City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to tonight's council meeting May 6, 2025. Uh, this meeting is hereby called to order. I need a roll call. Councilman Lewis here. Councilman Bushnell here. Councilman Roberts here. Councilman Enman here. Council member Ralph here. Councilman Bosford here. Councilman Barrett here. If you can all rise for a brief moment of silence and it will be followed by the pledge of allegiance. And would our city attorney Rod Rodrig please lead us in the pledge of allegiance? United States of America to the stand. We have no appearers this evening. We do have a consent calendar, our regular meeting minutes of April 1st, 2025, an introduction of item number 2025-05-01, an ordinance of the city of Covington to amend the 2025 operating and capital budget. I need a motion to accept the consent calendar. So move. I need a second. Second. Roll call, please. Councilman Bushnell, yes. Councilman Roberts, yes. Councilman Inman, yes. Yes. Council member Barrow. Yes. Councilman Bodford. Yes. Councilman Verrett. Yes. Councilman Lewis. Yes. Under our regular agenda agenda. Unfinished business. Items to be voted on. Public hearing and action on item number [Music] 2025-04-01. An ordinance of the city of Covington authorizing the mayor to sell on behalf of the city of Covington a portion of Joiner Street located within the city of Covington St. Tam Parish,

Louisiana. Councilman Bodzford. All right. Basically, uh, according to public works, we don't they have any use for this. Uh, there's no sewer. There's no utilities running through it. And, uh, Mr. Rodriguez informed me and gave me a little info on the back side of this that uh when they widened Collins Boulevard, they took 50 feet of this property, 50 by a little over 200 feet and they're just trying to take Joiner Street uh and add that put that 50 feet back into Commerce. Uh the other thing it with that is that all throughout Joiner Street, it's revoked everywhere all over the place. Uh Circle K, everything. So we revoked that uh a long time ago. It's only this one little section and it doesn't do the city any good or any other resident to access any of their property any good. So, I would recommend uh allowing the merit to go into the uh to sell this piece property. City Attorney Rod, anything to add? Uh that's a correct reflection of what happened. The state expropriated a large portion of this square for the widening of Collins Boulevard 50 years ago. Basically, this little strip of property has been out of commerce because it's not deep enough to accommodate the necessary setback lines, parking, and landscaping requirements of zoning code. The petitioner owns this strip along Collins. He also owns a portion of the property behind Joiner Street that's requested to be revoked. and he own he has a purchase agreement and the consent of the other neighbor that owns the piece contiguous to Joiner Street. And what he hopes to do is incorporate obviously the revoke street into all of his properties which will allow the construction of a commercial building and by and large puts a piece of unusable property back in commerce. Yes. Because the strip the strip that he owns along Collins Boulevard is not big

enough to do anything with. It's the same thing that was done out down by the Circle K, two squares down. Joiner Street bisected that square. It couldn't be used and we revoked Joiner two blocks down. Thank you, sir. Any public comment? Any further council comment? Seeing none, I need a motion to close the public hearing. So move. I need a second. Second. I need a motion to adopt. So move. And I also need a second. Second. Roll call, please. Councilman Roberts, yes. Councilman Inman, yes. Councilman Burrell, yes. Councilman Bodford, yes. Councilman Barrett, yes. Councilman Lewis, yes. Councilman Bushnell, yes. Moving on, public hearing and action on item number 2025-04-02, an ordinance of the city of Covington authorizing the mayor to sell on behalf of the city of Covington a portion of the South America Street Ride ofway in Favroville, also located in the city of Covington. Councilman Burrell, thank you. Uh, so I think most of you are familiar with where Fabville is, where South of America it ends just past 16th. I think we have quite a few um people who want to say something tonight. So, I'm not going to stand in their way. All right. We um asked everyone to fill out a card if they wanted to do so before the council meeting started. So, we will go um in order and we will listen to everyone. We are asking that everyone limit their remarks to five minutes. If you will look over at Councilman Roberts, he is going to be our um timer will be good. That's not what I was going to say, but that's a little more politically correct. And once he raises his hand, you'll have about 30 seconds. Okay. All right. Fair enough. Uh, would Mr. Paul Marone please come up? And as you come up, if you can give us your name and your u address, we would appreciate it for the record. Thank you. Uh, Mr. President, members of

