2025 Council District C 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.

ELIOT S. BARRON

Yes. The city should absolutely have a plan. Long term solutions are compromised by short term fixes. Now, is a five year plan the answer? Perhaps; it does smack of communist party propaganda and soviet history but heaven forbid we exist as captives of the present. The term “knee jerk reaction” comes to mind. One feels buffeted about by the back and forth and ups and downs of civic life. Some peace of mind and practical goals to work towards seem like a reasonable request. Sure, spending reduction.

Here is my idea for increasing tax revenue without increasing tax rates: everybody makes more money. Another expression that speaks to me is that a rising tide floats all ships. If we can address prevailing wages, consider basic income, and otherwise enjoy the royalties we deserve as residents of a resource rich state, then...there is an opportunity for structural balance.

KELSEY FOSTER

Yes, I do believe that a five-year financial projection would be a step in the right direction for the fiscal health of our city. City leaders constantly complain that they feel they are always in a position to respond to, rather than prepare for, disasters or other issues that arise. Financial planning for both revenues and expenses will help us better plan how we will invest in capital projects, manage ongoing maintenance projects, and prepare for (very) rainy days. Long-range planning is crucial to the success of government projects, which regularly take multiple years to fund, plan, and complete. We know that budgeting cannot predict the future; a five-year plan would likely not have foreseen the COVID-19 pandemic, for example. However, without a plan in place, our leaders will always be responding to the crisis of the moment and susceptible to immediate needs without a long-term vision.

There are many long-range projects that the City can consider to lower our costs over time, primarily the Orleans Justice Center and New Orleans Police Department Consent Decrees, while also looking at structural changes to our revenues, from a sales tax audit mentioned previously to a PILOT program to capture revenues from non-profit properties used for for-profit purposes.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

I agree that the city should have a five-year financial plan to chart a balanced approach to the city budget. The city needs to have favorable borrowing costs to invest in long term projects that are transformative for the city. I support a drainage fee that would include nonprofit property owners to close the funding gap for drainage improvements. Consolidation of the system into one organization is beneficial but does nothing if it isn’t funding adequately. Also, I support creating a cruise ship boarding fee to fund and expand public transit. More and more residents are without a car and need reliable transportation for work.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

Yes, I strongly support adopting and maintaining a five-year financial plan that targets a structurally balanced budget. A multiyear plan provides the framework to align one-time federal funds, operating expenses, and long-term investments. It ensures that we are not kicking the can down the road or relying on unpredictable revenue spikes.

To help achieve structural balance, I support gradually phasing out overreliance on one-time funds for recurring costs. I also support modernizing the City’s tax structure by reviewing outdated exemptions, improving collections of existing revenues, and expanding our economic base through business attraction. For example, the Bureau of Governmental Research has noted inefficiencies in local tax incentive structures, which we should reassess for return on investment. Spending reductions should be tied to performance evaluations and outcomes. This planning tool will allow us to better absorb economic shocks and preserve core services.

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

ELIOT S. BARRON

My wife is an accomplished person. She first came to town as a scholarship student from LSU and ever since has given this town her love and energy and professional knowledge. Once upon a time, in her home state of Alabama, she was a high school mathlete. This is in part why she was recruited by our great state. Still, even I can add and subtract.

To my understanding the idea is to have half our debt in cash reserve. If we have 35 million dollars in obligation, we want 17 million USD on hand to carry us through lean times - which we know come more often than we like. I have read this is equivalent to two months spending on an approved budget, but this is very concerning to me.

Firstly, my basic financial literacy taught me to try to have three months’ expenses in savings in case of emergency. How is this recommended for personal stability but overlooked in terms of the common wealth?

Secondly, my sources indicate that we don’t even have those two months’ monies as laid out by law. What gives?

Lastly, when 35 is allowed but we have over 50 million dollars in unpaid overhead, just what are we smoking? 17 million is a minimum and half of 60 is 30 million. So to review, at the moment in the present, to be safe we should have practically as much in reserve as we imagine we might have in debt. Fantasy is often better than reality; but let’s be real.

