Feb 25, 2026 Board of Commerce and Industry

[1. Call to Order – Jerald Jones, Chairman]

[00:00:04]

GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU IN 2026 FOR THE FEBRUARY 25, 2026 MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. AND MISS SIMMONS, WOULD, I'LL LET YOU GET BACK TO YOUR DESK, AND WOULD YOU CALL ROLL FORCE? MAKE SURE WE HAVE A PHONE? GOOD MORNING EVERYONE, STUART MOSS? HERE. DAVID TUBBS? HERE. DAVID AMOS? HERE. JOHN AUSTIN? BARRY MELE? HERE. SCOTT NEHEMIAH? REPRESENTATIVE VINCENT ST.

BLANC FOR DESSOTEL? HERE.

SENATOR FRANKLIN FOYLE? KYLE POLIZOLO? GERALD JONES? PRESENT. RONALD RAMIREZ? HERE. SENATOR BETH MEISEL? REPRESENTATIVE TONY BACALA? MICHAEL TANNER? SECRETARY SUSAN BOURGEOIS? HERE. GEORGE NASSAR? HERE. IRWIN THOMPSON? HAROLD COLLET? RIDGE MCGAZ? HERE. WESLEY BLAKE WILLIS? HERE. LETTY AUDOUIN? ROBBIE MILLER. HERE. RYAN ROBERTS? WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU, MA'AM. TO THE BOARD, I BELIEVE YOU'VE ALL RECEIVED... COPIES OF THE MINUTES FROM OUR DECEMBER 12, 2025 MEETING. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE MINUTES.

MOTION FROM MAYOR TOOPS, SECOND FROM MR. MOSS. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THERE IS NONE.

THE MOTION CARRIES. GOOD MORNING, MRS. DEGBY. GOOD MORNING. PLEASE WALK US THROUGH THE QUALITY JOBS PROGRAM, PLEASE. THERE ARE FOUR

[3. Approval of Minutes from December 12, 2025 meeting]

RNGD LLC, JEFFERSON, PARISH. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION

[4. Quality Jobs Program – Michaela Adegbe]

MOTION FROM MR. NASSAR. SECOND FROM MR. RAMIDES. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE.

THE MOTION CARRIES. THERE ARE FOUR RENEWAL APPLICATIONS.

2021-0008-365-LABS, LLC, EAST BATON ROUGE, PARISH.

2021-0050-IMTT, ORLEANS, PARISH. 2020-0246-J.M. TEST SYSTEMS, LLC, EAST BATON ROUGE, PARISH. 2020-0326, LANDLOCKED INDUSTRIES, LLC, CALCASIEU, PARISH. VERY GOOD. A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE RENEWALS FROM MAYOR TOOPS. SECOND FROM MR. MOSS. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? THERE BEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. ONE FULL TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP TO NEW COMPANY, 2017-03-98, LOTTE CHEMICAL, LOUISIANA, LLC.

NEW COMPANY NAME IS LOTTE CHEMICAL, USA CORP. CALCUS YOU PERISH VERY GOOD. SO DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ONE SPECIAL REQUEST FROM MR. MOSS, SECOND FROM MR. MILLER ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC THERE BEING NONE ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ANY OPPOSITION THERE IS NONE THE MOTION CARRIES. THIS CONCLUDES QUALITY JOBS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MA'AM. GOOD MORNING. I

[5. Restoration Tax Abatement Program – Travis Rosenberg]

GOOD MORNING. TELL HIM WE TRADED UP. TRADE IT UP.

2023-0182, 2400 NAPOLEON AVENUE, LLC, ORLEANS, PARISH.

2024-0290, COSALOT, YVONNE, M., ORLEANS, PARISH. 2025-0533, HUB CITY PLAZA, LLC.

LAFAYETTE, PARISH, 2025-0517, ROLFE PRESERVATION WORKS, JEFFERSON, PARISH, AND 2025-0069, VAGABOND PROPERTIES, LLC, EAST BATON

[00:05:07]

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSITION? HEARING NONE, MOTION PASSES. WE HAVE THREE RENEWALS. OUR RENEWALS.

2016-1122-111 IBERVILLE, LLC, ORLEANS, PARISH. 2019-0058 DLFP, LLC, NATCHITOCHES, PARISH. 2016 1637 SHREVEPORT RIO LLC CADDO PARISH GREAT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THESE RENEWALS, A MOTION FROM MR. MCGEOUGH'S SECOND FROM THIS MAYOR TOOPS. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD HEARING, NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING, NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ANY OPPOSITION HEARING, NONE, ALL MOTION PASSES. THERE'S ONE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP 2021-0451. THE FORMER OWNER WAS ROBERTSON STREET VENTURES LLC. THE NEW OWNER IS 3720 ROBERTSON STREET, LLC IN JEFFERSON PARISH. OKAY, DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THIS TRANSFER MOTION FROM MR. RAMIDI? SECOND, FROM SECRETARY BOURGEOIS? ANY QUESTION OR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? FROM THE BOARD HEARING? NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. THAT CONCLUDES RTA.

GREAT. YOU WANT TO MOVE RIGHT

[6. Enterprise Zone Program – Joyce Metoyer]

2014-1324, FRANCISCAN MISSIONARIES OF OUR LADY HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., EAST BATON ROUGE, PARISH. 2020-0451, HERITAGE MANOR, STRATFORD NURSING AND REHAB CENTER, CADDO, PARISH. 2021-0145 HERITAGE MANOR WEST LLC, CADDO, PARISH, 2021-0043 LOUISIANA FISH FIRE PRODUCTS LIMITED, EAST BATON ROUGE, PARISH, 2022-0516 PERFORMANCE CONTRACTORS INCORPORATED WEST BATON ROUGE, PARISH, 2023-0119 PROVIDENCE CLASSICAL ACADEMY INCORPORATED BOSSIER, PARISH, AND 2023-0095 THE NATIONAL WORLD WAR II MUSEUM INCORPORATED ORLEANS, PARISH.

VERY GOOD. DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THESE ENTERPRISE ZONE APPLICATIONS MOTION FROM MR. MILLER, SECOND, FROM CENTER, MIZZELL. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD, MR. CHAIRMAN I NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM PERFORMANCE CONTRACTORS.

PERFORMANCE CONTRACTORS WILL NOTE THAT RECUSAL FROM MR. MIGUEZ ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD HEARING? NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC, THERE IS NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. WE HAVE FOUR CONTRACT TERMINATIONS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 717D OF THE ENTERPRISE ZONE PROGRAM RULES, A BUSINESS MAY SUBMIT A REQUEST TO TERMINATE THEIR ENTERPRISE ZONE CONTRACT. IF, ONE, THE CONTRACT HAS BEEN IN EFFECT FOR AT LEAST 30 MONTHS, TWO, THE BUSINESS HAS MET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROGRAM, WHICH INCLUDES TIMELY FILING OF ALL PROGRAM FORMS, DOCUMENTS, AND APPROPRIATE FEES. THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, AND THE CONTRACT HOLDERS LISTED BELOW HAVE SUBMITTED A REQUEST TO TERMINATE THEIR ENTERPRISE ZONE CONTRACT. THE CONTRACTEE UNDERSTANDS BOARD DECISION IS FINAL AND CONTRACTS CANNOT BE REINSTATED OR REACTIVATED. ALL RIGHT. SHOULD I READ THEM OUT? LET'S GO AHEAD. OKAY.

2016-0735, ASSOCIATED MORNING, LLC, ST. JAMES PARISH. THE EXISTING CONTRACT

[00:10:07]

MARY PARISH. THE EXISTING CONTRACT IS 2-13-2022 TO 2-12-2027. THE REQUESTED TERM DATE IS TO 12, 2025.

2012-0782, OUR LADY OF LAKE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, EAST BATON ROUGE, PARISH. THE EXISTING CONTRACT IS 4-20 OF 2012 TO 4-19 OF 2017. THE REQUESTED TERM DATE IS 10-19 OF 2014. AND 2021-0172, SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC, IBERVILLE, PARISH. THE EXISTING CONTRACT IS 7-1-2021 TO 6-30-2026. AND THE REQUESTED TERM DATE IS 1-1-2024. OKAY.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE CONTRACT TERMINATIONS? ONE FROM SENATOR MIZELL, SECOND FROM MR. NASSAR. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? THERE ARE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. THAT CONCLUDES EASY. THANK YOU, MA'AM. HELLO, MR. ROUSSET.

GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING.

[7. Industrial Tax Exemption – Hud Usie]

NEXT, WE HAVE FOUR NEW APPLICATIONS FOLLOWING THE 2024 EMERGENCY RULES 2023-0041.

ASCENTEC, INC. CADDO, PARISH.

2025-0002 BOXY LLC DBA U.S.

