The challenges of relocating the Shreveport Police Department Headquarters from Texas Avenue to temporary locations have been exacerbated by several factors.
The first is the insistence by SPD Chief Wayne Smith of a large number of parking spaces at any temporary location. Many on the council seriously question Smith's explanation of the number of needed space.
The second is the apparent reluctance to seriously consider temporary locations at empty schools--primarily Sunset Acres and E.B. Williams/Stoner Hill. As of Tuesday, of this week, neither of these schools have been reviewed by Smith and his staff. Any decision to occupy a Caddo Parish School Board facility must be approved by the Caddo School Board. Several school board members have advised this writer--off the record--that they support SPD occupying the schools and that they believe a majority of the Board feels likewise.
A third factor is who is the wagon master in the selection of temporary locations? Mayor Tom has stated that Chief Wayne is responsible for visiting locations and making recommendations to him. There is some scuttlebutt that CAO Tom Dark has a big say in the process and that Dark has vetoed consideration of at least one location. Some council members believe the Mayor has given too much leeway to Chief Wayne in the selection process.
The temporary SPD locations is a separate issue from the recently discovered controversy over the donation by the North Shreveport Business Association (NSBA) to the City for a permanent SPD substation on North Market. The donation deed has a clause requiring a police substation on that location for 25 years--or the property reverts back to NSBA.
As of this writing, no one from the City of Shreveport has contacted NSBA to discuss removal of this reverter clause, which would resolve this issue. The City has spent $300,000 for removal of structures on the property including soil remediation.
Failing removal of the reverter clause the Shreveport City Council will have major decisions to make. The first is to proceed with a permanent substation on that location. The second is to warehouse the property and seek another location for the proposed permanent location in north Shreveport. The third is to authorize litigation to void the transaction due to some legal issues concerning the donation.
The Shreveport City Council is not the bad guy in this series of events. In fact, the Council is to be commended for raising the issue of the North Market donation and for pressuring the Administration to move faster on the temporary police substations. The Council is doing its job, and they are to be commended, not castigated, for the same.
How this story ends is an unknown. To say the least, litigation to revoke the donation is a last resort and one that will adversely affect relationships between the Council and the Administration. Additionally, further delay on selection process of substations is as much of a problem that will cast a cloud on Shreveport government that is not needed.