the council, Paul Marone, PO Box 1810, Coington, Louisiana 70434, and I represent Favroville LLC. The request before you this evening uh is for the city to sell a portion of the unopened rideway of South America Street to my clients. Um all in accordance with uh the provisions in your ordinances in particular article uh four of section 86 uh where it specifically identifies this particular action uh for a sale of a rideway like this. Uh this property that that we're talking about uh is in fact an unopen rightaway. There is not a street in this portion of the rideway, only a gravel driveway that was constructed by my clients to provide access to their homes. As we'll address in a little bit more detail tonight, um we have issues out there that um are safety issues and public safety issues and they're very real and we are dealing with those and we ask you to take action tonight to help resolve those. Um, since this all began, there's a great deal of more traffic on this unopened rideway. We have people driving up and back the unopened rideway that presents a real danger to people, pets, and property, and that has only gotten worse and has exacerbated uh over these months. We also are uh dealing with incidents of vandalism in the area. So, what has historically been a very quiet and tranquil area is anything but that. Today you have the opportunity to take action tonight in concurring with your planning commission's recommendation to sell the right of way to resolve all of these issues and we urge you to please do that this evening. Now since we before the planning commission uh we understand that Mr. Frederick has filed his own request to uh purchase the rideway. It has been suggested that maybe this request should be delayed so that that request uh could catch up. And

I would suggest to you that there really is no basis in fact and law at all to delay the action tonight by this council. Um there is simply no reason that this uh this request this evening should not be heard. We've complied with all of your ordinances. We have gone through the process that your ordinances set out. Uh and we are properly before you tonight. Everybody is here. The parties are all here and this is a case that we need resolved. I think the city needs it resolved and we ask you to take the opportunity and resolve it tonight. Now, there are some distinctions I want to touch on briefly that is different from our request of the Fredericks. If our request is granted and this right ofway is sold to Favroville LLC, everyone will still have physical and legal access to their property. If this right ofway is sold to the Fredericks, my clients will be landlocked. They will not have legal access or physical access to the property. There is also case law that would suggest if that happens, we would not even have a claim against the Fredericks to grant us a rightway that we would then be limited to bringing a claim against the city for the demunition of our value of the value of our properties. So, a sale to my clients resolve the issue would resolve the issues. a sale to the Fredericks would actually create more issues than they would solve. So again, we urge you not to table this case, but to move forward this evening. There was some concern that the lots on the New Hampshire side of the rideway, lots 8, 6, 10, and 12 could be landlocked. All of those lots are owned by members of my client. All of those owners are supportive of our request tonight. Each of those lots have direct access also to New Hampshire Street and that is their main u main way of ingress and egress to those parcels. So again, no reason in which to delay based on that. I understand there's a concern

about language in your subdivision ordinance section 5.1 C7 that talks about lots not fronting a public rightway or a public street. Mr. Villery mentioned this at the commission. I want to make sure you understand that language has nothing to do with the request this evening. The reason I say it has nothing to do with the request this evening is because it one is in your subdivision ordinance. The express language in that in that portion of the ordinance says that it applies only to new subdivisions and platting of new lots. We're not asking you to review a subdivision and we're not asking you to plat any lots this evening. So that language is a red herring and it does not have any bearing on the case this evening. The city has no need for this right away. The city has made that clear in past public hearings for 70 years. Neither the city nor the public has needed or used this rightway. The city has no interest in spending money in the rightway. And it shouldn't have to do that. The city does not want the rightway. The Fredericks do not need the rightway. They have legal access to New Hampshire, which came with purchase of their lot. I urge you to please concur with your commission, and sell this right away to my clients. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Mr. Baldwin Reed, get set up here. Yep.

Hi, good evening. My name is Baldwin Reed. I currently reside at 616 South America Street, but I grew up at 622 South America Street, and I have lived in Fabroville for most of my 70 years. I think that fact is important to you for you to know as I can validate firsthand most of what we're going to present to you tonight much of what we're going to present unlike Mr. Frederick who speculates or conjures up falsehoods and repeatedly makes misrepresentations to the city and the public. I want to thank you for your service to Coington and for the opportunity to speak to you tonight. We have a lot to say tonight to correct the record and to counter the three-yearong false narrative Mr. Frederick has developed. I pray that you will patiently indulge us with an open mind. We're here tonight because our neighborhood in Covington has become very dangerous. Our neighbor has directed a large number of vehicles to where they don't belong and where he wants to add even more vehicles. That same neighbor and his household have repeatedly and aggressively bullied our families. Article one, section one of the Louisiana State Constitution of 1974 states, "The purpose of government includes preservation of the peace, protection of the citizens, and promotion of the happiness and general welfare of the people." We strongly urge you to protect our neighborhood citizens. We offer you a solution that will end this dangerous and volatile situation that our neighbors, the Fredericks, have created. Fabville LLC, of which I am a member. That didn't advance. Sorry. Okay. Fabville LLC, of which I am a member and a manager, seeks to purchase this parcel of land. The LLC is composed of members who are all Fabro descendants. All of the homes and lots

