Fatal Flaw in Anti-St. George Litigation: The City of Baton Rouge Is Not a Plaintiff

On October 12, 2019, the people of the proposed City of St. George voted to incorporate by an overwhelming margin, thereby authorizing the creation of Louisiana’s fifth largest municipality with 86,000 residents.

Nevertheless, after the election, East Baton Rouge Parish Mayor-President Sharon Weston Broome filed suit to stop the incorporation.  She was joined in that suit by Ms. M. E. Cormier, a resident of the City of Baton Rouge, and by attorney Lewis Unglesby, a resident of the proposed City of St. George. 

Last month, I explained in this column why Mayor Sharon Weston Broome and Ms. Cormier got very bad advice from their pro bono attorney, Mary Olive Pierson, because they are not lawful parties to the suit and will eventually be dismissed as plaintiffs.  I cited La. R.S. 33:4, which provides that only the following may file suit to block an incorporation:

1) a resident of the proposed city

2) a property owner of the proposed city

3) a municipality that might be adversely affected by the incorporation, or

4) an elected member of the governing authority of such a municipality.

I showed that Mayor-President Sharon Weston Broome and Ms. Cormier met none of those qualifications and were not authorized to be  plaintiffs in the matter. Particularly, the Mayor-President is not “an elected member of the governing authority of such a municipality.” Under Louisiana law, R.S. R.S.42:1102, “‘Governing authority’ means the body which exercises the legislative functions of a political subdivision.” Therefore, the governing authority of a municipality is the city council or in our case the Metro Council.  Of course, the Mayor-President is not a member of the Metro Council.

A day or two after our column appeared in print, attorney Mary Olive Pierson rushed into court to add Metro Council member Lamont Cole as an additional plaintiff.  

Last week, the attorney for the City of St. George, Sheri Morris, filed a motion to have various plaintiffs kicked off the suit, including the Mayor-President and Ms. Cormier. 

The City of St. George will surely prevail in having plaintiffs Broome and Cormier removed. They clearly have no standing to sue. Mr. Lamont Cole, as a member of the Metro Council, may have standing. We will wait to see what Ms. Morris’ arguments are for removing him.

In any case, the addition of Mr. Cole as a plaintiff will not save attorney Mary Olive Pierson’s questionable case against St. George.

There is a fundamental problem with Ms. Pierson’s actions, even before we get to the merits of her case.

Ms. Pierson failed to include the City of Baton Rouge as a plaintiff in the suit challenging St. George. Think about that!

Why did Ms. Pierson leave the City of Baton Rouge out of the suit? Well, it wasn’t a mistake. It was intentional.  In fact, there’s a very strong reason the City of Baton Rouge is not a plaintiff. That’s quite clear!  Ms. Pierson didn’t have the votes on the Metro Council to authorize the City of Baton Rouge to file suit!  It’s really as simple as that! However, without the City of Baton Rouge as a plaintiff, there is no case against the City of St. George.  The City of Baton Rouge is an indispensable party in this matter.

Consider Ms. Pierson’s burden of proof in her attack on the public’s vote in favor of incorporating the City of St. George. La. R.S. 33:4(D) says, “D. The district court shall determine whether there has been full compliance with the provisions of this Subpart, including the accuracy of the statements in the petition and of the certification of the registrar of voters.  The court shall also reach a determination as to whether the municipality can in all probability provide the proposed public services within a reasonable period of time and whether the incorporation is reasonable.  In determining whether the incorporation is reasonable, the court shall consider the possible adverse effects the incorporation may have on other municipalities in the vicinity.”

So Ms. Pierson needs to show at least one of three things: 1) that St. George has not complied with the statements in the petition, 2) that the proposed municipality cannot provide the public services within a reasonable period of time, or 3) that the incorporation is unreasonable because of the adverse effects on a municipality in the vicinity.

Ms. Pierson’s only hope is Item 3.  The statute empowers the court to determine whether the incorporation is “reasonable” and says the court shall consider the adverse effects of the incorporation on another municipality.

However, here’s the problem. The City of Baton Rouge is not in court complaining that it will suffer adverse effects as a result of incorporation.

In court are Sharon Weston Broome, M.E. Cormier, Lewis Unglesby, and Lamont Cole — as individuals — attempting to argue that the City of Baton Rouge will be adversely affected.  Yet, the City of Baton Rouge has not authorized them to speak on its behalf!

All they can do is give their opinions, and they cannot spend one cent of city money to do so!

Now let’s take Ms. Broom and Ms. Cormier out of the equation, because they do not have standing. That leaves Mr. Unglesby and Councilman Cole to make the argument that the incorporation of St. George adversely affects Baton Rouge in an “unreasonable” way.

This is equivalent to a suit for divorce being filed by one of the children rather than one of the spouses.  Mama hasn’t sued daddy for divorce, but one of the children thinks she should. So she files suit and proceeds to complain about how bad daddy treats mama.

Sorry, my dear, you’re not a proper plaintiff. Mama is the one who has to sue, and mama hasn’t!

This suit by Mary Olive Pierson is vindictive and mean spirited. Ms.  Pierson knows the public has spoken. They voted to incorporate. That was their decision to make — not hers or the Mayor-President’s or Mr. Cole’s!  It’s the people’s decision. This suit is nothing more than a dictatorial attempt to delay and frustrate the democratic process and impose the will of a few over the lawfully, democratically expressed will of the many.

The cry of the Mary Olive Pierson and the Mayor-President that the incorporation of the City of St. George is something dire, awful, racist, unfair, unprecedented, dangerous, threatening, and immoral is nothing more than a smokescreen.  This is an unincorporated area that the City of Baton Rouge has never served and does not propose to serve.  In Louisiana, people in unincorporated areas have a right to go through the legal procedures for the creation of a new city. The people of St. George have gone through those procedures, and it’s time Ms. Pierson and the Mayor-President stop trying to deprive the people of St. George of the right to determine their future.