Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for April, 2013

Vetting (v.): To subject to thorough examination or evaluation (The Free Online Dictionary).

Did the LSU Board of supervisors make even a token attempt at vetting the applicants for LSU President before settling on F. King Alexander, current president of the University of California Long Beach?

Vetting (v.) The process of performing a background check on someone before offering them employment (Wikipedia).

Did Long Beach State make even a cursory attempt at vetting F. King Alexander before he was chosen president of that university?

Vetting (v.): To make a careful and critical examination (Oxford Dictionary).

Okay, the last definition was in deference to the Oxford Roundtable Foundation, the organization headed by Alexander but not really affiliated with Oxford University.

The LSU Board of Supervisors meets today (Wednesday) to finalize the details of Alexander’s contract.

But back to the original question: was there even a perfunctory effort to vet the leader of Louisiana’s flagship university by the LSU Board of Supervisors?

Besides the fact that Alexander’s own curriculum vitae indicates that the highest level to which he rose as a teacher was a five-year (1997-2001) stint as an assistant professor at the University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana before making the quantum leap to the presidency of Murray State University in Murray, Kentucky, where he served for another five years (2001-2005).

Apparently, it isn’t necessary to pose the vetting question with Murray State; he simply succeeded his father, S. Kern Alexander to the presidency of the school.

Assuming that it’s the norm for an assistant professor to scale the academic ladder to president of a 10,000-student university in a single move (which, of course, it certainly is not), it’s his handling of a major grant from a prominent movie executive http://thugthebook.blogspot.com/ while at Long Beach State that we will examine here. Additional analyses of his qualifications will be provided in subsequent posts which we will offer for simultaneous release to the LSU Reveille and a couple of other choice blogs.

In May of 2007, King signed off on a three-page pledge agreement by movie producer/director Steven Spielberg’s Wunderkinder Foundation in which the foundation pledged nearly $1.4 million to support Long Beach State’s Master’s in Fine Arts in Dramatic Writing Program within the Film and Electronic Arts Department.

The money was given by Wunderkinder in three incremental payments. The first payment, $590,000 was payable upon the effective date of the pledge agreement (May 31, 2007). The second installment of $400,000 was due on the first anniversary of the effective date of the pledge agreement (May 31, 2008) and the final payment of $388,000 was scheduled for May 31, 2009, the second anniversary date of the pledge agreement.

The pledge agreement said, in part:

• The pledged funds are designated to (i) support the Master’s in Fine Arts in Dramatic Writing Program at the (university); (ii) support the conversion of space for a soundstage and editing studio in the (Department), and (iii) support equipment maintenance, replacement, and upgrades within the (Department);

• If (the university foundation) should for any reason lose its tax-exemption so that gifts to it no longer qualify as tax deductible, or if the pledged funds are used for any purpose not specifically permitted under this pledge agreement, this pledge agreement shall terminate immediately and pledgor (Wunderkinder) shall have no further obligation thereafter to pay any amounts not previously funded.

• A breach by (the university foundation) of this pledge agreement may cause irreparable injury to pledgor not readily measurable in money and for which pledgor shall be entitled to seek injunctive relief or to terminate this pledge agreement without further obligation to (the foundation), or both.

All three checks were delivered to the university’s Film and Electronic Arts Department as scheduled.

The third check of $388,000 was issued through Comerica Bank-California on May 18, 2009. But six weeks earlier, on April 6, Alexander had issued a directive suspending future admissions for the program, effectively killing it—even as Spielberg was said to have been preparing to renew the grant for another three years.

The check was not only negotiated in the full knowledge that it would not go for its intended purpose, but some of the money was then moved from the donor foundation account into the Film and Electronic Arts general account to be mingled with state funds and used for salaries.

Because there were still five students finishing the program, each received $10,000 under the grant, leaving $338,000 that went for other purposes—an apparent violation of the terms of the pledge agreement.

When the financial crunch hit colleges and universities across the country, Long Beach State was not spared and university faculty took a 10 percent “furlough” pay cut for the 2009-2010 academic year–ostensibly because of funding cuts. Later that year, however, Alexander announced that additional money had been “found.”

The terms of the furlough that came into existence in the fall of 2009 specifically said, “Faculty Unit employees whose salary is 100 percent funded from grants and contracts not funded from the state general fund shall not be subject to this furlough agreement.”

Yet a faculty member whose salary was to have been funded 100 percent by the Spielberg/Wunderkinder grant saw a 10 percent reduction in his salary. That 10 percent was apparently re-allocated for general expenses rather than for the purposes specified in the pledge agreement which could be interpreted as a breach of the pledge contract.

