Riverfront Is An Embarrassment

Riverfront Is An Embarrassment

Posted in the St. Francisville Forum

First Prev
of 34
Next Last
OMG

United States

#1 Feb 18, 2013
http://theadvocate.com/news/bakerzachary/5195...

This junk piled up at our riverfront by our Police Jury President and his family is a disgrace to this Parish.
Appple Tree

Saint Francisville, LA

#2 Feb 18, 2013
The fruit doesn't fall too far from the tree. Daddy Lambert took advantage of his position as police juror back in 1970 when he left some of this old abandoned junk down at the river. He was supposed to be a parish contractor. It was unsightly but didn't stop us from using the riverfront. Pal is a whole different breed. Shame what greed will do.
History Buff

Saint Francisville, LA

#3 Feb 18, 2013
Historically the Riverfront was for all the people. It dates back as far as 1700s and was a port for the public. It was a very important economic driver for this area. The Lamberts are simply trying to steal our property right out from under our noses.
Uhm

United States

#4 Feb 18, 2013
Appple Tree wrote:
The fruit doesn't fall too far from the tree. Daddy Lambert took advantage of his position as police juror back in 1970 when he left some of this old abandoned junk down at the river. He was supposed to be a parish contractor. It was unsightly but didn't stop us from using the riverfront. Pal is a whole different breed. Shame what greed will do.
So does the fruit not fall far from the tree or does it fall far tree and he is in fact a different breed?
just curious

Saint Francisville, LA

#5 Feb 18, 2013
Why have the Lambert's paid taxes on the river property for all of these years if it didn't belong to them????
Uhm

Lafayette, LA

#6 Feb 18, 2013
just curious wrote:
Why have the Lambert's paid taxes on the river property for all of these years if it didn't belong to them????
No...No!

Don't bring logical arguments like that here...that's not what this is about, Lamberts are in the wrong and that is the end of it.

All arguments, no matter their meirt or whether or not they are based in factual evidence other than hearsay, will be admitted as the truth as long as they are in favor of the parish.

Any and all information that supports the Lambert will be mocked and the poster submitting said evidence will be ridiculed and attacked until they no longe post here.
Get Informed

United States

#7 Feb 18, 2013
just curious wrote:
Why have the Lambert's paid taxes on the river property for all of these years if it didn't belong to them????
They did not pay taxes on 15 acres of public owned riverfront property. They paid taxes on 3 small 1/4 acre subdivision lots.
Family Friend

United States

#8 Feb 18, 2013
We were all lied to about the Lamberts so called purchase of the public lands. Family, friends and business associates as well as the Asst DA and DA and the police jurors. We were all lied to. Ole man Lambert never bought this property and he knew that the Parish owned this land since at least the 1800s.
He was a Parish contractor and then a police juror. We have all been wrongly taken advantage of.
Get informed yourself

United States

#9 Feb 18, 2013
Get Informed wrote:
<quoted text>
They did not pay taxes on 15 acres of public owned riverfront property. They paid taxes on 3 small 1/4 acre subdivision lots.
Wrong , they were paying taxes on the river front and more, they owned an still own a lot of the property in that area.
Nice try Paul

United States

#10 Feb 19, 2013
Just because some taxes were paid DOES NOT mean that the Lamberts own the propery in question.
River Rat

Lafayette, LA

#11 Feb 19, 2013
Nice try Paul wrote:
Just because some taxes were paid DOES NOT mean that the Lamberts own the propery in question.
I know right? One little fact doesn't make a case....it's not like they also have sales that show the purchases , leases that show others including the parish recognized their ownership, continuous possession of the property as a lessor, and has effectively barricade the property taking complete possession of it without any other agency saying "hold on you can't do that....oh wait...they have all I that?

Maybe if the parish gives the barricades back , which according to the terms of the lease agreement it is the Lamberts in the first place, they will remove the current barricade and replace it with the concrete ones.

In any event I hope that if the vagness motion is denied they won't stall this out any longer and let the courts look into this and wiegh the evidence
Fact Checker

Saint Francisville, LA

#12 Feb 19, 2013
Get Informed wrote:
<quoted text>
They did not pay taxes on 15 acres of public owned riverfront property. They paid taxes on 3 small 1/4 acre subdivision lots.
You are actually way off Mr. Get Informed. Below is what they paid taxes on;

LOTS 38,39,40,41,42 & 1/2 OF 38 SQ. 4; LOTS 27 THRU 33 & PART OF 36 SQ. 3; LOT 54 SQ. 5; LOT 6 SQ.2 64 FEET FRONT BY 128 FEET SITUATED IN DEPTH; LOT 18 (4/5) OF SQ. 2, 64 FEET FRONT Y 128 FEET DESIGNATED IN DEPTH; AL SQ. 5 INCLUDING WAREHOUSE.

