Holy Cross area residents are suing the Port of New Orleans over plans for a controversial grain terminal in the area, accusing the port of failing to timely notify the public of a Monday meeting to discuss funding for the project. Therefore, he filed a lawsuit for failing. Make records regarding its scope publicly available.
But port officials disputed those claims in Friday’s response to the residents’ lawsuit and, in fact, gave the Advocate a Dec. 21 notice of Monday’s meeting, as required by law. He said it was posted. The agency also argued that residents did not properly request the records and that it had no legal obligation to turn over the records because Monday’s meeting was merely an opportunity for public comment and no vote was scheduled by the Port Board. .
The legal dispute is the latest flashpoint in a dispute between the port and neighbors over a grain terminal that Canada-based Sunrise Foods International is seeking to build at the Arab Street Pier. Port officials who manage the pier say they have already agreed to Sunrise’s plans, but residents accuse port officials of not informing them about the project until it was too late to cancel it.
Residents also criticize the project, saying it could pollute the neighborhood’s air, lower property values, and introduce unnecessary noise and rodents attracted to the bulk of the grain produced at the terminal.
In a lawsuit filed Friday in Civil District Court, Holy Cross homeowner Jeffrey Wittenbrink and the Holy Cross Neighborhood Association allege port officials’ plans to issue a $100 million bond and use a portion of it. Regarding Monday’s meeting, which accepted the comments, the port claimed that it was not sharing information. One of these is for the terminal project. Residents asked for the rally to be canceled, but Judge Monique Barial denied the request, but the judge scheduled a hearing on the lawsuit’s broad claims for 10 a.m. Friday.
Residents said they saw the Port Authority’s Dec. 21 public notice. The public notice referred to the “Arabo Complex Conversion” and directed people to contact the law firm Foley & Judel with any questions. However, when residents visited the office, they were unable to contact the lawyer, who was away due to Christmas, and received no response.
“This notice, published on the last Saturday before Christmas, was recorded in a manner calculated to avoid public scrutiny,” lawyers for the residents wrote. “We have been advised that the public hearing will take place on the first Monday after Christmas at 10 a.m., which does not allow sufficient time to review the record and provide written public comment before Monday’s meeting.”
Residents also said past notifications were similarly lacking in detail and projects were approved without public input. They are concerned about efforts made by Port NOLA officials to notify the public about the June 27 meeting in which the board approved a lease that would allow Sunrise to open a grain terminal. Port officials said two notices posted in The Advocate weeks before the meeting met legal requirements.
Sarah Porteous, the port’s vice president for external affairs and chief of staff, denied any wrongdoing after Monday’s port meeting.
“All meetings regarding this and other topics have been properly notified in accordance with applicable law,” she said.
Lawyers for the port commission also responded to the lawsuit by saying that if residents were looking for specific public records, they should have contacted the port directly rather than Foley & Judell, regardless of the notice’s instructions.
The Dec. 21 notice “allows interested parties to contact the Board’s bond advisor for information regarding the proposed tax-exempt bond financing,” the attorneys wrote. “This does not make the board’s outside bond advisor a ‘custodian’ of the board’s records under state law.”
About 35 residents packed Monday’s meeting and voiced their opinions on the grain terminal plan during a 90-minute public comment session. If approved, the $100 million bond would pay for a wide range of port projects, including the terminal.
Approximately $9 million has been allocated for the terminal project. Among other things, it will pay for the renovation of existing facilities’ fire protection equipment, electrical equipment, dehumidification systems, ship unloading systems, and rail loading systems.
Port Chief Financial Officer Ronald Wendell said the remaining $100 million “will go toward revenue-generating projects for the port.”
Wendell said the board has already given preliminary approval for funding, and final approval is expected at its Jan. 30 meeting. He said the bond vote will determine how the Arabo Street Pier improvements and other projects will be paid for, but not whether they will continue.
“These projects that are not bond-financed will be funded by the port’s cash flow and reserves,” Wendell said. “This project is not dependent on this bond issue. That’s the whole point of this.”
Wittenbrink, the resident who filed the lawsuit, said that if the port is going to continue with the project amid public outcry, the port will put the public interest first and issue a bond designed to pay for the project. He said the funds should not be used. Instead, they should be asked to find another means of paying for it.
“I think if they want to find the money, they’re going to have to come from their own funds,” he said. “I don’t think they should get bond approval for it.”