To make matters worse, Spielberg was never informed of the termination of the Master’s in Fine Arts in Dramatic Writing Program.

Spielberg, meanwhile, was experiencing problems of his own and for whatever reasons, did not pursue the matter. Wunderkinder in 2008 had become a victim of the giant Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Bernard Madoff. With assets of $12.6 million as of November of 2006, Wunderkinder’s financial fortunes had suffered right along with other investors in Madoff’s scheme.

By late 2009, even though Wunderkinder was financially crippled by Madoff, Spielberg continued his personal philanthropic activities on behalf of the University of Southern California, among others .

Vetting.

Read Full Post »

Call it revenge of the principals, insubordination or just down home independence or stubbornness.

The Louisiana Association of Principals has delivered a metaphoric “in your face” message for the Louisiana Department of Education and its Principal of the Year competition.

In a letter to Michael Faulk, superintendent of the Central Community School System in Central, Louisiana, Louisiana Association of Principals Executive Director Andrea Martin opted out of this year’s DOE competition because the DOE guidelines do not comply with guidelines of the National Association of Secondary School Principals or the National Association of Elementary Principals.

The DOE webpage indicated that the selection criteria for the award “are aligned with our state’s priorities of Compass and the Common Core State Standards.”

Compass, the DOE equivalent of the value added teacher assessment program and the Common Core State Standards are a bone of contention between the department and public school teachers, a factor that may have played a large part in the association’s decision.

Following is Martin’s email to Faulk:

The Louisiana Association of Principals regrets that it will not be able to coordinate with the LA Department of Education in their selection of the Principal of the Year because the guidelines and selection process from the DOE does not adhere to the guidelines outlined by the National Association of Secondary School Principals and the National Association of Elementary Principals.

As the Louisiana Association of Principals is an affiliate of these two national organizations, we are obligated to adhere to their guidelines. On a positive note, this will result in the principals selected by LAP being able to participate in the National Recognition Program sponsored by NAESP and the NASSP.

The applications are posted on the LAP website http://www.laprincipals.org and are available at this time. I apologize for the short turnaround time, but after contacting the DOE more than once, and participating in a conference call, we understood the DOE would provide LAP with a draft to ensure that all guidelines were followed before disseminating.

If you or other superintendents have any questions or concerns, please contact our office.

Read Full Post »

It was supposed to save the state some $40 million.

It cost more than 100 dedicated, efficient state employees their jobs.

It was supposed to be the best thing for the state even though studies commissioned by the Jindal administration said it was not a good deal.

It was such a great idea that the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) reduced its premium rates by 7 percent last July, six months before Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Louisiana (BCBS) was scheduled to take over as third party administrator for OGB’s Preferred Provider Organization (PPO). And if it was going to save $40 million, why not reduce rates?

Well, for one reason, since BCBS took over in January, that alluring $500 million reserve fund that former OGB Director Tommy Teague had helped the agency build up is now said to be less than half that amount because expenditures (claims payments) have been outpacing revenues (premiums).

Except no one really knows because the administration has not provided the monthly reports.

Our open, accountable and transparent administration has not been forthcoming with financial information on the agency.

We can’t seem to see any early evidence of that $40 million savings.

When revenues don’t keep up, BCBS has been forced to dip into the reserve fund to pay claims. Obviously, when the fund is depleted, there is just one way out for BCBS: increase premiums.

That’s not exactly an unexpected development. In fact, a retired OGB employee said last October the rate reduction was a formula for fiscal irresponsibility. “The program operated at a small deficit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010 (before the premium rate reduction), and is almost guaranteed a significant loss for Fiscal Year 2013 with the 7 percent reduction,” he said.

“The only reason that premiums could be reduced was the fact that the program had a significant surplus. For the current fiscal year, the program will be operating on its surplus for significant portion of the current year’s operating expenses…but this cannot go on forever,” he said.

“It is another example of using one-time funds to pay for continuing operations of the state. Once the reserve fund is exhausted, rates will need to be increased significantly to cover continuing operations.”

A member of the OGB board of directors requested copies of February’s monthly financial statement several weeks ago but has met only with frustration.

It can’t be that the report is not ready; word coming out of the agency is that not only is the February report complete, but the monthly report for March as well is complete.

Funny thing about this is that financials has always been provided to board members in the past. Suddenly things have changed.

With that in mind, we decided to submit our own request pursuant to the Louisiana public records laws.