in Favroville are owned by members of the LLC. The LLC serves as an HOA for the subdivision. LLC members contribute to the LLC, which pays the taxes on the land it owns and pays for maintenance and improvements on that land and the right of way, including utilities. In recent communications to all of you, Mr. Frederick wrote, "The Fabros are feuding amongst themselves right now, and several of their homes are for sale." This is another one of his fabrications. The truth is that only one house in the subdivision is for sale and for reasons totally unrelated to Mr. Frederick. Everyone is happy with life in the subdivision except for having to defend themselves from the Fredericks. We assure you that every member of the LLC supports our application to purchase this piece of ground. The LLC is legitimate and has been in good standing since 1997 when it was succeeded when it succeeded the Fabrville Partnership. It shouldn't be necessary to show you this, but questioning the legitimacy of the LLC is just more of the pasta that the Fredericks throw against the wall to see what will stick or to ca uh cause doubt and confusion in your mind as to the appropriateness and practicality of this sale. Contrary to Mr. Frederick's claims the LLC is not a boogeyman who's going to sell the parcel to Walmart. Providing servitudes for utilities and lots that need the rightway uh to get to the public road is not a problem and is currently being addressed uh or solved by us in another instance. Their communications are replete with red herrings, exaggerations, and outright falsehoods. Don't let them confuse you. This is very doable. All we need is your support. Highlighted here, and I apologize for the orientation, but it matches other surveys we're going to show you, is the

0.82 acre piece of ground on the unopened rideway that we propose to purchase. And here it is in context. The rightway, which is I'm sorry, the P I'm not making a point of work. This area here where the dark green blobs are. This map contains the surveys that reflect the current state of the relevant properties. The area in green is the footprint of the Favreville subdivision. The area in pink is Mr. Frederick's two lots. The arrows show the access how the vehicles access their homes on the rightway. The homes on lots 13, 14, and 15 use a single lane gravel driveway is the only access to their homes. Mr. Frederick, on the other hand, has access to a 25- foot wide and 140 foot long two-lane driveway to New Hampshire Street. It is 861 ft from Mr. Frederick's lot to 16th Avenue, where South America then becomes a two-lane improved street. That's over six times as far as he travels now over an inferior driveway. So much more to say and I apologize. It's hard to concise uh to consolidate this down. The Fredericks claim the city has constructed and maintained a big beautiful normal city for 75 years that dead ended at their house. They claim their home was once 1201 South America Street. They claim criminal and corrupt people stole the street. Because of these false claims, they think they're entitled uh to run all the way for the street to run all the way to their house. Apparently, they also feel entitled to wage war against us. They use the word street repeatedly to characterize an unopened rideway as something it is not and to control the

narrative. Of course, if you repeat a lie often enough, people will uh believe it. Every time you hear them call the rightway a street, remember it's an unopened rideway. There is no street. There never was a street. Thank you for your time. Thank you, sir. Mr. Michael Bell. I give my name and address. We have a um c we have hard copies of the PowerPoint for individual any of you all who would like them, but I think it might be some instances easier to read than looking at the screen. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it being given to all council members. Not everybody does that. Thank you. Hi, I am Michael Bell. I live at 810 South America Street and um thank you for this service, your service and this opportunity to speak with you. We think that you'll find the true history of this area enlightening. Favrose began visiting Covington regularly in 1899. In 1919, they bought their first home here. Over the years, family members bought homes along the west side of the America Street Rightway. In 1950, family members purchased the property on the east side of the rightway. By the late 80s, it became clear that the property should be subdivided into two into separate lots. So, in 1989, Carol Realy's assets were converted into the lots of individual homeowners. Valro Partnership, now an LLC, became the owner of this unbuildable lot 21 and the private Carol Drive. A few lots have a servitude over Carol Drive to get to South America

Street. The city of Covington approved this subdivision with the tennis court there where it is today. This survey is dated January 15th, 1955 and prepared by Coington surveyor CR Schulz. South America Street was developed up to just north of what today is Carol Drive. It ended with this elongated culde-sac for turning around. The street went this far presumably to serve the old Riverside in at 622 South America Street. The paving ends here today roughly where the co culde-sac ended in 1955. The survey suggests that this situation existed for many years before 1955. These two houses on the South America Street Rightway, um, excuse me, were accessed from Louisiana Street, which is now South New Hampshire Street, because this part of the America Street Rightway was not developed. This house was built in 1936, and its access has always been South New Hampshire Street. Riverside in closed in the 1920s and it's highly likely that this culde-sac end of America Street that served it was built long before the end closed. The Fredericks have this purported and marked up 1936 aerial photo of America Street. setting aside for the moment the question of its au this image's authenticity. You will see in it their driveway to New Hampshire Street and the culde-sac where America Street ended and we show that we showed you on the 1955 survey. These random white marks might be the reflection of the sun on something. Maybe spots where the grass is thin. Who knows? But whatever it is, that is a street that ends at the culdeac. and the rest of the rightway does not look like a street. Whatever it is, um, excuse me, this is hardly definitive evidence that the city

