/s/ Chuck Kleckley, President

/s/ S. Mark McMurry, Administrator &

Ex-Officio Secretary

* * * * * * * * * * * *

            President Kleckley advised that action was needed on Zoning Case RZ03-048-03 which was a request by David Reinauer to rezone from C-1 (Light Commercial) to R-M (Multi-Family Residential) to allow six duplexes at the corner of Smith Road and West Pinewood Road in Ward Three, Police Jury District 10. President Kleckley further advised that the Planning and Zoning Board had met on Tuesday, December 16, 2003, and voted unanimously to recommend that the request be denied. He pointed out that should the Police Jury decide to grant the request to rezone, the staff recommended the following stipulations: (1) that the development adhere to the site plan on file with the Division of Planning and Development as revised to relocate trash dumpster off of West Pinewood Drive; (2) that all drives and parking must be hardsurfaced (concrete or asphalt); (3) that the proper permits must be obtained within thirty days of zoning approval; and (4) that a centralized postal approved mailbox must be provided.

            Motion was made by Mr. Clement and seconded by Mr. McMillin that the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board be upheld with respect to Zoning Case RZ03-048-03 and that the request to rezone be denied.

            President Kleckley ruled that the proponents would be allowed five minutes to present their case, the opponents five minutes, followed by questions from the jurors, and a two-minute rebuttal for each side.

            Mr. David Reinauer, 409 Iris Street, Lake Charles, appeared before the Police Jury on behalf of the estate of Jules Reinauer. He explained that at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting, he had filled out a “Request to Appear” form, but no one had told him what to do with it, and he assumed that the Board would have asked him to speak. Mr. Reinauer further explained that he had also assumed the Board was in favor of his request and just did not need to hear from him, so everything he planned to present to the Police Jury on this date was new information.

            Mr. Reinauer stated that he appreciated the residents of Pinewood Subdivision coming to the meeting, and he was glad they felt so strongly about their subdivision, pointing out that he and his father had worked hard to make it a nice subdivision. Mr. Reinauer advised that one more street would be built in the near future, and there would be 25 new lots to sell, and they would not do anything to devalue their own property.

            Mr. Reinauer stated that in his 40 years of experience as a realtor, he felt that nothing they were asking to do on this date would devalue the property. Mr. Reinauer advised that Mr. Robert Golod, the developer, intended to live in one of the six duplexes after they were built. He pointed out that one of the Planning and Zoning Board members had told Mr. Golod they could not force him to do so.

            Mr. Reinauer advised that under the current zoning (C-1 Light Commercial), this property could be sold for uses such as a 24-hour grocery store/gas station, a veterinary clinic with barking dogs, a motor vehicle repair shop, a shopping center with powerful security lights where 18-wheelers would be going in and out all hours of the day and night, etc. Mr. Reinauer stated that he felt the most logical choice would be to down-zone the property and allow the construction of six duplexes of 1100 square feet each, with a wooden fence around the facility to separate it from the residential area, as recommended by the Planning and Development staff.

            Mr. Reinauer questioned why the surrounding residents were upset, pointing out that the duplexes would not cause any more traffic since Pinewood was shaped like a horseshoe, and the duplexes would be built at the entrance to the horseshoe, giving the residents of the duplexes no particular reason to drive into the subdivision.

            Mr. Reinauer stated that he thought the residents were afraid the duplexes would be used for Section 8 Housing but questioned if that was true, was that any reason to deny the request to down-zone the property, just because a poor person wanted to live in the duplex.

            Mr. Reinauer advised that Mr. Golod proposed to spend nearly $750,000 on construction of the duplexes which would provide tax income for the Parish. He stated that on a personal note, his wife and he owned a piece of property which was used for Section 8 Housing.

            President Kleckley interrupted Mr. Reinauer because his time was up but stated he would allow him an additional three minutes to finish his presentation.

            Mr. Reinauer continued, saying that the piece of property to which he was referring was currently up for sale but they had placed a restriction on it that if it was sold, an 80-year old woman who had been living there for 30 years could not be asked to leave, because they did not want to upset her.

