blighted area down by the river
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Hansel

Saint Francisville, LA

#41 Apr 23, 2013
Ha ha wrote:
Gretchen , sorry I mean Tom, your post is a small smidgen of truth, over ran by a lot of false spin, coupled with some out right wrong information and topped of with some down right lies...but what the hey , this is topix, lie on my friend and be happy.
Have you seen the actual documents that are floating around this parish? There are actual copies of leases, aerial photographs, police jury minutes. I don't see any of the post which is false spin. Please enlighten.

1) The Parish was the one claiming ownership of the Riverfront and Ferry Landing in the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s.
2) The Town government leased it out from 1860 to 1920s.
3) The aerial photographs from the 1940s to the current year show the large expanse of Public Riverfront land separating the Bayou Sara Town lots from the River. The 1940 maps also show the ferry landings and highway in the same location it is today.
4) The Parish through a cooperative endeavor with the State built the highway, the ferry landing, boat landings on the Parish land as far back as 1920s. Not through any lease with the Lamberts or the Lacosts.
5) The landings were originally built in 1860 not 1960 and still are on public land.
6) The Town and Parish made a profit off the ferry leases. Described as "all that area known as the "steamboat landing, Public Riverfront from the center of Principal street to the Mouth of Bayou Sara"
7) The Lamberts through their attorney, Mr. Kilbourne requested and received a Right of Way from the Police Jury in the 1950s to use a portion of the Parish riverfront with the provision that the Lamberts build and maintain a public road.
8) There are no old official Survey maps at the clerk of courts. The only map of the area is a sketch of an old drawing which only shows the Town lots which were sold and for sale in the Town of Bayou Sara in 1898.
9) This map is not filed in any court records and is not an official survey map. It is a copy of a sketch. It does not show the Public Riverfront or Public Ferry Landing which was not for sale in 1898 because it was not and has never been private land. 10) The Public Riverfront with its Boat Landings and Ferry Landings has never stopped being needed for the public.
11) The DA Hal Ware in 1988 requested and instructed the PJ to sign a permanent servitude with the Lamberts for the public ferry landing.
12) In 1998 Asst DA Hughes advised the PJ to enter a lease agreement to pay the Lamberts for this same area.
13) In 2012 Asst DA Hughes states he can not assist the PJ with this matter because his lawfirm has been the representative for the Lamberts.
Hansel

Baton Rouge, LA

#42 Apr 23, 2013
I sound like a broken record! I have said the above in several different ways and under many, many, different names over the past months. I have very little to do with my time so I get bits and pieces here and there and make up a post!!!!
Aintthatashame

Saint Francisville, LA

#43 Apr 24, 2013
Back to the original topic. Blight. The lamberts apparently like blight. Look at their property on hwy 66; an otherwise beautiful road. Look how the riverfront property has been for years. The only solution is stronger laws, that are enforced, in this parish. This properly is not going to happen. Ain't that a shame!
Aintthatashame

Saint Francisville, LA

#44 Apr 24, 2013
Probably, oops
Rebels

United States

#45 Apr 24, 2013
The Lamberts, Rinaudos, and McVeas are society folkes who are very involved with the Historical Society, Audubon Pilgrimage, and Promotion of tourism in this Parish.
Aintthatashame

Saint Francisville, LA

#46 Apr 24, 2013
Rebels wrote:
The Lamberts, Rinaudos, and McVeas are society folkes who are very involved with the Historical Society, Audubon Pilgrimage, and Promotion of tourism in this Parish.
All the more reason he should clean up his property which the public views.
Rep McVea

United States

#47 Apr 24, 2013
Rebels wrote:
The Lamberts, Rinaudos, and McVeas are society folkes who are very involved with the Historical Society, Audubon Pilgrimage, and Promotion of tourism in this Parish.
Tom McVea has worked to get the State to purchase private individuals property for tourism purposes. He has worked to get the Cat Island swamp land purchased from private individuals for tourism.
Toni McVea and her sister Susan Lambert work on the Pilgrimage committee and has been Pilgrimage Chairman.