PORTION OF LOT 14 & 8 FEET OF LOT 15 SQ. 2; PORTION OF LOTS 18, 24 SQ. 2

LOTS 21, PORTION OF 22, 23 SQ. 2; SQ. 10; SQ 13; LOTS 94,95,96 SQ. 8; LOT 276; SQ. 26

LOTS 266 AND 267 IN SQUARE 25 & LOT 318 IN SQUARE 36 AND THE NORTH PORTION OF LOT 319 IN SQUARE 36 SITUATED IN SECTION 43, T3S, R3W SITUATED IN THE TOWN OF BAYOU SARA, WEST FELICIANA PARISH, LOUISIANA.

Below are the links to the above legal descriptions

http://wfpainquire.softwareservices.net/Parce...

http://wfpainquire.softwareservices.net/Parce...

http://wfpainquire.softwareservices.net/Parce...

http://wfpainquire.softwareservices.net/Parce...
Fact Checker

Saint Francisville, LA

#13 Feb 19, 2013
For anyone who may take the time to click the links I have provided, under owner percentage it says ď50%Ē because that was Sr. ownership when he passed away, I believe his wife predeceased him and the children received her portion.
King of Westfel

Foley, AL

#14 Feb 19, 2013
River Rat wrote:
<quoted text>I know right? One little fact doesn't make a case....it's not like they also have sales that show the purchases , leases that show others including the parish recognized their ownership, continuous possession of the property as a lessor, and has effectively barricade the property taking complete possession of it without any other agency saying "hold on you can't do that....oh wait...they have all I that?

Maybe if the parish gives the barricades back , which according to the terms of the lease agreement it is the Lamberts in the first place, they will remove the current barricade and replace it with the concrete ones.

In any event I hope that if the vagness motion is denied they won't stall this out any longer and let the courts look into this and wiegh the evidence
Even if this comes out in favor of the Lamberts, doesn't the Parish have the right to purchase Parish the property at appraised value as Eminent Domain, or what ever it is called in Louisiana? The same process used when obtaining ROS when one or two owners are holding up a project by not negotiating a reasonable right if way?
The only Usable road that goes to the water is old hwy10 that now is controlled by the Parish, right ? I would think whatever happens the Parish has the leverag
ULysses Grant

United States

#15 Feb 19, 2013
River Rat wrote:
<quoted text>
I know right? One little fact doesn't make a case....it's not like they also have sales that show the purchases , leases that show others including the parish recognized their ownership, continuous possession of the property as a lessor, and has effectively barricade the property taking complete possession of it without any other agency saying "hold on you can't do that....oh wait...they have all I that?
Maybe if the parish gives the barricades back , which according to the terms of the lease agreement it is the Lamberts in the first place, they will remove the current barricade and replace it with the concrete ones.
In any event I hope that if the vagness motion is denied they won't stall this out any longer and let the courts look into this and wiegh the evidence
Why on this earth do you think that the US government would have granted this property to a private individual? The Port of Bayou Sara was vital to the largenplantations as well as the small business owners of New Valentia, St. Francisville, Tunica, and Woodville. This huge shipping port was in existence before little lots in a subdivision were being sold off to small businesses and middle class workers.
The big governmental leaders of this area would not have taken the chance that a peon like Pal Lambert would be Granted this steamboat landing. This area was not granted to anyone. It was kept for the benefit of the general public. The government always maintained ownership and controll of this area. Otherwise greedy individuals like the Lamberts would have shut down economic growth of this vital port. They would have shut down an important transportation hub and barricaded off the area just as they are doing now.
Notice that the Lamberts are not trying to claim they own a private individuals property along the big Mississippi River. They only want to try to claim public property that has improvements in place which were paid for with our hard earned tax money. They want to continue holding our public lands for ransom. Do you realize that the poor taxpayers of WF have paid them over $100,000 in the past? The Lamberts noticed a weakness in the legal abilities of our elected officials in the 80s and have continued to confused the public withnthis deception. It was an example of politics at its finest!
Hal Ware could have stopped this confusion from happening in 1988. Atty Hamilton Willis tried to tell them.
The Lamberts are masters of layering on deception. Don't be fooled.
Paul did buy little lots in an area that had been abandoned due to flooding making it no longer useable. When he purchased these little lots, there were no houses or buildings left in the area. He did not buy the steamboat or ferry landing property because it was never owned by a private individual. He bought property adjacent to the Oyster Bar. Not our riverfront public property.
Old Gator

