[StBernard] Parish Contracts

[Westley Annis]

Since the debris removal contract was not a line item in the parish budget
as approved by the council in January 2005, Junior was free to enter into a
contract binding the parish without council approval.  

Not that I agree with it, but the administration did not do anything wrong
by entering into the contract since there is a flaw in the NEW AND IMPROVED
charter.

This has been an issue since the inception of our NEW AND IMPROVED form of
government.

Anyone remember Lynn Dean acquired road equipment (a pot hole filler, road
grader?, ....) without public bids which he later paid for from his own
pocket to quell criticism.

Charlie Ponstien entered into the Mosquito contract which was overturned
because the company did not comply with the requirements.  Other
municipalities were dropping the same mosquito control company because they
were ineffective and there were outbreaks of West Nile.  The ineffectiveness
of the chemical used was the grounds the parish used to dissolve the
contract not any provisions in the charter.

Anyone remember Charlie Ponstein giving himself a raise without the parish
council approval and the attorney general rendered it fell within the
guidelines of the parish charter?  The raise was not overturned by the
council or attorney general's office.  


None of the above mentioned actions required approval from the council under
our NEW and IMPROVED form of government. WHY?

All were legal and binding once reviewed by our own district attorney and
the attorney general of the state of Louisiana.

This is a flaw in the charter that keeps reappearing.

The only way to close this loophole is for the council to place a referendum
on the ballot for the people of St. Bernard to ratify stating that the
COUNCIL should approve any expenditure over say $50,000.

It was the people of St. Bernard that voted out the Police Jury system and
voted in the NEW AND IMPROVED President/Council form of government by way of
referendum and only referendum can change the charter.  The council would
have to place the referendum on the ballot with enough council votes to
overturn a presidential veto.

Has anyone ever audited the checks and balances of our current NEW AND
CHARTER to verify if there are sufficient controls in place regarding the
administrations spending on outside contracts without council approval?

Mike Bayham had introduced a referendum limiting the president to
expenditures of no more than $50,000 without council approval before running
for State representative.  

He did so in enough time to get the amendment on the ballot for the October
4, 2003 primary but could not muster enough support from his fellow
councilpersons.  

Remember there were 2 councilpersons running for the office at the time so
the other 4 would have had to unanimously vote in favor of the measure in
order for it to be placed on the ballot.  I believe it would take 2/3
majority or 5 council persons to vote for the referendum to get it placed on
the ballot as a referendum.

Placing it on the ballot at the time of the 2003 primary would reduce the
cost by not requiring a special election.

The council debated over the dollar amount because $25,000 was too low and
$100,000 was large enough that it should require council approval.  That's
why the $50,000 amount was chosen because it had to be set as low as
reasonably possible but not too low that all expenditures would have to be
approved.  Parish government would not be able to function if the amount was
set too low ($25,000).

When all is said and done, the current administration followed the rules
that the people of St. Bernard set for them when adopting the current NEW
AND IMPROVED charter.  The administration did not do anything wrong by
entering into a contract that binds the future generations of the parish
because the charter allows this.

Maybe Mr. Taffaro could review my e-mail for accuracy and to verify if the
current system has enough checks and balance by the council over spending by
the administration after the budget is ratified.

This issue will repeat itself in perpetuity until an amendment to the
charter is placed on the ballot and approved by the people of St. Bernard.

Are we better off with this NEW AND IMPROVED form of government or were we
better off with the OLD POLICE JURY SYSTEM?


Kent Diaz