Yes.

I said I get to come on a fun night.

Yeah.

She brought some snicker bars.

We're gonna call this city council meeting in order.

Mr.

Harvey's gonna lead us in the pledge.

Our leaders in prayer.

I pray and ask that you will bless all my colleagues and all administration that we may govern according to your will, Father God, and that our decisions may be received according to the way you want them to be received.

Lord, we pray and ask these blessings in our darling son, Jesus Christ's name we pray.

Amen.

Amen.

One nation under God.

Liberty and justice for all.

I've been there, I've been with my dad.

Oh, go on.

Ms.

Renee.

Um Mr.

Bilbo.

Here.

Mr.

Young.

Here.

Mr.

Harvey.

Here.

Mr.

Mark.

Here.

Mr.

Vizeno.

Here.

Mr.

Fondell.

Here.

And Mr.

Weatherford.

Here.

We have a quorum.

At this time I want to take a point of personal privilege and we need to recognize two entities that have uh done some outstanding things with the city.

Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh I'd like to take the time to uh to we we're since we have a lot of our firefighters in the audience today for a matter on the agenda.

I want to take the time to ask all of you the councilman and the citizens of the city of Lake Charles to congratulate our fire department on achieving a class one rating on our fire rating.

This is the first time in history that the city of Lake Charles has achieved the class one.

And that's very important because it means that that uh we are at the highest level of fire protection.

And also uh we got together with the Department of Insurance, uh uh and they came back and sent us confirmation that everyone should go and look at their homeowners' policies now because with the fire protection rating at one, you should have a savings on your homeowners insurance, and that translates to taking care of and protecting our citizens, not just from the public safety side, but also the financial side.

But of course, without you need to put out the fire, so that takes us to water.

And I also want to congratulate our water department because our water system achieved the score of 108 out of 100.

Our firefighters, all of our public safety uh personnel.

And just remember that if we have to work as one late y'all and all those that pay taxes into the city, this is what your tax dollars do.

It's not just to not just a uh to uh to not just for take for fluff, it really is protecting us, making us stronger as we go through and navigate all the challenges that we have in this life.

So thank you, thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you, Mayor.

Also former may former state senator, Miss Willie Mount.

Thank you for being here with us today.

We go down and get started.

Um we'd like to defer three, thirteen, sixteen to May 20th, 2026, and we'd like to delete number 23.

We're gonna defer three, thirteen, and sixteen until May 20th, and we're deleting number 23.

Now we're also gonna start off at this time by hearing from uh uh fire chief before we do that.

Please vote on the minutes 7-4.

We're gonna ask the fire chief to come forward at this time.

Oh sorry.

Go ahead, Jesus.

What I'm talking about.

You said you were speaking today.

Oh, I wasn't ready.

Okay, all right.

Well, we're gonna give you a pass.

We'll push it back to the 20th.

No, no, I'm ready to speak, I just not this.

Oh, this early.

Oh, yeah, we won't go and get you out the way.

Go ahead.

Okay.

Well, I will say I I thought I knew what I was gonna say, but you didn't mess me up with that one.

So I will say uh if we're talking about the item that's on the agenda.

If you prefer to wait until that come up, we can do that too.

I I would just give me a little bit.

Not a problem.

All right, appointments.

Appoint a chairman to review bids for project number CP 3520 wastewater treatment plant A, Basin A-02 sewer rehabilitation.

Take that, Mr.

Weatherford?

Yes, sir.

Number two, appoint a chairman to review bids for project number CP 3503-2025 asphalt overlays and amend the budget as necessary.

Mr.

Billboard, would you take that one?

Yes, sir.

Number three has been deferred.

Public hearings.

Number four, public hearing and consideration of the Lake Charles Planning and Zoning Commission's decision to deny a request for a variance in order to construct nine new detached town homes with lot coverage greater than 40 percent, actual 45 percent within the residential zoning district at the northwest corner of West Clark Street and Ernest Street.

Uh Mr.

President, members of the council, I'd like to make one uh correction on this item.

The planning commission approved this request by a vote of four to one, so this is just a misprint on the on the item.

It has been advertised as an approval.

Uh to be brief, the planning commission considered this request for a resubdivision of property, which was approved and it will be filed at the courthouse's an approved subdivision.

The item before you this evening is the variance to build the homes on the lot to cover more than 40 percent uh of the lot coverage.

So that item was appealed by some constituents, so it's before you said this evening as presented.

So where does the 40% the uh home a structure can exceed 40 percent uh of lot coverage?

So it's a 6,200 square foot lot, the maximum they can have as far as square footage of a home is about 22 2300 square feet.

They want to build a little bit bigger home, about an additional 300 square feet, which puts it at about 45 percent.

So what's the normal?

The norm is the maximum is 40 percent in that in this zoning district.

Okay, and then they're trying to go 45.

45 percent.

Okay.

Now Mr.

Weatherfirme.

They could, I mean, you said they could build uh they could build a 10,000 square foot home if they do a multi-story.

It's just that's correct, it's a footprint.

That is correct.

Okay.

Well, I have a question.

If it passed 41, how did it how does it pass if we're coming back asking for this variance?

They're appealing the they're appealing their approval.

Okay, okay, gotcha now.

Gotcha.

The cons the constituents in the neighborhood have appealed the the approval.

So I just want to be clear.

Planning and zoning approved something that needed a variance.

That's correct.

So we are voting to undo what planning and zoning is done.

Yes.

Well, we're going to be able to do it.

No, no, no.

Subdivisions filed with the courthouse.

Now they're going to be applying for building permits, so they're getting a request to allow them to build up to 45% of lot coverage.

Okay.

You got it?

Somewhat.

Well and that's it's been filed as a subdivision at the courthouse.

That's one part of it.

Now they went to planning and zoning and they asked for a variance to build the house larger than what the lot is, but not too small.

They could build.

So in essence, we're considering something that the planning and zoning said approved, needing a variance.

So they approved the variance.

That's correct.

So now it's coming to us.

So yeah, so uh residence, area residence appealed.

So what about the the building?

What what is the recommendation from planning and zone?

They approved it.

They approved it.

They're saying let them build it.

Yeah.

They approved the 45% lot coverage.

Any other questions from the council?

Okay, we have some cards.

Dominique Darbone.

Are there cards from the developer?

Because they should go first.

I don't have any.

That's our normal developer here.

That's our normal process.

You want to speak?

I made it.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Okay.

I'm happy to let him go first.

Yes, ma'am.

Appreciate you.

Just as a uh a point of information.

Anyone that comes up has three minutes to speak unless you've been donated time from somebody else speaking on this issue.

I mean, I don't uh basically I'll just kind of tell you how we got involved uh as a company.

There was a developer that was trying to put in like 33, 32 units on this uh on this plot of land, and the church was involved, and a lot of neighbors in the area were not happy with it, so we ended up uh buying the property and over the last 18 months of you know talked with the city, talked with the parish, spoke with the uh the library to see if they wanted to buy part of the property or the property or whatnot.

And uh, you know, nobody's come to the table or whatnot.

The the offer still stands to buy part of the property, but in the meantime, you know, it's been 18 months.

We need to we need we need to move along.

Uh their concerns uh as the neighborhood, I I brought them into our office, you know, we went back and forth and had great discussions.

Uh and we've been able to meet just about every concern that they have.

One of their big things was they wanted single family homes, not duplexes.

We got single family homes, they're one story.

Uh they go great with the neighborhood.

You know, I certainly think it would be a great improvement for the neighborhood from what was there.

There was a there was a the church, the our lady Queen Avon had a church uh building there that was just dilapidated, it was you know needed to come down.

We took that down and it's just time to time to move on and develop develop the property.

So that's what we've come up with.

We've worked with now I would I would tell you that a lot of the neighbors are are pleased with you know what we've what we've come up with and how we would you know put build it back.

So if you could touch on it again, you said the neighbors wanted what and you chose to do what?

No, then the the neighbors at the time that I purchased the property did not want 33 new units to go on.

Yeah, that that was the proposal originally from a prior from a prior developer.

Gotcha.

What we did is we came back in and we went instead of 33 units, we're building nine single family, one-story homes.

So that's why the the variance there is you know, it's just a little bit over the what you know, and we technically we could build, you know, whatever two-story, but most of their neighbors do not want two-story, three-story buildings.

So the way to get it down to one story is we got to go about 300 square feet more than what you know the city allows per right.

Now I think it's pretty common to go to a little bit of you know, patio homes and all that sort of stuff is pretty common in that area.

So I I don't think it's far-fetched to go out of go out of the realms here.

And who's your company?

Uh Flavin Company, Flavin Development.

Okay.

And he may have to, I think he needs to.

I'll state your name and address for the record.

Sorry, uh Bo Flavin.

Uh my home address is 1501 Hillcroft Drive, Lake Charles, Louisiana.

Okay.

Anything else you want to add, Mr.

Flavin?

I don't think so.

I'd happy to answer any questions, uh any question for Mr.

Flavman.

Do you do you have a graphic?

I do, yes.

Do we have that to show?

No.

I can provide it.

So I think it looks great.

Sure.

If you don't mind, you could pass it down.

Sure, yeah.

I think there was an email that we got like some time this afternoon.

And we haven't finalized the design.

It's gonna look very similar to that because I you know so Mr.

Flavin, uh we may need some other we may have some other questions if you don't mind holding tight.

Sure.

Okay.

I mean, you don't have to stand out, but okay.

Now Ms.

Darbone.

State your name and address for the record, please.

Dominique Darbone, 313 West Oak Lane.

Um, okay, so yes, as Mr.

Flavin stated, he did have a meeting with a group of neighbors, and I will say that he did handle some of our concerns.

We are grateful to not be dealing with 32 units.

We are grateful to not be dealing with the two stories.

Um, but for nearly the entire two years prior to the meeting that Mr.

Flavin had with us in January, what was communicated to the neighborhood was that the tree would be saved, and there would be like five to six single family homes on the lot, and there would be a park.

Um, so I'm just gonna back up really quickly, and I want to go ahead and respectfully relieve you, gentlemen.

I don't expect you to appeal this.

I showed up into city council many times two summers ago with my entire neighborhood having written countless letters to you guys and a petition that had a thousand people on it to save this tree, and y'all didn't do nothing.

So I'm not expecting you to appeal this today.

I'm here on a matter of principle, and I'm here for my community.

Um that being said, for me, I am a member of this neighborhood, so there are some neighborhood issues that concern me, but I'm also a community organizer, and I have done a lot of community organizing for the Mary Tree.

Amy, would you hand me that thing out of my bag for the Mary Tree that sits on this property?

Um again, like I told you guys last, I don't know if it was Tuesday or Monday, it all runs together.

But this is a legacy oak tree in our neighborhood.

Um that is beloved, and that has garnered a lot of community support, which might be silly to y'all, but this is something that I was gifted for Christmas two years ago.

And I don't know if you can see this, but it's a laser cut of the tree that Mr.

Flavin wants to cut down to squeeze nine homes on that lot, just to give you an idea of what this tree means to me and what it means to the people in my neighborhood.

Now, Mr.

Flavin did tell us that we could save that tree for 200,000.

Um, which I that's a that's a generous offer, but as a community, we can't afford to set that precedent for things that are important to us, be they buildings, be they trees, be they whatever.

If we set that precedent, what are we saying?

Um to be quite honest, most of the people in my neighborhood are working class, and uh I don't think I need to explain to anybody in this room how expensive things are right now.

I would be remiss to collect donations to pay for a property that was gonna put money in somebody's pocket instead of do something for the community.

So I'm here on a matter of principle.

I'm here because it's wrong to overdevelop for the sake of profit.

And I'm here because I'm quite frankly tired of this expletive.

And like Mr.

Paul said last week, although I do greatly appreciate Mr.

Young, he is a massive improvement from my former representative.

Um I don't need you guys to represent me like Mr.

Paul said, 'cause I'm gonna be here for myself and for my neighbors.

So thank you for your time.

Amy A.

Bear, Herbert Abear.

Herbit, no way.

State your name and address for the record, please.

Amy Herbert, 2210 Ernest Street.

Um, I'm here to talk about the tree too, but maybe not just this tree and a whole lot of trees.

I realize that not everybody has a deep spiritual connection to trees, or maybe the inspiration of a legacy that they do provide us.

So I'll speak in language that maybe we do all understand, and that's waste, fraud, and abuse.

And that's a phraseology we've heard a lot of over the last year.

Um, and I want to be very clear that I'm not talking about the current administration.

I'm talking about something that goes back more than two decades, 2006.

Andre Duane, Charette Report, Louisiana Recovery Authority, Louisiana Speaks, long-term recovery plan, city hosted June 22 with green infrastructure, center, build back better, Lake Charles Rebound, Retree Lake Charles, and just imagine.

I'm talking about study after study after study.

They all say the same thing that we've got to preserve our tree canopy, especially our live oaks.

That's for our drainage, that's for our shade, and that's for the protection of our city.

Just the same way our firefighter fighters protect our city, our oak trees do the same thing.

Our firefighters are just oaks on two legs.

Um the Lake Charles community overwhelmingly rate shade as the number one community value of trees in a 2022 city hosted uh survey with Green Infrastructure Center, study after study after study, paid for, adopted, and then apparently forgotten because they're telling us the same thing.

There are initiatives that are available to us that have already been paid for by us that tell us how to protect our native legacy live oak trees, and it needs to be put into practice immediately.

And that's all I have to say.

Actually, I have one more thing to say.

I've got a little bit more time.

We have led a I don't know what you call it, a prayer chain for more than three months now praying for this tree.

A month and a half, all right.

Feels like a lifetime of prayer for this particular tree.

We have led rosaries for this tree, and our prayer is that the developer, in his wealth of creativity and resources, can find a way to make a development prop profitable that still protects this oak tree.

Thank you.

I have a question for you.

Yes, sir.

Uh I should ask this to Miss Dalbone, but she can holler.

Ms.

Darbone said the last time y'all came that the city council didn't do anything.

What happened to that tree in the meantime when we voted against it a year or so ago?

He didn't vote against it, it was deferred.

He kept being deferred.

There was never a vote.

Okay, so what happened to the tree in the midst of that?

Um the it was sold.

Yeah, come to the mic.

Come to the mic.

Yeah, come on up.

Sorry.

So I don't know all the legalities, things have been changing up now.

It's like century 21, basset, whatever, but Flavin company at the time was a real estate agent, and they were the lister of that property.

So when things fell through or not fell through, when it was pulled, Flavin just purchased the property.

Yes, yes, this is the same tree.

This is the same tree that I was here fighting for two years ago that I collected over a thousand signatures for, that I took the word of a developer for two years almost, and wasn't out organizing looking for um answers because I thought the developer was gonna save the tree to find out with maybe three months left that not only was the tree not going to be saved, but because the property was already owned, and by the way, that's another reason why you don't have a lot of neighbors here tonight.

They don't think there's anything they can do because we've been told repetitively by the city when we don't tell property owners what to do.

Well, but I get that, right?

But even when the property wasn't oh never mind, I'm sorry, I want to stay on task.

Did I answer your question, Mr.

Marks?

Okay, thank you.