            Mr. Reinauer also stated that he and Mr. Golod had made efforts, prior to opposition being voiced, to keep Pinewood Acres a nice place. He pointed out that Mr. Golod had agreed in writing that a deed restriction would be added whereby the property could only be used for multi-family purposes (if the request to down-zone was approved by the Police Jury), all construction would be new (brick or frame), only composite roofs could be put on the duplexes, no variances would be requested, each duplex would have a two-car garage or carport, the minimum square footage of each duplex would be 1,000 square feet, no temporary structures would be allowed, no animals would be allowed except dogs and cats, the only signs to be allowed would be “for sale” or “for rent” signs which would be removed when no longer necessary, and finally, any person(s) owning property in Pinewood Acres Parts D & E would have the right to enforce these regulations through the Police Jury or the court system.

            Mr. Reinauer concluded his presentation by saying that he had more of a vested interest than anyone living in the subdivision, and he thought it would be a travesty of justice if the Police Jury did not agree to grant the request to down zone the property.

            President Kleckley advised that he would give the opposition a total of eight minutes to make their presentation.

            Ms. Carla Chenier, 5546 West Pinewood Drive, Lake Charles, appeared before the Police Jury and advised that she lived directly adjacent to the subject property. She stated that they did not want the duplexes in their neighborhood and while she understood that (with the current zoning) a gas station could come “off the beaten path” to locate on the subject property, they would deal with that when it happened.

            Ms. Chenier stated that her subdivision was a small, nice subdivision in which $150,000-$200,000 homes were recently constructed. She also stated that she knew for a fact that some of the land next door to her would be selling if the developer would not require a person to buy four acres. Ms. Chenier stated that there would be at least 20 children living in the duplexes and questioned where they would play. She advised that she did not need eight minutes to make her presentation, that every door she had knocked on had been in strong opposition to the request to rezone, and there was already an apartment complex on Pinewood Drive which the residents were dealing with but did not want to deal with anymore.

            Ms. Sandy Montgomery, 5826 West Pinewood Drive, Lake Charles, appeared before the Police Jury and stated that the residents were very concerned that the duplexes would cause their property values to plummet. She also stated that she understood they needed to provide for the families to come, but the residents of Pinewood Subdivision were concerned about extra traffic, the children of the duplexes having no place to play, and property values.

            There being no one else wishing to speak in opposition, President Kleckley opened the floor for questions.

            Mr. Andrepont asked why the Planning and Zoning Board had voted unanimously to deny the request to rezone and also asked what Mr. Vickers’ position was in this matter.

            Mr. Vickers responded by saying that the staff had recommended approval of the project based on the fact that the property was currently zoned Light Commercial (C-1), and they felt a residential use would be more compatible with the subdivision as opposed to a commercial use. Mr. Vickers pointed out that the staff did not have the advantage of having already heard directly from the opposition at the time zoning hearings were held, and there was always new information that came out at said hearings.

            Mr. Vickers advised that the agenda packets contained a petition from a number of residents who were opposed to the rezoning and that the staff had known in this particular case that there would be some opposition. Mr. Vickers stated that there was plenty of discussion on this case at the hearing, and he thought the Planning and Zoning Board had weighed all the facts, the staff’s recommendations, as well as the opposition, and in the end had voted to recommend against the rezoning.

            Mr. Andrepont pointed out that zoning cases were never easy in that somebody would be happy with the result and somebody would be unhappy but that it was difficult for him to understand why anyone would be opposed to down-zoning, and he was just trying to get it straight in his mind why the Board had voted unanimously to deny when the staff recommended approval.

            Mr. Vickers stated that he felt the proposed units would be nice but that any time there was a single-family residential subdivision, predominantly owner occupied, there was a fear over any attempt to introduce rental property into that equation. He explained that he thought the residents had a fear of what the tenants would be like, whether the rental property would be maintained, whether the tenants would be appropriately managed, etc., and while he understood those concerns, the staff had looked at it from the standpoint that a smoother transition would occur if the property became residential instead of remaining commercial.

            Mr. Vickers also explained that he did not think there was a right or wrong answer, it was a matter of different people having different opinions and that over the years, he had learned that reasonable people had reasonable differences.

