Mayor Tom Arceneaux has suggested a possible temporary 2% surcharge on water and sewer bills for 18 months to fund the demolition of large, abandoned apartment complexes and commercial structures that have become dangerous and unsalvageable.
“These properties are a drain on our neighborhoods, a risk to public safety, and a symbol of disinvestment,” said Mayor Arceneaux. “We’ve spent years citing these owners, and we’ve exhausted every legal and financial option. This proposal is about finally doing something to clean them up.”
The surcharge is part of the Mayor’s proposed 2026 budget and would need approval from the City Council before taking effect. The surcharge would last for 18 months and automatically expire after that period.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Why not make the owners pay for the demolitions themselves?
The City already holds them accountable under property standards law, but most of these properties are owned by corporations or limited liability companies (LLCs) that have no money left and no assets beyond the properties themselves. The City can’t legally seize their personal funds or “pierce the corporate veil” to hold individual members or stockholders liable for the entity’s debts
The owners have long ago been cited for violating the City’s Property Standards ordinance. But the City cannot force them to tear down the derelict buildings. State law allows the City to tear them down and place a lien on the property (in effect, billing the owners), but it does not give us an effective way to collect on that lien. The City’s lien, by law, is secondary to other obligations of the owner affecting the property, especially unpaid mortgages. Since the properties are no longer worth more than the amounts of their unpaid mortgages, that leaves the City high and dry. Even if there were no mortgages, the liens could not be collected unless the property were sold. It is likely that there would be few, if any potential purchasers at this point.
To complicate things, even if we could file an effective lien on these properties, the City must first do the work upfront at our cost before filing the liens. There is no legal way around that.
2. Is there another way to pay for this?
At this time, there are no state or federal grants available for large-scale demolition. The Mayor and City Council will continue exploring options during budget discussions. That means that the discussions will likely center on whether there is another local funding source which the Council would approve, or whether the Council would prefer that the City take no action at this time to demolish those structures.
We are going to explore whether the National Guard might be able to assist in the demolition process, if they are deployed to Shreveport as the Governor has requested.
3. Why does this fee have to go on our water bill?
Using the water and sewer billing system is the most efficient way to collect a small, temporary fee from every household and business in Shreveport. The City does not have another quick or cost-effective tool for raising funds dedicated to this specific cleanup effort.
4. Why is this happening now?
These complexes have sat abandoned for years, and public complaints have grown louder. The City has reached the point where doing nothing is more expensive and dangerous than acting. The 2026 budget provides the first real opportunity to address them decisively.
5. What will this cost me?
The proposed fee would apply to all current water and sewer charges, except for the Safe Drinking Water, Solid Waste and Security fees.
The cost to each customer would depend on their water usage. However, someone using 4,000 gallons per month has a typical monthly bill (excluding those three fees) of $72.33. The 2% fee would cost them $1.45 per month, or just less than a nickel per day, a total of $26.10 after 18 months. A household using 6,000 gallons has a typical bill, excluding the fees, of $101.65, so the 2% charge would cost $2.03, less than seven cents a day, a total of $36.54 after 18 months.
Unlike the Solid Waste fee, which only applies to residential customers, the 2% blight surcharge would apply to all customers. This keeps the overall rate low and recognizes that businesses have a stake in eliminating blight, too.
6. How will residents know the money is used properly?
All funds collected through the surcharge will be restricted to demolition and cleanup work on projects the demolition of which is initially estimated to cost over $50,000. This would include larger apartment complexes and hotels, for example. The legislation would create a special account or capital project to insure that the funds could be used only for those purposes. The City Council can require regular public reporting in the legislation that approves the surcharge.
7. What does all of the demolition cost the City?
The City estimates that it will cost more than $2 million to demolish the properties we are absolutely sure we will have to demolish at our cost. There are several other properties, particularly The Jolie in East Shreveport, that the City may also need to demolish. Thus, a $3 million budget for the program was established.
8. How much money will the 2% surcharge generate for the City?
The surcharge, as currently proposed, would generate about $2,000,000 in 2025 and an additional $1,000,000 in the first six months of 2027, for a total of $3,000,000 for the City to use on demolition. The Mayor proposes that the surcharge expire at that time.
9. How long will this last?
The surcharge is temporary and will automatically end after 18 months unless the City Council votes to extend it. The Mayor is not proposing an extension.
10. What happens after 18 months?
Once the targeted demolitions are complete, the surcharge will end. The City will then focus on redeveloping the cleared properties or repurposing them for community benefit.
11. What if the fee doesn’t raise enough money—or raises too much?
The surcharge is expected to generate around $3 million total—enough to fund demolition of the most hazardous properties. If costs run higher, the City will reassess during the 18-month window. If any funds remain afterward, they will be used strictly for additional blight removal. If the surcharge will appear to raise more than needed, the City can terminate the surcharge early.
12. When will demolition begin?
If approved by the Council in December, demolition could begin as early as the first quarter of 2026. Several sites are already identified and ready to move forward once funding is secured.
13. What will happen to the properties once they’re cleared?
Once the unsafe structures are removed, the City will secure and maintain the properties. Long-term plans may include redevelopment opportunities, green space, or community reuse projects, depending on location and neighborhood input. These decisions will be made by the owners of the properties unless the City has become the owner at that point.
14. Is this part of the Mayor’s Block-by-Block initiative?
It supports one of its main goals. Block-By-Block is a long-term, multi-faceted process that seeks to eliminate sources of blight, renew abandoned and blighted properties and restore and revitalize neighborhoods. Removing these derelict and abandoned properties is one step in that larger process.
15. If this works, will there be more surcharges in the future?
This is a one-time proposal for a specific, measurable problem. The goal is to eliminate the worst blighted structures and then return to normal billing once the 18 months are complete.
16. How can we prevent this kind of blight from happening again?
The City is strengthening code enforcement, tracking ownership changes more closely, and seeking new partnerships for redevelopment. The goal is to stop properties like these from reaching the point of total decay again.
17. What are the next steps?
The Mayor and Council will discuss this issue over the next two months as a part of the process of adopting the City’s 2026 budgets. If the 2% fee or some alternative to it is to be effective on January 1, it would need to be approved at the Council’s December 9 meeting. It cannot go into effect without approval by the City Council.