By Monique Roth
L’Observateur

CONVENT — The St. James Parish Council went toe-to-toe with Petroplex International LLC representatives at the Nov. 5 Council meeting, citing their apparent displeasure with what Council members called a lack of construction progress at the liquid storage tank farm site in Vacherie.

Council members asked several questions of the Petroplex representatives while discussing whether they thought the company has complied with the parish-issued resolution outlining the construction timeline and building requirements.

Parish legal counselor Victor Franckiewicz said because Petroplex has not constructed a permanent facility by the July 31 deadline, they were not in compliance with the Council-passed resolution.

Corne Van de Reijt of Verwater Group — the company handling construction management at the Petroplex site — said construction began with the removal of topsoil and sugar cane in late July, adding a large majority of the work on the site thus far has focused on engineering.

Franckiewicz told the Council they were led to believe the project was fully engineered and ready for construction when they issued a land-use waiver to the company in May.

The St. James Parish Council granted Petroplex permission to build an $800 million tank farm in Vacherie earlier this year after its 6-1 vote in approval for the continuation of construction over ruled the Planning Commission’s 5-3 vote to deny construction permission.

Strictly speaking, the Petroplex project no longer fits with the designations of the parish’s recently adapted land-use ordinance, but Petroplex representatives hoped because the project was approved well before the ordinance was passed, the commission would OK the request to begin construction.

In May, Jimmy Percy of the law firm Jones Walker told the Council Petroplex had spent $33 million on the project thus far.

Councilmen Jason Amato, Ken Brass, James Brazan, Charles Ketchens, Terry McCreary and Alvin St. Pierre voted in favor of Petroplex at the time, and District 4 Councilman Ralph Patin — who represents the district in which the tank farm would be built — voted against Petroplex.

At last week’s meeting, St. Pierre asked Petroplex representatives when residents could expect to see tanks on the property. Van de Reijt estimated February.

St. Pierre called what he saw as a lack of progress “disappointing,” considering the Council “went out of our way” for Petroplex in granting them special permission in May.

“We haven’t seen construction,” St. Pierre said. “I’m not sure what’s going on. I expect to see some tanks on that property in February.”

Petroplex attorney Boyd Bryan said the company feels as though they’ve “been diligent and fully complied with the resolution.”

Franckiewicz told the Council he didn’t believe Petroplex has complied with the resolution, and future permits — including a yet-to-be applied for permit for a trailer on the construction site — should be denied unless the resolution was amended.

As of last week, Petroplex had not sought a permit to place a trailer on site. Van de Reijt said the trailer was only a place for workers to sign in for work, and he was unaware a permit needed to be obtained if he wasn’t using sewage or electricity. He said he would obtain the permit as soon as possible.

“I think we’ve seen a lot of smoke and mirrors here,” St. Pierre said. “I don’t appreciate being taken for a fool.”

Amato agreed.

“It’s only going to get worse,” Amato said to Petroplex representatives as he promised more questions and oversight into what was going on at the site.

The Council decided to continue the discussion and receive an update at the next Council meeting, scheduled for Nov. 19 in Vacherie.