            In answer to a question by Mr. Andrepont, Mr. Vickers explained where the property was located in South Lake Charles off of Smith Road, and that Mr. Reinauer’s father, Jules Reinauer, had originally developed the subdivision which Mr. (David) Reinauer was attempting to continue the development of, so he did have a stake in it. Also in answer to Mr. Andrepont’s question, Mr. Vickers stated that he would not change his position in recommending that the request to rezone be granted.

            Mr. Landry asked if Mr. Vickers was familiar with Mr. Golod and if he had developed any other property with which the Parish could compare to see what kind of job he would do “after the fact”. Mr. Vickers stated that he had asked the developer that, and he thought the answer was that Mr. Golod had no experience in this area.

            Mr. Landry asked if Mr. Golod was an older gentleman, and Mr. Reinauer interjected that Mr. Golod was present at the meeting on this date but was a little intimidated by what had happened at the Planning and Zoning Board hearing. He further stated that Mr. Golod had worked hard during his lifetime and wanted to build these duplexes as an investment in accordance with the “great American system”.

            Mr. Landry asked if Mr. Golod was a resident of Calcasieu Parish, and Mr. Golod answered that he was.

            Mrs. Griffin asked if the current zoning would allow someone to apply for a license to open a bar or a similar establishment, to which Mr. Vickers responded that it would not but that it would allow other businesses such as a small strip mall with a convenience store which could sell package liquor/beer.

            In answer to a question by Mr. Moon, Mr. Reinauer stated that the structures would be brick or frame and that Mr. Golod would not be putting vinyl siding on them. Mr. Vickers pointed out that there was an architectural rendering in the agenda packets which reflected what was proposed to be built, and Mr. Moon asked what obligation the developer had to adhere to the rendering. Mr. Vickers stated that the site plan was what the staff usually tied the development to and that the developer had said that if the zoning request was approved, he would retain an architect to further refine the site plan to make sure it met all of the necessary specifications.

            Mr. Moon stated that it seemed to him that it would benefit the community to down zone the property, particularly if the duplexes were as attractive as they were shown on the rendering, and he asked if there was an obligation that the developer construct such a complex. Mr. Vickers explained that anytime a request was approved, the staff based it on what had been submitted, so the developer could not just “free lance” on that. He further explained that once it got to an architect, there might be some small changes which the ordinance enacting the change in zoning would provide for, i.e., a change in location of a trash dumpster, but the developer could not stray too far from what was originally submitted.

            Mr. Landry asked if the duplexes would have garages, and Mr. Vickers stated he had heard that but it was not reflected on the plans. Mr. Reinauer advised that a two-car carport was a requirement he and Mr. Golod had agreed upon a long time ago, and the property would not be sold unless that was agreed to in writing.  

            Mr. McMillin stated that in looking at the drawing, there really was no place for children to play. He asked Mr. Reinauer if he felt he just did not get a fair hearing at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting and also asked what had changed since said meeting.

            Mr. Reinauer stated that (1) he did not speak at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting, (2) he did not explain the requirements which had been placed on Mr. Golod to assure that the subdivision would not lose any value, and (3) he did not discuss the fact that he still owned an additional 25 lots in the subdivision for future development. Mr. Reinauer stated that he had a significant vested interest in the subdivision and, therefore, would not do anything to detract from its value.

            Mr. Reinauer pointed out that none of this had come out at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting but instead Mr. Golod had appeared before the Board and spoke with an accent. He advised that the talk at the meeting had gotten emotional about kids getting run over and Section 8 Housing. Mr. Reinauer stated that he thought the Board members had seen through all of that, and he would love for all the people who were opposed to the construction of the duplexes to introduce themselves to Mr. Golod and ask him what they could do to work together to keep it a beautiful subdivision.

            President Kleckley asked if the jurors had any other questions and there being none, he told Mr. Reinauer that he would have two minutes for closing remarks.

            Mr. Reinauer pointed out that the Parish had strict requirements about how many units could be built on a certain size piece of property but yet at the same meeting when his request was turned down, the Board approved an apartment project on 26 acres of land with the stipulation that they could build 50% more apartment units than what the regulations called for. Mr. Reinauer stated that he and Mr. Golod were simply asking to build what the Parish regulations called for in a less intensive use, and less obnoxious use, than what they were already authorized to do under the current zoning, and to him this seemed like a “no brainer”.

