2025 Council District A Primary Candidates by Issue

CITY BUDGET AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

Background Provided to All Candidates

Strategic management of limited public resources will be key to improving the performance of City government. The City emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic in a stronger financial position thanks in large part to nearly $400 million in federal relief funding. But the windfall is over. The City projects little growth in revenue as it faces looming new costs. To help policymakers navigate this new reality, BGR analyzed the City’s financial management practices.

In After the Windfall, BGR recommended that the City administration develop a five-year financial plan and review it annually with the City Council. Having this roadmap can put the City on track to address fiscal challenges and opportunities. The plan should move the City toward a structurally balanced budget. A structural balance is when recurring revenues equal or exceed the recurring expenditures necessary to sustain public services and properly maintain facilities and infrastructure. Currently, the City relies on one-time reserves to balance its budget, and it does not adequately fund maintenance. Street maintenance alone would need an estimated $36 million increase in annual funding. Achieving structural balance is important for the City government’s fiscal health, but also for New Orleans’ sustainability and quality of life.

BGR also recommended the City administration develop, and the council adopt by ordinance, a policy for the use and preservation of its General Fund reserves to ensure an adequate financial cushion. Given New Orleans’ vulnerability to disasters, City officials should strongly consider a reserve level higher than the minimum of two months of General Fund expenses (about 17%, or $158 million this year) recommended by government finance experts.

Before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the City’s reserves remained well below 17% and even turned negative in some years, signifying a deficit. The federal pandemic relief funding enabled the City to bolster its reserves, reaching a high of $344 million, or 54% of General Fund expenses in 2022. But three years of spending from the reserves could again reduce them below the minimum recommended level by the end of this year. Maintaining adequate reserves is important because it helps avoid cuts to essential services and increases in taxes and fees during financial crises. A reduction in reserves also could hurt the City’s credit rating, driving up taxpayer-funded borrowing costs for capital projects, such as street repairs.

On City budget and financial management, BGR asked the candidates:

3. Do you agree that the City should adopt and maintain a five-year financial plan that aims for a structurally balanced budget? Why or why not? Please describe any spending reductions or revenue-raising opportunities that you would consider to achieve a structurally balanced budget.

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

Yes, I strongly support adopting and maintaining a five-year financial plan that moves the City toward a structurally balanced budget. This is a basic best practice in public finance, and BGR’s After the Windfall report underscores how essential it is to restore public trust and ensure long-term sustainability.

Currently, the City relies heavily on one time revenues and reserves to patch over structural deficits. That is not just fiscally irresponsible; it is unfair to future residents who will bear the cost of today’s inaction.

A five-year plan would allow the City to:
1. Forecast future obligations and revenue risks.
2. Prioritize investments in core services, like infrastructure and public safety.
3. Identify and phase out ineffective or redundant programs.
4. Set clear expectations for departments and improve budgeting discipline.

As Councilmember, I would also push for regular public updates and Council hearings tied to progress on the plan.

To achieve structural balance, I support:
1. Phasing out the use of reserves for recurring costs.
2. Reassessing and sunsetting underperforming subsidies or contracts.
3. Improving permitting and code enforcement systems to boost compliance and revenue.
4. Exploring smarter, fairer cost recovery models for services, as recommended by BGR.

This is about more than balancing a spreadsheet. A structurally balanced budget is how we ensure the City can deliver reliable services, make smart investments, and honor its commitments for years to come.

AIMEE McCARRON

Prior to serving the residents of District A as the full-time Policy and Budget Director for Councilmember Giarrusso, I was a financial advisor helping individuals and businesses with their financial plans, both short term and long term planning. With this background, I deeply understand the importance of fiscal responsibility and I firmly agree we need to adopt and maintain a five-year financial plan. This plan needs to be done in close collaboration between the Administration, City Council, and the community.

We also need to have a capital projects plan that is developed in partnership with the City Council. Currently, there is no input from the District Councilmembers on the capital projects needs of their districts and I see this as a major issue. District Councilmembers are the people’s gateway to their government. These offices are the ones that help constituents navigate the issues affecting their neighborhoods and can provide the Administration with critical insight into residents’ top concerns . Due to mismanagement and delays on FEMA-funded roadwork, we have an $800M gap for street repairs and $300M of that money is in District A alone. The Administration and the Council also need to work together to formulate a plan that includes short term repairs (1 year) for street projects that are no longer on the list for reconstruction and then have a long term funding plan (3-5 years) for full reconstruction. Our bonds defease fairly quickly and consistently over the next several years, so we need to be both realistic at what we can execute, while ensuring we have the money and the right plans in place for residents.

One opportunity we have for a revenue growth to assist in rebuilding infrastructure is a storm water management fee, but this cannot be implemented until we reform SWBNO; reconfigure millages to ensure residential homeowners pay no more than they do today while property, tax-exempt properties begin paying; and establish a COUNCIL-managed fund to receive the fee in order to provide proper accountability before SWBNO or any entity can receive any further funding. This fee could help facilitate much-needed repairs to drainage infrastructure and both above- and below-ground features to reduce flooding.

“ALEX” MOSSING

Yes. A five-year financial plan is essential to good governance. To achieve structural balance, I support evaluating existing tax dedications and millages for alignment with today’s needs, and I’d establish performance metrics for major budget items, linking funding to realistic measurable outcomes. For the last twenty years we have had access to a variety of one-time funding pools, first through FEMA in our post-Katrina rebuilding era, and more recently through COVID relief funds. With the sunsetting of both sets of resources, it’s important for the next city council to create a plan that will fit the realities of our current needs and available resources. We need a plan that clearly connects our standard revenues with expected expenditures to ensure that we are intentionally allocating our resources based on a consistent vision instead of operating reactively, which is usually inefficient and expensive. This includes following through collecting all revenues, including fees and fines already on the books for various code enforcement infractions in order to maximize our revenue and create accountability across all sectors.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

Yes. We should be developing long-term financial plans (I think 5 year and 20 year would be prudent) in a participatory way, engaging the community in what they need now and in the long term, how we acquire funding for these projects, and driving the conversation on expectations. These trying times require imagination and making sure decisions are coming from the bottom, not the top. Marta Harnecker’s book “Planning From Below: A Decentralized Participatory Planning Proposal” has interesting approaches that are scaled to municipal level and community level proposals.

It’s critical that we understand the purpose of structurally balanced budgets should be making sure “vital” or “critical” City services are maintained, and stop austerity measures. There are a number of revenue sources that we are not leveraging. There is no method of collecting revenue from the uber-wealthy in our city, and massive non-profits like Ochsner, LCMC, and Tulane have massive property footprints that do not contribute a cent to the public good via property taxes. It’s time that the City pursue revenue collection for properties that increase exponentially with value, and collect fees from non-profits who exceed large thresholds of square footage owned. I want to explore the creation of a municipal bank that would allow for planned financial investments decided upon democratically by voters, reduce payroll costs and other banking expenses that the City makes, and provide citizens with free banking and other financial resources that they may continue to struggle to get. Further, municipal banking can allow for revenue that isn’t reliant on federal and state funding, which we have seen recently is something we cannot rely upon.

BRIDGET NEAL

Yes. Adopting and maintaining a five-year financial plan that aims for a structurally balanced budget is not only sound governance- it is a fiscal imperative. New Orleans’ ongoing reliance on one-time revenues and reserves to fund recurring expenses is unsustainable and increasingly risky. We can no longer assume that federal backstops will continue to shield the City from the consequences of poor financial planning. Structural balance is not a theoretical goal; it is essential to protecting vital services and rebuilding public trust.

A structurally balanced budget means recurring revenues cover recurring expenses. This stops the cycle of short-term fixes funding long-term obligations, allowing the City to plan ahead, protect core services, and avoid emergency cuts during downturns.

Spending Reductions to Consider:

• NOPD Overtime Reform: Implement payroll integration and hour-verification software, as recommended by the Office of Inspector General, to curb excessive overtime spending and improve oversight. These reforms could yield multimillion-dollar annual savings.

• Operational Efficiency Reviews: Consistent with BGR’s recommendations, conduct department-by-department operational reviews with the CAO responsible for performance outcomes to identify inefficiencies, reduce duplication, and improve service delivery.

• Pension Sustainability: Preserve earned benefits for current employees while introducing more sustainable plans for new hires. Addressing long-term pension liabilities will relieve pressure on the General Fund within the five-year planning horizon.

Revenue Opportunities:

• Louisiana Incident-Based Reporting System (LIBRS) Compliance: Restoring NOPD’s federal data compliance would recover at least $1.1 million in lost grants and reestablish eligibility for future federal support.

• Stormwater Fee: A fair, usage-based fee, recommended by the City Services Coalition would replace current property tax millages dedicated to drainage as they expire. This approach ensures that those who generate more runoff contribute proportionally to its management, creating a more equitable and sustainable funding model.

• Federal Grant Maximization: Proactively maintain departmental compliance to protect existing grants and aggressively pursue new federal funding opportunities.

Implementation Approach:

The financial plan should be adopted by ordinance and reviewed annually by the City Council. Coupling disciplined cost management with targeted reinvestment will help stabilize city finances, preserve our credit rating, and ensure sustainable funding for core services, infrastructure, and climate resilience over the long term.

4. What percentage of the General Fund budget should the City keep as a financial reserve, and why?

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

The City should maintain at least 20% of its General Fund budget in reserves, slightly above the 17% minimum recommended by national finance experts. Given New Orleans’ exposure to hurricanes and flooding, this cushion is not just prudent; it is essential.

As BGR’s After the Windfall report makes clear, the City only achieved adequate reserves in recent years due to one time federal pandemic aid. However, that windfall is gone, and reserves are again being depleted to plug recurring costs. This is not sustainable.

Fiscal responsibility and transparency are core to building public trust. A robust reserve policy shows residents we are planning for the long term, not just the next budget cycle.

I support codifying a formal reserve policy that:
1. Sets a minimum reserve target of 20%.
2. Establish clear conditions for when reserves can be used.
3. Requires a public plan to replenish reserves if drawn down.

Maintaining adequate reserves protects against midyear service cuts and helps secure better bond ratings, saving taxpayers money on infrastructure borrowing. It is a smart, stabilizing practice that signals fiscal maturity.

Reserves aren’t just a rainy day fund in New Orleans, they’re an every year necessity. I will champion a forward looking, disciplined approach to reserve management that safeguards both services and solvency.

AIMEE McCARRON

With the increased uncertainty of funding from the federal government I believe around 15% to 17% of the General Fund budget should be kept for a financial reserve with the caveat that a portion of it stay very restricted (like the $33M required by the Home Rule Charter) and the rest be available to use via budget ordinance, mutually agreed upon by Council and Mayor. Having this level of financial reserve ensures we can keep the credit rating we need in order to receive the best possible rate for any bond sales. In order to implement a long term strategy for streets and infrastructure, we need to ensure we are getting the necessary funds at the lowest possible cost to taxpayers.

“ALEX” MOSSING

The City should keep at least 20% of the General Fund as a reserve. A 20% reserve provides a stronger cushion for continuity of services in a crisis and helps protect the City’s credit rating, keeping borrowing costs down. This is a big ask given the city’s budget constraints, but maintaining this level also allows us to avoid cuts to essential services and reduces the temptation to over-rely on one-time federal or emergency funds. The reserve could be structured with specific allocations: 8% for general emergencies, 8% for infrastructure disasters, and 4% for economic development opportunities to provide accountability and ensure the funds serve strategic purposes rather than becoming slush funds for sloppy spending.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

This is a common struggle that a number of cities of similar population/municipal budget have. I argue that partitioning off three months of the operating budget for reserves is ideal, however that is idealism, and we need to be grounded in the material reality that doing so would have to reduce critical spending here and now. I think having a one-month reserve built into the Charter for dedicated funding would give a floor to work within reason without sacrificing critical services during this housing and affordability crisis. I want the Budget committee of City Council actively engaged throughout the year on spending actuals compared to the budget. This would allow for ongoing budget/auditing updates to see if expenses are down or revenue is up. Any wiggle room can then be decided upon (as democratically as possible) on moving those unplanned funds to reserves for the remainder of the year.