FRAME FACTORY, ST. MARTIN PARISH. 2024-0201 DOW HYDROCARBONS AND RESOURCES LLC, ST. CHARLES, PARISH. AND 2024-0167 LOUISIANA PLASTIC INDUSTRIES, INC. OUACHITA, PARISH. VERY GOOD. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE...

2024 EMERGENCY RULE APPLICATION FROM MR. NASSAR. SECOND FROM MR. ST. BLANC. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? THERE ARE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT, WE HAVE 21 PROJECT APPLICATIONS FOLLOWING THE 2025 RULES. 2025-0289-1001 HIGHWAY 182, LLC, LAFAYETTE, PARISH. 2025-0636 ACADIANA MANUFACTURING LLC, IBERIA, PARISH. 2025-0570 ASCENTEC, INC. CATTLE, PARISH. 2025-0248 CNC MARINE AND REPAIR LLC PLAQUEMINES, PARISH. 2025-0564 EXXONMOBIL CORPORATION WEST BATON ROUGE, PARISH. 2025-0667 EXXONMOBIL CORPORATION EAST BATON ROUGE, PARISH. 2025-0541 GILLIS NEW ENERGY SOLUTIONS LLC, BEAUREGARD, PARISH.

2025-0559 LEXICON, INC. DBA STEEL FABRICATORS OF MONROE, OUACHITA, PARISH. 2025-0519 LINDY, INC. ASCENSION PARISH.

2025-0593 MCELHENNEY COMPANY, IBERIA, PARISH. 2025-0600 MARTIN SALT, INC. IBERIA, PARISH. 2025-0637 MARTIN SALT, INC. IBERIA, PARISH.

2025-0622 PACKAGING CORPORATION OF AMERICA, BEAUREGARD, PARISH. 2025-0623 PACKAGING CORPORATION OF AMERICA, BEAUREGARD, PARISH.

2025-0624 PACKAGING CORPORATION OF AMERICA, BEAUREGARD, PARISH. 2025-0482 PARISH BREWING COMPANY, LLC, LAFAYETTE, PARISH. 2025-0582 PIPE AND STEEL INDUSTRIAL FABRICATORS, INC. LIVINGSTON, PARISH. 2025-0614 PRECISION FAB AND MACHINE LLC ASCENSION, PARISH. 2025-0610 SKYFALL BIOLOGICALS, LLC, ASCENSION, PARISH. 2025-0580 STELLAR INC., LAFAYETTE,

[00:15:01]

BERNARD PARISH. VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE 2025 RULES? PROJECT APPLICATION? I HAVE A MOTION, MR. MILLER. SECOND, MR. WHEELIS. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? EXXONMOBIL AND STULLER. ALL RIGHT. NOTE THOSE RECUSALS BY MR. POLOZOLA ON EXXONMOBIL AND STULLER. IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? YES, SIR. OKAY. GOT IT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? THERE ARE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT, WE HAVE SIX TIMELY PRE-EXECUTIVE ORDER RENEWAL APPLICATIONS.

2013-04.29 CAMERON LNG LLC CAMERON, PARISH. 2013-0429-PT.

CAMERON LNG LLC CALCASIEU PARISH. 2016-15-22 ENERGY LOUISIANA LLC NELSON CALCASIEU, PARISH.

2011-06-59-I-PT SABINE PASS LNG LP CAMERON, PARISH.

2011-06-59-I SABINE PASS LIQUEFACTION LLC, CAMERON, PARISH. 2015-09-10 SHINTEC LOUISIANA LLC IBERVILLE, PARISH. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE PRE-EO RENEWAL APPLICATIONS? A MOTION FROM MR. MOSS, SECOND FROM MR. RAMIDES. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? MY ONLY COMMENT IS, AGAIN, MR. MOSS IS JUST POINTING OUT SOUTHWEST LOUISIANA IS A MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR, BUT...

AS WE ALL KNOW NOW, NORTHWEST LOUISIANA HAS ENTERED THE FRAY, SO BE CAREFUL AT ANY RATE. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER NON-RELATED COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR THE BOARD? I LOVE WHEN SECTIONS OF STATE START COMPETING THIS, I LIKE THIS, THIS MIGHT BE GOOD, ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE FROM THE PUBLIC, THERE ARE NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ANY OPPOSITION, THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT, THERE IS ONE 2017 RULE RENEWAL APPLICATION, 2017-0493, AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS, INC. AND ASCENSION PARISH. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS SINGLE 2017 RULE RENEWAL? A MOTION FROM MR. NASSAR, SECOND FROM SECRETARY BOURGEOIS. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? THERE IS NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT, WE HAVE SIX RENEWALS FOLLOWING THE 2018 RULES. 2019-0019, ASH INDUSTRIES, INC., LAFAYETTE, PARISH. 2018-0501, ALLIANCE COMPRESSORS, LLC, NATCHITOCHES, PARISH.

2019-0355-A, CF INDUSTRIES, NITROGEN, LLC, ASCENSION, PARISH. 2019-0168, FABRICATED STEEL PRODUCTS, EAST BATON ROUGE, PARISH. 2018-0502, CRF RACK SAND, BOSSIER, PARISH.

AND 2017-0205, WESTLAKE VINYLS COMPANY, LP, ASCENSION, PARISH. GREAT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE RENEWALS UNDER THE 2018 RULES? A MOTION FROM MR. MEALY, SECOND FROM MR. ST. BLANC. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. WE HAVE ONE CHANGE IN LOCATION ONLY.

LOUISIANA LNG INFRASTRUCTURE LLC, CONTRACT 2016-1566. IN CALCASIEU, PARISH, PREVIOUS LOCATION, GLOBAL DRIVE, SULPHUR, LOUISIANA, 70665. NEW LOCATION, 3000, GLOBAL DRIVE, SULPHUR, LOUISIANA, 70665 IN CALCASIEU, PARISH. ALL RIGHT.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS CHANGE? A MOTION FROM MR. MOSS. SECOND FROM MR. MILLER. ANY QUESTIONS

[00:20:02]

JAMES HOLDINGS, LLC, CONTRACT 2014-1117-PT. IN ST. JAMES PARISH IS TRANSFERRING TO COKE METHANOL ST. JAMES, LLC.

ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS CHANGE OF CONTRACT FROM MR. NASSAR.

SECOND FROM MAYOR TOOPS. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? THERE IS NONE.

ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT, WE HAVE ONE CANCELLATION OF CONTRACT.

DELTA TREATMENT SYSTEMS, LLC, CONTRACT 2022-0424 IN LIVINGSTON, PARISH. REASON FOR CANCELLATION, LED IS NOTIFYING THE BOARD OF A BREACH OF CONTRACT RESULTING FROM THE COMPANY'S FAILURE TO IMMEDIATELY INFORM THE DEPARTMENT OF A CHANGE IN THE PROJECT'S PLANNED LOCATION.

OKAY, BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO TAKE SOME HERE FROM THE COMPANY AND FROM THE DEPARTMENT.

ON THIS ONE, BECAUSE IT'S JUST AN UNUSUAL SITUATION, BECAUSE THE LED, THE DEPARTMENT IS ACTUALLY ASKING FOR A CANCELLATION OF CONTRACT DUE TO THE COMPANY'S HANDLING OF THE CONTRACT. WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE FROM DELTA TREATMENT SYSTEMS. IF YOU'LL COME FORWARD. IF YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR POSITION WITH THE COMPANY. HI, MY NAME IS ANGEL MUSTON. I AM THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AT DELTA TREATMENT SYSTEMS. I'M SORRY, YOUR LAST NAME? MUSTON. THANK YOU. YEAH, THANK YOU. AND I'M GOING TO TRY TO DO THIS TO SAVE US TIME MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, TO KIND OF SET THE TABLE ON WHAT AT LEAST I UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION TO BE. AND IF... IF EITHER THE DEPARTMENT OR DELTA SYSTEMS DISAGREES WITH MY RECITATION OF THE FACTS, FEEL FREE TO DO SO. YOU WON'T HURT MY FEELINGS AT ALL. I'VE BEEN WRONG MORE TIMES THAN I CARE TO COUNT. ESSENTIALLY, WHAT WE HAVE HERE, AS I APPRECIATE IT, IS THAT. THE COMPANY BACK IN 2023 FILED AN ITEP APPLICATION LISTING AS THE LOCATION OF THE FACILITY AS AN ADDRESS IN WALKER, LOUISIANA. THE CONTRACTS WERE SIGNED UNDER ITEP. APPLICATIONS WERE FILED WITH THE STATE.

