Law, launch litigation block grocer

What really happened on Big Cypress?
July 16, 2014
Cultural tag could rejuvenate Thib.
July 16, 2014
What really happened on Big Cypress?
July 16, 2014
Cultural tag could rejuvenate Thib.
July 16, 2014

A Thibodaux man wants to prevent a grocery chain from opening a store adjacent to his 3.5-acre property on the outskirts of Thibodaux, so he plans to build a boat launch with the hopes the recreational property would be a legal barrier to any business that sells alcohol.

Proposed parishwide law devised to aid Justin Tenney in his effort overwhelmingly failed last week, so it’s unclear now if this tactic will work. But opposition from Tenney and others to the supposed potential development at the corner of Percy Brown Road and La. Highway 1 persists.

Parish councilmen rejected an ordinance to ban the sale of alcohol within a 300-foot radius of public and private recreational properties, a proposal the parish administrator stated was directly motivated by Tenney’s situation.


“I’m extremely upset with the way things transpired” at the council meeting, Tenney said. “I think there’s still an argument that the current law still affords me those protections. … The avenues, legal or otherwise, I’m going back and forth with my attorneys (to make a decision). Certainly, the last has not been heard from me.”

The no-alcohol-sales radius would have applied to playgrounds, parks, boat launches or other recreational facilities. As written, it made no distinction between public and private property, as long as “the public is permitted to visit and use the recreational facility free of charge,” but Tenney said he would develop a non-motorized boat launch and floating wharf in Bayou Lafourche at his expense and donate the land to parish government.

Tenney said his property, which he repeatedly labeled as a “significant lifetime purchase,” would be devalued should a commercial company open up shop next door and attract traffic, noise and litter to his backyard.


Acadian Plantation co-owner and co-developer Ronald Adams owns the adjacent land.

Two-plus years ago, prior to Tenney’s purchase said, he said he was assured the adjacent land would be a residential development for Adams, himself. Adams recently informed Tenney that he holds a signed letter of intent from a third-party entity to develop the property, Tenney said.

Adams denied Tenney’s claims, telling the Tri-Parish Times in a brief interview last week that Tenney did not speak to Adams before he made the purchase.


“Before Tenney bought his property, I didn’t know him,” Adams said. “He told me he was assured by (Realtors) that my daughter and I were building there. But my property has no zoning. It has got no restrictions. None.”

Adams also denied an assertion made by Tenney and other sources that he was working on an agreement to sell the land to a national supermarket chain.

“I don’t have no plans,” Adams said. “There’s nothing going on there now.”


Tenney is not the only person fighting the potential development: Attorneys with the Rouses Supermarkets-affiliated Rouses Land Company in April filed suit against the Thibodaux land corporation run by Adams, expressing concern over the same tract of land in their petition.

Rouses’ attorneys alleged the land developers are circumventing an agreement that would have given the locally based grocer exclusive rights to operate among burgeoning subdivision developments there struck when Rouses agreed to purchase a plot from Adams for $1.8 million last November.

Nearby vacant properties owned by Adams’ development corporation were stipulated in the agreement as off-limits from potential Rouses competitors, the suit reveals, but the plot at the corner of Percy Brown and La. 1 was not because Rouses’ representatives were under the impression Adams would build a personal home there – it is referred to in court papers as the “Adams Residential Block.”


“Plaintiff believes that Adams has ceased construction because defendants intend to sell the Adams Residential Block to a third party, which may use the Adams Residential Block to construct or operate a full service supermarket or full service grocery store,” reads the petition, which asks Dist. Judge Walter Lanier to reform the contract to add the “residential block” to the restricted zone. Attorneys argue that Rouses’ clear intent was to prevent a competitor from opening nearby, so the contract should reflect that.

Alternatively, the suit asks a judge to rescind the contract and award damages for negligent misrepresentation and other harms.

Adams was served with the suit in late April and has not yet responded, according to the court file. Adams declined to comment on the litigation.


Aside from the civil matters of whether a land developer has the liberty to change his mind and conduct business in an residential area not marked for zoning and whether Adams leveraged community perception into a personal windfall at the expense of others, the situation raises the question of whether a new law that would undoubtedly impact future developments should be applied parishwide for the sake of one resident.

Related to the local council action last week, an ensuing amendment was written to ban only the retail sale of alcohol in proposed no-sale radius, parish administrator Archie Chaisson III said, so beer sales at the French Food Fest, Thibodaux Firemen’s Fair, Hurricane Festival and many other events at public and private recreational facilities would not have been impacted. Existing enterprises would have been exempted via a grandfather provision.

The council voted 7-1 to withdraw the motion indefinitely, with Councilman Aaron Caillouet opposed and Councilman Joe Fertitta, in whose district the consternation lies, absent.


Councilman Jerry LaFont proposed the ordinance on behalf of the administration, common practice that doesn’t always indicate support. At the meeting, he was a devoted opponent.

“I don’t think we’re here to make laws to stop (development) just because someone doesn’t want a liquor store by their house,” LaFont said.

Councilman John Arnold raised ethical concern about the proposed donation and said he would abstain from voting on the formal ordinance. “That’s taking a bribe,” Arnold said.


Although Tenney and Chaisson acknowledged the proposal was devised because of the civil conflict, they argued that its benefits would extend throughout the parish.

“We realized it would be a benefit parishwide and not just for this landowner,” Chaisson told the council. “We’re talking about protecting recreational developments across the parish.”

Current parish law, championed by LaFont in 2012 and unanimously adopted, prohibits the consumption of alcohol in the presence of parish-run youth recreational activities.


Parish laws dating back to the 1960s ban permit issuance for the retail sale of booze within 300 feet of churches, public libraries, schools, full-time day care centers, correctional facilities and public playgrounds.

A provision in the parish’s Code of Ordinances gives the parish president the latitude to reject any alcohol-retail permits, which need final local approval from the sheriff’s office.

Council opponents to the failed proposal last week softened their stances after the meeting concluded. Despite making the public proclamation on ethics, Arnold afterward urged Tenney to bring his proposal back to the council. Other councilmen said they empathized with his situation but could not foresee supporting a de-facto zoning ordinance to remedy one resident’s problem.


Unincorporated Lafourche Parish does not have a comprehensive zoning policy, though the parish council has tailored ordinances to essentially serve that purpose in the past.

Last month, the council by an 8-0 vote approved a business-backed measure aimed at restricting off-track betting parlors from setting up within a 1-mile radius of homes.