Yes, thank you.

Please state your name and address for the record, Mr.

Ayers.

Dennis Ayers, 3800 Ernest Street.

I've lived on um in that house, which is just on the north side of the same block for over 24 years.

And um I'm retired.

The last time this came up through, the developer wanted to put 36 two-story townhouses on it.

Well, that fell through, and then this I haven't come through.

In the meantime, he sold half of the property.

He sold the back half of the property.

So now there's only the front half, and on that front half, he wants to put nine houses.

He's got three lots up for sale.

I went and measured them.

The lots are 39 foot wide.

I have a three-car garage, which is 36 foot wide.

So these are going to be very little like shotgun houses.

But to come back to this 40% to 45%.

I keep hearing everybody wants to worry about flooding and drainage.

Well, you fill that up, that from 40% to 45, that's 5% more that's gonna go in the street.

Now, if you want to stop flooding, you gotta start somewhere.

You might as well start right now by not letting these people overbuild the lots.

He's gonna put nine houses where five are on the other side.

So where does the water go?

Does it go in the street or does it come back on the back side?

And us that are living on earnest and live oak.

Now we gotta worry about the water coming from Earnest, West Oak, and now with these buildings coming up, the drainage coming in from the back, coming in the back side of our house.

So like I said, if you're worried about flooding and drainage, which I keep hearing about, you're gonna work on it.

This is the first best place to start.

Make them do the 45%.

You know, and and get rid of that and and do it right, because those lots are ridiculous.

39 foot wide.

That's all I got to say.

Thank you, Mr.

Ayers.

You want to rebut that, um, Mr.

Flavin?

Anything?

I don't want to go back and forth.

Okay.

Um, Mr.

Young, that's your district, right?

Yes, sir.

Uh thank you for the time.

Um I appreciate the public healthy debate that this uh particular development has uh spurred, and I've heard up from quite a few residents on on birth both sides of the argument uh for and against this development.

Um I do uh want to thank uh Miss Darbone and Miss Herbert for coming and speaking up in favor of the tree.

I I do think that the city of Lake Charles needs to consider moving forward a tree ordinance that helps protect legacy oaks, especially considering how many we have lost since the storms of 2020.

And I do think there's been a large replanting effort, but we can do more, certainly.

Um that being said, we we seem to be talking about two different things tonight.

The subdivision with nine homes has already been determined.

That's been filed with the courthouse.

We're talking about lot coverage, uh 40 or 45 percent.

And I want to thank the developer for having met with me uh number of times with the residents a number of times and really talked about possibilities moving forward.

I think the main concerns with the last iteration of this development on this property, not by the current developer, but by the last one, was the number of units 32.

That's been reduced to nine, and the number and the number of stories, it was two stories, people didn't want folks peering into the backyards.

This is primarily single story family homes.

And so uh I don't see uh a problem with the 45 percent to 40 percent.

If we deny it today, he can come back tomorrow and build two-story homes without anybody's permission.

Uh that's why I'm gonna support this moving forward, but I do appreciate the debate.

Any other comments?

Questions?

Okay.

If we vote uh a yes means that the ordinance is overturned, correct, Miss uh Thomas?

No.

No, a yes vote is approving the yes is approving the variance, overturning it.

No.

No, it's completely.

You're just supporting you're you're affirming the planning commission's approval of the application on a yes.

On a yes.

On a no, you would be denying it.

We would be denying it.

Okay.

Please vote.

74.

Number five, an ordinance ordering demolition and authorized in the city of Lake Charles to enter an agreement for demolition of a structure located at 1814 Easton Street.

Willie Lafleur and Josephine LaFleur owners.

Mr.

Hester.

Good evening, Council.

And this is a storm damage residential structure.

And you can see in the pictures, there's roof damage, exterior wall damage, window damage, all I suppose in the interior to severe weather damage of the structure.

Mr.

President, at this time I'd like to offer for the record the photographs as well as proof of service through the Marshall's office.

Um we do have one person here to speak as well as an attorney is here, Miss LaCosha Robson is also present.

Yes.

Uh Ms.

Peggy LeFleur.

Yes, sir.

That's your name and address for the record, please.

Peggy LaFleur, 156 Lee Street, Lake Charles, Louisiana, 70605.

Okay.

What do you want to see happen, Miss LaFleur?

Well, at this time, we can't get any help with my nieces and nephews.

We done did everything we could, so we might as well just tear down.

Okay.

And tried everything.

It says it's my district.

Yeah, it was.

It was.

Uh huh.

If I remember if I remember correctly, Miss East, I mean Ms.

LaFleur, you were trying to get a secession done, and you needed uh, I think you had a couple of more signatures to get.

No, we did the secession.

Um we tried to get the partition, but that didn't happen.

So I tried to get the um act of donation.

And um they're not willing to give me my couple of nieces and nephews are not willing to give it to me so I can have it, you know.

Um I was trying to get it for, you know, the city helped me to tear it down and rebuild it for my I don't have a house, so that's our lot.

Right.

But my nieces and nephews are not willing to give it to me.

So they do understand that once it gets torn down, it's gonna go against the tax lien and they I tried to tell them that, but for some reason they don't see it my way.

They thinking I'm being sneaky and all this other stuff, so they being so you know disrespectful and stuff.

So I'm I'm I'm I'm done with it.

I don't try it, and I appreciate you guys sticking with me and giving me more time because I tried to do everything I could.

Miss Lakosha here's been so great with me trying to get everything done, you know, but they're not willing to do it.

Anything you want to add, Miss Roberts?

Uh no, sir, Mr.

Marks Lakotia Roberts on behalf of Miss Peggy LaFleur, uh my office address is 1607 Ryan Street here in Lake Charles.

Uh Ms.

LaFor is correct, both successions were completed and actually recorded back in October of 2025.

And since that time, there have been attempts made to have the relatives donate the property as she stated.

There has not been a partition filed with the within the courts uh because at this point, according to Miss LaFleur, um, to go the additional mile and additional costs for a partition, it really does not appear to be worth it at this time.

There's not been a lot of cooperation with the other family members.

So at this time, she believes it's in the best interest to simply uh allow the city to demolish the property.

I have been in contact with the other relatives.

Um I've done my best to explain to them what the next steps are and what those entail, including the cost of the demolition being tacked on or attached to the property as a lien.

Um that seems to be where we are.

Um there are no other ways for us to maneuver to try to resolve this issue at this point.

And I obviously, as you can see, the property is definitely a hazard.

Um and it's a concern regarding the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens who uh live in the area.

Um so at this point, uh, on behalf of Miss LaFleur, we're asking the city move forward with the demolition of this property.

Okay.

Uh Ms.

Fundale, 1515.

Okay.

Mr.

Marks, I think you had another card on that one.

On number five.

On number five.

Do y'all still have it?

Um maybe ask if there's someone else who wants to speak on it.

But anyone else that wanted to speak on number five.

Yes, uh, Mr.

Fundell, go ahead.

She's having a problem with uh the residents, the rest of the relatives, but she's part owner.

Does she qualify for the re rehab program with the city?

I don't think we had it anymore.

I don't believe uh, I think all the other uh heirs would have to participate in on the program.

It wouldn't be changing the property or anything.

It wouldn't be they would just be signing what would they be signed?

It wouldn't they would have they would not lose ownership.

No, no.

No.

Uh you're talking about the participated in the program?

Yes.

No, but they would have to agree to live and use the home as their primary residence.

And she wouldn't be the one with the primary residence.

I don't know if she lived in that.

She, but she the her plan was to uh re remodel the house at some point, obviously before it got into this condition and make it her primary residence.

But the problem was because she co-owns the property with the city of uh with her relatives, is my understanding that some of the programs that may have been available, she would not have necessarily been able to qualify without the relatives agreeing to donate their ownership interests in the property to her.

No.

Well, somebody, whoever was the paperwork would have to use that as a primary residence if the others are not using it, then they would have to sign over there.

In order for her to qualify for the program, she would have to have been living in it and it being her primary residence to get the program.

Or agree to live in it, and uh and I was I'm not an attorney, but I know what a partition basically the It's a separation.

The partition would have been ordered, it would have been basically a separate the property and she would have whatever the state was worth, she would have gotten that, and she may have had to pay right the other way.

I don't know.

The problem is with partitions, generally when partitions are done, the court orders the property to be sold, and then the proceeds are just split among the co-owners because you can't force people to co-own property if they are no longer friendly in the co-ownership.

So a question, Miss Roberts.

So a question, Miss Roberts, uh if we go forward and we tear it down, she can still partition to sell the property, correct?

Well, it it she can file to partition to sell the real estate, correct.

And then of course, if once the the order is uh the judgment is rendered, then the property could be sold and the proceeds would be divided.

And I just want to put that on your plate because if we're gonna tear it down, I think you would do better trying to sell it as opposed to letting it go to adjudication, you know, and then everybody lose.

And actually, I just had that conversation with the adjudication conversation with her today.

So I think she's she's fully aware of that other option, and I don't think she's willing to allow that to happen.

Okay.

So going forward, 1515.

1515, please vote.

Thank you.

74.

Number six, an ordinance ordering demolition and authorizing the city of Lake Charles to enter an agreement for demolition of a structure located at 1610 Graham Street.

Alan J.

Mitchell owner.

Go ahead.

Well, before you say that, because you might not even have to go through it.

Last time we came up with this property, this is a property that Project Builder Future is in the process of buying.

They've just went through the submitted the documents.

I got a call from Mr.

Mitchell today, Mr.

Harvey.

And so they just need Project Builder Future needing more time to complete the sale of this property.

So Mr.

Harvey.

Oh, I mean.

You don't have to do nothing if you I'm okay with deferring if that's what that's what's needed.

That's what's needed.

Defer for 30 days.

Okay.

How much time they need to close it.

I know he said they submitted it, so I don't know how long it takes from the time that they did the paperwork.

I would just say 30 days.

30 days and they can check back.

I think Mr.

Mitchell is an attorney, so he can give your report and then get that back.

I'd give it 30 days.

We would defer to 30 days, which would be when?

June 3rd.

June 3rd.

Please vote.

7-4.

Number seven.

An ordinance order and demolition and authorizing the city of Lake Charles to enter an agreement for demolition of a structure located at 1400 North Shadow Street.

Cleveland Nash and Elvira Nash owners.

Mr.

Hester.

This is a storm damage structure.

It has roof damage, exterior wall damage, window damage, all exposed in the interior to severe weather damage of the structure, and it is in the flood zone.

Mr.

President, I'd like to offer into the record photographs of the subject property and proof of service through certified mail.

This is a rehearing from April 15th.

Mr.

Harvey.

Last time uh we had someone who was here and then they left.

Uh but someone is currently living in this property.

Uh I mean, I I want to suggest 1515, but there's someone who I can say I I pass by there today.

There's people who live in there.

Yeah, and whether it's between that as well.

So I think that's something we need to check into because if it's utilities, yeah.

You have some information.

Yeah, right.

So the pro one of the property owners came to meet with Mr.

Mayon, Terry Mayon, to discuss the FEMA regulations.

I don't know what transpired in that meeting, but they were told the wrong meeting date.

They were told the meeting of the 20th.

So that's why no one's here today.

Okay.

So we defer it to the 20th, Mr.

Harvey?

That's fine.

We're going to defer to the next meeting, which is May 20th.

Please vote.

7-4.

Number eight, an ordinance order and demolition and authorizing the city of Lake Charles to enter an agreement for demolition of a structure located at 317 South Louisiana Avenue.

Front house only.

Grace Smith, Eurik Wyatt Price, Charles Y Price, Monica Manka Russer, Marcia Manker, and Gregory Manker owners.

Mr.

Hester.

This is a storm damage structure.

You can send the pictures of severe roof damage on the structure, exterior wall damage, broken windows, all exposed in the interior to severe weather damage of the structure.

Mr.

President, this is a rehearing from April 15th.

At this time, I would offer into the record photographs of the subject property and proof of service through both the Marshall's office and certified mail.

Mr.

Harvey.

Yes, I received a phone call from one of the heirs on this property that they're living in California.

They will not be back in Louisiana until the first week of June.

Um I know when Miss Price came the last time.

She was okay with demolishing the property, but she's not the sole heir of the property.

So I wouldn't feel comfortable making a decision until we get those people in town.

I know they say they would be at the first meeting the week of in June.

So I'm gonna ask that we defer to what's the first meeting in June.

June 3rd.

June 3rd.

June 3rd.

Deferred to June 3rd, please vote.

Seven four.

Number nine, an ordinance ordering demolition and authorizing the city of Lake Charles to enter an agreement for demolition of a structure located at 1528 Pine Street.

Thelma Hill, Willie Mayhill, Sadie Dotson, Eddie Lee Ladou, Jr., and Floyd Mitch Floyd Michael Ledue owner, subject to a tax sale to the state of Louisiana.

Mr.

Hester.

And this one has severe roof damage.

You can send the pictures to exterior wall damage to the front of the house, exterior window damage, all exposed and interior to severe weather damage of the structure.

Mr.

President, this is a rehearing from April first.

At this time, I would offer into the record photographs of the subject property and proof of service through certified mail, as well as the appointment of a curate curator for the uh heirs who whose whose location we are.

Mr.

Fundale.

Please vote.

1515.

Number 10.

An ordinance ordering demolition and authorizing the city of Lake Charles to enter an agreement for demolition of a structure located at 1900 Praiseon Drive.

Burn Apartments only, Plays Vendome Apartment Homes, LLC owners.

All right.

And if you well, go ahead, state your name and address for the record.

Sure.

Uh Scott Cheatham address my office address is 701 Porter Street, New Uh, New Orleans, Louisiana, 70139.

Mr.

Cheatham, if you don't mind, I explained to the council.

I met with uh Mr.

Cheatham and these what is the other guy?

The um Jason What what is his position?

He's the keeper.

He's the keeper with glass ratners the company.

Can you explain to them what the keeper is?

Yes.

So uh as part of the foreclosure, we asked for a keeper.

A keeper's kind of like a receiver, but not quite.

They're up, but they're allowed to go in and secure, maintain, uh, improve the property while the lender is attempting to seize it.

Because obviously we can't go in as lender and just start removing things without court order.

At the time of the last hearing, we've we had filed the petition.

We're waiting on the order.

We got the order about two weeks later, so about two weeks ago, we received the keeper order and the keeper.

7-4.

Thank y'all.

Thank you.

Number 11.

An ordinance ordering demolition and authorizing the city of Lake Charles to enter an agreement for demolition of a structure located at 1514 Graham Street.

Joseph Howard Beverly owner, subject to a tax sale to the state of Louisiana.

Mr.

Hester.

You can see in the pictures, this is a storm damage structure.

It has severe roof damage.

The structure is collapsed.

Exterior wall damage, window damage, all exposed and interior to severe weather damage or the structure.

President, at this time I would offer into the record photographs of the subject property and proof of service through the appointment of a curator.

Mr.

Harvey.

We have any cords?

No cards.

1515.

1515, please vote.

74.

Ordinances for final action.

Number 12, an ordinance accepting the lowest responsible bid and authorizing the city of Lake Charles to enter an agreement for project number CP 3242, South Sewer Leaf, Gulf Highway Lift Station Force Main.