EVERYTHING WAS DONE AND APPROVED ULTIMATELY BY THIS BOARD. HOWEVER, IN DECEMBER OF 2024, THE BUILDING WAS COMPLETED AT A DIFFERENT LOCATION, A DIFFERENT ADDRESS. AND I WANT TO GET INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT, JUST IN A MOMENT. STILL IN WALKER, LOUISIANA, BUT A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ADDRESS. ALMOST A YEAR LATER, ABOUT 10 MONTHS AFTER COMPLETION OF THE BUILDING, THE SUMMIT, THE CONSULTANT FOR THE COMPANY NOTIFIED, LED OF THIS CHANGE IN ADDRESS. THE REASON THAT IS SIGNIFICANT UNDER THE RULES, THE RULES REQUIRE THAT IF THERE IS GOING TO BE A CHANGE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER THESE APPLICATIONS, THAT THAT NOTICE HAPPEN IMMEDIATELY.

SO AS I SEE IT, AT LEAST, AND THIS IS JUST JONES TALKING, BUT AS I SEE IT, WHAT THIS IS COMING DOWN TO IS A DEFINITION OF WHAT IS IMMEDIATE.

IN THIS CASE, THE NOTIFICATION CAME FROM THE... THE COMPANY TO LED 10 MONTHS AFTER COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, MUCH LESS AFTER INITIATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION, THAT IT WAS BEING BUILT AT A DIFFERENT ADDRESS. AND WE CAN TALK MORE ABOUT THAT.

NOW, THAT'S HOW I, THOSE ARE THE FACTS AS I UNDERSTAND THEM TO BE. DO YOU ALL TAKE ISSUE WITH THAT? IF SO, PLEASE CORRECT ME WHERE I'M WRONG.

STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. SURE. ROBERT WIGGY WITH SUMMIT CREDITS. SO YOU'RE CORRECT IN THE MAJORITY OF THOSE FACTS. WE DID, HOWEVER, FILE FOR A CHANGE IN LOCATION IN JULY OF 2025, AND THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE WERE MADE AWARE THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE ADDRESS, AS WHEN YOU SUBMIT A PROJECT INTO FASTLANE, THE SYSTEM ASKS FOR YOUR PROJECT ADDRESS THAT ONE TIME. EVERY SINGLE FORM

[00:25:05]

THE COMPANY APPLIED SIMULTANEOUSLY FOR QUALITY JOBS AND THE ITEP PROGRAM BACK IN 2023. AND AT THAT POINT, THEY WERE ANTICIPATING JOB GROWTH AT THEIR PRIOR LOCATION, THE LOCATION THAT'S LISTED IN FASTLANE. AND SO FOR QUALITY JOBS, THAT ADDRESS WAS CORRECT.

HOWEVER, FOR ITEP, THAT ADDRESS NEEDED TO BE UPDATED.

BUT THERE WAS NO TRIGGER POINT TO UPDATE THAT ADDRESS. AND SO IT WAS A CLERICAL ERROR ON OUR SIDE. WE SHOULD HAVE ENTERED THE PROJECTS AS SEPARATE PROJECTS, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS THE SAME COMPANY, THE SAME JOBS. WE SHOULD HAVE DIVIDED THOSE PROJECTS FROM THE BEGINNING, AND WE DID NOT DO THAT.

HOWEVER, AS SOON AS WE WERE MADE AWARE THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE ADDRESS, WE ATTEMPTED TO RECTIFY THAT THROUGH FASLANE BY SUBMITTING THE CHANGE IN LOCATION. AND WE HAVE MET WITH LED TO DISCUSS THIS PROCESS IN A PATH FORWARD. WE HAVE FULL SUPPORT FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES. WE'VE MET WITH THE ASSESSOR. MET WITH ALL THE TAXING BODIES TO REVIEW THAT THIS PROJECT AT THE LOCATION OF WITH THE CORRECTED ADDRESS IS WHAT THE COMPANY INTENDED FROM DAY ONE. THIS WAS SIMPLY A CLERICAL OVERSIGHT. HELP ME UNDERSTAND. WHEN WE SAY DIFFERENT ADDRESSES, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT STREET AND THE SAME FACILITY, OR IS IT THE SAME FOOTPRINT? IT'S ABOUT A MILE AND A HALF AWAY, SO IT IS A SEPARATE. OKAY, SO IT'S A COMPLETELY SEPARATE LOCATION. YES, SIR. OKAY. WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH HERE IS THAT THE COMPANY UNDERSTOOD IT WAS BUILDING AT A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT LOCATION. BUT YET, WHEN THE APPLICATION WAS FILLED OUT, HOWEVER, WHATEVER THE PROBLEM IS, WE CAN BLAME IT ON SOFTWARE, WE CAN BLAME IT ON EVERYTHING ELSE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE COMPANY KNEW THAT THE LOCATION WHERE IT WAS GOING TO BUILD THE PROJECT WAS DIFFERENT FROM THE ADDRESS IN THE... PAPERWORK THAT WAS WITH LED. AND THIS IS WHAT I'M WRESTLING WITH. BECAUSE IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT THE RULES SAY IS. WHEN THERE'S GOING TO BE A CHANGE, YOU GOT TO NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. AND THIS NOTIFICATION DOESN'T FALL ON FASTLANE. IT DOESN'T FALL ON LED. IT FALLS ON THE COMPANY. AND THE REASON THIS WORD IMMEDIATELY IS IMPORTANT TO ME IS BECAUSE, IN SOME CONTEXT, IMMEDIATELY IN LOUISIANA LAW IS INTERPRETED AS 24 HOURS. I KNOW IT'S NOT SEVEN MONTHS, FIVE MONTHS, 10 MONTHS. I KNOW IT'S NOT THAT, AT LEAST IN MY MIND. SO WHAT I'M, AND THE REASON I'M MAKING A KIND OF A BIG DEAL ABOUT THIS IS BECAUSE IF THE WORD IMMEDIATELY IS IN THE RULES AND IT'S GOING TO MEAN ANYTHING, AND THIS BOARD INTERPRETS THAT, THAT A SEVEN TO 10 MONTH YOU NOTIFICATION SATISFIES IMMEDIATELY, THEN WHAT DOES IMMEDIATELY REALLY MEAN? THAT'S WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH. AND I REALIZE IT WAS, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS EVER ANY INTENT TO PLAY GAMES. I DON'T THINK IT WAS, I BELIEVE IT WAS A MISTAKE.

SEMICOLON, HOWEVER, COMMA, IT'S A MISTAKE, WITH CONSEQUENCES, PERHAPS.

AND SO I'M, THAT'S WHERE I AM RIGHT NOW.

THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT I WANT THE BOARD TO, EXCUSE ME, SERIOUSLY THINK ABOUT. BECAUSE IN MY MIND, AND MAYBE IT'S JUST MR. POLIZZO, THE LAWYERS IN US, IT JUST, THE WORDS, WORDS MEAN SOMETHING. AND IF THE RULES REQUIRE IMMEDIATE, WHAT IS THAT GOING TO MEAN? AND DOES A CLERICAL ERROR, DOES A MISTAKE? DOES THAT SOMEHOW RELIEVE YOU OF THE OBLIGATION TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY? AND THAT'S WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH. YES, SIR. SO LET ME ADD A LITTLE COLOR TO THAT IN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR NOT RECOGNIZING THE ADDRESS WHEN THE APPLICATION WAS FILED.

FROM THE COMPANY'S PERSPECTIVE, THESE APPLICATIONS ARE FILED UP FRONT. THE APPLICATION WAS FILED BEFORE THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION EVEN STARTED. AND SO, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE, THEY'RE REVIEWING AN APPLICATION THAT HAS THEIR CURRENT ADDRESS AT THE TIME ON IT. AND THEY MAY NOT HAVE

[00:30:01]

AND WE FELT THAT WE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED LED AS SOON AS WE WERE MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE OR THE PROBLEM.

AND I'M NOT TRYING TO ARGUE. I'M REALLY NOT. IT'S JUST SECRETARY BOURGEOIS MAY BE ABOUT TO KICK ME UNDER THE TABLE. I DON'T KNOW.

BUT THESE PROGRAMS ARE INCREDIBLE INCENTIVES. WE UNDERSTAND THAT. AND THEY ARE INTENDED TO ENCOURAGE COMPANIES TO DO BUSINESS IN LOUISIANA.

HOWEVER, THEY ALSO REQUIRE THE COMPANIES TO DOT THEIR I'S AND CROSS THEIR T'S. BECAUSE THEY ARE SO VALUABLE AND BECAUSE THEY DEAL WITH TAXPAYER MONEY THAT IS BEING ABATED. AND THE RULES, NOW WE CAN ARGUE ABOUT WHETHER THE RULES OUGHT TO READ THE WAY THEY DO.

THAT'S A SEPARATE ARGUMENT. BUT THE RULES HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED.