KELSEY FOSTER

The Government Finance Officers of America recommends that local governments maintain a general fund reserve of at least two months of operating revenues or expenditures, often expressed as a percentage, typically between 5% and 15%, which in the FY 2025 budget for the City of New Orleans would be $90 million to $270 million. Given the City of New Orleans’ deep needs for infrastructure investment and basic service improvements, I believe we should aim for the lower end of that range while we continue to make up for years of deferred maintenance and unmet community needs. A reserve in the 5–7% range would provide a meaningful cushion against emergencies or revenue shortfalls while allowing more dollars to be directed toward immediate priorities such as public safety, drainage, and neighborhood improvements. Over time, as the city’s fiscal health strengthens, we could work toward building a larger reserve closer to the recommended 15% target. The adjustment of this reserve policy should be considered on an annual basis along with the five-year financial planning for both operational and capital budgets.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

I support the recommended 17% reserves to ensure the city has the funding to keep the city running in case of emergency. The threat of credit rating downgrade raises costs for the city to invest in long term projects that could benefit the city’s residents.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

I support maintaining a General Fund reserve of at least 10 percent. This aligns with best practices recommended by the Government Finance Officers Association and helps protect against revenue volatility, natural disasters, and unexpected emergencies.

New Orleans is particularly vulnerable to shocks like hurricanes or downturns in tourism. A strong reserve provides flexibility and reduces our reliance on borrowing or federal bailouts. During COVID-19, cities with robust reserves were able to maintain services and avoid layoffs. I would advocate for codifying this 10 percent target in the City’s financial policies and ensuring the fund is replenished after drawdowns.

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.

ELIOT S. BARRON

I would seek an increase in funding for police if for no other reason than to pay them. We need them, we use them, we call them; they should not be fudging numbers for bare necessities. As I have been told we are at least 24 million dollars off from what was projected and what actually is needed. Say what?

Now, do I have thoughts on how money might be better spent by them and us? I do. I don’t want to live in a police state - no offense intended. From reconsidering the sheer number of police agencies in town - from NOPD to RTA to Harbor Police to HANO to Levee Districts and beyond to Ground Patrol, with State Police as icing on the cake; not to mention special security districts like the Garden District - it is clear we are willing to pay for protection.

Turns out though, if you want public nuisance ordinances enforced, and issues like aggressive and intimidating drug addicts occupying city neutral grounds addressed, that’ll cost extra. See the hundreds of thousands of dollars we have to cough up to clean up the Quarter or the gagillions spent for temporary shelter during special events and you catch my drift. Shouldn’t some of that be included? We need a greater return on our collective investment before we throw more good money after bad.

KELSEY FOSTER

No, I would not seek an increase to the NOPD budget. Simply increasing funding in the past has not addressed these systemic issues; to the contrary, I think we’ve seen an incredible lowering of crime statistics relative to the size of our police budget, highlighting the importance of good police management and leadership. We must invest more strategically in the root causes of crime by expanding access to health care, housing, youth programming, and economic opportunities. These investments strengthen communities, reduce the conditions that lead to crime, and can ultimately lessen the strain on law enforcement.

Within the existing NOPD budget, I would prioritize funding for initiatives that improve officer recruitment and retention, training in de-escalation and community policing, and technology that makes existing operations more efficient. At the same time, I would advocate for shifting resources where possible toward evidence-based alternatives to traditional policing, such as mental health crisis response teams and violence interruption programs.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

I do not support increasing NOPD’s budget. The city spends as a percentage of the general fund than other comparable sized cities. The department has shown for years it cannot accurately budget funds and needs a full investigation by the inspector general’s office. I support reducing the department’s budget to fund support services that proactively reduce crime and reduce the need for traditional policing. I believe the department needs at minimum a 10% reduction in funding to transfer to housing, infrastructure, and crime reduction programs.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

I support increasing funding for NOPD if it is tied to clear outcomes in recruitment, retention, and public trust. We need more officers, but we also need smarter deployment. In 2023, the City had fewer than 950 commissioned officers, well below our goal of 1,200. I support funding targeted recruitment incentives, civilianizing non-patrol roles, and expanding the use of technology to increase coverage without overburdening staff.

However, I also support auditing the department’s current spending to ensure funds are being used effectively. Any increase must come with accountability, community oversight, and alignment with broader safety goals. The public deserves transparency about how public safety dollars are spent and whether they are making a difference.

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?

ELIOT S. BARRON

When I was young, enlistment in the army was a good call. I did it. I am proud of my service and enjoy veteran status. In the moment there was hardship, though. Basic Training is not for the faint of heart. Uncle Sam will break you down and build you back in his image of a soldier in the army. You might think this revolves around fitness, fighting strength, obedience, and skill and it does, but you might be surprised to learn how much area beautification is included. Beyond spit shining, starched uniforms and polished floors there is no end to tightening up.

Police the area. This is a basic and unofficial standing order. And what does it mean? On one level it means picking up trash. I’m old enough to remember an ad campaign called Litter Bugs Me. These days, it’s Make Louisiana beautiful. I’m about it. I’d like to see our area policed. I don’t mean more arrests necessarily. Jail conditions and funding aside, I believe that mass incarceration is not the answer. I do believe in holding people accountable.

