The Price of Neglect: Youngsville’s Costly Mistake on Police Pay

The Youngsville City Council adopted a new pay plan for the officers of the Youngsville Police Department last week. For some, the change came as a surprise. For others, it was part of a long-awaited plan that started under the previous administration. Some people, including council members, appeared to be overwhelmed by the various proposals put forth, while others claimed they didn’t receive enough information. Join us as we explore the new pay plan and cover all the details you may have overlooked.

Prior Pay Plan

In January of 2022, the Youngsville City Council adopted a pay plan for all employees of the Youngsville Police Department. At the meeting, Councilmen Matt Romero, Lindy Bolgiano, and Ken Stansbury seemed to lead the move to adopt the plan. Councilman Gary Williams was mainly silent on the issue, but voted in favor of it. Councilwoman Kayla Reaux, who had previously abstained from voting when the ordinance was introduced, voted in favor of its final adoption.

Nothing in the discussion shed much light on why a new pay plan was being proposed at that time. Romero indicated that the police department budget is “sometimes tight,” and he was looking ‘broad scale, four or five years down the road.’ As the vote approached, the language of the ordinance was still unclear to many, with one city official saying, “We’ll figure it out.” Romero then stated while laughing, “I think everybody trusts what we’re doing.” Yes, we laughed out loud as well.

In addition to making changes to officers’ pay, the ordinance established a requirement that a salary study of comparable law enforcement organizations be conducted by a compensation professional every five years. The plan also provided that in years where market competitiveness is not assessed, a two (2%) or more cost-of-living increase may be assigned, provided funds were approved within the budget.

Lastly, the plan stipulated that all employees, whether currently employed or hired later, would be eligible to receive years of creditable service for their previous law enforcement experience, provided they had completed their six-month probationary period. The amount of creditable service would be calculated by giving ½ a year’s credit for every full year of service in law enforcement. It was the responsibility of the Youngsville Chief of Police to administer the plan according to the adopted rules. However, the plan fell short in its application.

Broken Promises

Despite the language of the ordinance, a select few employees were granted credit for their previous law enforcement experience. Discussion at the meeting earlier this month revealed that only two officers of a department of just under forty employees may have ever received compensation for years of creditable service. Appearing and speaking at that July 10, 2025, council meeting was Youngsville Police Officer Joseph Hardy. Hardy, a twenty-two-year veteran of law enforcement, was asked if he had ever been given credit for his years of prior law enforcement experience. He indicated that he had not.

This is a theme that has played out repeatedly in the City of Youngsville. Despite an ordinance being adopted that has full force and effect, our elected leaders fail to take the necessary steps to fulfill their lawful duties.

Examples of Lapses Everywhere

One example that recently came to light centers on the Youngsville Recreational Advisory Committee, which was established in July 2016. According to the resolution, the committee was tasked with adopting bylaws and holding monthly meetings. Members who miss more than three consecutive monthly meetings would lose their position on the committee. Nine years after its creation, the Committee had failed to adopt any bylaws governing the board. Additionally, a review conducted in May 2025 revealed that no meetings were held in February, March, and April 2025 due to a lack of attendance; however, no committee members were removed.

In September of 2021, the City Council authorized the Mayor to enter into a Cooperative Endeavor Agreement with Sugar Mill Pond Investors, LLC, about the Linear Park project. As part of that agreement, the city was to pay up to $1,000,000 towards the project based on it providing a “public and economic benefit if the Linear Park were to be open to the public.” To ensure public access, the agreement required that a public access agreement be presented for approval within 60 days of the effective date. Three years later, when we followed up with the city and requested a copy of the agreement, we were told no such document existed.

Lastly, there was the infamous transfer of taxpayer money to a local grifter, which became known as Youngsville on Ice. Under that agreement, the contractor was to provide a weekly accounting to the City, which included all funds received and all payments made in connection with the event. However, when we requested copies of the weekly accounting, we were again informed by the city that they didn’t have the documents. Do you see the trend? These may seem like small, trivial tasks in the grand scheme of things, but when you start paying attention to the frequency with which they occur, it demonstrates a pattern. The failure to properly implement the pay plan, which was adopted in 2022, only to the detriment of our police force.

