SLCA Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2010

STARING LANE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
April 18, 2010
Magnolia Woods Club House

The meeting was called to order at 5:10 p.m. by the president. People who were present introduced themselves.

The president gave an overview of the meeting’s objectives: update on any contracts about possible appraisal offers and to determine if we’ll take some type of legal action in reference to these proposed offers.

Pam Labbe, secretary, was unable to attend; Judy Barbay acted as recording secretary.

The minutes were read and two corrections were noted:
1. Only 2 people have been present when their land was appraised.
2. The value was approximate of $3.50 per square foot.
Pete Territo made a motion to accept the minutes as corrected; Judy Barbay seconded the motion and the motion carried.

It will cost 46.4 million to place utilities underground.
Property owners on O’Neal Lane have received $14/sq. ft. for commercial and $7 for residential.
The majority have received letters asking if they wanted to be present when the appraisal was done.

Publicity Committee—no report

Membership Committee—It is hoped that all present will become members.

Finance Committee—There is $320.00 in the account.

Nominating Committee—Some members have moved so we will wait until there is more stability before filling the positions.

OTHER NEWS:
The majority of people have been contacted.
Six people have had their property appraised: O’Rourke, Herke, Territo, LaCaze, White, Singleton
Three people have had offers: Territo, Singleton & White
Two have rejected the offers.

PRESENTATION BY GWYNN SHAMLIN, ATTORNEY
If one rejects the offer, they must make a proposal with documentation for rejecting the offer. If the City-Parish doesn’t agree, they will do a “quick take” and it will go to court. We may want to do group appraisals.

Pete Territo presented the correspondence he had received from Pete Newkirk responding to questions that had been posited by the Association.
Underground Utilities: City-Parish is going to provide high poles like on Essen Lane to avoid the trees (will not run lines underground).
Cable and Telephone Lines: Same as above.
35 MPH Speed Limit: DPW will make this determination.
Servitude Ending at Construction Line: 5 foot will be needed for actual road construction and 17 foot of “back grade” for future development.
Double driveway entrances: Won’t outright agree to this. Residents should insist they need a double driveway if the road is close to the house to provide easy access.
Preservation of existing trees: Planning to put high electricity poles to avoid the trees. However, the construction workers will not respect the trees. The engineers said they were going to clear the right of way. You will have to be paid for fence removals.
2-Lane Street: City-Parish is planning to develop it as a 4-lane street as voted on in the Green Light plan. Can develop as 5 lanes but can put in fewer lanes if they thought it was better.

It was indicated that it was still in question as to whether the house at the corner of Hyacinth and Staring was going to be taken. The Thomases haven’t had any information recently.

Gwynn Shamlin, Attorney, reviewed the Association’s Two Options:

Option One: Challenge City-Parish’s right to take property. Attorney Gwynn Shamlin did research and the “quick take” process to take property requires court. Even though this “quick take” procedure has been under criticism (statute is too broad, gives too much power to the municipalities); if we were to take legal action, we would have to establish that the law has been unconstitutional and it would be expensive to do so. The City-Parish would probably get a stay of order until the decision is rendered. The money would be put in an escrow account and would go to court; but they will go ahead and take the property. The money could be accessed during the court procedure but you will have to pay expert witnesses when you go to court and an attorney would want one-third as payment. Attorney Shamlin will break down the law for us and send it to everyone.

Option Two: Property owners could negotiate a better offer based on a private appraisal. Property owners need to negotiate and not take the first offer and make a counter offer based on a certified appraisal. The key is getting an appraisal done. Must take into account noise, heat, etc. Will need an appraisal comparable to the City-Parish’s appraisal.


Attorney Gwynn Shamlin will help without asking for anything but he is not a “takings” lawyer. His phone number is 225 772-0341. He will answer questions via the Q & A site he has established at his website.

Other points made:
· We must understand the legal ramifications of any action that we take.
· When we begin to negotiate, we want to consider future possible commercial value of the land.
· Appraisers giving out questionable information such as don’t worry about the “set back,” you can do what you want with the servitude which isn’t correct.
· Pete Territo’s comps were based on vacant land.
· A show of hands indicated that a majority would have an appraisal.
· Three agents are working the Staring Lane project: Ronnie Rabalais, Robert Cain and one other one.
· Home owners will work through the agents and not the appraisers.
· Green Light is over budget on all projects.

An amended motion passed to have an executive committee meet with outside appraisers and come back with a report to the group.

Meeting concluded at 6:55 p.m.