BRIDGET NEAL

New Orleans should maintain 25–30% of annual General Fund expenditures in reserves, well above the Government Finance Officers Association’s (GFOA) 17% minimum. While this may appear conservative, our city’s unique risk profile demands a higher standard of preparedness.

Why This Matters:

New Orleans faces compounding risks: below-sea-level geography, hurricane exposure, aging infrastructure, and one of the nation’s highest poverty rates. As the Bureau of Governmental Research (BGR) has noted, the City’s reserves have been “inadequate to weather major storms or economic downturns.” With nearly 25% of residents in poverty, the City must fund pre-storm evacuations and post-storm recovery for thousands unable to do so on their own.

The Federal Reality Has Shifted:

The scale of post-Katrina federal aid was extraordinary and unlikely to return. Federal disaster policy is shifting toward cost-sharing and reduced direct aid, meaning New Orleans must rely more on local fiscal resilience.

Reserves as a Stabilizer:

Strong reserves are essential to:
• Protect our credit rating and reduce borrowing costs for major infrastructure bonds
• Maintain core services during economic shocks
• Prevent emergency tax hikes or midyear service cuts

Why 25–30% Is the Right Target:

GFOA’s 17% baseline doesn’t account for disaster-related costs. Adding in evacuation and recovery needs, 25–30% is not excessive- it’s essential.

Implementation:

I support codifying this reserve target by ordinance with:
• Automatic deposits in surplus years
• Strict withdrawal limits
• Separate pre- and post-storm Weather Emergency Reserves

PUBLIC SAFETY

Background Provided to All Candidates

When New Orleans voters last elected their mayor and council four years ago, the city was reeling from a violent crime surge during the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of sworn officers in the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) had fallen by nearly 20%. BGR hosted a Breakfast Briefing speaker series on public safety in spring 2022 that analyzed New Orleans’ longstanding crime problem and presented both law enforcement and community-based approaches to addressing it.

The City implemented recruitment and retention bonuses for NOPD officers – covering the initial costs with a substantial portion of its federal pandemic relief funds. It expanded its collaboration with other law enforcement agencies, including the Louisiana State Police, as the NOPD superintendent explained at a December 2023 BGR Breakfast Briefing. The City also invested in several public safety initiatives besides law enforcement, from mental health crisis response to violence prevention. Nonprofit organizations, businesses and others came together to form the NOLA Coalition in summer 2022 to invest in both NOPD and youth support services.

Crime has fallen significantly from its 2022 peak, and a recent public opinion survey found increasing satisfaction with NOPD and neighborhood safety. But public safety remains a top concern for many residents. NOPD’s officer strength has stopped its downward trend but hasn’t markedly improved. The department is the City’s largest annual General Fund expenditure, accounting for about a fifth of the budget. BGR’s recent report on the City’s financial management highlighted inaccurate budget projections for NOPD in 2024. Overtime costs have been a key driver in tens of millions of dollars of unplanned expenditures.

On public safety, BGR asked the candidates:

5. Would you seek an increase in funding for NOPD? Why or why not? If yes, please specify the increase level and what the additional funds would support. If no, please specify any changes to the department’s current budget that you would seek.

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

Before supporting an increase in NOPD’s budget, I would first demand smarter use of the funds we already allocate, currently about 20% of the General Fund. As BGR has pointed out, unplanned overtime and weak budgeting practices have led to massive cost overruns, without clear improvements in officer performance or public safety outcomes.

Instead of just spending more, we need to spend better. I would prioritize:
1. Building a real time data analysis team within or in partnership with NOPD to guide deployment, target hot spots, and evaluate program effectiveness.
2. Investing in updated technology: crime tracking software, mobile field devices, so officers can work smarter, not harder.
3. Strategic overtime management with caps, pre-approval, and public reporting.
4. Deepening community engagement through neighborhood based policing and partnerships with civilian led programs like NODICE.

Officers cannot perform at a high level without access to meaningful data and modern tools. Supporting them means more than just adding more police officers; it means giving them what they need to succeed. I will focus on building a modern, accountable department that delivers results, not just larger budgets.

AIMEE McCARRON

Any discussion regarding public safety funding must be approached from a holistic perspective. Through work I assisted in as Budget and Policy Director for the Council Budget Chair (and thanks to important research from BGR), we know that NOPD overtime costs threaten our total public safety budget.

NOPD funding is critical to ensuring the safety and functionality of our City but it must be managed responsibly, ensuring any additional dollars be used to increase officer counts and decrease response times. It should also be approached as just one component of the criminal justice system. The City provides tens of millions of dollars to Judges and Courts, the Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office, and District Attorney. The Council MUST increase oversight and scrutiny of these agencies and how funds are being spent to ensure funding is used properly to improve public safety throughout the city. Some of these agencies continue to ask the Council to allocate more money but do not provide sufficient transparency to ensure these dollars actually improve public safety.

It is true that crime rates are down in many key categories, as are rates throughout the country. However, it is critical that we continue to think carefully about how to keep crime down. This includes funding evidence-based programming at community centers and schools, as well as ensuring adequate funding for NORD facilities. I believe that investments in smart, proven, safe technologies like virtual police reporting through zoom and civilian traffic accident response while we continue to try to improve officer recruitment. If elected, I would also build on the many successful We should also continue efforts of current Councilmembers, such as to bolstering NOPD operations and reducing response times and through civilian staff and ensuring the completion of the ARPA-funded real criminal justice system data continuity initiative, which will finally align data across the criminal justice system to vastly improve efficiency and public safety.

This is all to say, if I am elected to serve as the Councilmember for District A, I will first ensure the Council and public have a full and clear understanding of how public safety dollars are being utilized across all agencies before committing to any changes to budgets.

“ALEX” MOSSING

I do not support a blanket increase to the NOPD budget. Our improved public safety statistics over the last year suggest that this is unnecessary. Instead, I support better fiscal oversight, targeted investments, and performance accountability. NOPD already receives nearly 20% of the City’s General Fund. I would support shifting existing funding to increase allowances for officer retention bonuses, mental health support programs, and community policing initiatives that build neighborhood trust. These programs would come with performance requirements like reduced response times, increased clearance rates, and measurable community engagement improvements.

The overtime crisis can be addressed through better staffing models and resource allocation. I would support shifting some overtime spending toward hiring additional officers or civilian support staff (forensic analysts, administrative support, etc.) depending on department needs and improving scheduling systems to address this issue. Finally, I’d establish quarterly public reporting on department performance metrics and community satisfaction surveys.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

No. In spite of the dropping and stagnant workforce numbers of NOPD, we are seeing a decades-long low for violent crime. For the first time in several years, the NOPD budget as a percentage of the entire budget did not increase by 3% YOY. I see correlation, perhaps not causality, but it’s important to dig in further beyond workforce numbers. What is NOPD spending money on? Personnel is three-quarters of spending, consistently with an excess in overtime. Of the remaining quarter, close to $20 million dollars are being spent on surveillance technologies, consultation, weapons and munitions, and vehicle-related purchases. I think the critical funding that NOPD has for solving crimes, particularly violent crime like rape and murder, should have political prioritization. Most importantly, NOPD needs public oversight, especially if the consent decree isn’t reinstated, and funding for consent decree monitoring should stay in place to fund community police oversight.

BRIDGET NEAL

Reform First, Funding Next. I support strengthening public safety through responsible stewardship of the resources NOPD already receives, nearly one-fifth of the General Fund before considering any increase. Both the Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the Bureau of Governmental Research (BGR) have raised concerns about overtime misuse, weak internal oversight, and unreliable data reporting. These issues must be addressed first to ensure tax dollars are being used effectively.

Priority Reforms Before Any Increase:

• Technology Infrastructure: Deploy an integrated timekeeping and payroll system (e.g., UKG (formerly Ultimate Kronos Group) or equivalent) with biometric logins, GPS check-ins, and automated alerts to flag overtime violations in real time. The OIG documented officers logging 16+ hour shifts for extended periods behavior that cannot be credibly tracked or corrected without modern systems.

• Crime Data Compliance: The City should fund independent support to help NOPD regain LIBRS compliance and restore more than $1.1 million in federal public safety grants with impacts lasting through 2031. Due to noncompliance, victim services funding fell by 33%, costing local organizations over $700,000 per year.

• Stronger Oversight: Enhance supervisory training and accountability to enforce rest periods, prevent burnout, and improve officer performance.

• Strategic Staffing: Follow City Services Coalition guidance by civilianizing non-enforcement roles and coordinating with regional law enforcement to reduce unnecessary strain on NOPD staffing.

Accountability First: BGR has identified "tens of millions of dollars in unplanned expenditures," largely tied to uncontrolled overtime. These funds could be redirected toward officer recruitment, community-based violence prevention, and victim services without increasing NOPD’s baseline budget.

Path Forward: Once core reforms are in place and performance metrics improve such as restored grant eligibility, accurate crime data, better clearance rates, and stronger community trust, I would support targeted funding increases tied to clear public safety outcomes.

6. Beyond NOPD, what do you think are the top two areas where City resources can most effectively drive improvements in public safety? Why does the City’s involvement in these areas have strong potential for improving outcomes?

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

To improve public safety citywide, we must invest in smarter infrastructure and data tools that support officers in the field and proactively prevent crime.

First, the data team within NOPD is severely understaffed and underfunded. Expanding this unit is one of the most impactful steps we can take. Officers cannot be expected to perform at a high level without real time information and analytical support. A fully built out analytics team will help identify hot spots, guide smarter deployments, and assist with investigations; allowing officers to work smarter, not harder, especially as we continue to face staffing shortages.

Second, I would prioritize sustained City funding for NODICE, a new initiative housed at the District Attorney’s Office. NODICE has already helped close the London Lodge Motel, the tire shop on Claiborne, the Shamrock bar and cleaned up Harrell Park. It leverages real time data, cross agency collaboration, and community input to address crime and blight before it escalates. These are the types of proven, high impact programs that the City should invest in.

Public safety must be modern, proactive, and community connected. The City needs to invest in what works and stop recycling approaches that don’t.

AIMEE McCARRON

Better lighting and streets! There is a proven link between infrastructure and public safety, particularly when it comes to lighting. I believe we must have a real workforce development program to hire a City workforce to improve these basic services. Cleaner, well lit streets and more job opportunities for people mean better safety outcomes. As I mentioned before, the City only has one electrician, so we have to rely on an outside contractor to fix a basic streetlight or traffic light. It is less efficient and costs more. If we work towards having an in-house crew for these things (similar to Jefferson Parish) streetlights would be lit faster and our neighborhoods across the city would feel safer.

We must also continue to provide investments in our youth, specifically the youth summer jobs program. This is something the City Council pushed to fund with an increase in funding last year to provide more spots for kids. These programs all play a significant role in providing opportunities for kids during the summer and beyond and have proven success and positive impact.

“ALEX” MOSSING

Youth programming and mental health services offer the greatest potential for improving public safety outcomes. As an educator, I’ve witnessed how quality after-school programs, summer jobs, and educational opportunities prevent crime more effectively than enforcement alone. Kids benefit from safe, structured activities and they need to see a future for themselves that includes real job opportunities in high-paying fields. The city should expand partnerships with schools and nonprofits providing structured activities for young people during high-risk hours. Fully investing in our NORD recreation centers, job training programs, and mentorship initiatives will address root causes of many public safety challenges.

Mental health crisis response is another critical area. Many emergency calls would benefit from trained counselors more than armed officers. Expanding crisis intervention teams and mobile mental health units would improve outcomes while reducing police workload. Models like mobile crisis units and civilian mental health responders can reduce strain on NOPD and result in better outcomes. These strategies reflect a broader public health approach to safety and allow NOPD to focus more effectively on violent crime.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

More city jobs - the only minimum wage that can be set by the City is for municipal employees, and thankfully the livable wage ordinance provides working people in New Orleans the opportunity to get a job that isn’t a poverty wage. We need to expand our municipal workforce rather than shrink it as Gilbert Montano and the City have successfully done over the last two terms, primarily in services that have been sorely needed around public works, functional jobs like electricians and sign makers, and a job corps for giving young people & students quality jobs year round.