built and maintained a street to their home, and it appears to show the opposite. This is what Mrs. Frederick said about her address at the PNZ meeting in March. HM Fabro bought the Frederick House in 1950. He died in 1953 and his relatives lived there until 2011 when his daughter sold the home to Mr. scans. They accessed it from South New Hampshire Street the entire time that they owned it. The evidence shows this and people are still alive who can attest to this. And he used an 8:30 New Hampshire Street address the entire time that he owned it. Interestingly, Mrs. Frederick is correct that at one time Mr. Favro identified his home as 1201 America Street. The problem is that when he used a 1201 America Street address, he did not live in the Frederick's house. He lived in this house at that time. Hm. Fabro was an architect. In 1936, he designed and built this home with access from New Hampshire Street because the part of the row in front of his house was not developed. in designating his house as 1201 America Street. He may have thought that the row might one day be approve improved into an actual street. That didn't happen. And since this home had to be accessed from New Hampshire Street, he or owners of the home eventually began using the address of 822 South New Hampshire Street, and they still do today. In 1950, Mr. Favro bought the Frederick's house which was next door at 8:30 South New Hampshire Street and he then sold this house to other members of the family. Here's an invitation that HM Fabro sent to his architectural office

staff inviting them to 1201 America Street for a party in 1939. He included a map to tell guests how to get to his home at 1201 America Street from New Hampshire Street. The streets seem to have changed names a few times. So that's possibly explains the question mark on the street, but it's clearly looking at the layout. It's New Hampshire Street. The Frederick's house is over here and Mr. Mr. uh Favro's house was here. If you'd like an invitation, so you may take a closer look at this this document. Um, Mr. Fabro's grandson has several copies and he'd be glad to uh to pass them out to you. So 12:01 1201 South America 8:30 South New Hampshire. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, sir. Miss A Bell Absolutely. Thank you. I'm sure he meant it in a good way. Hi there. I'm Aay Bell. My address is 810 South America Street in Covington. Um, thank you for your service to Cington and for the opportunity to speak to you. We found it extremely offensive the way Mr. Frederick and his attorney speak of past city leaders who served this city as you do today. It seems they say say anything to suit their purposes. My grandfather Clifford Fabro was a very honorable man. He was a friend to New Orleans who among much other

recognitions was awarded the time speaking loving cup and he was a great friend of Coington which called him their own. In the 1950s it was clear that the city had no public need for the rightway and it was not going to develop it into a paved street. It was apparently easiest to leave the rightway alone when residents were happy to maintain and pay for it and were also happy to buy recreational equipment for Cington's playgrounds. A fact that my grandfather humbly shared with his family, me, his granddaughter included. After 30 years, in 1989, the city um again approved a situation which created an entire subdivision built around this scenario. The Fredericks have made themselves judge and jury in condemning people they never knew who lived in a different time when a man's word meant something and where it would have been they would have never occurred to these gentlemen that they would have to defend their honor to lawyers like these in 70 years later. To recap, the Frederick's House never had a 1201 America Street address. South America Street was never improved to the Frederick's house and their indictment of good good men confirms that they still will say just about anything to get what they want. Let's now look at the Frederick's property. Until 2016, these three lots were one large lot with addresses of 8:30 South New Hampshire and with 141 ft of frontage on that street. In fact, lot was a part of this property before it was later carved out. So the frontage on

South New Hampshire Street was over 380 ft when Mr. Hm Favro purchased it. David Scansy bought it in 2011. During all those years 830 South New Hampshire was the address and of course the driveway was to South New Hampshire Street. Mike Scansy s Mr. saw that he could carve out three lots out of this one large lot and sell two of them. So, he subdivided the property. And what you see is the result. Mr. Scansy built a new home on South New Hampshire Street on this lot. In 2020, he sold the this lot with the 8:30 South New Hampshire Street address to Mr. Frederick. The city's approval of this subdivision and the abuing 1989 subdivision shows clearly how the Frederick's property was intended to be approached from South New Hampshire Street. The Frederick The Frederick seemed to be quite happy in their new home. In 2020, Mrs. Frederick created an Instagram page entitled Our New Hampshire. However, per terms of the sale, Mr. Frederick had an option to buy this lot. A dispute arose between Mr. Scansy and Mr. Frederick about that option and they ended up in a contentious litigation. So, the Fredericks decided that they did not like driving by Mr. Scansy's home anymore and they didn't want to be on South New Hampshire Street either. You might call it buyer's remorse. In any case, Mr. Frederick appears to know that it doesn't look good to cause all this mess to avoid a neighbor. At a PNZ meeting, Mr. Frederick wouldn't even admit that he had a dispute with Mr. Scansy, but it's all in the public records. As Keith Villery said to you, the fallout of this dispute should not fall upon the city to the detriment of numerous property owners, but this is where the Fredericks

