JOHN E. SETTLE JR. EDITOR
Elected officials are required to adhere to the Louisiana Code of Ethics. This is a minimum requirement. In reality, elected officials should avoid any appearance of unethical conduct.
Attorneys in Louisiana are required to adhere to the Rules of Professional Conduct. This also is a minimum requirement. Attorneys in Louisiana are also expected to avoid the appearances of unethical conduct.
Both council member Tabatha Taylor and Shreveport City Attorney Ron Lattier have both grossly violated their respective ethical obligations.
It is a well-known fact, a reality, that Taylor and Lattier are paramours. Social media has tracked their relationship for many years. They are always together at social events and go to the church ministered by Councilman James Green.
On July 5 of this year, Lattier filed a car accident report on behalf of Taylor in the Caddo District Court. Lattier is the attorney of record for this litigation.
Lattier filed this as part of his private practice of law. Thus, he is representing in a legal capacity a council member as an attorney.
The fact that the suit is in his private capacity versus that of city attorney does not alter the obvious and undisputed conflict of interest of both Taylor and Lattier.
But this is not the first instance of unethical conflict by Taylor since she took office as a council member and Lattier as city attorney.
Lattier was confirmed by the city council as the city attorney on Aug. 20, 2020.
Taylor voted for Lattier’s confirmation. She did not disclose her relationship with Lattier nor did she recuse herself from the vote.
In April of this year, Taylor introduced legislation to give all Shreveport city employees a pay raise. Lattier is a city employee.
Taylor again did not disclose her relationship with Lattier. And again, she voted for the pay raise without recusal.
The net effect of her legislation and vote increased Lattier’s salary by $19,500.
Taylor also spearheaded an effort, along with council members James Green and Alan Jackson, to have my access to the city’s website domain blocked. As a result, for over 14 days I could not email any city officials or employees. Not even my own council representative or DOWUS on a water bill issue.
Her actions clearly violated her ethical obligations as a council member, blocking a citizen and a member of the media from access to the city’s website domain.
Lattier is a commissioner of the Red River Waterway Commission. He was appointed before he became city attorney.
After his appointment, Lattier voted to approve funding by the Waterway Commission of moneys to help underwrite the Bakowski Bridge of Lights on the Texas street Bridge. His vote, wearing the hat as a commissioner and as city attorney, was a conflict of interest under the attorneys’ rules on ethical conduct.
To make matters worse, the city attorney’s office thereafter approved for execution by the city of Shreveport of a Cooperative Endeavor Agreement (CEA) between the commission and the city of Shreveport.
This CEA imposed obligations on the city for 20 years of operation of the bridge.
Lattier did not disclose this obvious conflict of attorneys’ ethical rules. And even if the CEA was approved by an assistant city attorney in that office, the conflict was not resolved.
Thus, he voted to give money for the benefit of the city of Shreveport and then approved a contract imposing financial obligations on the city for the same project.
The repeated actions of Taylor indicate that she plays fast and loose with the rules of ethical conduct, which she is mandated to adhere to as a member of the council. These actions clearly should disqualify her from continued service as a council member paid with city tax dollars.
One can only wonder what other ethical violations Taylor has committed, and will continue in the future, while on the council dealing with constituents, city contractors, city employees and the public in general in votes on city dollars, city appointments and city ordinances.
The fact that Taylor is up for re-election to office in November should also be a matter of concern to all city voters. Hopefully, the election will be a referendum on her unethical conduct.
Along the same lines, one can only wonder what other unethical actions Lattier has taken in his position as city attorney, or what he will do in the future.
As for Lattier, he should resign post-haste as city attorney.
Lattier has violated his ethical requirement in his actions on the Waterway Commission CEA. Furthermore, his confirmation and pay raise are due in part to the unethical votes of his paramour.
Lattier’s actions as city attorney are embarrassing to the city and his profession. At a time when the mayor is seeking re-election, Lattier could very well be a millstone around his neck.
The same can be expected by his ardent support by Taylor in his re-election bid.
Before I am tarred and feathered, readers should know that I praised Mayor Perkins on his nomination of Lattier for city attorney.
I also contributed $500 to Taylor’s campaign for election to the unexpired term she is serving on the council.
One can expect Lattier to get a pink slip on day one if a new mayor other than Perkins is sworn into office in December.
As for Taylor, her actions for the remainder of her service on the council, however long that may be, should be closely scrutinized.
Shreveport and its citizens deserve better — much, much better — from Taylor as an elected representative and Lattier as a high-ranking city official.
NOTE: More picutures of this couple are welcomed by this writer. Send to John@jesettle.com or text to (318) 422- 2022.