Market Comparison

When we requested salary studies of comparable law enforcement agencies in preparation for the proposed new pay plan, we weren’t surprised when no such study was provided. Just another broken promise. We also learned that contrary to false statements made by some elected officials, Chief J.P. Broussard did not initiate the proposal to increase officer pay at the Youngsville Police Department. It was initiated in July 2024 by Chief Cody Louviere.

It was Chief Louviere who arranged for contracting with Vermilion Analytics, a well-respected company, to develop two pay plans for the Youngsville Police Department. The goal was to increase starting pay to $45,000.00 and to even out disparities in rank differentials within the department. By August of 2024, Dr. Jenelle Doucet delivered two plans to Chief Louviere along with an estimated cost of implementation. The estimated salary cost to implement plan 2024.01 was $208,000.00, and $263,000.00 to implement plan 2024.02. As late as October 2024, Chief Louviere was in discussion with Chief Financial Officer Cathryn Greig regarding the implementation of the plans. However, by December 2024, Chief Louviere had been narrowly defeated by just 15 votes.

Chief Broussard then resurrected the idea of a modified pay plan for the Youngsville Police Department around March of 2025. Broussard then received three plans from Vermilion Analytics. The first, a revision of 2024.01, was estimated to have a total salary cost of $302,843.00 for implementation. The second, a revision of 2024.02, was estimated to have an implementation cost of $375,970.00. Lastly, 2024.03, which sought to increase starting pay to $50,000, was estimated to have a salary cost of $682,009 to implement, or over three times the cost of Plan 2024.01 proposed by Chief Louviere.

After taking into account the retirement contribution of 33.3475% mandated by the Municipal Police Employees Retirement System, the Broussard plan would have cost around $1,000,000 to implement. Keep in mind that the entire annual budget for the Youngsville Police Department is close to $5,000,000. Pretty alarming for a candidate who campaigned on being a fiscal conservative.

Reining In Fiscal Irresponsibility?

We can only assume that the meeting with Vermilion Analytics, which occurred on April 15, 2025, with Mayor Ken Ritter, Chief J.P. Broussard, CFO Cathryn Greig, COO Terry Bourque, and Human Resource Manager Cristin Boudreaux is best categorized as a ‘come to Jesus meeting.’ We suspect it was at this meeting that attempts were made to rein in the fiscal irresponsibility of the proposals put forth by Broussard. Whether Broussard saw the light or not, the result was yet another three proposals (2025.00, 2025.01, and 2025.02) from Vermilion Analytics, followed by another revision in May of 2025.

By June 2025, Vermilion Analytics was in regular communication with CFO Greig, leading up to the June 26, 2025, council meeting, at which the proposed ordinance would be introduced. The fact that the ordinance was introduced at a special meeting late in the month meant that it would come up for final adoption just a few weeks later, thereby missing an opportunity for close scrutiny from the public and others. Just the week before the council meeting, both Mayor Ritter and Councilman Bolgiano would be away on vacation. That likely contributed to a remark made by Bolgiano to a resident at the meeting about not receiving as much information as they had received.

Desk Jobs Pay More Than Patrol Work?

The initial draft submitted with the introductory ordinance provided yet another shocking piece of information. It further divided individuals of the same rank and years of service into two more distinct sub-classes: those who have an eight-hour workday, Monday through Friday (2,080 hours annually), and those who work rotating shifts of twelve hours (2,184 hours). The “base salary amount” was then used to extrapolate an hourly rate, essentially paying different rates to people who are similarly situated, thereby defeating the purpose of a merit-based pay system. In doing so a person of the same rank and years of service who is assigned to work Monday through Friday, which is considered by many to be a better assignment, is compensated at a higher hourly rate (because they are working less hours) and also has a lower over-time threshold (40 hours in a one-week cycle or 80 hours in two-week cycle).

Matt Romero commented in an open meeting just months ago that an SRO (School Resource Officer) working during school hours in a controlled and air-conditioned environment has an easier job than someone on patrol. Yet, he voted to pay that person more than a patrol officer. It is contrasted by the person assigned to shift work, who is compensated at a lower hourly rate (because they work more hours to achieve the same salary rate) and also has a higher overtime threshold (84 hours). This income disparity is not only an issue in application and bad policy making for a tenure-based system. It is also contrary to Louisiana law.

YPD Officers Are Being Shafted

In addition to not receiving the agreed-upon amounts for years of credible service and previous law enforcement experience, officers were being compensated less than their peers of the same rank and tenure. They were not being adequately compensated for overtime work. Section 207(k) of the Fair Labor Standards Act outlines the maximum number of hours that an employee can work before becoming eligible for overtime compensation. In a fourteen-day pay cycle, such as that adopted by the City of Youngsville Police Department, the number is 86 hours. However, Louisiana law sets a lower threshold.

According to Louisiana Revised Statute 33:2213 the maximum hours of work required for…

“any full-time paid patrolman, patrolman first class, sergeant, lieutenant, or captain, or any other employee of the police department, except those employed in a position, grade or class above that of captain, in any municipality affected by this Subpart, shall be forty hours in any one calendar week.”

Section (H) then provides:

“Any municipality subject to the provisions of this Subpart, to maximize police protection, may establish and implement a fourteen-day shift cycle for all full-time paid patrolmen, patrolmen first class, sergeants, lieutenants, captains, or any other employees of the police department except those in a position, grade, or class above that of captain which may require such officers to work Monday, Tuesday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday of the first week of the cycle, and Wednesday and Thursday of the second week of the cycle. The workday shall consist of twelve hours on the above-specified days. Such officers shall be paid overtime at one and one-half times their usual salary when the number of hours worked during the two-week cycle exceeds eighty hours or shall be credited with compensatory time on a one and one-half basis for all hours in said cycle that exceed eighty hours.”

Sloppy standards could be an even bigger problem.

What does it mean? The City of Youngsville may owe its police officers a significant portion of money in back pay due to the improper administration of the pay plan. The previous pay plan was administered in a way that arbitrarily denied officers higher salaries when they met the requisite criteria to receive years of creditable service. Additionally, officers were denied compensation for work performed above the overtime threshold established by Louisiana law. This is what happens when people ignore the small details. Some councilmen attempted to shift the blame, claiming they had little involvement in the pay plan, despite being involved in its adoption in 2022 and in assigning the responsibility for administering the plan to the Chief of Police.

Some were content with the explanation that the new pay plan adopted at the July 10, 2025, meeting would only deny a few officers an incremental increase over the next few years, while many would benefit from an immediate increase. However, the truth is that a significant number of officers likely should have been receiving compensation at a much higher rate all along. Many more would be earning salaries higher than what they are going to receive under the new plan if the old plan had been properly administered.

Is the new pay plan any better? I’m not sure; we still don’t know precisely what pay plan was adopted by the Council. We have requested those records, but they have not been finalized.

Tenure vs. Merit

In a debate before the adoption of the ordinance, freshman Councilman Nick Niland inadvertently reopened an old conversation. Niland remarked about working in the healthcare industry and his belief that pay increases should be “merit-based.” Dr. Doucet addressed Niland and explained that in the public sector, merit increases are very uncommon. Niland also made a motion to ensure the Youngsville Police Department officers were treated the same as other City employees and would receive a 3% raise, just like their peers outside the police department. Niland’s motion failed when no other Council member chose to second the motion.

Similar words were uttered by Mayor Ken Ritter when he was still on the Council during another debate over pay. Councilman Ritter, at the time, was discussing another salary ordinance in May of 2014, and described the process as being “fundamentally flawed.” Ritter would comment: “What I would propose, like I did the first year I was here, was that we do performance-based reviews.” Sound familiar? At that time, the entire debate over the ordinance angered Mayor Wilson Viator, who stated that he would veto the ordinance if it were passed with the amendments being discussed.

Viator was also criticized at that meeting for hiring Ricky Boudreaux as Park Security and effectively allowing him to campaign for Chief of Police while on the job. At one point, former Councilwoman Dianne McClelland remarked: “I don’t think we need to be bullied into anything, so maybe we’ll just table it.” The ordinance would eventually pass, but only after there was sufficient debate from a Council that didn’t just rubber-stamp everything presented to them. Boy, times sure have changed!