have put it. So to avoid one neighbor, they attacked a whole community of others. The common denominator is the Frederick's. The city doesn't own Mr. Frederick a street to his house, and we don't owe him use of our privately funded driveway to which he has contributed nothing. nothing but wear and tear and the city has a very serious public safety reason to now sell the right away to us. We would be grateful for your approval. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Uh Miss Jennifer Smith. Good evening. I'm Jennifer Fabra Smith. I live at 420 South Lotus Drive North in Mandeville. I'm representing my parents at 800 South America Street, which abuts the Frederick's property, and I spend a lot of time at my parents' home. I want to talk about vehicular traffic on the right of way. In the survey on the left, you can see the curving pre 1989 driveways. The dash lines on the right of way represent the current driveways we've created to respect the new property lines. The city knew the city we would build. The city knew that we would build this driveway and not a street to our homes. The driveway is partially on our lots up to three feet, not less than 12 inches. As Mr. Frederick has claimed to you, Mr. Frederick's proposed connection to our driveway would be 150 ft, not 60 feet as he said, nor 30t as she said to you last year. Other than our minimal driveway, this property we wish to purchase consists of a lawn with oak trees and a tennis court. It is certainly not a drivable streak. Preick's The vehicular traffic was minimal as you would expect. The only issue was that lost people would sometimes drive down the driveway

and they would have to turn around in our circular drive. In a 2009 in 2009, a resident put up a private drive sign to help public public navigate the area. The intent was innocent, but the city asked that we that it be taken down. So, in that same year, 2009, it was taken down. The sign did not remain up for 15 years as Mr. Frederick has falsely claimed to you. The shortlived private drive sign was replaced with these two no through traffic signs. Drivers still missed these signs, but it was not so common that we worried about our safety. Then the Fredericks invited the public to come on in. This happened Easter morning when the lost driver in the silver car missed the signs and wandered down the driveway. She backs up with dogs behind her. My mother moved her car to help her get out. We need to help people know to turn around before they get to this point. If we purchase the rightway, we can make this happen at Carol Drive. Here is how Mr. Frederick himself drives on the rightway. We've seen this many times. Mr. Frederick repeatedly calls what you see there a street and says people use it all the time. Nobody used the rightway to get the to the Frederick's house until they began inviting them to do so. Mr. Frederick repeatedly falsely claims delivery vehicles had and the public at large access his house via South America Street. But the truth is that beginning in in August of 23, we began encountering lost truck drivers. They would get to the end of our driveway and they would see lawn between our driveway and the Frederick's house. Drivers told us that the Fredericks gave them an 8:30 South America Street address. There is no such thing. The drivers explained that they can get fired for driving on

lawns. So, they turned around in our circular drive and then they have to go to the Frederick's Wheel driveway on South New Hampshire Street. These drivers seem to be pawns in Mr. Frederick's war. Mr. Frederick says there will be little or no traffic increase as if his truck will be the only additional vehicle on the rideway. That's already far from true. And how does he square these statements with what he said at the March pansy? That's what I'm hoping to do. I think Unfortunately, with the Frederick's proposal, traffic would get many times worse than what it once was. So, everyone but Mr. Frederick would use our driveway to come and go. in his house. He repeatedly says that we're concerned about free traffic. There won't be through traffic. His driveway is already private and when he closes it off, the public will use ours. No matter what he intends to do, we are talking about a lot of vehicles on a driveway. And add to that the traffic to the additional house that will be built on his empty lot by the river. And it just gets more and more dangerous. We already deeply fear for our children, our grandchildren, our pets, and our Coington friends. to put the put all these vehicles on our driveway, the Fredericks would have to cooperate with us in terms of maintaining and paying to maintain the right of way. The the Fredericks should get no benefit of the doubt of their ability to cooperate with us. What's even worse, imagine the

run-ins on our driveway where courtesy is required to determine who will yield. We would be at their mercy forever. Here, Mr. bell in the red vehicle for the sightseer waits in his vehicle for the sightseer to pass by so that he may get to his home. We who share this driveway would be doing this forever. We all know that we would always have to yield to the Fredericks all of this so that they can have the second driveway. Mr. Frederick claims he only wants to remove the levy that he claims we placed there and just add some gravel so that he can get to this house from our driveway. Thank you, Michelle Murphy. Good evening everybody. U Michelle Favro Murphy. I'm at 812 South America Street. Um and again, I thank y'all for your service to the city of Coington and allowing us to speak tonight. This is very much close to our heart, so we do appreciate it. As you know, two years ago, the Fredericks began bullying us um to get what they wanted. And we have remained non-confrontational as much as possible, but we have witnessed so much. Please know everything that I'm going to be showing on the screen, we have hard evidence on. They're either videos, audio, pictures, or even words that the Fredericks have put out. So when the Fredericks didn't get what they demanded, they went ballistic. There's evidence uh it is evidence that their intent was and still is to turn their family, friends, clients, and whoever would listen to them against us. They have excuse me um they have said things to they have said things to disparrage us for all the world to see on social