Investing in our youth - our young people are the most blighted infrastructure of our city. We need a generational investment in our young people, from newborns to 25 years old. Expanded UBI, splash pads, and more are all outlined on my platform. We can’t retain our workforce if they can’t raise a family here, and people are leaving in droves due to a hostile state government and the economic reality that comes with it. We can reduce youth criminal activity, reduce childhood poverty and hunger, and increase our potential for the next generation, but we need to do it now. Public safety doesn’t come in the form of red and blue lights, it comes from housed people with full bellies.

BRIDGET NEAL

A. Education and Economic Opportunity

The most effective long-term public safety strategy is economic stability. When residents have access to education, job training, and living-wage employment, the incentive for criminal activity declines. City government can play a central role by leveraging existing infrastructure, libraries, recreation centers, and workforce hubs to expand GED programs, job training, and small business development, especially in neighborhoods with high rates of violence.

By partnering with the Orleans Parish School Board, Nunez Community College, other community colleges, and major employers, the City can coordinate a unified workforce pipeline tailored to local demand in fields like construction, healthcare, technology, and green infrastructure creating opportunity and reducing crime risk at the source.

B. Youth Programming and Mental Health Services

Unsupervised hours after school and on weekends are a known risk window for youth involvement in violence. Expanding safe, structured programs in sports, arts, mentorship, and STEM, paired with accessible mental health services, can reduce both delinquency and trauma. Following the City Services Coalition’s “New Orleans 360” approach, the City should:

• Extend recreation center hours
• Integrate violence prevention counseling
• Expand the Mobile Crisis Intervention Unit (MCIU)
• Fund treatment diversion programs to reduce unnecessary law enforcement contact

Why City Leadership Matters

These efforts span Parks & Recreation, Libraries, and Health, and require cross-agency coordination. Through a Public Safety & Justice Council as recommended by the Coalition, the City can ensure equitable access, consistent funding, and data-driven results.

Addressing the root causes of violence, not just its symptoms, will make New Orleans safer, stronger, and more resilient over the long term.

ORLEANS PARISH JAIL

Background Provided to All Candidates

The Orleans Parish jail has been under federal oversight or investigation for more than 50 years, longer than any other local jail in the country. It has suffered from chronic problems, including violence, understaffing, and insufficient medical and mental health care. The May 16, 2025, escape of 10 men from custody heightened the public’s concern about the jail’s problems.

BGR’s 2022 report, Keys to the Jail, linked the jail’s performance problems to the strained governance relationship between the Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office and the City. Under Louisiana law, the Sheriff’s Office operates the jail, while the City must pay most of its costs – 79% of its $91.1 million total budget in 2025. This structure has blurred accountability for the jail’s performance and impeded progress toward improving its performance and exiting federal oversight. BGR recommended the City and Sheriff’s Office develop a multi-year agreement to:

• Establish an ongoing strategic planning process in which they collaborate on the budget, facilities, employee compensation and training, and other jail needs.
• Improve fiscal transparency and accountability, both to ensure adequate City funding for the jail and careful tracking of how the Sheriff’s Office uses the money.
• Strengthen the appointment process for the top jail administrator by defining the job’s responsibilities and qualifications and by enabling City and public input on the candidates.
• Create an independent local entity to oversee jail performance to ensure ongoing monitoring of jail conditions and treatment of people in custody after federal court oversight ends.

In April 2025, voters renewed the Sheriff’s property tax for the jail. BGR supported the renewal based on its analysis showing the tax provides essential funding for the jail that would otherwise have to come from the City. However, BGR recommended that the Sheriff’s Office regularly report on tax expenditures and the office’s progress toward improving jail compliance, performance and outcomes. Following the May 2025 escape and the risk of more finger-pointing between the City and Sheriff, BGR re-emphasized the importance of the City and Sheriff’s Office coming to a long-term agreement.

On the Orleans Parish jail, BGR asked the candidates:

7. Should there be a cooperative agreement between the City and the Sheriff’s Office along the lines of what BGR recommends? If yes, please explain which components in the bullet point list above should be included in the agreement, plus any other priorities you would include. If not, please explain how you would work with the Sheriff to improve the jail’s performance.

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

Yes. The lack of coordination between the City and the Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office is at the root of the jail’s long standing failures and BGR is right to call for a formal, cooperative agreement to fix it.

We must move beyond finger pointing and toward shared accountability, with a written, multi year agreement that includes:
1. Joint strategic planning on budgeting, staffing, facilities, and long term compliance.
2. Clear fiscal transparency, with public reporting on how City funds, currently accounting for 79% of the jail budget, are being used.
3. Defined qualifications and public input for appointing the jail administrator, ensuring leadership is competent and not politically motivated.

I also support BGR’s recommendation for an independent local oversight entity to monitor jail conditions and operations, especially once federal oversight ends. Without this structure, we risk slipping back into the same dangerous patterns that led to violence, neglect, and, most recently, the May 2025 escape.

The City must continue to fund the jail, but that funding should be tied to clearly defined metrics, transparent reporting requirements, and a measurable path to compliance. I will push for a cooperative agreement that sets clear expectations, protects public dollars, and restores public trust. The jail’s failures are too serious, and too costly, to ignore. We need a structured, accountable partnership that finally moves us forward.

AIMEE McCARRON

Yes, I do think there should be a CEA between the City and the Sheriff. I also believe OPSO needs to join the City’s financial system to allow better transparency and accountability for the use of taxpayer dollars. I agree with the first 3 bullet points, but I have some concerns with the fourth bullet point about creating an independent local entity to oversee jail performance. I am hesitant to create another entity for someone to manage. I would need to learn more about how this would be set up, who would be responsible for managing their work and outcomes, and any costs involved.

“ALEX” MOSSING

Yes. While the Sheriff is independently elected, collaboration between the City and Sheriff’s Office is essential to improving jail conditions and outcomes. Budget transparency is particularly crucial. I support a formal agreement that includes joint planning for budgets, facilities, and staffing; clear standards for transparency and performance; and routine public reporting through the BRASS system and any new data dashboards we implement to track expenditures and outcomes.

In the same way the City Council has implemented an approval process for mayoral appointees, we should consider a system for approving the Sheriff’s pick for top jail administrators. That would be best accomplished as part of the formal agreement between the City and OPSO to avoid needed changes at the state level. I also support creating an independent oversight body to monitor jail operations and ensure the safety and rights of people in custody, especially after federal oversight ends. The Council should push for accountability while ensuring the jail has what it needs to operate legally and safely.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

Yes, the City Council needs proper oversight of the administration of the funds it collects and informing constituents accurately. I think all four of the points are sufficient, but I would want to have input and representation from formerly incarcerated people, families and victims of currently incarcerated people, and from people that are currently incarcerated. The living conditions are unacceptable, and if we actually value the constitutional rights of all people, we need to ensure that includes people inside OJC.

BRIDGET NEAL

Yes. A formal cooperative agreement is essential to address the jail’s chronic failures, resolve the federal consent decree, and protect public safety. The current structure where the City funds operations but the independently elected Sheriff controls management creates a structural misalignment: the City bears the cost without policy authority, while the Sheriff lacks financial accountability.

I support creating a cooperative agreement as recommended by the Bureau of Governmental Research (BGR), aligning City funding with performance expectations, cost controls, and independent oversight. A well-structured agreement would clarify roles, strengthen transparency, and create a credible path toward compliance and eventual release from federal supervision.

Ultimately, safety and fiscal responsibility require shared goals, measurable standards, and joint accountability between the City and the Sheriff’s Office.

Key elements that should be included in the CEA:

• Strategic Planning Process: As recommended by the City Services Coalition’s Public Safety & Justice Council, a joint collaboration on budget, facilities, and training eliminates the current dysfunction where the City pays 79% of costs ($72 million annually) but has minimal operational input.

• Fiscal Transparency: Mandatory reporting on how Sheriff’s Office uses City funds, with regular performance metrics tied to federal compliance requirements and escape prevention protocols.

• Professional Administrator Selection: City and public input on the top jail administrator ensures professional qualifications over political connections, critical for ending the revolving door of failed leadership.

• Protocols for dispute resolution to prevent political standoffs that delay improvements.

• Independent Oversight Entity: Local monitoring capability with quarterly reporting requirements to both the CAO for operational management and the City Council for legislative oversight ensures continued accountability after federal oversight ends, preventing regression to past failures. The City Services Coalition emphasizes that “the CAO is responsible for operational efficiency in delivering city services” and must “establish and maintain a system of data gathering and metrics-based performance evaluations publicly available on a dashboard,” while the Council retains budget authority and removal powers to ensure political accountability.

Additional Priorities:

• Medical and Mental Health Standards: Specific performance benchmarks for healthcare delivery, addressing chronic deficiencies that contribute to federal oversight.

• Staffing Requirements: Minimum staffing ratios and training standards to prevent security failures like the recent escape.

• Performance Penalties: Clear consequences for non-compliance, including potential management changes or funding adjustments.

The cooperative agreement should be binding, 5-year renewable terms, and performance-based, tying a portion of City funding to measurable improvements in safety, staffing, compliance, and rehabilitative outcomes. By formalizing collaboration and requiring transparency, we can move beyond decades of dysfunction toward a jail system that protects both public safety and human dignity.

STREET MAINTENANCE

Background Provided to All Candidates

The City is making more than $2 billion in federally funded repairs to streets and subsurface infrastructure damaged during Hurricane Katrina. However, the long-term benefits of this once-in-a-lifetime investment are threatened by the City’s chronic underfunding of street maintenance. As BGR reported in 2024, the Public Works department estimates it would cost $50 million a year to properly maintain the City’s 1,500 miles of streets. The City spends about $14 million, or $36 million less than is needed. This is particularly problematic because preventive street maintenance tends to pay for itself over time. Public Works has estimated that every dollar spent on preventive maintenance saves $4 to $5 on repair and reconstruction costs down the road.

On street maintenance, BGR asked the candidates:

8. What would you do to address the City’s underfunding of street maintenance? Please be specific on funding levels and how you would go about finding more revenue for streets.

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

New Orleans is spending just $14 million annually on street maintenance. Less than a third of the $50 million Public Works estimate is needed to properly maintain our 1,500 miles of streets. Without serious reinvestment, the once in a generation post-Katrina infrastructure work will continue to deteriorate prematurely.

As the former Constituent Services Director for Councilmember Joe Giarrusso, I organized early morning coordination meetings at active construction sites, bringing together contractors, DPW, the Sewerage & Water Board, a Mayor’s Office liaison, and residents. These meetings improved communication, reduced costly delays, and built public trust. As Councilmember, I will bring this model back so that maintenance and repair efforts are not undermined by poor coordination.

To close the $36 million annual funding gap, I support:
1. Prioritizing federal and state infrastructure funding opportunities, particularly those focused on resilience and long-term maintenance, and ensuring District A projects are competitive for these dollars through stronger coordination and application support
2. Creating a dedicated Infrastructure Maintenance Fund to keep up with long-term repairs. That could be supported by fair, realistic cost recovery tools—like updating franchise fees, improving the permitting process, or exploring drainage-related assessments
3. Auditing underperforming contracts and administrative overhead, then redirect those dollars to higher impact maintenance projects.

Preventive maintenance is one of the smartest investments we can make. I’ll fight for the systems, coordination, and funding we need to stop patching problems and start protecting progress.

