While Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry implemented a suspension of tolls on the new Belle Chasse Bridge in early October 2025, and the state is currently in the process of resolving the issue of its contract with Plenary Group (the company contracted to construct and manage the bridge), anxieties around the impacts of these tolls has led several residents to file a lawsuit against Plenary and the state government. Filed in the 25th Judicial District Court (JDC) on October 14, 2025, by local attorney Leo Palazzo, the petition seeks to be labeled as a “Class Action Lawsuit.”
A lawsuit against the bridge project was not necessarily a surprise—especially considering all the project’s issues. However, Plaquemines political leaders who have been actively engaged in the effort to shut down tolls were split on whether this lawsuit would help or hinder their cause.
Speaking in an interview, Palazzo stated that if the lawsuit is certified as a Class Action, this would mean he would essentially represent all those who have been negatively impacted by the tolls and fees being charged by Plenary. Specifically, the lawsuit names Plenary Infrastructure Belle Chasse, Plenary Louisiana Tolling, Kapsch Trafficom USA, and the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) as defendants. The plaintiffs in the case are residents Vic Palazzo, John Helmers, Anthony Frankovich, and the local company Bywater Base Camp Services. These individuals would become the “class representatives” if the lawsuit were officially labeled as a Class Action.
The justifications Palazzo gave for the lawsuit were the “absurd” problems residents and drivers have been forced to contend with since tolling began back on May 14, 2025. As has been heavily discussed over the last few months, residents have been charged expensive 'administrative fees” (not advertised throughout the bridge’s development) with no explanation why; residents who were under the impression that they had established a GeauxPass account for the toll bridge to receive the “discounted Plaquemines resident rate” were still being charged as though they lived outside of the parish; and residents were not being given a fair chance to challenge these fees with any sort of appeal-process.
In the few short months that the tolls have been enacted, Palazzo explained, this has led to residents being charged an absurd amount of money—sometimes going up into the thousands-of-dollars range— and threatened with “marks against licenses' if they don’t pay. For obvious reasons, there’s a large contingent of residents who feel that this whole process has been unfair and harmful.
In a press release from Palazzo on the lawsuit being filed, the plaintiffs went over their experiences with the toll bridge and explained why they felt the needed to sue. Resident Vic Palazzo stated that he had to pay $1,600 due to his account being hit with so many administrative fees; at one point, his account was billed a $25 administrative fee 18 times in one day.
Owner of Bywater Bar & Grill in Myrtle Grove John Helmers reported tolls of “$10 to $12 per crossing drove away both customers and suppliers.”
And Contractor Anthony Frankovich stated in the press release that neither he nor his family has been “charged the advertised rate” when crossing the bridge.
All these issues with the incessant fees and improper tolling have resulted in Plenary collecting around $6.8 million in fees since tolling began in May 2025. At the same time, Plenary has only collected around $5.1 million in tolls. This is something that Palazzo and the plaintiffs viewed as highly unfair to the residents and a breach of Plenary’s contract with the state.
Palazzo’s lawsuit demands a full reimbursement and a judicial declaration that the tolls and fees were against state law.
“There have been so many issues with this project and the contract the state signed with Plenary. It’s clear the state got ripped off on this, and now the residents of Plaquemines are paying for it,” Palazzo stated. “People are getting charged fees that were never discussed; businesses are suffering because no one wants to travel into the parish; our infrastructure is being negatively affected; and the bridge project isn’t even finished yet. It’s unacceptable how the people of Plaquemines have been treated in this whole process.”
“We want to send a message and make sure that everyone gets a 100 percent refund on their overcharged bills…that’s the immediate goal. Ideally, the tolls would be eliminated and we’d get completely open transportation in and out of the parish again,” he added.