THEY'VE BEEN PASSED BY THIS BOARD. THEY'VE BEEN PASSED BY THE LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. AND THEY ARE THE RULES. AND IF WE ESSENTIALLY IGNORE THE RULES? BECAUSE SOMEONE HAS TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THE PROGRAM, AND I DON'T MEAN THAT IN A PEJORATIVE WAY, BUT HAS DONE. EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO, IS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE PROGRAMS, BUT WE SAY, BUT IT WAS REALLY A NO HARM, NO FOUL. AND YOU SEE WHERE WE START GETTING, WHAT IF THE NEXT ONE COMES IN, AND THERE IS... AN INTENT TO DECEIVE. NOW THIS BOARD, IN ORDER TO DRAW A DIFFERENT CONCLUSION, HAS TO THREAD A REAL FINE NEEDLE.

TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT BEING ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS, AND IGNORING IMMEDIATELY IN ONE CASE, AND NOT IGNORING IT IN ANOTHER CASE. THAT'S THE PLACE THAT WE ARE IN AS A BOARD. AND WE RECOGNIZE YOUR CONTRIBUTION TO THE STATE, YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE STATE, AND FOR THAT WE'RE APPRECIATIVE.

IT'S JUST I'M STRUGGLING. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR ANYBODY ELSE IN THE BOARD, BUT JONES IS STRUGGLING WITH THE IMPLICATIONS OF NOT RENDERING SOME SORT OF DISCIPLINE ON THIS CONTRACT. THAT'S WHERE I AM. SO IF I COULD SHARE ONE LAST POINT. THE RULES DO. DO STATE THAT THE GOALS OF THE PROGRAM ARE TO FACILITATE OR ENCOURAGE CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND JOB GROWTH. AND IT SAYS IN SECTION 501, PARAGRAPH 2, THAT THESE RULES ARE TO BE INTERPRETED IN A MANNER AS TO PROMOTE THESE GOALS. AND SO I THINK YOU DO HAVE THE DISCRETION TO INTERPRET THE RULES, TO PROMOTE THE GOALS OF THE PROGRAM. AND THAT'S ALL THAT I'M ASKING YOU TO DO IS TO SUPPORT THIS COMPANY WHO MADE AN INVESTMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, INTO LOUISIANA, INTO LIVINGSTON PARISH. IT'S NOT A HUGE PROJECT. YOU KNOW, THIS WAS A SIMPLE OVERSIGHT.

AND THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING, IS THAT YOU NOT PENALIZE THEM FOR THIS OVERSIGHT. I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM MS. PORTER, THE COUNSEL FOR LED. SHE HAD HER HAND UP A MOMENT AGO. AND IF WE COULD MAKE SOME ROOM FOR HER AT THE TABLE, PLEASE. THANK YOU. HI, I'M ROBIN PORTER, EXECUTIVE COUNSEL FOR LED. AND IN MY OPINION, THERE IS A PROVISION IN THIS SECTION OF THE RULE THAT DOES GIVE DISCRETION FOR YOU ALL. WE PROVIDED A RECOMMENDATION FOR CANCELLATION. HOWEVER, IF YOU FIND THAT THAT NOTIFICATION WAS NOT IMMEDIATE, I THINK THAT... WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT THAT MISTAKE WAS MATERIAL BECAUSE ITEP IS SITE-SPECIFIC, BUT THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE RULE THAT GIVES YOU THE DISCRETION. WE RECOMMENDED CANCELLATION. HOWEVER, YOU GUYS NEED YOUR AUTHORITY, AND IT

[00:35:02]

WAS THE FACT THAT THE BUILDING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED DOWN THE STREET WAS LISTED ON THE ROLLS AND WAS ABOUT TO BE TAXED. SO THAT DEEMS THE PROPERTY INELIGIBLE. SO IN ORDER FOR US TO EVEN BE HERE TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION. IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAD TO GO TO THE LOCALS AND GET CONSENT FROM THEM IN WRITING TO INDICATE THAT IT WOULD BE TO PAY FOR IT TO BE REMOVED FROM THE ROLES SHOULD THE BOARD DECIDE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE THE EXEMPTION. SO, IN MY OPINION, I THINK THAT BASED ON WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY REVIEWING IN THIS PARTICULAR RULE, IT DOES GIVE THE DISCRETION.

HAVE TAXES ALREADY BEEN PAID? NO, THEY HAVE NOT. OKAY, SO THERE'S NO REFUND ISSUE THAT WE HAVE. NO, NO, BUT THE ASSESSORS ARE WAITING.

BUT THEY HAVE BEEN ASSESSED? IT'S ON THE ROLLS. THEY ARE ON THE ROLLS? YES, IT IS. SO THIS IS WHY WE DIDN'T BRING IT IN DECEMBER, BECAUSE SUMMIT HAD TO GO AND ASK FOR PERMISSION AND FOR IT TO BE IN WRITING. THAT THEY WOULD BE OKAY WITH REMOVING THE ASSET FROM THE ROLLS SHOULD THE EXEMPTION BE PROVIDED. AND LET ME ASK YOU THIS, REPORTER. IT WERE THE DECISION OF THE BOARD THAT THEY FEEL LIKE CANCELLATION IS TOO DRASTIC. WHAT IS SOMETHING SHORT OF CANCELLATION THAT THE BOARD COULD DO? A RESTRICTION COULD BE POSSIBLY GRANTING THE EXEMPTION, NOT FIVE AND FIVE, FIVE AND FOUR. PENALIZE A YEAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YES, SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. IT COULD BE A PENALTY SHORT OF CANCELLATION. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. CAN WE HEAR WHAT SOMEONE ELSE ON THE... I'M SORRY, JUST A SECOND. MR. MEALY, GO RIGHT AHEAD. CAN WE READ SOME OR HEAR SOME OF THE WORDS OF THIS DISCRETION? YOU SAID THAT THERE ARE WORDS. OH, YES.

IT'S IN THE, HOLD ON. OKAY, I'M ON SECTION 533. AND THE DEPARTMENT IS TO BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF ANY CHANGE WITH EFFECTS THE TAX EXEMPTION CONTRACT. AND I'M GOING TO GO TO THE LAST SENTENCE HERE. WE TALKED ABOUT IMMEDIATELY, WHICH IS, THAT'S AN ISSUE. WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE NEED TO BE NOTIFIED OF A MATERIAL CHANGE, BUT FAILURE TO REPORT ANY MATERIAL CHANGES CONSTITUTES A BREACH OF CONTRACT AND, WITH THE APPROVAL BY THE BOARD, SHALL RESULT IN RESTRICTION OR TERMINATION.

WE RECOMMENDED CANCELLATION.

HOWEVER, WE NEED THE AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD. YOU'RE NOT PIGEONHOLED INTO TERMINATION.

YOU CAN ALSO HAVE A RESTRICTION. SO THAT'S THE DISCRETION, IN MY OPINION.

IT'S NOT JUST ABSOLUTELY TERMINATING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. PORTER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. RAMIREZ? I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

OKAY. IF THEY COULD COME BACK UP. YEAH. SO WHEN THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED, THE COMPANY OWNED BOTH TRACTS OF LAND. IS THIS CORRECT? SO TECHNICALLY, THERE'S A REAL ESTATE ENTITY THAT OWNS THEIR PRIOR LOCATION AND THE NEW LOCATION. OKAY. SO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS COULD HAPPEN, BUT WOULD YOU SAY THAT THEY LISTED THE MAILING ADDRESS IN THE LOCATION WHERE THEY WERE REQUIRED TO LIST THE PROJECT ADDRESS? I WISH, BUT NO, THAT'S NOT THE CASE. IT'S SIMPLY WHEN YOU SUBMIT A PROJECT INTO FASTLANE, IT ASKS YOU FOR YOUR PROJECT DETAILS, WHICH THE ADDRESS IS ONE OF THOSE DETAILS. AND THAT'S WHAT WE SUBMITTED BASED ON THEIR PRIOR ADDRESS. AS FOR QUALITY JOBS PURPOSES, THEY HAD ANTICIPATED JOB GROWTH, AND WE MOVED FORWARD WITH A QUALITY JOBS CONTRACT AT THEIR PRIOR LOCATION, WITH THE INTENT OF TRANSFERRING THAT CONTRACT OVER TO THE NEW LOCATION ONCE IT WAS BUILT. JUST NOTHING TRIGGERED THE ITEP CHANGE. WE SHOULD HAVE TRIGGERED THAT WHEN WE FILED THE APPLICATION AND WE MISSED IT. OKAY. SO ANY SUBSEQUENT DOCUMENTATION THAT YOU PROVIDED, DID IT HAVE THE CORRECT ADDRESS ON IT? ANY SUBSEQUENT? LIKE, IF

[00:40:03]

FOR ANYTHING FURTHER, TO PROVIDE OUR ADDRESS ON, SO ALL OF THE FORMS THAT WE SUBMIT INTO FAST LANE. THE ADDRESS IS PRE-POPULATED BASED ON THE ADDRESS THAT WAS INITIALLY PUT INTO THE SYSTEM WHEN WE STARTED THE PROJECT. SO WE DON'T FILL OUT AND WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CHANGE THAT ADDRESS IN THE SYSTEM. SO WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO NOTIFY LED THAT HEY, THERE'S AN ADDRESS ISSUE.