Quick Take Process ( Louisiana Law )

April 21, 2010

To: Staring Lane Community Association
Re: Louisiana Quick Take Process
Dear Association Members:

As promised, the following are a list of applicable laws with reference to a quick take action in Louisiana. They can be found in Title 48 of the code of Louisiana Revised Statutes. To sum it up, the following steps will have to happen in a “quick take” process:

1. The city will file a petition expropriate or “take” the property following a failure to agree on compensation;
2. Defendant (you) has the right to file a Motion to Dismiss within 20 days if the following occurs:
a. You can prove the property was not taken for public purpose, or;
b. The city failed to fulfill the requirements of statutes 442-444 (listed below);
c. The Motion will be heard by a judge.
3. Should the motion fail, the defendant has the right to file an answer within one year to have a trial on the compensation issue.
4. Should you win on the motion, or should you prove that you were under compensated, 48:456 provides that you can recover attorney fees and court costs.
I am confident that we can use this process to force the city’s hand in providing appropriate compensation. The key will be in filing the Motion To Dismiss and an Answer which I can assist with.


Here are the laws:

§441. Authority to expropriate and acquisition of property prior to judgment
A. Where the Department of Transportation and Development cannot amicably acquire property needed for highway purposes, the department may acquire the same by expropriation.
B. In any suit for the expropriation of property, including both corporeal property and servitudes, the department may acquire the property prior to judgment in the trial court in the manner provided in this Part.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954. Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1977, No. 291, §1; Acts 2006, No. 11, §5.


§442. Contents of petition for expropriation; place of filing
The rights of expropriation granted by this Part shall be exercised in the following manner:
(1) A petition shall be filed by the plaintiff in the district court of the parish in which the property to be expropriated is situated. However, where the property to be expropriated extends into two or more parishes and the owner of the property resides in one of them, the petition shall be filed in the district court of the parish where the owner resides, but if the owner does not reside in any one of the parishes into which the property extends, the petition may be filed in any one of the parishes. In all such cases, the court wherein the petition is filed shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate as to all the property involved.
(2) The petition shall contain a statement of the purpose for which the property is to be expropriated, describing the property necessary therefor with a plan of the same, a description of the improvement thereon, if any, and the name of the owner or owners as shown in the public records.
(3) The petition shall have annexed thereto the following:
(a) A certified copy of a certificate of authorization to expropriate executed by the secretary of the department, declaring that the taking is necessary or useful for the purposes of this Part.
(b) A certificate signed by the chief engineer or, in his absence, his principal assistant, declaring that he has fixed the right-of-way in a manner sufficient in his judgment to provide presently and in the future for the public interest, safety, and convenience.
(c) A certificate signed by the chief engineer, by the road design engineer, and, if appropriate, by the bridge design engineer, declaring that the location and design of the proposed improvements are in accordance with the best modern practices adopted in the interest of the safety and convenience of the traveling public. In the absence of any of them, his chief assistant may sign for him.
(d) An itemized statement of the amount of money estimated to be the full extent of the owner's loss for the taking or the damage, or both, as the case may be, the methodology used in the estimate, and all of the information required by R.S. 48:443 relative to estimators. It shall be signed by those who made the estimate, showing the capacity in which they acted, and the date on which it was made. The real estate administrator or his designated representative shall signify his approval on the face thereof. It shall not be grounds to dismiss the taking if it is shown that the estimate is or may be less than the full extent of the owner's loss.
(e) Repealed by Acts 2003, No. 1065, §2, eff. July 1, 2003.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954; Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1977, No. 291, §1; Acts 1979, No. 413, §9, eff. July 11, 1979; Acts 1984, No. 304, §1; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1; Acts 1989, No. 124, §1, eff. June 22, 1989; Acts 2001, No. 473, §1, eff. June 21, 2001; Acts 2003, No. 1065, §§1, 2, eff. July 1, 2003.