Palazzo and the plaintiffs listed in the case have taken a formal step into the fight against the toll bridge with this lawsuit, seeking a solution mediated by the legal system rather than simply advocating their case at various public hearings. Up until now, the effort has been mostly led and managed by government officials— namely, those in the Plaquemines Parish Government (PPG), State Representative Jacob Braud, State Senator Pat Connick, and Governor Landry. While residents, businesses, and local organizations have always been vocal in their opinions on the bridge, the “public’s voice” has not been a deciding factor in whether the toll bridge would be developed.
This class action lawsuit, depending on how things play out in the courts, could shift that dynamic, with complaints of disgruntled residents really influencing how this situation develops going forward. Speaking in separate interviews, parish president Keith Hinkley, Braud, and Connick were split in their views on how this would impact the current efforts to negotiate a solution to the toll bridge problem occurring between the state and Plenary.
From Connick’s perspective, this lawsuit was a welcome development and one that was probably inevitable considering how the bridge has impacted residents. He explained that everything he and other governmental officials representing Plaquemines have done was about protecting the citizens of the parish. This lawsuit is simply another way that residents are choosing to protect themselves.
“This lawsuit is something these residents felt was necessary at this time. It shows that the people of Plaquemines aren’t backing down,” Connick stated. “Obviously, the state is working with Plenary, and we hope to get a resolution. But in a situation like this, sometimes it requires litigation. Residents had their hand forced. And, one way or another, we need to get a solution to these tolls and fees.”
Hinkley, in contrast, was much more concerned about how the lawsuit may limit the ability of the state and Plenary to negotiate a solution. In fact, one of the reasons Governor Landry moved to suspend the tolls, Hinkley stated, is that he wanted to avoid a lawsuit from PPG.
When a lawsuit is filed, Hinkley explained, it makes it much harder for the parties involved to discuss the issue that is the topic of that lawsuit. Both Plenary and the state have been working openly and “in good faith” with PPG and the other government officials involved in this situation. But Hinkley is worried that it may become more difficult moving forward due to the lawsuit.
“I’ve seen lawsuits cause people and companies to clam up on discussing certain things. They have to be careful with what they say because those statements could impact the lawsuit. It makes communication much more difficult,” Hinkley stated, emphasizing that residents have “every right” to be upset and look for relief. But he added that the situation is delicate and that relief is being actively pursued.
“Due to the timing of where things are at now, we just didn’t want to jeopardize the potential of finding a favorable solution. It takes time,” Hinkley said. “The Governor has stated that he is dedicated to making sure the residents are treated fairly. He didn’t need the help of a lawsuit. He knows this is a bad deal and won’t let our residents be taken advantage of.”
Additionally, Hinkley noted that the situation is now in a somewhat precarious and complex political arrangement. The state government has been highly critical of Plenary over the last few months, Hinkley said, due to all the complications with the tolls, lingering infrastructure problems, and slow progress on the bridge project generally. This has resulted in the state government becoming supportive of the parish’s opposition to the toll bridge, highlighted by Governor Landry’s recent suspension of tolls.
But the lawsuit flatly groups DOTD (i.e. the state government) and Plenary together as defendants who are in an antagonistic relationship to parish residents/ businesses as plaintiffs.
For the first time in several years, Hinkley added, the parish has a strong presence in Baton Rouge with Connick and Braud and good connections to the Governor’s Office. This has brought much benefit to Plaquemines, such as the shutdown of the diversion project in the parish, and Hinkley is worried about endangering it.
“Everything that’s being asked for in the lawsuit is exactly what we, Braud, Connick, and the Governor are working towards right now,” Hinkley stated. “We’re not sure how this will impact things yet, but the timing of the lawsuit may make things difficult. But regardless, we plan to keep working with the Governor and state government to find a solution.”
Braud, in his own interview, stated that he didn’t feel comfortable commenting on the lawsuit as he was unsure how exactly it would influence things going forward.
“I commend all the work that has been done by Hinkley, Connick, Braud, the council members, and Governor Landry,” Palazzo added. “People have been asking me to do something about this, and I think it’s time the residents get some relief. I hope my efforts help with that.”