OKAY, ALL RIGHT, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

MR. ALMAS. MRS. PORTER, CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT THE OTHER MATERIAL... PARAMETERS OF THE PROJECT DID NOT CHANGE.

WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE ADDRESS AND IT DOES SOUND. CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT THIS IS THE SAME LOCAL JURISDICTION? IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S THE CASE.

YEAH, NOTHING ELSE CHANGED, IT WAS THE ADDRESS, BUT IT'S AGAIN. I TAP IS SITE-SPECIFIC. AND I BELIEVE ALSO THAT THE PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT WAS DONE AS WELL. CORRECT THAT SAME THING.

WE DO NOT COMPLETE THE ADDRESS ON ANY OF THOSE FORMS. SPEAKING, OH, SORRY, YES, YES. THE PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT, THE AFFIDAVIT, FINAL COST, THE APPLICATION, THOSE WERE THE FORMS THAT WERE SUBMITTED THROUGH FAST LANE.

BUT AGAIN, WE DO NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE THE ADDRESS. AND IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT CAME TO THE TOP OF OUR MIND, THAT WAS OUR FAULT THAT THAT ADDRESS WAS NOT UPDATED IN THE SYSTEM. AND AND THAT I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THANK YOU FOR SAYING THAT. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS. IT'S A FAST LANE ISSUE. BECAUSE IT'S NOT A FAST LANE ISSUE. THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE THE APPLICANT HAS AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE CLEAR TO LED, THEY KNOW THEIR PROJECT, THEY KNOW WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD IT. IT'S THEIR OBLIGATION TO SAY, OKAY, THE FAST LANE IS NOT LETTING US CHANGE THIS, BUT WE'RE BUILDING IT IN A DIFFERENT PLACE. BECAUSE IF YOU WANT TO GO, IF LED EXERCISES A DESCRIPTION TO DO AN INSPECTION OF THE PROJECT UNDER CONSTRUCTION, WHERE WOULD THEY GO? THEY GO TO THE ADDRESS IN THE SYSTEM.

IF IT'S THE WRONG ADDRESS, IF YOU DON'T GET THE ADDRESS STRAIGHT, WHAT HAPPENS WITH TAX ASSESSMENT? THIS STUFF HAS CONSEQUENCES. THERE'S REASONS FOR THE RULE. AND SOMETIMES THEY HAVE UNSEEMLY CONSEQUENCES, BUT THERE'S REASONS FOR THE WAY THE RULES ARE WRITTEN, THE WAY THEY ARE. SO I JUST WANTED TO... I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS, WELL, WE NEED TO FIX THE SOFTWARE. NO, WE NEED THE APPLICANTS TO TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY LED. WE'RE BUILDING THIS IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION THAN WHAT THE ADDRESS SAYS.

AND I'M NOT BEING CRITICAL OF YOU GUYS. I'M REALLY NOT BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM. BUT I'M ALSO TRYING TO MAKE A STATEMENT TO WHOEVER'S LISTENING AND ALL THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS THAT THIS STUFF MATTERS AND THE PAPERWORK MATTERS. AND SO WE CAN'T TAKE IT TOO LIGHTLY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM MR. AMOS? I THINK THE INTENT IS IMPORTANT HERE. THE PRECEDENT THAT YOU BROUGHT UP IS IMPORTANT HERE.

AND SO WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE MECHANICS OF WHAT WE'RE DOING, THEY NOW HAVE ANOTHER PROPERTY ON THE ROLLS. SO WHAT ARE OUR REAL OPTIONS, MECHANICALLY, IN TERMS OF CANCELLATION OF AN EXISTING PROJECT? A NEW PROJECT AT A NEW SITE, LIKE, HOW DOES ALL THAT WORK? YOUR QUESTION? WE WOULD AMEND THE EXHIBIT A. THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, AND WE HAVE TO CONTACT THE ASSESSORS AS WELL.

BUT WE COULDN'T DO ANY OF THAT WITHOUT HAVING THE AUTHORITY OF THE ASSESSOR. AND THE LOCALS INDICATING THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING AND OKAY WITH REMOVING THAT PROPERTY FROM THE ROLES. SHOULD AN EXEMPTION, YOU GUYS GRANT THE EXEMPTION? SO WE COULDN'T, THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T COME, OR THEY DIDN'T COME IN DECEMBER, BECAUSE IT WAS INELIGIBLE. SO I HAVE THAT APPROVAL. IT'S BEEN SIGNED BY THE ASSESSOR, BY ALL THE TAXING BODIES, TO REMOVE THE PROPERTY FROM THE TAX ROLLS.

TO ALLOW THE BOARD OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY TO UPDATE THE ADDRESS ON THE EXISTING EXEMPTION CONTRACT.

OKAY. AND THIS IS A MECHANICS ISSUE OR QUESTION. ARE WE IN THE INITIAL FIVE-YEAR TERM OR THE RENEWAL TERM ON THIS CONTRACT? BRAND NEW.

BRAND NEW CONTRACT. YEAH, BRAND NEW CONTRACT. OKAY. OKAY. SO IF, AND THE BOARD HAS ALREADY APPROVED THE APPLICATION, AND WE'VE ALREADY SIGNED THE CONTRACT. YES. SO IF THERE WERE TO BE SOME SORT OF PUNITIVE MEASURE, IF WE WERE TO REDUCE THE INITIAL TERM, IT WOULD BE,

[00:45:01]

THAT'S NOT PROBLEMATIC IN ANY WAY. I'M ASKING, MS. PORTER, IF WE CAN REDUCE, IF WE WANT TO REDUCE IT FROM FIVE YEARS TO FIVE YEARS.

TO FOUR YEARS, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. IT WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM. THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. OKAY. YES, SECRETARY BIJWA. YEAH, MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU DID A REALLY FINE JOB SPEAKING ON LED'S BEHALF, LAYING ALL THIS OUT, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE IT'S IMPORTANT FOR EVERYONE TO HEAR WHAT I CONTINUE TO REAFFIRM FROM THIS CHAIR.

IN THAT, THE LEGAL TEAM, THE INCENTIVES ADMINISTRATORS HAVE WORKED A GOOD WHILE WITH THE COMPANY.

TO SEE WHAT WE DID FEEL LIKE OUR PARAMETERS TO SOLVE FOR WERE. WE DID NOT COME AT THIS FROM A PUNITIVE PERSPECTIVE. I THINK YOU HAVE FOUND FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS, WE DON'T DO THAT TYPICALLY.

BUT WHERE ROBIN LANDED AS EXECUTIVE COUNSEL WAS THAT SHE FELT THE RESPONSIBLE THING FOR THE DEPARTMENT.

WITHIN THE RULES, WITHIN ALL THE LAW THAT WE COULD LAND ON, WAS TO... MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT FOLLOWED THE RULES FROM THE DEPARTMENT AND LEAVE THE DISCRETION TO THIS BODY. MR. MAYLING? SPEAKING TO INTENT, YOU HAD SAID THAT YOU CONTACTED THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE AND GOT THE APPROVAL. WAS THAT AROUND THE SAME TIME WHEN YOU ALSO REFERRED TO ON THE FAS LANE, THERE WAS NO ROOM TO CHANGE IT, THE ADDRESS, CORRECT? SO NO, IT WAS A DIFFERENT TIME. SO ONCE THE FORMS WERE SUBMITTED IN FASTLANE, WE THEN HAD A MEETING WITH LED, AND THEY INFORMED US IN DECEMBER THAT WE NEEDED TO WORK WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE TO MAKE SURE THE PROPERTY WAS NOT ON THE TAX ROLLS AND GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. AND SO AT THAT POINT, WE DID, AND THAT'S WHEN WE HAD THE DISCUSSION WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE.

AND THEN GOT THE CHANGE.

CORRECT. AND THEN, BY KNOWING THAT ON THE FASTLANE APPLICATION, THERE WAS NO ROOM TO CHANGE IT. CORRECT. AND LOOK, YEAH. SO THERE WAS JUST NO, REALLY, THERE WAS JUST NO PICKING UP THE PHONE AND CALLING AND SAYING, HEY, THERE'S NO ROOM TO CHANGE IT.

DO WE NEED TO? BUT YOU HAD ALREADY DONE THE WORK WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE.

YES. AND I WANT TO CLARIFY, I'M NOT STATING THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH FASTLANE OR THE SOFTWARE. IT'S JUST THE PROCEDURE THAT YOU GO THROUGH.

WHEN YOU SUBMIT THE FORMS, IT DOES NOT ASK YOU FOR YOUR ADDRESS AGAIN. AND SO THAT DIDN'T TRIGGER, HEY, THERE'S AN ERROR OR AN ISSUE.

