SettleTalk.com

Now that the Shreveport election for mayor and council members is less than 60 days away, the local campaigns should become more foreground to Shreveport voters.

Schools have been back in session for several weeks and the last major summer holiday has passed. Between now and the November 6 primary the only big red letter event on most refrigerator calendars is Halloween.

So, where do the campaigns go from here.?

Numerous mayoral forums have been conducted. A candidate forum for District B and C candidates drew large crowds. A forum for districts D has been scheduled and another forum for District B is in the planning stages.

The overall impact of candidate forums is an unknown. 

Many times the audiences have more candidate supporters than non-committed voters. Often the candidates began to sound like “parrots” as they basically repeat what others have said. And with council forums, the candidates sometimes misunderstand their role as a council person and the limitations of the position versus the mayor.

The overriding goal of each candidate is to successfully “sell “ themselves to citizens who will actually go vote. Pep rally type meetings do not necessarily translate into votes. And all the “attaboys” in the world are meaningless unless the vote totals push the candidate over the top.

Walking streets and putting out yard signs has always been the model for council races. Unfortunately, door to door meetings are often not that successful. Who really likes to be interrupted at dinner, during a great TV show or while bathing the kids to visit with a stranger at the door with a campaign push card?

Mailings of flyers is also a standard practice of candidates. How much of the mail is actually read is a big unknown, much less the ultimate impact on how a person votes. But it’s the practice. 

Media advertising is expensive and it is difficult to direct to council races, much less to measure its impact. With a mayor’s race its almost necessary because of the size of the city as well as campaign credibility to voters. The impact on the actual vote is still an unresolved science.

The big unknown is the impact of social media. For good or bad, social media is the “news source” for large numbers of people. And the veracity of what is posted is often subject to serious questioning. The ability of individuals to instantly post their most casual thoughts that are broadcast to a large audience is a communication reality that often has unintended consequences.

The most perplexing question that candidates always struggle with is what motivates voters in their selection process. Is it party affiliation, sex, and/or race? How about age? Or how many kids the candidate does or does not have? Is it important if a candidate owns a home or if he/she was actually born in Shreveport?

Campaign endorsements are also a standard in local elections. They can be a blessing or a curse, depending on who a voter likes/dislikes, knows or does not want to know. And do they imply that a candidate will be beholden to those who have endorsed?

The same thinking follows the examination of campaign finance reports that are due on October 6. It always makes for good hot stove talk to review the names and amounts of contributors to each candidate. It’s even more political gossip fodder when the same names appear on the donor lists for opposing candidates, especially if the donation amounts differ.

For political junkies, Shreveport’s elections make for good sport to watch, speculate about and even participate in as an active candidate supporter. Labor Day has always been the real beginning of the mayor and candidate races and this year is no different. One can expect the major candidates to ramp up campaigning that will escalate in the days between now and the November 6 primarily.

(This article was published in The Inquisitor on Thursday, September 6, 2018)

It comes from everywhere in Shreveport — sewage from commercial water customers. The $64 question is if the city is unlawfully billing for sewage? And, if so, how much has been overcharged and where is the money?

That’s the crux of the latest lawsuit filed against the City of Shreveport over the city’s water billing fiasco.

Where, and when, this bureaucratic nightmare will end is anyone’s guess. It is becoming a bigger and bigger burr under the saddle of Mayor Ollie Tyler while she seeks re-election.

The prior litigation involves somewhat complicated accounting and billing interpretation. In contrast, the lawsuit filed by The Haven Property Owners Association and Briarwood Apartments makes for “easy” reading, as far as lawsuits go. The plaintiffs say that the city improperly collected a state sales tax from commercial sewage customers and refused to refund the money.

The tax involves only commercial, not residential, accounts. State law allows the city to collect a sales tax on the amount of water used by business customers. But it does not set any tax on sewer services.

The lawsuit alleges that additional taxes were mislabeled as water customer, sewer quantity or sewer customer charges (collectively, “sewer taxes”). The pleadings state that these charges are illegal. And, it further alleges, these sums were retained by the city rather than remitted to the state.

