On July 20,2017, I published in the Shreveport Times an op-ed titled "Why the Shreveport-Caddo MPC should be Dissolved". A copy of this editorial is at the bottom of this article. Many of the problems identified in that column exist today.

There have been some substantive changes at the MPC office since its publication. Some of these have been good and others continued the mediocrity of this regulatory office. My list, which most likely is incomplete, includes the following:

1. Media pressure lead to the non-renewal of the contract with then MPC Executive Director Mark Sweeney and his subsequent resignation. The MPC board then hired long time zoning administrator Alan Clarke as the Executive Director.

2. The Shreveport Chamber took an active role in airing the complaints of the building/development community with the UDC.
This effort resulted in some changes in the UDC to make it more user friendly which appeased ,to some degree, the UDC critics.

3. The Caddo Commission exerted its funding power to split away from the combined Caddo Shreveport MPC and to establish its own agency. The Commission made substantive changes to many of the Unified Development Code (UDC) applicable to parish property subject of the MPC jurisdiction,--the so-called five-mile radius around the Shreveport city limits.

4. Under the direction of Director Alan Clarke additional amendments have been made to the UDCs of both the city and the parish. Many of these have resulted in complaints of over regulation by property owners, especially legislation requiring property owners to list rental properties with the MPC.

5. Procedures implemented to have citizen meetings to review controversial proposed zoning changes have had little positive
effect. These meetings have in many instances become wild west showdowns with unruly citizen behavior and security concerns.

These meetings are not monitored by the MPC staff, to the dismay of several Shreveport City Council members.

6. The delays for zoning approvals by the city council have become very troublesome. Mahy of these are caused by council action to remand the proposed change back to the MPC for further review and action. The number of these delays is evidence that the MPC office and its boards are not effective.

Change, as in big time change, in the MPC office is needed and very long overdue. The catch is that the MPC is a separate government entity not subject to review by the Shreveport City Council. The only "power" of the council is the purse strings. The city funds a large portion of the MPC funds. This agency is also funded to a much lesser extent by the parish, and it generates funds from fees which many believe are excessive.

The Shreveport UDC is much more restrictive than that of Bossier City and Bossier Parish. Citizens and businesses universally applaud the assistance of the Bossier MPC while they curse those of the Shreveport MPC. It's another verse in the long chanted dirge that "it’s easier to do business in Bossier and hard to do business in Shreveport."

If the Shreveport City Council needs more grist for the anti-MPC mill, then they now have it. A report by a well-respected nonprofit entity recently released a study on how to make it easier to do business with Shreveport, especially for small and beginning businesses.

The well documented report had 10 recommendations. Guess how many dealt with the MPC.

Here you go:

a. Recommendation 2--Allow home-based businesses to operate by right, without requiring a zoning inspection.
b. Recommendation 3--Waive the plan approval process if projects utilize pre-approved plans.
c. Recommendation 4--Eliminate landscaping requirements from the UDC.
d. Recommendation 5--Consolidate zoning districts.
e. Recommendation 6--Cross-train MPC and Zoning employees on how projects should move through the approval process.

So, there you have it--5 of the 10 recommendations involve the Shreveport MPC.

The City Council has no direct authority to require these recommendations to be implemented. As evidenced at the last council meeting by the resistance by MPC Director Clarke to recommendations by council members, the MPC must become a city agency if substantial change is to occur.

The ingrained bureaucracy and the voluminous over regulatory UDC make it virtually impossible to implement needed changes in the current structure. Thus, It is better to blow it all up and start over. The best way to accomplish that is a two-fold process. The first is to not fund the MPC for 2025, or perhaps just for the first quarter. The second is to move the zoning and planning process to a city department.

These actions would provide three plus months to set up the department and to adopt a new UDC. And it should not be that hard--starting with adoption of the Bossier UDC which has been in effect for 20 plus years. The new department--or a unit of an existing department--could be managed by an experienced administrator. Prior zoning/planning experience is not necessarily a requirement. especially if the uncomplicated Bossier UDC is adopted.

It is time to make a big, big change with the Shreveport MPC. There is no doubt that this agency, which is not really accountable to any constituency has become a barrier to economic development. This council could make a lasting statement by taking this action, and it would help improve the legacy of two members who are termed out. The other five members who may seek re-election can be judged by their action, or inaction, on the MPC mess.

Why the Shreveport-Caddo MPC should be dissolved

John E. Settle Jr. • Op-ed column • Shreveport Times, July 20, 2017

The Shreveport Caddo Metropolitan Planning Commission (MPC) is a separate governmental entity that is funded by the City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish. The MPC has jurisdiction over all of Shreveport and in the parish to five miles outside the city.. This agency is charged with regulating zoning and building development and enforcing zoning regulations.

Unfortunately, the MPC is not accountable to either the city or the parish.

The city funded $1.2 million to the MPC this year and provides financial services to the agency at no charge. The parish chipped in $240,000. The city and parish, which together own Government Plaza, give the MPC rent-free offices. The MPC also derives income from zoning applications, subdivision plating and other planning services that are required for construction.

The MPC is, in theory, governed by its nine-member board of volunteer commissioners. The city and the parish each appoint four members, and they choose the ninth member jointly.

The MPC executive director, Mark Sweeney, has an employment contract with the MPC board. He is the only public employee in north Louisiana with such a contract. The contract was recently renewed for another year by a 5-4 vote of the board.

Sweeney has run the MPC office as if it were a private kingdom. Since becoming executive director in the fall of 2014, he has closed the MPC offices from noon until 1 p.m., shutting off the lights, locking the doors are locked and setting the phones to be answered by a recording.

Sweeney spent almost $20,000 on a conference in New York City this spring that he, two board members and five staffers attended. He has spent in excess of $80,000 on office furnishings, carpet, paneling and equipment since taking over the MPC directorship.

The legislation that authorized the combined city and parish planning office was enacted by the Louisiana Legislature in 1962, and it is discretionary, not mandatory. Additionally, the Louisiana Constitution provides that the city council or the parish commission can serve as individual planning commissions.

Thus, legally, either the city or the parish can pull out of the Shreveport Caddo MPC and refuse to fund that office in 2017. A simple majority vote of either body will, in effect, pull the plug on the combined office.

The city has many reasons to seriously consider pulling out of the MPC and establishing a separate planning office. Initially the city could offer to provide planning services for the parish in the five-mile area outside city limits, on more favorable terms than it now has with the MPC.

Secondly, city most likely could save money through the economies of scale it would achieve by combining MPC functions into existing city functions. The MPC is authorized for 20 employees and currently has 18, including Sweeney, and they already currently participate in the city retirement system and health insurance program.

Office hours for a city planning office would be set up by the mayor and the city council, as would holidays and vacations. Similarly, travel expenses and equipment purchases would be subject to the same guidelines as other city departments. And there would be no need for separate legal counsel for the MPC.

Sweeney’s relationship with the council has been up and down. On one or more occasions he has been less than candid in his comments to this body. It’s obvious that with the need for less government, more transparency and real accountability, it is time for Shreveport to have its own planning office.

John E. Settle Jr. lives in Shreveport.