Louisiana Voice

In just over a month (March 9) the 2026 regular 60-day session of the Louisiana Legislature convenes in Baton Rouge. Sessions in even-numbered years such as 2026, are for 60 days while in odd-numbered years, sessions last for 85 days.

No measure levying or authorizing a new state tax, increasing an existing state tax, or legislating with regard to state tax exemptions, exclusions, deductions, or credits shall be introduced or enacted during even-numbered years, according to the 2026 Regular Session Information BULLETIN issued by the House Legislative Services.

But, hey, that doesn’t mean those 144 lawmakers (105 House and 29 Senate members) can’t inflict harm on the citizens of Louisiana, so it would behoove folks to at least attempt to keep tabs on what goes on in Baton Rouge.

Remember in 2014, they almost slipped through a major but illegal windfall for then Louisiana State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson. The bill, by State Sen. Neil Riser (R-Columbia) would have pumped up Edmonson’s retirement considerably and the amendment was sneaked into the final day of the legislative session. Only a tip by an anonymous reader allowed LouisianaVoice to break the story and open the way to Sen. Dan Claitor’s successful lawsuit to quash the effort.

 But there are plenty of other mischief afoot when lawmakers, lobbyists and campaign contributions come together.

Take last year, for example. A couple of Shreveport senators, Alan Seabaugh and Thomas Pressley co-authored SB 134 which eventually became Act 342 with Gov. Jeff Landry’s signature.

That law makes it more difficult to SUE NURSING HOMES in Louisiana.

The state already had a bad reputation for quality of care in nursing homes. Remember BOB DEAN AND HURRICANE IDA?

SB 134 sailed to passage, getting final HOUSE approval by a 59-37 vote and breezing through the SENATE with a comfortable 26-11 margin.

So, why would the legislature pass a measure that protects nursing homes from being held accountable for possible abuse and/or neglect?

For that answer, let’s boil down the numbers.

Between Jan. 1, 2023 (the last statewide election year) and Jan. 1, 2026, nursing homes, their political action committee and their various owners contributed more than $146,000 to 85 members of the two chambers who voted for passage of SB 134. That averages out to a little more than $1700 each—but it’s only an average. Some got considerably more.

Let’s start with Senate President Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) and Sen. Bob Hensgens (R-Abbeville). It just so happens that the two are members of a 10-PERSON OWNERSHIP GROUP for the Acadia St. Landry Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in Church Point and Hensgens is the nursing home’s administrator. Two other members of his family also are part of the ownership group, according to records on file with the Secretary of State.

Both senators did pretty well in raking in contributions from nursing home interests. Henry received $35,300 and Hensgens accounted for $31,600 in contributions.

Did either senator abstain from voting in favor of SB 134 because of a possible conflict of interests? Don’t be absurd. This is Louisiana where ethics go to die.

Pressley, one of the bill’s co-authors, received $22,100 from nursing home interests during the same time frame and the other co-author, Seabaugh, got $6400 in nursing home campaign contributions.

Riser, who way back in 2014, attempted to reward his friend Edmonson with that generous retirement increase, received another $15,300.

Statewide candidates also got in on the act, though we did not factor in their contributions when giving amounts received by legislators.

Secretary of State Nancy Landry received $20,000 while Gov. Jeff Landry was the recipient of $27,500 in nursing home contributions, Attorney General Liz Murrill got $18,200 and State Treasurer and current congressional candidate John Fleming received $16,500.

So, you see, every action taken in Louisiana politics (and we can only assume elsewhere, as well) has a back story and that story is almost always preceded by dollar signs.

Why do you think the legislature passed that dreadfully draconian CAMRA bill that prohibits citizens from lodging air quality complaints on the basis of readouts from private monitors?

There is only one group on the face of the earth that would benefit from such a detestable piece of legislation: the oil and chemical industry, particularly that 85-mile stretch along the Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans affectionately known as CANCER ALLEY.

It’s anyone’s guess how much money the fossil fuel and chemical interests have poured into the campaign coffers of Louisiana’s politicians over the years. The same would go for any state agency with oversight powers over any given industry—such as the LOUISIANA PUBLIC SERCICE COMMISSION and its questionable TIES to utility-related businesses.

So, as we cautiously ease into the upcoming legislative session, you might want to keep one eye on Baton Rouge and most of all, follow the money.

(Click on the + sign to enlarge type, go to the bottom of page and slide bar to the right to see all of text. Or, go to the link [in green type] just above the first cartoon for a full-page view.)

A lot of attention is being given to events in Washington, Minneapolis and that’s good. We should be aware of what’s taking place in our government and in law enforcement.

But we would be wise to also keep tabs on events in Louisiana and actions by our state elected officials.

We would do well to begin with Dustin Granger, owner of the Dustin Granger for Louisiana web blog, who recently posed the not-so-rhetorical question: “Why in hell are we giving our sensitive voting data and private Social Security numbers to the Department of Justice?”

That seems to be a fair question to which no one has as yet provided a satisfactory answer.

Granger correctly pointed out that other states had refused to provide the data but Louisiana literally over itself in complying, a step Granger describes as reckless.

Think this is an overreaction or a case of paranoia? Well, let’s turn our attention to the state of Maine where ICE is beginning to make its presence felt. There are reports of a STATE CORRECTIONS OFFICER being detained by ICE agents who terrified the officer’s pregnant wife and left the officer’s vehicle idling in the street.

In another report, ICE agents approached an elderly woman who had driven closest to the officers. They first spoke with her and then proceeded to FIRE PROJECTILES at her vehicle. The projectiles, assumed to be paintballs, were fired at other cars in a Home Depot parking log and in another instance, ICE agents began photographing a woman who was driving near them. Asked why they were taking photos of her, an agent replied, “We’re compiling a data base. You’re now a domestic terrorist.”

Okay, Maine and Minneapolis are a long way from Louisiana but if you think for one moment it can’t—wone—happen here, you’re deluding yourself into a false sense of security.

This country is under siege, folks, and our governor is fiddling as we burn.

Even as a new just-released reveals Louisiana ranks DEAD-LAST in the health of its citizens but first in the U.S. for chlamydia (a sexually-transmitted infection: I didn’t know, either) and second in Gonorrhea, (Interestingly, 9 of the 10 lowest-ranking states in those health rankings were red states while 9 of the 10 healthiest states were blue states) our governor has busied himself writing an opinion piece for NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE extolling the virtues of dog-killer Kristi Noem as Secretary of Homeland Security at the same time others are demanding her resignation or impeachment.

Jeff Landry has also found ample time to serve as Cankle Ankles Trump’s special envoy to Greenland (whatever that’s supposed to mean) even though the Louisiana Constitution clearly says he is forbidden to hold another position concurrent to his term as governor. Meanwhile, Landry’s tough-on-crime reforms are resulting in  UNPRECIDENTED COST INCREASES because prisoners are remaining in jail longer as a result of the governor’s stricter parole policies.

In Squeaky Toy Landry’s first year as governor and supposedly under his stellar leadership, the Louisiana legislature in May 2024, passed the Community Air Monitoring Reliability Act (CAMRA) which PROHIBITED local groups from lodging allegations of air quality violations through the use of their commercial sensors. Violations were subjected to a fine of up to $33,000 per day.

This appeared to be an especially egregious action to stymie local citizen participation in the monitoring of air quality around Louisiana’s hundreds of petro-chemical plants, particularly those along the Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans. After all, what citizens group can afford fines of $33,000 per day when the only real concern is the ability to breathe freely?

It’s anybody’s guess as to how much campaign money was poured into legislators’ coffers by the petro-chemical interests in the months leading up to the passage of that law that all but gives the plants carte blanche to spew noxious fumes without fear of punishment.

(Editor’s note: The following was written by James C. Finney, Ph.D.)

The Louisiana Secretary of State and the East Baton Rouge Parish Registrar of Voters were sent an email December 10, 2025, by an attorney from a local law firm informing them of the East Baton Rouge School Board’s intention to use an illegal voting map for the Board’s election in the Fall of 2026. To be fair, the letter from the attorney didn’t admit that the plan is illegal, but facts are facts. There are many problems with the email, but this post will hit on some of the lowest-hanging fruit.