The Haven is a high-end subdivision near LSU-Shreveport and behind the levy on East Kings Highway. It has approximately 500 homes. Residents pay a water and sewage fee in their monthly homeowners’ association dues. Briarwood is a 100-unit apartment complex on Golf Links Boulevard near Greenwood Road.

A significant issue in this litigation is the claim that Barbara Featherston, director of Shreveport’s Water and Sewage Department, became aware in September 2015 that the sales tax applied only to water use by commercial customers. In late 2017 she acknowledged by email that no sales tax should be charged on sewer use, according to the lawsuit. Nonetheless, sewer taxes were collected from July 2015 until January of this year.

The depositions of Chief Administration Officer Brian Crawford and Tyler taken in February 2017 seemingly add insult to injury. Both Crawford and Tyler acknowledged that the city’s water billing system was not operating correctly. And that an audit was needed.

Crawford stated that a request for proposal (RFP) for a water billing audit was sent out the day before his deposition. Tyler stated that the city had many priorities other than an audit. The lawsuit states that  the RFP was retracted and redrafted — but never sent out.

All of the water billing litigation has been filed by the Harper Law Firm. Jerry Harper wrote the mayor in May, attaching water bills and explaining the legislative history. He even offered to help the city correct the billing problems — at no charge. Harper wanted the city to shoot straight with the public and reimburse the overbilling.

The only response from the city was a letter from City Attorney William Bradford on May 23. “We are reviewing the history of billing and collection of taxes, and when the review is concluded, we will determine if customers were charged a tax on non-applicable items,” Bradford wrote, continuing: “In the event of such charges and collections, the City will take the appropriate action.”

The city did nothing after sending this letter. Harper filed his suit on Aug. 6.

How many business customers are being illegally charged for their sewer use is not known. The lawsuit alleges that the amount collected is between $2.5 million and $3.5 million. Shreveport has thousands of commercial water and sewer customers. The Haven estimates the city owes it a refund of $25,000 to $35,000.

Not surprisingly, the Tyler administration has been tight-lipped on all the water billing litigation. When questioned at a recent mayoral candidate forum, Tyler said that “if something has been done wrong, we will do the audit when I’m re-elected.”

What it will take to convince Tyler that something is wrong is unknown?

Clearly, she does not want the water billing to become as big an issue as the “crime problem.” There is a big difference between the two controversies. Tyler has repeatedly said that Shreveport police cannot be in every household, which is true when she addresses crimes of passion. However, she can order an audit anytime.

Julie Lafargue, the city’s attorney in all the water-billing litigation, has said that the city is working to correct any billing errors, and will refund any over-payments to customers. Her comments raise several questions.

First, is this an admission of overbilling? Second, what would be the source of funds for any refunds? And lastly, is Tyler leaving a significant problem for her successor if not re-elected (she is one of eight candidates)? Tyler has complained repeatedly about administrative challenges she inherited from former Mayor Cedric Glover. 

As expected, the city is attempting to delay any action on the recent litigation. There is plenty of truth in the old courthouse saying that “justice delayed is justice denied.” When Shreveport citizens will get answers to all the water billing controversies is an open question. For sure, it will not be until after the next mayor is elected in December.
 

(This articles will be/was published in The Shreveport Times on Sunday, September 2, 2018)

“Can you take off time from your day job to handle responsibilities of a council member that must be accomplished during the business work day?”

It’s a critical question that should be asked of all Shreveport council candidates.

Levette Fuller and Laura Mclemore are candidates for District B. Both have public sector jobs and their salaries are paid for with public dollars. 

Fuller is employed by the Shreve Memorial Library system and she works at the North Market branch. Her hours are 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. with an hour unpaid lunch. Thus for a council meeting, she must leave work at 2:30 to allow for travel time. She will rarely if ever, get back to work before 6 pm. 

Fuller gets 96 vacation hours a year. That equates to 8 hours a month. Attendance at the 4 council meetings a month will easily exceed these hours.

McLemore heads up the LSUS Archives in the LSUS library. She may be able to “flex’ her hours for the four regular Council meetings each month. She would need to leave the LSUS campus no later than 2:30 pm to arrive by 3 pm at Government Plaza. The library is open extended hours/days beyond the regular work days at LSUS.