Okay.

This is the one.

Yeah.

Go ahead.

We met with the uh we met with the bidders.

That was some questions that need to still need to be resolved with the bid.

We met with the uh the uh lower's bidder today.

They're gonna get that resolved.

Either we schedule it for a special meeting before the meet uh the uh agenda meeting on Tuesday or the May 20th meeting, but uh I think we're gonna get all this resolved, so we asked for a deferral.

Okay.

Uh before I move for the deferral uh mayor, some of the council members had some concerns that they wanted to address in regards to this item, if they still want to address them.

Anybody as long as we're the the deferment doesn't affect the 45 day committee.

That's why we don't cross that.

Yeah, the bid prices are good until uh until after the the Tuesday meeting.

That's why it's a special meeting.

If if if if we can't get it resolved by then, then uh the uh the bit the the bidders would send a a written a written acknowledgement that they would hold their prices until we get this resolved.

But if we set the date for Tuesday, we'll be within all the parameters.

Yes, yes, okay.

Um I have something in regards to this.

The only concern I had to this when we were discussing this was I submitted to the administration three times to get the bids, and I want to go on record today.

Every bid that comes through the city, I'd like the city council to have a copy of those bids and the bid process before we decide on the bid because there's an ordinance in place.

11372.

It states that anytime a consultant does anything on behalf of the city that we're getting that we are paying them to do, the city council can recommend any documentation in regards to that, and it has to be given to the city council 14 days prior to us having to vote.

And I think that a lot of things that were brought to us on this particular issue, I'm not gonna say they was wrong or right, but it could have we could have understood better had we had the documentation to follow along.

So I'm just asking that going forward all bids be sent to the council and that we exercise that 14-day period so that if there's any questions, we can remedy this stuff in the bud.

I mean, nip it in the bud.

Any other comments or questions?

Okay, yes, Mr.

Harvey.

Tuesday.

We're gonna move this to Tuesday.

I'm requesting that Wagner be in attendance.

Okay, or the engineering firm or the consultant firm, which are what they refer to, but I would prefer they be in attendance.

It's too many questions that we have that no one seems to be able to have the answers, and if we're paying them and they're contracted by the city, I want to have them at the table.

We have several questions for them.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments?

Mr.

Harvey, if y'all would like, uh, I can schedule a meeting before Tuesday with council members and uh Wagner.

And we can vet some of those questions in a private meeting prior to the meeting on Tuesday.

If you'd like.

If you don't mind, Mr.

Cardone, could you send us some some dates and tentative times?

I mean, being tomorrow's Thursday.

I will.

Yeah.

All right.

All right.

You good with that?

All right.

Uh so we're coming back to the we're gonna we're we're gonna amend this to make a special meeting Tuesday before the agenda meeting.

So we'll have a special meeting to handle this, and then we'll go into the agenda meeting.

This will be the as far as I know.

This is the only item for the special meeting.

Only item.

You understand?

Yeah.

Okay, so we're voting first to defer.

Yes.

Please vote.

And now we're voting to have a special meeting on Tuesday, the what is Tuesday?

19th.

Tuesday the 19th at 50.

Not the 19th.

No.

This upcoming Tuesday.

Tuesday the 12th.

At 5 30 in the council chambers.

I mean, in this chambers prior to the agenda, the regular agenda meeting.

So we're yeah, so this is to so and I think what it has to be have you now approved to come.

Not not to have the meeting, but to bring it up tonight.

Is that how what's the process for that?

It was already on the agenda.

It's already tonight.

Yes.

Okay.

So everybody good?

Do you need a motion or second?

Special meeting?

Yeah.

Do we we need a motion for that?

Yeah.

To have a special meeting.

Motion.

Yes.

The motion has been put on the floor by Mr.

Young, second by Mr.

Harvey.

Please vote.

Seven four.

All right.

Number 13 is deferred.

Number 14, an ordinance creating the positions of chief of administration and chief of operations within the administrative division of the Lake Charles Fire Department and to provide for the qualifications, duties, and responsibilities for such positions and other related matters.

At this time, Chief, you rather go through the cards first or you're gonna go first.

Yes.

I'll try to keep it short.

Unless you need more.

Okay.

As I stand up here now, I thought I knew what I was gonna say, but I don't.

Still.

But as I look out in the crowd and I see all these firemen here, I wish that I was standing here saying that they were here for in support of a fire chief that is a decision that I made.

Okay.

But unfortunately, they're not.

Which is okay.

They have a right to say what they got to say.

But I'll say if you look out and you see all these firemen in here and what they do and what they represent, that's what you re uh associate yourself with, knowing all these guys ride on fire trucks.

These are the men that you see.

They ride on the fire trucks, save lives, put out fires, cut people out of cars, save babies, birth babies.

They do all that.

But as the fire chief, the fire chief look at the fire at the fire department from a completely different angle.

I usually tell people I'm looking at it from a 40,000 foot view of the whole department.

And let me tell you what you don't see.

When you see those trucks running, you don't see the two mechanics that I have that that maintains the entire fleet.

You don't see when you see them running, you don't see the only two training officers that I have that keeps up their training, including uh training for the region for uh people that has to keep up all their training, their EMS, and has to double back and be safety officers.

What you don't see is the three prevention officers that I have that has to inspect every business in this city.

You only get three of them, and have to again double back and be investigators for structured fires and all this in there.

You don't see the one administrative assistant that I have.

They got one minute, I got time for that.

You're gonna have some more time.

Okay.

What you don't see is the one administrative assistant that I do have that's in charge that helps me keep on track with the budget and do all the stuff that I need to do so I can focus on other things that needs to happen because again, fire chiefs nowadays aren't what fire chiefs used to be back in the day, just sit in the office and run a department.

I'm on the several different committees, several different other things.

So when I say what you don't see is that's that is the fire department.

I see because that's who I have, and when relation to that, these two positions are in the administrative division.

What I'm in, not the ops division.

These two positions are going to help me.

That that's all it is for.

That's what uh you do you don't see when you when when you uh see these guys running around on the fire department.

A few months back we had Mr.

Excuse me.

I'm sorry, Mr.

President.

Did you have time?

Yeah, uh we give Chief two more minutes.

Okay, please vote.

Let's just give him time before he can get through.

Well, we have to put a time.

We can keep doing it.

And let's chief, unless you want to stop now and rebut afterwards.

Get yourself get your thoughts together with it let me get it out now.

Go ahead.

So uh basically what I'm saying is this is what decisions that fire chiefs make.

I can't base my my decisions for this department is for the citizens, citizens of this city.

Not based on what somebody like or don't like or what somebody just view from five feet in front of their face.

Right.

I have to make these decisions, and they're not easy, they're hard decisions.

But a few months back we had some uh when when when uh I had some guys come up here and talking, I'm just want to key on one of them that said something to the fact of there's only one problem that we have on the department, and that's a staffing issue.

In the fire chief's world and the fire chief's mind, staffing is temporary because it can go as as it goes this and that.

What I see is we don't it's not a staffing issue.

It's uh it's a problem with faith and a problem with trust.

That issue happened way before any one of us sat in this one of these positions that goes back years.

And it and again, I get it because I was here and I understand where they're coming from.

That's why this is emotional for me.

But I've been told by several ministers that want that they get to me, they said if you have enough faith the size of a mustard seed, you can move mountains.

This has nothing to do with I'm gonna say these two positions, how I feel, how I see it.

It has something to do, go way back to where the faith in the trust failed on their eyes in the council in the administration, and then pass fire chiefs.

So that's the way I see this has nothing to do with me.

That's why I'm sticking to my guns because that's what leadership do.

I make a decision and I stick by it, and I can't falter because of pressure of how somebody sees something.

The faith or some of the trust has to be built some kind of way by somebody, by either administration, city council, whatever, whatever they're asking for, but I understand the position, and that's where this goes.

So all I'm asking is for today is what I'm in approval of.

We're talking about funding that I've already talked to finance, human resources, legal, city administrations, two city administrations, because that's how long this went over.

Uh and all approval.

I'm just asking for approval of the funds for these two positions, so I can move forward and make decisions that I need to make for the department in the future.

Thank you.

All right, Chief.

Anybody got any questions for the chief?

I don't know why I have one for the chief, but these two positions are not currently budgeted for, so we would have to amend the current budget.

Is that correct?

Yes.

So and we're basically we've got four months left in this physical year.

Five months, I think made juju allows.

So five months.

We're more than halfway through the year.

Is it urgent?

Is there the urgency that we need to approve and amend the budget for these positions, or can we wait until the new budget year and go through that budget process?

Then as far as that, I I think that's what they're talking about.

But like I said, this is this is not even the final step in this process.

If it gets approved now, it still has to go before civil service.

And again, that can take a look at the state.

And that's through the and is that the local civil service or the state civil service board.

Is the local civil service is going to get it, and they should just approve it because everybody the city didn't already approve the funding, and then it goes to the Office of State Examiners who's going to put everything in legal form like they need to.

So would the civil service board turn it down for any reason?

I don't see why they why they should after the city council, city administration all already approved it.

Well, that's a that's a step beyond us, anyway.

So that's an independent board.

They can do I don't know who the members are, but what I'm asking is that chief, if we should happen to approve this, you are all right with us continuing it on until the next budget before you staff this or well according to civil service.

If you approve it, I can I can put somebody in it and then we we're waiting on just for the civil service uh board or the office of state examiners to send us back all the paperwork that makes it.

But I'm saying in regards to the budget, like uh Mr.

Weatherford's talking about you're good with that.

Okay.

All right.

Any other questions for the chief?

Okay, all right.

Is this is this structure in place in other fire departments?

Correct, yes.

It is it's this is what how it came about because again, fire departments across the state are doing things different in these positions that's where they come from.

I didn't have to create them, they're already on departments across throughout the state.

Any other questions?

Comments?

All right, Terrence Thomas.

Uh yeah, they didn't think about the budget you want.

No, not yet.

Terrence Thomas, 1912, Second Street Lake Charles.

I'm not gonna go first.

I got other people that's gonna talk because I'm gonna close it out.

Okay.

You are the union rep.

I'm the union president.

Okay.

But are you the union rep speaking today?

Yes.

All of us are union reps speaking today.

They're not donating to all y'all, they're donating to one person.

So who's gonna get the numbers?

The uh good day.

Yeah, because I'm I can only go by the cards.

They got a point time, point time, union rep, union rep, and then Terrence just happened to be the first one I called, so that's why I'm clearing who's the union rep that these times is dedicated to.

Okay, so we'll take three and give to you.

But you want that last.

That's fine.

Yes.

Yes.

All right.

So let me let me to make it easier.

I'm gonna go by the cards that I have, and when we get to the union rep, you know you have six minutes that I can split between y'all.

Along with your three, your original three.

You follow me?

Some of us are also residents.

Do we need to change our status as far as union representation or I have cards here that specify like and power orn power?

Orn Powell.

Aaron Powell is donating his way?

All right, right there.

He's day he's donating his time to Terrence.

You follow me?

That's fine.

And that's how we that's how the cards are uh filled out.

So right now, go ahead.

So do they need to specify who they're donating time to?

Yes.

So do we need to do that?

Do we need to amend those or assumption as well?

No, no, no, no.

When you get here, if you need more time, that whoever that person fill out a car can say I'm donating my time to them.

We good, yes, sir.

All right.

So right now, you want to right now we got Sean Ferguson.

Ready?

He said he would like to speak.

Sure.

All right.

How's everybody doing this evening?

All right.

State your name and address for the record.

Oh, Sean Ferguson, 5717, Gene Lane, Lake Charles, Louisiana 70605.

Okay.

Uh I'm the second vice with the uh Lake Charles uh 561 local firefighters unit.

Okay.

And I need these because I'm okay.

They're getting bad.

Uh I'll try not to wander too much.

Okay.

Uh there's a lot of print and scratches.

So anyway, uh good evening, everybody.

Uh we're here today to speak about the addition of the two chiefs' positions, of obviously.

Uh however, I think it would be a disservice to the citizens if we didn't speak about the issues surrounding the subject of the two positions.

Uh is the council aware that between two to eight fire trucks are being browned out or shut down every day.

Now, as of recently, it's it's it's less, but that's because they're in the process of forcing guys like me who are drivers to take the overtime.

Some guys don't want to take the overtime because they got wife, kids, family.

They want to be there.

So if you take a day of overtime, you're stuck at work for three days.

I typically work five days straight without seeing my kids or wife.

And then I go home for a day or two, and then I go back to work for another five days straight.

I work well last Saturday on my long off because we're just short people.

I completely understand where the chief's coming from as far as personnel.

We do need we need more mechanics, we need more prevention guys.

We need drivers, we need firemen.

I mean, it's it's I'll continue reading before I go off on a uh yeah, anyway.

So when the trucks are browned out, uh response times a lot of times in the district slow down because you might have only one truck there, or you know.

Uh so the citizens in your in your district's protection is I don't mean to say neglected, we're put in a tight spot, but there's less trucks serving that area.

Like I say, as of lately, things are guys are working these extra hours because if they don't, sooner or later they're gonna get forced.

Vacations are gonna be cut, which has already happened once before, and guys are told no, you have to work.

You have to work.

There's no no vacation.

You've already earned it, you were told you can, but now you can't.

Uh one minute.

Uh good question to ask ourselves is why these units are being shut down.

Uh at our current level, I I think this number is a little off.

It was 40 to 42 men short.

Uh I don't think it's quite that bad anymore, but it's still it's still pretty bad to have to shut those trucks down.

Uh the big thing is is how do you justify creating these two positions at around 100K a piece?

Just I'm giving an estimate because they have to be above a assistant chief, but below the fire chief.

Plus perks, incentives, retirement, and all this stuff.

So that's 200k plus perks and everything.

If you cut that and gave it to all the guys and women across the fire department, that'd be what, an extra thousand dollars a year.

I mean, we we we need to get more people on, you know, not just in on the line, but across the board.

Uh Mr.

President, time is expired.

Does he have some extra time just a minute or two is all I need.

Okay, I'll give you two minutes uh out of this.

You got put them on the clock for three.

That's Cody Green.

Cody Green donated.

Thank you, Cody.

Uh it's a position of the union body uh that it's not a fiscally responsible move at the moment.

Uh it might be different if we were fully staffed and things were going, but we're we haven't been in a good way for a while.

Um we did a vote on this about a year or so ago with the union body.

And I don't know if y'all are aware, but uh 98% of our union body showed up.

They were told about the positions.

Uh and in the vote, uh there were four votes for the positions, and 102 meant of these positions.

I know that might not mean anything to you guys, but I don't know.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.

But from our perspective, it just seemed like it wasn't a good use of money at the time.

Um in conclusion, our department needs substantially more men and women.

Again, mechanics division, there's only two guys, a fleet of trucks.

Not of not a lot of them not in the greatest of shape.

Uh prevention division, again, there's a chief and two guys that are that are stuck, they have to rotate on their their on call.

So sometimes they might not be off for half the year.

You know, on their week off, on their weekend off, they're still like looking at the phone.

Am I gonna get called out?

