News -> INDReporter WED, JUN 8 10:46AM by Walter Pierce

Update: ‘No tax ordinance’ nixed

As expected, an ordinance that would have established a policy prohibiting the Lafayette City-Parish Council from considering the establishment of taxing districts without a vote by residents was soundly defeated Tuesday by a 7-2 vote, despite a show of force at the council meeting by members of the Tea Party of Lafayette and Acadiana Patriots. Only the ordinance’s sponsors — Councilmen William Theriot, R-District 9, and Jared Bellard, R-District 5 — voted in favor of the measure.

Nicholas Persac has the story in today’s Advertiser.



Walter Pierce
About the author:


Comments (3)add
...
written by NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN , June 08, 2011 - 04:11 pm
And this show was all a farce, a nonsensical apocryphal display of couillion measure designed to appease the couillion voters. The day Joey Durel, surrenders his sleigh of hand magic to reward his fellow cronys is the day he is out of that office, he has more hanger-ons waiting with bid in hand than the rascalesque crowd in Chicago.
...
written by James Melancon , June 08, 2011 - 08:20 pm
This is unfortunate. Despite the legal issue of the State vs Parish, the charter's wording is clear. Theriot and Bellard need to be applauded for the efforts.
...
written by realitycheck , June 10, 2011 - 01:07 am
TIFs and Redevelopment : "Under redevelopment, "public use" now includes privately owned shopping centers, auto malls, and movie theaters. "Public use" is now anything a favored developer wants to do with another individual's land. Eminent domain is used to effect what once were purely private transactions.

In a typical redevelopment project, a developer is given an "exclusive negotiating agreement," or the sole right to develop property still owned by others. Once such an agreement is made, small property owners are pressured to sell to the redevelopment agency, which acquires the land on behalf of the developer. If refused, the agency holds a public hearing to determine "public need and necessity" to impose eminent domain. By law, this must be an impartial hearing. In reality, the agency has already committed itself to acquire the property for the developer, so the outcome is certain.

Whole areas of cities have been acquired, demolished and handed over to developers to recreate in their own image. Historic buildings, local businesses and unique neighborhoods are replaced by generic developments devoid of the special flavor that once gave communities their identities.

Typical is the experience of Anaheim. Having demolished its historic central business district in the mid-1970's, the redevelopment agency recently hired consultants to help restore the identity of a downtown that no longer exists. "The complete eradication of the traditional business district has left nothing for the community to relate to as their downtown," admits an internal city memo.

"Redevelopment means the bulldozers are coming," said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., (January 30, 2000, L.A. Times). "A lot of the time you displace business. Once you do that it's tough to replace them."

Small property owner have little chance to participate in redevelopment projects. Consultants and redevelopment planners prefer to work with one huge parcel under a single ownership. Entrepreneurs and homeowners just get in the way.

Typically, it is small family-owned businesses that are targeted for eminent domain. the Veltri family ran a popular Italian restaurant for years in downtown Brea. Forcibly acquired and demolished by the agency, a Yoshinoya Beef Bowl now stands in its place. Across the street, the Vega family saw its service station condemned and demolished to make way for a brew-pub."

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it