§442.1. Contents of petition for expropriation; property needed for design-build projects; place of filing
Notwithstanding the provisions of R.S. 48:442, the rights of expropriation granted by this Part shall be exercised for design-build projects authorized according to the provisions of R.S. 48:250.2 in the following manner:
(1) A petition shall be filed by the plaintiff in the district court of the parish in which the property to be expropriated is situated. However, where the property to be expropriated extends into two or more parishes and the owner of the property resides in one of them, the petition shall be filed in the district court of the parish where the owner resides. If the owner does not reside in any one of the parishes into which the property extends, the petition may be filed in any one of the parishes. In all such cases, the court wherein the petition is filed shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate as to all the property involved.
(2) The petition shall contain a statement of the purpose for which the property is to be expropriated, describing the property necessary therefor with a plan of the same, a description of the improvement thereon, if any, and the name of the owner or owners as shown in the public records.
(3) The petition shall have annexed thereto the following:
(a) A certified copy of a certificate of authorization to expropriate executed by the secretary of the department, declaring that the taking is necessary or useful for the purposes of this Part.
(b) A certificate signed by the chief engineer or, in his absence, his chief assistant, declaring that he has fixed the right-of-way in a manner sufficient in his judgment to provide presently and in the future for the public interest, safety, and convenience of the traveling public and has made a determination of the amount and location of the property required for the purposes set forth in the petition and that in his opinion the property is neither excessive or inadequate for such purposes.
(c) An itemized statement of the amount of money estimated to be the full extent of the owner's loss for the taking or the damage, or both, as the case may be, the methodology used in the estimate, and all of the information required by R.S. 48:443 relative to estimators. It shall be signed by those who made the estimate, showing the capacity in which they acted and the date on which it was made. The real estate administrator or his designated representative shall signify his approval on the face thereof. It shall not be grounds to dismiss the taking if it is shown that the estimate is or may be less than the full extent of the owner's loss or that the estimate was made without consideration of final plans.
Acts 2005, 1st Ex. Sess., No. 43, §1, eff. Dec. 6, 2005.

443. Appointment of estimators; restrictions in selection
A. The real estate administrator shall select one or more persons to make the estimate of just compensation except when the estimate is expected to exceed the amount of thirty thousand dollars in which case he shall select two or more persons. However, when the department cannot amicably acquire clear title to property solely for reasons unrelated to the amount of just compensation to be paid such as unopened successions, absentee defendants, or partial interests, one person shall be selected to make the estimate regardless of the amount. The estimate shall be performed by either a real estate appraiser or real estate specialist in the regular employ of the department or a licensed Louisiana appraiser certified pursuant to the Louisiana Real Estate Appraisers Law. The person performing the estimate shall be familiar with land values in the vicinity of the property to be taken and shall conduct the appraisal in accordance with real estate appraisal guidelines.
B. Each estimator in determining the extent of the owner's loss shall consider the replacement value of the property taken.
C. Prior to filing its petition, the department shall provide to the owner the following information with respect to each estimate of the owner's loss.

(1) The name, address, and qualifications of the person or persons preparing the estimate.
(2) The amount of the estimate.
(3) A description of the methodology used in the estimate.
(4) Upon request by the owner, a copy of the estimate prepared by each estimator.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1 eff. June 24, 1954; Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1; Acts 1989, No. 124, §1, eff. June 22, 1989; Acts 1989, No. 736, §1; Acts 2001, No. 56, §1; Acts 2003, No. 341, §2; Acts 2006, No. 727, §1, eff. June 29, 2006.


§444. Prayer of petition; ex parte order of taking
The petition shall conclude with a prayer that the property be declared taken for highway purposes. Upon presentation of the petition, the court shall issue an order directing that the amount of the estimate be deposited in the registry of the court and declaring that the property described in the petition has been taken for highway purposes at the time of the deposit.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954. Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975.

§445. Vesting of title
Upon the deposit of the amount of the estimate in the registry of the court, for the use and benefit of the persons entitled thereto, the clerk shall issue a receipt showing the amount deposited, the date it was deposited, the style and number of the cause, and the description of the property and property rights, as contained in the petition. Upon such deposit, title to the property and the property rights specified in the petition shall vest in the department and the right to just compensation therefor shall vest in the persons entitled thereto.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954; Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1.

§446. Notice to defendant
Upon receipt of the deposit, the clerk of court shall issue a notice to each defendant in the suit, notifying him that the property described in the petition has been expropriated for highway purposes.
This notice, together with a certified copy of the order, the petition, and the clerk's receipt for the deposit, shall be delivered by the clerk to the proper sheriff for service on each defendant in the manner provided for the service of citations.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954. Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975.

§447. Contesting validity of taking; waiver of defenses
A. Any defendant desiring to contest the validity of the taking on the ground that the property was not expropriated for a public purpose or on the ground that the petition and attached exhibits do not satisfy the provisions contained in R.S. 48:442 through 444 may file a motion to dismiss the suit within twenty days after the date on which the notice was served on him. He shall certify thereon that a copy thereof has been served personally or by mail on either the plaintiff or its attorney of record in the suit. This motion shall be tried contradictorily with the plaintiff to the judge alone and shall be decided prior to fixing the case for trial.
B. Failure to file the motion within the time provided constitutes a waiver of all defenses to the suit except claims for compensation.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1 eff. June 24, 1954; Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1.

