Reservoir hearing Tuesday

THE DAILY NEWS

FRANKLINTON n The 22nd Judicial District Court plans to hear arguments Tuesday on a case in which two parish residents allege the Washington Parish Reservoir District violated state law.

Nevels W. Pittman and Marvin A. Moore, the petitioners in the case, have filed suit against the district with the Miley Law Firm of Baton Rouge.

They are expected to appear at the Washington Parish Courthouse Tuesday morning for a hearing on the suit.

According to the petition, the two residents allege the District violated state law at the Washington Parish Reservoir Commission's Jan. 5 meeting.

At the beginning of the January meeting, Commission chair Huey Pierce told a packed audience that public comment would not be allowed, and that the commission did not have the jurisdiction to open themselves to a public hearing.

However, the commission did have a comment period in which persons could ask written questions regarding scientific, factual or technical data on the proposed sites for the reservoir.

Without a public hearing at the meeting, the Commission voted to pursue an area in the Oak Grove Community, also known as Site Two, as the most viable location for a reservoir.

According to public documents, petitioners in the case allege the commission violated Louisiana Revised Statute 42.5, which states that, with the exception of school boards, "each public body conducting a meeting…shall provide an opportunity for public comment at such meeting, subject to reasonable rules, regulations and restrictions as adopted by the public body.

Petitioners allege the District is defined as a public body by La. R.S. 42:2, which includes "special district boards, commissioners or authorities, and those of any political subdivision thereof, where such body possesses policy making, advisory, or administrative functions…"

The Washington Parish Reservoir Commission is defined as a political subdivision by the state.

Petitioners also allege the district neglected to post a copy of La. R.S. 42-1-13 as required by La. R.S. 42:4.1 (B), and that no adequate notice of the meeting was provided as required by La. R.S. 42:7.

If a violation of any of these statutes is determined, all active participants in the Jan. 5 meeting could be subject to a fine of up to $100.

Petitioners request that, as a result of the alleged violations by the District and the Board of Commissioners, all actions taken at the meeting be deemed void, that a declaratory judgment be rendered against the defendants and injunctive relief is granted to prohibit further violations.

In addition, petitioners are seeking "reasonable attorney fees" and all costs related to the proceedings therein.

An official order from the 22nd Judicial District Court, Franklinton, was reportedly submitted to Pierce and Attorney General Charles Foti in March.

Pierce has been ordered to appear before the court to give reason, if any, as to why a judgement should not be rendered on this case, at the Washington Parish Courthouse at 9 a.m. Tuesday.