            President Kleckley stated that the opposition would have two minutes at this time for closing remarks.

            Ms. Chenier stated that the residents had purchased their land knowing it was zoned commercial, and they were prepared to deal with those consequences. She further stated that the worse case scenarios had already been presented, but they were concerned about strangers’ kids being up and down the street, and garages would leave even less room for kids to play. Ms. Chenier also stated that Section 8 Housing was not the issue and that she was the mother of three small children. She advised that she was very overprotective and just did not want to deal with people that close to her home.

            Ms. Chenier closed by saying that the people in her subdivision had saved and worked hard to build their homes and if Mr. Reinauer wanted to build another subdivision where the residents would be in agreement with his proposal that was fine, but the residents of her subdivision were not.

            A vote was taken on the motion on the floor, which was to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board with respect to Zoning Case RZ03-048-03 and to deny the request to rezone, and the result thereof was as follows:

YEAS: Mr. Clement, Mr. Danahay, Mr. Derbonne, Mr. Manuel, and Mr. McMillin

NAYS: Mr. Andrepont, Mr. Collins, Mrs. Griffin, Mr. Landry, Dr. Mackey, and Mr. Moon

ABSENT: Mrs. August, Mr. Breaux, and Mrs. Treme

NOT VOTING: President Kleckley

            The vote being five (5) in favor of the motion to six (6) against the motion, President Kleckley declared the motion as having failed.

            Mr. Smith pointed out that if the Police Jury wished to approve the request to rezone, a motion to that effect would need to be made at this time; whereupon, motion was made by Mr. Andrepont and seconded by Mr. Landry to overturn the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board with respect to Zoning Case RZ03-048-03 and to grant the request to rezone from C-1 (Light Commercial) to R-M (Multi-Family Residential).

            Mr. Landry offered an amendment to the motion on the floor, which was duly seconded by Mr. Manuel, that each duplex have a two-car garage. Mr. Smith pointed out that the deed restrictions would call for a two-car carport or garage, and Mr. Landry explained that he was aware of that but he preferred that each duplex have a two-car garage.

            A vote was taken on the motion as amended, and said motion carried unanimously; whereupon, the following ordinance was adopted:

ORDINANCE NO. 4668

AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 26 - Zoning, of the Code of Ordinances of the Parish of Calcasieu, Louisiana, classifying the area: A request by David Reinauer to rezone from C-1 (Light Commercial) to R-M (Multi Family Residential) to allow six duplexes on the property described as: Lot 17 of Block 11 of Pinewood Acres Part D.

            BE IT ORDAINED BY THE POLICE JURY OF CALCASIEU PARISH, LOUISIANA, convened in regular session on the 18^th day of December, 2003, that Chapter 26 - Zoning, of the Code of Ordinances of the Parish of Calcasieu, Louisiana, and the Comprehensive Zoning Map for Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana, be and they are hereby amended insofar as said ordinance and map pertain to the following property in Ward Three of this parish:

From C-1 (Light Commercial) to R-M (Multi Family Residential) to allow 6 duplexes with the following stipulations: 1) that the development adhere to the site plan on file with the Division of Planning and Development as revised to relocate trash dumpster off W. Pinewood Drive; 2) that all drives and parking must be hardsurfaced (concrete or asphalt); 3) that the proper permits must be obtained within 30 days of zoning approval and 4) that a centralized postal approved mailbox must be provided, on the property described as: Lot 17 of Block 11 of Pinewood Acres Part D.

Zoning Case RZ03-048-03

            BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the rezoning of the above described property is effective this date, classified in accordance with a new zoning District Map (adding to the existing District Map) which is attached to this ordinance to be placed on file in the Office of the Clerk of Court showing the classification of the new area of the above described property.

            THUS DONE AND PASSED BY THE CALCASIEU PARISH POLICE JURY on the date above inscribed.