§448. Right of possession; limitation by court
If there are no buildings located wholly or partially upon the property described in the petition, the department is entitled to enter upon and take possession of the property upon the deposit of the estimated compensation.
If any building is located wholly or partially upon the property described in the petition, the court may postpone the right of entry for any period not to exceed thirty days from the date on which the last of any parties defendant was served with the notice. However, the department in its discretion, may request the court to order possession surrendered after a longer delay. The court may fix a reasonable rental to be paid to the department by a defendant in possession of the property for each day he remains in possession after the withdrawal of any part of the amount deposited.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954. Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975.

§449. Withdrawal of amount deposited
Upon the application of any party in interest, and upon due notice to all parties, the court may order that the money deposited, or any part thereof, be paid forthwith to the person entitled thereto for or on account of the just and adequate compensation to be awarded in the proceedings.
The court may make such orders as shall be just and equitable to direct the payments of taxes, encumbrances and other charges out of the money deposited.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954. Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975.

§450. Defendant's answer; requirements; delay for filing
A. Where an entire lot, block or tract of land is expropriated, any defendant may apply for a trial to determine the measure of compensation to which he is entitled, provided:
(1) He files an answer within ninety days from the date he is served with the notice;
(2) His answer sets forth the amount he claims;
(3) His answer has a certificate thereon showing that a copy thereof has been served personally or by mail on all parties to the suit who have not joined in the answer.
B. Where a portion of a lot, block, or tract of land is expropriated, any defendant may apply for a trial to determine the measure of compensation to which he is entitled, provided:
(1) He files an answer within one year from the date he is served, in the same manner provided for service of the petition, with a copy of the department's notice of acceptance, which has been filed with the clerk of court of the parish in which the action is pending, declaring that it has finally accepted the construction of the highway project for which the property was expropriated; provided however, that he may file his answer at any time prior thereto;
(2) His answer sets forth the amount he claims, including the value of each parcel expropriated and the amount he claims as damages to the remainder of his property;
(3) His damage claim is reasonably itemized;
(4) His answer has a certificate thereon showing that a copy thereof has been served personally or by mail on all parties to the suit who have not joined in the answer.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954; Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1.

§451. Fixing for trial; notice
After answer is filed, if no motion to dismiss the suit pursuant to R.S. 48:447 is pending before the court, either party may, upon ex parte motion, request that the matter be docketed for trial. The court shall fix the time for the trial of the suit not more than sixty days after the filing of the motion, and the trial shall be conducted with preference and with the greatest possible dispatch. The clerk of court shall thereupon issue to all parties a notice of the time fixed for the trial. This notice shall be served at least thirty days before the time fixed for the trial and in the manner provided by law for the service of citations.
Acts 1987, No. 619, §1.

§451.1. Right to trial by jury
In an expropriation proceeding pursuant to this Part any party has the right to demand a trial by jury to determine just compensation.
Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975.

451.2. Time limit for demanding jury trial; waiver of demand for jury trial; limitations
A. A defendant may demand jury trial in his answer or by motion filed within the delays provided for the filing of his answer.
B. The department may demand jury trial by motion filed no later than fifteen days after service upon the department of an answer filed by a defendant.
C. For purposes of this Section, answers filed by attorneys appointed to represent absent or unknown defendants shall not cause these delays to begin to run, unless that answer indicates that the appointed attorney has been retained or employed by the owner to assert and prosecute a claim in his behalf.
D. Once any party has timely demanded a jury trial, that demand is effective against and binding upon all parties to the suit, and cannot thereafter be waived without the consent of all parties. With the consent of all parties, a demand for jury trial may be waived at any time prior to the swearing of the jury.
Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1.

§451.6. Procedure in general
In cases to be tried by jury, six jurors summoned in accordance with law shall be chosen by lot to try the case. The method of calling and drawing by lot shall be at the discretion of the court.
Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975.


§451.19. Number required for verdict
In order to reach any verdict, five of the jurors trying the case must concur therein.
Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975.