AIMEE McCARRON

Similar to my responses to questions about budget planning - the City Council and the Administration must also work together on a street repair and maintenance plan that can be both funded AND executed. Our bonds are going to be steadily decreasing over the next several years, which opens up an opportunity in our capacity to sell additional bonds for construction and maintenance. I know the current Administration is working on a bond proposition for this year, which includes $25M per council district–this is a good start, but we need more. Right now we are facing a situation where we have both streets that aren’t going to be repaired at all, and streets that are repaired, but will need continued upkeep if we are going to ensure our investment lasts. During my time as a financial adviser, I would frequently advise my clients of the importance of using “buckets” while formulating financial plans. I would use a similar strategy, alongside my knowledge of the City budget to work with the Administration to come up with a realistic plan for street maintenance:

1. Bucket 1: Determine updated costs for all remaining JIRR/FEMA funded roadwork that is not currently in construction;
o Short Term Plan: what funds do we need to provide some relief to residents struggling to drive down their street until we can do the proper, full restoration
o Long Term Plan: if we are going to do smaller bond sales every few years, we need to plan out what projects get done and when and then ensure proper funding and that it can be executed.
2. Bucket 2: Maintenance on our streets that have already been repaired
o Understand and map current conditions of those streets and understand the cost of maintaining and how
o Build out a street repair workforce with proper equipment so we can do these things in-house, instead of outside contracting for basic repairs
3. Bucket 3: Equipment and Materials
o Bringing some of our basic services back in house will require an investment in equipment and materials and this needs to be accounted for as well. Pothole fillers, street lights, dump trucks etc.

Having a plan like this also needs to be monitored and managed in an effective way, similar to the level of coordination we saw in the build up to Super Bowl LIX. This will ensure that we are actually executing these plans in a timely manner and communicating this to residents.

“ALEX” MOSSING

The Department of Public Works budget was cut by around 40% last year, despite chronic underfunding of street maintenance. We need to make investment in infrastructure a priority. I’d pursue the full $36 million annual increase needed for proper street maintenance through multiple revenue streams and budget restructuring. We could raise these funds using a combination of strategies, such as identifying underused capital funds, reviewing and potentially repurposing expiring millages, and pursuing state and federal infrastructure dollars with locally matched funds through municipal bonds (which is a key part of the current federal administration’s requirements for funding projects). We should also enforce utility cut standards and permit fees more aggressively so that private development doesn’t further damage our roads and sidewalks without contributing to their repair. Finally, we need a consistent system for smaller scale investments in routine maintenance, so we don’t continue to find ourselves buried due to deferred maintenance issues that become much more expensive emergencies. There should be a rolling schedule of maintenance that is trackable via dashboard so citizens can see when their streets are likely to be under construction and can prepare to adjust accordingly.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Why do we continue to contract out the majority of surface level construction projects when we used to have a fully staffed municipal roadworks crew? It costs less to utilize City employees (who have guaranteed living wages) than the volume of different private contractors with their own hiring standards and quality controls and oversight of contracts and project managers and overhead. We’ve seen the City have issues paying these contractors on time, but we don’t have that issue with City employees’ payroll. I want to increase DPW staffing by at least 30% with crews that can be deployed to finish stalled roadwork projects and handle more minor surface issues like filling small potholes. We will also need to acquire the machinery necessary to work on larger projects and to upgrade existing equipment. Further, we need to have a more participatory plan from neighbors on deciding which streets are fixed when and how to fund those projects accordingly, whether that’s through remaining federal funds, finding new revenue sources like road infrastructure grants for bike lanes and traffic calming to offset costs, and having large nonprofits pay their fair share of roadwork maintenance costs. Ultimately we need to reckon with the fact that we continue to dump concrete on top of drained swampland, and we will continue to have more expensive maintenance costs for our car-dependency, and we must begin to build out alternatives for transit to discourage automobile traffic.

BRIDGET NEAL

Citywide Street Maintenance & Flood Mitigation Plan (City’s underfunding of street maintenance)

New Orleans’ chronic street failures are often the result of subsurface erosion, the loss of structural support beneath pavement due to stormwater infiltration and inadequate drainage. This is a citywide issue affecting every district, costing taxpayers millions annually in repeated repairs. Repaving without addressing the underlying erosion results in temporary fixes that often fail within a year, raising serious concerns about the City’s stewardship of FEMA and local tax dollars.

As a Councilmember, I will advocate for a citywide audit of infrastructure contracts and construction standards to ensure that erosion- resistant sub-base materials are properly specified, installed, and independently verified. In some neighborhoods, like Carrollton, reports have surfaced that unsuitable sand was used under newly paved streets, which are already showing signs of failure. If substantiated, these practices may represent contractor negligence or fraud.

I will support policy changes requiring:

• Geotechnical verification before final payment

• Performance bonds tied to street longevity, if roads fail within three years due to subsurface issues, the contractor’s bond should fund the repairs

• Stronger specifications and enforcement mechanisms in all future roadwork contracts

In addition, drainage and water displacement must be treated as core engineering criteria in every street project. Repeated contractor stoppages often point to unresolved drainage or scoping problems—which prolong construction and disrupt neighborhoods. I will push for firm project timelines, clearer accountability, and integrated infrastructure planning that coordinates roadwork, drainage, and utility upgrades.

Ultimately, we must shift from a reactive, surface-level approach to a preventive, performance-based model that builds lasting infrastructure. I will support proposals that align funding, design standards, and oversight mechanisms to break the cycle of patchwork repairs and deliver structurally sound streets across the city.

A Fair, Resilient Funding Framework- No Exemptions (Specific on funding strategies)

Fixing the structural problems beneath our streets requires more than repaving, it requires funding tools that are dedicated, equitable, and resilient. I support the following top funding strategies to address chronic subsurface erosion and drainage failures, throughout District A:

1. Neighborhood-Specific Bonds & Self-Assessments (No Exemptions)

• Bonds: Structure voter-approved infrastructure bonds by district, with a fixed millage dedicated solely to flood mitigation, drainage, and street improvements.

• Special Districts: Utilize existing security or improvement districts where possible, or establish new Flood Mitigation Districts where property owners vote to fund infrastructure through 10–20 year annual assessments, tied to direct property benefits.

• No exemptions for major landowners like universities, parks, or nonprofits—everyone should contribute when their property directly benefits.

2. Stormwater Fee Implementation (No Exemptions)

• Replace the first expiring 2027 drainage property tax (projected $20 million) with a user-based stormwater fee based on impervious surface area. Other drainage taxes expire in 2031 and 2046.

• Unlike property taxes, this fee applies to all properties, including tax-exempt universities, churches, and nonprofits.

• Larger contributors to runoff pay more, generating millions annually for drainage infrastructure and flood prevention.

3. Federal & State Resilience Grants (Less Likely in Current Climate)

• Frame subsurface erosion as a resilience and hazard mitigation priority to qualify for FEMA’s BRIC and HUD’s CDBG-MIT programs.

• Though competitive, these grants can support multi-million-dollar infrastructure projects that reduce disaster risk and address long- term vulnerabilities.

Together, these tools build a fair, resilient funding framework that combines local control, broad-based cost-sharing, and strategic external partnerships. This integrated approach ensures that every infrastructure dollar works twice, repairing today’s roads while preventing tomorrow’s failures.

SEWERAGE & WATER BOARD GOVERNANCE

Background Provided to All Candidates

The Sewerage & Water Board is a state-created utility over which the mayor and City Council have substantial influence. The mayor serves as president of the utility’s board of directors, which is responsible for its operations and finances. The City Council has a seat on the board and controls the utility’s water and sewer rates and drainage property taxes.

One key task for the next mayor and council is supporting better Sewerage & Water Board performance. While the utility is implementing a wide-ranging strategic plan, long-term success will depend on improving the Sewerage & Water Board’s governance structure. This means the laws and policies that shape the powers, roles and responsibilities of the utility and those involved in its operations.

A core problem is that the Sewerage & Water Board must operate New Orleans’ water, sewer and drainage systems, but the City Council controls the fees and taxes that support them. Over the years, this tension between operational responsibility and funding control has allowed politics to influence funding decisions. This has resulted in underfunding, contributing to today’s deteriorated infrastructure and shifting costs to current and future ratepayers.

BGR suggests either strengthening the Sewerage & Water Board as a stand-alone utility that operates separately from City government or replacing it with a municipal utility that functions as part of City government. BGR’s 2023 report, Waterworks in Progress, details the potential benefits of each option over the status quo. But each option would present new complications that require further study. The next mayor should initiate that study and coordinate these efforts with the City Council and the Sewerage & Water Board, as well as seek public input.

In the near term, the City Council can improve its process for considering Sewerage & Water Board funding requests. As BGR outlined in its 2023 letter, the council should (1) objectively evaluate funding proposals, (2) regularly assess the utility’s performance, (3) track outcomes against desired goals, and (4) review strategic and financial plans and reports. These efforts would build on the council’s important work to expand its oversight of the utility, set up processes with State legislative support to help resolve customer billing problems, and help fund important infrastructure, such as a new electrical power complex to improve drainage pumping.

On Sewerage & Water Board governance, BGR asked the candidates:

9. What changes to management, operations, or governance of the Sewerage & Water Board would you support, and why?

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

New Orleans cannot afford another decade of mismanagement at the S&WB. Chronic flooding, billing failures, and aging infrastructure are symptoms of deeper governance and workforce limitations. BGR’s “Waterworks in Progress” report calls for reform that aligns structure with accountability and performance.

To their credit, S&WB has taken key steps forward: most notably, the rollout of smart water meters, which will improve billing accuracy, leak detection, and transparency. But one of the most critical challenges remains: S&WB is constrained by the City’s Civil Service system, which limits their ability to hire, train, and retain skilled technical workers.

That’s why I support S&WB’s proposal to leave Civil Service and adopt the People’s Plan. A modern utility must be able to compete for talent and manage performance. The People’s Plan would provide S&WB the flexibility it needs to build a 21st century workforce while still maintaining accountability and worker protection.

Long term, I support a public study of the two governance models BGR outlines: either strengthening S&WB as a standalone utility or integrating it into City government, with full public engagement and financial transparency.

In the meantime, I support:
1. Removing the mayor as automatic board president
2. Requiring technical qualifications for board appointments
3. Formalizing coordination between S&WB and the Department of Public Works
4. Implementing public facing performance benchmarks via dashboards
5. Have S&WB become part of the 311 system instead of the 52-WATER system

Our water, drainage, and sewer systems are foundational to our daily lives. It is time for SW&B to have the structure and staffing flexibility to get the job done.

AIMEE McCARRON

I think it is fair to say that the issue of SWBNO governance is a complicated and nuanced one, but it is clear: the current governance structure is not working effectively to meet the needs of the people of New Orleans and cannot stay the same. I recognize that it will be the responsibility of this next Council and Mayor to work with our state partners, Sewerage and Water Board, and the community on the best path forward. In the near term, though, we need to continue to ensure billing issues that have plagued customers for years are resolved and bills are accurate moving forward. The Smart Meter program is now fully functional and is improving the accuracy of customers’ bills, but it is important that the next Council stay vigilant to prevent any future problems.

I also feel that SWBNO needs to commit to full coordination on all infrastructure projects moving forward before any additional funding is appropriated to the agency.

Further, we need to move the customer service center out of inaccessible downtown and into a place where people can actually reach it - like Mid-City. We need to have the Board’s meetings take place in the City Council chambers so that the public can actually attend. And we need the board to attend meetings and engage fully in governance - not allow the Mayor or any one person to control the board from a single seat.

“ALEX” MOSSING

The current structure of the Sewerage & Water Board as a state entity with varying mayoral and council oversight is inefficient and leaves gaps in accountability. I support exploring structural reform, either by fully incorporating SWBNO as a city department under DPW or creating clearer lines for reporting and accountability by streamlining leadership. Any changes will require collaboration with our legislative delegation and the support of state officials, and any restructuring must be grounded in a clear plan for improved service delivery, not just reshuffling who’s in charge.

