(The Center Square) — The Shreveport City Council held an administrative conference meeting this week ahead of their regular meeting Tuesday.
An administrative conference meeting is usually held before a regular meeting to strategize and prepare for upcoming agenda items.
One issue the council wanted answers on at the meeting on Monday was the deed for the land in which the new North Market Street police substation is expected to be built.
In a previous public safety meeting, the council learned the owners of the land donated the plot to the city of Shreveport with one major condition: It must be used for a police station for the next 25 years. If it isn’t, they have the right to take the land back from the city.
Because of this, the council wanted to know if the $29 million bond agreement used to fund the construction would be violated if the land were to be returned back to its private owner.
Michael Busada, a public finance and economic development attorney, assured the committee they would not break the terms of their bond agreement because of a thing called the “private activity test.” This essentially allows 5% of the tax-exempt bonds to go to construction that would primarily benefit a private individual or entity.
The bond uses don’t currently account for any cost overruns, so Busada says technically, because the police station would cost $2 million, they could build the whole thing and retain 5% in case of emergency. However, that would leave them with no room for error or for other private entity expenses in the future.
“As it stands now you can move forward it just depends on how comfortable you are with that and knowing it does add certain risks to you by having it in there,” Busada said.
Having no wiggle room in the contract still left council members worried and hoping they could get the deed fixed to allow for the construction of other city facilities. Mayor Tom Arceneaux says he’s having those conversations with the owners currently.
“Even though we can walk away with no penalty, it was still real money spent at this location,” said Council Chairman Alan Jackson Jr. in support of considering other options on location.
There was also discussion on an ordinance changing the definition of certain group homes to sober living homes.
This would give rehabilitation institutions more zoning areas to house these former addicts and allow them to live together in a residential home as a ‘family’ even though they are not blood related.
The distinction is so it is not considered a group home meaning it’s a step further in the rehab process and there’s no actual treatment happening in the sober living homes. In fact, the family pays the rent and utilities just like any other family. These types of homes are more acceptable to homeowners in the neighborhoods and other residential areas in which they would be built.