                                                                                    /s/ Chuck Kleckley, President

/s/ S. Mark McMurry, Administrator &

Ex-Officio Secretary

* * * * * * * * * * * *

            Upon motion made by Mr. Andrepont, which was duly seconded by Mr. Landry and carried unanimously, the following resolution was adopted:

RESOLUTION

            WHEREAS, notification has been received that an application for a Department of the Army Permit has been made to the U.S. Corps of Engineers, and an application for a Water Quality Certification (WQC) has been made to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality by Tra Fogleman to clear, disk and grade an area, place approximately 10,000 cubic yards of on-site graded material to cover 2,600 feet of irrigation ditch, all to prepare the site for use as a hayfield/pasture. Also, dredge 3,400 cubic yards of native material to construct a pond and deposit 1,500 cubic yards of the excavated material as necessary to construct a single family residence, barn, and driveway. Project implementation will impact approximately 26.4 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Said project is located adjacent to Hickory Branch Road approximately 8 miles northwest of Gillis, in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana; and

            WHEREAS, the staff of the Division of Planning and Development has evaluated the proposal of Tra Fogleman relative to its compliance with current parish ordinances and provisions, such as zoning classification, flood zone regulations, coastal zone regulations, and required development permits, as well as its impact on the Parish Transportation System; and

            WHEREAS, upon completion of evaluation, the staff of the Division of Planning and Development concluded there is no cause for objection to the permit application based on parish ordinances and provisions, provided all necessary permits are obtained from the Parish Division of Planning and Development prior to commencement of the project.

            NOW THEREFORE,

        BE IT RESOLVED BY THE POLICE JURY OF CALCASIEU PARISH, LOUISIANA, convened in regular session on the 18^th day of December, 2003, that it does hereby indicate no objection to the proposal of Tra Fogleman to clear, disk and grade an area, place approximately 10,000 cubic yards of on-site graded material to cover 2,600 feet of irrigation ditch, all to prepare the site for use as a hayfield/pasture. Also, dredge 3,400 cubic yards of native material to construct a pond and deposit 1,500 cubic yards of the excavated material as necessary to construct a single family residence, barn, and driveway. Project implementation will impact approximately 26.4 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Said project is located adjacent to Hickory Branch Road approximately 8 miles northwest of Gillis, in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana.

            BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the no objection position of the Police Jury in this permit application is based solely on the evaluation of the parish staff of the project’s effect on current parish ordinances and provisions, provided said work meets with the rules and regulations of the Corps of Engineers and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, subject to Best Management Practices during the course of construction as set forth by EPA guidelines, and approvals are received from all appropriate state and federal agencies, and further, that all necessary development permits are obtained from the Calcasieu Parish Division of Planning and Development prior to commencement of the project.

            BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a study on the environmental impact of the aforementioned project has not been made due to lack of expertise of the parish staff to accomplish such a study, and the Police Jury requests that agencies and/or individuals with such expertise make an environmental review of said project and forward their findings to the U.S. Corps of Engineers.

            THUS PASSED AND ADOPTED on the date above inscribed.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

            Motion was made by Dr. Mackey, seconded by Mrs. Griffin and carried unanimously that the recommendations of the Director of the Division of Planning and Development be approved with reference to the Surplus Adjudicated Property Sale conducted on December 16. 2003, on the following cases, and further, that an ordinance be adopted with respect to each piece of property:

AP03-134-03 (1008 16^th Street, Lake Charles) (Police Jury District 6)

The Director of the Division of Planning and Development recommended that the highest offer in the amount of $11,000.00 by Mr. Que Phan be accepted.

AP04-133-03 (860 Invader, Sulphur) (Police Jury District 12)

The Director of the Division of Planning and Development recommended that the highest offer in the amount of $9,100.00 by Mr. Steven L. Griffith be accepted.

            As a result of passage of the foregoing motion, the following ordinances were adopted:

ORDINANCE NO. 4669

AN ORDINANCE authorizing the Police Jury to declare the property described as: Lot 8 Blk 13 Himount; (AP03-134-03; Tax Assessment No. 388378); 1008 16^th Street in Ward Three, Lake Charles, Louisiana, surplus property and to authorize the sale of said lot to Mr. Que Phan, his designated agent, or assignee for the consideration of $11,000.00 (eleven thousand dollars) cash, or to the highest offer or which is accompanied by a certified check or money order in the amount of $325.00 ($250 appraisal fee plus $75).

