Ethics Board Fines Temple $25,000 Over Lease

Collis Temple Jr. was penalized for leasing his Florida Boulevard office building to the Bridge Center for Hope while serving on its board.

Updated on Nov. 6, 2026 in Remote Work

Bold flat-color editorial illustration of a plain office building facade beside a lone live oak, in navy and cream with an oxblood accent, evoking public-ethics scrutiny of a property lease.
Louisiana's Board of Ethics fined board member Collis Temple Jr. $25,000 for leasing his Florida Boulevard building to the Bridge Center for Hope, which paid more than $200,000 yearly in rent. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Do you trust local officials to avoid conflicts of interest when serving on public boards?

The Louisiana Board of Ethics fined Collis Temple Jr. $25,000 over leasing his property to the Bridge Center for Hope, a city-parish organization on whose board he served. Recovery International Inc. paid more than $200,000 annually in rent to Temple's company under the lease.

Why it matters

The case highlights how board members with property interests in public-facing organizations can create conflicts of interest under state ethics law. State law also bars a former agency head from contracting with that agency for two years after leaving.

The Ethics Board imposed a $25,000 civil penalty on Temple and his company, while Recovery International paid over $200,000 annually in rent under the lease. The maximum potential penalty could reach 150% of the profit made from the arrangement.

The players

Collis Temple Jr.

Temple is a Baton Rouge businessman and former Bridge Center for Hope board member who owns the leased property through Human Resource Group Inc.

Louisiana Board of Ethics

The Louisiana Board of Ethics is the state body that enforces the ethics code governing public officials and former agency heads.

Bridge Center for Hope

The Bridge Center for Hope is a Baton Rouge nonprofit established in 2016 that operates a city-parish clinic under a cooperative endeavor agreement.

Recovery International Inc.

Recovery International Inc. is the tenant that paid more than $200,000 annually in rent to Temple's company under the lease.

The details

Temple suggested an office building he owned at 3455 Florida Boulevard as the clinic site during a December 19, 2019 meeting, then resigned from the Bridge Center for Hope board the following day. The board unanimously approved the lease on January 21, 2020, and Temple personally executed the agreement between Recovery International and his wholly owned company, Human Resource Group Inc.

Timeline

  1. March 2019: Bridge Center for Hope entered a cooperative endeavor agreement with the city-parish.

  2. April 2019: Temple was appointed to the Bridge Center for Hope board.

  3. December 19, 2019: Temple suggested his office building as the clinic site.

  4. January 21, 2020: The board unanimously approved the lease of the Florida Boulevard site.

  5. February 2020: Rent payments of over $200,000 annually began.

Legal Context

Louisiana's ethics code bars former agency heads from assisting or contracting with their former agency for two years after leaving office. The Board's $25,000 penalty applies that restriction and the conflict-of-interest rules to a nonprofit board member who leased property to a city-parish clinic.

Residents of Baton Rouge who rely on the Bridge Center for Hope clinic may see how its leasing arrangements are governed under city-parish oversight. The penalty signals that conflicts involving board members' property must be disclosed and managed under state ethics rules.

The takeaway

Board members who hold property interests in organizations they oversee should disclose those interests and recuse themselves from related decisions. Public-facing nonprofits should verify such conflicts before approving leases.

Further reading

For related coverage of work arrangements in the region, see Remote Work in Baton Rouge.

Source note: This article includes information reported by The Advocate.

Live Poll

Do you trust local officials to avoid conflicts of interest when serving on public boards?