LIKE, WE DIDN'T REVIEW THE INFORMATION THAT'S PRE-POPULATED IN THE FORMS. AND THAT'S ALL I WAS SAYING.

IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW THAT INFORMATION. IT JUST, THERE WAS NO TRIGGER. I CAN SAY WE'VE BEEN WORKING, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH YOU GUYS, WORKING WITH THE ASSESSOR. THE ASSESSOR HAS BEEN VERY VOCAL AND VERY OPEN TO CONTACTING US. I THINK WE WERE MADE AWARE ABOUT THE PROPERTY OR THE ASSET BEING ENROLLED BY THE ASSESSOR.

YOU, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS A TRIGGER, OF COURSE, TO SAY, WELL, IT'S NOT ELIGIBLE, SO WE CAN'T TAKE IT TO THE BOARD IN DECEMBER. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE OKAY WITH THAT COMING OFF. IN CASE YOU GUYS GRANT THE EXEMPTION.

SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING COLLECTIVELY TO TRY TO SEE WHERE WE COULD LAND.

BUT AGAIN, THE DISCRETION IS WITH THE BOARD. OKAY, I'M GOING TO STICK MY NECK OUT HERE. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO PENALIZE THE COMPANY WITH A ONE-YEAR 20% PENALTY FOR THE FIRM OF THE EXEMPTION.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE SITUATION TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS BOARD NEEDS TO HONOR THE INTEGRITY OF THE RULES AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE RULES. AND I THINK.

ASSESSING A PENALTY OF 20% OR ONE YEAR WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

AND I WOULD ENTERTAIN THAT MOTION. MR. MOSS MAKES IT.

MR. WHEELESS AND SEVERAL OTHERS SECOND IT. I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT. ABSOLUTELY, MR. MEADE. SO LET'S SAY THIS MOTION PASSES AND THEY GET THE FOUR YEARS OF THE TAX EXEMPTION. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR IT TO GO BACK ON THE ROLLS AT NORMAL ASSESSMENT? THAT WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM HAVING THE FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION PERIOD.

BECAUSE THEY CAN'T, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THEY COULD ASSESS IT LOWER, TAKE IT BACK OFF THE TAX ROLL. THEY'LL HAVE TO DO THAT. AND THE TAX ASSESSOR'S ALREADY AGREED HE WILL TAKE IT OFF THE ROLLS.

WITHIN FOUR YEARS, BUT THERE MAY BE ANOTHER TAX ASSESSOR AT THAT TIME. WELL, THAT HAPPENS WITH ANY ABATEMENT. I'M SORRY.

YOU HAVE TAX ROLLS, YOU HAVE ELIGIBLE, OR I'M ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT THINGS I DON'T KNOW WHAT.

YOU HAVE THOSE THAT PAY TAXES,

[00:50:04]

EXCUSE ME, YOU'VE GOT 80% ABATEMENT, SO THEY'RE PAYING 20% OF THEIR TAXES. SO THEY'RE STILL ON THE ROLLS. SO IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE OFF THE ROLLS.

IT'S WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF TAXES THEY'RE HAVING TO PAY. AM I REASONABLY CORRECT THERE? YES, YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO PAY THE 20%. I'M SORRY? YOU'RE RIGHT. ALWAYS HAVE TO PAY THE 20%. BUT AT THIS POINT, THE SEPARATE ASSET THAT HAS NO CONTRACT ON IT IS GOING AT 100%. IT'S AT 100%. YES. SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF WE APPROVE... IF WE APPROVE THIS, THE ASSESSMENT WILL BE REDUCED FROM 100% TO 80% FOR FOUR YEARS. CORRECT. 80.

TO 20. 20 PERCENT. THANK YOU.

20 PERCENT. 80 IS COMING OFF.

IT'LL BE TAXED AT 20 PERCENT.

THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU.

BUT WOULD THEY BE PENALIZED IN THEIR FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION AT THAT 20, BECAUSE THEN THAT 20 PERCENT BECOMES MUCH MORE ON THE RENEWAL, ON THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD AFTER? I THINK THEY RENEW A YEAR EARLIER. AM I CORRECT IN THAT, HUD? NO.

YES. MR. IF A ONE-YEAR PENALTY IS IMPOSED, THE INITIAL CONTRACT WOULD JUST EXPIRE ONE YEAR EARLIER, SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO RENEW ONE YEAR EARLIER THAN NORMAL.

BUT IT WOULD STILL STAY AT 20% AS LONG AS THEY RENEW TIMELY.

SO THEY TAKE A YEAR OFF AND WE'RE GOING TO ASSESS THEM 20% A YEAR? THAT'S DOUBLE-DIVIDED. THEY DON'T TAKE A YEAR OFF. IT'S JUST A FOUR-YEAR ABATEMENT.

IT'S JUST A FOUR-YEAR ABATEMENT. A FOUR-YEAR ABATEMENT, OKAY. AND YOU HAVE TO RENEW AT THE END OF FOUR YEARS OR IN TIME TO HAVE A... IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE A SKIP, YOU'VE GOT TO RENEW EARLY. THAT'S RIGHT.

OKAY? AND WE DEAL WITH THIS ROUTINELY IN COMPLIANCE ISSUES. ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION.

SECOND. HAVE WE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION? YEAH, I UNDERSTAND.

NOW, THEY'LL BASICALLY BE ELIGIBLE FOR ONLY NINE YEARS.

IT'S A FAIR QUESTION. IT'S A FAIR QUESTION. I UNDERSTAND IT.

I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO OPEN IT TO INTERPRETATION OF WHOEVER THE NEXT TAX ASSESSOR MAY BE.

RIGHT. IN ALL FAIRNESS TO THE APPLICANT, WHATEVER DECISION WE MAKE IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE, THEY CAN PLAN MOVING FORWARD HOW THINGS WILL UNFOLD.

BUT I THINK TAKING A YEAR OFF AND THEY'RE ELIGIBLE FOR FOUR YEARS, THEY HAVE TO RENEW A YEAR EARLY AND THEN BE ELIGIBLE FOR THEIR FIVE YEAR AFTER THAT. AND THAT WOULDN'T BE OPEN TO INTERPRETATION FROM ANYONE. CORRECT. I THINK WE'RE OKAY. GOOD. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? NO. I JUST WANTED TO SAY, LIKE, I THINK THIS IS A VERY REASONABLE COMPROMISE, BUT ALSO TO NOTE, TO YOUR POINT, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT INTENT MATTERS. AND THE REASON THAT THIS ISN'T A CANCELLATION, IN MY OPINION, AND IT'S A ONE-YEAR PENALTY, IS BECAUSE OF IT. THANK YOU, MR. AMOS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? APPLICANT? YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING? YES, WE APPRECIATE IT.

OKAY. HAVEN'T VOTED YET. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. YOU'RE WELCOME.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, AS I'M POINT OF ORDER, I'M JUST WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE COMMENTS OF THE SECRETARY OUT OF ORDER ON THE AGENDA. SHE'S GOT ANOTHER MEETING SHE NEEDS TO GET TO, AND SHE HAS A LOT THAT SHE WANTS TO TELL US ABOUT. AND I DON'T WANT TO MISS IT SO. I DO APOLOGIZE AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN, FOR ALLOWING ME TO DO THIS.

AND WHEN I LEAVE, I'M GOING TO ASK MY DEPUTY TO STEP IN FOR VOTING PURPOSES.

BUT I DO WANT TO COVER A FEW THINGS WITH EVERYONE SINCE I HAVE THE FLOOR AND AM ABLE. AND THIS DISCUSSION WAS ACTUALLY A GOOD SEGUE TO CONTINUE TO REMIND EVERYONE HOW COMMITTED THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THESE INCENTIVES AND OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT ARE TO, WHEN THESE ISSUES ARISE, TO CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH WHAT OUR PROCESSES ARE INSIDE OF THE DEPARTMENT.

TO CONTINUE TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR BUSINESSES TO SUCCEED AND TO USE THESE PROGRAMS EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY.

SO, YOU KNOW, I REPORTED EARLY ON ABOUT HOW MUCH WE'VE STREAMLINED OUR PROCESSES AND HOW USER-FRIENDLY WE ARE BECOMING, BUT I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO THINK THAT THAT WAS A ONE-AND-DONE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE STOPPED. WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT, AND I CAN'T THANK THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE OF LED ENOUGH AND THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT ON REALLY THINKING OUT OF THE BOX ON GETTING US THROUGH THESE THINGS. SO, UM, FOR SURE, WANTED TO SAY THAT.

BUT NOW FOR SOME OF THE LESS BUSINESS, MORE GOOD STORY STUFF. IF MANY

[00:55:01]

WE'RE CALLING IT OUR LOUISIANA STORYTELLER INITIATIVE. AND THE REASON IT'S IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE YOU ALL GET TO HEAR ME AT THESE MEETINGS. GIVE AN UPDATE ON OUR NUMBERS. AND THE GOVERNOR, WHO, BY THE WAY, ROUNDS UP. QUITE A BIT, IF YOU HADN'T NOTICED, GIVES A REPORT ON THE NUMBERS EVERY CHANCE HE GETS. BUT THERE IS REALLY SIGNIFICANT, SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE HAPPENING IN THIS STATE. AND IT'S HAPPENING ON SUCH A FREQUENT PACE RIGHT NOW THAT WE ALMOST DON'T TAKE TIME TO STOP, NOT JUST ENJOY IT, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE LUXURY OF ENJOYING IT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S LOTS MORE WORK TO BE DONE, BUT TO CELEBRATE IT AND, MORE IMPORTANTLY, TO AMPLIFY IT. SO WE HAVE CREATED AN ENTIRE PROCESS TO USE THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN THE AMPLIFICATION OF THAT MESSAGE. AND I WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU ALL, IF YOU WERE AT WASHINGTON MARDI GRAS, YOU SAW PEOPLE WALKING AROUND WITH THIS BIG, GIANT, VERY COVETED MEDALLION.

TO SAY THAT I AM LOUISIANA.

THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS, AND IT'S A LOUISIANA STORYTELLER. AND SO THERE'S A QR CODE ON THESE. WE HAVE THEM ON THE DESK, BUT IF YOU IN THE AUDIENCE DON'T HAVE THEM, I'LL LEAVE SOME AROUND. AND I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO GO SIGN UP. WHAT IT DOES, OUR GOAL WAS TO HAVE 1,500 OF THESE. WE HAVE 915 PEOPLE SIGNED UP FOR THIS ALREADY.

AND WHAT IT DOES IS IT GIVES PRIVATE SECTOR FOLKS LIKE YOU ALL ACCESS TO A DIGITAL HUB. WITH ALL THE INFORMATION THAT I GET TO TALK ABOUT, WITH ALL OUR ANNOUNCEMENTS, WITH ALL OUR RANKINGS, WITH ALL OUR... ALL THE INFORMATION THAT REALLY IS THE NARRATIVE AROUND HOW LOUISIANA IS DIFFERENT, IT GIVES YOU ACCESS TO IT. SO THIS IS JUST A FUN LITTLE POCKET CARD. I HOPE YOU ALL TAKE THIS WITH YOU, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO UPDATE THESE BECAUSE SOME OF THIS IS OLD ALREADY. IT'S A GREAT PART OF THE PROBLEM TO HAVE.

BUT I REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU ALL, YOUR INTEREST HERE, YOUR ROLE HERE, AND CERTAINLY ALL OF YOU AS BOARD MEMBERS TO JOIN US IN THAT EFFORT. AND SO, WITH THAT BEING SAID, WITH THE WHY THIS IS ALREADY OUT OF DATE, I LIKE TO ALWAYS GIVE YOU THE UPDATE ON OUR NUMBERS. I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE NUMBER IN HERE IS. I THINK IT WAS $76-78 BILLION THAT WE HAD ANNOUNCED IN PROJECTS. AND AS OF MONDAY, WHEN WE ANNOUNCED A $12 BILLION PROJECT IN BOTH SHREVEPORT AND IN CADDO AND BOSSIER, WHICH IS REALLY EXCITING. THAT WE CAN SPAN THOSE PARISHES, WE ARE AT $90 BILLION OF ANNOUNCED PROJECTS IN THE TWO YEARS OF THIS ADMINISTRATION. AND...

TO SAY THAT THAT IS UNPRECEDENTED IN LOUISIANA'S EXPERIENCE IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT. BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER ELEMENTS OF THAT THAT I AM EQUALLY AS PROUD OF, IF NOT MORE. JUST LAST YEAR, ON OUR JOBS THAT WE ANNOUNCED IN OUR ANNOUNCED PROJECTS LAST YEAR, THE AVERAGE WAGE OF THOSE JOBS WAS $91,000. THE AVERAGE WAGE IN LOUISIANA TODAY IS ABOUT $52,000. SO THE PROJECTS THAT WE ARE ANNOUNCING THROUGH THE WORK OF THIS DEPARTMENT, AND I HATE THAT PAIGE HAD TO LEAVE BECAUSE SO MUCH OF IT IS OUR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT TEAM, BUT NOT ONLY ARE WE ANNOUNCING CAPEX, YOU KNOW, THE BILLIONS. JERRY WAS SAYING.

HE REMEMBERS A DAY WHEN A $150 MILLION PROJECT WAS A BIG ONE, AND THEN A $500 MILLION PROJECT WAS A BIG ONE. YOU KNOW, THIS ISN'T JUST A SYMPTOM OF INFLATION. THIS IS A CHANGED LOUISIANA. BUT WHEN WE CAN AMPLIFY THAT STORY, AND MAKE SURE PEOPLE HEAR THE STORY. TO ALSO REFLECT THAT THE JOBS THAT ARE REPRESENTED IN THOSE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS ARE LIFE-CHANGING, PATH-CHANGING FOR FAMILIES IN LOUISIANA. IT REALLY IS THE REMARKABLE WORK OF THIS DEPARTMENT, ALL OF YOU, EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE TO HELP US WITH THAT. SO, WITH THAT BEING SAID, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO BECOME ONE OF THOSE AMPLIFIERS FOR US.

AND I WILL TELL YOU, AS I ALWAYS DO, TODAY'S NUMBERS ABOUT OUR PIPELINE. JUST TO...

THE FACT THAT WE HAVE $90 BILLION SORT OF IN THE REARVIEW MIRROR, IN A GOOD WAY. OUR PIPELINE TODAY HAS 192 PROJECTS, REPRESENTING 51,000 NEW DIRECT JOBS AND AN ADDITIONAL $290 BILLION. SO THAT IS MY UPDATE.

THANK YOU FOR TAKING ME OUT OF ORDER, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU, SECRETARY BUJUAN. THANK YOU FOR, AND I KNOW THAT THE THANK YOU.

AS A LEADER, YOU GET MORE CREDIT AND MORE BLAME THAN YOU EVER DESERVE. BUT TO EVERY STAFF MEMBER IN LED THAT SUPPORTS THE SECRETARY AND THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE, THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING. IT IS NOT GOING UNNOTICED. THE SECRETARY TOLD ME BEFORE THE MEETING STARTED THAT THERE WAS SOMEBODY UP IN PENNSYLVANIA SAYING, YEAH, WHAT'S GOING ON DOWN THERE? AND I JUST LOVE IT WHEN THAT HAPPENS, WHEN OTHER STATES ARE GOING, OKAY, WHAT ARE Y'ALL DOING? WHAT ARE Y'ALL DOING? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, WE REALLY ARE DOING SOME AMAZING THINGS, AND I THANK YOU, SECRETARY, FOR THE WORK YOU'RE DOING.

VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT, WITH THAT, WE'LL GO BACK

[01:00:02]

COMPLIANCE COMPONENTS EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT. CRYING EAGLE BREWING COMPANY LLC CONTRACT 2022 ZERO, THREE, NINE, SEVEN, GREAT. WE'VE GOT ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ACCEPT THIS AMENDMENT, HAVE A MOTION. MR. MOSS, SECOND FROM MAYOR TOOPS. OH, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING. NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ANY OPPOSITION THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT, WE HAVE THREE SPECIAL REQUESTS. THE FIRST IS FOR PLACID REFINING COMPANY, LLC, CONTRACT 2024-0305. PLACID REFINING COMPANY, LLC, IS REQUESTING TO HAVE FUTURE PHASE APPLICATIONS BE ALLOWED AS PART OF CONTRACT 2024-0305-ITE TO ACCOMMODATE ASSETS BEING PLACED IN SERVICE IN MULTIPLE CALENDAR YEARS.

UNDER THE 2024 EMERGENCY RULES, AND EXHIBIT A IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE PART OF THE CONTRACT. AND AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, THE COMPANY DID NOT ANTICIPATE PHASE APPLICATIONS.

THEREFORE, THIS INFORMATION WAS NOT INCLUDED ON THE APPLICATION PRESENTED TO AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD ON FEBRUARY 26, 2025. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTION FROM THE STAFF? ANY ISSUES WITH THIS FROM Y'ALL'S PERSPECTIVE? I THINK THIS IS PURELY HOUSEKEEPING. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. GREAT. SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE. MAYOR TOOPS, SECOND. FROM MR. MEALY, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? I NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF. MR. MIGAZ, NOTE HIS RECUSAL. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? THERE BEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. THE NEXT SPECIAL REQUEST IS FOR BASF CORPORATION, CONTRACT 2019-0262. BASF CORPORATION IS REQUESTING TO AMEND THEIR EXISTING EXHIBITING AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT 2019-0262.

