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.