Community service and fines should be enforced for those people who bring their filth and degradation and lay it before us. Also, if only those expensive crime cameras could catch drivers dumping ashtrays at stoplights or pouring the contents of fast food bags upside down, item by item followed by the empty sack itself on our streets and sidewalks, it would be a good start. Also, for all the traffic light failures, traffic police at intersections has real appeal. That’s my little soapbox. Thank you.

KELSEY FOSTER

Beyond NOPD, the City can most effectively drive improvements in public safety by investing in youth services and programming and behavioral health and crisis response.

Expanding access to quality afterschool programs, job training, mentorship, and summer employment for young people can reduce risk factors for crime and provide positive pathways. These programs have proven long-term impacts on reducing violence and improving community stability; Baltimore has seen incredible results from similar investments, particularly in summer youth programming.

Similarly, increasing the City’s investment in behavioral health resources—such as mental health services, addiction treatment, and non-police crisis response teams—can address issues that often escalate into public safety concerns. These interventions connect people with care before situations reach a crisis point, reducing repeat encounters with the criminal justice system and improving outcomes for individuals and neighborhoods alike.

Both areas align with the City’s core responsibilities, leverage existing partnerships, and have strong potential to reduce violence and increase safety in a sustainable way.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

As I stated above, proactive community crime reduction programs have a clear track record of engaging the community to prevent crime before traditional policing is needed. Also, housing insecurity has been proven by studies to fuel crime in neighborhoods. Large portions of the city’s residents are housing insecure. Overall, investing in people is the solution to solving our policing issues.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

Two areas with strong potential for improving public safety are youth services and blight remediation. Research consistently shows that investments in youth programming reduce crime. In District C, I supported increased funding for mentoring, school-based supports, and recreation. I will continue to push for strategic partnerships with nonprofits and schools to keep kids engaged and safe.

Blight also contributes to crime by creating environments of neglect. The City’s code enforcement and housing departments need more resources to expedite demolitions, incentivize redevelopment, and maintain public lots. Strategic public investment in revitalizing blocks can improve safety and neighborhood morale.

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.

ELIOT S. BARRON

Yes, there should be an operating agreement between the City and the Sheriff’s Office, even along the lines that BGR recommends. It is amazing to me that this is an issue. Not a new one at that. What is the question? Should the city and the sheriff work together? For real? Before delving in to the details it is worth observing “the City” is not a unified entity. For the sake of this discussion I think we mean city council but when it comes to budgeting, who is the boss? The mayor’s administration appears to be infighting between the administrative office and the revenue bureau. The council is both challenging that dynamic and contributing to the confusion by acting independently and at times erratically.

Yes! Establish an ongoing strategic planning process in which we collaborate on the budget, facilities, employee compensation and training, and other jail needs.

Yes! 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.

Wait...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? Please tell me we aren’t thinking third party private contractors! That is not cost effective and worse.

Yes! 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. But really, isn’t that the Sheriff’s Office? What are we paying for after all. We need a little of the buck stops here mentality up in this piece. The end.

KELSEY FOSTER

Yes, I support a cooperative agreement between the City and the Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office, as recommended by BGR. The current governance structure, where the Sheriff operates the jail and the City funds most of its costs, has long blurred accountability and impeded progress toward addressing the jail’s chronic problems. A formal agreement would clarify roles and responsibilities while improving oversight and transparency.

This issue has been at the forefront of every city budget process that I have participated in as a community leader and good government advocate. Until we’re able to meaningfully address the power struggle between the Sheriff and Mayor, our residents will have no reason to begin building trust in the Orleans Parish Justice Center as an institution, and those in leadership positions with a platform to make major financial decisions that impact thousands of New Orleanians every year, such as the New Orleans City Council, will have no basis from which to make an informed decision.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

I support creating a cooperative agreement as stated above. An independent oversight board is critical to monitoring the conditions within the jail and ensuring the residents are receiving proper conditions and medical care. I support integrating the jail into the city’s BRASS accounting system to give transparency to financial expenditures at the jail. I support strategic planning to solve the underpaid employees that causes follow on issues like the escape that made national bad headlines for the city.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

Yes, a cooperative agreement between the City and the Sheriff’s Office is critical for improving jail performance and public trust. I support including the components BGR recommends, such as clear service expectations, shared performance goals, fiscal transparency, and mechanisms for regular evaluation. The City must ensure that tax dollars sent to the jail align with constitutional obligations and community expectations.