§453. Measure of compensation; burden of proof; extent of loss
A. The measure of compensation for the property expropriated is determined as of the time the estimated compensation was deposited into the registry of the court, without considering any change in value caused by the proposed improvement for which the property is taken.
B. The measure of damages, if any, to the defendant's remaining property is determined on a basis of immediately before and immediately after the taking, taking into consideration the effects of the completion of the project in the manner proposed or planned.
C. The owner shall be compensated to the full extent of his loss. The court shall include in its consideration the difference between the rate of interest of any existing mortgage on an owner-occupied residence and the prevailing rate of interest required to secure a mortgage on another owner-occupied residence of equal value.
D. The defendant shall present his evidence of value first.
E. Reasonable attorney fees may be awarded by the court if the amount of the compensation deposited in the registry of the court is less than the amount of compensation awarded in the judgment. Such attorney fees in no event shall exceed twenty-five percent of the difference between the award and the amount deposited in the registry of the court.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954; Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1976, No. 391, §1, eff. Oct. 1, 1976; Acts 1983, No. 33, §2; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1.

455. Judgment to provide interest
If the amount finally awarded for compensation exceeds the amount deposited, the judgment shall include legal interest on the excess from the date the defendant files an answer as provided in R.S. 48:450 until paid, but such interest shall not accrue on any award made for expert fees or attorney fees prior to judgment.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1954; Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1; Acts 1992, No. 483, §1; Acts 2006, No. 322, §1, eff. July 1, 2006.

§456. Judgment as to difference awarded; payment of judgment
A. If the amount finally awarded exceeds the amount so deposited, the court shall enter judgment against the department and in favor of the persons entitled thereto for the amount of the deficiency. The judgment shall not be an in globo award, but shall list separately the amounts awarded, but not deposited, for:
(1) An increase in the fair market value of the part taken;
(2) An increase in severance damages;
(3) Attorney fees;
(4) Expert witness fees; and
(5) Any other type of loss or damage.
B. Those portions of the final judgment which award an increase in the value of the part taken, an increase in severance damages, compensation for any other type of loss or damage, together with interest payable on those sums not deposited, attorney fees, and expert witness fees shall be paid within ninety days after becoming final. Thereafter, upon application by the owner or owners, the trial court may issue a writ of mandamus to enforce payment.
Added by Acts 1954, No. 107, §1, eff. June 24, 1981; Amended by Acts 1974, Ex.Sess., No. 30, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975; Acts 1988, No. 882, §1.


Sincerely,

Gwynn L. Shamlin, II

SLCA Executive Committee Meeting Minutes - April 21, 2010

STARING LANE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
April 21, 2010

In Attendance: Gwynn Shamlin, Brunetta Shamlin, Pete Territo, Cathy & L. J. Cusimano, Mr. Herke and Judy Barbay.

As agreed upon by the Association, an executive committee met with appraisers to determine who could best meet the needs of Association members.

1st Interview: Octavius Butler of Reva Scott’s Appraisal Company, RSB Appraisal Services

Ms. Scott was unable to attend, so Octavius Butler represented RSB Appraisal Services.
This company has been in existence 15 years and has operated in the States of California and Louisiana.

They have expertise in residential and small commercial appraisals.
RSB Services has two employees.

Appraise vacant lots as well.

Appraise home and land value within your subdivision by looking at comparable homes—age, condition, exterior and interior.

48 hour turnaround to receive report (unless extenuating circumstances.

Appraises shrubberty, trees (considers historic value of trees)
Calculates external obsolescence (noise due to schools, railroad tracks)—the percentage is based on different neighborhoods.

Land value is determined on vacant land.

Have never been taken to court over the result of their appraisal.

Appraisal: broken down to land, carport, depreciation of home—breaks down square footage to home itself, carport/garage and lot
Appraise improvements—itemized as part of value.

Must make a special request to get commercial and residential value of land.
Will have a proposal ready for the Association by early Friday morning.

2nd Interview: Kermit “Wayne” Williams

Has testified many times as an expert witness.

Is a certified real estate appraiser who has contracted with the city on the sewer project. Can work with both sides of controversy. Will work with objectivity.

If has at least 10 appraisals from the Association will charge $1500 per parcel and $200 per hour for other expertise. If there aren’t 10, then the charge will be $3,000.

He urges everyone to hire an attorney to represent them with negotiations with the city-parish.
His appraisals are composed of “Before and After” approach/”Paired Sales”—courts say you are to be compensated to the full extent of the loss. He would do a study on properties and will look at the plan and compare to other properties where similar things have happened (paired sales) such as on Stanford Avenue and the street is very close to the front of the houses—he would compare their value with the value of houses within the Southdowns area and show how the estimated worth of square foot value is decreased due to this. Will see what this street widening project would do to the value of your property.