In past requests for records from the Division of Administration, we have encountered delays and stonewalling that would test the patience of the Dalai Lama. DOA consistently offers the lame excuse that DOA personnel are “searching for records and reviewing them for exemptions and privileges.”

Anticipating the usual foot dragging, we submitted the following request:

From: Tom Aswell [mailto:azspeak@cox.net]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:55 PM
To: doacommissioner@la.gov
Subject: PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST

• Pursuant to the Public Records Act of Louisiana (R.S. 44:1 et seq.), I respectfully request the following information:

• Please allow me the opportunity to review the monthly financial statements for the Office of Group Benefits for February and March of 2013.

• And please do not insult my intelligence by giving me your B.S. stock response (below) that you are “searching for records and reviewing them for exemptions and privileges.” You and I both know this is not privileged information and it certainly is not exempt. I will call on you Tuesday to review the documents. Any delays on your part will be met with prompt legal action.

Our most recent public records request to DOA was on March 10. Here is DOA’s response:

From: Joshua Melder [mailto:Joshua.Melder@la.gov]
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 4:53 PM
To: ‘azspeak@cox.net’
Cc: David Boggs (DOA)
Subject: RE: PRR BenefitFocus

Mr. Aswell,

We are still searching for records and reviewing them for exemptions and privileges. Once finished, we will contact you regarding delivery of the records. At that time, all non-exempt records will be made available to you. As of now, we will not be ready to produce records on Monday.

Regards,

Joshua Paul Melder
Attorney
Division of Administration
Office of General Counsel

Under Louisiana’s public records laws, public agencies, from town hall to the governor’s office, have three days in which to provide requested records or to respond in writing why the records are not available and when they will be available.

Here is that March 10 request for which we still are waiting for the records:

From: Tom Aswell [mailto:azspeak@cox.net]
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 9:19 PM
To: doacommissioner@la.gov
Subject: PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST

Pursuant to the Public Records Act of Louisiana (R.S. 44:1 et seq.), I respectfully submit the following request:
Please provide me the opportunity to review the following information dating back to July 1, 2012:

• all written (email and traditional mail) correspondence between the Division of Administration (DOA) or any of its representatives, spokespersons and/or agents and BenefitFocus or any of its representatives, spokespersons and/or agents relative to any contract, Request for Proposal or any other contractual or business relationship between DOA and BenefitFocus or between the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) and BenefitFocus;

• all written (email and traditional mail) correspondence between the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) or any of its representatives, spokespersons and/or agents and BenefitFocus or any of its representatives, spokespersons and/or agents relative to any contract, Request for Proposal or any other contractual or business relationship between OGB and BenefitFocus or between DOA and BenefitFocus;

• all written (email and traditional mail) correspondence between the Division of Administration (DOA) or any of its representatives, spokespersons and/or agents and the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) or any of its representatives, spokespersons and/or agents relative to any contract, Request for Proposal or any other contractual or business relationship between DOA and BenefitFocus or between OGB and BenefitFocus.

We will keep you posted on how this silly, unnecessary drama plays out.

Read Full Post »

James Bowman is officially listed as the Chief Information Officer for the Louisiana Department of Education (DOE).

At $148,000 a year, he ostensibly presides over information technology for DOE.

He may even be the one responsible for redesigning the department’s web page to make it all but impossible to navigate. So much the better to keep the public uninformed about the machinations of DOE.

LouisianaVoice made its initial public information request pursuant to a curious Bowman email way back on March 10 but DOE did not get around to responding until Wednesday of this week. Our request read, in part:

• Pursuant to the Public Records Act of Louisiana (R.S. 44:1 et seq.), I respectfully request the following information:

• Emails sent by James Bowman the week of March 4-7, 2013 relative to directing staff not to attend BESE meeting.

The email was sent by Bowman on March 7 to Dave Elder, Carol Mosley and James McMahon of DOE and read:

• If you have staff that normally attends these meetings, pls advise that they should not attend tomorrow.

Inquiring minds, of course, want to know. Accordingly, we fired off an email to James Bowman, Chief Information Officer for the Louisiana Department of Education, in which we sought…well, information. Our email read thusly:

• What was the reasoning behind your email of March 7 to Dave Elder, Carol Mosley and James McMahon in which you directed them to advise their staff members that “they should not attend” the March 8 BESE meeting?

Bowman opened our email at 6:12 p.m. Wednesday but by 10 p.m. had not responded.

…So much for the information part of his title. Apparently that does not extend to the great unwashed.

For what it’s worth, we were unable to ascertain the exact job titles and salaries of Mosley or McMahon, but Elder was a former information technology director for DOE who has since retired.