In my time on the Council, I have advocated for accountability from all criminal justice agencies receiving City funding. I would also prioritize coordination on mental health services, intake and release protocols, and data sharing. A formal agreement will help ensure that both agencies are working toward a safe, humane, and efficient jail system.

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.

ELIOT S. BARRON

Whatever street maintenance costs, we should fund at that level. Why it is underfunded when it is a top gripe of every casual conversation? People are leaving en masse for this reason alone (although there are others too). Without getting lost, I’d like to deal with where we are over where we’d like to be. Which is not to say I don’t want to help lead the city to a better place. There is opportunity here and now to consolidate efforts and work together to achieve our dream of a city with circulation and drainage and the like.

I would reconsider the overlapping interests of Streets and Sidewalks, Public Works, and Sewerage and Water. I think Parks and Parkways should be in the loop. We are awash in federal funding for infrastructure upgrades, but storm water management eludes us.

Finding more funding should not prove impossible. There is public interest in all this and more, so maybe it’s time to take on storm water fees, let alone the proposed benefits of attracting business to our home. What do we get in return? And we can we bury the power lines where? Perhaps if we spent less on recovery we could spend more on preparation. Then we might find reward for our efforts instead of beef with our civil services.

KELSEY FOSTER

The City’s chronic underfunding of street maintenance threatens the long-term value of the $2 billion in federally funded repairs currently underway. If Public Works has estimated it would cost $50 million annually to properly maintain the City’s 1,500 miles of streets, but the City currently spends only about $14 million, the gap of $36 million per year can only lead to deferred maintenance that ultimately costs more.

Some options to close this gap can include the previously mentioned review of our sales tax dedication or PILOT program over for- profit use tax-exempt properties. I am leery of any new revenues that cost local residents more; we know that many New Orleanians, renters and homeowners, are facing an affordability crisis. I would be open to street-related new revenues, such as an additional fee on parking lots downtown, raised parking fines, or additional fees aimed specifically at tourists– a raise in hotel/motel or short term rental fees, for example.

Bringing annual funding closer to the $50 million target will require phasing in increases over several budget cycles, but doing so will protect the City’s infrastructure investments, reduce long-term costs, and improve daily quality of life and should be done in accordance with a long-term budget forecast.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

The city should fund infrastructure to the required levels. I fully support spending $50 million yearly to prevent the increasingly expensive reconstruction costs. The federal funding that is being used has quickly been exhausted as costs have climbed after the pandemic. The city is in a unique situation to maintain the new infrastructure paid for by federal funds. Continued underfunding puts the city back in the same situation before this windfall.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

The City currently faces a street maintenance backlog of over $1.4 billion. Annual funding levels have historically been insufficient to keep pace with deterioration. In 2023, only about $30 million was budgeted for street repairs, far below the estimated annual need.

To address this, I support dedicating a larger portion of infrastructure bond revenues and recurring millages to maintenance, not just new construction. I would also advocate for increased coordination with state and federal agencies to unlock matching funds. Additionally, I support a long-term capital plan that includes lifecycle maintenance costs to avoid future backlogs. Transparency tools, like project dashboards, should be used to track progress and improve public confidence in how dollars are spent.

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?

ELIOT S. BARRON

Do not privatize.

We enjoy an incredible amount of freedom and power at the mouth of the Mighty Mississippi. These topics have been debated ad nauseum and prior administrations have made big moves to get with the times. Water quality, water pressure, water runoff, and to a degree water supply. This is what we have to contend with.

I would like to see a little entrepreneurial spirit though, all things considered. If there is a world wide shortage of fresh water, and we are literally inundated annually, is there not a better response than to spill it? Could we bottle and sell it? Create energy out of it? It’s not reinventing the wheel.

Anyway, it is very important to not use drinking water for industrial cooling purposes, and we must protect our underground sources from contamination, and critically, we must safeguard against upriver diversions. It is our most precious resource.

The rivers, bayous, lakes, and the Gulf: the water is the reason we are here; let it not be the end of us. It is a collective responsibility.

The current crisis is bureaucratic. And change comes from within - not by selling it off.

KELSEY FOSTER

I support transitioning the Sewerage & Water Board (S&WB) to a fully municipal utility operating within the Department of Public Works. The current hybrid governance model has clearly not provided the leadership, governance, or political stability needed to operate this crucial organization in an effective manner. As a Commissioner of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority - West, I had the opportunity to see what a de-politicized, professional board could do for management of a crucial public infrastructure body; I want to believe that the same could be true for the S&WB, but my fear is that the capital investments needed are too urgent for a new governance model to be conceived and implemented in a timely manner.

