Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Allocation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council moves to withhold $250,000 for King Joseph building pending legal review of ownership
Summary
Council members debated whether parish should spend $250,000 on the King Joseph (TK) building after staff said the city may own the property; an amendment was moved to delete the $250,000 line item from a carryover pending legal review and the council advanced the budget action with that deletion pending confirmation.
Council members on Feb. 11 moved to withhold a proposed $250,000 capital carryover for the King Joseph (sometimes referenced as "King Joe") building until legal staff can confirm whether the parish actually owns the facility.
The question arose during committee discussion of a $529,490 recreation and playground fund carryover. Councilwoman Natalie Broussard moved to amend the carryover to delete the $250,000 allocation for King Joseph pending legal review; she said she would not support spending parish funds on a building the parish does not own. Several council members said they had been paying insurance and conducting repairs on buildings the parish may not own and urged that legal examine property records and any existing agreements before spending capital funds.
Other members cautioned that deleting the line item outright without understanding any underlying capital‑outlay agreements or contractual obligations might disrupt projects tied to state or grant funding. Those members asked legal and finance to review contracts and report back before the full council finalizes the budget action.
Outcome: The council moved the amendment to delete the $250,000 pending legal review and proceeded to advance the larger carryover item with the deletion pending confirmation; members directed staff to have legal and finance review property ownership and any tied capital outlay obligations and report back at the next meeting.
Why it matters: Deleting or withholding capital funds for a building that the parish does not own could preserve parish resources but could also affect ongoing projects if contractual obligations or capital‑outlay arrangements exist. Council members emphasized the need for clear property records before committing taxpayer money.
Attributions: Statements recorded in the transcript include Councilwoman Natalie Broussard (mover of the amendment), council members debating ownership and insurance responsibilities, and references to Parks & Rec staff and legal/finance staff to check ownership records.