Short of full consolidation, I support formalizing Council oversight through performance benchmarks, public reporting, and enforcement tools tied to funding. This would allow the Council to be a stronger check on operational effectiveness while also creating a clearer connection between the funding source (Council) and operational leadership.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

If I had a magic wand, I would merge SWB with Department of Public Works to reduce or expedite procedural redundancies, improve coordination, have City Council confirmation and recall power for Director level positions, reform board requirements to make it more inclusive and representative of our City’s demographics, and have more public oversight on a local level. SWB is in many ways symbolic of the decaying state of our state and local government’s insistence on the status quo instead of answering to the people. There’s money to be made by a lot of business owners of contracts, and as a result profits before people is what you get. I want SWB to actually operate for the benefit of all of us. Transparent dashboards on how SWB is performing, where road works are currently happening and progress of work, where road works are planned to happen, billing accuracy, and more relevant information to the public and City Council.

BRIDGET NEAL

The Sewerage & Water Board (S&WB) requires fundamental reform. With 80% of voters demanding “major changes” and only 19% rating the utility favorably, the current structure is failing New Orleans residents. Its hybrid city-state governance model blurs accountability and makes it difficult to assign responsibility for failures in drainage, billing, water quality, and infrastructure.

Governance Reform: Establish a New Orleans Water Authority (NOWA)

I support replacing the S&WB with a New Orleans Water Authority (NOWA), as proposed by the City Services Coalition (p. 131). This would eliminate the dysfunctional hybrid model that separates operational control from funding authority—allowing political interference to override sound utility management. This disconnect has contributed to system deterioration and public distrust.

The NOWA model would establish a professional governing board, replacing elected officials with individuals who have relevant expertise in engineering, infrastructure, and utility operations—mirroring successful models in Pittsburgh and Washington, D.C. where failed water systems were transformed through depoliticized, expert oversight.

A one-year Transition Committee, appointed by the Mayor, City Council At-Large, Governor, and state delegation, alongside utility professionals, would guide the conversion. The permanent board would oversee drainage, stormwater management, and wastewater operations. Water purification functions would be relocated to a regional facility upriver, mitigating saltwater intrusion and reducing long- term costs.

Operational Improvements

Immediate reforms should include:

• Completing smart meter deployment to modernize billing and eliminate disputes

• Enabling merit-based hiring outside civil service to attract skilled professionals

• Deploying customer-friendly digital platforms for service tracking and transparency

• Conducting the EPA’s Efficient Utility Management diagnostic with public reporting

• Implementing a formula-based rate-setting process to align revenue with infrastructure needs and reduce political manipulation

Financial Sustainability & Regional Collaboration

To ensure long-term viability, I support:

• Replacing expiring drainage millages (2027, 2031, 2046) with an equitable, user-based stormwater fee based on runoff volume, not property value and applied to tax-exempt properties as well

• Conducting affordability studies to protect vulnerable households

• Creating stormwater retention credits to incentivize private green infrastructure

• Supporting regional collaboration across four parishes to build a shared water purification facility, lowering costs and improving resilience for the entire metro area

Near-Term Oversight

While pursuing structural reform, I also support BGR’s recommendations to strengthen Council oversight, including:

• A structured, objective review process for all S&WB funding requests

• Performance-based evaluations tied to measurable outcomes

• Regular public reporting on progress toward strategic and financial goals

Conclusion

This dual approach, near-term oversight and long-term structural reform offers the clearest path to restore public trust, modernize utility management, and ensure reliable water services. While I have not independently validated every detail of the City Services Coalition’s proposal, it is a well-researched, politically viable plan with strong stakeholder support. Embedding financial review reforms within this broader governance overhaul would enhance fiscal discipline, transparency, and long-term accountability.

10. How would you improve the City Council’s approach to reviewing funding requests from the Sewerage & Water Board for rates and taxes?

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

The City Council has a duty to protect ratepayers while ensuring the Sewerage & Water Board has the resources it needs to modernize infrastructure and deliver essential services. But that funding must be tied to performance, accountability, and transparency, not assumptions or politics.

As outlined in BGR’s “Waterworks in Progress” the Council should adopt a structured, year round review process that evaluates funding requests based on:
1. Clear performance benchmarks: including response times, project delivery, billing accuracy, and infrastructure maintenance.
2. Strategic and financial plans submitted in advance of any funding request, with supporting data and implementation timelines.
3. Independent cost benefit analysis before any vote on a rate or tax increase.
4. Public transparency: all data and projections should be accessible to residents, with meaningful opportunities for public input.

The Council also needs to ensure that funding decisions are connected to S&WB’s broader reform efforts, including its push to exit Civil Service and adopt the People’s Plan. If the utility is expected to function like a modern utility, it must have the tools and staffing flexibility to deliver results.

Finally, I support establishing an advisory team to focus year-round on utility performance, so that oversight doesn’t begin and end during budget season.

Council oversight should be more than reactive. It must be strategic, consistent, and grounded in what’s best for residents and not what’s easiest in the moment.

AIMEE McCARRON

There should be a specified timeline for any funding requests - these should be first vetted through a public process - like NPPs or other public hearings - then the Council should hear the details in the public works committee. SWBNO brass should be required to attend these meetings and be given a template of public needs and transparency criteria that should be met before a funding request or major project is approved. SWBNO should clearly identify all state and federal funding opportunities it has sought before seeking local funding, and an independent auditor should confirm they are not leaving outside money on the table.

“ALEX” MOSSING

The Council uses a formula-based system for objectively analyzing Entergy’s requests for rate increases, and I would advocate for a comparable system when determining the necessity of rate increases and other funding requests from SWBNO. There should be an objective system for evaluating infrastructure needs and quality standards based on standardized evaluation criteria. The review process should include independent technical analysis of proposed projects, cost-benefit assessments, and performance measurement for previously funded initiatives. Rate and tax increases require demonstrated need and clear outcome expectations.

As part of that system and in alignment with my suggestion that oversight/leadership should be streamlined, City Council should also have access to SWBNO data allowing them to evaluate performance by tracking outcomes based on established goals and reviewing strategic plans. The council needs dedicated staff capacity for utility oversight rather than relying on utility-provided information alone. Independent analysis ensures objective evaluation of proposals and performance.

Finally, I’d create a citizen advisory committee including engineers, community representatives, and financial experts to review proposals and provide public recommendations. This ensures technical competency and community accountability in decision-making.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

Just like regulating Entergy, I believe it’s incumbent on the City Council to use its responsibility for City spending and revenue to actually regulate utilities. The power of the purse strings includes creating criteria for agencies like SWB for these requests, such as audits on spending to ensure requests are accurate, reporting on customer billing accuracy and complaints, as well as ensuring dollars being spent abide by our City’s commitment to clean air and water requirements. Finally, I want to make sure we aren’t just rubber stamping more dollars for Entergy through SWB, which is Entergy New Orleans’ largest customer. We give them enough of our money, it’s time to make Entergy pay.

BRIDGET NEAL

Toward Transparent, Accountable Oversight

To restore trust and ensure responsible funding decisions, I support strengthening the City Council’s review of Sewerage & Water Board (S&WB) rate and tax requests through a formal, transparent process rooted in objective analysis, independent verification, and measurable outcomes.

First, I support adopting BGR’s recommendations to require comprehensive submissions before any vote, including:

• A clear explanation of the operational or capital need

• Detailed allocation of projected revenues

• Timelines and performance benchmarks (e.g., drainage readiness, billing accuracy, and water quality)

Second, all funding requests should undergo independent financial, engineering, and operational review, funded by a dedicated 0.5% of utility revenues. This ensures decisions are based on expert, impartial analysis not internal estimates.

Third, I would require annual performance hearings, scheduled in advance of the budget cycle, where the S&WB’s progress is publicly evaluated. Future funding should be tied to verified results, not unproven promises.

Fourth, I would expand public transparency and engagement by requiring:

• Real-time public dashboards with key performance data

• Affordability and environmental justice impact assessments

• Neighborhood-level outreach and citizen advisory panels

Fifth, I support aligning the Council’s budget process with S&WB’s planning calendar and linking all rate approvals to measurable service improvements.

The City Services Coalition further recommends a formula-based rate-setting plan administered by the City Council or the Louisiana Public Service Commission to reduce political interference and align rates with actual infrastructure needs. While I have not independently validated whether this is the optimal model, it is well-researched, widely supported, and provides a solid foundation for reform.

Together, these steps would create a more disciplined, transparent, and accountable funding process, one that improves service delivery, protects ratepayers, and rebuilds public confidence.

STORMWATER FEE

Background Provided to All Candidates

In 2027, one of New Orleans’ three drainage property taxes will expire unless it is renewed by voters. It provides $22 million a year, or nearly a quarter of drainage system revenue. Even with the tax, the system faces substantial unmet funding needs, for everything from cleaning catch basins to fixing pipes to upgrading pump stations. And experts have recommended supplementing traditional drainage with “green infrastructure,” or natural rainfall retention projects that can lighten the load on pipes and pumps and reduce ground subsidence.

To meet these funding needs, the Sewerage & Water Board, the City, and others, including BGR, have suggested creating a stormwater fee. As discussed in a 2017 BGR report, this type of user fee charges a property owner based on an estimate of stormwater runoff that the system collects from the property and discharges into local waterways. Generally, a fee has a couple of advantages over a tax. It applies to both taxable and tax-exempt property, spreading out the cost burden. Also, it is tied to a property’s runoff, rather than the property’s value, which improves fairness.

Sewerage & Water Board and City officials have not yet made a stormwater fee proposal to the public. As a first step, BGR urges them to review the funding needs of the entire drainage system. BGR also recommends careful planning, administration, and oversight to ensure a fair fee structure, effective use of the new revenue, and public accountability.

On stormwater fees, BGR asked the candidates:

11. Do you favor pursuing a citywide stormwater fee? If yes, please explain what the fee proposal should include to ensure effectiveness, fairness and accountability. If you do not favor a stormwater fee, please explain how you would address the drainage system’s financial needs.

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

Yes, I support pursuing a citywide stormwater fee—if it’s done transparently, equitably, and with strong accountability measures in place. New Orleans’ drainage infrastructure is decades behind where it should be. The Sewerage & Water Board and Department of Public Works both face steep funding gaps that limit their ability to maintain and upgrade the system. A stormwater fee offers a dedicated, recurring revenue stream tied directly to the users and properties that impact runoff volume.

But any proposal must be fair. That means crediting property owners who implement green infrastructure like permeable pavement or rain gardens, offering exemptions or tiered rates for low-income households, and ensuring that large commercial and institutional landowners, who contribute significant runoff, pay their fair share.

Effectiveness starts with transparency. I would push for a public-facing dashboard to show how every dollar is collected, where it’s spent, and what impact it’s having. The City must also clearly separate stormwater revenue from general operating funds and prohibit it from being used to patch other budget holes.

Stormwater fees are not a silver bullet, but they are a necessary tool for building a modern, resilient drainage system. If structured right, it’s not just a fee, it’s a reinvestment in our city’s future.

AIMEE McCARRON

Yes, but not without the following stipulations:

1. The fee must be coupled with a decrease in the millages to ensure residential property owners pay no more than they do today while non-paying entities begin to pay.

2. The fee must be paid into a fund controlled by the City Council to establish transparency and to ensure SWBNO and other public entities have comprehensive plans to decrease flooding and fix broken infrastructure before receiving money for such projects. We can also create a public dashboard so residents can also see how the money is spent.

3. SWBNO governance must be reformed to decrease their overall responsibilities, which means reviewing opportunities to form cross-parish water purification operations; reduce or eliminate power operations and exclusively use grid power for all pumping stations - which will occur once the east bank substation is completed; and streamline and merge operations with the City’s public works department beyond just storm drain clean out to include better cooperation on all infrastructure projects.

4. The public MUST vote on this proposal and therefore a unity of public officials must speak with one voice about this clear plan and the responsibilities therein to prove this will actually solve drainage problems.

