Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Banking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sabine Parish jurors defend appointment of Citibank and Trust after Bank of Montgomery protests
Summary
A finance committee member read a detailed response to criticism from Bank of Montgomery, saying the bank’s proposal lacked required financial documentation and that Citibank and Trust was the only respondent that met the request-for-proposal requirements; jurors agreed to publish the committee’s written response.
A member of the Sabine Parish Police Jury finance committee read a written response on Nov. 20 defending the committee’s October recommendation — and the jury’s subsequent vote — to name Citibank and Trust Company as the parish’s fiscal agent.
Secretary‑treasurer/finance committee representative Mister Weatherford told jurors the committee had unanimously recommended Citibank and Trust after reviewing proposals and that Citibank was the only respondent to provide a sworn statement of financial condition as required by Louisiana Revised Statute 39:12:20. "The Bank of Montgomery did not meet the mandatory requirement of Louisiana Revised Statute 39:12:20 and is ineligible to qualify as fiscal agent for the Sabine Parish Police Jury," Weatherford said, urging jurors to rely on the committee’s documented evaluation.
The committee memo and Weatherford’s remarks explained other evaluation factors the committee used, including clarity of interest‑rate proposals, loan terms and local availability of problem assistance. Weatherford noted Citibank proposed an interest‑rate floor of 1.5 percent and described Citibank’s loan offer as "2% below Wall Street Journal Prime with a ceiling rate of 8%." He criticized a projection circulated by Bank of Montgomery as "crude" and based on unrealistic assumptions, and said Bank of Montgomery had not attended the committee meeting when invited.
Several jurors pressed Weatherford on why a proposal that failed to provide required documentation had nonetheless been scored; Weatherford said the scoring sheet had been used to assess the overall package and that the committee had discussed the items during the finance meeting. After discussion, jurors agreed the committee’s written response explaining its review should be posted on the parish website and shared with local media. The jury did not reopen the October award vote during the Nov. 20 meeting.
The exchange included sharp language about the tone of letters from Bank of Montgomery: Weatherford called the letters "inflammatory" and said they made serious accusations "without providing any evidence." Jurors repeatedly emphasized following the committee process and documentation when evaluating bids.
What happens next: the jury agreed to publish the finance committee’s written response online. No motion to rescind the fiscal-agent appointment was made at the Nov. 20 meeting.