He is confident itemizing small objects on land but not large trees and shrubbery—recommends getting an expert in this area to determine their worth.
“A good settlement is better than a good fight.”

People have challenged the “quick take” law and lost.

Usually the servitude is used for construction and you get it back.

Heat and noise are not being addressed in the appraisal.

Looking at “paired sales” to prove detrimental effects of the construction project.

Two ways to measure damages—cost to fix damages (such as moving carport; could require a double driveway) Have to have other experts to determine landscaping losses.

Each property would be appraised on its own merit.

Consistent use principal: can’t value land as commercial and house as residential.

You need an attorney and having a solid front would do a lot more for negotiations.

SLCA Meeting Minutes - March 28, 2010

Staring Lane Community Association
Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2010

While the original traffic count on Staring Lane was 22,000, we discussed at last meeting: updated traffic counts: 13,000 + on south side; 19,481 on north side.

Dr. Shamlin stressed the importance of maintaining the organization and of having paid members.
- Asking for membership dues for those who have not yet paid (also for 2010) - $25 per family

Members who paid during meeting:
C. Paul Serio (cash); William H. or Joan F. Herke, ck; Rosalyn T. Brand, ck#; Pamela Labbe (cash).

Officer recommendation:
The membership was in agreement that we should maintain the current officers for another year. The officers agreed to do so.

There was a show of hands for who have been appraised. Three hands went up (Herke, President Shamlin & V.P. Pete Territo). Several others raised hands for receiving a letter. Worthington Estates has received nothing.

There are three contact persons for the 3-mile project. The contacts are agents for CSRS. Sham’s contact person is CAIN; Pete’s contact person is Ronnie Rabalais.

Vice President Pete Territo made a short presentation:
- He’s been working to find out more information
- He’s met with Ronnie Rabalais , with two realtors, has called Mike Songy w/ CSRS & Pete Newkirk. He’s met with Hallman from Entergy, Newkirk and others.
- He requested to have the utilities put underground. Many homes are only 16 feet from the road. This causes problems with putting utilities underground, he was told.
- Mike Songy said that all things have been finalized.
- Pete has been seeking information the back way
o Sidewalks will b near the street instead of four feet in
o Speed limits will be 45 mph
o All prints currently say utilities will NOT be underground
o Staring Lane = 2 miles. $32 million to $49 million, currently.
o Smokey Bourgeois has been in our corner
o Pete wants to meet with each family individually
- What the city is willing to pay property owners for the property fronts in the servitude (five feet across, city will pay 100 percent of value; everything after that will be at 90 percent value). Pete says $7 / sq. ft. would be reasonable, but the city is offering Pet around $3.50 / sq. ft.
- Need an appraiser: can we get a group rate?
- Issues:
o Vibration
o Heat
o Sewage construction (mud/dirt/dust)
- Rejection of city’s offer?
- ISSUE: Contesting the appraised value of property:
o If the homeowner is satisfied with the $3.50 / sq. ft. price, then there is nothing more to do. But if the homeowner wishes to contest the offer or has trees they wish to save [significant tree=18 inches in diameter], then the homeowner will need to contest the offer.

Ronnie Rabalais = his job is to get the homeowners’ land for as little as possible.

18-wheelers are already driving down Staring Lane, but the city claims that no 18-wheelers will travel this way to go down toward Burbank.

Gwen Shamlin Jr. (lawyer) suggests litigation discussion: the prevention of taking property; would it really be worth hiring a lawyer, paying court fees, expert witnesses, etc.? Lawyers usually take their cut as well as charging their usual rates. Local lawyers: would any be interested in taking the case? We must consider the costs. Gwen Jr. also suggests that we write a letter to the city. Is this an option? He suggests we hire an appraiser as an association. Can we go outside the city for this? A “Class Appraisal” is what we need. The city will be low-balling everyone. Everyone is being advised to reject the first offer. Expert witnesses are very expensive. 2,500 feet=the area that is being affected.

Jay Lacaze: his mother lives on Staring Lane; he knows someone who might be able to do a few appraisals, he said.

Bill Herke mentioned a law firm who might be able to take on a class action type cases: Biersdorf & Associates. It is an out-of-state firm.

Pete suggested we need to reject the city’s proposals: and then see if litigation is necessary. Hopefully the second offer will be better.

Gwen Jr. suggested for Bill Herke to call the law firm to see what their minimum would be to take a case. L.J.’s wife Cathy is a realtor with C.J. Brown and she spoke. What was stressed was that not only we reject the first offer from the city, but for us to hold on to our own appraiser’s appraisal with out showing it to the city.