What's going on?

Um, these positions do nothing to fix the lack of staffing within our department.

Uh you know, I I I can appreciate the fire chief's uh point of view on this, and again, I'm not the fire chief, so I I I can't make those calls, but from us from a fiscal standpoint, it just seems like with all the help we need going in the direction of putting more people at top, when you have ACs that do one of those positions already, it it's it's it yes, ma'am, thank you.

But that's all I got to say.

Thank y'all for y'all's time.

Yes, sir.

So you're saying that by taking the two positions gonna make more people go to work?

Or did no no fill those positions, they would come out of your your rank?

No, they wouldn't come out of my rank, but they would be coming out of the ranks in the in the fire department, I would imagine.

Now I'm I'm I'm sure he might be able to, I don't know if he can hire outside of the department.

That's a possibility.

Two people would come out of yes, sir.

The ranks.

Either either the ranks, but I'm not sure if it's set up where if he can hire someone outside the department.

So you said it fluctuate.

We've been talking about this for a while.

So did a class come in, some new ones come in.

We've had classes come in.

So it's constantly one of the parts.

Yes, sir.

So what point do you think that what what what are you waiting?

What's what would be the magic number that we have to hire for we can fill these positions?

I'll be honest with you, I don't know.

Unfortunately, we learn we lose people to other departments around us, and and I know everybody hates talking about issue.

It's always an issue.

It's these two jobs are losing people somewhere else.

Yes, sir.

I I think part of it is, and I hate to bring this up because we talk about it a lot, pay money.

It's it's whatever.

It is what it is.

Young people, they're all there, they care about what does this job start at?

That's that's the main thing.

Every time I've ever been to a job fair, that's the first thing they ask is what does it start at?

You know, you're like, well, no, and I'm trying to tell them, hey, we got retirement.

We got the two positions.

Yes, sir.

And your objection is that if they came out of your ranks, y'all would have to work more overtime and structure with what would happen.

My objection is is that we're about to spend 200k plus benefits and perks on two positions at the top that don't help that don't help where the where the the issues are, which is manpower down towards the bottom end, not the top end.

Okay.

All right.

Yes, sir.

No problem.

David May?

David May.

State your name and address for the record, please.

Uh David May, I live at 1865 for Able Road in Iowa, Louisiana.

Uh-huh.

Uh I've been with the Lake Charles Fire Department for a little over 21 years now.

Um start off good evening.

Uh I'm here tonight because you know the fire department is obviously in a breaking point.

Uh, we're currently facing a staffing crisis where stations are operating well below the ideal levels.

We have been closing trucks down, as Mr.

Ferguson was saying.

Uh while leadership uh proposes shifting towards a certification-based system and adding administrative positions.

The reality on the ground is that our personnel are leaving for better paying jobs in smaller surrounding departments.

Uh back in 1970, Lake Charles Firefighters were making $2.74 an hour.

Today, that pay has only reached $12.08.

When you adjust for 55 years of inflation, our firefighters have effectively taken a massive pay cut while the job has become more dangerous and technical.

This is a blue-collar job built on a legacy of mentorship and life skills passed through the generations.

By prioritizing test takers over experienced workers and administrative bloat over competitive wages, you're alienating the very people who keep this city safe.

We don't need more desks in the office.

We need a livable competitive wage that remain uh that retains our experienced employees and recruits the next generation.

I asked the council to help uh to hold leadership accountable and prioritize the safety of our citizens by investing in the men who actually do the work.

Thank you.

So let me ask you so you're saying that you don't want this position because the money that we're spending to pay these guys could be better used with raises for you guys.

Not necessarily just raises, but the raises would help generate more people to come in to work for the fire department.

We are 30 plus people mention short, if I'm not mistaken.

Uh almost 40, correction.

Um within the next three to six years, we're gonna have 20 plus people retiring.

Okay, the objection for the chief with these positions has to do with the money that is being spent there compared to spending it on hiring somebody.

I mean, he he's actively trying to hire people right now.

That's correct.

But not like he's shutting down the hiring.

No, sir.

But as Mr.

Ferguson said, the the issues right now is manpower at the bottom.

We have the administration it's not based on the pay for these salaries.

The issue with manpower has nothing to do with the those two positions.

We just can't get firefighters recruit enough firefighters.

But I'm I'm I'm assuming is what they're saying is the allocation of that money into that position isn't necessary.

It needs to be allocated down below where we can get people in.

Okay.

Thank you.

We have pictures up here to show 1970.

We had to fight for pay, and we still going through the same thing.

It shouldn't be happening in this time.

Uh put the next one.

Hold on, hold on.

Are you on the clock?

No.

Okay, well, you showing pictures and okay, when and you'll get to show them when I call the next person.

How much time did I have to leave on this?

Do the posts are here with that.

Uh sure what you want to say on it.

He had about 30 seconds.

It don't have to be him.

The next one can take a picture of it.

Look at it, blow that up so they can see the price.

Yeah, 274 an hour.

Okay.

We still fight in the same fight today.

That don't make sense.

Okay.

In 55 years, we went up nine.

Okay, but but Mr.

Thomas, when you come up as the rep, you can you can say all of them.

That's all right.

Trust me, I'm ready.

All right.

Andrea Rafay.

Who they do?

Hey, uh, can I can I go ahead of uh if you don't mind?

Yeah, you got uh that way I can I can ask I seen you call go ahead.

Yes, that way I can answer some questions.

Uh uh Chief Joseph Dantley with the Lake Charles Fire Department addresses 35 Joseph Dantley.

Okay.

Uh 3515 McKinley, uh, 27 years as a firefighter for the city of Lake Charles.

Now to answer uh Mr.

Fondale a question before I start, uh what these guys keep saying is the money that's allocated for these two positions, we can hire probably 12 or 13 guys.

But we're still trying, if we could find 13 guys, we would hire the case.

And that's and that's a true statement.

That's true as a true statement.

All right, and I have we have no problem with but hiring the guys.

So at this point, we have two guys in training, as the chief already uh spoke about this.

So now, since the other guy, Mr.

May said that uh all those guys are going through training as as of now, today.

Okay, so what when you talk about guys going through training, is that new hires?

Yes, sir.

We have at only two.

No, we have two guys that's training them.

We got two training officers, yes, sir.

We have two training officers, correct, at this time.

And then after this class, they come on from not mistaken, chief.

Uh correct me, Chief.

Uh these guys come on June 1st.

Uh, then we're not gonna have any more class uh this 2026.

But you'll have two two new hires, right?

Well, I'm gonna have seven new hires.

Okay.

So at this point we're gonna have seven new hires.

So in when this class comes in, the the two people that leave your rank for that position, you would replace them with seven guys, so two would actually no sir.

So what ended up happening?

Uh so this position that we've been talking, like said for about a year about these two positions.

These two positions come from the um, you have one that's gonna be in the research from the research position, which is Chief Kirkwood.

The other one is gonna be Chief Delano.

That uh, so he's coming from the assistant chief.

Everything is a ladder with the Lakeshouse Fire Department, civil service.

So that means whenever those guys go up, somebody gotta come up from the bottom.

Right.

Okay, so what that means, there's no one to fill the positions.

So at this point, Chief Kirkwood goes up, the person that's behind Chief Kirkwood.

He has to take the test and then go to the position.

If he he's a captain now, and if he goes to that position there, someone from the bottom has to take another civil service test to come up.

So, Mr.

Danley, you're saying theoretically, you're bringing in seven new people.

Is it's equivalent to five because two gonna have to move up.

Oh no.

Oh no, sir.

It's more than five.

How's it more than five?

Because you have Chief Kirkwood have to somebody have to fill his position.

But every time you move to two move up.

Every time you move, however many you move, you gotta move.

So those two positions are gonna move five.

Because if Chief Delano is up for the position, then the next DC, I'm yeah, the next DC that's with me, which is gonna be Chief Um Ross Gillary is gonna move.

So everybody's gonna move up.

Gotta move.

So that's five positions.

But you start from the bottom.

Start from the bottom.

If you bring in in seven new people, okay, and two people move.

Okay.

That means two gonna move up, two gonna move up, two go much.

That's not two separate people.

That's just two positions being filled, but it causes a chain reaction.

It causes a chain reaction.

Okay.

So in essence, you're only bringing in five people instead of seven.

If yeah, if you're talking about those five guys are not really considered firefighters when they first come on.

Okay.

They're probation at firefighters.

So they have to work their working test period of one year before they can become a firefighter.

So but that can happen tomorrow if one of the chiefs decided that they wanted to retire or leave.

Okay, that that could that same scenario can happen.

The scenario is gonna always be there, but we're saying that the money that is gonna be spent for those to allocate for those two positions, be best to put guys boots on the ground.

The money that's more concerned about than the people than the position, actual people short.

The money as well as the people started because at this point, as you said earlier, I was the civil service president for the for the past 14 years until I made uh district chief four years, three years ago.

So at this point, I could not be the civil service president any longer.

Yes, that couldn't be any longer.

That's just it's just one of the rules that we have in place.

Okay, I'm in management.

I can't be sitting on the board that's handling our disciplinary action and in management at the same time.

You were in management?

I was now I'm a district chief.

You was promoted.

I was promoted to a district chief.

Okay.

Three years ago.

Okay, that was the answer.

One of your questions.

The second question you asked, you keep saying is about the money.

It's not about money, because right now the starting position at as of April 16, 2026, is 12.9 an hour.

That's why these guys keep saying that we're losing guys to other departments.

We look we lost in the past year.

We had two classes that just came on.

We done lost how many?

It was eight graduated four people left from our department.

But but I understand what y'all saying.

We have a money issue.

But we're voting on two positions.

So the position is won't, okay.

So let now let me do my part.

Okay.

So put me on the clock.

Three minutes.

All right.

So my my part of it is uh these two positions uh would is not uh it's not gonna be coherent for the for the department.

We just uh you just recognize chief uh Carter for doing a good job and for achieving a class one in 150 years.

Okay.

So at this point, those two positions wouldn't have helped us achieve a one at all, not nowhere.

How do you determine what's gonna help the chief?

How did how do I determine?

Yes, because number one, I am a district chief, uh-huh, and those two positions incorporate everything that I do as well as the assistant chief does.

Okay, but do you understand that the chief is over everything?

I do.

And he explained from the beginning that things are different at the top when you look down.

Most definitely.

So for you to say that those positions wouldn't help would be like me saying you don't need to get promoted because you're not gonna help the chief.

And that's a true statement.

And I I like that statement you say about me not being promoted because I wouldn't help the chief.

And I probably wouldn't have helped the chief if I was not in this position.

But at this point, I'm helping the chief because whenever he has a problem on a lower rank, he talks to assistant chief, which is three of them.

Uh huh.

And that that is your administrative chief, uh-huh.

Then your supportive chief, which is myself, we have nine district chiefs, and it goes down the line, uh-huh, and anything that that needs that come from the top, because he sees everything at 45,000 feet, uh-huh, drops down to this 15,000 feet.

So he's putting some more aides, some more people like you in positions to help him govern.

So y'all saying that that's wrong.

It's exactly because you have six.

Yeah, I'm sorry, you have twelve.

Twelve.

Is it three nine?

Three, six.

Nine district.

You have to go ahead.

So we have twelve, and then we have three rover positions that's never we asked them not to fill because we couldn't keep up with the uh the people coming up and coming on the fire department.

Gotcha.

So, hey, quick question.

Can I get some of this water?

Because I'm sure I need to try so the question, well, yeah, three minutes running.

So if I ask you, I understand, but I need some water.

So we've got we've got uh we've fire chief, then we have three assistant chiefs, yes, and nine district chiefs.

Correct.

Three rover district chief positions that's not filled because we asked the chief not to fill them because we were short staff at the bottom.

So you have some management positions that are and and I understand the discussion about money, money's finite.

You know, we we don't print money.

Federal government prints money.

Correct.

But we don't.

Correct.

So there's a finite amount of money that we can spend across the the city based upon our revenues and everything else.

So that's uh so that's the question.

Well, that's just the point, I guess that's being made is that sure we can create these new and I don't know what the salary is gonna be.

I know that I do know that that roughly um for every dollar we we pay a firefighter or uh employee in the fire department, roughly there's about 30 percent on top of that to pay into the retirement system that we pay.

Well, when I say we we as a taxpayers pay that.

So that's part of the compensation, and and I think uh I think it's a point well taken that to a 22-year-old guy or 20-year-old guy, you could talk about retirement, but like they're more concerned about you know getting another buck another even 10 cents an hour.

Yeah, means more to that person than the retirement does.

Right or wrong or anything, that's just the reality.

Right.

Okay, Mr.

Dadley, you can continue.

Yes, so um to answer your question.

So the way it works, uh right now the assistant chief make 50% below the beginning guy.

So these two positions will have to meet, yes, ma'am.

These two positions will have to be 60% above the beginning guy.

So right now the starting pay is like I said, it's $12 and nine cents an hour.

All right, so in in order to get these positions, you just don't come off the street.

You can't be a mall cop and come be a police officer and be at the top deputy chief.

That's not how it works.

And we try not to keep it the same way it's been.

The uh the city of Lake Charles, uh the union have been a part of the city for 84 years.

I'm sorry, 86 years.

At this point, I came on March 1st, 1999, making $5.99 an hour.

So at what he was saying earlier was from $599 to now, it's on uh $6.10.

The the neighboring departments, Moss Bluff, Westlake, Carlis.

Sulfur.

And all those guys depend on us.

President, are you gonna give District Chief Dantley more time?

Let me see.

So you're an assistant chief or district.

Your district district, yes, I not north side of Lake Charles.

Give him two more minutes.

So we uh so at this point we we run, we have a mutual agreement with everyone.

So we go everywhere within the city and and elsewhere.

Uh on Monday, the uh chief at 45, which is the terrorist, was headed to Hackberry for a fire on the camper.

So again, we we understand that we're gonna lose uh some kids, people to the uh other departments.

Our point and our position is simple.

We don't want it, we don't need two more chiefs.

It's not gonna, it's not gonna do anything.

He got three chiefs that he speaks to constantly.

Two motifs in the way is all it is to me is finding someone else to um to uh to uh to blame.

Meaning if something something fails, we we gotta go we gotta go that way.

Mr.

Danley, is that safe to say that that is your opinion?

No, sir.

It's safe to say that I I am I'm a chief over 18 guys on the north side, and if something happens and it's gonna come back to me, correct?

So I don't know how the hierarchy works.

It started at the top, though.

It started at the top.

Okay.

So but you said that putting those two people in those positions would just be two more people to blame.

It's correct.

And I'm asking, that is your opinion.

That is my opinion.

Okay.

Of 27 years, correct.

Okay.

My opinion.

Okay.

So if that with me govern the north end of town, so if I if something happens, I I'm the first one besides the captains to get griefed on.

And then my chief, yes, ma'am.

My chief's uh uh finish.

No, no, I stand on the corner.

So my my chiefs is constant uh is gonna be the one that's gonna have to stand before you guys or before the civil service and defend what have what happened, as well as Chief Carter.

He got to defend what happened, why he believed that his position was favorable.

Right.

Our position is simple.

