Posted on Jan. 4, 2010

 

By Steve Beatty

The Pelican Institute for Public Policy

 

Not counting police officers and sheriff’s deputies, well over 200 city of New Orleans employees continue to enjoy the taxpayer-financed perk of driving a city-owned vehicle, according to the latest city report and other public documents.

 

That number would be much higher, though, had the city not revoked the privilege from nearly 100 employees between April and October, the report shows.

 

As of Sept. 30, the list of people still driving on the taxpayers’ dime includes City Council staffers, the mayor’s top budget officers, many department heads, judges and a host of other employees who may or may not meet the city’s criteria for having such a vehicle.

 

The perk also includes gas, insurance and maintenance, all of which can be an increasingly expensive proposition for vehicles driven by employees who live outside the city. The latest report shows a handful of employees living more than 30 miles from their workplace. City taxpayers are covering the costs of their commute.

 

The list covers only departments under the supervision of the city’s chief administrative officer. That doesn’t include the city courts, the Sewerage & Water Board, the Aviation Board or such related entities – many of which issue cars to employees.

 

In general, the employees pay $1,200 per year for the car and related services. As an unofficial bonus, drivers of vehicles marked as city property aren’t likely to get parking tickets, either, as evidenced by the daily glut of city vehicles parking for free in metered spots around City Hall.

 

Until recently, the city had a legal limit of 50 take-home cars, which was flatly ignored. Partly in response to an December 2008 Inspector General’s report detailing 274 such vehicles, the City Council removed the cap over the summer.

 

The Inspector General’s report said the city spent about $9.2 million on maintenance and fuel in 2007, though that includes all city vehicles, not just take-home cars.

 

The city reduced the 2010 budget by about $68 million, compared to the 2009 budget, because of projected shortfalls. This has caused cuts to city services, such as an end to blighted-property hearings and a cut to the public defender’s office.  

 

The council ordinance requires employees to meet two new criteria for getting a car: The vehicle is used “to perform a critical function” for the city, and it’s used to respond on a 24-hour basis.

 

The council’s ordinance exempts from the criteria public-safety departments, as well as safety and permit workers and a handful of other departments.

 

Some employees have a clear need for their vehicles to do their jobs, such as building inspectors. Others, though, aren’t necessarily apparent from their job descriptions.

 

The Pelican Institute for Public Policy sent a list to city officials, asking them to justify the use of a car by 25 employees. The general response was that they’re all on call around the clock in case of an emergency.

 

When pressed how the vehicle helps employees accomplish a “critical function” aside from getting them to their office, the city did not respond.

 

The list sent to the city included:

·         an autopsy assistant and a psychiatrist with the Coroner’s Office

·         the city’s finance director

·         the social services coordinator

·         the city’s intergovernmental-affairs coordinator

·         the director of sanitation

·         the head of the Vieux Carre Commission

·         the director and the deputy director of the French Market Corp.

 

 

The city’s list of take-home vehicles stood at 177 at the end of September, the latest report available. But that doesn’t include more than 100 vehicles at the Criminal Sheriff’s Office, about 20 at the airport and various other vehicles assigned to court officers, airport workers, the Sewerage & Water Board and other agencies associated with the city.

 

A look at the list of city employees who were getting payroll deductions in mid-October, just after the period covered in the report, showed the following people not on the city list paying for the use of a city vehicle:

 

·         Municipal Court judges Paul Sens, Desiree Charbonnet and Sean Early

·         Municipal Court clerk Ronald Lampard and assistant clerk Erin Shea

·         Traffic court judges Ronald Sholes and Mark Shea

·         Evidence room supervisor Warren Spears

·         Traffic Court clerk Noel Cassanova

·         Traffic Court judicial administrator Louis Ivon

·         Criminal District Court clerk Arthur Morrell

 

Various court officials did not return phone calls seeking to understand how they justified the use of a city vehicle.

 

A 1990 attorney general’s opinion, cited by the Inspector General, makes it clear that government can’t offer a vehicle as a fringe benefit.

 

“No public entity may donate an automobile to an official or employee for unrestricted personal use,” it reads. “All public vehicles must be used for a public purpose subject

to the fiduciary duty of the operator. Personal use is permissible only when it is minimal, reasonably necessary and incidental to the authorized public use.”

 

Airport spokeswoman Michelle Wilcut said 16 airport employees get cars because they’re the backbone of the emergency operations center that must respond to all crises. She said they reimburse the cost of their gas and that they pay the city the lease value of the vehicle. She also said out that the airport, because it is a self-sustained entity financed through user fees, has no effect on the city budget.

 

As for the 177 vehicles reported by the chief administrative officer, almost half belong to three departments:

·         District attorney, 33 vehicles

·         Mayor’s office, 28 vehicles

·         Safety and permits, 23 vehicles

 

When asked to comment on why these people, and all the others on the list, are entitled to vehicles, city spokeswoman Ceeon Quiett sent an e-mail message that talked about dedicated city employees who survived Hurricane Katrina and then slept on cots, in ships and trailers as their families were displaced.

 

She went on to say that she’s happy to provide facts about the city’s recovery, but that her office wouldn’t participate in a “gotcha” article that “reinforces the inaccurate information that has plagued this city and cheated the residents of the truth of this recovery.”