“Fresh Air”

Since: Jan 11

Saint Francisville

#48 Apr 24, 2013
Rep McVea wrote:
<quoted text>
Tom McVea has worked to get the State to purchase private individuals property for tourism purposes. He has worked to get the Cat Island swamp land purchased from private individuals for tourism.
Toni McVea and her sister Susan Lambert work on the Pilgrimage committee and has been Pilgrimage Chairman.
And what, exactly, does this have to do with the blight and litter pervasive in our otherwise beautiful parish, some of which they could do something about and, hence, leave toursts with a much better impression?
Catfish

Baton Rouge, LA

#49 Apr 24, 2013
countrylad wrote:
<quoted text>
And what, exactly, does this have to do with the blight and litter pervasive in our otherwise beautiful parish, some of which they could do something about and, hence, leave toursts with a much better impression?
I believe it was in response to the comment made by aintthatashame , the said poster was essentially saying "the Lamberts" (the family as a whole) don't care about the beatification of this community , the later you were replying to was saying that isn't true based on their sisters actions.

At least I think....
Tourist

United States

#50 Apr 24, 2013
Rep McVea wrote:
<quoted text>
Tom McVea has worked to get the State to purchase private individuals property for tourism purposes. He has worked to get the Cat Island swamp land purchased from private individuals for tourism.
Toni McVea and her sister Susan Lambert work on the Pilgrimage committee and has been Pilgrimage Chairman.
Tom and Toni McVea were instrumental in getting a lease deal worked out with the Lamberts to use the old Parish ferry landing as a boat landing area.
Aintthatashame

Saint Francisville, LA

#51 Apr 24, 2013
Catfish wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe it was in response to the comment made by aintthatashame , the said poster was essentially saying "the Lamberts" (the family as a whole) don't care about the beatification of this community , the later you were replying to was saying that isn't true based on their sisters actions.
At least I think....
"The lamberts" being those members of the family that own or control the riverfront and hwy 66 property.
Catfish

United States

#52 Apr 24, 2013
Aintthatashame wrote:
<quoted text>
"The lamberts" being those members of the family that own or control the riverfront and hwy 66 property.
I knew you ment Pal, but nonetheless she is a Lambert, and as a heir she does own a share of that property along with the other two.

I was just interpreting what the other was sayin g is all
Sweet Deal

United States

#53 Apr 24, 2013
Tourist wrote:
<quoted text>
Tom and Toni McVea were instrumental in getting a lease deal worked out with the Lamberts to use the old Parish ferry landing as a boat landing area.
This sounds good but why would the McVeas feel the Parish needed to pay to lease property that the Parish already owned? Do you really think they misread the maps and thought these were Lambets Lots from Square 3 of the Town of Bayou Sara? If they thought this, wouldn't this land belong to the US Government who bought those lots from the Lamberts in 1960? I guess all is fair in Love and War. I think the rest of us should just stay out of this Family Affair.
Catfish

United States

#54 Apr 24, 2013
Sweet Deal wrote:
<quoted text>
This sounds good but why would the McVeas feel the Parish needed to pay to lease property that the Parish already owned? Do you really think they misread the maps and thought these were Lambets Lots from Square 3 of the Town of Bayou Sara? If they thought this, wouldn't this land belong to the US Government who bought those lots from the Lamberts in 1960? I guess all is fair in Love and War. I think the rest of us should just stay out of this Family Affair.
And there it is y'all! The daily bullcarp post by someone that dose not know what they are talking about, but figures "what the heck, I'll post anyway because I like to stir the pot."

McVea, along with the rest of the jury, thought that the Lamberts owned it based on the Cash Sale between Paul and Lacost for the "warehouse lots" that are shown on a map as Lots "B" and "C" (or is it "A" and "B") that are shown to sit on the river.

They did not think it was because of anything Paul Sr. purchased in square 3, that is a completely separate issue.