“ALEX” MOSSING

I am in support of a citywide stormwater fee levied only on tax-exempt property owners (accounting for around 65% of total assessed property in the city). This allows a huge portion of the city’s property owners to contribute to our essential drainage infrastructure without adding to the already tax-burdened homeowners of the city. The simplest calculation for fairly assessing a stormwater fee would be through a total impervious area formula. Additionally, I support implementing the city’s existing Stormwater Plan and expanding the use of green infrastructure like rain gardens, permeable pavement, and bioswales, especially in flood-prone neighborhoods. I would also advocate for creating incentive programs for property owners to incorporate these features into their properties by building out tax credits for green infrastructure renovations. The stormwater fee should generate much need funds for drainage maintenance and upgrades, while the green infrastructure incentives will help mitigate the drainage challenges we face.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

I believe accessing a stormwater fee makes sense so long as it is equitably charged. I don’t want to see homeowners on fixed income paying the same rate as multi-million dollar nonprofits that own multiple square blocks of property. We do not have a wealth tax in New Orleans or Louisiana, and I believe that our stormwater system is an opportunity for the wealthiest people in our city to finally start to carry their fair share of paying for public services during a climate crisis.

BRIDGET NEAL

Yes, I strongly support implementing a citywide stormwater fee. New Orleans urgently needs a more equitable and sustainable way to fund our drainage infrastructure, and a stormwater fee is the most practical and just solution available.

Today, drainage is primarily funded through property taxes, but nearly 40% of properties in Orleans Parish are tax-exempt. These include universities, churches, hospitals, and other major landowners that benefit from flood protection but contribute nothing to its cost. This imbalance is not just financially unsustainable- it is structurally unfair. A user-based stormwater fee would change that by ensuring everyone pays their fair share based on the runoff they generate.

Structure & Fairness:

The fee should be calculated using impervious surface area, rooftops, driveways, parking lots, so the largest contributors to stormwater runoff bear the highest cost. Unlike property taxes, the fee would apply to all properties, including those currently exempt. This ensures a broader, more equitable revenue base and discourages excessive paving.

Phased Implementation:

I propose replacing the expiring 2027 drainage millage (~$22 million annually) with the stormwater fee. This creates a natural opportunity to modernize the funding structure without increasing the overall burden on taxpayers. As additional millages expire in 2031 and 2046, they should be phased into the stormwater fee framework, providing long-term fiscal stability and predictability for the drainage system.

Infrastructure Investment & Subsurface Erosion:

Beyond fairness, the stormwater fee must be tied directly to outcomes specifically, infrastructure that prevents flooding and subsurface erosion. I have consistently advocated that every street maintenance project must account for the water displacement and erosion issues beneath our roads. Stormwater fee revenue should be used to fund both traditional and green infrastructure, including retention ponds, upgraded drainage lines, bioswales, and permeable paving. These investments not only reduce flooding but also protect our roads from premature failure, ensuring that every infrastructure dollar is spent wisely.

Affordability Protections:

Equity must also include affordability. I support income-based assistance programs for low-income homeowners and seniors, and I would impose caps on residential fees to prevent disproportionate burdens. Commercial and institutional properties with large impervious footprints—many of which are currently exempt from taxes would pay more.

Accountability & Transparency:

Stormwater fee revenue should be placed in a legally protected fund with strict limitations on use. I support creating an oversight board with community representation, publishing public dashboards tracking performance, and requiring annual audits and affordability studies. The public deserves to see where every dollar goes and how it’s improving outcomes.

Regional Coordination:

Finally, stormwater doesn’t follow parish lines. I support the City Services Coalition’s recommendation for a regional stormwater management plan and shared infrastructure investments consistent with Act 783’s multi-jurisdictional flood planning framework.

In short, a stormwater fee, done right, can fund the drainage upgrades and flood protection we desperately need, while making the system fairer, more transparent, and more sustainable.

Note: While I have not independently validated the City Services Coalition’s governance reform proposal, it is a well-researched plan with clear political will and influential community stakeholder support to move forward. (City Services Coalition. “New Orleans Water Authority Proposal: A New Governance Model for the Sewerage & Water Board,” City Services Coalition Final Report, March 2025, pp. 131-134.)

The City Services Coalition report recommends both a regional purification facility and a regional stormwater management plan:

1. Regional Water Purification Facility: The report proposes creating a regional water purification facility upriver, shared among parishes, to reduce reliance on the Sewerage & Water Board’s current facility. This would help mitigate the risk of saltwater intrusion and lower long-term costs. The regional approach is presented as a structural fix for the city’s drinking water vulnerabilities.

2. Regional Stormwater Management Plan: The report also explicitly recommends that Orleans Parish work with Jefferson, St. Bernard, and Plaquemines Parishes to develop a comprehensive regional stormwater plan, consistent with Act 783, which encourages multi-agency flood prevention coordination.

These two initiatives are central to the Coalition’s vision of shifting from fragmented local sewage and water board fixes to coordinated regional infrastructure planning.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Background Provided to All Candidates

In November 2024, voters amended the City charter to require an annual budget dedication equal to at least 2% of the City’s General Fund budget to the Housing Trust Fund, starting in 2026. The City will use the trust fund to preserve and expand affordable housing for low- to moderate-income residents. BGR’s report on the proposition identified acute problems in housing affordability in the city and the need for increased housing investment. However, BGR took a position against the proposed charter amendment citing the budget inflexibility of the charter-based dedication.

The City has tapped two public agencies, Finance New Orleans and the New Orleans Redevelopment Authority, to administer the Housing Trust Fund. In addition, the City Council formed the Housing Trust Fund Advisory Committee to advise the council on appropriations from the fund. In December 2024, BGR wrote a letter to the mayor and City Council recommending ways to ensure effective administration and use of Housing Trust Fund dollars. These recommendations include establishing clear metrics and criteria for examining program performance and expanded accountability measures, such as independent auditing of trust fund revenue. BGR also highlighted the need for other initiatives outside the trust fund to increase affordable housing, such as zoning reforms and tax incentives. As discussed in a previous section, the City should have a long-term financial plan that balances funding for the Housing Trust Fund with other needs.

On affordable housing, BGR asked the candidates:

12. How can Housing Trust Fund dollars be used most effectively in New Orleans?

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

To ensure Housing Trust Fund dollars have maximum impact, we must establish clear priorities, outcome based performance metrics, and transparent public reporting.

The BGR report emphasizes the need for robust evaluation, rather than simply allocating dollars without tracking results. I support dedicating Housing Trust Fund investments toward:
1. Preserving existing affordable housing units in high opportunity neighborhoods.
2. Supporting small scale infill development on City owned and adjudicated lots.
3. Funding projects that support long term affordability through deed restrictions and shared equity models.

To ensure accountability, I support:
1. Independent audits of the fund and its disbursements.
2. Clear criteria for selecting projects, including income targeting, long term affordability, and geographic equity.
3. Publishing performance dashboards to track units preserved, created, and populations served.

I also support prioritizing projects that align with broader neighborhood revitalization goals and have demonstrated community support. Funds should not be siloed but part of a coordinated citywide housing strategy that includes land use, zoning, and transportation planning.

We cannot afford for these dollars to become an unclear budget category. With discipline and transparency, the Housing Trust Fund can be a powerful tool to ensure working families, seniors, and essential workers can afford to live in the city they serve.

AIMEE McCARRON

First, alignment of Notices of Funding Availability is critical. This allows the housing development community to understand when funds will be available and how to access them. The current Administration has struggled to do this, resulting in confusion and inefficiencies.

Second, tie funding to low or minimal cost public land to maximize the efficacy of incentives without requiring more public dollars. That means encouraging nonprofit developers and other partners to see the full scope of available, underutilized land owned by ALL public entities including HANO, NORA, City of New Orleans, and more, and tie development dollars to these properties to get them back in commerce and to increase workforce housing units.

Third, use the Housing Trust Fund to provide much needed support for residents facing extreme insurance costs (whether directly or through rent increases). This can include City liaisons that could help find discounts and wind-rating opportunities to decrease premiums; provide funding for fortified roofs and other proven improvements that decrease premiums; and improve resilience on new buildings that would ensure lower premiums on those new facilities.

“ALEX” MOSSING

Housing Trust Fund dollars should focus on preserving existing affordable housing and creating new affordable units that strengthen neighborhoods. Priority investments should include down payment assistance for working families and rehabilitation loans for longtime homeowners, as well as financial literacy and homeownership counseling to help residents see opportunities to build wealth through property ownership whenever possible. I would especially advocate for a portion of funds to be dedicated specifically to the fortified roofing program for low and moderate-income homeowners to complete repairs that will additionally serve to lower insurance costs.

For new construction of affordable units, we should require developments to integrate with neighborhood character and avoid large- scale affordable housing that segregates low-income families from community opportunities. We should also partner with LOCAL community development corporations and nonprofit developers with proven track records rather than prioritizing largest or lowest-bid projects, and we should strictly enforce that the affordable unit requirement is met in these developments with consistent enforcement of the affordable housing overlay requirements in the case of small multi-family development (housing with 4 units or less).

Finally, the fund needs accountability measures. We must establish clear performance metrics: number of families housed, average income levels served, neighborhood stability indicators, and long-term affordability maintenance. This will help us determine successes and help us identify options for improvement.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

City Council committed to redirecting 2% of our city’s general fund towards affordable housing via the Housing Trust Fund. That financial commitment is important and necessary, but will become almost meaningless if more of the City’s money is funneled to corporate landlords than to tenants. I will advocate for a portion of the Housing Trust Fund dollars to go directly to tenants through emergency rental assistance and the Renter Anti-Displacement Fund before they’ve been served with eviction notices. Currently, no Housing Trust Fund dollars are allocated to either purpose.

When City Council passed the Healthy Homes Ordinance in 2022, they recognized that many tenants in this city are living in uninhabitable apartments but cannot afford to move, and they established a Renter Anti-Displacement Fund to address that concern. The municipal code provides that the fund shall be used to provide relocation assistance and alternate housing to tenants who have been displaced because their house or apartment does not meet the City’s minimum rental standards. It has been over two years since the passing of the Healthy Homes ordinance, and the City has failed to place funds in the Renter Anti-Displacement Fund. Consequently, even when renters report their landlord to the City for violating City code and code enforcement confirms that a violation is occurring, renters often cannot move out of their apartment because they cannot afford to move, and the City does not help them. By ensuring that there is money in the Renter Anti-Displacement Fund, I will give renters a pathway out of the moldy, rodent-infested, and structurally unsound apartments that are unfortunately far too common in this city.

Additionally, many New Orleanians benefited from the federal Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) that the federal government funded from 2020 to 2022. ERAP funding was administered through the city’s Office of Community Development. Renters who faced eviction due to a temporary emergency, such as an injury or illness, unexpected loss of work, or a death in the family, could apply for ERA funds. If their application was successful, the City would directly pay their landlord several months of back rent to avoid eviction and debt. In the longterm, this program SAVED money by keeping people housed. Too many New Orleanians are only one or two missed paychecks away from eviction. While ERAP funds are no longer available, we must use the Housing Trust Fund dollars to fund emergency rental assistance for tenants.

BRIDGET NEAL

Addressing New Orleans’ housing affordability crisis requires aligning Housing Trust Fund (HTF) investments with complementary policies zoning reform, public land strategies, and tenant protections so that gains are not undermined by structural barriers. With approximately $17 million annually starting in 2026, the Fund’s impact must be maximized through transparency, performance metrics, and leveraging outside capital.

I support BGR’s December 2024 recommendations to:

• Establish clear evaluation criteria, prioritizing proximity to transit, schools, and jobs; long-term affordability covenants; and high- quality construction.

• Require independent audits of HTF revenues and expenditures, along with public dashboards for accountability.

• Tie allocations to measurable outcomes units created or preserved, cost per unit, and percentage serving extremely low-income households.

The November 2024 charter amendment’s allocation, 15% each for preservation, new construction, and homeownership, with 55% flexible for greatest need should remain. However, the Housing Trust Fund must serve primarily as gap financing, not sole funding By leveraging HUD HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, and private/philanthropic capital, the Fund can multiply its impact 5–10 times.

New Orleans faces a severe deficit of 44,000 affordable rental units yet produced only 239 units last year. Priority must be given to rental housing for households earning 30% or less of the area median income. All funding awards should require a minimum of 30 years of affordability to ensure long-term impact and housing stability.

