CentralSpeaks.com » Gov’t

RFQ for Consultants for City of Central

dave — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:00:19 +0000

The city of Central is seeking consulting services for the transportation element of our comprehensive Master Plan. The city of Central requests qualifications from qualified consultants who have expertise in transportation planning and travel demand modeling to assist the City’s professional staff and its Master Plan consulting firm in finalizing the city of Central Master Plan. The Transportation Element of the Master Plan will be developed to support the Master Plan Land Use Plan adopted in September 2010, to ensure that the Land Use Plan and Transportation Elements work together to meet the Master Plan goals.

The deliverables from this project will include, but not be limited to, a Transportation Element that will serve as a long-term guide for the planning, construction, and maintenance of the roadway network in the city of Central. This plan will focus on developing a recommended future major street plan including new and proposed arterials, collectors, and local roads.

The RFQ can be downloaded on the city’s website at www.centralgov.com or obtained at 13421 Hooper Rd, Ste 9, Central, LA 70818. The response to this RFQ must be hand-delivered or mailed to the address named in the proposal in such a manner that it is received no later than 4:00 pm CST on February 23, 2012.

The city of Central is an Equal Opportunity Employer. We encourage all small and minority-owned firms and women’s business enterprises to apply.

Loop Oops! – Unanswered Questions about the BR Loop

dave — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:00:03 +0000

By Dave Freneaux

Central Speaks began researching the Baton Rouge Loop in response to the controversy over a toll road being forcibly built through the City of Central. The result is that Central Speaks dug into the State Law governing the BR Loop and found that no construction can take place without Central’s prior express written consent. This was certainly welcome news to the citizens of Central, but the investigation yielded other troubling questions about the BR Loop Authority, also known as the Capital Area Expressway Authority or the CAEA.

Following are eight questions raised by the investigation, along with the specific findings that gave rise to each question. Central Speaks does not claim to be an authority on the legal, corporate and legislative issues presented here, and will thus simply present the facts found and the questions these facts raise. Central Speaks has tried repeatedly beginning December 19th to bring these concerns to the CAEA Chairman, EBR Mayor-President Kip Holden, but the request for a meeting has been denied.

As a newspaper, Central Speaks is neither for nor against the concept of a toll road in or near Central. However, fiscal responsibility dictates that any organization spending tax dollars be run correctly and in accordance with all laws and regulations. It is possible that there are reasonable answers which satisfy each of these eight questions, and Central Speaks stands ready to print any or all of them should they be made available.

1) Could EBR Parish legally have acted as an incorporator of the CAEA?

State Law Reads: “Each parish or municipality shall adopt an ordinance approving the drafting and execution of the articles of incorporation of such authority and shall act as an incorporator of the authority.” The EBR Metro Council passed Resolution No. 43173 on 4/14/2004 authorizing EBR Parish as an incorporator of the CAEA. An ordinance is a local law. A resolution is a non-binding, unenforceable statement made by a legislative body. It would seem that EBR failed to qualify to act as an incorporatorof the CAEA.

2) Do the boundaries of the CAEA

even include EBR Parish, the City of Central and other Municipalities?

State Law Reads: “The boundaries of the authority shall be coextensive with the territorial boundaries of the parish or parishes or municipality or municipalities which establish such authority.” If EBR Parish, by failing to pass an Ordinance to act as an incorporator, did not participate in establishing the CAEA, then the boundaries of the CAEA’s authority apparently do not include EBR Parish. Similarly, the City of Central and any other municipality such as Walker and Baker who did not join in the establishment of the CAEA should logically be excluded from the geographic boundaries of the CAEA project.

3) Do the boundaries of the CAEA include Iberville and Ascension Parish?

According to records at the Louisiana Secretary of State’s Office, on June 8, 2004 East Baton Rouge Parish, West Baton Rouge Parish, and Livingston Parish joined together under 1997 Louisiana Act 1017 and created the Capital Area Expressway Authority (CAEA). Iberville and Ascension Parish did not participate in establishing this authority.

4) Was it appropriate to spend tax dollars studying loop routes through Ascension and Iberville Parishes if those Parishes were not within the geographic boundaries of the CAEA’s authority?