It does not it is not going to help us for two more chiefs at all.

Okay, because at this point, you got nine.

Okay.

Two more is going to what is it going?

What is two more going to do?

Okay.

Besides clog up the communications.

And that's my position.

All right.

And I'll move away for somebody else to talk.

No problem.

All right, unless you got a question and I'll answer.

No, sir.

All right.

Any questions?

All right, let me get this and some water.

We got uh we got Jared Chandler.

State your name and address for the record.

Jared Chandler, 1105 contraband lane.

Charles.

Uh good evening, city council, mayor.

Uh, thank you for this opportunity to speak.

Uh I'd like to say this is something that we've talked about, you know, tonight singularly, but it's not the case.

This is something we've been harping on uh like a dead horse, as the saying goes for years, decades.

Um this department has been as of this year in operation for 150 years since 1876.

And you've just seen on the uh pictures up there pictures of guys back in 1970 going on the streets and saying, hey, I need more than 274 an hour.

I've been with this department for 13 years.

I got off this morning at 6 a.m.

after being there for 72 hours straight.

I have a one-year-old and a three-year-old and a wife who works two jobs, and I have two jobs myself.

I pay a house note for child care for them for me to have the opportunity to work here like I do.

My wife is a single mother most of the time because of that.

You have guys that are sacrificing more than what they were asked of originally, their lives, to just scrape by.

I make sixteen dollars and forty-six cents an hour.

Been here for 13 years.

I'm a driver.

So that's with one promotion.

That's what I make.

That's before any overtime now.

And we work 2,912 hours a year.

The average work week is 40 hours, is 2,080.

Almost a thousand hours we work as a base salary before the average working man's 2080.

Now, tack on overtime, and I can pull up the statistics of every guy in this department, the amount of overtime that they work, it is egregious.

And it's egregious from many standpoints.

So taxpayer to you, uh, we talk about these dollars that you know, anytime we actually raise dollars have to be justified.

It's coming from the taxpayer.

We have to justify this money.

And as you spoke, you know, 30% coming for retirement and all these things.

How do we justify $200,000 in perpetuity, mind you, annually for two positions?

Um, whenever we currently can't fill the position we have a hundred and thirty-three men allotment uh online, we are nearly 40 guys short.

Today, May 6, ladder one, engine four, ladder four, ladder six, and tanker nine.

That is five trucks out of 15 that are online.

Those trucks don't have a hoseman.

Ladder one, that's Enterprise, if you're familiar with Central Engine Four, that's Creole and 18th, if you're familiar.

Uh Ladder 4, engine four and ladder four, same area that they serve Creole on the 18th.

They don't have a hoseman on those trucks.

There's a captain and a driver.

And I know that it's really hard for me to educate everybody how the fire department works.

Uh and I encourage you to look into this.

Um International City Management Association, ICMA, uh managing fire service, second edition.

You they say a five-person company is a hundred percent effective.

A four-person company is 65%.

A three-person company is 38% effective.

Now, who here would like to say that they like to have a truck show up at their house 38% effective of either saving their property or saving a life.

Sir, you need to.

Yeah, I see, thank you.

38%.

That's with three.

What do you think it is with two?

They don't even list that number.

You know why?

Because professional fire departments don't operate that way.

And I don't want to look a gift horse in the mouth as far as the fact that we have attained a class one rating.

Miracle, I've had fire departments and other unions call me and go, how did y'all pull that off?

They know how short-handed we are.

I'll tell you how.

You got the men and women in this department that have really dug deep and and and and checked the hydrants and did the pre-plans and did all the work that we were trying.

We're trying to just save the two rating we had.

Some of us, like myself, can barely afford to live in this city and might also receive the benefit of that insurance permit, at least being sustained, if not, you know, God forbid, worsened.

Somehow we pulled off a one.

Pulling off that one is great.

We gotta maintain it.

We got to retain that rating.

How we do that is getting more guys.

I'm telling you, they warned us for years and preached us, you need two more stations, you need more guys, you need more manpower.

We pay $12.08 an hour.

Go to software.

They start off at $14,65 an hour.

Suffer.

We're late, Charles.

Moss Bluff, Carlis.

Hell, some of the volunteer departments are around here that have man people pay more than that.

We are the lowest paid department in a five-person, five parish area.

We're one of the biggest cities in that five.

We are the biggest city in that five parish area.

How can we claim to be so proud of that one rating when we are really struggling?

I'm gonna say this again.

I got off at 6 a.m.

this morning after having been there at Sunday at 6 a.m.

hadn't seen my kids.

You know what I did when I got off 6 a.m.

I pulled my tool trailer to a house and I worked nine hours remodeling a house in my other business.

Never gonna see my either of my kids.

They haven't seen me since Sunday.

Actually, no, Saturday, because they were asleep when I left at 5 a.m.

This is a problem, and it's not singularly unique to me, it's across the board.

You have guys okay, Mr.

Chandler.

Yep, your minute is up.

I'd like to have some what's your name?

Tyrant.

Tyrone Tutson?

Tyrand Tutson.

Tyrant.

Okay.

You're on the clock.

Three minutes.

Three minutes.

You have guys that currently don't get to go home.

And I'm gonna I'm a very passionate person.

I'm gonna use passionate words here, and it's not being overly flagrant.

It's emotional and financial extortion, what the city is doing to keep guys on that truck so that people are safe.

So that you, mayor, and anyone else in this in your constituency.

Address us.

No, I'm I'm address us.

That's all I'm asking.

Okay, you, City Council.

I know where all of you live, I know where your areas are.

You know, which of you wants to have that fire truck show up with two guys on it?

There's a captain and a driver.

I'm the driver.

I have to stay on the pump panel and operate that that pump panel and pressurize the hoses and get everything set up while the captain's making a 360 around the house.

I'm gonna try and explain this really quickly because I can't explain the fire service to you in this three minutes.

Who do you think's going in and saving you, your kids, your pets, your property?

There is nobody, there's no hoseman.

They need a hoseman and a captain.

Technically, by an FPA, you need two in and two out.

Two people go in, you got two people on the outside because we also have to protect ourselves.

Those guys go down, you need two guys to go in and get them.

So that we don't die.

We sacrifice a lot to save a lot.

You're in there.

What do you think happens?

And I'm not gonna name names, what do you think has happened?

Whenever we show up and we've only got a captain and a driver, and there's somebody in that house.

Do you think that we follow an FPA and put our hands and go, man, wish I could go in there and save them?

Don't have enough guys.

You know what we do?

Because I have to look myself in the mirror at night and live with the fact that we didn't have enough guys to go in and go, man, no, I'm going in.

And we've had singular captains.

One guy go in while I'm man in the pump panel, throwing gear on, trying to feed him hoes in 110 degree heat outside in Louisiana.

The next nearest truck, five minutes out.

We don't even have a water supply yet.

We got a thousand gallons on a truck.

Maybe if we're lucky, if it's one of the pumpers that's got 750.

You're pumping 250 gallons a minute.

How many minutes you got?

Three.

Not much, is it?

I don't know about you, but I live in this town.

That's not what I want showing up.

I know the reality as a firefighter, what's showing up to my house.

I know the caliber of the guys, we're gonna do what we have to do.

And we're gonna do it despite not being given the resources that we need.

I would like to say, no, I I would love to be in support of my fire chief.

I want us to have the type of department that is cohesive and on the same page.

We don't have even a department as it stands because we're almost a third of our department short.

But I want to support having those two extra positions.

The departments that we're comparing to, mind you, are Baton Rouge, Shreveport that have these positions.

Do the math.

I can't give you the metrics right now, but we don't have the size department that do to justify those positions.

I want that though.

I want that for our citizens.

I want that for this city.

We're putting the cart before the horse.

Nobody is saying we don't need those positions.

We're saying we don't need them right now.

I want to support those positions.

A lot of guys would like to have that.

Donation of Tom?

Y'all want to give you gonna speak?

Ronnie Sonye?

Semi in.

Want to give him your time?

All right.

Thank you, Simon.

Excuse me, I'm gonna get back on my point.

Can I make a point?

Yes, sir.

I understand the passion of all y'all.

I sympathize with y'all.

Believe me.

But we are talking about two positions.

Y'all wasting y'all time arguing about salaries.

I agree with y'all.

We could do better on salaries.

We need to hear some arguments about why these particular jobs, all we voting on tonight is filling these two positions.

I'm getting to that point.

That's why I need the other three minutes.

Okay.

You got it.

Start?

Yeah, go ahead.

Okay.

Well, three minutes.

Let's let's squeeze them.

We're comparing ourselves with departments like Baton Rouge and Shreveport.

Now, Shreveport, I won't say they're in a similar position.

But Baton Rouge, we have guys that left here to go there and no longer work here.

Mind you, two years into the job making more than a captain does here because they pay better.

And it's written in black and white.

I mean, let's be real.

Like was said earlier, you apply for a job.

What's the first question people ask?

What is it, Pay?

Do you think that we can really get guys fresh out of high school?

Hey, would you like to go risk your life for $12.08 an hour?

Most of them come here because the position is available and we'll pay for the training.

That's a waste of tax dollar money.

You know why?

Because Beaumont pays 70K a year starting out, and I can sit here and list all the departments that list more.

They come here, they get the certifications, and then another department benefits from our tax dollars because we wasted them.

And I don't want to see more money wasted.

$200,000 on salaries that you're asking the reason behind it.

We don't have the size of department of the man.

His span of control in any system is what?

Seven people.

We have 133 online.

You do the math and break down, we've got 12 chiefs as it goes now.

It doesn't make sense in black and white to throw two more chiefs in that.

And not to, you know, it's a poor phrase, but too many chiefs, you know.

We don't have enough people to justify these positions yet.

I want to have that department as much as the next guy.

And I would love whenever we get that department to be in support of these positions when they're justified.

I would love to hear from the fire chief if he's able to rebut what's the justification for these two positions?

Because I we've asked, and to be frank, in the meetings, the justification being told is because I want it.

I'm the chief.

I've not heard any metrics to justify.

We got to justify tax dollars, right?

What are the metrics and what is the direct correlation of 200,000 and a direct benefit to the taxpayer of spending that kind of money?

And it's not a one and done over positions for for a year.

No, this is perpetuity and going forward.

We have to justify that, right?

And that's what we're told every time we ask for a raise.

We've got to justify the tax dollars.

I would love to hear a direct metric comparison of justified justification for tax dollars.

How does that play out?

I don't see it.

I've not heard it.

I'd love to hear it.

We've asked, we've not been told, both behind private doors and here publicly.

Uh I didn't hear anything from the fire chief that says, hey, this is directly how this is going to help both the department and the taxpayer.

I don't see it.

I want to support these positions in the future if we have that kind of department.

We don't have the size of department that justifies these two positions.

Baton Rouge.

We're not on the same level as them.

Not even close.

We're not just talking about the money.

We're talking about safety.

We're talking about guys that are showing up with only two guys on a truck to save you.

Your house, your kids, your wife, your husband, your grandparents.

How is that acceptable?

I don't want to look at gift horse in the mouth.

We we got the class one rating that's great.

Anyone want to get him three more minutes?

No, not frustrated at all.

Okay, you got time, you want to give it to him?

This would be the last three minutes.

He can have up to 12, correct?

That's what I'm asking.

If anybody else wants to give him time.

Morrow, Mr.

Morrow.

All right.

Simple.

I'm gonna try and reel it in here.

I'm so passionate about this because we've been beating this dead horse for a long time, and I'm gonna I'm gonna give you some more justification.

Safety.

It's an issue, and it's not just a money thing.

We're like Chief Dantley said, we're pulling two guys offline essentially to fill these two positions.

It's a cascade effect.

We're already short there.

Common sense dictates if you're already short in an area and you can't justify the new area you're trying to create.

Why would you pull from a bucket that's almost empty?

It doesn't make sense.

And we can't refill that bucket.

I'm telling you, we lose the attrition rate here, is over half in most cases of all the classes we bring on.

In some cases, more than that, three quarters.

It's ridiculous.

The only guys we're able to keep are people like me that really care about the community and have stayed here and have some loyalty in it and have some skin in the game, but it's getting worse and worse with inflation.

1208 an hour.

Who wants to sacrifice?

Not only okay, maybe let's not get too embellished on sacrificing your life, but you're sacrificing your life as far as quality of life.

I'm never home.

These guys are never home.

They never get to see their wife and their kids.

It's emotional and financial extortion because these guys feel indebted to their community to make sure that we don't walk away.

I have a business that outstreaks well what I make here that I've developed.

How much longer do you think that I'm gonna stay here?

How much longer do you think I'm gonna look at my one-year-old and three-year-old and go, hey guys, barely scraping by, daddy's never home.

I'm gonna keep being a firefighter.

Eventually we have to walk away.

We don't want to walk away, but it's a breaking point.

We're losing not just guys on the bottom end, we're losing guys at the top end, 20-year guys that are going and going, you know what, I'm gonna go make real money.

Justify tax dollars.

That's what's always harped on us when we ask for a raise.

I'd love to hear your justification as city council members and the chief why we should spend $200,000 annually when nobody that I've heard has given a direct correlation at the benefit of those positions.

The fire chief, I mean, maybe he's I don't know, does is he not able to perform his duty as it sits now and needs to delegate?

I'd love to hear the metrics on that.

What is it directly these people are gonna be responsible for that he is not already responsible for now?

Departments that have these positions are significantly larger than ours.

Safety.

Two guys on a truck.

Five trucks out of 15, a third of the department right now has no hoseman on it.

And that's today.

This is a Wednesday, the beginning of the cycle.

But I get two weeks and end of the cycle, it gets worse.

Guys are burnt out, they've been here for four or five, six days straight.

Pull up the metrics again.

I encourage you to call.

Call on a regular basis and ask how many trucks are not just short, browned out, browned out, and I'm gonna educate.

That means an entire truck for your area is not in service because by loss, you have to have a driver and a captain.

If you don't have a driver cabinet, that truck cannot legally move.

That means there's a truck in your area that's not being serviced.

Not to, like I said, not to look at gift horse in the mouth, you know, it's great.

We got the class one.

We really scrape together to somehow make that miracle happen.

Maybe we will retain it.

I guarantee you, if we don't get those numbers up on the bottom end, and keep throwing money at the top end, it's never gonna happen.

Time I can't we'll give you three more minutes to get the same.

That's all right.

I think I've beat this dead horse again for the umpteenth time.

All right.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your consideration.

I hope that you all justify these tax dollars.

Mr.

Frederick Pornell.

State your name and address for the record, please.

Frederick Pornell.

Uh I live at 117 Briar Court in Saltville, Louisiana.

I would like to start off saying thank you for allowing me this time to talk and speak to everyone.

Uh for being on for nearly 20 years.

I see that this is an issue, and y'all can see as well, but these are some of the things I'd like to inform y'all about.

The LCFD is facing severe frontline staffing shortages.

The fire chief is asking to support him in creating more administrative positions when the union overwhelmingly voted against this creation of two positions, which does not address the staffing deficiencies and safety of the online men and personnel of this fire department.

As they stated earlier, as a union whole, only four of the members voted for this.