How will common property owned by a subdivision be handled when it is outside the servitude? Gwen Jr. suggested that a certified letter be sent to the D.P.W. and that we should not be intimidated by the process. He would create a message board for all members to post questions on it for him to answer, and he would e-mail it to Pam to upload on the blog.

Mrs. Shamlin requested to set up future meetings. Assignment dates need to be determined regarding tasks. It was suggested that by Thursday of the week after this meeting an appraiser should be selected. Leverage in holding up the project: “quick takes” // we can’t delay the city.

Dr. Shamlin and his wife had spoken to Mayor Holden a while back: he made promises, and then avoided us afterward.

Dr. Shamlin spoke to his agent Cain regarding protecting his trees. Apparently, protecting trees with a historical society does NOT increase the financial value of the trees. We can write a letter from the association, but do we want to risk ill-feeling? Everyone can write letters to the editor of The Advocate. Gwen Jr. suggested we take the approach of getting the best offer, instead of fighting the effort.

Tasks: find a group appraisal; city will be responding on an individual level
Appraisers: Bill Brumfield, Mr. Culpepper (deals with trees)

Specialized appraisal needed. The fact that it affects future values needs to be assessed.

Appraisal for commercial value? Plants/trees have no value, but developers are less likely to tear thru everything like they’ve done in the past.

Saturday, April 17, 2010

To: SLCA Members

From: Pete Territo, SLCA Vice-President

Re: Response from Pete Newkirk, Director DPW


For the past three years we have been trying to get straight answers to our concerns regarding the proposed Staring Lane Green Light Project. Pete Newkirk responded with the letter that follows this message. His responses immediately follow the numbered questions that we posed to him.

We will discuss the ramifications of his responses at our next meeting THIS Sunday, April 18, 2010 at 5:00 p.m. at the Magnolia Woods clubhouse. Please be there as this is an extremely important meeting. We will also discuss our search for appraisers so that we may make a counter offer to what the city is willing to pay us for our property and landscaping, and also severances. Please contact your neighbors and let them know about the meeting. We need everyone at this meeting!!!!!!

I look forward to seeing you at the meeting!

Pete


--- On Fri, 4/9/10, Peter Newkirk wrote:
From: Peter Newkirk Subject: FW: Latest from the Staring ResidentsTo: "'peterterrito@bellsouth.net'" Cc: "'Songy, Michael'" Date: Friday, April 9, 2010, 8:17 AM

Pete: Below are responses to the concerns related to the Staring Lane Road Improvement project. Let me know if you have any questions or need further information.


Pete Newkirk, P.E.
DPW Director
City of Baton Rouge

(225) 389-3158
e-mail: http://us.mc1804.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pnewkirk@brgov.com



April 1, 2010


Mr. Pete Newkirk,
DPW Director

Hello Pete,

As we discussed in our telephone conversation yesterday, I am sending you the major concerns that The Staring Lane Community Association brought to the attention of Jeff Hollman, Mike Songy, and you over a year ago.

We, the Association, are requesting that all power and utility lines be placed underground. This includes the Entergy transmission lines as well as the electrical service to the residences and businesses.

We have requested and Entergy has provided their projected cost to put the electric transmission and service lines underground. We are currently projecting that the total ADDITIONAL cost to the City-Parish of putting electric, cable, and telephone lines underground vs. overhead would be approximately $ 1,800,000. This proposal does NOT include installing underground electric from the right of way to each individual house as Entergy was not willing to even consider estimating that as each property owner would have to consent to a right of entry. Therefore, even though this proposal would provide for the main service line to be underground, Entergy would still need to place power poles at each property line to provide the overhead dip to each structure.

The projected cost and fact that it still does not achieve 100% underground facilities deems this as an excessive cost in expending public funds that are specifically targeted for road improvements and not utility systems.

That being said, we are exploring with Entergy the possibility of installing taller poles that will lift the lines above the majority of the overhanging limbs and would go a long way in reducing the amount of overhanging limbs that will have to be cut. Once Entergy finalizes their concept and cost estimate on this we will be in a position to make a decision going forward.

Regarding the transmission lines, these would be overhead on the taller poles based upon the proposal that is currently being developed.

We are requesting that all cable and telephone services also be located underground.