With these two parishes having failed to act as incorporators of the CAEA in 2004, the CAEA held a board meeting on August 11, 2009 and passed the following resolution: “Approval of Resolution on the Geographical Boundaries of the Capital Area Expressway Authority. On a motion by Mr. Berthelot, seconded by Mr. Martinez, a resolution was adopted establishing the geographical boundaries of the Authority to be coterminous with the geographical boundaries of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston and West Baton Rouge parishes.” However, State Law makes no provision for Parishes or Municipalities to be added to the geographical boundaries of the CAEA authority by a simple resolution of the CAEA Board. Further, there is no provision made, even if this resolution were to be legal and binding, to include any City or Town within these Parishes.

The other issue surrounding Iberville and Ascension is the timing of the studies. While the CAEA Board may or may not have been legally allowed to add Parishes to the CAEA authority by simple CAEA Board resolution, this occurred in August of 2009. Maps showing the entire loop around Baton Rouge including routes through Ascension and Iberville Parishes were on display at public meetings held by the CAEA as far back as 2007, over two years prior to any attempt to include those Parishes in the CAEA.

5) How is the CAEA Board operating with only three Board Members?

State Law Reads: “….the Board shall consist of at least five directors, including the secretary of the department (DOTD) or his designee….the chairman of the metropolitan planning organization or his designee….each parish or municipality shall appoint an equal number of directors.” In 2010, prior to the September 8, 2010 CAEA Board meeting, the Parish Presidents of Livingston, Iberville and Ascension Parishes resigned from the CAEA Board. The CAEA Board was seemingly left with only three Board members and has made no effort to add members to the Board. It would seem that the remaining two Parishes, EBR and WBR, would simply have appointed one additional Board member each, restoring the board to the five members required by state law. It appears that the CAEA Board is either meeting with only three of the six Board Members present, which would not be a legal meeting because three does not constitute a quorum, or that the CAEA board has failed to meet the State Law requirement that there be five Board Members.

6) Are Livingston, Iberville and Ascension Parishes still included in the boundaries of the CAEA Authority?

Since the resignation of the Board Members from these three Parishes, there has been no mention in CAEA Board minutes of the effect this may have on the geographic boundaries of the CAEA Authority. With the initial inclusion of Iberville and Ascension being in question anyway, the issue of whether Livingston’s resignation removes that Parish from the geographic boundaries of the CAEA should at least be determined.

7) Why is the Chairmanship of the CAEA Board not being alternated between Parishes?

State Law Reads: “An authority shall elect from its directors a chairman, a vice chairman, and a secretary-treasurer who will serve one year terms…the chairmanship for each successive term shall be alternated between the representatives of all participating parishes and municipalities.” According to the minutes of the CAEA Board Meetings, EBR Mayor-President Kip Holden was the Chairman of the CAEA for 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011. Further, the CAEA Bylaws state that officers shall be elected “annually at the first regular meeting in each calendar year.” There are no elections of officers recorded in the minutes of any Board meeting in 2009, 2010 and 2011.

Why does the CAEA not meet quarterly as required in its Bylaws?

The Bylaws of the Capital Area Expressway Authority were adopted at the CAEA organizational meeting on November 14, 2007. Item 14 of the Bylaws reads: “Regular meetings of the Board shall be held on the date and at the time(s) and place(s) established by resolution of the Board, but in no event less often than quarterly.” Minutes of the CAEA Board reflect that the Board met only once in 2011, only once in 2010 and only twice in 2009.

1/26 Planning and Zoning Agenda

dave — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 14:21:17 +0000

CITY OF CENTRAL

MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONS

Thursday, January 26, 2012 6:00 P.M.