Our argument is that the department's priority should be addressing the manpower shortage in the field rather than expanding administration at this time.

Maybe if it was a bigger department, I could I could see that would be fine, but it's not.

Burnout and safety is an overwhelming experience, and it's extreme because some of these guys are working for almost a week at a time without, like he said, addressing and seeing your family.

We have families.

You can go and look on the records of how many people have worked over time, which is a staffing.

Administrative, it's not administrative, it's staffing of manpower.

As we were addressing earlier, with this last class, we had eight recruits.

Three of them lost, and then we also lost another two people that have been here for over 15 years.

That's an issue.

Mary Simon, if you'd like me to address you for just a second and just to put put a point.

Isn't there a need for a ladder truck on the North Lake Sides?

All your questions come to the council, please.

Isn't there supposed to be a ladder truck that's supposed to be on the north side of our department?

There's also a need for Morganfield to have another truck, or actually two, which would be 18 employees.

Where is that coming from when we give administrative?

There's no need for that.

As my closing statement, if the council allows this to take place, it will be a disservice to the citizens and shows a lack of concern for the safety and the citizens and the firefighters of this department.

Furthermore, a more prudent action for the council would be to listen to the facts of the case rather than to listen to an inane position, which is no merit and no purpose.

You need more time.

Nope.

Okay.

Thank you.

Stephen Willis.

Oh, Miss Offrey, I'm sorry.

I called you earlier.

Come on.

State your name and address for the record, please.

Stephen Willis, 1825 Topsy Road Lake Trail 70611.

Uh Stephen Willis, I'm a district chief.

I've been here for 27 years.

Uh I'm coming at, you know, I thank y'all for y'all's time, first of all, and I'm coming at a little different point of view.

Oh, I'm probably fellow, a lot of my fellow guys a little upset with me.

I'm not totally against these positions.

I think it's a horrible timing.

Uh a few years back, Chief Carter asked me to start looking into and and helping build our critical stress team.

I don't know if that y'all know what that is, critical stress debriefing stuff.

Every time we have a critical incident, we go and we talk to them.

Uh since 2022, I don't know how many people I've met with and talked with.

But I just want to give you a few stats on firefighter mental health struggles.

Uh firefighters experienced mental health struggles, including PTSD, depression, suicidal ideas at a significantly higher rate than the general population.

Some studies show approximately 20 to 40 percent of firefighters struggle with these issues.

This is high, uh, and it's attributed to the exposure to the traumatic events that we do as firefighters, uh, which average non-traumatic events a year.

Uh the human body is not made to see this every day.

Uh, roughly 20% of the firefighters meet the criteria for post-traumatic stress at some point in their career.

Uh 6.8 lifetime risk of general uh is the regular of general population.

Some studies indicate that it's as high as 37%.

Suicidal thoughts, Florida State University found that 47% of U.S.

firefighters have considered suicide.

19 is actually made plans, 16% is actually attempted some time of this uh suicide in their career.

Anxiety and depression, approximately 40% of firefighters report some type of clinical levels of anxiety and depression.

Sleeping disorders, at least 30% have sleeping disorders, which is linked to three to six times higher likelihood of developing mental health disorders.

The morale and other things, over 50% of firefighters have suffered some kind of psychological distress from actions or lack of, as uh driver chandler was saying when you get somewhere and you don't have the manpower issues, uh the manpower there, you can't do your job, and that that may not beat you to death.

I can't tell you how many people I've met with that has issues with that.

Uh and then so saying that uh you do stuff that you don't want.

Uh 30% of firefighters nationwide have an alcohol dependence.

They try to find a way to cope with an alcoholic thing.

Uh, what I see and what the the nation sees is uh we don't see single incidents, it's just repeated, and that just gets to you gets to you.

And these guys are working tons and tons of overtime.

Uh, if if you all asked about numbers a little bit earlier, if if we could get it down to we're only holding five or you know, we get that number from allotment from one, whatever is like 30 something people short to maybe 20 uh only being 10 or 15 short, then maybe these positions could could be uh, in my opinion, thought about.

But until then, we're putting too much stress on our guys.

So you just said what what number would be the magic number for I don't know the magic number, that would be something with the chief, but in my personal opinion, it if and I'm just saying I don't even know the numbers.

Say if we're 40 people short, if we could right now we're 40 people short.

I don't know that.

I don't know the exact number, but I know we're close to it.

I mean, y'all y'all know this more than I do.

Uh so if we're 40 people short, if we could be 10 people short, if we could find 30 extra employees right now, that would significantly help our our stress levels and in the stuff.

Uh what you see is you see a lot of sleep deprivation.

Uh, and I'll use myself as an example.

I worked overtime the other night in a 12-hour period on a Friday night to 6 o'clock Saturday morning.

Another minute.

Just 30 seconds, maybe.

All right, go ahead.

Uh I made eight calls.

The following night was a Saturday night.

That was my regular shift.

I worked it.

We made seven calls that night.

Driving down Broad Street, going to a call.

I can't even respond like I should be because sleep deprivation.

Uh, and we're asking these guys to do this seven days, eight days, nine days, ten days.

Some of them even do it 14 days in a row.

It's it's getting to a critical point.

Uh and saying that on the on the stress point, I'm I've met with a lot of these guys, and and they're they are at a breaking point.

And it's hard to sit there and go back home, and they all know I just finished a class with the police department.

That was a great class they put on.

Uh, I wish more people would go to it.

Uh they say, like you have to turn my telling me I have to turn my phone off.

I can't do that because these guys need a need need somebody to listen to them.

We're just at a point right now we can't afford to lose any more people and and rely and put more stress on the guys that that's there at work.

Thank y'all for y'all's time.

I appreciate it.

Y'all have a good night.

Okay, I need SC Andrea Arfa.

Can you state your name and address for the record, please?

Andrea Orfin, 7058 Bowman Road in Iowa.

Most of the things I'm gonna read off of here have already been said, so it's basically just a reiteration.

The Lake Charles Fire Department is facing a critical staffing shortage with vacancies reaching one-third below ideal levels.

To manage this, current leadership has begun canceling earned vacation time.

This ill-advised measure will only further the following extreme burnout.

Suppression personnel work 2,912 hours annually.

That's 33.24% of the year, significantly higher than the 2,080 hours or 23.8% worked by office staff or administration.

Loss of morale, forcing overworked employees to forfeit rest, adds dangerous psychological and physical stress, increasing the risk of workplace injury and sleep deprivation.

Loss of confidence.

There is a decline in trust toward the administration due to a perceived preference for punitive scheduling over competitive compensation.

In recruitment and retention, sulfur starting pay is around 36,500 per year.

Carlis' starting pay is around 42,000 per year.

While Lake Charles starting pay is around 35,198 per year.

The nearby smaller departments are taking our trained personnel with better pay.

We believe instead of restrictive scheduling, the administration should immediately decrease canceling vacations and restore the ability for employees to recharge, preventing long-term disability and further resignations.

Implement a pay scale that meets or exceeds the regional average to stop the bleeding of trained employees leaving for surrounding departments.

Implement a play a plan to reach the optimal staffing level of 182 people without relying on canceled vacations and overtime.

The safety of Lake Charles residents depends on a fire department that is mentally sharp and physically ready.

Relying on staffing through exhaustion is a liability, not a solution.

We urge the council and mayor simion to refocus on solving the root cause, recruitment and retention through fair pay and respect for employee well-being, not to new office positions.

I don't have time to read my second one, but I do want to say addressing the two positions.

We already are struggling with communication through up through the ranks to chain of command.

I feel like that would just muddle the chain of command communication even more.

Any questions?

Before I call Terrence up.

Does anybody have a minute they can't?

You can take one of Terrence's minutes.

Okay, I'm taking and I'm gonna rush through this.

All right.

I'm here representing the men and women who protect the city.

We are the people who sacrifice our own health both physically and mentally to ensure the safety of the community.

We miss the birthdays, the graduations, sporting events, and the holidays because the job doesn't stop.

But right now we are asking for your help because we can no longer sustain the pace you are demanding of us.

We are here tonight to formally ask you to reject the creation of these two new administrative positions.

For over a century, the department's administration has gotten the job done with the current structure.

What has changed is our ability to keep people.

We are currently facing a retention crisis because we cannot recruit and keep personnel with our current wages.

Adding two more people to an office does nothing to help the firefighters who are working countless hours of overtime and running on empty.

Staffing shortages aren't just a workplace issue, they are a public safety risk.

When we don't have enough boots on the ground, response times are threatened, and the safety of every citizen in Lake Charles is on the line.

Every dollar spent on a new office position at this time is a dollar that isn't going toward competitive wages that would keep our trained employees from leaving for better paying small departments nearby.

Please stop taking our sacrifices for granted.

Please help us help you fix the staffing shortage, address the wages, and put the focus back on the front lines.

Please vote no on these administrative notes, roles, and yes to the people doing the work.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That only one of them.

I got six cards.

No, this is Terrence here.

So he appoint Mr.

Lloyd Hanks.

Before Mr.

Hanks comes up, Caleb Dadley, Brandon C, and Dylan Fruge.

Are y'all um donating time?

Donating time.

Okay.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

My name is Lloyd Hanks.

My address is 2504 14th Street, Lake Charles, Louisiana.

Um, I'm one of the three assistant chiefs on duty.

Um, I'm representing local 561.

And um, and also like I said, I'm a citizen.

So this is to the mayor, to the city counselors, to the public, other representatives, and I just wrote this uh briefly, maybe about four or five hours ago, so just be where it went of my grammar, it might be a little off, but I'm here.

Uh so at work, I'm just read what I have here.

Um, first I'm gonna talk about what they were saying, the shortage.

Um, so you'll be pulling three guys from suppression.

So one of the guys will be coming from assistant chief to uh one of the positions, one person is coming from administration from planning, uh, a captain is going to be filled that spot for planning.

Uh so that's three spots there, and then the chain reactions goes down, uh, filling the slot.

So somebody has to take the assistant chief position from the district chief, and the captain's moving into the district chief position, and then the driver going to a captain position.

And then you will see, well, you're gonna have a driver going up to that uh firefighter going to driver position, but you're really not because we don't have the adequate staff in that one position.

Okay, so what I wrote down here is value versus devalue.

Um, I like to say I like to commend the chief and the rest of the staff members that are here on our class rating, and uh they did a guy a good job.

Uh uh one of the guys that's standing behind me that but was passionate about it, he was there, and and uh I gave him uh hats off to him.

So um, so the first thing I'm gonna just go ahead and read value versus devalue at work, the experience of being valued or devalued often boils down to mattering, the feeling of being the sufficient and adding measurable value to a group and or business valued employees recognitions, respect and growth, devalued employees are ignored, interrupted, excluded that devalues an employee.

Okay, I don't know if I kind of scramble all that in there.

So valued employees are recognized, respected, and grow, devalues is interrupted, excluded and ignored.

Not everything I'm saying here is not attacked to anybody.

I'd hope nobody takes this nothing personal.

Uh uh, most of the stuff I'm gonna say is is according to feedback.

Okay, I did scratch out a few little things there because I think they told me it was too strong, but like I said, I just written this just recently.

Uh signs of devalue, micromanagement of slack, of lack, and trust being closely watched or having resources deliberately withheld, exclusion is not being invited to keep meetings or being ignored when you provide suggestions, social div devaluation uh is stereotype based on age, gender, orientation that leads to someone passed over regardless of merit and or senior and seniority in our department is based off of seniority, and like I said, I wouldn't even go on speaking again.

Uh reputation of damage is staff undermining staff in front of peers, leading to lower status, disengagement is lower, low morale, reduces productivity, and increases asymptotic.

Time, Mr.

President.

Mr.

Hanks, you need more time.

Yes, sir.

I still got yes, if you don't mind.

Mr.

Michael Robertson is donating this time.

Okay.

The impact of feeling value, uh, employee experience that matter and effect that builds loyalty and innovations.

Acknowledgement, frequent meaningful recognition beyond manual receipt or review.

I'm sorry, trust being able to manage and handle tasks without excessive supervision, professional growth, access to development of opportunities and a clear path for advancement, respectful communication, ideas are heard, and professional opinions are respected.

So, like I say, I'm not here to attack nobody.

Like I said, I wrote this earlier.

So keep in mind a value and devalue.

So Mr.

Hanks, I have a question.

Yes, sir.

Help me to understand.

Yes, sir.

Are you saying that's how you treat it?

Say it.

Somewhat.

So you're saying the chief devalues y'all and belittles y'all?

Yes.

That's what y'all saying the chief does.

Can I speak?

No, when your time comes.

Because they might be afraid of that.

That's all right.

They're up there now.

My question is for Mr.

Hanks.

Well, and and the reason why I didn't want to speak is because of what he just said.

Uh I don't I don't like retaliation.

I'm not a person that uh bucked the system.

Everybody in here but knows me, they know how I work.

So you say the chief, if you talk about the chief, he would retaliate.

Talking.

Yes or no?

Yeah.

Okay.

Anything else?

Yeah, why don't you be on?

So anyway, keep in mind in the value.

Everyone, including city councilmans.

I'm trying to go somewhere with this in here.

Uh everyone that city councilmans, mayors, judges, or selected representatives are in positions due to the citizens of Lake Charles having the right to vote and the outcome we choose.

We choose you.

So when you sit in the office, do you feel value?

Are you feeling value at this time?

No.

I'm just asking your question.

Go ahead.

Yeah, I'm just it's that's what I have here.

You should feel value because you are overseeing your district, and the mayor is seeing the city of Lake Charles.

You are serving the community right now by letting me voice my opinion and anyone else for or against it.

I got you.

What reasons?

When you were when this was already voted on by the fire department union body.

While we still discussing this right now.

When we, the community of Lake Charles, clearly move more important, we have more important issues to resolve.

I heard somebody say about a tree earlier.

I know about the bridge.

We talked about the community center.

Uh last time I was here with some industrial business up there in the terrace, uh, flooding issues, highways and street problems, homeowner properties.

Every time I come here, we're talking about beautification, and that's just a few things at the top of my head.

Uh we are discussing the topic within our fire department to you.

I'm pretty sure other departments within the city of Lake Charles have issues, concerns, topics, and will not bring them to the city council meetings.

If you don't feel devalued, I'll feel the value for you.

Me standing here, I feel the value.

You need more time?

Yeah, I'm almost done.

Okay, I'm I'm gonna give you Caleb Dadley.

Three minutes.

Me as a taxpayer, our taxpayers' money right now is being spent on voting on something that already has been voted on.

We should be moving forward, not idle, not backwards, which leads to insult, but feedback to solutions.

I haven't heard a solution yet.

Good idea at this time, but we have bigger concerns, and this will not make the community of Lake Charles any better.

And I think that's what one of the drivers said earlier.

We are worrying around worrying about the wrong things.

And then I got a little human thing in that I was just playing around with it.

So uh, like Alan Iverson said, you know, you know, we we're talking about practice, we're not talking about a game, we're talking about practice, and to us, the fire department, we're just practicing because we have bigger issues, real life situations.

Thank you for your time.

All right.

Union rep.

Yes.

State your name and address for the record.