media. We only wish we were uber wealthy. And inciting intolerance for those who live in New Orleans is despicable enough, but to do it while lying is horrible. Many of us live and vote in Coington. And these are just the names and descriptions that they have used. You could spend hours on the thread that they laid their lies about what my family has done and it was hard for us to read. Obviously attacks that um these types of attacks are the choice of the for people like the Fredericks who don't have truth or logic on their side. We have not retaliated. We have we have waited our turn. Setting aside the staggering incivilities of their rants, we can't help but point out their hypocrisy is astounding. This is what they have said about us. Who is freaked out? Who is unably? Who is wealthy here? I'm sorry to say their riverfront house is worth well more than any of the homes in our subdivision. Who feels entitled to two driveways no matter what it costs the others. This is a text from to our attorney um from December of 2023. people from West 30s will be playing tennis in Fabroville if I don't get what I want tomorrow. He goes on, it's a public property. The noise will be very loud if I don't get what I want very soon. I will be playing tennis there tomorrow, inviting everyone I know to play tennis. This is stupid. And I have been super kind till now. You mix all that hostility with vehicles and it gets really scary for

us. This one right here, I want to blow up. I want a terrorist to blow up the house and break a window was said um the day after the terrorist attack in New Orleans. Um and my son was downtown that day. It's got harder than I thought. I'm sorry. Um, they've incited the public to destroy the tennis court, to play tennis and loud music on the right of way, to use the rightway as a street. These are all on social media. We can show it to you. We have decided not to put them on here right now. Whether the city it's the target is city property or private property, vandalism is just not right. It is commonly known that bicycle and skateboard wheels can create ruts on tennis courts. There was once a sign on the chain link fence that said no wheels on the tennis court, but it did not survive the last hurricane. Throughout all of this, we have never told the Fredericks they could not use the tennis court. We have only asked them kindly to keep the wheels off the tennis court so that it doesn't damage the surface. Mr. and Mrs. Frederick not only ignored us, they encouraged their family and guests to ride on the court. um which may be why one of the family members decided to yell FU to Mrs. Bell when she had asked them to get off to take the wheels off the court. We've got pictures of the damage on the surface which will tell the full story. They would also go and sit on the net which was damaging it so we took it down. Um we u took the they cracked the pole and the p uh on the net. We have taken the basketball goal down just so that we can save our property. The Frederick's trespass um on private property not only uh it was not just for us chasing tennis balls like they said. Here is Mr. Frederick on the property in

2023 walking around taking pictures. Um over the Christmas holidays he had members ride their bikes up at the up to Mr. Bell's house and he um they just wanted to taunt them. We've got verbal assets. Um this has been the hardest part for me as an educator. The amount of profanity that has been directed at us outside of my front door has been horrific. Um Mr. Frederick at the planning and zoning and said, "None of this is true. None of this about the kids is true. No one has done anything about these people. This is what we have seen. I'm going quickly through this because it is hard to show all this on screen, but these are this is what our family has been looking at for the last two years. So, I do hope you will listen to what we have to say and listen to what we are the safety of our neighborhood. Thank you very much. Thank you, Jameson Bagwell. Good afternoon. I have no dog in the hunt so much as who who gets to buy the property or not. I guess my comments are procedurally um selling it to one party is just not equitable. Um the what the council voted on before the development board voted was that the street could be sold, not that the street had to be sold to the fab. Um as you saw on all their maps they put up that body is surrounded by more than one owner. Um, and I'm sure Rod and all them agree that sometimes the council and the mayors might find when one property owner surrounds an entire piece of public land, sure, that that land becomes no longer usable except for the people around that

property. And so therefore, the council may vote to sell it. That's really not the case here. um because it bounds multiple multiple people. Um this council does not really have the right to pick and choose a winner. Uh that's not how the law works. Um if anything, if the council rules in favor of one person, then I pretty sure that other person could immediately file an injunction in court and it would be struck down and then the council could be stuck with litigation. So I think that really needs to be taken into account here that this council can only vote today whether they want to sell the property. Then it needs to go to public auction um and and go the proper procedures. If this council strictly votes that they want to sell to one party versus the other then uh I think the council is going to find themselves in a little bit of trouble. That's all I have to say. Alex Perigine. Thank you. I want to address Mr. Maron's procedural arguments first. I believe that all of this started when Mr. Frederick submitted an application to remove the dirt on the street. The street where the tennis court is. It's a street. We know it's a street. Rod knows it's a street. Rod knows that the tennis court is on a public street. Mr. Frederick submitted that application more than two years ago, I believe. And I might be a little off in my day, but roughly two years ago, it was definitely in 2023. And the city council has never heard it. It's never been put on an agenda. The mayor doesn't want to act on it. He doesn't want it heard. Paul Marone gets up and says, "Well, it's appropriate for you to argue this now because the Favros and just the Favros want the right to buy the street." After the Fabro submitted their application to purchase the street, Mr.

