Police Jurors say courthouse improvement projects should have PJ approval

   If a houseguest in your home decided to pay to remodel the guest bedroom without asking you, would you be upset? Remember, they’re paying for the remodeling out of their own pocket. Still upset?

  That was the tone at the Avoyelles Police Jury’s committee meetings on Aug. 4. 

  Jurors alternated between expressing appreciation for various courthouse “tenants” being willing to pay for needed repairs and improvements and calling for an end to various agencies side-stepping the Police Jury when they are planning those repairs and improvements.

  Since then, Jones has developed a “letter of clarification” to the courthouse departments that creates a “work order” system for requesting routine maintenance requests and spells out the process for more extensive renovation/ and repair projects.

  “We should have had a work order system in place,” Jones said this past week. 

  On major projects, Jones said a written request will be submitted to the jury’s Courthouse Committee, which will review the reasons for the request and funding options.

  “The intent is to reduce the confusion,” he said.

  The Aug. 4 discussion started when Parish Engineer Ron Bordelon told jurors that a contract for repairs in the Clerk of Court and District Judges’ offices was substantially complete and would be within the project’s budget. Those repairs were paid for by reassigning $18,000 in Louisiana Government Assis-tance Program (LGAP) grant funds. Bordelon reminded jurors they had agreed to pay about $8,000 in additional costs in those two offices.

  That information seemed to be news to at least a few jurors, but Bordelon said he had included that extra cost in every update he made. Jurors agreed to pay the  $8,000.

  Bordelon noted the project the jury was paying for did not include all work done in the Clerk of Court and District Judges’ offices. 

He said when he brought the contractor around to see the work to be done under the contract, Clerk of Court Connie Couvillon pointed out other areas needing attention.

 

   “I told her that work is not in the $26,000 contract,” Bordelon said. “She said, ‘I’ll pay for it.’”

   Bordelon said during the inspection of Judge Kerry Spruill’s office, Spruill noted other work that is needed in the office.

   “I told him it isn’t in this contract, and he said he would pay for it,” Bordelon said.

  “This is it for me,” Jones said. “This has to stop.”  He said there needs to be a more unified plan for courthouse repairs, maintenance and improvements “instead of this piecemeal approach” with other departments “cutting side deals for additional work that their office will pay for.”

   Juror Henry Moreau said that if a farmer who is willing to pay to fix a parish road or drainage ditch is prohibited by law from doing that work, “how can these other departments do work on public property?”

   Assistant District Attorney Norris Greenhouse Sr. said he had not researched the issue, but promised to do so. However, he said that at first glance, Moreau’s comparison of the courthouse projects to an individual doing work on public property without the Police Jury’s approval appears to be valid.

  “Everyone else is telling us what they are going to do in the courthouse instead of going through us to coordinate the work,” Juror Marsha Wiley said. “They should come to us and ask for permission before planning any work.”

   Jones said state law says the “courthouse belongs to the Police Jury, and it says we have to provide space for their offices.” 

   He said the tenants of the courthouse do not have the authority to go off on their own and make repairs and remodeling of the courthouse.

   “We are the governing body of the parish,” Wiley said. “They should be considerate enough to come to us and say, ‘This is our plan.’”

   Jones agreed, saying if a courthouse office sees the need for a project that they intend to fund, “they should come to us with their plans. We have consulting engineers that can help with the review of the project  plans. 

   “Even if another office is paying for the project, that project should come through us as though it is a Police Jury project,” Jones added

  An example of what jurors are talking about is the plan to remodel the courtrooms on the third floor of the courthouse. The Parish Assessor’s Office has committed $100,000 to that project and the District Judges’ Office will pay $170,000. The Police Jury has not been actively involved in that project.

  Jones said the remodeling project is best described as being “in the discussion stage.” He said he expects all departments in the courthouse to get together later to further discuss details of the project.

 

   “No disrespect to other elected officials, but this needs to be cleared up,” Jones said. “We need a process. We need a procedure.”

   Wiley asked what would happen if a contractor was underway with a project paid by another courthouse office “and they find a problem that requires addressing? They will come to us,” she added, answering her own question.

   Jones said jurors have been informed of the “third floor project,” so it is not something that was a surprise. He said he and Juror Mark Borrel have attended meetings in which the plans were discussed.

   “We were just there,” Borrel added, noting that everything seemed to be decided by the time jurors were invited to a meeting.

  “I want to stress that these are not bad things these officials are doing,” Jones continued. “There is no evil intent on the part of anyone. It’s just the mechanics of how we do things that need to be worked out.”

  Jones said the Police Jury “does not want to stop anyone from doing anything in their departments to better serve the people. However, there needs to be an understanding among all parties that there is an owner of the building under state law, and it’s the Police Jury.”

  Jones said jurors will develop the necessary policies and procedures, with input from the District Attorney’s office for legal advice, to be considered at a later date.

  Jones said the plans in place at this time can continue, “but we need administrative procedures in place on how this will happen in the future.”

  Moreau agreed, saying, “Nobody is against what they are trying to do, but they should have come to the Police Jury and informed us beforehand -- not call a meeting and inform us  what is being done after the fact.”