But then there are committee meetings—this week Property Standards met at 1:30 p.m. And then there are other events that pop up with little notice. 

McLemore and Chancellor Larry Clark are setting themselves up for criticism if McLemore effectively does her job as a council person. As the head of the library archives, she needs to be at her job on a regular basis. This will not happen if she is as diligent as most of the current council.

Hester is employed as a police officer by the Town of Blanchard. If elected this could represent a conflict of interest since he is being paid by one municipality and will also be paid as a city council representative.

His work schedule varies. It is possible that he can attend council meetings without taking time off from work. How Hester will handle the other meetings listed above is an open question.

Currently, Blanchard does not have a policy of dealing with employees serving on political bodies. And it does not have a policy on whether or not an employee can attend activities as a council representative while “on the clock”. Seemingly Hester will have challenges on both of these matters if elected to the Shreveport council.

In addition to the regular four council meetings, council members also have committee meetings. The standing committees are: Audit and Finance, Master Plan, Multicultural, Planning & Infrastructure, Property Standards, Public Safety, Risk Management, and Riverfront committees. These meet on a periodic basis, and usually at 1 pm before a meeting of the Council. Most of the committees have 4 council members.

Council members are also assigned to other boards and task forces. These include Architect and Engineering Committee, Government Plaza Standing Committee, Inter-Governmental Committee, Shreveport Convention Center Hotel Authority, and Small and Emerging Business Task Force. These groups almost always meet during the business day.

And there are meetings with the mayor, department heads, major press conferences and constituents that must be attended during the business day. Yes, phone calls, texts and emails from constituents can be handled “after hours”. But much like the business operations of the city, many of the council duties can only be accomplished during the workday.

It’s safe to say that a diligent council member can count on 16 to 20 hours a month, minimum, of time expended during the business day carrying out their job responsibilities.

Fuller, McLemore, and Hester should also be asked if they can effectively discharge their job duties or day job while taking time off for council responsibilities. And is it good government to have an employee of a public entity on the Shreveport City Council?

It’s a good question.

An even better one is whether Commissioner Steven Jackson should even be on the Caddo Commission while an employee of the David Raines Community Health Center (DRCHC).

The Hatch Act of 1939, officially titled “An Act to Prevent Political Activities, is a United States federal law that prohibits federal employees from certain forms of political activity. A 1940 Amendment extended the act to include certain employees of state and local governments whose positions are primarily paid for by federal dollars.

The Hatch Act prevents a federal employee from being a candidate for public office in a partisan election and from holding a partisan elected position. The Act’s prohibitions include campaign speeches, collecting contributions in political fundraising events and even from campaigning against a candidate in a partisan election.

The DRCHC website indicates that it is a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) that provides health care to all regardless of race, national origin, insurance status or income. The website also indicates that it is a “deemed Public Health Service employee” under federal law.

Seemingly the DRCHC website confirms that Jackson is considered to be a federal employee. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has an online memo that the health care providers like DRCHC are deemed to be federal employees with coverage under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Steven Jackson became the community development coordinator for DRCH in 2015. He successfully ran for the Caddo Commission that year and was sworn into office in January 2016. He announced his candidacy for mayor in July of this year.

Public records requests to DRCHC asking for funding sources along with job information on Jackson have been stonewalled by DRCHC staff. 

Corporate counsel advises that DRCHC is not a “public body” subject to the Louisiana Public Records Law. Counsel also stated that DRCHC is a non-profit that provides health services pursuant to the Public Health Services Act.

By letter dated June 25, 2018, Jackson’s private attorney requested that no further contact be made to him or his employer regarding is employment.

There are many questions that need to be answered. The first is Jackson considered to be a “federal employee” and thus subject to the Hatch Act. If so, should he be barred from serving as a Caddo Parish Commissioner? And is he barred from campaigning for mayor while employed by DRCHC?

And if Jackson is not subject to the Hatch Act other questions need to be answered from the perspective of a federally funded employer.

Should Jackson be paid by DRCHC while attending Commission meetings and conducting Commission work? Should he be paid while conducting political activities related to his mayoral campaign during the business day? And lastly, why is the DRCHC refusing to provide any information?

