P&Z member delivered printed plea to council member to vote ‘yes’ — out of reach of later public records requests

Handwritten and printed documents excluded from Sucette public records request for Danielson, Kreller and Bush

Adams espoused single criterion instead of 12 in CLURO

Adams wrote ‘half a billion’ revenue basis for his vote

Letter heavily redacted by City before release to Mandeville Daily

Joked local restaurateur should ‘poison’ people opposed to project

Updated 2/28/2024: Expands coverage of City of Mandeville’s CLURO.

MANDEVILLE — Former Planning & Zoning Commission member Nixon Adams delivered a printed letter to District I Councilwoman Rebecca Bush in an attempt to persuade her to vote in favor of the Sucette Harbor project before the City Council’s September 5th vote, according to documents released in response to a public records request by Mandeville Daily.

---

Editor’s Note: This is the fifth part in a series that will explore the recent Sucette Harbor public records release.

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5

---

The undated letter was written sometime after the Planning & Zoning Commission’s 4-3 vote to recommend the project on April 17th, 2023, but before the City Council’s vote to deny on Sept. 5th, according to wording in the letter, and confirmed by Bush.

In the letter, Adams for the most part urged Bush to vote in favor of Sucette Harbor, but he also gave his personal opinions as to why each of the P&Z members voted how they did.

One of his assertions is that now-former P&Z member Simmie Fairley voted in favor of the project at least in part due to financial reasons. Adams told Bush that Fairley owns or owned “several” pieces of property in close proximity to the proposed Sucette Harbor project — the Kleber and Lambert streets area — and believed his property value would have increased as a result.

But Fairley told Mandeville Daily when reached by phone Sunday that his main reason for voting to recommend the project had more to do with jobs and the benefit to Mandeville.

“That would not be my primary reason when that was voted on to send it over to the council at all. Maybe that would have consideration way down, that it would increase property values in that area in general,” he said.

Fairly added, “I believe strongly then and now that the project would have created some jobs in my community, brought in revenue for the City and greatly improved the property value in Kleber Street and Lambert Street area.”

When Adams was explaining his own personal reasons for voting in favor, he cited “a half billion dollars” in tax revenue.

“Conversly (sic), developing the two lakefront properties could add a half billion dollars or more to the tax roles, generating perhaps a million dollars a year for schools, fire and law enforcement service, etc.,” Adams wrote.

An economic impact study presented during the Sucette Harbor application process estimated $78,000 tax benefit to Mandeville and approximately $500,000 to parish resources, including schools and fire protection, but those figures were criticized by project opponents as being overly optimistic.

When describing what he believed the “only criterion” should be for evaluating the Sucette Harbor application, Adams contradicted what the City’s Comprehensive Land Use Regulation Ordinance says in Article 4.3.3.8 “Review and Evaluation Criteria,” a.k.a “the twelve criteria” standard that was often discussed at Sucette Harbor special meetings before the P&Z and City Council.

“I offer the following explantion (sic) of my vote. First, and the only criterion on which the proposal should be judged, the question of whether a planned district like this should be approved is this: when all of the reasonably expected positive gains for the community outweigh probable negative consequences of its development, what the applicant requests, with reasonable tweaks by the P&Z and the council, should move forward to the next step of the development process. That’s it – PERIOD!” Adams wrote.

But 4.3.3.8 reads:

“The Planning Director, the Planning Commission and the City Council shall review and evaluate and make the following findings before granting a Conditional Use Permit or Planned District zoning using the following criteria…”

The five-page letter was delivered personally by Adams or someone on his behalf to Bush’s law firm, meaning it was not sent via U.S. Mail nor delivery service, according to Bush.

The letter was heavily redacted by City Attorney Elizabeth Sconzert, either to protect unrelated personal information for either Adams or Bush, or for privileged legal advice shared by Sconzert with council members and P&Z members related to Sucette Harbor, according to Sconzert.

The letter was not turned over as part of the September 11th Woodward Interests public records request because Bush, District II Councilman Dr. Skelly Kreller and Councilman at Large Rick Danielson were not asked for “handwritten notes” nor “hard copy” documents, only documents that had been sent or generated electronically.

Mandeville Daily learned, however, that only Councilman at Large Jason Zuckerman and District III Councilwoman Jill McGuire were asked for “handwritten notes” or “hard copy” documents.

Here are key claims Adams made in the letter, followed by a link to download the entire scanned city-redacted document:

Claims Rhinehart and Durio were against project from beginning

“First, the vote never was going to be better than 5-2 for approval because Bryan (sic) (Rhinehart) and Clair (sic) (Durio) had made it pretty clear that they were opposed to the project almost before the hearings before us began.” — Page 1

Fairly had financial interest in approval

“Semmie (sic) was strongly for the project from the beginning primarily, I think, because of the potential job opportunities it offered the local black community. Semmie (sic), also owned several pieces of property in the Kleber/Lambert area and was smart enough to know that Sucrete (sic) was almost certainly going to increase the value of his property and all other black property owners in the area.” — Page 1

Adams decided yes early in process

“I was the fourth positive vote and came to that decision pretty early. It was obvious to me that basically it was good for the city, with far more upside than downside. … It should not be killed outright by the usual malcontents from the Old Town who consider any change, bad.” — Page 1

Could add ‘half billion dollars’ to tax rolls

“Conversly (sic), developing the two lakefront properties could add a half billion dollars or more to the tax roles, generating perhaps a million dollars a year for schools, fire and law enforcement service, etc.” — Page 2

Benefits outweighing consequences is only criterion that matters

“I offer the following explantion (sic) of my vote. First, and the only criterion on which the proposal should be judged, the question of whether a planned district like this should be approved is this: when all of the reasonably expected positive gains for the community outweigh probable negative consequences of its development, what the applicant requests, with reasonable tweaks by the P&Z and the council, should move forward to the next step of the development process. That’s it – PERIOD!” — Page 2

Joked Pat Gallagher should poison people opposed to Sucette Harbor

“If I was Pat Gallagher, I would be poisoning the folks in town opposing this project.” — Page 4

Adams and neighbors were likely to move into Sucette Harbor when completed

“Obviously, to me, the benefits vastly outweigh the concerns. The concerns are legitimate, but I believer (sic) that they can be addressed without a whole lot of effort as the project moves ahead. Frankly, I am now totally prejudiced and in fact will probably be trying to move into it as I get more and more decrepit. Two of my neighbors here on Dona Drive have told me the same thing.” — Page 5

Download the entire, redacted document here…

-30-