Terrence Thomas, 1912 2nd Street, Lake Charles.

Okay.

For starters, this is a booklet of all the brownouts we do on a regular basis.

Anything you see in yellow is missing personnel.

Unacceptable.

Now, I'd like to start off by thanking y'all for the funds into our water infrastructure to help us do this class one rating because that's what helped us get across the hump.

This success clearly demonstrates that our current workforce is capable of meeting high standards without the addition of new administrative roles at this time.

Chief of Administration and Chief of Operation is not needed.

It is a duplicated service.

Me as an assistant chief, I am over administration in the absence of the chief.

I'm over operations every day that I work.

There is no need for these two guys to come in and try to do what I do.

Our staff has achieved these goals despite being short-staffed, undercompensated, overworked, and low morale.

However, we are now at a critical juncture where burnout, council vacations, and low morale are threatening our operational stability.

That's the safety of every citizen in this city.

To maintain this class one, the city must prioritize comfort competitive pay to improve the recruitment and retention, especially as we are already two years into the next grading period.

So we got this one, but we already two years into the next grade.

And we've already been instructed that if we don't do something about manpower, we're gonna fail.

We're gonna lose that one.

Our primary need is not additional executive oversight, but rather boots on the ground and support.

Investing in our frontline personnel is the only way to ensure the continuous safety and excellence of our city's infrastructure.

Since we're talking about PIL, PIL evaluates several aspects of the fire department.

Emergency communications, training, personnel and staffing, water supply, equipment.

Just to the main points of it.

For property insurance in Louisiana, the PIL does not provide specific credit for the number of chiefs of fire department has.

So the chief has yet to explain how this helps with our crisis of manpower and safety of the citizens.

Because that's my main focus.

My family lives here.

We cannot do this any longer with working like this.

Our guys sacrificed everything to improve this class one.

The chief was not even here for the grading.

So that's why guys are upset and feel the distrust and the lack of faith in his leadership.

It is pathetic.

I'm an assistant chief who's right under him.

In the two years since I've been assistant chief, he does not come to me and talk to me about any leadership things dealing with the department.

He goes to Chief Delano, who he wants to put in that position.

What Chief Hanks was trying to say is he don't talk to him either.

This is a lack of leadership.

We don't need other chiefs up here for him to be able to put in between us to give orders.

If he can't fulfill that need, maybe he need to re-evaluate being the fire chief.

Because we don't need more chiefs, we need more Indians.

Our department is dying.

And we're here to ask y'all to stop the bleeding.

If y'all vote for this, y'all basically telling the citizens you don't care about their safety because we care.

That is our main concern.

The money, I don't care about all that.

Money is what drive the community and the world.

If you don't pay these people, these people are not staying here.

I talk to young people all the time trying to recruit them to come here.

But when you tell them that we make $35,000, which is $12 and eight cents an hour, they laugh at me.

They laugh at me.

I've gave the chief a written contract for when we get new hires to retain them for at least three years.

We have yet to see that contract go into effect.

So we are doing everything we can on this side of the line to protect this community, but we're being let down at the top.

If y'all vote for this, it's gonna be a tremendous disgrace to this city.

I have questions for you.

Hold on.

You need more time?

Whatever you're willing to give me, because I got a lot to say.

Okay, but do you have a lot to say about this issue?

Oh, yes, sir.

Okay, well, continue on.

You got he had a question.

Okay, go ahead.

Yeah.

Um my question is.

Are you aware that we don't have the administrative?

We have a mayor and the chief.

We're not the administrative, we we don't take care of folks' jobs.

You know, that's not what we do.

I know that.

Okay, and we have to trust the mayor is elected by the citizen to run this thing.

The city council, all we do is approve what he puts in front of us or not.

Okay.

Okay.

Number one.

And evidently, the mayor and the police chief decided that it would be in the best interest of the city to have this position and they're asking us to pay for it.

Okay?

That's our role.

Okay.

Now, can I respond?

That's all I'm saying.

Before you get too far.

Yeah.

I might forget something.

So let me respond to that.

Number one, the mayor knows nothing about the fire service.

Number two, the fire chief was on fire line for four years, went to training for 21 years.

So he has a disconnect with the men.

I work with the men.

And if you take a vote of hands right now, these guys will tell you that they don't have confidence in this chief leading this department because he thinks, because he's the chief, no matter what the men need, if he don't want it, we don't deserve it.

Well, that's what I'm saying.

And that is not how it goes.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

It's not our job.

But it's your job to vote.

I mean, all we are voting on is whether to approve the spending the money.

The chief's record is not on trial here.

Well, we'll wait.

The mayor's record is not on trial for the council.

The council is only to decide whether we're gonna spend this money at the mayor's recommendation and the chief recommendation.

You're not 100% correct in that statement.

Your job as the council is to protect these citizens.

Yes.

We are here pleading to you to protect the citizens from this error that's being made in our leadership.

So it is your job to listen to the facts, the evidence that we're presenting and make a decision off of that, not off of the chief because he's the chief.

If I was the administrator, I can't change nothing that's going on there.

That's not my role.

That's not what I'm asking you to do.

I'm asking you to listen to the facts, the law, the NFPA standards, everything that we're presenting, because the chief has presented nothing to show where these positions justify the correction of the errors we have with the staffing.

Now, if I can move on before she tells me I'm out of time, I need the chief to come to the podium because I have questions for him.

No, you talk, and then he comes back for his rebuttal.

That's the way we conduct this meeting.

He won't be able to remember all these questions.

But that's not up to me for him to remember you.

If you need to ask you something, he asked you something, but we're not going back and forth.

Well, first of all, Chief, correct me if I'm wrong.

We have three assistant chiefs that do administrative and operational duties, is the first question.

Which he's gonna say yes, because he has no choice because of our operational chart.

Can you pull up the operational chart of the fire department on there, please?

Mr.

President, while they're doing that, can you tell me how much time this is?

I should have some more minutes on there.

Somebody else got some time.

You didn't, you didn't exhaust it.

I'm counting the minutes.

That was three minutes.

Okay, that's why I said you got three more.

I was unclear as to how much time you gave him.

He had a total of nine minutes.

Nine, okay.

So if he's creating these two positions to do what I do now, what will I be doing?

That's a question.

So you're worried about your job.

I'm not worried about my job.

But you just asked that question.

No, the question is if you're gonna take my duties and give them to somebody else, uh-huh, what is my new duties?

What are the duties of this new job?

The new duties will be over operations and over administrative.

So we can't have two then.

I already do that job.

But we can't have two.

What you mean?

No, sir.

No, so you don't know what can have it.

No.

Chief Delano and Chief.

Okay, but but you but what I'm saying.

This chart right here shows you our structure.

Okay, that's as it is now, right?

No, that's with these made up positions that he's trying to put in here.

Uh-huh.

Because first of all, he's one that could put create these positions.

Bat Ridge has 602 employees.

Okay.

I understand that point.

I'm simply asking the positions that he wants to create.

Are they in this?

With this chart, yes, but with our regular chart, they're not there.

Take that operations out.

That's the three assistant chiefs.

Uh huh.

That's the formation now that comes down.

Uh-huh.

At the top, it's him.

And then when he's not here, the assistant chief is in that position too.

So, what are these two new positions are gonna be doing?

They're gonna be over all administrative duties and all over operation duties, what I do.

So it's duplicated service.

So wasted tax documents.

What I'm asking you, you saying duplicated.

Has the chief said this is how it's gonna be, and this he's gonna take your position.

Did the chief say that?

He can't take my position.

But I'm these are the guidelines of civil service.

Okay, it has a list of the things that the assistant chief does.

Okay.

He's gonna incorporate these positions to do what I am doing now.

So he would have to come up with another job for me to be doing, which he already has us doing payroll, that is not our job.

That's what I'm trying to what I'm trying to get you to understand is if he creates another position, he could very well take a duty from you and give it to this other thing.

He can do that.

That's not the purpose of it.

But you, but we don't know.

So I know you're telling us what you think it is, because you just told me it wasn't in the uh in the in the operations.

Yes.

Okay, so it's a new job being created.

And all I'm asking you is it's possible for all how many it would be three, four, what?

These two people going into the same position or different positions, different positions.

Okay, so administrative person will be over to support chiefs and their division.

Uh-huh.

The operations person would be over the operations of the suppression people.

Okay, who I am over.

Okay, so now can he take the job that you do and the job that's coming up and divide it evenly?

No.

How he can't?

No.

How can he not?

Because number one, number one, I'm over all suppression work right now.

These positions do nothing to fix our problem.

You are you're trying to mislead the conversation.

No, this is about safety.

Hold on, Terrence.

Hold on a second.

We're talking about two positions.

I'm asking you about these two positions.

What are their jobs going to be?

Your response was they're gonna take, they're gonna do what you're doing.

I like that.

And I'm asking you, based upon what you know.

If we hire two new positions, that means we got four people in those positions right now, correct?

Yep.

So now, can the chief divide all of the duties up evenly where all four people would have a job?

No, you sitting here talking about ifs and what ifs.

The chief is standing right there.

How about he come to the podium and describe what he's gonna do?

Because I don't have to do that.

I'm asking you based upon what you're saying.

You're telling me that this person is gonna take your job.

I didn't say you're gonna take my job.

You say he's gonna do it.

And all I'm asking you is if we got four positions, can we divide all the jobs up where they be evenly distributed, and each one of these positions have duties?

Let's say hypothetically, yes.

Okay, that ain't no hypothetically.

That's what we're doing.

So all I'm saying is when we say what these positions are going to be, we have to let ask the chief and say, Chief, what are the gonna be the positions of these four positions?

Now, you may not have a job that you have right now, you may have something else.

And the new person may have what you're doing, and so on and so forth.

That's all I'm asking you.

Is that possible?

Fine, yes.

Okay, that's okay.

That's my need to ask you a question.

Okay, when he comes up here and do his rebuttal, do I get a chance to come back up here and go at it again?

No, you don't.

Why not?

Because that's that's not the way the meeting works.

That's unfair.

That's not the way the meeting works.

You're coming into a meeting that have established protocol already.

We're not creating new.

I know y'all might feel like we're doing something new, but that's the way it is.

Well, let me ask you this question.

How many of y'all ever used the fire service before up there?

What you mean about fire service?

If you ever had an emergency where you called us to come to it.

Let me ask, let me let me let me let me let me answer that question this way.

I value the fire department.

We need the fire department.

I'm not diminishing nothing y'all saying.

What I am saying in this position is we're asked to vote on two new positions.

For the time that we've been hearing y'all, we've heard every complaint what's going on with the fire department.

And I know personally, I can speak for Craig Marks and District F.

I have gone to the stations.

I have sat down with y'all for going on six years now.

The first time y'all came, y'all told us it was the fire departments.

Me and Mr.

Harvey went there, we sat down, we evaluated the fire departments.

We came back, we got the council to vote to repair and buy new suits and all kind of other stuff.

Then it became about pay.

And then we went back and we talked again about pay, and y'all got a raise.

Then we come back and it was about something else.

Then the term switched over.

We gave y'all instructions based upon the council, say, hey, when the new mayor come in, sit down, go renegotiate the things that you didn't feel you can get from the last administration.

Remember we we talked about that?

So when y'all came back this time, it was about pay.

So the mayor came back and gave a raise.

Then it came back about the two jobs.

And then it came back about something else.

So what I am saying right now, you y'all asked about our positions.

Our positions, you right, is to sit here and evaluate the facts.

Now, I've had a chief come up here, I've had the union president.

Well, you're another chief, right?

Your chief.

I had two chiefs come here and tell me.

They actually had four chiefs come.

But I had two chiefs come tell me that their boss is disrespectful, don't value, don't do any of this.

And prior to this, we had a meeting, right in that meeting room, and we asked y'all, sit down with the chief, and the chief sit down with y'all, because we went to the chief as well and say, hey man, this doesn't look good.

Let's sit down and talk about this.

We've asked that on several occasions, but every time it appears to me, and I can speak on this because I this is my uh going into my sixth year of being on the council.

It seems like every time we reach a plateau, instead of negotiations happen, it becomes a bullying tactic.

I'm part of a union.

I worked in the union, so I understand the rights and and privileges of being in a union, and y'all doing what y'all supposed to do.

But at the same time, I have never heard of a union that don't want new jobs.

Now, us bringing in other people, like Mr.

Fundell said, all we can do, we can do better.

Uh I ain't gonna say we can do better.

We have to go through finances and all that to find out can we pay?

We have the same gripes y'all have.

We're fighting for the same things y'all have.

The police want to raise, public works want to raise, fire department wanna raise, management wanna raise, the council won't raise, you know.

All of these things are what we we're gonna deal with.

You understand what I'm saying?

And and and I sympathize with y'all, so I don't want it to be the mean that I don't care.

What I am tired of is the bickering.

We have to come to a point to where we can sit down and negotiate this.

Because last time we had the same scenario, we asked y'all, let us talk.

You know what happened?

The firemen end up in front of City Hall, picketing.

Right?

So only way we get our point.

Okay, but but you you getting your point across.

Y'all, y'all talk about patience and understanding and value and all that.

We telling y'all we negotiating.

We telling y'all we're working behind the scenes, but y'all don't believe it.

But y'all got two raises in less than six years.

Okay.

That come, but it doesn't matter what it was.

I'm saying, no, let me let me rephrase that.

It matters to y'all the amount.

But I'm saying we are making progress.

But every time, y'all say y'all not.

But but if we didn't do what we did, would y'all have anything?

Would y'all have the raises?

We didn't get it.

We didn't get the full 3% that you promised.

But that's okay.

If that's something else, now that's something you need to come to the council and say, hey, y'all said y'all was giving us 3%.

Y'all didn't give us 3%.

And we can rectify that.

That's something we can rectify because we voted on it.

All I'm asking y'all to do, in my opinion, is just my personal opinion.

This is not a good look.

It's not.

But but what I'm saying is, y'all won't respect, but y'all came in here and disrespected the chief.

No, the chief.

Oh, the chief did this first.

Let me address some of the stuff you said, please.

Hold on, hold on.

Let's be straight.

Let's be straight.

Y'all came in here and said everything y'all wanted to say, right?

I have not said everything.

I'm not saying you through.

I'm saying you have been given the opportunity to speak your.

I asked Mr.

Dadley from top.

I say, this is your opinion.

Mr.

Danley was the only one that said, this is my opinion.

Okay?

So now I'm giving you my opinion.

I still gotta render a vote.

So what I'm taking from y'all, I have to factor into my vote.

You right?

That's all I'm doing.

I'm not saying you wrong, y'all right, wrong, or indifferent.

I am saying this is not the proper way.

We've come to hold on.

I see, he was the one last time that we had to that we had to put out for disruption.

Can I have a chance to rebuttal some of the stuff you said?

Yes, you can.

When I get through, just like I gave you to me.

Oh, no, you're right.

I'm on your minutes.

Go ahead.

You done eat my minutes now.

No, you're gonna get them back.

You gonna get them back?

You got them back?

Number one.

You talk about us having a conversation about meeting with the fire chief.

We met with the fire chief.

He did not come to the meeting with anything to tell us about why these positions make this department better, how they were gonna fix our problems, or anything.