Jackson’s campaign push card touts that he “enacted stronger ethics and transparency on the
Caddo Commission.” Surely, he should believe in transparency as it pertains to his eligibility to serve on the Commission, much less run for Shreveport Mayor. 
 

(This article was/will be published in The Forum on Wednesday, August 29, 2018)

Although a Shreveport City Council seat is a “part time” position, almost everyone who has served on the Council will tell you that it is virtually a “full time” part time job.

For beginners, the council meets on the second and fourth weeks of each month. The administrative conference, commonly referred to as the work session, is on Mondays. The regular meeting is on Tuesdays. 

The meeting starts at 3:30 pm and they end when the agenda is finished, which rarely is before 5 p.m. The meetings generally last until 5:30 p.m. or later. 

Then there are committee meetings: Audit and Finance, Master Plan, Multicultural, Planning & Infrastructure, Property Standards, Public Safety, Risk Management, and Riverfront committees. These meet on a periodic basis, and usually at 1 pm before a meeting of the Council. Most of the committees have 4 council members.

Council members are also assigned to other boards and task forces. These include Architect and Engineering Committee, Government Plaza Standing Committee, Inter-Governmental Committee, Shreveport Convention Center Hotel Authority, and Small and Emerging Business Task Force. These groups almost always meet during the business day.

And there are meetings with the mayor, department heads, major press conferences and constituents that must be attended during the business day. Yes, phone calls, texts and emails from constituents can be handled “after hours”. But much like the business operations of the city, many of the council duties can only be accomplished during the workday.
It’s safe to say that a diligent council member can count on 16 to 20 hours a month, minimum, of time expended during the business day carrying out their job responsibilities.

Fuller is employed by the Shreve Memorial Library system and she works at the North Market branch. Her hours are 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. with an hour unpaid lunch. Thus a council meeting she must leave work at 2:30 to allow for travel time and she will rarely if ever, get back to work before 6 pm. 

Fuller gets 96 vacation hours a year. That equates to 8 hours a month. Attendance at the 4 council meetings a month will easily exceed these hours. 

Hester is employed as a police officer by the Town of Blanchard. If elected this could represent a conflict of interest since he is being paid by one municipality and will also be paid as a city council representative.

His work schedule varies. It is possible that he can attend council meetings without taking time off from work. How Hester will handle the other meetings listed above is an open question.

Currently, Blanchard does not have a policy dealing with employees serving on political bodies. And it does not have a policy on whether or not an employee can attend activities as a council representative while “on the clock”. Seemingly Hester will have challenges on both of these matters if elected to the Shreveport council.

Surely voters in District B and District D should inquire as to the availability of any candidate to do their job as an elected official. Seemingly both Fuller and Hester will have major limitations in their current employment in effectively representing their respective districts if elected. And that should be a major decision-making factor for voters.

(This article was/will be published in The Shreveport Times of Sunday, August 26, 2018)

Question: when is one elephant in the room a good thing, but two a bad thing? Answer: when two Republicans are in the Shreveport mayor’s race.

That is the unhappy challenge for the diehard Shreveport Republican crowd.

Lee O. Savage was one of the first candidates to declare his intention to run for Shreveport mayor. As a white Republican, he started his campaign with a virtual built in base of supporters, much like Victoria Provenza in the 2O14 mayoral election.

Savage started out aggressively with a Facebook page, a big announcement event in the ag building at the state fairgrounds and being the first to open a campaign headquarters. He began with two challenges: not being a household name and not having been blessed by the Shreveport Republican hierarchy. Nonetheless, Savage started making some big waves in the election world.

And then along came Jones…. actually along came Jim, as in Jim Taliaferro. (Music aficionados that “Along Came Jones” was released by The Coasters in 2001. This hit is not to be confused with “Along Comes Mary” was recorded by The Association in 1966.)   

Taliaferro filled many squares on the Republican tally sheet. Taliaferro was a known quantity—having had a high profile with the Shreveport Crime Stoppers Program along with his unsuccessful race for Shreveport City Marshal in 2014. And he certainly looks much more comfortable in a coat and tie than Savage, who rarely even wears a sports coat.