As for that mysterious March 8 meeting, the agenda appeared rather routine:

• Academic Goals and Instructional Improvement;

• Administration and finance;

• Educator Effectiveness;

• Policy Information.

We can’t help but wonder if that BESE meeting may have held a clue to DOE’s agreement to provide sensitive student information to a huge computer data base controlled by Fox News honcho Rupert Murdoch—thus the directive to bar certain DOE staff members from attending the meeting.

What might have been buried in that “policy information” item? Or “academic goals and instructional improvement?”

Paranoid? Hell yes.

Read Full Post »

It seems Gov. Bobby Jindal’s $500,000 advertising campaign was good money thrown after bad.

You’ve probably seen those ads paid for by Believe in Louisiana, the non-profit 527 political organization founded by Jindal supporter and Baton Rouge Business Report publisher Rolfe McCollister.

The advertising blitz was supposed to turn the tide in favor of Jindal’s proposal to abolish the state income tax in favor of a state sales tax increase that kept changing. The ads laid it out loud and clear: you either wanted to get rid of the state income tax or you preferred to “keep loopholes for lobbyists.” The ad concludes with the question, “Whose side are you on?”

Pretty simplistic. Very much like former President George W. Bush’s “If you’re not with us, you’re against us” in his dust-up to his Big Iraq Attack.

But just as Bush’s “Mission accomplished,” and his “You’re doing a heckuva job, Brownie” were a bit premature, so was the ad campaign.

And they were still running on Tuesday, a day after Jindal suddenly folded like a cheap suit on his tax proposal. That’s what happens when you make a large media buy. Just like furniture store and automotive ads that often continue to run a couple of days after a special promotional ad, the tax ads continue to implore viewers to tell their legislators to support the tax plan.

Jindal unexpectedly pulled the rug from under legislators who first heard that he was pulling the tax proposal bills when the governor announced it during his uncharacteristically brief 13-minute address to open the 2013 legislative session on Monday.

His decision, besides catching legislators short, also disappointed many who have grown to detest everything about this governor.

“I was almost sorry Jindal folded,” one Baton Rouge resident said. “I was hoping for a well-deserved humiliating defeat, which would have been good for the state, if not for him. He’s got about three more years to keep wrecking Louisiana. I’d rather have Edwards or Uncle Earl (Long) when he was in Mandeville,” he said in reference to Long’s commitment to East Louisiana Hospital in Mandeville in 1959 during the waning days of his last administration.

“Jindal is wrong about the GOP being the stupid party,” he said. “It’s the crazy party now and for the immediate future.”

Another longtime political observer said, “I wasn’t surprised that he capitulated. That was going to happen sooner or later. But I really was surprised that he had no Plan B,” he said. “How could they not have a fallback plan?”

The sudden retreat should not have caught anyone by surprise. Trying to decipher the governor’s tax plan was closely akin to trying to watch a black and white movie from the back row of an old drive-in theater in a thick fog.

But then, anyone parking on the back row of a drive-in theater on a foggy night probably had no intention of watching a movie in the first place, so perhaps that’s a bad analogy.

The lack of an alternative plan prompted retired Louisiana State Budget Director Stephen Winham to say that Jindal “never had a plan beyond elimination of income taxes and franchise taxes as an ancillary.”

But then Winham perhaps captured the quintessential Jindal when he predicted that Jindal would turn lemons into lemonade. “I think he can possibly salvage his national reputation, again based on my original premise that he can claim he tried to lead us to the Promised Land, but we just didn’t have sense enough to go.”

Winham said in a guest LouisianaVoice column way back on Jan. 25 that Jindal had “already achieved a major goal of this proposal—getting extensive national media coverage for making a bold proposal to fix Louisiana’s budget and economic development problems.”

A somewhat jaded Baton Rouge political junkie said Jindal realized his ambitious tax plan was stalled and would never get out of the House Ways and Means Committee. “No governor could have his plan die in committee, so he got in front of it and pulled it,” he said.

“I also think he did the smart thing by throwing it to the legislature. Now it’s on their backs. If they don’t come up with a plan (and they won’t) Jindal can blame the legislature,” he said, echoing Winham in predicting Jindal will play the blame game on his renewed national speaking tour.

Moving forward at the end of the day (as Jindal is fond of saying), the blame game is about all that is left for him in his efforts to save face in the coming weeks.

With the tax issue all but dead now, we can all turn our attention to the legislative debate on Jindal’s patchwork budget proposal.

That should be every bit as interesting as the highly anticipated tax debate that went out with a whimper after a lot of bravado, buildup and B.S.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »