By Edwin Crayton/Opinion
This is a tale of two audits. What I mean by that is, I’ve been writing about a recent audit in which a CPA reported that the current board of the Natchitoches Community Improvement Foundation (NCIF) has $22,345 in cash withdrawals unaccounted for and $715 in debit card transactions unaccounted for. But there was another audit before this one that revealed that a previous NCIF Board also had money unaccounted for. So that $42,560 figure in the headline is the total sum of unaccounted for money from two different NCIF boards. But NCIF is responsible for the actions of both NCIF boards. Both audits were conducted by a certified public accountant. The first audit was in 2014. That audit revealed that $19,500 in cash was unaccounted for. That money is still unaccounted for today. The fact that these audits took place at different times indicates a pattern which I will discuss in a moment.
But first, your obvious question might be, why should you care? Well, it matters, because this money is designated to benefit you. It’s money from a settlement that happened in the 1990s’s after Tennessee Gas was involved in a spill of dangerous pcbs into Sibley Lake, drinking supply for the City of Natchitoches. The money was placed in a fund and the judge ordered that it be used to benefit the people of Natchitoches in four areas: recreation, education, housing, and economic development/seed money for grants. Eventually, that led to the formation of the Natchitoches Community Improvement Foundation (NCIF). There have been several NCIF boards with different people serving then being replaced by others, the way boards operate. But NCIF has had a very controversial history. Part of that has included the previous NCIF Board in which several members overstayed their terms and had to be removed by a judge. But the biggest persistent problem at NCIF has been that historically, audits repeatedly reveal lots of funds unaccounted for. Really, like I said it’s a pattern. Here is what I mean. As best I could determine from court records, documents and talking to people involved with NCIF, the last two audits have resulted in a CPA saying money was unaccounted for. The similarities are interesting. Neither board has explained what happened to the unaccounted-for funds. In both cases, the boards had a reputation for keeping very few records. And the CPA was even the same: Mark Thomas.
I want to point out that even though the first audit was in 2014, that doesn’t mean the board from that time period was the one responsible for the unaccounted-for funds. Actually, it appears the unaccounted-for transactions occurred around 2003. But years ago, I did ask the Chairman in 2014, Leo Walker about that money. He said then, in a quarterly meeting that they didn’t know what happened to that money. That fact hasn’t changed. But his answer is the whole point: large sums of money are designated as unaccounted for and no one “knows” what happened. No one on the current NCIF Board, headed by Chairman Harold Bayonne, has been able or willing, or both to provide any information that would cause the CPA, Mr. Thomas to change his findings. In the case of this current board, the report of unaccounted for funds, does indeed reflect upon their handling of the money. The audit makes it clear, the transactions happened on their watch. Like I said, it’s a pattern. And that is the worst part. When such a pattern is set, with money being unaccounted for and there are no consequences, you can be sure of one thing: it will happen again. Like it did in this case. But we can break the pattern. It’s called deterrence. The NCIF Bylaws should be amended to put in place processes and penalties that would deter people from having unaccounted for funds occur on their watch as board members. This would be enforced by the court. You see, because there were no consequences, it happened a couple of times. If you know anything about human nature, I don’t have to tell you all the reasons why. But it will happen again, if it is not penalized strongly when it happens.
Actually, I think we the people, can do plenty to turn this around. But rather than get into specific ideas, just to get the ball rolling here are a few examples of what could work. First, I would just say, that since money is the problem and they’re handling it so poorly, whatever change or reform should make it impossible to spend money without setting off a lot of procedures and alarm bells. (Where are the bureaucrats when you need them?) Even spending a $1 should generate a paper trail. Also, I don’t understand why any board with $22,345 in unaccounted for transactions, should be allowed to stick around. Immediately and automatically suspend the entire board the same day an auditor says money is unaccounted for. If the money remains unaccounted for as long as a brief grace period of a week, why not then just remove the entire board permanently and have a new election supervised by the court? And why not ban the board with the unaccounted-for funds from serving again? Especially if the money remains unaccounted for like in these two cases. Also, other investigations may happen if the evidence indicates that is appropriate. The idea is to deter and discourage this kind of thing.
In other words, whatever we do, we need to make it clear that unaccounted for funds isn’t happening anymore. And you know what? If we do it right, they will stop happening.
“Let all things be done decently and in order.”—1 Corinthians 14:40
The last quarterly meeting of 2026 for the Natchitoches Community Improvement Foundation will be October 13, 5pm at 400 North Street. It’s a public meeting. Attend.
The opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of the Natchitoches Parish Journal or its associates.