Making the S&WB a municipal entity would align operational responsibility, financial control, and accountability under one local government structure, still offering the Mayor and City Council the opportunity for oversight as with any other city department. As your report notes, this change would reduce political delays in funding decisions, streamline coordination on streets and drainage projects, and give voters a clear avenue to hold City leadership accountable for performance. It would also eliminate the conflict of interest created by having elected officials on the S&WB board, replacing it with direct mayoral and council oversight.

By integrating the S&WB into City government, we can improve efficiency, strengthen long-term planning, and restore public confidence in this critical utility.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

The city council should be the sole governing body as the SWB only serves Orleans Parish. State oversight was created over 100 years ago and needs to be updated for the 21st century. The SWB needs to increase pay for employees to get the best employees. Also, it needs to stop outsourcing parts of management that drive up costs and don’t produce results.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

I support reforms that strengthen accountability and performance at SWBNO. This includes enhancing the Council’s oversight role, requiring performance metrics, and increasing coordination with City departments. For instance, the City Council should have more formal input into SWBNO’s budgeting and capital planning processes.

I would also support operational reforms to modernize billing systems, improve customer service, and reduce water loss. As of 2022, SWBNO reported losing approximately 70 million gallons of water per day due to leaks and infrastructure failures. Governance reforms, such as expanding the board to include infrastructure and finance experts, should be considered. Ultimately, SWBNO must operate transparently, meet service delivery benchmarks, and be accountable to ratepayers.

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

ELIOT S. BARRON

Two Words: Due Diligence

KELSEY FOSTER

I support BGR’s call for a formal, transparent process for evaluation of both the performance and future funding requests of the S&WB. Particularly at a time when many New Orleans residents are finding themselves burdened by the cost of living-- particularly the cost of owning a home-- all decisions related to increased or new millages should be tied specifically to clear and achievable goals for crucial service improvements.

City Council should adopt clear timelines, evaluation criteria, and public hearing requirements for all rate and tax requests. This framework should rely on independent expert analysis to verify S&WB financial needs and balance them with ratepayer affordability.

Finally, I support requiring public reporting on how revenues are spent and linking future approvals to demonstrated financial and operational progress. This structured, transparent process would reduce the influence of short-term politics, improve accountability, and provide a stronger foundation for sustainable infrastructure funding.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

The city council should always account for the financial impact of ratepayers and use that as the first criteria. The city council needs to adopt a review framework for all increases to rates.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

The Council must take a more data-driven and transparent approach to reviewing SWBNO funding requests. I support requiring SWBNO to submit performance reports, rate models, and audited financials ahead of any rate or tax approval.

As a Councilmember, I have supported efforts to increase transparency in rate-setting. Going forward, I would push for a formal review process that includes public input, independent analysis, and performance benchmarks. For example, the Council could require SWBNO to tie proposed rate increases to specific capital projects and efficiency improvements. The public deserves to understand why rates are rising and how that revenue is delivering better outcomes.

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.

ELIOT S. BARRON

Yes, I do favor pursuing a citywide storm water fee for the unfortunate reason that we have got figure it out and make it happen. We cannot just cry about it and expect others to give us what we want. Do I think our water bill is too high already? Yes. Is it unfair to put the entire onus on property owners? Yes, especially when so many of us rent. Is any surcharge equivalent to a tax whether or not it is so named? Yes. It is. Let’s be honest.

In accordance with BGR recommendations the fee should be accurate and justified. It is about time we rule out crude approaches and avoid complexities, if the past is any indication. We should not lead with a discussion of exemptions. I mean come on. It comes off as self sabotage.

We should encourage better and best practices and stimulate green infrastructure investments and reward onsite water management. And more.

I do agree that billing should be expanded to include properties (non profit entities) which are not subject to ad valorem taxation, and we should be careful about Tax Increment Financing as the jury is still out if we aren’t giving away the baby with the bathwater.

In conclusion, I think the City should err on the side of enthusiasm and enact storm water provisions before we change the home rule charter. That feels like an insurmountable obstacle as evidenced by the length of this deliberative process (2005-2017-2025). Enough already. The state constitution needs refreshing as well, I might add. Carry on.

KELSEY FOSTER

Yes, I support pursuing a citywide stormwater fee. I strongly believe that if this effort is to be successful and equitable, it must be based on the runoff factor of each property and not be tied to home value and should apply to both taxable and tax-exempt properties to create a broad payer base.

The proposal should include a limited credit system to incentivize property owners to implement runoff-reducing measures, such as permeable surfaces or green infrastructure, but those credits should be narrowly tailored to ensure meaningful, measurable impact. To increase accountability, the fee must be paired with clear, public reporting on revenue use and outcomes, including performance benchmarks and regular updates to the City Council and public. The process of establishing the fee should involve comprehensive financial analysis, transparent planning, and community engagement to build understanding and trust.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

I support a citywide stormwater fee. 50% of properties in the city are owned by nonprofits and don’t pay their fair share for infrastructure, especially drainage. The fee should include criteria like lot size and amount of impermeable surfaces. Homeowners cannot continue to be the majority of burden for taxes in this city.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

Yes, I believe a well-designed stormwater fee is worth exploring. As drainage costs rise and infrastructure needs grow, a fair, sustainable funding stream is essential. The fee should apply equitably to all property types, including tax-exempt institutions, and be calculated based on impermeable surface area to reflect runoff impact. Clear criteria must govern implementation, including robust public engagement, transparent rate-setting, and safeguards for vulnerable residents. Revenues should be used for both capital upgrades and green infrastructure to reduce subsidence and flooding. Accountability measures, such as annual reports and third-party audits, will be critical to maintaining public trust.

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?

ELIOT S. BARRON

Great question. How can the Housing Trust Fund be most effectively used? The introduction talks about Finance New Orleans and New Orleans Redevelopment Authority. What happened to the Housing Authority of New Orleans? Where is the federal department of Housing and Urban Development in this? Is it appropriate to talk about income over age and marital status?

Instead of exclusively developing block grants, tax credits, and other incentives to build new units, I’d like to have a plan for our senior citizens and/or our unused commercial real estate for residents. Isn’t there an unprecedented amount of unoccupied office space in the Parish with no future in sight for commercial tenants? The reuse of the old VA is a good move. What else can we do to house people and save money?

Let’s make the most with what we have and serve those in need.

KELSEY FOSTER

Given the current demand for new units of housing, I would like to see the immediate investment of Housing Trust Fund dollars focus significantly on the creation of new, permanently affordable housing units in communities with the fastest rates of displacement. Administratively, it’s crucial for Finance New Orleans and the Housing Authority to come to an understanding of how this money will be governed. In the short-term, I think each entity has the ability to take ownership of the three current funding buckets within the Housing Trust Fund: Preservation and Resilience and Lasting Affordability.

Actionable ways this funding can be used immediately include aging in place programs, to help elderly homeowners make repairs to their homes, blight remediation for small landlords and homeowners, helping to do minor repairs like fresh paint to help locals avoid blight liens, and subsidizing the cost of resiliency investments like solar and energy efficient appliances for small affordable developers and current low-income homeowners, off-setting the rising costs of utilities.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

The housing trust fund should be used to build fully affordable housing created by HANO or nonprofit housing developers. Other forms of progressive housing like community land trusts and cooperatives should also receive funding. Also, displacement funds should be available to move residents living in substandard conditions outlined by the Healthy Homes ordinance to move into accommodations up to standard.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

To maximize the Housing Trust Fund’s impact, the Housing Trust Fund Advisory committee should focus on deeply affordable units and ensuring dollars are leveraged with private and philanthropic investment. I support prioritizing funding for housing at or below 60% AMI, preserving existing affordable stock, and aligning projects with public transportation and services. Performance metrics, transparent selection criteria, and regular public reporting will ensure the fund remains accountable and impactful. I also support aligning allocations with identified needs from the City’s housing gap analysis.

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

ELIOT S. BARRON

In short, long term care. We need to destigmatize mental illness, acknowledge that addiction is real, and we need to address it now. People are out here struggling, and begging to be seen, especially downtown. Where can they get help to actually overcome these conditions? Elder care is tied in to this and it is to our great shame that unknown persons die on our streets every year. Which is to say, not only is rent too high, but many people can’t pay anything given their current situations. Who are we serving by letting people wallow in misery in plain view?

KELSEY FOSTER

Beyond investments in the Housing Trust Fund, I support a comprehensive approach to address housing affordability in New Orleans. This includes reforming the city’s permitting and zoning processes to reduce barriers and delays for affordable housing development, making it easier and faster to build needed units. I particularly support inclusionary zoning efforts that create by-right opportunities for affordable projects with community-appropriate density.

In a longer-term vision, I believe HANO, FANO, NORA and the City’s Office of Economic Development could be combined to better manage land assets, publicly funded housing, financial management, and the attraction and financing of new projects to the city in a more efficient, coordinated way, though I acknowledge that this is likely a difficult political achievement.