EBR Registrar of Voters & Sec of State 12-10-25Download

First, attorney Nathan M. Long of the Hammonds, Sills, Adkins, Guice, Noah & Perkins, LLP law firm has only been a member of the Louisiana Bar Association since October 21, 2024, so his knowledge of any activities from 2022 would be limited, making his selection as the Board’s spokesperson questionable.

Also, the law firm (Hammonds, Sills, et al.) may not actually have the legal authority to act on behalf of the East Baton Rouge Parish School Board, or at least not to charge the Board for any of its work. The board most recently approved a resolution designating the firm as a special counsel at their regular monthly meeting February 16, 2023 (item G5). Note that the resolution refers to Louisiana Revised Statutes 42:263. This law says, in part: “No parish governing authority, levee board except as provided in Subsection B hereof, parish school board, city school board, or other local or state board shall retain or employ any special attorney or counsel to represent it in any special matter or pay any compensation for any legal services whatever unless a real necessity exists, made to appear by a resolution thereof stating fully the reasons for the action and the compensation to be paid. The resolution then shall be subject to the approval of the attorney general and, if approved by him, shall be spread upon the minutes of the body and published in the official journal of the parish.” That appears pretty clear-cut, except that no such approval from the Attorney General has been produced despite several requests. What has been shared by the Attorney General’s Office is the following letter from former Attorney General Jeff Landry.

June 19 2023 letter from Attorney General Jeff LandryDownload

Now perhaps Mr. Landry had a change of heart before ascending to his current office of Governor, or his successor has since approved the board’s use of Hammond, Sills, et al., but documentation of such approval hasn’t been produced. Note that the next statute in Title 42, Louisiana Revised Statute 42:264, suggests that the Board may be justified in demanding a refund of all money paid to the law firm in recent years.

Furthermore, the current East Baton Rouge School Board, in its current membership following the 2022, hasn’t voted either to use the map adopted in 2022 or to authorize Hammond, Sills, et al., to act on its behalf in matters related to redistricting. In fact, the previous board didn’t authorize Hammond, Sills, et al., to do anything in response to a lawsuit (Adeline Rene’ Singleton, Christopher Kees, Sr., Tania Nyman and Dr. James C. Finney versus East Baton Rouge School Board, et al, C 710557 30) filed in the 19th Judicial District Court in opposition to the map adopted in 2022. Yet the attorneys not only lost at the District Court level but pursued an appeal that somehow resulted in the subsequent election taking place using the map adopted in 2014. So at least the law firm is consistent in acting without board approval, racking up many billable hours in the process.

Aside from some Executive Session discussions, the Board has taken two redistricting-related actions, both of which appear to have been in response to an effort by the plaintiffs to achieve a fair outcome for the 2026 election without the need for further litigation. The plaintiffs’ attorney sent the Board’s attorney the following letter dated June 30, 2023.

Letter to Mr. Evan M. Alvarez (settlement offer) 06-20-2023Download

The request was rather straightforward: Agree that Plan 22 is null and void, and start the process over. The board finally took action November 16, 2023. The recommendation that was approved as item 7 on the Consent Agenda was “Consideration of a request for the authorization of the Superintendent and staff to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to provide for the development of a Board reapportionment and redistricting plan such authority conditioned upon the dismissal of the lawsuit entitled ‘Singleton, Kees, Nyman, and Finney versus East Baton Rouge Parish School’ and captioned Number C-719057, Division 30, 19th Judicial District Court, and to provide for related matters.”

The plaintiffs dismissed the lawsuit (but without prejudice) June 24, 2024, never having been contacted by the Board’s attorneys in response to the settlement offer from a year earlier. RFQQ Number 05-2024 for Reapportionment Services was finally issued February 5, 2025, with a submission deadline of March 12, 2025. Two firms submitted proposals. It wasn’t until August 21, 2025, that the board formally responded. Despite the Superintendent’s recommendation at the Committee of the Whole two weeks earlier, to accept the higher-ranking proposal, the board decided that somehow the entire process was tainted by the district administration having handled this RFQQ process using its typical processes. So RFQQ 03-25 was issued September 30, 2025, with an opening date of November 5, 2025. The action taken in August was “Consideration of a request that the RFQQ be re-issued and that the Superintendent collate the responses to the re-issued RFQQ and present them directly to the Board at a future Committee of the Whole meeting without scoring or recommendation.” Conveniently enough, there was a Committee of the Whole meeting scheduled for November 5, 2025, and there were three proposals received — from the same two that submitted earlier, plus one more firm.

