News -> News TUE, OCT 25 3:41PM by Walter Pierce

Deconsolidation: A Black Prerogative?

coverstory5
Lafayette City-Parish Council Chairman Kenneth
Boudreaux, one of deconsolidation's most outspoken
supporters

Parsing the precincts suggests charter repeal was most popular in Lafayette’s minority community. By Walter Pierce

A funny thing happened on the way to deconsolidation being shot down: Support appears to have been strongest in Lafayette’s “inner city,” otherwise known as the black community.

Overall, deconsolidation, as it was popularly called, sank at the polls by a resounding 63-37 percent margin. But a closer look at the vote, precinct by precinct, shows support for deconsolidation greatest in majority-black districts 3 and 4.

“I think they’re probably the ones who are most greatly affected negatively by consolidation, and I think the issues that affect the black community and minority community are kind of set aside and they’re given back seat to other issues,” says District 4 Councilman Kenneth Boudreaux, the current council chairman who was an outspoken proponent of deconsolidation. While Boudreaux was unopposed on Oct. 22, he says he made a point of lobbying for repealing the charter with his constituents. His counterpart in District 3, Councilman Brandon Shelvin, also supported deconsolidation; Shelvin won his re-election bid handily over challenger Lloyd Rochon, who opposed deconsolidation.

For Boudreaux, who represents Lafayette’s most impoverished, high-crime district, the inequities he sees in consolidation are most stark in terms of law enforcement.

“One of the things that I spoke about often with groups and organizations was the police issue,” he says. “You take the councilman from District 9: He has the benefit of having the sheriff’s department, the Youngsville Police Department and the Broussard Police Department to protect his community. OK? I am totally dependent upon the Lafayette Police Department. But yet let’s say the representative from District 9 doesn’t want to grow government. Let’s say he doesn’t believe police officers should get a pay raise, which affects our ability to recruit and provide services. Let’s say he’s not concerned about operations of the police department that may require special functions. That means that he or she can vote on those issues without negatively impacting [District 9’s] ability to protect and police themselves. It was those types of issues that I spoke about.”

Boudreaux was quick to point out that he was using District 9 as an example only because it comprises very little of the city of Lafayette and more unincorporated Lafayette Parish, not because of any specific votes by its council rep, William Theriot, who won re-election Saturday.

But Boudreaux’s message appears to have resonated with voters. Of the more than 100 voting precincts in Lafayette Parish, only 15 had a majority of voters pressing a yes for deconsolidation, and all of them are in districts 3 and 4. And as we move away from those “inner city” districts, support for deconsolidation falls conversely. On the south side of the city of Lafayette, at polling places located at Woodvale and Broadmoor elementary schools, for example, the vote against deconsolidation was 58 percent at both locations. And the vote against deconsolidation in the smaller municipalities was the heaviest: 71 percent against at Precinct 1 in Carencro, 65 against at both Precinct 25 in Scott and Precinct 28A in Duson; 71 percent against at Precinct 108 in Youngsville and a whopping 79 percent opposed at Precinct 98 in Broussard.

“To me it’s about the dollars, about who’s paying for what and who’s receiving what,” Boudreaux adds. “South side residents and certainly unincorporated residents and parish residents in general, as you look at the food chain, the community that voted the greatest to support this item was those who were the most greatly affected; the people who are hurting the most speak the loudest, and I think that was reflected in the vote.”

As council chairman, Boudreaux says he’s eager to at least set in motion discussion about amending the Lafayette Home Rule Charter to grant the city of Lafayette more autonomy and control over its budget, which is separate from the parish budget, now that deconsolidation in effectively a dead issue. But Boudreaux says the process will likely wait until two new council members — Kevin Naquin in District 1 and the winner of the District 6 runoff — are sworn in and new council leadership is voted into place.

coverstory6
District 3 Councilman Brandon Shelvin, who was re-elected
Saturday, also favored deconsolidation.

“I plan on reaching out to the administration, and I want to see some movement on this. We have seven folks in place and the same administration in place,” he says, adding that he hopes to see those opponents of deconsolidation who nonetheless acknowledged Lafayette’s need for autonomy but believed repealing the charter was too drastic put their money where their mouth is and help resolve the issue. Boudreaux is referring specifically to former charter commission member Don Bacqué, who led the charge against deconsolidation and even formed a political action committee, True PAC, to lobby against the proposition.

“I’m hoping that the PAC that was created and raised all that money to oppose this, I hope they put their money behind it to fix it,” Boudreaux says with a chuckle of resignation.


Walter Pierce
About the author:


Comments (11)add
...
written by ragin_cajun , October 26, 2011 - 02:35 pm
I think it's VERY curious how much priorities and focus has changed here at theIND since Saturdays election. Of all the things that have happened in Lsfayette in the last 6 weeks, a defeated Councilman and a defeated Charter Resolution are what the editors at theIND consider news this week?
...
written by Cajunhiker , October 26, 2011 - 06:29 pm
Councilman Boudreaux is misleading everyone.
District 9 councilman Theriot does NOT have the Youngsville PD or the Broussard PD. Theriot has no vote or any other type of authority on the Youngsville & Broussard police departments. And these police departments don't patrol in the PARISH.

Theriot does have a vote & therefore some control over the Sheriff's Office, just as Mr. Boudreaux & the other CITY councilman do.

