided to tell the truth? That doesn't matter at all to you?
These are the people organizing this proposed city and they've already started lying to the public. You're ok with that?
Page 7 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News