Mr. Frederick submitted a second application, this time to buy the street. Why is it that the Favros are the only people who can buy the street? Why is it that a street in public use and it is still in public use? Every time somebody plays a game of tennis on the tennis court, they're playing a game of tennis on a public tennis court. It is a public use. Anytime anybody walks to the tennis court, anybody anytime anybody walks down is about people should be free to walk down the public streets. All we're asking is to get rid of the dirt, the tennis court, and let it be what it is. What it is is a public street. Mr. Butler is going to going to come and I'm sure you all know Bruce Butler. He's a well- reggarded surveyor here in town. He will tell you that the bed of the street is still there. Remember Paul told us that this all happened. I don't remember whether it was the 1950s roughly in the 1950s when one of the favros said to whoever was the mayor at the time and and I don't want to put words in Paul's mouth, but what they said was, "You want some equipment for your playgrounds? I'll buy the equipment. You let me cover this road with dirt and put a tennis court on." Whatever that deal is, that was the deal. Now they're saying because they did that back then, they get to buy the whole thing. Nobody else gets to bid on it. Nobody else has a say. It's not right. Mr. Frederick applied to have the dirt removed. No action by the mayor's office. No action by the city council. Never been heard. 2023. The favros apply to buy the property

from the city. They first the the planning commission says no and now they say yes. What you should do honestly is you should reject their yes recommendation and do nothing. Do absolutely nothing. That's the appropriate measure. Don't help either side. Any questions? You are actually standing before us saying that you want the status quo. I'm saying that the best thing for the city government of Covington is to keep the status quo, reject the planning commission, and let nothing happen. You realize you and your client are the only one that don't want the status quo. Uh, I'm sorry. You're saying that no one has spoken? I am saying that your client is the only one that does not want the status quo. If you look at Fabro bill and its peace and harmony that it has had and you stand before us and you did it before P&Z, I'm just trying to understand your argument. My argument is this, sir. Mr. Frederick's applications, he now has two, have never been before any. Does the Favros file an application and it immediately comes up? When did he when did he ask for the permit? I, as I said, I do not know the exact date, but I believe it was 2023. Okay. So, for two years, he's had a pending permit. May May 2nd, 2023. He didn't have any u inclination to do anything else other than have that permit. He does not have that permit. Right. That's what I'm saying. Right. Well, it's been not acted on. So now that the five rows who have demonstrated I think and made a compelling argument about the circumstances they are they are the ones they are the petitioners and now you are the

petitioners at P&Z to purchase the property. Is that correct? I believe Mr. Frederick's application to purchase was filed after the Fabros. Correct. Right. Okay. I mean go to the point of the speaker performing. Why isn't there a why is this being sold only to one party that's I'm sorry sir that is what we are here on what we are here on right so the idea I'm just trying to understand your argument my argument is that the city council should reject the planning board's recommendation because it's a bad idea to do this bad for the city and it says bad things for the city and the better move is for this council say, "No, we're not going to do this." Maybe you put everybody that wants to buy the street and let them all come and they can have a bid on it. Maybe you uncover the street, you get rid of the tennis court, you let dogs and kids walk and play and go down the street like a city. Does that answer your question, sir? No, it does not. It was a It was a nice uh colloquy, but it did answer my question. What I asked you was, do you and your client intend to ask this council and this city for the status quo? And it seems to me that's what you said at PNG was that the best thing the council can do tonight is take no action which can only be done by rejecting planning and zoning. Anything other than rejecting their recommendation is accepting their recommendation and the Favros get to buy it. No one else has been heard by before this council on those issues. Anything else? No, sir. All right. Miss Jennifer Frederick. Hi. How are y'all tonight? I'm Jennifer

Frederick. I live at 8:30 South New Hampshire. Um my husband couldn't be here tonight because he coaches baseball and they had two games for Coington Rex. So, I'm going to read his letter first and then I'm going to address some comments that were made um or answer some questions that they might have said. So, this is from my husband Renee. The only thing this council needs to consider is is there any public use for this property? If so, the street cannot be sold. Think about what brings us here tonight. 125 years ago, the city of Covington built South America Street to dead end in at my house. For 65 years, South America Street was used by the public and maintained by the city just like any other street in Coington. Then 60 years ago, the Fros, including the owner of my home at the time, who was Favro, I don't there's no initial, cut a deal with the city to look the other way while they buried the street and built the tennis court. The deal was not in writing and no legal terms were set. But why didn't the city just sell it to the fibros back then? The answer is because it is a public street and public street in use by the public cannot be sold by the city. In the 90s when the fros asked to pave South America street, the city reminded the fros that it is a public street. Why didn't the city just sell it to the foss in the 90s? The answer is because it is a public street in use by the public. Can't be sold by the city. My husband and I have simply applied to remove the dirt that covers part of South America Street. The dirt is basically a levy which prevents the street from draining. It was illegally placed there by the Favros without a permit. It blocks the natural drainage