Quoting Mr. Boudreaux, but changing the police agency and council district, the logic of Mr. Boudreaux applies toward PARISH residents.
Boudreaux said, "Let's say the representative from District 4 doesn’t want to grow government. Let’s say he doesn’t believe Sheriff's Deputies should get a pay raise, which affects our ability to recruit and provide services. Let’s say he’s not concerned about operations of the Sheriff's department that may require special functions. That means that he or she can vote on those issues without negatively impacting [District 4's) ability to protect and police themselves."

See how the same logic can be applied to CITY councilman Mr. Boudreaux.

...
written by ragin_cajun , October 26, 2011 - 07:16 pm
As another commenter wrote under the X Factor article..."I only wish the Independent was as aggressive in reporting about the political contributions and connections of Joey Durel. "


...
written by Anonymous , October 26, 2011 - 08:49 pm
Cajunhiker, read the comments about the police departments again. There was nothing said about having control, just about having protection. Every citizen of the parish, whether in the cities of Lafayette, Broussard, Youngsville, Scott, Duson or Carencro has a councilman on the City-Parish Council. Therefore, someone in Mr. Theriot's district has not only their respective police departments to protect them, but also the Sheriff's department.

The problem at hand is that the councilmen with the majorities of their districts outside the city have the SAME vote as those inside the city. So every one (including citizens of other municipalities) runs the city government.
...
written by shucks , October 26, 2011 - 10:43 pm
shucks man for $10.00 I would have voted for all of that and Joey. Why didn't they put Joey' name on my card they handed me with my $10.00. P.S. the chicken was good.
...
written by Andrew M. Hebert , October 27, 2011 - 11:28 am
This post was removed from "The Advertiser"
I wonder why!
'Deconsolidation is off the table'
11:00 PM, Oct. 23, 2011 |
andymhebert
10:29 AM on October 24, 2011
“Voters from within the city of Lafayette…”

The media’s continued portrayal of the people who actually vote in these elections continues to perpetuate the illusion that votes were cast by the people of the City of Lafayette.

The people of the Parish were the only ones to cast votes then and now. In 1992 the Parish people living in the City of Lafayette recognized the bankruptcy of the Parish was coming and as responsible Parish people felt that the Parish should be united with the City.

However, as City people, we did not believe that the “Charter” consolidating the only the City of Lafayette was in the best interest of our City and the leaders of the City refused to place the issue on a City ballot to repeal the current and still existing City of Lafayette Home Rule Charter. Check the records.

And as the Legislative Act No. 187 states: “A. The people of Lafayette Parish and the people of the city of Lafayette shall have the power…”

The people of the City are distinctly and recognizably 2 separate people with 2 separate legal jurisdictions and voting rights. The State Constitution states clearly “Proxy voting is prohibited”.

In a 1971 City election only the people of the City of Lafayette could vote to change their form of government from a “Board of Trustees” to a “Home Rule Charter”.

State Constitution: “§6. Home Rule Charter or Plan of Government; Action by Legislature Prohibited
Section 6. The legislature shall enact no law the effect of which changes or affects the structure and organization or the particular distribution and redistribution of the powers and functions of any local governmental subdivision which operates under a home rule charter.”

If the City of Lafayette’s 1971 adopted Home Rule Charter is not still a legal governing document, then please print a copy of the legally required City Ordinance calling an election and ballot for the repeal of the City of Lafayette Home Rule Charter?

...
written by RCajunrunner , October 27, 2011 - 06:29 pm
I am sure the IND absolutely loved the fact that "Distric 9 councilman" was used in the example.

Unfortunately, for the IND and other promoters of big government and higher taxes in Lafayette Parish, William Theriot won.

Did he win by alot? No, but he successfully fought off the Joey Durel Administration, Lafayette Chamber of Commerce, the Lafayette "Independent" and all the Michot/Durel money-backers.
...
written by Frankie , October 28, 2011 - 12:11 pm
Jared Bellard won too. It shows that you can buck the Durel machine and survive. We need more councilmen like Bellard and Theriot.
...
written by Soop. , October 31, 2011 - 12:53 pm
The fact that Broussard, Youngsville, Carencro and the other municipalities within the parish that retained local government were so opposed to deconsolidation exposes the flaw in the charter. They get the benefit of consolidation but none of the headaches.

The Youngsville tax on the Nov. 19th ballot is an excellent example. It will pass and Youngsville will get to upgrade its parks system. But you could never see the same thing happen in Lafayette because the parish as a whole will never increase taxes for Lafayette parks. Even if the tax was just to cover business within the city, why would someone from Youngsville vote to raise the taxes they pay when shopping in the city to benefit Lafayette parks? Parks they will never use?

I'm using parks as the example because that is the most current issue but it applies to any endeavor a city might want to undertake.

All the best,

Soop
...
written by LaffyGirl , November 01, 2011 - 02:35 pm
Frankie-more like Theriot and Bellard? Have you EVER been to a City-Parish council meeting? They do nothing. Literally, nothing but vote "no" - on everything. Bellard leans back in his chair like he is asleep and barely listening. And they both vote "no" to any change, anything, over and over again. They are both jokes.
...
written by Roberto W.... , November 16, 2011 - 04:59 pm
@ LaffyGirl. Speak your mind in the meetings if you ever attend. Make sure you have supporting facts, that back your argument. The reason youngsville is moving forward is because, "THEY WANT TO GO FORWARD" to create a better community for tommorow.... Thanks, Roberto p.s. if you speak facts, People will listen I assure you that. Good luck
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it