Additionally, I back stronger coordination between housing, transportation, and workforce development policies to ensure affordable housing is connected to economic opportunity and essential services.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

Accessory dwelling units should be allowed by right city-wide. These small housing types allow for cost effective density and allow for homeowners to make additional money as their cost of maintenance increases every year. Four-plex housing types should also be allowed city wide. The city should encourage housing cooperatives that give residents shared burden for maintenance of their complex. The city should develop all unused schools and parking lots to get housing built near high activity areas.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

Beyond the Trust Fund, I support zoning reforms to enable more multi-family and mixed-use housing, near transit, schools, and jobs. I’ve backed rental protections, tax incentives for affordability, and increased code enforcement to address blight. I would also explore community land trusts, expand home repair assistance, and strengthen eviction prevention. Our strategy must include both increasing supply and preserving the affordability and stability of existing homes.

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?

ELIOT S. BARRON

What a concept! Cohesive support from regional stakeholders, the City of New Orleans -community members and leadership (elected and unelected) - let alone business interests sounds too good to be true. If I could, and I surely should, develop a strategic plan for economic development it would be a matter of course that consensus get us there.

In many ways this already exists. On the one hand, there are the priorities laid out in this survey: housing, public safety, public works, public finances - who doesn’t want these things to be both adequate and excellent? On the other hand it’s a dog eat dog scenario where it can appear as though every one is in it for themselves.

In my district, main street style economic development for corridors - support for small, family owned businesses and professional services and local retailers - is in order. Adding value to the port and its operations as well as public access to the river which runs through it is another key element. As a major economic driver, the waterfront offers green jobs, green transportation, and green energy opportunities. Keeping people alive, healthy and happy is also a worthy goal.

Lastly, in the spirit of the long view and anticipating deteriorating conditions, it is not out of order to work towards ensuring food security (urban agriculture), sustainable growth, and public health which will promote public wealth.

KELSEY FOSTER

In my time as the Executive Director of the Algiers Economic Development Foundation, I created an LED-award winning strategic plan for our community. Our success was built on the cross-sectional reality of economic development in low-income communities, considering transit, workforce needs, housing, and small businesses in our plan explicitly.

New Orleans’ economic development strategic plan should emphasize equitable growth that benefits all residents, particularly those in historically underserved neighborhoods. Key priorities should include supporting small- and locally-owned businesses, attracting industry that compliments our existing workforce or proactively designing pipeline programs to ensure that locals will be hired in new industries, diversifying our economy away from reliance on tourism, and thoughtfully considering how new development impacts– positively or negatively– our infrastructure. The plan must also prioritize responsible use of public incentives across jurisdictions.

To ensure cohesive support from business, community, and regional stakeholders, I would champion a transparent, inclusive planning process that actively engages diverse voices from the outset, including residents, neighborhood leaders, employers, and regional partners. I would also promote regular public reporting on progress and outcomes, fostering accountability and trust. By centering equity and collaboration, we can build broad-based commitment and sustained momentum toward shared economic goals for New Orleans.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

The city should be focusing on small businesses run by residents. Currently prioritizes large projects that take years to come into fruition. Grants should be available for regular people to start a business that keeps profits in our city. The city should fund incubators that help residents make their ideas a reality or expand their business.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

The City should emphasize inclusive growth supporting small businesses, workforce development, and neighborhood revitalization. Priorities should include reducing barriers to entrepreneurship, attracting sustainable industries, and linking residents to good-paying jobs. I would collaborate with regional partners, chambers, and neighborhood organizations to align goals and implementation. I would also engage with the Louisiana Department of Innovation in order to prepare our citizens for the jobs of the future. An updated strategic plan must be sincerely community-informed, and rooted in measurable goals. Too often strategies have appeared community informed but have proven to be ineffective because of a lack of real engagement. Real coordination across public agencies, private sector stakeholders, and the broader community is essential to real success. That takes time and seriousness of purpose.

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

ELIOT S. BARRON

It has become almost cliche to talk about collaborative endeavor, but here I go. “Can’t we all just get along?” Between The City having multiple personality disorder in terms of the who and the what the’s and the State seeking to subjugate us or otherwise assert authority - for good or ill - and innumerable interests and individuals seeking subsidies, exemptions, work around solutions to inertia, or relative autonomy.

It’s as though the whole shebang is set up for failure. We need to set ourselves up for success. No need to “should” on people. Let’s just go ahead and get serious about the thoughtful work that’s been done on our behalf. Let us stabilize the power grid, stabilize our water supply, plan for storm readiness as much as disaster response, and help people find ways to stay.