Once again though, as it is with all of the bullcarp post, there is a little bit of truth there, and that is that Paul Sr. did sell lots to the US gov'ment and yes some were in Square 3, from what I understand.
Black Kettle

United States

#55 Apr 24, 2013
Catfish wrote:
<quoted text>
And there it is y'all! The daily bullcarp post by someone that dose not know what they are talking about, but figures "what the heck, I'll post anyway because I like to stir the pot."
McVea, along with the rest of the jury, thought that the Lamberts owned it based on the Cash Sale between Paul and Lacost for the "warehouse lots" that are shown on a map as Lots "B" and "C" (or is it "A" and "B") that are shown to sit on the river.
They did not think it was because of anything Paul Sr. purchased in square 3, that is a completely separate issue.
Once again though, as it is with all of the bullcarp post, there is a little bit of truth there, and that is that Paul Sr. did sell lots to the US gov'ment and yes some were in Square 3, from what I understand.
There you go again Catfish. Bullcarp? What little bit of half truths are you spouting today? Lots B and C?? Or is it A or B? When were these in existence? Where are they located? I believe that if you stop trying to stir you false information pot a little truth might come forward. Lot A, B, C on the maps were referred to as "Negro Tennaments" in 1891. They were swept away in the Bayou along with All of Square 10 that you so stirringly state Lamberts ownership. These lots touched the lots that have the Oyster Bar. That is a long distance from the Public Riverfeont.
Keep repeating g Catfish, you've got 3 police jurors working on your side with the Lamberts. You just need one more
Catfish

Baton Rouge, LA

#56 Apr 24, 2013
Black Kettle wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go again Catfish. Bullcarp? What little bit of half truths are you spouting today? Lots B and C?? Or is it A or B? When were these in existence? Where are they located? I believe that if you stop trying to stir you false information pot a little truth might come forward. Lot A, B, C on the maps were referred to as "Negro Tennaments" in 1891. They were swept away in the Bayou along with All of Square 10 that you so stirringly state Lamberts ownership. These lots touched the lots that have the Oyster Bar. That is a long distance from the Public Riverfeont.
Keep repeating g Catfish, you've got 3 police jurors working on your side with the Lamberts. You just need one more
The ware house lots that I was referring to was never in a square, they stood alone, and say on the river. They were purchased from the Lacoste, I just can't remember if they were called "A" and "B" or "B" and "C" .

Rey could not of been "swept" away by the bayou because they did not sit on the bayou, they sat below Square 1 if I'm not mistaking. They are shown on both maps that I've seen of Bayou Sara
True Land Owner

Baton Rouge, LA

#57 Apr 24, 2013
Lamberts only own half of this property. I know this because it is my family's land.

Grandpa purchased 50% the property back in the 1960's ..... sale IS recorded in the clerks office Of west feliciana with the legal description of 15 acres with the river and the mouth of bayou Sara as the borders. When he died, his succession included this land called and was recorded in the clerks office in the 90's.
Stinky

United States

#58 Apr 24, 2013
True Land Owner wrote:
Lamberts only own half of this property. I know this because it is my family's land.
Grandpa purchased 50% the property back in the 1960's ..... sale IS recorded in the clerks office Of west feliciana with the legal description of 15 acres with the river and the mouth of bayou Sara as the borders. When he died, his succession included this land called and was recorded in the clerks office in the 90's.
This does not pass the test. Who is your grandfather and how did the Lamberts not purchase this land?
Get You Some

United States

#59 Apr 24, 2013
True Land Owner wrote:
Lamberts only own half of this property. I know this because it is my family's land.
Grandpa purchased 50% the property back in the 1960's ..... sale IS recorded in the clerks office Of west feliciana with the legal description of 15 acres with the river and the mouth of bayou Sara as the borders. When he died, his succession included this land called and was recorded in the clerks office in the 90's.
The Lamberts may owe you some money

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

St. Francisville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
President Trump - How's He Doing? 8 hr littleasy 256
What Leadership 12 hr Informed Resident 35
D'Aquilla Sues Council - What Do You Think? Fri not so fast 38
BTon Rouge Feb 22 strange 35
HSBaseball Feb 21 Blunder 3
4 h Feb 20 kevin the douche 22
Where is the best boiled seafood/crawfish in th... (Apr '12) Feb 19 Citizen 18

St. Francisville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

St. Francisville Mortgages