Council restocks low-income assistance program

Lafourche Parish lawmakers rescued a mishandled Office of Community Action program with a $100,000 infusion after a months-long standoff between the administration and some on the council.

The Lafourche Parish weatherization program was bolstered with $822,799 in federal funds in 2008 as part of a 108-home agreement. The funds are spent by the parish and reimbursed by the state through the program, which facilitates permanent energy-efficient alterations to low-income homes to help keep energy costs down.

The parish has already spent $864,878 through the program, and the administration requested additional money because about $150,000 of the expenditures is not eligible for state reimbursement, according to a presentation Parish President Charlotte Randolph made to the council.

The supplement will be diverted from the parish’s autonomous royalty fund and be used to complete 14 homes remaining on the contract. The vote passed 6-3, with Joe Fertitta, Jerry LaFont and Daniel Lorraine opposed.

The typical weatherization applicant spends 20 percent of his or her annual income on energy bills, Randolph said.

“Our intent is to correct all of the errors that were made throughout the time and therefore, we are asking for your assistance in this,” Randolph said. “At this point in time, there are people who need our assistance, and we want to go forward now. We won’t have this problem again.”

The parish is eligible but not guaranteed reimbursement for the money that will be used on the homes, Randolph said.

Randolph’s presentation was based on the results of a Department of Finance audit organized after weeks of back and forth between Randolph and the council over who was to blame for the weatherization shortfall.

The presentation did not assign blame to anyone in particular.

“Something went wrong, and nobody wants to say what went wrong,” said Councilman Daniel Lorraine, who has strongly opposed the supplement.

“The buck stops here, sir,” Randolph responded. She said the program’s accounting “wasn’t the best it could be,” and admitted the parish overstaffed the department and subsequently misspent money.

The errors include mostly money spent on salaries, non-production and training costs and sick, vacation and holiday pay that were not eligible for state reimbursement, Randolph said.

The parish spends its own money to weatherize homes and files a reimbursement request with the state upon completion of each unit.

Weatherization had five employees in 2009, 12 in 2010 and seven in 2011, and all employees received full benefits. Contractors were used when special certification or skills were necessary. Individual employee salary and benefits averaged about $37,800 per year, Randolph said.

Some salaries were ineligible for reimbursement because it could not be charged to a specific home, Randolph said.

Employees still commanded salary when no modification was taking place. The dormant periods cost the parish $47,063 in non-reimbursable money, according to the presentation.

Moving forward, the parish will pay only one part-time employee to oversee the program’s funds and will use contractors for all home-modification work, she said. The Department of Finance will also work more closely with the program.

Without council assistance, weatherization in Lafourche n beyond the 14 homes remaining from the 108 originally included in the 2008 grant contract n would have been indefinitely halted, Randolph said.

She said more than 50 Lafourche homes are on a waiting list and would be completed through separate, annual contracts with the Department of Energy.

Work cannot begin on the 11 homes included in the parish’s current contract with DOE, for which the reimbursement period expires in July, until the 14 leftover homes are finished, she said. If that contract is not complete, another cannot be secured.

Aside from the blow to weatherization, not completing the 14 homes would prevent Lafourche from attaining any Community Action grant monies, the parish president said. “If we do not complete this contract, it stops every contract with Community Action. That’s what the state is telling us.”

The council rejected supplementing the program in December. Councilman Lindel Toups had a change of heart over the 46 days separating the two votes.

Toups originally voted against the appropriation, saying “I cannot take money away from road royalty to put into Community Action.”

The December proposal asked for $20,000, one-fifth of the cost he and the council approved last week. It also asked for $25,000 to fund LIHEAP salaries.

It was voted down 5-2, with two councilmen absent. Toups was the only lawmaker to change his vote, and Louis Richard, who also voted against it in December, is no longer on the council.