In conclusion, economics often swirl around producers and consumers. In my view it is actually local consumers who are the producers because we go to work to make money. We make money and “producers” try to get it from us. Therefore, effective subsidies could produce a significant positive ratio of benefits to costs, as supported by a rigorous cost-benefit analysis. That and subsidies ought not create unfair impacts on local competitors or the surrounding neighborhood. It takes money to make money.

KELSEY FOSTER

As an economic development professional from Algiers, this question is particularly important to me. Federal City’s TIFF shows us what can happen when land value capture tools are used to divert funds over a long period of time without explicitly requiring them to be tied to outcomes for our community. Experiences like this illustrate how poorly structured subsidies can fail to deliver the promised community benefits. I would pursue reforms to ensure that local tax subsidies, such as PILOTs, Economic Development Districts, and TIFFs, are used strategically, transparently, and only when they deliver a clear public benefit. Subsidies should be granted based on rigorous, independent analysis demonstrating that a project cannot proceed without public support and that the subsidy operates under a governing body that includes community voices, and be re-considered on a regular basis to ensure that the project is delivering on the promises under which it was designed.

I would also advocate for a unified and transparent subsidy approval process across the City, the Industrial Development Board, and other special districts to align with an adopted economic development strategic plan. Each subsidy should be evaluated through a formal cost-benefit analysis that weighs community impacts and avoids creating unfair advantages over local competitors or negative effects on surrounding neighborhoods. Public reporting and clear performance benchmarks are critical to hold recipients accountable. These changes would help ensure that every tax dollar allocated through a subsidy delivers long-term value for New Orleans residents.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

The city should end tax subsidies for economic development. The city is throwing away tax revenue when city services and infrastructure continue to cost more and more every year. Overall, the city does not invest enough in the people of the city and gives too much money to developers that often don’t fulfil their economic growth goals that supposedly merit large subsidies.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

We need clear, consistent guidelines across all agencies that award subsidies. I support requiring independent cost-benefit analyses and ensuring subsidies are performance-based and only used when market failures are proven. Transparency is key, subsidy recipients should report outcomes publicly because those receiving benefits must be both transparent and accountable to the communities they service. I also support strengthening the City Council’s role in approving and reviewing deals. We should avoid duplicative incentives and ensure local businesses are not disadvantaged by publicly subsidized competitors.

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.

ELIOT S. BARRON

At the risk of repeating myself, the council should use due diligence, transparency, and a modicum of fiscal responsibility when it is compelled to address the growing space between compensation packages, the substantial and rising costs of retirement, and money in the bank so to speak.

To be fair, these problems are not exclusive to us. National uncertainty, market volatility, and widely divergent views on public service, job security, and benefits complicate the present conversation.

That said, we can’t be writing checks our bodies can’t cash. I don’t know what else to say.

KELSEY FOSTER

The City must balance fiscal responsibility with the need to offer competitive compensation to attract and retain a talented workforce. I would support a multi-pronged approach that strengthens pension fund stability while ensuring fair compensation. First, I would prioritize fully funding the City’s actuarially required contributions each year to prevent future shortfalls and avoid repeating the mistakes of past underfunding. I would also advocate for independent actuarial reviews and stronger public reporting to increase transparency and rebuild public trust.

For new employees, I support maintaining pension benefits aligned with national norms while ensuring that total compensation— through a mix of salary, benefits, and career development opportunities—remains competitive. I would oppose efforts to reverse the 2016 and 2018 reforms that reduced benefits for new hires, as undoing these changes has already worsened the City’s long-term obligations. For underfunded systems like the Fire Fighters’ pension fund, I would explore negotiated adjustments and dedicated revenue sources to improve funding without placing the entire burden on the General Fund.

This problem was not created overnight, and many years of underfunding will take many years of sustained financial investment to correct—but we must begin now, because we cannot keep kicking the can down the road.

JACKSON KIMBRELL

Pensions should fund pensions equally for new and current employees. All employees should receive the same pension, regardless of department. The city needs to find new revenue streams to ensure the solvency of pensions moving into the future. Funding for the mayor’s office and chief administrative office need to be examined and probably increased as they account for a large portion of the budget. I support fully funding pensions for the hard working employees of this city that dedicate a career to making this city work.

FREDDIE KING III (INCUMBENT)

Pension costs must be managed responsibly to protect both retirement security and fiscal solvency. I support maintaining reforms that align benefits with national norms while ensuring competitive total compensation. The City should fully fund required contributions and avoid reversing needed changes. For underperforming funds, including the Fire Fighters’ pension, we must ensure transparency and compliance with legal settlements. Any future benefit enhancements must be paired with actuarial analysis and offsetting cost controls. Recruitment and retention depend on fair pay, sound retirement options, and long-term stability.