ERIK SANZENBACH / L’Observateur / June 17, 2000

LAPLACE – To paraphrase Shakespeare: Is a water tower by any other name still a water tower? That is a question the St. John the Baptist Parish Council had to ponder thisweek.

Councilwoman Melissa Faucheux’s second attempt to get the St. John Parishlogo painted on the Belle Terre water tower met with more success than her first attempt.

Ignoring the warnings of the two council lawyers that the parish is setting itself up for a lawsuit, the council voted 5-4 to paint the St. John Parish logoon the tower on Belle Terre Boulevard.

The issue started several weeks ago when refurbishing and painting of the tower was almost completed. Faucheux had been approached by severalelderly citizens who were irritated the tower had the Belle Terre Land Co.

logo even though the tower was parish property.

Faucheux did some investigating and discovered a contract signed by then- Parish President Arnold Labat and Landcraft Inc. According to the contractLandcraft gave the land to the parish for the tower in exchange for the Belle Terre logo on the tower.

Landcraft was dissolved in 1999, and Belle Terre Land bought up the property around the tower.

Faucheux talked to two lawyers outside of St. John Parish, and according tothem, she said, the contract is now null and void and St. John Parish can putits logo up on the tower.

“How can Landmark and Belle Terre have the same contract?” asked Faucheux.

Council attorneys Charles Lorio and Barry Landry said Belle Terre enjoys the same covenants and terms as Landmark, and the contract is still good.

“I’ve read this contract three times, ” said Lorio, “and it is a binding contract.”Landry warned, “If the council votes to remove the Belle Terre logo they are inviting a lawsuit. The contract doesn’t prohibit putting the St. John logo upthere, but the Belle Terre logo has to be put on the tower.”Faucheux responded, “If there is a lawsuit, I will have the attorney general investigate this matter.”Landry said, “A contract is a contract, and we have a signed contract in black-and-white that tells us what to do. Mr. Lorio and I can’t see how to getpast this contract.”Other council members were a bit leery of the resolution.

“For the record, I could care less,” said Councilman Steve Lee. “What isimportant is that the water tower is operating. If this issue makes it harderto get water to the parish then I’m not for it. However, our lawyers said thisis a binding contract.”Lee went on to say that the rest of the resolution “gives me chills.”The resolution asks that the state attorney general investigate the contract for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

“I can’t do that,” said Lee.

Faucheux said she wants the investigation just to make sure “there was complete compliance with everything and that the contract is on the up-and- up.”Councilman Ranney Wilson and Parish President Nickie Monica both suggested both logos be put on the tower. However, Lester Rainey suggested that if theparish is going to put up advertising on the Belle Terre tower, why not do it for all the towers, including the ones in Wallace and Edgard.

But Faucheux’s biggest complaint is the cost to the taxpayers.

“Why should the taxpayer pay for painting the advertisement for a private organization?” she asked. “When people come off the I-10 they are enteringLaPlace and St. John Parish, not Belle Terre.”Council Chairman Duaine Duffy said he got a letter from the Belle Terre lawyers saying the contract is binding.

“I don’t care about the name,” he said, “but we do get sued a lot, and I don’t want it to happen anymore.”In the end, Rainey, Faucheux, Allen St. Pierre, Cleveland Farlough and DaleWolfe voted to paint the St. John Logo on the water tower, and the motionpassed.

Faucheux said she received a call from St. John Parish Chief AdministrativeOfficer Chris Guidry Thursday afternoon saying Belle Terre Land was willing to compromise and paint both the St. John Parish and Belle Terre logos onthe tower.

“I find this really coincedental,” said Faucheux. “I don’t know what we will donow, but I still would like the attorney general to investigate this matter.”Guidry was not available for comment.

Return To News Stories