To top it off, Taliaferro was a southeast Shreveport candidate—at least on paper. Taliaferro reportedly resides with his mom in Broadmoor. Some say he actually lives on a rural farm outside the city limits. Nonetheless, he is registered to vote with a Shreveport address.

Taliaferro has a military background, which is always a plus to many voters. He is married and has all American pictures with his wife and daughter.

Savage is not a veteran, he is divorced, and he lives on Cross Lake. Savage does, however, have a college degree from LSU Shreveport. Taliaferro is not a college graduate.

Both candidates have a major problem—how to attract black support. However former Shreveport detective and “Murder Choose Me” TV star Rod Demery has endorsed Savage. Demery is a black Republican. Savage has announced Demery will be his police chief if elected mayor.

The voter math says if only one Republican in the race then a that candidate can survive the November primary. But in the December general election, a black candidate will prevail. (Think 2014 with Provenza and Tyler going head to head in the runoff when Tyler coasted to an easy victory.)

It’s possible that Savage and Taliaferro will cancel each other out of the runoff. That’s why some observers believe that at some juncture one of the two may drop out and endorse the others. Many do not see Savage falling on his sword for the sake of the Grand Old Party. 

When Taliaferro jumped into the race some politicos thought he was a Tyler “plant” to pop the Savage balloon. There were rumors that if Tyler won, she would reward Taliaferro by naming him to be her new police chief. Of course in political races rumors are always out there, especially in the social media world. And they constantly change.

It’s almost certain that there will not be two Republicans on a December mayoral ballot. Whether or not one of the two will survive the primary is currently anyone’s guess, much less which one.

Needless to say one elephant in the room is plenty, and two is a major headache for Shreveport Republicans. Cleaning up the poop in the “Republican room” is becoming more and more a major issue….

(This article was published in The Inquisitor on Friday, August 24, 2018)

It should have been routine. But it wasn’t.

Carolyn Prator was expected to be appointed to the Red River Waterway Board of Commissioners. But she wasn’t.

Former longtime commissioner Mickey Prestridge died earlier this year. Prestridge was the Caddo commissioner.

The waterway commission enabling act requires one appointment from each of the seven parishes in the waterway district. The other parishes are Avoyelles, Bossier, Grant, Natchitoches, Rapides and Red River. The Louisiana director of public works is the ex-officio chairman.

By statute, parish vacancies on the commission are to be selected by the governor from names submitted by the parish police jury (Caddo Commission), the district levee board, and the Red River Valley Association. Prator was the nominee of the three bodies.

Sooo.. Prator’s appointment as the Caddo commissioner should have been a slam dunk, right? WRONG.

With a some bureaucratic game playing, governor John Bel Edwards appointed Ronald F. Lattier as the designated Caddo commissioner. But Lattier had not been nominated by any of the three designated bodies. He was serving as one of the four at large members that the governor appoints in his discretion. 

By moving Lattier from being an at-large seat to a parish designated position, then viola—John Bel had an open at large slot. He filled it with Michael P. DeVille of Pineville.

Why is this important? For starters, the Red River Waterway District (RRWD) is a political subdivision of the State of Louisiana. Its district is governed by the board of commissioners. The RRWD is responsible for the operation and maintenance of a navigable channel in the river. It also actively participates in economic and recreational development for areas along the Red River.

Caddo Parish paid 40% of the tax dollars received by the Commission in 2017. These taxes are a dedicated milage. Bossier was the next highest at 23% followed by Rapides at 18%.

While Prestridge was alive, Caddo had 3 commissioners—Roy A. Burrell and Lattier were at-large. Now Caddo has been reduced to 2 representatives. 

So what happened between the nomination of Prator by the three nominating bodies and the governor’s desk? Well, “politics” in the bad sense of the word if the only logical explanation.

Carolyn Prator is a Democrat, like John Bel. Her husband, Caddo Sheriff Steve Prator, is a Republican. Her hubby Steve has been an outspoken critic of John Bel’s early prisoner release program enacted in 2017.

Seemingly John Bel would have overlooked this fuss—especially since The Chief Republican, as in President Donald Trump, has given kudo’s to John Bel’s early release program. So much that John Bel invited the commander-in-chief to visit Angola Prison, of all places. 

