LAPLACE — Sweeping changes proposed by St. John the Baptist Parish Council could impact the way the administration interacts with the district attorney’s office and potentially add lengthy delays to the contract approval process.

Council members for the past two meetings have discussed an amendment that would require Parish President Natalie Robottom to provide documents and contracts to be reviewed by the district attorney’s office up to 45 days in advance of a parish council meeting. Under the proposed ordinance, Robottom’s administration would be prohibited from placing on the council meeting agenda any contract that has not been deemed “legally sufficient” by the DA’s office.

Additionally, failure to comply with those regulations could result in a fine imposed on Robottom by the District Attorney Bridget Dinvaut.

The ordinance, which could come up again for potential adoption in upcoming meetings, appears to be rooted from finance committee meetings when contracts that have not been reviewed by legal counsel have come up for a vote, resulting in lengthy discussions. Quite often, and especially during the past few months, the trend has been for the council to table those items, stymieing projects from moving forward.

The frequent flare-ups pitting administration against the legal and legislative branches of government have exposed a public and palpable distrust among parish officials.

“We are trying to stop this foolishness,” an animated Councilman Marvin Perrilloux said May 28 during a nearly one-hour discussion on the ordinance he proposed and helped craft.

“I am sick and tired of coming to these meetings and sitting here for two hours during a finance committee meeting because you sent the contract late,” said Perrilloux, directing his comments at Robottom. “Send it in a timely fashion.”

A visibly angry Robottom told the council that they don’t want their authority challenged and “I don’t want mine either.”

“I don’t work for the district attorney,” said Robottom, who is being term-limited this fall. “I was elected by the people of this parish. In the charter, there is a section that deems (the DA’s office) as legal advisor, not the legal king, queen. There appears to be some confusion as to who works for who. (The DA’ office) works for us.”

Robottom added, in the past, attorneys from the DA’s office would write ordinances or contracts for the administration. That practice has since ceased.

She also claimed the DA’s office has injected itself into areas where it has no business, mentioning the new practice of requiring public bodies such as the River Parish Tourist Commission and Transit Authority to enter into agreements to use the new government complex to hold meetings.

“A lot of these (contracts, ordinances) that are being stopped are intentional,” Robottom added. “There are at least three (assistant district attorneys) working on our documents. I can’t understand how three attorneys can’t review a one-page document. Maybe (the DA’s office) is not capable of keeping up with what we are doing and we need another source to help us.”

Robottom said neither the DA’s office nor the council has any authority over the administration, and that both branches have “no clue” as to what her administration does on a daily basis.

“I’m stunned at you Mr. Perrilloux. We talked and you said this item might be for the next administration, and you are back here with this motion,” she added.

“What I see is you don’t want to be told what to do,” Perrilloux quickly retorted. “That’s the problem. Don’t try to put the blame on somebody else when you are the one to blame because you don’t want to be told what to do. This council is going to tell you what you are going to do.”

Perrilloux mentioned that in the past representatives from the administration, council members and DA’s office would meet several days before a council meeting to discuss upcoming agenda items. Perrilloux accused the parish president of stopping that practice because of her “attitude.”

Councilman Larry Sorapuru said he enjoyed those meetings, saying it helped provide a better insight as to what was coming up for vote. Robottom said the meetings were a violation.

Councilman Lennix Madere echoed the sentiments of several council members when he said he saw no need for Robottom to provide legal counsel with contracts that are annually renewed so far in advance. He and other council members agreed legal counsel should be given sufficient time to review all new contracts but acknowledged 30 to 45 days might be unreasonable.

“In my mind, a timely fashion is two weeks,” he said, also siding with Robottom that the DA’s office has no control over the parish administration.

Robottom stressed that her office does not purposely delay submitting documents for legal review but explained that approval for some contracts, especially those involving grants, must be approved in a small window. She has mentioned in the past that failure to approve those contracts under the imposed deadline could result in the parish losing funds, forcing the scrapping of projects.

Council member Jaclyn Hotard-Gaudet said the ordinance is borne out of a disconnect between two branches of government and stressed there needs to be a better spirit of cooperation.

Hotard-Gaudet called Perrilloux’s proposed ordinance “too restrictive,” saying it would hold up parish government.

Perrilloux withdrew his motion to adopt the ordinance with a hope of reaching a compromise that will be satisfactory to all parties.

No member of the DA’s office spoke during the heated exchange.

— By Richard Meek