Kristenwood Meeting Facility

14025 Greenwell Springs Road

Central, Louisiana 70739

www.central-la.gov

Planning Agenda:

PUBLIC HEARING CASES (NEW BUSINESS):

1. SS-20-11 Subdivision of Lot 12-B-2 of the former Richard Odom Property This property is located at the east end of Lockridge Avenue of Crystal Place Subdivision in Section 48, T-6-S, R-2-E, GLD, EBR, LA. The applicant is proposing to subdivide a lot into 2 single family residential lots. (Applicant: Carl Newlin)

2. SS-21-11 Subdivision of the Carl B Hein and the former WestBrook Properties This property is located on the south side of Denham Road west of the El Ranchitos intersection in Section 48, T-5-S, R-2-E, GLD, EBR, LA. The applicant is proposing to subdivide 2 tracts into 5 single family residential lots and dedicate a private servitude of access. (Applicant: Carl Newlin)

3. SS-22-11 Subdivision of Tract A of the Westbrook Home Place Property This property is located on the north side of Greenwell Springs-Port Hudson Road between the Liberty and Hubbs Road intersections in Section 40, T-5-S, R-2-E, GLD, EBR, LA. The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 139.75 acre tract into 2 single family residential tracts. (Applicant: Mickey L. Robertson)

Zoning Agenda:

PUBLIC HEARING CASES (NEW BUSINESS):

1. RZ-3-11 Rezoning This property is located at 14455 Wax Road, Suite A, on the north side of Wax Road near the Sullivan Road intersection in Sections 8 and 68, T-6-S, R-2-E, GLD, EBR, LA. The applicant is proposing to rezone from C-2 (Heavy Commercial) to C-AB-1 (Commercial Alcoholic Beverage District One) for a full-service restaurant. (Applicant: Yuwen Zheng, Nagoya Central Inc.)(Deferred from Dec. 15, 2011 Meeting)

PUBLIC HEARING (OLD BUSINESS):

1. SPUD-01-10 (Revision) Rezoning This property is located off of Triple B Road west of the Kohler Lane intersection on Lots 4 through 7 of the Irwin Kohler property in Section 50, T-7-S, R-2-E, GLD, EBR, LA. The applicant is proposing to rezone from Rural to SPUD (Small Planned Unit Development) to create a 20 lot townhouse development. (Applicant: Brandon Dodson)

Loop Resolution Does Not Protect Central: Just the Facts

dave — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 20:42:01 +0000

By Dave Freneaux

Tuesday night Central Council Members Messina, LoBue and Washington passed a non-binding resolution disapproving the Loop. In an effort to separate fact from misinformation, here are some verifiable truths about the resolution.

You may have heard that this resolution is Central exercising its option to say “No” to the Loop. UNTRUE. FACT: After the Loop Authority selects proposed routes for a toll road, and after they hold a public meeting on the issue, Central can THEN accept or reject the building of a toll road through any part of Central. This resolution is premature and DOES NOT protect Central.

You may have heard that the resolution was only against a toll road through the middle of Central. UNTRUE AGAIN. FACT: There are two proposed toll road routes that touch Central. The northern route skirts the north boundary of the city and would cross the very north end of Blackwater and Joor Roads just several thousand feet inside Central’s City limits. Many in Central are encouraging the Council to consider this as possibly good for Central. The resolution passed by Council Members Messina, Washington and LoBue opposes the northern route as well.

The resolution itself makes the claim that the project is “overwhelmingly disfavored by the citizens of Central.” COMPLETELY UNSUPPORTABLE. FACT: No vote or poll has been taken to support that claim. It is further not possible that the public could reasonably be asked for an informed opinion on the Loop when Council Member Messina himself did not know the state law behind the Loop when he introduced the resolution.

The resolution makes the claim that the Loop “will likely transect the City of Central”. UNTRUE ONCE MORE. FACT: The only way the Loop can cut through the middle of Central is if the City Council approves such a plan. The only way that can happen is if three Council Members vote to make it happen.

You may have heard that passing this resolution was necessary to protect Central from the Loop. UNTRUE ONE LAST TIME. FACT: Central is protected by State Law. The Law firm of Jones Walker represents the Loop Authority and is in agreement with Central’s City Attorney that Central will, in due time, have the right to accept or reject any toll road construction in Central.

Loop Resolution Premature

dave — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 20:35:37 +0000

By Dave Freneaux

The Central City Council has passed yet another non-binding resolution. Central citizens spoke out 2 to 1 asking the City Council to do their homework before making decisions. Most of those pleading with the Council not to act without first researching the issue were Central’s young voters who are becoming increasingly aware and involved.