Additionally, the appointment of Carolyn Prator to the waterway commission would have been consistent with the governor’s policy of inclusion. The commission has always been a “boy’s club,” and Prator certainly would have changed that reality. Additionally, she would be a white Caddo member. Burrell and Lattier are black.

So, is there any remedy?

There is no legal authority for John Bel’s “bureaucratic shuffle.” Presumably, he could sign new executive orders to correct this slip-up.

Or, a lawsuit could be filed to void the governor’s action. If successful, this would move Lattier back to an at-large seat, remove DeVille from the commission and then leave the designated Caddo seat open.

There’s little doubt that Prator will not be appointed by John Bel under any circumstances. This is indeed unfortunate as she is certainly qualified to serve, probably more than many of the commissioners. 

Prator has served as president and vice president of the Caddo Levee Board for eight-plus years. During her presidency, she oversaw flood control during two floods of the Red River.

She also experienced the reality of the river flooding. Her home had three feet of water for 10 days. She subsequently moved due to concerns over future river flooding.

It’s an open question how this will all shake out. What is for certain is that Caddo should have three representatives on the commission. Prator would have served Caddo Parish well.

(This article was/will be published in The Shreveport Times on Sunday, August 19, 2018)

It’s always tragic when someone dies “before their time.” Especially if it is a young child.

Such is the case with the death of Daysean Jermaine Combest. On or about August first of 2017, Daysean drowned while trapped in a Shreveport culvert.

Although there are no witnesses. Presumably, Daysean decided to play in an open drainage ditch while helping his mother and sister move into a new residence. The shoes of the seven year old were found next to the culvert by his older sister. Evidently, Daysean was playing in the ditch and was swept into the culvert. 

Despite an extensive search by city employees, his body was not found until three days later.

Daysean’s parents recently filed a lawsuit against the city of Shreveport, they have asserted that the open ditch was an “attractive nuisance”.

Wikipedia states a landowner may be held liable for injuries to children trespassing on the land if the injury is caused by an object on the land that is likely to attract children. The doctrine is designed to protect children who are unable to appreciate the risk posed by the object.

The lawsuit notes that the culvert did not have a grate or a guard to prevent the child from getting into the ditch and being swept away by the water. Just before the incident, heavy rains had increased the water flow in all Shreveport culverts, including this particular one.

The issues concerning the city’s liability can be overshadowed by this tragedy.

The city of Shreveport has hundreds of miles of open drainage ditches that feed into culverts. These can be seen in practically every neighborhood in the city—from the MLK area to South Highlands. To say the least, the cost to put in protective grates or devices throughout the city would be exorbitant—and not economically feasible.

If the drainage ditch and culvert are considered to be an “attractive nuisance”, then there are many other areas in the city that could also be deemed the same. Start with Cross Lake and its miles of shoreline. Then consider the pond at the Shreveport Dog Park.

The fountain spray park on Clyde Fant Parkway could also fall into this category. This area is currently not working due to needed repairs. Whether if this work should be done is now an open question.

And as distasteful as it is, the issue of appropriate supervision of Daysean is an underlying issue that this litigation will bring to the surface. That plus his age—should he have realized that playing in water is dangerous? These are sad matters that have stayed below the media radar but will now surface, for good or bad.

As a standing rule, the city of Shreveport does not comment on litigation until it is concluded. It was very appropriate that city attorney William Bradford deviated from this policy when he released this statement:

“The city of Shreveport is aware of the lawsuit filed on behalf of Daysean Combest. Ordinarily, the City does not comment on pending litigation, but a matter like this affects not only a grieving home; but also our community. Our hearts are with his family and we will work to conclude this lawsuit with as little emotional impact to them as possible. However, the City of Shreveport must explore all the issues of fact and law related to the passing of Daysean. There are many items to be discussed with the parties and witnesses who are involved. While this process is ongoing we continue to thank the men and women of the Shreveport Fire Department, Shreveport Police Department, Public Works, Engineering, Water and Sewerage and the countless other who works tirelessly to bring conclusion to that painful moment in time.”

There is a revered saying that “a parent should never have to bury a child”. It’s certainly true in this case, which has no good answers for Daysean, his family, and Shreveport.
 

