Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council takes no action after hearing on Gatormill Works' ITEP noncompliance; members cite hiring and payroll timing issues
Summary
After receiving testimony from Gatormill Works and the Livingston Economic Development Council, the parish council adopted a resolution to take no action regarding Gatormill Works' Industrial Tax Exemption Program noncompliance for the 2024 reporting year, citing factors such as state rule changes, COVID-era impacts and hiring timing that affected
The Livingston Parish Council on Oct. 9 considered notice of noncompliance for Gatormill Works under the Industrial Tax Exemption Program (ITEP) for the 2024 reporting year and ultimately adopted a resolution to take no action.
Livingston Economic Development Council staff explained that state ITEP rules changed after the company’s original application and that the program’s reporting counts only Louisiana wages and Louisiana resident employees. The company, Gatormill Works, said it had taken profitable work in other states during interruptions tied to the flood and COVID-period moratoria and that hiring timing and the program’s requirement to count net-new Louisiana payroll made it difficult to meet a $250,000 payroll threshold in a single reporting year.
Company owner Ted (Chad) Foster and Melody Lockwood of the Economic Development Council described the company’s growth, noted that employee counts now meet the program’s job targets, and said historic disruptions (flooding, COVID and construction moratoria) constrained the 2024 payroll numbers that are used by ITEP. Economic development staff also said gubernatorial changes to ITEP rules in 2025 removed some payroll requirements going forward.
After discussion and remarks from council members recognizing the company’s local economic contributions, the council moved to adopt a resolution to take no action on the notice of noncompliance; the vote was recorded as unanimous. The council did not impose penalties or require repayment at the meeting.