Same response as item 1

3. We are requesting that the speed limit remains 35 miles per hour, and not 45 as depicted on the signage plan.

You are correct that the construction plans are designed for a maximum 45 mph speed limit. The Traffic Engineering Division of DPW will perform an engineering study to determine the appropriate speed limit once the roadway is constructed and opened to traffic.

4. We are requesting that the servitude ends at the limit of construction lines. We do not feel that the Staring Lane residents need to subsidize a "Land Bank" for the City. We have always stipulated that only the minimum amount of homeowner property should be taken from the homeowners.

The limits of construction shown in the construction plans represent the sloping necessary from the edge of sidewalk back to natural ground for both fill or cut sections. The limits of construction do not reflect the additional space that may be required for the utility company relocations. In all instances the taking line for the multi purpose servitude is either just outside the limits of construction or as needed for utility work. The City-Parish is not requesting any right of way that is not required to construct the project.

We are requesting double driveway entrances for those residents who wish to have one. Shamlin made this request earlier and it is presently of greater importance once we learned that many residences will be 16 feet from the servitude. This is a safety issue as residents will need the space to turn around before entering Staring Lane in the future.

The issue of driveways, access, and proximity of the roadway to existing homes is being addressed by the appraisers as part of the compensation offered to the property owners.

We are requesting a timeline for the various phases of the Staring Lane Green Light Project.

The right of way acquisition phase should be complete by the end of this year. We are currently studying the project to see if it will be constructed in phases or bid all as one package. Bids for the first phases of work should be received prior to the end of this year.

Where feasable, we are requesting that the tall, large trees on Staring Lane be saved and trimmed as were trees found near other right of ways, ie... Airline Highway from Florida Blvd to Old Hammond Highway , as well as in other areas of the city.

As noted in item 1 above, the goal is to try and elevate the overhead lines as much as possible and limit the amount of clearing of overhanging limbs to the greatest degree that we can.

We are requesting that a single traffic lane be utilized on both sides of the median since the new traffic count indicates less traffic than originally listed, ie.. streets such as Kennilworth, Sherwood forest , etc,,,

As previously communicated, this project was approved by the voters as a 4 lane facility, it has been designed as a four lane facility, and will be constructed as a four lane facility.

Your prompt response to this message will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your consideration.

Pete Territo, Ph. D.
SLCA Vice President

Message Board is now set up

Dear Staring Lane Community Association Members:

As promised I’ve set up a Message Board for use by the association.

You can get there through my site at http://www.shamlinlaw.4t.com . Just scroll to the bottom of the main page and click on the link for Staring Lane residents.

The direct link to the message board is http://staringlanecommunity.proboards.com/ .

I will visit the board each night to review any questions.

Thanks,

Gwynn L. Shamlin, II

Letter to Pete Newkirk (April 1, 2010)

Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:28:58 -0700
From: peterterrito@bellsouth.net
To: pnewkirk@brgov.com
CC: gwynnshamlin@hotmail.com; peterterrito@bellsouth.net
April 1, 2010


Mr. Pete Newkirk,
DPW Director

Hello Pete,

As we discussed in our telephone conversation yesterday, I am sending you the major concerns that The Staring Lane Community Association brought to the attention of Jeff Hollman, Mike Songy, and you over a year ago.

1. We, the Association, are requesting that all power and utility lines be placed underground. This includes the Entergy transmission lines as well as the electrical service to the residences and businesses.

2. We are requesting that all cable and telephone services also be located underground.

3. We are requesting that the speed limit remains 35 miles per hour, and not 45 as depicted on the signage plan.

4. We are requesting that the servitude ends at the limit of construction lines. We do not feel that the Staring Lane residents need to subsidize a "Land Bank" for the City. We have always stipulated that only the minimum amount of homeowner property should be taken from the homeowners.

5. We are requesting double driveway entrances for those residents who wish to have one. Shamlin made this request earlier and it is presently of greater importance once we learned that many residences will be 16 feet from the servitude. This is a safety issue as residents will need the space to turn around before entering Staring Lane in the future.

6. We are requesting a timeline for the various phases of the Staring Lane Green Light Project.

7. Where feasable, we are requesting that the tall, large trees on Staring Lane be saved and trimmed as were trees found near other right of ways, ie... Airline Highway from Florida Blvd to Old Hammond Highway, as well as in other areas of the city.

8. We are requesting that a single traffic lane be utilized on both sides of the median since the new traffic count indicates less traffic than originally listed, ie.. streets such as Kennilworth, Sherwood forest, etc,,,

Your prompt response to this message will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your consideration.

Pete Territo, Ph. D.
SLCA Vice President