Saint Francisville, LA

#16 Feb 19, 2013
King of Westfel wrote:
<quoted text>Even if this comes out in favor of the Lamberts, doesn't the Parish have the right to purchase Parish the property at appraised value as Eminent Domain, or what ever it is called in Louisiana?
The parish could purchase the property from the Lamberts via eminent domain. The U.S. Constitution requires the government to provide just compensation (fair market value) to the owner of the private property to be taken. To exercise eminent domain, the government must prove that the private property that they are taken is going to for a public use. The definition of public use has been pretty broad so they should be able to justify the purchase if they donít cock it up.
King of Westfel wrote:
<quoted text>The only Usable road that goes to the water is old hwy10 that now is controlled by the Parish, right ? I would think whatever happens the Parish has the leverag
The parish canít just close the road because they are in a property dispute, that is a good way to get sanctions against you.
Dead Horse

Saint Francisville, LA

#17 Feb 19, 2013
Mr. Grant, oh how I love the way you keep coming up with witty names and re-posting the same old stuff over and over with slight variations to add some new name or fact, be it a made up one or not.

Keep up the good work here, if you keep saying it, it will eventually become true. Right?
Thash

Saint Francisville, LA

#18 Feb 19, 2013
Old Gator wrote:
<quoted text>
The parish could purchase the property from the Lamberts via eminent domain. The U.S. Constitution requires the government to provide just compensation (fair market value) to the owner of the private property to be taken. To exercise eminent domain, the government must prove that the private property that they are taken is going to for a public use. The definition of public use has been pretty broad so they should be able to justify the purchase if they donít cock it up.
<quoted text>
The parish canít just close the road because they are in a property dispute, that is a good way to get sanctions against you.
Regardless of ownership, the river front has looked trashy for years and now it is unbelievablely trashey. Is this what trashey people do?
Real Facts

Saint Francisville, LA

#19 Feb 19, 2013
Fact Checker wrote:
<quoted text>
You are actually way off Mr. Get Informed. Below is what they paid taxes on;
LOTS 38,39,40,41,42 & 1/2 OF 38 SQ. 4; LOTS 27 THRU 33 & PART OF 36 SQ. 3; LOT 54 SQ. 5; LOT 6 SQ.2 64 FEET FRONT BY 128 FEET SITUATED IN DEPTH; LOT 18 (4/5) OF SQ. 2, 64 FEET FRONT Y 128 FEET DESIGNATED IN DEPTH; AL SQ. 5 INCLUDING WAREHOUSE.
PORTION OF LOT 14 & 8 FEET OF LOT 15 SQ. 2; PORTION OF LOTS 18, 24 SQ. 2
LOTS 21, PORTION OF 22, 23 SQ. 2; SQ. 10; SQ 13; LOTS 94,95,96 SQ. 8; LOT 276; SQ. 26
LOTS 266 AND 267 IN SQUARE 25 & LOT 318 IN SQUARE 36 AND THE NORTH PORTION OF LOT 319 IN SQUARE 36 SITUATED IN SECTION 43, T3S, R3W SITUATED IN THE TOWN OF BAYOU SARA, WEST FELICIANA PARISH, LOUISIANA.
Below are the links to the above legal descriptions
http://wfpainquire.softwareservices.net/Parce...
http://wfpainquire.softwareservices.net/Parce...
http://wfpainquire.softwareservices.net/Parce...
http://wfpainquire.softwareservices.net/Parce...
Impressive purchase of a bunch of lots in the New Valentia Subdivision. These are not the Port of Bayou Sara.
These lots were sectioned off in 1811. The Port of Bayou Sara was created in the 1700s.
New Valentia was created near the Port. It is not the steamboat landing or the ferry landing, riverfront property.
Fact Checker

Saint Francisville, LA

#20 Feb 19, 2013
Real Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Impressive purchase of a bunch of lots in the New Valentia Subdivision. These are not the Port of Bayou Sara.
These lots were sectioned off in 1811. The Port of Bayou Sara was created in the 1700s.
New Valentia was created near the Port. It is not the steamboat landing or the ferry landing, riverfront property.
Iím not sure what you are talking about, but all of those lots mentioned in the legal descriptions that I posted are Bayou Sara lots. If you donít believe me, click the link, under ďLocationsĒ it says Bayou Sara.

This whole New Valentia thing is Mrs. Leeís latest attempt to grasp some straws and like all her/the juryís previous attempts the information has now been distorted and misused.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 34
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? (Jan '17) 35 min muffinthumper 720
News Zachary PD arrests processed Nov. 30 - Dec. 6 (Dec '12) 11 hr Tangy 14
Child Pornographer in St. Francisville Mon WFP Parent 72
WFP. Safe haven for sexual predators? Nov 10 Pot Stirrer 4
Plantation 2017 Nov 9 Truth to Power 28
Upcoming Parish President Election Nov 8 Check back in 2019 4
Middle school (Nov '16) Nov 2 frank 77

St. Francisville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

St. Francisville Mortgages