When we asked him those questions, his answer to us was, I don't have to answer to y'all.

I'm the fire chief.

So you tell you talking about like we went there with a bad attitude.

It's his attitude.

It's him who don't want to work with us.

Okay.

That's why he's trying to create these positions to put a buffer between me and him.

He wants yes men beneath him.

I'm not a yes man.

Okay.

I'm an actual facts man.

Okay.

Everything I said had to do with these jobs.

You you you got some more to talk about these jobs?

Oh, I most definitely do.

First, I need to respond to you talking about the bullying.

This is a memoranda from the fire chief to our department.

This is very unprofessional.

And this is bullying.

And I wrote him a letter letting him know that I will be contacting civil service and everybody else because this is bullying.

He's threatening people to force them to do things because he failed as a leader in managing our retention and recruitment.

That was quick.

I'ma give you some more time.

Say focus.

We be all right.

Well, she flashing me with the car, she's throwing me away.

So you pass the letter down.

You want to see this?

Is that the only copy?

Yes.

Because I had no plans on going there until Mr.

Marks made that statement.

And I'm gonna stand on it.

Okay, and I'm standing on this is rude and disappointing.

Is that the one that came through the email where he responded?

And and and he responded to a letter.

No, well, you want I got that letter too.

No, I'm asking you, is that the same one?

That's not a response to a letter appropriately.

The letter I wrote to him and the mayor and to y'all was about the safety of the citizens.

Uh-huh.

This is his response and his answer to correcting my letter.

Uh-huh.

And I read it.

Because he tried to act like I was being breaking the chain of command coming through y'all.

I'm the union president.

I never have to speak to him ever to come talk to y'all automatic.

We do that out of courtesy for him and the respect we had for him.

But because he chose not to show respect back, we are choosing to duplicate it back to him.

Okay.

I respect who respect me.

And just to get into a little bit of that before I go into this, he was the one who was supposed to evaluate me to confirm me for my assistant chief position.

My ninth month and 12-month evaluation was done on the same day.

I have to stretch, I have to stretch you back.

Is that gonna be relevant to these two positions?

Okay.

It's showing the lack of leadership.

Okay.

You work on a job, Mr.

Harvey work on a job.

Y'all know if you evaluate somebody, you're supposed to sit down and go over the evaluation with them.

So y'all both could critique and say what your feelings and all your suggestions is.

I didn't get that opportunity.

He waited till my 12th month, did both of my evaluations on the same day, left them on my desk in a folder, and when I came back from lunch, he was gone and I didn't see him for a week.

That was bad.

I don't know.

I never even read them.

I never even signed them because that's not the way you take your business as a leader.

That is not how you do business as a leader.

And this is what everybody's complaining about.

Our leadership is crumbling this department.

You played jingle before?

Play what?

Jingle.

Yeah.

Okay.

What happens when you keep pulling from the bottom and putting it on the top?

It collapses, right?

This department is at that state right now.

Because we keep on pulling from the bottom to try to make the top operate smoother or better.

Let me ask you a question.

How long you been on the force?

31 years.

How long he's been chief?

He's been the chief four years, and in four years we've lost more people than we've lost in my other 27 years here.

Y'all didn't have them issues under the last chief.

No.

So it was a perfect department.

No, it was not.

What was wrong?

We had disagreements with the other chief.

What why how did you handle it differently?

Because he actually sat down and talked to us.

This chief refuses to try to communicate.

The only person he communicates with is Chief Delano.

But what about these two jobs?

Those two jobs is because he wants some yes men.

It's duplicated services over and over and over again.

The citizens already compliant complaining about duplicated services.

So the fire department don't need to fall in that category and start duplicating services.

We need y'all to vote these positions down.

These positions are not needed at this present time.

We have a staffing issue that creates safety issues.

In order for us to be able to protect and serve this community like we need to, we need men on the trucks.

Not sitting in the office behind the door or playing golf on TV or hanging out.

We don't need that.

We need workers.

Quick question.

If we don't do these jobs, we don't fill them.

What next?

How about y'all look at the contract that I gave the fire chief and see if we can enact that contract?

Because even though we training people and they're leaving, that contract would hold them here for however many years we choose.

Three years, five years, whatever it is.

Would you believe that the council has already bought that up?

I wrote the contract.

Do you?

I'm just asking.

Would you believe that the council has already made that presence?

Since you brought it up, and I wrote it when we're gonna enact it.

Because it helps us hold people until we can get new people.

It does.

It does.

But it's not an overnight thing.

It's not just you, but you're making it seem like the administration can just do something and it's done.

We gotta consider finances, we gotta consider all of these things that y'all talking about.

We got a whole lot of things to consider.

The contract don't cost y'all anything, though.

Yeah, but it to end up.

I'm not talking about that.

To enact any for us to change anything, it's not just simple like that.

We gotta go through legal, we got to go through a whole lot of things.

The other legal team, I turned this contract in to the previous administration.

Okay.

That was eight years.

I turned it in to this chief to give to this administration.

Okay.

So far, we have nothing.

So far.

You could say nine years of a contract sitting there being wasted.

Okay.

When we're steadily losing people.

Okay.

We're doing everything on this side of the eight ball.

Okay.

To help this city win, but we're not getting help from the other side of the table.

I'm not cutting you off, Terrence, because you know this could go on forever.

Yeah.

Because I still got some stuff on the city.

What is your what is your final take on these two jobs?

We do not need those two jobs at this present moment.

Okay.

We need men on the trucks.

Because I got four and a half years left.

But I'm trying to do all I can do for this city and these citizens before I leave.

And it would be a failure on my part to not come up here and argue against these positions when I know they don't help our department.

Everybody else was humping on the money.

We need money.

My number one problem is safety of these citizens that we are supposed to serve and protect.

We can't do it if we don't have the man on the truck.

So just to be clear, it jeopardizes the safety of the citizens if we move, if we create those two positions.

Yes, because they do nothing to help our problem.

All I'm asking you, if we create these two positions, it affects the safety of the citizens.

Yes, because we're still pulling from the bottom.

Listen to what I'm asking you.

If we create these two positions, does it affect the city's safety?

Yes.

Yes.

I disagree with that.

You're pulling from the bottom.

That's already shame.

I think I think it's the farmer's top area, so don't uh Okay.

Well then you understand what I'm talking about.

We don't need no more people at the top.

We get the job done.

I think I think the fact that we have a uh fire rating on one means we're a safe shit.

I don't think we're gonna say out here.

I agree, I agree.

It's not because of the administration.

Terrence got a little bit of a man.

Terrence.

Terrence.

All I'm asking you, listen to the question closely.

If we create these two positions, does it affect the safety of the citizens?

Yes, in my professional opinion.

Are you saying that because if we move them two people or if we create the positions that affects the safety?

We are still pulling from where we're hurting the worst.

We're hurting the worst at the bottom.

I understand what you say.

So if you pull up, the bottom is getting weaker and then it collapses.

I agree.

But all I'm asking is if we create the two positions, yes, it affects the safety of the citizens.

Yes.

And I'll say it a thousand times.

Now, can I ask the audience a question?

No.

Why?

Because you don't speak to the audience.

You talk to us.

Well, one of the councilmen cannot get you to ask the audience about their opinion of morale on our department.

But this is not a public debate.

You come here.

No, it's not.

We don't engage with the Terrence.

Now, one thing we're gonna get straight.

In the city council chambers, we have protocol.

Uh-huh.

That protocol is the people come up and talk, and y'all address the council.

We don't take a poll of the citizens to see if what we're talking about is popular.

It's a lot of firemen in here.

I know that's gonna happen.

But you're not even taking the time to listen to the question.

Yes, I did.

I I told you my answer.

I said yes, and I'll tell you yes a thousand times.

But you're saying my professional.

But you're saying that, but you're saying if we pull people up, correct?

Exactly.

I saw I'm done with the question.

All right.

Now let me move on to some other stuff before y'all tell me I'm out of time.

You you're about to be.

You took all my time.

I gave it back to you.

And you didn't have it.

You gave me a minute and a half.

Go ahead.

How much more time, Mr.

President?

I need an hour.

I mean when he's asking questions, I don't go against his time.

I need an hour.

I know.

Go ahead.

All right.

Since 2000.

Since 2000, we've added ladder four, ladder eight, engine eight to our fleet.

So there's three new trucks.

So that's nine people per truck.

So that's 27 people, right?

Right.

Everywhere we go.

To our fleet, manpower is still hovering around the same number.

We used to have four people on a truck.

Can you pull that do that or do the route?

Terrence, can we do this for the second time?

I'm I'm agreeing with you about the the needing.

But I need to put this out here because this needs to be known by the citizens, not just by you.

Okay.

Because that's who I represent.

Okay.

Now we must pray for two men on a truck when we used to have four men.

The shutdown of trucks never happened in the history of Lake Charles fire department until two or three years ago.

New administration, new fire chief.

Last year, yeah.

On this chart, you can see the hoseman position has two hosemen on almost every truck.

That's in year 2000.

So in 2000, we were man in the trucks with four people.

Today we can't get two.

That's a serious problem.

Again, we're talking about hiring, correct?

Yes.

Okay.

So I just I just want to focus on these two jobs.

Let me go into these numbers because this all of this is relevant to our argument.

He hasn't made an argument.

Well, I think we've been brown trucks longer than three.

No, sir.

For his time.

No, sir.

I think we have done.

Even under Chief Murray, the last five chief, we never browned out trucks.

We've came very close.

But we did not.

It has happened.

No.

Not when Chief Murray was the chief.

We did not.

Only time we shut trucks down was to go to training out there in De Quincy or Certick or whatever y'all want to call it.

All I'm saying is this to expedite time.

Oh, it's facts.

It's short.

I'm not denying that.

We understand that you are short and that we need to hire and we need to pay more.

That's a given.

Now I'm asking you to narrow down to these two jobs.

It's about the country.

Can I finish this report?

Because we put time in to get these facts for you.

I understand that, but we only got a certain amount of time.

If you let me go and stop cutting me off, it won't take that long.

So with all these trucks being added last year in 2025, up to September, we had 3,697 calls that we responded to.

We made a little over 4,000 at the end of the year.

Back in 2000, when we had four people to a truck, we only made 1938 calls.

We doubled the work and we went half of the staff.

It's not sustainable.

And my guys are only here to plead to say we can't continue this.

We can't.

And putting off his jobs is not gonna fix that problem.

We need to take that energy that he's putting into those jobs and put it into him getting out here and help us recruit people.

Because he can say what he wants about the department.

He doesn't help us recruit.

I feel these rosters on a daily basis.

I gotta call these guys and beg them to stay six, seven, eight days at the station without going see their family.

I'm starting to feel guilty.

I apologize, but we have he has reached a maximum of 12 minutes.

I didn't get 12 minutes, he took six.

We paused.

Go ahead and finish up.

Wrapped up if you don't mind.

So that being said, how can we sustain this?

We got half of the people on the truck that we had in 2000.

This is 2026.

And we're doing double the work.

These guys are dying out here.

And they're asking you to step up to the plate and tell him no, because it's not the time.

We need men on the truck, not in the office.

I'm getting my job done in office.

We can get more done in office if he was available to me when he's supposed to be at work.

Everybody in this room can tell you when I work, he don't come to the office.

That's not good business.

It's not good management, it's not good leadership.

He does Chief Hanks the same thing.

That's why he was up here hesitant to speak, because he likes to retaliate like that bullying thing he sent out in the memoranda.

I'm not scared of his retaliation.

Terrence, stick to the two jobs, man.

This is about the two jobs.

Okay, but that's another issue.

These positions don't need to be created.

Okay.

So tell me that.

I've told you a thousand times, and I'm asking you for the last time, all of you.

Think about what these guys sacrifice.

I'm not the one who's out there working like them.

But when they call, I'm there to help them.

Okay.

They can't keep this up.

And if somebody go out there tired, fatigue, overwhelmed, and go hurt and kill somebody, the city's gonna be at fault.

Because we overworking our guys, and then we're thinking about creating office jobs when they're begging for help so they can go home and see their family.

And that's all I have to say.

Think about that when y'all vote.

Gotcha.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Any other counselors?

He coming back, Chief.

You got a rebuttal, Chief?

So forth.

I will say as the fire chief, it's just hard.

Being in this role of making these decisions of doing what we have to do and making the decisions that we have to make.

And it's hard when you sit here and you listen to you guys, which I've tried, I'm trying to go there, even though they said I was in the training division.

I'm disassociated from what they do, this and that.

I still been here 27 years, been watching all this all this time.

So a lot of the decisions I make was based on that time of me watching and seeing what was happening.

But it doesn't change the fact that these decisions by the fire chief still needs to be made.

Now he was correct when he said I wasn't gonna remember all he said, but I know a few things.

What I've heard some people say, I'm not going to walk into a room where I know it's just gonna be an argument as we've been talking, as we've been hearing just for anything, when I still have to sit there and say, I have to follow a law, I have to follow a rule, whatever you want, you can ask me.

Everything they gave me, I came and gave to the, you know, gave to the thing, but then we still have to sit there and say, well, lawfully or policy or this, this that's how this is how we work.

Uh I I I I seriously cannot run a department based on how your people, you know, how they feel about something when I still have to make a hard decision.

This what he sent, what he gave y'all, what was that about that's the memorandum?

That again, by law, according to their words.

You heard Chief Thomas just say thousand times, we short, we're short.

And he told you, he's the assistant chief who handles this.

So by civil service law, that assistant chief position is afforded the right to manage his shift.

Right?

So if he sees his shift coming up short, he has to do what he needs to do to make sure that his shift is full for the safety of the citizens of the city of Lake Charles.

Well, obviously that's not being done.

So with all what it was said, the chief had to make a decision and say, we have to cancel this.

If it's that bad, like you're saying, and I'm so disassociated, and I don't know what's going on.

If it's that bad, because I'm listening to you, then you need to cancel vacations.

Then you need to call people back.

Then you need to hold people over.

You see what I'm saying?

This is a decision that the chief had to make because the people in that in that position wasn't making the decision.

That's what that was all about.

It's not bullying, that's just me making the decision.

As far as I don't know, what else was it?

Uh like I said, I thought I can't remember that.

Yeah, it was a lot.

Well, the one of one of the main questions that nobody's yet answered.

What these two positions are gonna even do.

Exactly okay.

That's a good one.

That's what we really want to do.

So, as it was said that these physicians are going to do the same thing they're not doing.

They're not these positions, as he said, one is to be over the administrative divisions, and one to be over the three assistant chiefs.

He won't be doing the same thing to do, he'll be managing them.

It's not me trying to buff us and put somebody in between us.

It's now I can only talk to one person that's talking to those three.

Yeah, I'm saying so.

When something needs to be done, if we're talking about, you can see that they really want to talk to the fire chief, but the fire chief has a lot of other stuff on his mind, and I can't talk to you about fire truck stuff, station stuff.

I need a guy there that can talk to them about that.

He put it in the report.

We have a meeting, and now I can focus on just talking to that one person because he took talk to the three collectively.

That's that's what he's going to be doing.

So make me understand.