of the street and has even caused the flooding of a Favro home. If there is any public use for the street, it cannot be sold. Our application to use the street is a public use. Just because the current mayor wants to sell the property does not mean that there is no public use for the street. Just because the current mayor does not want to deal with the headache of solving this problem does not mean that there is no public use for the street. Administrative laziness does not compel the sale of the street. The mayor only serves for a brief period in life of Coington. The footprint of one of Coington's most historic streets must be preserved. Selling South America Street is stealing from Coington's history. In two years, there will be a different mayor. But by voting to sell a street, you will forever alter one of Coington's most historic streets. You cannot ignore reality and declare that there is no public use for this street. Now, we didn't make up the history of this home. Jack Terry, he's a historical historian. He um I applied to have the house um what is it called? The to be in the Covington history flat. So when you apply for that, they do a whole research on the home, when it was built, who it was from. I mean, it is so detailed. It transfers. He goes to the courthouse to the farmer um paper, pulls up everything, does a whole timeline, pulls up every pictures. Our home was the Oak Annex Hotel. The street went to the house. Of course, it wasn't paved. It was never aspholded. when it was in use, they were driving around horse and buggy. So when it came time in whatever

whenever they started asphalting the road, it only went to a certain part. They didn't asphalt the whole the the rest of the way. Um, you know, we hired a land surveyor, did the land, it's a public road. It's not their private property. We hired an engineer. The engineer told me, "Drive it morning, noon, and night." He said, "It is not against the law. If I drive on that road, if I walk on that road, I would not get arrested. It is a public road. Um, let's see. Public safety. You know, they showed the pictures of my husband driving on the road. He was going the speed limit. Do they have a speedar radar gun showing that he's speeding recklessly? No, they don't. We have some of these people that came up. I've never even met them in my life. They've never been in any of the meetings that we've had for this road. Mark, you've been in most of them. You've been to my home. We have never been ugly to them. Mr. Reed, I've never met him in my life. He said I curse and everything else. Sorry. Okay. Um, let me see. I guess it it's a public road. My family, we live at this home. My my all of my utilities are there. my electricity, my gas, my water. We drain all of Fabville through a pipe, through our pond. It's a road. We should be able to get to use the road. All we have done and it's created all of this is just apply, which normally is two to three days to put down a little I mean gravel. That's it. Thank you. Sorry, Sims Favro.

Good evening and thank you. My name is Sims Favro. I reside at 1904 Palmer Avenue in New Orleans. I'm the grandson of HM Favro who along with his wife, my grandmother, uh purchased what is now the Frederick residence in 1950. Prior to that, in 1936, my parents grandparents uh constructed the residence next door to the present uh Frederick residence which is today owned by Mr. Caffrey Fabro who's here. Um and it was only uh after they residing in that home for 13 14 years did they buy the Frederick residence in 1950. Uh I just want to emphasize the fact that um any assertion that uh the Frederick residence refers to his then residence next door to the president Frederick residence as 1201 America Street. This was 11 years before he purchased the Frederick residence. So it seems like the historian that Mrs. Frederick referred to that apparently did some research on the house and told him that the prow had a uh once had address of 1201 America Street. That fallacy seems to have originated when that historian must have found a document or something that referred to my grandfather as owning a residence at 1201 America Street. And that person erroneously assumed that that reference was to the Frederick residence and it was not. So to the extent anyone of you might be considering relying on the Frederick's claim that the that that house once had an America Street address, I would urge you to respectfully urge you to disregard that. I'd also like to emphasize that what is now the Frederick residence was in my family uh for the first 51 years of my life. And during that time, I spent countless uh hours, days, and weeks in that residence. And I can tell you it was never ever referred to at any time as having had an address on America Street. No one ever in my

extended family ever complained about access having access to the uh to that house only from South New Hampshire Street. No one ever expressed the desire to have any access to America Street. Everyone was delighted to have that unopened street right away in our front yard as green space and never no one no one ever had a thought of ever trying to change that. Um and uh that's all I have to say. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Sam Jabberger. Nice to see you all again from this side. Um, Mr. Bushnell, uh, we haven't met. I was on the council sort of when all of these issues um, began to surface and um, congratulations and glad you're here to help make this decision tonight. Uh, when we first began this journey together. Um, you know, I did the same work everybody here has done. You know, met with uh members of the Fabro family, met with the Fredericks and I tried an understanding of what was going on. And a couple things uh uh to me um perhaps the first being that there is no street that is there. There is an open unopened I have no idea. But the fact there's no street there. It is a grassy null. And uh showed me is that really the only person in the city of Covington standing to benefit from all of this drama are the Fredericks.