When this resolution to disapprove of the Loop was introduced by Council Member Messina in November he was unaware that Central will eventually have the legal right to accept or reject any proposed toll road through any part of Central. Since Central Speaks made the Council and the public aware of this protection in State Law, many citizens are now asking the Council to do better research before taking a stance on this issue.

Almost all of the citizens who urged the Council to table the motion until they fully understood the issue also stated that they were neither for nor against a toll road through some part of Central. They did, however, send a very strong message to the Council that they were opposed to decisions being made with insufficient research. Council Members Louis DeJohn and Aaron Moak seemed to hear that message and opposed the resolution. Council Members Messina, Washington and LoBue voted for the resolution in spite of the call for better research.

This Loop resolution was similar to November’s non-binding resolution to dictate a new seating arrangement for Council meetings. Neither resolution carries any force of law. The seating arrangement resolution was also introduced by Council Member Messina and was passed by the same 3-2 vote of the Council with the support of Council Members Washington and LoBue. The seating arrangement called for in the resolution was never implemented.

December Building Permit Summary

dave — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:55:15 +0000

From the City of Central

Building permits slowed during the month of December 2011 within the city of Central. A total of 7 new residential permits were issued. The total building valuation of these permits was $1,826,074.

Within these permits, two were issued in Burlington Lakes with an average valuation of $158,998; three in Village at Magnolia Square with an average valuation of $300,292; one in Indian Mound with a valuation of $251,262; and one in Bellingrath Lakes with a valuation of $355,940.

For the year 2011, a total of 136 new residential building permits were issued. As a comparison, in 2009, there were 90 new residential permits issued, and in 2010, there were 138 new residential permits issued.

Building valuation is the price based upon the square footage of the home used for permitting purposes. The actual selling price of the home is usually higher than the valuation and depends upon amenities installed by the builder.

Tuesday’s City Council Agenda

dave — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:59:22 +0000

I. Preliminary Business

1) Call to Order

2) Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance

3) Roll Call

4) Approval of the minutes from the December 13, 2011 council meeting.

II. Unfinished Business
None

III. New Business

1) Mayor’s report and presentations.

2) Report from IBTS concerning services through November 2011 provided to the City of Central.

3) Introduction of the following item(s) (with public hearing to be held at the January 24, 2012 council meeting).
a) An Ordinance to amend and reenact Section 707 of Title 12, relative to enforcement of ordinances enacted prior to the effective date of Act 271 (2011) and of ordinances involving licensing and permits and to provide for related matters. (By Council Member Washington)

4) Public Hearing and action regarding the following instrument(s):
a) A resolution disapproving the Baton Rouge Loop Project. (By Council Member Messina)

IV. Zoning Cases

(1) Introduction of the following item(s) (with Public Hearing to be held at the January 24, 2011 council meeting):
None

(2) Discussion and action regarding the following case(s):
None

V. Other Business

(1) Public Comment
* Restricted to items not on the agenda. A Public Comment Request to Speak Card must be turned in to the City Clerk prior to the start of the meeting in order to be considered. Public comment is limited to 10 speakers with three minutes each.

(2) Announcements

(3) Adjournment

Join Metropolitan Councilman Trae Welch at Metro 1 District Meeting

dave — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 14:51:54 +0000

Submitted by the City of Baton Rouge

District 1 Metropolitan Councilman Trae Welch, will host his first monthly Metro 1 Meeting of 2012 on Tuesday, January 3, at 6:30 p.m. at the Zachary Police Training Room. Councilman Trae Welch would like to invite any citizen residing in District 1 to attend the monthly Metro 1 Meetings, which are held throughout the district. Council District 1 covers the northern part of the parish, including Pride/Chaneyville areas and the cities of Baker and Zachary and a small portion of Central. “My goal is to have public involvement, giving each and every person in Council District 1 an opportunity to voice their opinion, share ideas or suggestions and have Metro 1 serve as a clearinghouse for information”.