        WHEREAS, the Parish of Calcasieu owns property described as: Lot 8 Blk 13 Himount; (AP03-134-03; Tax Assessment No. 388378); 1008 16^th Street in Ward Three, said property having been adjudicated to the Parish for unpaid property taxes; and

        WHEREAS, all Members of the Local Services Agreement have recommended that the property be declared surplus and no longer needed for public purposes; and

        WHEREAS, a request has been received by the Division of Planning & Development from Mr. Que Phan, to purchase said property for the consideration of $11,000.00 (eleven thousand dollars) cash, at the time of sale; and

        WHEREAS, no written opposition or higher offer has been filed with the Division of Planning & Development Office; and

        WHEREAS, the Calcasieu Parish Police Jury is of the opinion that this property is surplus and no longer needed for public purposes and that it would be in the public interest to convey the above mentioned property to Mr. Que Phan, for the offered consideration.

        NOW, THEREFORE,

        BE IT ORDAINED BY THE POLICE JURY OF THE PARISH OF CALCASIEU, convened in regular session on the 18^th day of December, 2003, that it does hereby approve the following criteria for the sale and disposition of adjudicated property:

        Section 1.       The property described as: Lot 8 Blk 13 Himount; (AP03-134-03; Tax Assessment No. 388378); 1008 16^th Street in Ward Three, Lake Charles, Louisiana, is hereby declared to be surplus and no longer needed for public purpose.

            Section 2.       Ten days after the final adoption of this ordinance, if no restraining order has been obtained, the President or the Director of the Division of Planning & Development, is authorized to execute an act of cash sale in which the Parish of Calcasieu conveys the above described property to Mr. Que Phan, his designated agent, or assignee for and in consideration of $11,000.00 (eleven thousand dollars). However, neither the President, nor the Director of the Division of Planning & Development, shall execute the act of cash sale until the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development has certified in writing the following:

            (a)       Purchaser has certified in writing to the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development that the Adjudicated Property Section has been provided a Mortgage and Conveyance Certificate or an equivalent by an abstract company doing business in Calcasieu Parish certifying that an examination of the mortgage and conveyance records of the Clerk of Court of Calcasieu Parish was made to obtain the names and last known addresses of all owners, mortgagees, and other persons who might have vested or contingent interests in the property, or who have filed requests for notice as provided for in LSA-R.S. 47:2261, and a list of those names and addresses is attached to the certification. The written certification shall contain an indemnification and hold harmless clause by the purchaser in favor of the Parish of Calcasieu, its officers, agents and employees if the purchase should fail to request notification to an interested party or should incorrectly identify or locate any interested party.

            (b)       Purchaser has made written request to the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development to notify those persons identified above in accordance with LSA-R.S. 33:4720.17 and LSA-R.S. 47:2261 and has paid the Parish the sum of five dollars per notice and/or the sum of thirty dollars per notice by publication requested.

            (c)       Upon written request from the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning and Development, the Purchaser shall remit 25% of the purchase price as earnest money to be held in escrow by the Calcasieu Parish Police Jury for application to the purchase price at closing, or to be retained by it in the event Purchaser fails to complete the purchase.

            (d)       The Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development has provided purchaser with proof of notice, and purchaser has recorded same in the conveyance records of Calcasieu Parish and has provided the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development a stamped copy of the recorded proof of notice.

            (e)       Purchaser has certified in writing to the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development that the number of days required by LSA-R.S. 33:4720.17 has elapsed since the above required notice was made or attempted and that the property has not been redeemed by the payment of the taxes owed.

            (f)       Purchaser has paid the consideration in cash to the Parish and the cash sale attached has been approved by the Division of Planning & Development.

            Section 3. If purchaser should fail to complete the requirements of Section 2 A) and B) within sixty (60) days of adoption of this ordinance, the President or the Director of the Division of Planning & Development, is authorized to execute an act of cash sale in which the Parish of Calcasieu conveys the above described property to anyone who shall complete the requirements of Section 2. If all of the requirements of Section 2 are not completed within six months from the date this ordinance is adopted, the President’s authority to execute an act of cash sale for this property shall cease, and any and all rights of the purchaser to this property shall terminate.

