Why should I have to pay for peoples kids to play ball?

This is to the person that has a problem with the junk yards. There is a difference between a junk yard and a towing facility. For one think, the law is that a storage yard or towing yard, is to be wrapped with tarp. The company across from the church in Albany is. It’s not a junk yard. It’s a storage facility. I’m sure if you were broke down in middle of the night, you would love for them to come get you off the side of the road and store your car. They can’t help it if people don’t come get their cars and there’s a legal process they have to go through before removing a car from the storage yard. There is also a legal process to dispose of a wrecked vehicle especially if someone has been injured or worst in the car. So take it up with Louisiana Dept of Transportation. As far as the other ones, I can’t speak for them other than not everyone follows the law.

I was checking your prices for subscription on your website, on place it says $49 a year another place on the page says $52? Which is it and how many issues a year? Once a week or twice like I used to get! Seems really high since I used to get it before the flood!

We have another election Saturday, November 8th, Livingston Parish! Remember to go vote!

Recreation 5 South District:

I just thought an open discussion would be great about the upcoming vote on the proposed Rec 5 South District. Many do not know that they fall into this district. Recreation district 5 south, which would be south of interstate 12. This district has its own board with the following members; Ronnie Lambert, Trent Acosta, Matt Fussell, Blake Keller and Jeremy Acosta. These members were appointed to this board by Tab Lobell and Jeff Averett. Speaking specifically about the Rec 5 South District, what parks/programs are currently located within the district lines and how were these lines drawn? The District lines were drawn by Tab Lobell and Jeff Averett and the only current parks/public programs that will benefit from this tax is Colyell Ball Park and Frost School. The School will only benefit from this tax if an agreement can be reached between the rec board and school board. I have looked at the current description of what property is located within these lines and am curious as to how these specific lines were drawn out to include/exclude areas. Why was French Settlement left out of this district as well as King George Ball Park? This is another park that would greatly benefit from additional funds. I am aware that King George is held by members, but who owns Colyell Ball Park? I believe the redrawing of this district should take place, as the current lines benefit Colyell Park and possibly Frost School, but the line is drawn into the French Settlement school district. So those homeowners are paying for a tax that will not benefit their children. A recent article stated that if this tax is not passed, Colyell Ball Park will fall into possession of the Parish, which would be unable to sustain the park forcing the property to be sold to a private firm. What is the percentage of increase to homeowners should this tax pass and how do we determine the cost that will be reflected on our property taxes at the end of the year? A mill is equal to $1 per $1000 of assessed taxable value of your home and property. So on average a homeowner with a home value of 100,000 will have an assessed value of $10,000, homestead on $75,000, with a total of $2500 taxable value which roughly equates out to $350/year in taxes. How much of an increase should this homeowner expect? According to the rec5south.org website only a $25 increase would be seen for this property owner. Is this accurate? I’ve read numerous conflicting statements on this account. What concerns me the most in conjunction with this proposed tax is the passing of 2 Amendments on the November 6, 2018, ballot? Have these amendments been taken into account with the numbers given on how this rec 5 south tax will affect property taxes, specifically the Amendment to extend eligibility for special property tax treatments to property trust and the reappraisal amendment that states the cost of reappraisal should it decrease in the total ad valorem tax collected will be absorbed by the taxing authority and NOT allocated to the other tax payers? These two amendments will greatly impact the newly proposed 10 year 10 mill tax as there will be an increase in the number of homestead/property tax exempt homeowners and in direct correlation a decrease in the amount of contributing households to this rec tax. Further, the rec 5 south tax reads, “ Shall the Recreation District No. 5 South of the Parish of Livingston, State of Louisiana (the “District”), levy a special ad valorem tax of ten (10) mills on the dollar of assessed valuation on all property subject to taxation within the boundaries of the District (the “Tax” ) (an estimated $126,789 is reasonably expected at this time to be collected from the levy of the Tax for an entire year), for a period of ten (10) years, commencing with the tax collection for the year 2019, and annually thereafter, to and including the tax collection for the year 2028, and shall the proceeds of said Tax (after paying the reasonable and necessary expenses of collection and administration) be dedicated and used solely for the following purpose of acquiring, improving and maintaining recreational facilities for the District, or any other lawful purpose, title to which shall be in the public? “

According to the website for this tax very clearly states that, “All monies collected for this new, more localized recreation District 5 south will go to fund ONLY those improvements and programs in the new district located south of Interstate 12 however the actual tax could be interpreted differently especially with the last line reading or any other lawful purpose, title to which shall be in the public. Does that mean in all actuality this money could go to any public purpose? I would like to clarify this as its troubling. I have heard of many wonderful Ideas that have been proposed that this tax would go towards in our area such as an independent baseball league, running track, and splash pad, covered metal pavilion at Colyell closer to playground, basketball court, soccer field, and upgrading playground equipment. All of these things sound amazing and I would love to be a part of making that happen, however I would also like to ensure that what our representatives are proposing is going strictly to that and can in no way deviate from the proposed benefit of additional and improved recreational facilities. I also want to make certain that the money that will be obtained is not in extreme excess of what is actually needed and will not cause undo harm to many homeowners that are lower, middle class families that may not be able to afford a large jump in property taxes. I hope we are able to get some clarification so that we can make an educated decision when casting our votes on this matter this Saturday, December 8th. Sincerely, Rec 5 South District inhabitants

Recommended for you

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.