Should you have any ideas regarding guest speakers or topics of interest at a Metro 1 meeting, contact Councilman Trae Welch or his Legislative Assistant, Lisa Rioux at 389-5170 or e-mail council-dist1@brgov.com.

The Loop – Community Leaders Comment

dave — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:00:58 +0000

Graydon Walker, Former Chief Administrative Officer of EBR, Former Assistant Superintendent of EBR Schools, and Administrator of Zoar Baptist Church: “It would be a major mistake not to at least get to the table and be a part of the discussion. If you cut yourself off, then you have no say so period, anywhere.

Rodney Bonvillian, Chairman of Central’s Planning & Zoning Committee: “The loop is a very complex and contentious issue. I believe that the most prudent path forward is to stay engaged and informed. As responsible community leaders we do not have the luxury of only complaining about solutions with which we disagree, we must also offer viable alternatives to address the challenges we face.”

Russell Starns, Incorporator of the City of Central: “It is important that Central has a voice in this matter. Since Central now controls whether any toll road is built, it would be short-sighted to walk away from an opportunity to influence potential improvements for our City. Central needs to be engaged in the process and seek ways to improve our infrastructure, attract new businesses, and increase our sales tax base to support our school system. If this can be done while preserving the Central Community as we know and love it, we should stay in the discussion.”

Wade Giles, Chairman of the Central Economic Development Foundation: “Currently, Central is spending 49% of our dollars outside of the city because Central lacks the retail outlets that provide the things we need. This means that 49% of our sales tax dollars are being lost to the surrounding areas, EBR, Zachary, and Livingston Parish. These lost dollars are being spent to support the schools and governments of those municipalities. Without added retail, Central will be forced to accept higher taxes to support our schools.

In addition, our roadways are overburdened by through traffic with people travelling to and from Livingston Parish via Magnolia Bridge. Even if we add a bridge at the extension of Hooper Road, the traffic leading to these two bridges will only continue to grow. This means that the traffic on Hooper, Sullivan and Greenwell Springs Roads will continue to get worse because these are the roads leading to the bridge(s).

In terms of traffic control in Central, a bypass or loop would be the best solution to reduce the traffic on our main arteries. In terms of economic development, an Interstate type roadway with exits in areas of our city that would attract a regional shopping center that would provide the necessary retail outlets to allow us to keep our tax dollars at home. To oppose a bypass or loop is to advocate higher taxes, which we are all opposed to.”

The Truth About the Loop: No Construction Without Central’s Approval

dave — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:00:45 +0000

By Dave Freneaux

There is no need to break out the pitchforks and torches to defend the City of Central from Dr. FrankenLoop’s Monster. Just a little thorough research by Central Speaks uncovered the truth that the Capital Area Expressway Authority (CAEA) has no authority to build a toll road through Central without Central’s written consent. There is also no need to pass a non-binding resolution with no force of law against a Loop when actual Louisiana State Law prevents the CAEA from constructing anything anywhere unless it has “the prior express written consent of the affected governing bodies.” Central is indeed a “governing body” and Central has not given any such consent.

In light of the sensationalized coverage the Loop has received over the past three weeks, this news probably comes as both a surprise and a welcomed relief to the citizens of Central. Here is the actual Louisiana State Law found in 1997 House Bill 411 which became the 1997 Legislature Act 1017. This legislation was created for the purpose of allowing CONSENTING parishes and municipalities to construct toll roads. Section 2028 A begins: “An authority created and established pursuant to this Chapter may only construct new additional highway toll and/or transitway toll facilities under the terms set forth in this Chapter, with the prior express written consent of the affected governing bodies within the geographic boundaries of the authority after public hearing.”

So, not only does the CAEA need the City of Central’s prior written consent, but that consent has to be given AFTER public hearing. This means that passing a non-binding resolution with no force of law behind it would be both impotent and premature. To fast-forward and see the end of the movie right now, there is a group of people working to secure private funds to build a road in or near Central which could help alleviate Central’s traffic problems and increase Central’s tax base to support the city and the School System, all at no charge to Central. And, in the end, if Central doesn’t like their proposal, Central can simply say no thank you. It would seem wise to see what the CAEA wants to give Central before rejecting the offer out of fear.