TO ADD A SIX-MONTH EXTENSION TO THE TWO-YEAR GRACE PERIOD PROVIDED IN SECTION 6.01B1, RESULTING IN A TWO-AND-A-HALF-YEAR GRACE PERIOD THIS EXTENSION WOULD ALLOW FOR THE COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF THE MDI PLANT EXPANSION BY DECEMBER 31ST, 2026. I DO WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THIS. WE HAVE SOMEBODY HERE FROM BASF.

PLEASE. YOU JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR POSITION WITH THE COMPANY, PLEASE.

SIR, ANDREW GOTTERKER. I AM THE GENERAL SITE MANAGER FOR BSF AND GEISMAR. GREAT, THANK YOU. JUST TELL US WHAT'S GOING ON. I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE MAKE A RECORD OF IT. AS TO THE REASON FOR YOUR SIX-MONTH EXTENSION REQUEST. YES, SIR. SO, AS STATED, THE PROJECT ACTUALLY STARTED IN 2019. EVERYBODY HERE KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED SHORTLY AFTER THAT. SO COVID PUT US BEHIND, AND WE WERE JUST NEVER ABLE TO CATCH UP FROM THAT. EXCUSE ME. ADDITIONALLY TO THAT, WE HAD SOME RIVER WATER LEVELS LAST YEAR. THAT ALSO PUT US BEHIND. BEYOND THAT, WE'RE RIGHT ON TRACK. WE'RE MEETING OUR COMMITMENTS FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE AND JOBS PERSPECTIVE. AND WE'RE ACTUALLY ONLY A FEW MONTHS AWAY FROM BEING IN THE POSITION OF STARTING UP. SO SHORT EXTENSION IS ALL WE'RE REQUESTING. GREAT. OKAY. I FIGURED THAT'S WHAT WAS HAPPENING. I KEEP WAITING FOR THE RIVER HEIGHT ISSUE TO ALSO START RAISING ITS HEAD BECAUSE IT'S... WHETHER IT'S HIGH OR LOW, IT STILL AFFECTS OFFLOADING EQUIPMENT, DOESN'T IT? YES, SIR. CORRECT. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. ANY OTHER? DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? LET'S JUST HAVE A MOTION FROM MR. MILLER, SECOND FROM MR. WHEELIS. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? THERE IS NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE.

THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOUR COMMITMENT TO LOUISIANA. THE LAST SPECIAL REQUEST IS FOR COMMONWEALTH LNG LLC, CONTRACT 2018-0509.

COMMONWEALTH LNG LLC IS REQUESTING TO AMEND THEIR EXISTING EXHIBIT A AGREEMENT, SECTION 4.02A, FOR CONTRACT 2022-0302.

TO STATE. THE COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS WILL BEGIN BY NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 31, 2031. COMMONWEALTH IS ALSO REQUESTING TO ACCOUNT FOR PHASE APPLICATIONS FOR ASSETS ESTIMATED TO BE PLACED IN SERVICE IN 2028. 2029, 2030, AND 2031 THAT WERE NOT PREVIOUSLY ACCOUNTED FOR. HONORABLE MEMBERS,

[01:05:02]

FOR COMMONWEALTH LNG, I'M ALSO AN OFFICER OF THAT COMPANY. GREAT. THANK YOU. TELL US WHAT'S HAPPENING.

THERE'S A LOT HERE FOR ME TO DIGEST, SO IF YOU COULD CAPSULIZE IT FOR US, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.

CHAIR, THANK YOU. SIMPLY STATED COMMONWEALTH. LNG WAS WHAT WE THOUGHT AT THE TIME, SORT OF THE POSTER CHILD FOR WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE IRREPARABLE HARM CAUSED BY THE PRIOR FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION'S BAN ON LNG PERMITTING, COLLOQUIALLY KNOWN AS THE BIDEN LNG PERMITTING BAN.

SINCE THAT TIME, AND WITH THE NEW FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION COMING IN, I'M VERY HAPPY TO TELL YOU TODAY. WE WERE THE PERMIT THAT BROKE THE LNG PERMITTING BAN THAT WAS SIGNED ON THE RESOLUTE DESK. IN THE OVAL OFFICE, IN A TELEVISED CEREMONY. AND SO THAT WAS LAST JANUARY. SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE SOLD LNG VOLUMES. WE HAVE GOTTEN ALL PERMITTING IN PLACE. WE HAVE SIGNED OUR EPC CONTRACTS, AND FINANCING IS UNDERWAY WITH OUR SYNDICATE OF BANKS.

WE EXPECT TO REACH FID AT THE END OF NEXT MONTH.

BUT BECAUSE OF THAT BAN AND THE SUBSEQUENT DELAYS, WE ARE ASKING THAT THE ITEP BE EXTENDED INTO. YOU KNOW, 2030 AND THE YEARS LEADING UP, SORRY, 2031 AND THE YEARS LEADING UP. AND I WILL TELL YOU, IF YOU'LL PERMIT ME ALSO, THAT WE ARE THRILLED, THRILLED TO BE PART OF THIS BUSINESS COMMUNITY THAT YOU'VE CREATED.

AND WE'RE EXCITED TO PUT CAPITAL ON THE GROUND IN THIS GREAT STATE. GREAT, GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT RUNDOWN. I HAD FORGOTTEN THAT YOU GUYS WERE ON THE POINT OF THE SPEAR ON THAT. GOD BLESS YOU. WE WERE. WE WERE. IT'S NOTHING LIKE COMMITTING A LOT OF MONEY AND HAVING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAY, OH, NO, NOT REALLY. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADD A MOTION TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION FROM MR. AMOS, SECOND FROM MR. MOSS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE.

THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR INVESTMENT, LOUISIANA, AND FOR STICKING TO IT. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.

THANK YOU, MEMBERS. NEXT, WE HAVE 30 NONCOMPLIANT CONTRACTS FOLLOWING THE 2018 RULES.

OKAY, BEFORE YOU START READING, I'M NOTICING ON HERE, AND THESE, JUST FOR THE BOARDS, AS YOU LOOK ON YOUR AGENDA, THESE ARE NON-COMPLIANCE SUMMARIES FOR UNDER THE 2018 RULES. AND IF YOU WILL NOTICE OVER ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE AGENDA ON THAT PAGE, YOU'LL SEE. THIS IS WHERE THE LOCALS, WE HAVE TO GO TO THEM FOR RECOMMENDATIONS OF WHAT THEY WANT US TO DO IN LIGHT OF THESE NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUES.

AND IF YOU WILL NOTE, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE LOCALS HAVE BASICALLY PUNTED TO US.

AND IN MY WORLD, THAT MEANS THEY DON'T REALLY CARE WHETHER WE PENALIZE OR NOT. AND NOW I'M ATTRIBUTING MOTIVATION TO BEHAVIOR. AND MY DADDY SAID, THAT'S A BAD THING TO DO.

BUT NEVERTHELESS, I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO INTERPRET IT. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE TAKE ALL OF THESE IN GLOBO. AND I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE WITHOUT PENALTY IN GLOBO. SO MOVED. I HAVE A MOTION FROM MAYOR TOPE, SECOND FROM MR. NASSAR. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS? NOW, HAVING SAID THAT, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO TAKE ANY SPECIFIC ONE OF THESE OUT OF ORDER AND HANDLE IT ON ITS OWN, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. I DON'T WANT TO IN ANY WAY IMPLY THAT WE'RE GOING TO SHUT OFF DEBATE OR DISCUSSION IF THERE NEEDS TO BE SUCH. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION, SECOND. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON THIS? ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION IS TO HANDLE ALL OF THESE IN GLOBO, TO LET THEM PROCEED WITHOUT PENALTY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? THERE IS NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. AND THAT CONCLUDES ITEP. THANK YOU,

[8. Other Business-Election of Officers]

OKAY. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE ELECTION OF OFFICERS. AND DO... SO, ANN VILLA, DEPUTY SECRETARY, CFO FOR LED, AND ON BEHALF OF THE SECRETARY, WE WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE JERRY JONES FOR THE CHAIRMAN POSITION OF THE BOARD OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR, AS WELL AS ROBBIE MILLER FOR THE VICE CHAIRMANSHIP, AND

[01:10:02]

WE'LL MOVE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. NOW, I HAVE LOBBIED TO HAVE MY PAY INCREASED BY 20%. SO, APPROVED. SO ANYWAY, THANK YOU ALL FOR THE CONFIDENCE. BUT WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR THOSE POSITIONS? HEARING NONE, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION CARRIES.

[9. Secretary Remarks – Secretary Susan Bourgeois]

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER BEFORE WE ADJOURN? ANYTHING AT ALL? THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE. GOD BLESS THE STATE. I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. WE HAVE A MOTION, MR. MILLER, SECOND, MR. MEALY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.