The Fund can further stretch resources by using surplus city land identified through comprehensive inventory to lower development costs and by partnering with mission-driven developers. Nationally, the most effective housing trust funds pair predictable revenue with strategic partnerships, focusing on the most vulnerable populations and neighborhood stabilization.

When well-coordinated, the HTF can fill critical financing gaps, unlocking stalled projects and catalyzing broader, long-term affordable housing development citywide.

13. What other initiatives besides Housing Trust Fund investments would you support to address housing affordability issues in New Orleans?

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

Affordable housing is about more than funding, it’s about fixing the systems that keep homes out of reach. In addition to the Housing Trust Fund, I support a multi pronged strategy:

1. Streamline Safety & Permits and City Planning Commission processes. Developers, including nonprofits and affordable housing builders, face long and inconsistent permitting timelines that drive up costs. I support a complete overhaul of the permitting process to make housing development more predictable and transparent.

2. Return blighted and adjudicated properties to commerce. I support launching a program to identify and repurpose abandoned homes and lots across the city. These properties are often concentrated in low and moderate income neighborhoods and could be used to support affordable homeownership or rental housing.

3. Support land use reforms that allow for more housing.

4. Expand housing support for essential workers. Teachers, first responders, and service workers deserve to live in the neighborhoods they serve. I support targeted down payment assistance to create housing stability.

We need a housing strategy rooted in coordination, accountability, and outcomes. I’ll bring that approach to the Council.

AIMEE McCARRON

1. Making more publicly-owned land available for development as a major non-cash incentive.
2. Continuing to fund eviction protection programs like the Council’s right to counsel for renters to increase housing stability.
3. Vastly increase the City’s efforts to expand solar on rooftops and at community solar facilities to decrease utility costs for renters and homeowners.
4. Work with RTA to improve reliability, affordability, and frequency of public transit to ensure residents of housing developments in all parts of the city are assured reliable transportation to job centers.
5. Keep residential areas from being overrun by STRs by fighting to preserve the ban on whole-home rentals and corporate ownership of residential STRs, while stopping further expansion through “exceptions” or other work-arounds.

“ALEX” MOSSING

I support existing limitations on the short-term rental market to preserve housing units for residents and prevent further artificial housing inflation due to speculative development. Another problem specific to the uptown/university area of District A has been the “doubles to dorms” issue, and I would advocate strongly for avid enforcement of all codes and zoning ordinances to protect the character of existing neighborhoods and ensure that development is beneficial to the whole community, not just tourists or transient students of wealthy families. Many of our challenges are rooted in poor enforcement of existing statutes, and this is a low-investment, high reward place to start working to improve affordability in our community.

Since insurance costs are another major component of the affordability crisis, I will also advocate for broader incentive-based programs to help all homeowners invest in fortified roofs and other mitigation measures to help lower their premiums. Similarly, I would be interested in reaching out to local insurance providers to discuss opportunities for collaboration on measures to most effectively reduce rates and to gain commitments to help protect residents from future cost increases.

I support an increase in the Homestead Exemption, which will need to be approved by the Louisiana Legislature. I would work closely with our local legislative delegation to advocate for those changes to assist homeowners who are tax-burdened because of significant increases in property values at the last assessment cycle. This will allow us to compete more closely with neighboring states like Texas who have already made this adjustment.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

I support increased regulation of short-term rentals, as well as enforcement of existing regulations. The unrestricted conversion of homes into short-term rentals has erased the fabric of entire neighborhoods by removing properties from the housing market, increasing housing costs across the city. According to Jane Place Neighborhood Sustainability Initiative, “thousands of homes continue to be taken off the market, particularly in historically Black neighborhoods, to cater to tourists.” Fewer short-term rentals means lower housing costs and more homes available for locals.

I believe public funds should be used to fund the creation of truly affordable, city-funded social housing. I also support additional funding for housing assistance vouchers through HANO, rapid rehousing assistance for families with children, and seed funding for land trusts and cooperative housing. We need to augment roof fortification program funding to help all residents, particularly vulnerable residents, to reduce insurance bills and make sure their home is safe for storms. Renters and homeowners are significantly above average in % housing cost burdened, and Entergy accounts for a significant amount. We need to stop rate increases, forgive debt stretching back to the pandemic, and ban residential shutoffs so people can afford to live with power for their AC.

BRIDGET NEAL

A truly effective housing strategy must pair Housing Trust Fund investments with coordinated reforms in zoning, tax policy, tenant protections, and public asset management.

Zoning Reform is foundational. Research from Brookings and BGR confirms that New Orleans must legalize “missing middle” housing, duplexes, townhomes, and small apartment buildings—in areas currently restricted to single-family homes. Expanding by-right approvals and reducing parking minimums will lower development costs and timelines.

One of the most promising actions is the expansion of Small Multi-Family Affordable (SMFA) housing by allowing two detached structures per lot. This enables up to four affordable units without triggering costly commercial code requirements. Only eight SMFA projects have been built since 2022, largely due to regulatory barriers. Fortunately, recent amendments supported by Councilmember Leslie Harris provide a clear path forward offering both policy momentum and political feasibility.

Tax Policy Reform is also essential. Split-rate taxation or land value capture mechanisms can incentivize productive use of underutilized parcels. Targeted tax abatements and fee waivers for affordable developments can make otherwise infeasible projects financially viable.

Tenant Protections are critical to prevent displacement. I support right-to-return policies, rent stabilization in rapidly gentrifying areas, anti-eviction safeguards, and the expansion of community land trusts to secure long-term affordability.

Public Land Strategies should prioritize affordable housing in city-owned land disposition. A transparent public land inventory and partnerships with mission-driven developers can accelerate delivery.

Finally, regional coordination is essential. Closing the 44,000-unit housing gap will require cross-parish collaboration and integration of climate-resilient construction standards.

Like healthcare reform’s “three-legged stool,” housing affordability depends on the synergy of land use reform, targeted financial tools, and strong tenant protections. All three must work together to ensure real and lasting progress.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Background Provided to All Candidates

The City and other economic development entities should take a rigorous approach to reviewing private development projects seeking tax subsidies. Developers and public officials often view these subsidies as free money. But the tax breaks represent an allocation of future resources and should be evaluated with a rigor worthy of a long-term investment. BGR’s reports on payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT) and tax increment financing (TIF) emphasize several criteria:

• The project advances priorities specified in the City’s economic development strategic plan.
• Independent analyses demonstrate the market will not produce a desirable outcome for the project site, therefore making a public subsidy necessary.
• The subsidy provides only the minimum needed for the project to proceed. In addition, the subsidy should not compensate for basic financial weaknesses in a developer or a transaction (e.g., inadequate equity investment) or a lack of demand for a service or product.
• Effective subsidies produce a significant positive ratio of benefits to costs, as supported by a rigorous cost-benefit analysis.
• Subsidies should not create unfair impacts on local competitors or the surrounding neighborhood.

The City is not the sole entity with authority to abate local taxes in New Orleans to promote economic development. Others include the New Orleans Industrial Development Board and special economic development districts. This potentially makes it more difficult to implement a unified subsidy strategy, especially if the entities do not share the same economic development priorities.

On economic development, BGR asked the candidates:

14. What do you think New Orleans should emphasize in a strategic plan for economic development, and what would you do to ensure cohesive support from business, community and regional stakeholders necessary to achieve the plan’s goals?

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

A successful economic development strategy must prioritize quality of life, ease of doing business, and neighborhood revitalization, rather than just incentives for big developers. That’s why I support a focus on safety, permitting reform, and public/private partnerships to expand access to opportunities.

To build consensus and momentum, the City should focus on:
1. Neighborhood based economic growth: Align capital investments and small business support
2. Streamline Safety & Permits reform: As cited in BGR reports, delays and inconsistencies in permitting hinder business growth. I support a complete restructuring of the department, prioritizing customer service, transparency, and accountability.
3. Workforce development: Partnering with Delgado, SUNO, and training providers to align programming with high growth sectors like infrastructure, tech, and healthcare.
4. Data transparency: Track and publish economic indicators such as permits, business licenses, and foot traffic, to inform decisions and build community trust.

To ensure business, community, and regional buy in, I will lead with accessibility and results. That means:
1. Convening monthly roundtables with business owners, neighborhood leaders, and technical partners.
2. Publishing clear goals and tracking outcomes, not just activity.
3. Creating regional alignment with GNO, Inc. and the Port to attract investment and support small businesses.

We need to create a system where local businesses thrive, residents succeed, and investments follow strong leadership.

AIMEE McCARRON

I 100% agree with BGR that, at present, incentives are more about who you know than about what you’re doing for the greater public. We need to open incentives to smaller and emerging developers while ensuring that they have strict accountability standards regarding real public goods: that means aligning them with community priorities like workforce housing and resilience.

I am in full support of, where possible, merging boards and entities that provide incentives into unified Economic Development operations - perhaps through a new economic development corporation - instead of the patchwork of inside and outside institutions that currently provide incentives. This would require strong relationship building and commonality with regional and state actors (including the legislature in some cases), but I believe I have the unique ability to collaborate with these actors on facts and common purpose.

The business community is vital to these efforts, so I would push the Administration to fund and implement real LIAISONS for businesses - a SINGLE contact to help them navigate City Hall for their specific project or need. This can help them unlock incentives and build capital stacks that make sense and increase the throughput for development across the city. It also helps attract new businesses from elsewhere while growing support for entrepreneurs.

Of course the one of the greatest tools we have to fuel economic development is FIXING SAFETY AND PERMITS so that businesses no longer struggle or fail due to red tape. We’ve seen this happen again and again and it must stop. As a Councilmember, I’ll roll up my sleeves and do the hard collaborative work of completely rebuilding the safety and permits office with the next Mayor and demanding that we get HONEST, COMPETENT, EFFICIENT service from this agency by increasing the thoughtful use of technology and decreasing the arduous and unnecessary steps it takes to simply do business in this city!

“ALEX” MOSSING

New Orleans should emphasize growing industries that build on our existing assets: education, healthcare, technology, creative sectors, and sustainable coastal management. These industries provide quality jobs and address visible needs in our own community. Priority initiatives should include expanding University partnerships for research and development, supporting local entrepreneurs through incubators and loan programs, and developing green infrastructure industries addressing climate challenges.

To ensure shared support, I’d establish quarterly stakeholder meetings including business leaders, community organizations, educational institutions, and neighborhood representatives. I would also create specific goals for local hiring, minority contracting, and small business participation in all development projects receiving subsidies. Success can be measured by community wealth building in addition to total investment dollars.

As an educator, it is extremely important to me that we support workforce development programs connecting NOLA residents (especially young adults) to emerging opportunities in healthcare, technology, and green infrastructure sectors by partnering with schools and community colleges providing relevant skills training such as the New Orleans Career Center and the OPSB Success Hub. We need to build a pipeline of young people with skillsets that match the needs of industries with high growth and wage potential.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

I think for far too long, the business community, particularly the large capitalists and the non-profit sphere that props up finance capital’s activity in New Orleans, has been able to decide what our economy will be for far too long. We allegedly live in a democracy yet unelected business stakeholders decided we need more pickleball courts and golf driving ranges. We should let the people decide what type of economy they want to be a part of, what kind of jobs we want to see created, where our tax incentives should be going. The people that live here, that contribute to our City, the ones who disproportionately pay higher tax rates, they are the key stakeholders. Our City’s Master Plan expires in 5 years, I want to begin the process of amending the current plan (hasn’t been updated since before COVID) and develop the next Master Plan with a grassroots driven, bottom up approach to deciding how our City needs to handle rising sea levels, more extreme weather, and the fight for local sovereignty.

BRIDGET NEAL

New Orleans’ economic development strategy must balance long-term competitiveness with near-term resilience by investing in our strengths and fixing systemic barriers to growth. Incentives and subsidies must be treated not as giveaways, but as strategic tools measured by sustained job creation, infrastructure improvements, and tax base growth.

