Comments for RE: Paint Drying at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.theind.com Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:51:38 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/re/6849-paint-drying#comment-10232 I agree with ragin_cajun - maybe a brief refresher is required; i.e., where are we now, where do we want to be, and how do we get there (from a 90's perspective)? And how does that contrast with the current situation? Unfortunately, there is a ton of money to be made in "Byzantine financing" and the like. CPAs, Tax Attorneys, Investment Bankers, and numerous others love it. It will be interesting to see if it's unraveled. Mr Hebert, your analysis and opinions are appreciated: by me, at least... Keep them coming. - Will it be Politics or Logic? Fri, 03 Sep 2010 15:15:01 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/6849-paint-drying#comment-10231 The reason for so many accounts is to maintain plausible deniability for our elected officials and so that no one can get an easy "one page" snapshot of LCG finances. Just like at state level we have a budget crisis every year when actual numbers don't meet the estimates. The logical solution is to base the budget not on forecasts but the real numbers from the prior year. Then you know exactly what you have to spend and we end the constant cycle of budget crises. But they will not do that because it is easier to cut higher ed and hospitals if it is a CRISIS and not just another decision of the budgeting process. They can just blame it on the nameless, faceless economists who got the forecast wrong. All the best, Soop - Soop Fri, 03 Sep 2010 13:36:50 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/6849-paint-drying#comment-10224 Andrew M. Hebert-- Flawless logic from you as usual. But I always come walk off scratching my head after I read your posts. I always feel like I'm just missing something--like there's some important piece of the puzzle that I don't have in the history of all this. If consolidation was such a bad deal for the people living in the city, then why did it ever happen in the first place? Consolidation was not some evil plot pushed on the city by the parish. The city (politicians and people) came up with the idea, proposed it, pushed it through, and ultimately voted on it. There was alot of effort put into consolidation in the 90's, the city had to overcome a lot of ineria and resistance to get it done.....why? What was in it for the city in the 90's to do this, and what is different now? I've heard this was Ed Abell's brainchild--that true? Was anyone currently involved in City-parish government involved in consolidation in the 90's? What reasons were given for consolidation when it was put on the ballot back then? - ragin_cajun Fri, 03 Sep 2010 10:51:12 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/6849-paint-drying#comment-10188 Walter, there is an error in your calculations. Since City and Parish revenues are kept separate, then, please divide the City assets by only the City population to achieve their worth. And since they are also Parish taxpayers divide the Parish assets by the Parish population. Add that worth to the City residents to achieve a true worth of their separately owned assets. So in a nut shell, the only purpose of consolidation was to eliminate the City voters from controlling their separately owned tax revenues and assets. - Andrew M. Hebert Thu, 02 Sep 2010 08:59:02 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/6849-paint-drying#comment-10175 Its my prediction that the status quo will stay the same. I doubt the public even gets to vote on it. That said, why can't the city of lafayette have its own city council, just like the outlying towns, then also have a parish council. that way, for city issues, the city council can vote on it and not have outside interests interring? That way everyones best interests are served. if this can't or won't be done, abolish the towns mayors, city councils, etc. that way, all the parish will truely be consolidated, not the unconsolidated "consolidated" government we now have. - Southsider Wed, 01 Sep 2010 19:07:49 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/6849-paint-drying#comment-10135 I think that repeal and separation is ridiculous and impractical. I think that we need to simplify the "Byzantine financing" so that it is something that the average citizen can understand. If a full-time reporter can't keep it straight, how can a voter? In talking to my city councilman about various things, I can assure you all that they have trouble understanding how LCG works, too. That is unacceptable, and that is what the commission needs to address. Deconsolidation is an overly emotional panic reaction to a simple shift in demographics. If it happens, it'll cause, or bring back from the past, a whole bunch of other problems, and it will cost ALOT of time and money to do it. - ragin_cajun Wed, 01 Sep 2010 08:57:20 +0100