Tenure-based vs. Merit-based

The reason why pay plans in a police agency protected by Civil Service are generally tenure-based is that civil service systems are designed to ensure individuals are treated fairly and are free from political pressures. If an officer isn’t doing the job, they should simply be out of a job. And those who like to blame the civil service for making it challenging to remove police officers need to take a long, hard look in the mirror and recognize that they simply aren’t putting forth the effort to train, coach, discipline, and even terminate officers when necessary.

It is also a challenging task to measure performance based on outcomes in law enforcement. Police agencies don’t produce a product; they render a service. We can review crime statistics as a whole to evaluate whether that service is being adequately provided. Still, it is hard to equate the actions taken by a police department, let alone individuals within a police organization, to those outcomes.

You can’t look at the number of arrests or traffic citations issued either. Quotas are illegal, and encouraging an increase in either could lead to an unlawful profit incentive, which ultimately encourages staff to find violations only to meet an outcome measure and collect more revenue for the city. You can’t base it on efficiency or the amount of time it takes to handle a call, either, because every situation is dynamic. So, in the end, if the officer is doing a fair job, they stick around and earn salary increases with tenure. If he wants to be a leader and possesses those qualities, he can seek a promotion. However, attempting to evaluate merit in such a system invites favoritism, political pressure, and an unfair application of standards, which is precisely what occurred under the previous pay plan.

Some police officers may prefer to work under a merit system. They can find such a system at their local Sheriff’s Office. You may receive a reward for merit, or you may not. You may secure a high-paying job as a political appointee simply because your dad was a major donor as well. Or you may be unable to advance for that exact reason. The bottom line is that the government doesn’t typically award merit; it rewards failure. Not convinced?

A Comparison

We don’t have to speculate what a tenure versus merit system would look like. We have an example in Youngsville. It is something Mayor Ritter discussed in 2014, and it refers to the system currently in place for non-police department city workers. The Mayor sets their pay, subject only to the budget restrictions adopted by and oversight of the Council. Under that merit system, several city employees recently received substantial raises despite clear questions about adequate performance and professional behavior.

Cathryn Greig was hired as the Chief Financial Officer for the city in February of 2023 with a starting salary of $75,000.00. The most recent audit report for the City of Youngsville, issued by the Legislative Auditor in April of this year, revealed ten findings of deficiencies, seven of which originated in 2024. The issues include:

• Inadequate control over bank reconciliations
• Significant audit adjustments
• Inadequate Segregation of Utility Deposits
• Procurement violations
• Non-compliance with Bond Requirements
• Failure to amend the budget
• Failure to timely file audited financial statements

Despite this, the Mayor and City Council budgeted funds to support a salary of $95,483.00. That is a $20,000.00 increase from her starting salary just two years prior.

Terry Bourque serves as the Chief Operations Officer for the City of Youngsville. Bourque has worked for the City for just under a decade and had an initial salary of $56,000.00. Over the years, he was promoted up the ladder to his current position. This year, the Mayor and City Council budgeted funds to support a salary of $98,351.00 for Bourque.

That increase came just months after Bourque was arrested and released on a citation for the crime of simple battery while he was on duty for the City of Youngsville. The incident occurred in February of 2025 when a dispute arose with local businessman Brian Blanco over a permitting issue. While Blanco was exiting the building, he was pursued by Bourque. Blanco then walked back towards Bourque after being enticed, at which point Bourque can be seen shoving Blanco. Bourque later claimed that Blanco struck him. The video is the best evidence. You decide!

The merit system in Youngsville has yielded similar outcomes to those of most government-implemented programs. You can apply sound business principles to government, but ultimately, government is not a business. The government does not produce a product or service that people voluntarily buy. Instead, it operates by force, collecting taxes and providing services regardless of whether people want them, need them, or are satisfied with them.

Therefore, if we are going to be required to pay for government services, a tenure system would be preferable to a merit system. Ultimately, government merit systems are, well, “meritless” and are used to award cronies regardless of the outcomes they produce. Again, you can decide. But what is undisputed is that the officers of the Youngsville Police Department have been treated unfairly for far too long. A bump in pay will only provide temporary relief and satisfaction. We will be having the same debate in just a few more years.

###