The board did not discuss redistricting at the November 5, 2025, meeting of the Committee of the Whole. Nor did the board discuss redistricting in December (the Committee of the Whole did not meet), nor at the Committee of the Whole meeting on January 8, 2026. Perhaps they will choose a consultant at the February 5, 2026 Committee of the Whole meeting. But the letter from the gentleman who purports that his firm is acting on the Board’s behalf would suggest that the Board has absolutely no intention of adopting a legal election map.

So what, exactly, is wrong with Plan 22, the map that the board adopted (but didn’t use) in 2022?

The litigation that blocked its use (until an appeals court partially reversed the initial order) focused on the map’s use of split precincts, which are forbidden unless unavoidable. Louisiana Revised Statute 17:71.3 states, “The boundaries of such election districts shall contain whole election precincts established by the parish governing authority under R.S. 18:532 or 532.1.” There is an exception for circumstances when the use of whole precincts is impossible, but the board has not shown any evidence that there was a need to split precincts. They only demonstrated that their 2022 demographer didn’t offer any plans without split precincts, nor did the public submit any 9-member plans without split precincts. Writing as the member of the public who submitted several proposed maps, the reason not to submit a legal 9-member map was a strong preference for a map with at least 11 single-member districts, if not more. Revised Statute 17:71.2 states, “In accomplishing the reapportionment authorized by this Subpart, each of said school boards may, by majority vote of said board as presently constituted, reestablish itself with not less than five nor more than fifteen members. . . .” RS 17:71.3.B states, “Each of said boards, after determining the number of members of said board after reapportionment is to be effective, may create such school board election districts as it deems desirable.” Had the board followed the mandated sequence in 2022 (determining the number of members, and then subsequently creating the districts), the public would have offered a 9-member plan that satisfied the law. Instead the board considered both the 9-member plan that was later adopted and a competing 11-member plan up until the date of plan selection.

Whenever a precinct is to be split if circumstances demand it, there are limits. A map may “divide a precinct into portions which are bounded by visible features which are census tabulation boundaries.” There are some split precincts in Plan 22 that abide by that restriction by following streets, but there are two that do not.

State law also requires that school board districts be as equal in population as possible. Revised Statute 17:71.1 states, “Each of the parish and city school boards, as heretofore created and organized, is hereby authorized to reapportion itself so that each member of said board represents as nearly as possible the same number of persons.” Plan 22 has a population range from 41,119 to 45,126 out of a total school-district population of 387,014 according to the 2020 Census. The ideal population for each district is 43,002 (nearest whole number after dividing 387,014 by 9). The difference in size between the largest and smallest population (45,126 – 41,119) is 4,007, which is 9.32% of the ideal population of 43,002. Federal one-person-one-vote case law generally allows that number to be as high as 10%. However, the state statute, demanding “as nearly as possible the same number of persons,” is a higher standard.

A plan with district populations between 42,159 and 43,785 would have been possible without splitting precincts. Current numbers might be slightly different since some precinct boundaries have changed since 2022. That difference represents a difference of only 3.78% of the ideal population, less than half the variation in Plan 22. That alternate plan is also more compact as required by RS 17:71.3’s provision that board member election districts “shall be compact and contiguous.” One measure of compactness is the Reock score, which measures how dispersed each district’s shape is. A higher number is better, with the theoretical maximum being 1. By this measure, the adopted plan has a score of around 0.31; the alternate plan mentioned above has a Reock score of 0.33. Another easily-calculated measure is the Polsby-Popper score, which measures how indented districts are. Plan 22 has a score of around 0.22; the alternate plan has a score of 0.29.

Finally, a fair election map would give voters an opportunity to vote for members who represent their interests. The East Baton Rouge School Board serves a population that is more Black than White (but with neither race having a majority). And there are more Democratic voters registered than Republicans. Plan 22 almost certainly violates what’s left of the Voting Rights Act, although that analysis is rather complicated and the United States Supreme Court has weakened the power of that legislation in recent years.

