As part of the Legislative Auditor's mission of accountability and transparency, we began posting a list of "fiscally distressed municipalities" on our website in 2019. The municipalities included on this list are those municipalities whose fiscal distress may limit their ability to continue to provide basic services (utilities, police protection, etc.) to residents, or who have not provided statutorily required financial reports for us to assess whether they are fiscally distressed.
When determining the composition of the list, we analyzed each municipality's most recent financial reports, as well as financial trends compared to other municipalities. We also considered additional factors, including:
Our goal is to work with each municipality's elected officials and provide recommendations to place the municipality on a path to fiscal stability.
| Municipality | Parish | Concerns Based on Most Recent Financial Report |
|---|---|---|
| Town of Baldwin | St. Mary | The town has significant problems with its water system and exhibits signs of fiscal distress, as indicated by repeat findings identifying deficit net position/unassigned fund balances and problems with bond reserve and utility rate requirements. |
| Village of Bonita | Morehouse | The village exhibits signs of fiscal distress, as indicated by a significant decrease in net position and cash balances, as well as untimely payment of payroll taxes. |
| Village of Clayton | Concordia | The village was placed under fiscal administration by the Fiscal Review Committee based on a large outstanding loan and utility system problems, but a fiscal administrator has not been appointed. |
| Town of Clinton | East Feliciana | The Fiscal Review Committee is monitoring the town for general financial concerns. |
| Village of Estherwood | Acadia | The village exhibits signs of fiscal distress, as indicated by operating deficits in its utility operations, as well as repeat findings identifying problems with operating reserves/ financial monitoring and noncompliance with debt covenants. |
| City of Grambling | Lincoln | The city's audit report notes a going concern relating to a fund balance deficiency in the General Fund resulting from recurring losses from operations. |
| Town of Jonesboro | Jackson | The town had disclaimers on its 2017 and 2018 audit reports and has not yet completed its 2019 or 2020 audit reports, limiting our ability to assess the town's finances. |
| Town of Lake Providence | East Carroll | The town’s 2018 audit report notes a going concern relating to significant deficits and corresponding transfers from utility funds. The 2019 and 2020 audit reports have not been completed, limiting our ability to assess the town’s finances. |
| Town of LeCompte | Rapides | The town exhibits signs of fiscal distress, as indicated by negative governmental fund balances and late payroll taxes. |
| Town of Melville | St. Landry | The Fiscal Review Committee is monitoring the town for water infrastructure and general financial concerns, including outstanding payroll taxes. |
| Town of Newellton | Tensas | The town’s 2018 audit report notes a going concern relating to operating deficits. The 2019 and 2020 audit reports have not been completed, limiting our ability to assess the town’s finances. |
| Village of Powhatan | Natchitoches | The village has significant problems with its water system and its 2018 compilation report notes signs of fiscal distress, as indicated by minimal fund balances. The 2019 and 2020 reports have not been completed, limiting our ability to assess the town’s finances. |
| Village of South Mansfield | DeSoto | The village has not filed its 2018, 2019, or 2020 financial reports, thereby meeting the criteria for fiscal administration. |
| City of Tallulah | Madison | The city has resolved its prior year going concern but still has not resolved all issues relating to its water system and debt covenants. |
| Village of Tangipahoa | Tangipahoa | The village’s review report notes a going concern relating to recurring losses from operations, as well as findings identifying problems with receivables, deposits, billings, and payables. |
| Town of Tullos | LaSalle/Winn | The town has significant problems with its water system. |
| Town of Washington | St. Landry | The town’s 2019 audit report notes a going concern relating to fund balance deficits. |
| Town of Waterproof | Tensas | The town exhibits signs of fiscal distress, as indicated by recurring and significant unreconciled utility receivables. |
| City of Winnfield | Winn | The city had significant hurricane damage, a disclaimer on its 2018 audit report, and has not completed its 2019 or 2020 audit reports, limiting our ability to assess the city’s finances. |
| Town of Winnsboro | Franklin | The town has made improvements in operations but still has a negative fund balance and negative change in fund balance in the General Fund. |
Those municipalities listed above who have not submitted a required financial report to our office by the statutory deadline, or who received a disclaimer rather than an audit opinion, may also appear on the Legislative Auditor's Non-Compliance List along with other entities who are currently non-compliant with the Audit Law. The Non-Compliance List can be found at https://lla.la.gov/reports-data/non-compliance/