(This article was published in The Inquisitor on Friday, August 17, 2018)

Today is the first day that Alan Clarke is the new executive director of the Shreveport Caddo Metropolitan Planning Commission (MPC).

Former executive director Mark Sweeney’s last day with the MPC was yesterday (August 15).
Sweeney is off to a new job that he calls the opportunity of a lifetime.

And it could be the opportunity of a lifetime for Clarke as well. He is serving on an interim basis. He could be chosen by the MPC Board as the permanent executive director.

Clarke has many supporters. They say that he is responsive and that he can be realistic when enforcing the complex requirements of the rather complicated Unified Development Code.

His critics say that he is inflexible and overly strict. They point out that he as zoning administrator that he cited the Little Free Library as a violation. They also say that he has been anti-billboards and that he lacks the professional background for the job.

Clarke has served for over 20 years as the Zoning Administrator. Now he will oversee an agency with a $1.2 million dollar plus budget.

The MPC is a separate government entity, apart from the Shreveport City Council and the Caddo Commission. A nine member board appointed by the council and the commission oversee the MPC.

Zoning Enforcement has the largest staff within the MPC and its primary function is to investigate alleged violations of the zoning laws. The Zoning Office averages over 3500 zoning inspections each year. Certificates of occupancy, home occupation applications, and sign permits are also a function of the Zoning Office.

As the interim executive director, Clarke will also oversee the other MPC departments: Land Development, Community Planning and GIS and Mapping. 

One challenge for Clarke will be funding for 2019 from the Shreveport City Council and the Caddo Commission. Both bodies have had numerous complaints about the MPC and there have been discussions by members of each concerning 2019 funding. The city budget will be adopted in December and the commission budget is early January.

Clarke’s performance will be judged by the building and development community from day one. This group, along with council members, have had constant complaints about Sweeney.

Council and Commission members will get a quick read on his leadership. The number of complaints they receive as well as the number of permits the MPC processes will be easy performance evaluation standards.

For the last year, there have been dark clouds over the MPC office. Clarke’s experience and professional demeanor should provide much needed stability to this embattled office.

Longtime Shreveport Caddo Metropolitan Planning Commission (MPC) employee Alan Clarke assumes the duties of interim executive director on August 16. 

Clarke replaces Mark Sweeney, whose last day is August 15. Sweeney accepted a position in Oklahoma a few days after the MPC Board refused to allow his employment contract to automatically renew.

Clarke was selected at the August 1 meeting of the MPC Board. Dale Colvin (who nominated Clarke), Nancy Cooper, Curtis Joseph, Ronnie Remedies, and Bessie Smith voted for Clarke. Theron Jackson and Winzer Andrews voted against Clarke. Board members Lea Desmarteau and Alan Young were not at the meeting.

Clarke will head up the MPC until the next “permanent’ executive director is hired. The MPC budget is $1.2 million dollars; the lions share is funded by the Shreveport City Council. Other funding is from the Caddo Commission and various fees charged by the MPC.

Clarke has over 20 years experience with the MPC. He served as the Zoning Administrator before becoming the interim executive director.

Zoning Enforcement has the largest staff within the MPC and its primary function is to investigate alleged violations of the zoning laws. The Zoning Office averages over 3500 zoning inspections each year. Certificates of occupancy, home occupation applications, and sign permits are also a function of the Zoning Office.

As the interim executive director, Clarke will also oversee the other MPC departments: Land Development, Community Planning and GIS and Mapping. 
One challenge for Clarke will be funding for 2019 from the Shreveport City Council and the Caddo Commission. Both bodies have had numerous complaints about the MPC and there have been discussions by members of each concerning 2019 funding. The city budget will be adopted in December and the commission budget is early January.

Clarke’s performance will be judged by the building and development community from day one. This group had constant complaints about Sweeney.

Council and Commission members will get a quick read on his leadership as judged by the number of complaints they receive as well as the number of permits the MPC processes.

For the last year, there have been dark clouds over the MPC office. Clarke’s experience and professional demeanor should provide much-needed stability to this embattled office.

(This article was published in The Forum online on Monday, August 13, 2018)