Core Priorities:

• Economic Diversification: We must reduce overreliance on tourism by strengthening high-growth sectors where New Orleans has competitive advantages, advanced manufacturing such as digital media, healthcare and life sciences, climate resilience and water management, and green infrastructure.

• Infrastructure Readiness: Drainage, flood protection, broadband, and electrical reliability are prerequisites for economic development. Without them, we can’t retain or attract businesses or keep residents.

• Workforce Development: We must align local hiring pipelines with economic development efforts. That means integrating training programs at community colleges, trade schools, and universities with the needs of emerging industries. Publicly supported projects should include local hiring and supplier diversity requirements.

Smarter Incentives:

Every public incentive must pass a market gap test, proving the project would not happen without support and must include measurable deliverables for job creation, wage levels, community reinvestment, and protections against displacement. Clawback provisions and transparent public reporting should be standard.

Stakeholder Engagement:

I would ensure community and business buy-in through quarterly briefings, neighborhood listening sessions, and sector-specific roundtables. Strategic development must be collaborative and data-informed to earn trust and produce results.

15. What, if any, changes would you pursue to how local tax subsidies for economic development are used and administered in New Orleans?

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

Too often, tax subsidies in New Orleans are awarded without rigorous analysis, clear goals, or public accountability. I support a complete overhaul of how we manage these incentives: rooted in transparency, performance, and public benefit.

As BGR recommends, I would require every project seeking a PILOT or TIF to meet the following baseline standards:
1. Independent third party cost benefit analysis.
2. Demonstrate financial need and not just developer preference.
3. Clear alignment with a published citywide economic development strategy.
4. Transparency on community impacts and benefit commitments.
5. Require claw back provisions for any subsidy recipient that fails to meet jobs, wages, or construction targets.
6. Publish an annual public report on all outstanding subsidies, costs, and benefits delivered.

Finally, I would end the practice of approving subsidies through political negotiation. The City must have clear, published criteria to guide all subsidy decisions. We should reward projects that meet public needs and align with community values, and not those with the best lobbyists.

Taxpayer dollars are not free money. They’re a public investment and should be treated as such.

AIMEE McCARRON

We must tie incentives closely to community priorities and align them across government. We need more workforce housing, more resilient public infrastructure, and more thoughtful deployment in areas of need. The recent Restoration Tax Abatement changes are a model that the Council worked on and produce a more thoughtful end product that actually improves the opportunities for leveraging the RTA for real neighborhood redevelopment. As Councilmember, I would also engage neighborhoods more thoroughly on capital investments for business development that makes sense in each individual neighborhood.

“ALEX” MOSSING

Our tax subsidies, as they are currently structured, lack accountability measures to help us understand whether they are effective. I would pursue establishing a clear and measurable set of criteria for determining whether a project meets the threshold for receiving a tax subsidy, regardless of the agency approving the tax abatement. These criteria should be published, and once a subsidy is awarded, there must be follow-up accountability in the form of performance monitoring. As a teacher, I am required to track outcomes for my students, and we should expect the same information as taxpayers tracking outcomes of our investments. We should create provisions allowing us to recoup tax subsidies for projects failing to perform and renewals should be performance-based. I would also advocate prioritizing local businesses and developers over out-of-state entities, especially those hiring local folks, paying living wages, and including affordable housing components.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

We need to end PILOT programs and stop giving tax breaks to corporations and venture capitalists who want to treat our neighborhoods as passive income. We need to instead start funding worker owned cooperatives and small businesses owned by historically oppressed people, and shift OBES focus towards these initiatives. Further, we need to expand the Neighborhood Participation Program to be included more on these tax subsidies and have a say in whether people should avoid paying their fair share at the expense of neighborhoods.

BRIDGET NEAL

Tax subsidies can be powerful tools for growth but only if they’re used with discipline, accountability, and strategic alignment, as recommended by BGR’s analysis of incentive effectiveness. The current fragmented system split among the City, Industrial Development Board, and special districts encourages inconsistency and undermines cohesive planning.

Unified Evaluation Framework: All entities with tax-abatement authority should follow a single, Council-approved process. Every proposal should require:

• Independent analysis showing the project cannot proceed without support (market gap test);

• Proof that the subsidy is the minimum required;

• Alignment with citywide economic and infrastructure priorities;

• A cost-benefit analysis showing positive public returns.

Performance-Based Subsidies: Replace automatic or upfront abatements with phased incentives tied to real outcomes such as verified job creation, prevailing wage levels, and local reinvestment targets. This protects public dollars and ensures taxpayer risk is minimized.

Transparency and Accountability: Publish all applications, financial analyses, and draft agreements at least 30 days before a vote. Require annual public performance reports. Enforce clawbacks when developers fail to meet commitments.

Strategic Oversight: Establish a unified Economic Development Incentive Review Board with representatives from the City Council, IDB, and community stakeholders to coordinate across all entities, prevent duplication, and align tax subsidies with long-term strategic goals.

Sunset and Reauthorization: All incentive programs should expire unless reauthorized based on results. That ensures public subsidies remain accountable and continuously justified.

Together, these reforms will ensure that New Orleans’ incentive programs truly serve the public interest, driving inclusive economic growth, not fragmented or politically driven deals.

PENSIONS

Background Provided to All Candidates

BGR has documented the sharply rising costs of pensions for public employees in a series of reports. The City’s total annual pension contributions have increased nearly 50% from $78 million in 2010 to more than $110 million this year. BGR’s research linked the problem to several factors, including benefits that far exceed national norms, past underfunding by the City, poor investment decisions, and overly optimistic assumptions about investment returns.

The City adopted a series of pension reforms during the last decade. These included increasing funding for pensions and lowering benefits for newly hired employees aside from police officers. However, the City has already reversed some of these reforms, and the rest are at risk.

Starting in 2018, the City reduced pension benefits to match national norms for new hires in the New Orleans Municipal Employees’ Retirement System (NOMERS), which includes all City employees except police and firefighters. But the City reversed many of the reforms in 2020 with almost no public discussion or justification.

Another set of reforms for the New Orleans Fire Fighters’ pension fund are part of a landmark 2016 legal settlement. The settlement includes higher annual contributions from the City and lower benefits for new firefighters. Voters also approved a 2.5-mill tax to help fund the settlement, which has made limited progress on improving the pension fund’s financial health. BGR found in 2024 that the ratio of the fund’s assets to its liabilities is just 11.5%. The recommended goal is 100%, and anything less than 70% is cause for serious concern. Despite the fund’s continued poor health, firefighters and pension system officials have stated their desire to undo the reforms. Meanwhile, the City’s current annual contribution of $45 million would need to increase by $23 million to put the fund on track to be fully funded, according to the fund’s annual actuarial report.

On pensions, BGR asked the candidates:

16. How should the City address the substantial costs of pensions while ensuring its total compensation packages for current and new employees are competitive? Please be specific about the changes you would pursue.

HOLLY FRIEDMAN

The City must strike a responsible balance between honoring commitments to workers and protecting long term financial stability. As BGR has documented, pension costs have ballooned, rising nearly 50% over the past decade, and threaten to crowd out essential city services if left unchecked.

I support maintaining the 2016 firefighter pension reforms, which reduced benefits for new hires and secured a dedicated funding stream through voter approved millage. Rolling back those reforms, especially given the fund is only 11.5% funded, would be fiscally reckless. I oppose any further benefit increases without a full review.

Similarly, I support revisiting the 2020 rollback of pension reforms for new general municipal employees. Those earlier reforms brought benefits more in line with national norms and helped curb long term liabilities. Changes to pension structures should be data-driven, transparent, and paired with long term funding strategies and not made behind closed doors.

To stay competitive in hiring, the City should modernize its overall compensation approach. That includes:
1. Conducting regular salary and benefits benchmarking.
2. Offering strong professional development opportunities.
3. Improving retirement plan education and financial literacy for employees.

Ultimately, a healthy pension system is one that’s sustainable for workers and taxpayers. I’ll fight for smart reforms that protect city services, respect workers, and give residents confidence in how their dollars are being managed.

AIMEE McCARRON

The City must aggressively seek pension fairness for both taxpayers and pensioners - we need to be realistic about the annual cost associated with pensions. We also need to have pension boards present annually in the budget process about their status and their level of solvency - and independent audits should be simultaneously presented to confirm these numbers. Pension funds also need to commit to modern and accountable investment practices to avoid superfluous or naive investments that end up causing long-term financial damage. I believe we need to offer competitive pay and benefits to current and future employees or we will never recover our ability as a city to perform basic tasks and excel at basic services. Our economic viability is on the line - if we do not improve our basic services we will be left out in the cold as the economic vitality we seek leaves us behind.

“ALEX” MOSSING

The City must address escalating pension costs through comprehensive compensation reform that balances fiscal responsibility with competitive employee benefits. Pension obligations—now exceeding $110 million annually—threaten both long-term city finances and retirement security for public employees.

For new hires, I support transitioning to a hybrid model that combines a modest defined benefit with a defined contribution plan. This structure aligns with national norms, limits future liabilities, and offers employees portable retirement benefits. For current employees, I would maintain existing pension commitments while offering voluntary defined contribution options.

To stabilize the system, I support gradually increasing City contributions over a 15-year horizon to achieve full funding, paired with improved fiscal discipline. I also support reforming investment strategies by reducing reliance on high-fee active management in favor of low-cost index funds, which improve returns over time.

Pension reform must be transparent and data-driven. I support regular public reporting on pension performance, funding progress, and investment outcomes. Reforms must include employee engagement and phased implementation to preserve workforce morale and retention.

As a candidate with a background in public education and a family member in the Fire Department, I am committed to supporting essential personnel while ensuring system solvency. Reforms must be structured to preserve core benefits, control costs, and ensure the sustainability of city services.

ROBERT “BOB” MURRELL

The “substantial cost” is someone’s livelihood after being a public servant - should we consider the “substantial cost” of police pensions while we’re at it? No, and we should stop treating librarians or City Hall workers less than they deserve. At the end of the day, budgets are moral documents and it speaks to the moral commitment to take care of people. I will not consider cuts to pensions.

BRIDGET NEAL

New Orleans is in the midst of a severe pension crisis, with annual contributions to its two largest systems, NOMERS and the Fire Fighters’ Pension Fund, exceeding $98 million and crowding out investments in public safety, drainage, infrastructure, and other core services. These costs fall directly on the General Fund and, ultimately, taxpayers. Yet in October 2020, the City quietly reversed its most fiscally responsible reform to date: a 2018 measure that aligned new hire pension benefits with national norms.

The City of New Orleans must adopt a comprehensive pension reform strategy that restores fiscal sustainability while preserving its ability to recruit and retain a capable workforce. Annual pension contributions now exceed $98 million, consuming a growing share of the General Fund and threatening essential city services.

In 2018, the City adopted fiscally responsible reforms that brought pension benefits in line with national norms. However, in 2020, those reforms were quietly reversed, increasing pension benefits by 32% for recent and future hires without any data showing a hiring or retention crisis. BGR found the reversal lacked transparency, created inconsistent cost projections ranging from $19 million to $115 million, and added permanent costs during a pandemic-driven budget crisis. BGR recommends restoring the more sustainable 2018 structure and requiring any future benefit increases to be tied to clear, department-specific recruitment need.

Long-term, both BGR and the City Services Coalition support moving new hires away from traditional defined benefit pensions toward hybrid or defined contribution plans that offer portability, reduce employer risk, and align with modern workforce expectations."

The City should also implement a targeted compensation strategy:

• Front-loaded pay for new hires, rather than deferred pension-heavy packages;

• Retention bonuses for hard-to-fill roles;

• Professional development tools like tuition assistance and training; and

• Flexible benefit tracks, allowing employees to choose between higher immediate compensation or enhanced retirement benefits.

Ultimately, we must resist across-the-board benefit increases and instead pursue targeted, data-driven reforms for new hires to avoid legal complications with current employees. This will allow us to protect current retirees, offer attractive compensation packages to new hires, and preserve the City’s capacity to provide the services residents expect. Pension reform is not optional; it is a prerequisite to building a resilient city workforce and a solvent municipal government.