Note that, as of February 1, 2026, the East Baton Rouge Parish School district has 238,874 registered voters. Of those, 108,888 are Democrats. 61,544 are Republicans. Another 68,442 are registered with neither of those parties. Yet Plan 22 has five districts that lean Republican. And it received votes from the five Republicans then serving on the Board.

There is still time for the East Baton Rouge Parish School Board to create the circumstances so that the new board can be elected fairly, although it’s hardly certain that they have any intention to do so.

They COULD select one of the three demographers when they meet February 5 (although a final decision would likely be two weeks later).

They COULD decide in February or March to expand the number of seats to a more reasonable number so that board members are more accessible to their constituents. Or they could vote to keep the number the same. Or they could threaten to shrink the number of members to satisfy business interests and punish the activists who are pushing for a fair map. The current average size of 43,002 is almost as large as a Louisiana House district and larger than any other single-member school board district in Louisiana except for Jefferson or Orleans Parishes. In fact, 43,002 is higher than the population of many whole parishes in Louisiana.

They COULD decide that compactness, equal population and fair opportunities for representation are important enough ideals that they should be given primary consideration in development of a map. Or they could pick another ridiculous map and leave it to their attorneys to defend the map as meeting the tight legal standard of “good ‘nuf,” especially if it helps the incumbents stay in power.

We shall see.

What’s going on in the 22^nd Judicial District of Louisiana?

Comprised of the parishes of Washington and St. Tammany, it’s beginning to appear that anything goes in those two Florida parishes that abut the Pearl River in the easternmost part of the Louisiana toe.

There’s the going on nine-year-old as yet unsolved murder of NANETTE KRENTEL.

 And while the 2012 murder of St. Tammany native businessman BRUCE CUCCHIARA did not occur in either of the two parishes (it happened in New Orleans East), his ties to Covington’s Jared Caruso-Riecke continue to raise questions while providing no answers.

It didn’t help when Sheriff Randy Smith arrested Jerry Rogers in 2019 for “criminal defamation” (a law that does not even exist) when Rogers, an investigator for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, criticized the lack of progress in solving the Krentel killing.

Rogers filed a LAWSUIT against Smith and two of his deputies in federal court in 2020. Rogers prevailed in his lawsuit when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5^th Circuit RULED IN HIS FAVOR in 2023.

Nor did it help burnish the local image when Smith’s predecessor, Jack Strain, was arrested in 2021 on state charges of rape, incest and indecent behavior with a juvenile. He was subsequently SENTENCED to life imprisonment for those offenses and for 10 after entering pleading guilty to soliciting and receiving bribes involving contracts for privatization of a work release program in St. Tammany Parish.

We’re rehashing all those past stories as a way of bringing events to the present day as they pertain to the City of Bogalusa and apparent reluctance by the district attorney’s office to investigate claimed irregularities in the previous city administration.

A Jan. 22 posting on Facebook by The Parish Spectator called into question the apparent lack of interest in investigating claims of bid irregularities that allegedly occurred during the administration of former Mayor Wendy Perrette.

Early in the tenure of Perrette’s successor, Mayor Tyrin Truong formally requested that District Attorney Collin Sims “investigate potential contractor fraud” connected to the administration of Perrette, the Facebook post said, adding that among the questionable transactions were “more than $1 million spent between two contractors without bids or quotes, with work allegedly awarded directly to individuals described by many as friends of the former administration.”

Instead, an investigation was initiated into Truong himself. Truong was indicted last October on multiple charges, including malfeasance of office, public intimidation and theft. The charges were tied to a drug trafficking investigation. Truong, incidentally, supported Sims’s opponent. Sounds much like a scaled-down version of Cankle Ankles Trump.

“It is not unreasonable for the public to ask whether that political reality has influenced what followed,” the Facebook post said. When prosecutorial power is exercised in a way that appears retaliatory, public trust erodes—and with it, confidence in the justice system itself.”

Fast forward to today. The results of a 71-page INVESTIGATIVE AUDIT conducted by the Legislative Auditor’s office has revealed a plethora of violations of state laws and regulations as well as a violation of the Louisiana State Constitution and the city charter.

The question that must be asked, then, is just where has the district attorney’s office been all this time?