            Section 4. This act of sale shall be without any warranty or recourse whatsoever (including warranty of title), even for the return or any reduction of the purchase price, but with subrogation to all rights and actions of warranty the Parish of Calcasieu may have, and shall contain such warranty limitations and other provisions as are required by the Parish Attorney. The Parish of Calcasieu shall reserve all oil, gas and other mineral rights in and to the property to be conveyed, but shall convey the surface rights of the said property.

            This ordinance was adopted on the 18^th day of December, 2003.

                                                                                    /s/ Chuck Kleckley, President

/s/ S. Mark McMurry, Administrator &

Ex-Officio Parish Secretary

* * * * * * * * * * * *

ORDINANCE NO. 4670

AN ORDINANCE authorizing the Police Jury to declare the property described as: Com on N/S Invader St 199.2 ft E of SW Cor Lot 2 Blk 2 Starlin Sub No 2, th W along N/S Invader St 60 Ft, N 155 ft M/L to S/L drg ditch, nely along ditch 61.8 ft, S 169 ft M/L to com; (AP04-133-03; Tax Assessment No. 636363); 860 Invader in Ward Four, Sulphur, Louisiana, surplus property and to authorize the sale of said lot to Mr. Steven L. Griffith, his designated agent, or assignee for the consideration of $9,100.00 (nine thousand one hundred dollars) cash, or to the highest offer or which is accompanied by a certified check or money order in the amount of $325.00 ($250 appraisal fee plus $75).

        WHEREAS, the Parish of Calcasieu owns property described as: Com on N/S Invader St 199.2 ft E of SW Cor Lot 2 Blk 2 Starlin Sub No 2, th W along N/S Invader St 60 Ft, N 155 ft M/L to S/L drg ditch, nely along ditch 61.8 ft, S 169 ft M/L to com; (AP04-133-03; Tax Assessment No. 636363); 860 Invader in Ward Four, said property having been adjudicated to the Parish for unpaid property taxes; and

        WHEREAS, all Members of the Local Services Agreement have recommended that the property be declared surplus and no longer needed for public purposes; and

        WHEREAS, a request has been received by the Division of Planning & Development from Mr. Steven L. Griffith, to purchase said property for the consideration of $9,100.00 (nine thousand one hundred dollars) cash, at the time of sale; and

        WHEREAS, no written opposition or higher offer has been filed with the Division of Planning & Development Office; and

        WHEREAS, the Calcasieu Parish Police Jury is of the opinion that this property is surplus and no longer needed for public purposes and that it would be in the public interest to convey the above mentioned property to Mr. Steven L. Griffith, for the offered consideration.

        NOW, THEREFORE,

        BE IT ORDAINED BY THE POLICE JURY OF THE PARISH OF CALCASIEU, convened in regular session on the 18^th day of December, 2003, that it does hereby approve the following criteria for the sale and disposition of adjudicated property:

        Section 1.       The property described as: Com on N/S Invader St 199.2 ft E of SW Cor Lot 2 Blk 2 Starlin Sub No 2, th W along N/S Invader St 60 Ft, N 155 ft M/L to S/L drg ditch, nely along ditch 61.8 ft, S 169 ft M/L to com; (AP04-133-03; Tax Assessment No. 636363); 860 Invader in Ward Four, Sulphur, Louisiana, is hereby declared to be surplus and no longer needed for public purpose.

            Section 2.       Ten days after the final adoption of this ordinance, if no restraining order has been obtained, the President or the Director of the Division of Planning & Development, is authorized to execute an act of cash sale in which the Parish of Calcasieu conveys the above described property to Mr. Steven L. Griffith, his designated agent, or assignee for and in consideration of $9,100.00 (nine thousand one hundred dollars). However, neither the President, nor the Director of the Division of Planning & Development, shall execute the act of cash sale until the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development has certified in writing the following:

            (a)       Purchaser has certified in writing to the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development that the Adjudicated Property Section has been provided a Mortgage and Conveyance Certificate or an equivalent by an abstract company doing business in Calcasieu Parish certifying that an examination of the mortgage and conveyance records of the Clerk of Court of Calcasieu Parish was made to obtain the names and last known addresses of all owners, mortgagees, and other persons who might have vested or contingent interests in the property, or who have filed requests for notice as provided for in LSA-R.S. 47:2261, and a list of those names and addresses is attached to the certification. The written certification shall contain an indemnification and hold harmless clause by the purchaser in favor of the Parish of Calcasieu, its officers, agents and employees if the purchase should fail to request notification to an interested party or should incorrectly identify or locate any interested party.

            (b)       Purchaser has made written request to the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development to notify those persons identified above in accordance with LSA-R.S. 33:4720.17 and LSA-R.S. 47:2261 and has paid the Parish the sum of five dollars per notice and/or the sum of thirty dollars per notice by publication requested.

            (c)       Upon written request from the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning and Development, the Purchaser shall remit 25% of the purchase price as earnest money to be held in escrow by the Calcasieu Parish Police Jury for application to the purchase price at closing, or to be retained by it in the event Purchaser fails to complete the purchase.

            (d)       The Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development has provided purchaser with proof of notice, and purchaser has recorded same in the conveyance records of Calcasieu Parish and has provided the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development a stamped copy of the recorded proof of notice.

            (e)       Purchaser has certified in writing to the Adjudicated Property Section of the Division of Planning & Development that the number of days required by LSA-R.S. 33:4720.17 has elapsed since the above required notice was made or attempted and that the property has not been redeemed by the payment of the taxes owed.

            (f)       Purchaser has paid the consideration in cash to the Parish and the cash sale attached has been approved by the Division of Planning & Development.

            Section 3. If purchaser should fail to complete the requirements of Section 2 A) and B) within sixty (60) days of adoption of this ordinance, the President or the Director of the Division of Planning & Development, is authorized to execute an act of cash sale in which the Parish of Calcasieu conveys the above described property to anyone who shall complete the requirements of Section 2. If all of the requirements of Section 2 are not completed within six months from the date this ordinance is adopted, the President’s authority to execute an act of cash sale for this property shall cease, and any and all rights of the purchaser to this property shall terminate.

            Section 4. This act of sale shall be without any warranty or recourse whatsoever (including warranty of title), even for the return or any reduction of the purchase price, but with subrogation to all rights and actions of warranty the Parish of Calcasieu may have, and shall contain such warranty limitations and other provisions as are required by the Parish Attorney. The Parish of Calcasieu shall reserve all oil, gas and other mineral rights in and to the property to be conveyed, but shall convey the surface rights of the said property.

            This ordinance was adopted on the 18^th day of December, 2003.

                                                                                    /s/ Chuck Kleckley, President

/s/ S. Mark McMurry, Administrator &

Ex-Officio Parish Secretary

* * * * * * * * * * * *

            It was moved by Mr. Manuel, seconded by Mr. Danahay and carried unanimously to adopt the Parish’s Fiscal Year 2004 Annual Budget, in accordance with the Local Government Budget Act and a public hearing held by the Budget Committee on December 4, 2003, and as per the recommendation of said Committee on said date:

RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION adopting the Fiscal Year 2004 Annual Budget of the Parish of Calcasieu, Louisiana, as submitted by the Parish Administrator and Staff.

            BE IT RESOLVED BY THE POLICE JURY OF CALCASIEU PARISH, LOUISIANA, in regular session convened on the 18^th day of December, 2003, that:

            Section 1.        The Fiscal Year 2004 Annual Budget of the Parish of Calcasieu, Louisiana, as submitted by the Parish Administrator and Staff, is hereby adopted.

            Section 2.        Certification is hereby given that all actions required by the Local Government Budget Act have been completed in compliance with L.R.S. 39:1306.

            Section 3.        In accordance with L.R.S. 39:1304, the Parish Administrator is authorized to make changes within various budget classifications without approval of the governing authority.

            THUS PASSED AND ADOPTED on this, the 18^th day of December, 2003.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

REVENUE\EXPENDITURE RECAP

ESTIMATED REVENUES\EXPENDITURES

GENERAL FUND
Legislative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .				$    396,748
Coroner’s Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .				489,284
City/Wards Judicial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .				552,714
Registrar of Voters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .				212,933
Facility Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .				2,655,811
Facility Management - Magnolia Building . . . . . . . . . . . . .				205,468
Creative Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .				182,473
Weed & Grass Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .				50,000
Calcasieu Government Channel Access. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .