If you didn’t believe the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee handled Louisiana State Police (LSP) Superintendent Mike Edmonson with kid gloves a week ago (Wednesday, May 18) you need only contrast that performance with the manner in which committee members ripped into Department of Juvenile Justice Director Mary Livers two weeks earlier (Wednesday, May 4).
In all the years of political posturing witnessed in more than 40 years of covering elected officials, we have never seen anything as disgraceful and disrespectful—or as hypocritical—as the grandstanding of committee Chairperson Karen Carter Peterson (D-New Orleans).
Nor did members Jean-Paul Morrell (D-New Orleans), Wesley Bishop (D-New Orleans), and Jim Fannin (R-Jonesboro) even make so much as an attempt at civility or professional courtesy in dealing with Livers, a veteran of 40 years in the field of corrections. Fannin, in fact, stopped just short of an outright accusation of malfeasance and misappropriation of funds in his condescending North Louisiana drawl.
Members spent the entire 80 minutes not looking at her overall performance but instead, grilling Livers about conditions at the Bridge City Juvenile Detention Center. They seem particularly fixated on her seeming inability to prevent employee turnover at the facility—even to the point of Bishop’s application of a puzzling mathematical formula to explain the significance of 30 staff vacancies at Bridge City.
Oh, but when it came to addressing the documented personnel and administrative problems in the state’s law enforcement agency (verified by LSP’s own internal documents, by the way), members took on a collective hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil persona. Instead of a vetting by the committee, the hearing turned into a coronation with the only missing stage prop being a halo. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/05/18/16942/
To watch the unabashed lovefest during the Edmonson hearing, go to the 1:11 mark at this link: http://senate.la.gov/video/videoarchive.asp?v=senate/2016/05/051816S~G_0
Yes, the Bridge City facility does have problems. Any correctional facility does and Bridge City may well be far worse than the others and Morrell may have been correct when he said he was concerned that recent events there “was not isolated.”
It was in April that several teenagers housed there broke through locked doors and gave staff a run for their money for several hours and members were justifiably concerned over the reports of violence and “mayhem” (Peterson’s word for conditions there). http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2016/04/bridge_city_youth_center_attac.html
But as Livers attempted to explain, she was repeatedly interrupted by Peterson who seemed to think the hearing was all about her and who made sure everyone understood she is a lawyer. Among the problems at Juvenile Justice, Livers said, is a 40 percent budget cut endured by the agency.
“There is a lack of staff there,” Livers said. “We have more than 30 vacancies and the staff we have are required to work multiple shifts to make up for the shortage and there is no money in our budget for overtime pay.” (Did we mention a budget cut of 40 percent?)
“The youth there have lots of problems or they wouldn’t be in a facility like Bridge City,” she said. “The problems are historic. When you have more than 100 kids in a facility, you have problems. Today Bridge City is at 136 youth. That’s too many kids in one place, not enough space. It’s a recipe for problems. We have a difficult time keeping people.”
As Livers was saying this, Peterson can be seen on the inset video as she shared a laugh with another committee member. http://senate.la.gov/video/videoarchive.asp?v=senate/2016/05/050416S~G_0
As evidence of Peterson’s apparent inattention to the testimony, Livers said 38 minutes into the video, “I was there (at Bridge City) yesterday.” Then, just 22 minutes later, at the one-hour mark, she asked Livers “When was the last time you were down there.”
Livers said the 30 vacancies were direct line officers. “That’s a major part of the vacancy issue. There are challenges filling social work positions. Our salaries are competitive to hire but not to keep. I’m down there every two or three weeks when we’re having these kinds of issues…”
“You’re always having these kinds of issues,” Peterson interrupted. “You say you have a passion for this. Overall, I’m not suggesting you’re not doing a good job but in this instance, it’s not adequate. Why? Even with the resources you have, if there are current vacancies and you lead the department and the vacancies are the reason that institution can’t function, that needs to be prioritized. Whatever needs to happen to get that filled, that’s your job. Every day it’s not filled, those children are at risk.”
Funny that same mindset wasn’t present two weeks later when Edmonson said in that same chair. You’d think that when a trooper is allowed for months on end to work a couple of hours and then go home to sleep for the remainder of his 12-hour shift, the driving public might be “at risk.”
When a trooper is having sex with a young female while on duty—once on the back seat of his patrol car—you’d think a committee member might wonder if the public might be “at risk” because the trooper wasn’t doing his job.
It might be reasonable to assume the integrity and reputation of the Louisiana State Police might be “at risk” when a State Police lieutenant escorts an underage girl onto the gaming floor of a Vicksburg, Mississippi, casino, tries to use his position to talk his way out of a citation (again, from LSP documents obtained by LouisianaVoice through a public records request), is fined $600 by the Mississippi Gaming Commission, and is subsequently promoted to troop commander.
Some member of the committee missed a great opportunity to pontificate about whether a state police lieutenant found to be using prescription narcotics while on duty might be placing himself “at risk.” That same member might wonder why that trooper was also subsequently promoted to troop commander.
But….nary a word from a single member—except when they took turns gushing over what a great public servant Edmonson is.
But Peterson, Bishop, and Fannin tripped all over each other in challenging Livers and her performance. And when Livers attempted to explain the hiring process, she was abruptly cut off by Peterson. Not a shred of common courtesy was displayed by either of the three. Funny how that works.
Peterson asked why there was such a high turnover—a question Livers had already addressed in describing the working conditions at Bridge City. But she gamely tried again. “There is a variety of reasons,” she said. “Most say the job was not what they thought it would be. They don’t like being called into service and working all kinds of hours because of vacancies.”
“That goes back to you,” Peterson snapped. “It’s not enough to take responsibility. You’ve been there a long time. You say you take responsibility but nothing gets done.”
“With all due respect,” Livers said, “I don’t think nothing is being done. I think a lot is being done. Is it acceptable? No, but we’ve thrown everything we have at it to make the sure the kids are safe.”
“There are 136 kids at Bridge City,” Peterson said. “Are they safe?”
“Based on the staffing we have, yes,” Livers said.
When Bishop finally got to speak, his jumbled math quickly became a bone of contention.
“I’ve tried to equate 30 vacancies for 136 kids,” he said. “Let’s say there are just 120 kids. With 30 vacancies, that’s a ratio of four to one.”
Huh? As best we could make out, he seemed to believe there were only 30 staff members before they all quit—or something like that.
“There are more than 200 staff members who are there,” Livers said, trying to bring him around—possibly to Common Core math.
“Aren’t absences even more of a reason to fill vacancies?” he asked. “Why don’t you fill the vacancies? Why would you not hire people?”
“Why would anybody not strive to fill all the positions that you have?” Livers answered.
“That’s the question most of us are asking,” said Bishop, apparently also not paying attention when Livers earlier explained why there was such high turnover at Bridge City. (What does it take to get these people to shut their mouths and listen to testimony being given?)
“We are striving to do that, Senator,” she said, coming down heavy on the word. “And we’re striving to keep those people. It’s not from a lack of desire, attention, or focus; it is a complexity of issues that culminate into a very difficult task.”
“You’re still saying it’s safe?” Peterson asked.
“Chairwoman, we’re doing everything we can…”
But again, Peterson was hell bent on interrupting. “I’m asking if you believe the facility under your jurisdiction is safe.”
“I do.”
Then it was Fannin’s turn. The former Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee before he was forced to run for the Senate after being term-limited on the other side of the Capitol rotunda asked how long the 30 vacancies had existed and what the average vacancy duration was.
He then launched into a veiled accusation of fiscal mismanagement by Livers. “I don’t recall the Department of Juvenile Justice having any excess revenues. What do you do with the funds allocated for those 30 salaries?”
Reminding Fannin of that 40 percent budget cut, Livers tried to explain that her agency had ended its fiscal years having to borrow money from the Treasury to stay afloat. “Whatever money there is goes towards operations,” she said. “We’ve ended the year short of funds for three years in a row.”
“You’re not really answering my question. You didn’t know how long the vacancies was (sic) and now you’re not wanting to answer what you use the money for.”
“We have been underfunded for the past three years, so when we have operational costs, whatever savings there may be from vacancies are shifted into operations through working with the Division of Administration,” she said. “We are one of the agencies that have suffered the most cuts.”
“But you have 30 vacancies,” Bishop said. “A deliberate decision was made to use money for vacancies for other purposes.”
“We are not deliberately not hiring people, Senator,” she said. “That seems to be the impression you’re getting.”
Peterson closed out the joint exercise in narcissism by scolding Livers one last time. “You were there yesterday and you were there three weeks ago and that was inadequate,” she said. “I don’t know who runs that facility but I would highly recommend that you get there and roll up your sleeves and you fix it (funny, no one told Edmonson to “fix” anything). And you hire these 30 people ASAP.
“And we may ask you to come back and finish this confirmation hearing before the end of the session.”
No you will not.
Your committee’s boorish treatment of Ms. Livers, in stark contrast to the butt-kissing you did with Edmonson, convinced her she’s had enough of your crap. To be perfectly blunt, she doesn’t need to be subjected to such a blatant double standard.
Accordingly, she has taken her retirement and gotten out of Dodge.
Yes, there are problems at Bridge City. No one can deny that. There are problems at every corrections facility. And committee members are within their rights to ask hard questions—but they do not have the right to ignore one problem with only syrupy words of high praise for the public face of law enforcement in Louisiana while crucifying another department head just for the sake of political posturing.
So, Sen. Peterson, why don’t you get there and roll up your sleeves and fix it? And you hire those 30 people ASAP.
Louisiana Voice 
Oh please let this committee try these heavy handed tactics with State College and University Presidents. Can’t you just see Karen Peterson chastising the Presidents for loss of accreditation. And their response will be “Because you cut our funding by over 60% which caused us to have to reduce faculty. The courses required for accreditation also require professors. They don’t just teach themselves. So we can’t offer the courses. For lack of courses the degrees can’t be offered. And when a college can’t offer even the most basic courses required for accreditation, the school ceases to be an accredited university. Any questions?”
Actually, every department and division head in the state (except for Edmonson’s fiefdom) can and should use the same defense. The problem lies squarely at the feet of the legislators. totally!
Eight years
Repub Gov
Repub Senate
Repub House
They controlled the whole ball of wax. After putting all these departments in a financial bind, they haven’t any right to criticize anyone. In fact, their feet should be held to the fire.
“After putting all these departments in a financial bind, they haven’t any right to criticize anyone. In fact, their feet should be held to the fire.” Jerry, you are correct. The same can be true about those legislators who are now complaining about the hospital contracts. The same ones who did not say a thing about them when they were initially negotiated.
The difference comes down to one thing… Livers isn’t the trained pet of the Louisiana Sheriff’s Association and Edmonson is.
This report of the Livers hearing is very different from the one in The ADVOCATE newspaper. That report made Ms. Livers appear almost totally inept and the committee members heroes for holding her feet to the fire. But, even in that report, readers should have been able to discern the root problem – years of budget cuts that went largely unnoticed by the public because the officials responsible were afraid to speak up about the problems budget cuts created for fear of losing their jobs.
This LouisianaVoice report of the hearing shows it to have been a rare case where the person before the committee members lacked the power to preempt what amounted to classic schoolyard bullying and piling on.
At least the Edmonson hearing went as might have been expected. The Livers hearing was shameful in every respect – including the fact her major point failed to get the attention it deserved in the MSM.
We all know that the base root of these problems lies with the Republican form of non-governance that Louisiana suffered grossly under Jindal. It still seems to be going and going and going. What is the solution? If the majority of Louisiana voters continue to re-elect and elect the same politically aligned politicians, how can this be fixed? I do know that honest, stark reporting would go a long way. I do not recall reading much investigative reporting on our actual governing in the Shreveport Times.
Peterson and other members of that lynching committee deserve the same degree of disrespect they showed Ms. Livers. It was apparent that they didn’t understand the basic principles of financial or personnel management.
Or, equally bad, that they saw a chance to publicly humiliate somebody and got into a feeding frenzy doing so. They would not have done this to somebody by whom they were intimidated or believed they would lose politically or financially from treating that way. In any case, it is good LouisianaVoice has provided a balance to the MSM reports.
And these same politicians wonder why those of us who actually read sites like this one, who think for ourselves and don’t buy into the propaganda put out by the “media” hold our politicians at every level to a lower level of trust than telemarketers and used car sales people. What vile, disgusting critters these elected officials are.
It is embarrassing to live here. I vote. I write letters. I try and teach my students to be civil and respectful of each other, even when they disagree. They piled on Ms. Livers because she can’t do anything to them, or FOR them, like Edmondson can. They were rude and condescending because they can be because they are not professionals. They are pathetic. Many of us will keep voting and writing letters but until more do, well, it is just humiliating.
Having served as the Director of Communications for the Office of Juvenile Justice for nine years, most of that time under Deputy Secretary Dr. Mary Livers, I took an interest in the OJJ matters played out recently in the news. Some observations…..Dr. Livers is a Ph.D and it was not lost on many that the Senate committee members who conducted her confirmation hearing pointedly failed to address her by her title. She is the current president of the American Correctional Association, meaning that Dr. Livers is nationally known as a corrections leader with impressive credentials. Try replacing that, senators.
Dr. Livers’ confirmation hearing took place on May 4. On April 28, New Orleans Juvenile Judge Mark Doherty conducted a hearing concerning matters at OJJ’s Bridge City Center for Youth. At the hearing some very uncomplimentary information was presented, some of which was exaggerated and some downright untrue, according to my sources. OJJ administrative staff were not apprised of the hearing in advance, and only learned of it after it had begun. Bridge City staff who testified were subpoenaed, not invited, again according to my sources. News of the hearing was widely reported – a week before Dr. Livers’ confirmation hearing.
The timing was certainly interesting. No need to discuss who engineered that drama. The people behind it accomplished their goal. Dr. Livers is no longer at OJJ. Their ultimate goal is total closure of the secure care facilities – the juvenile equivalent of prison. Watch what you ask for, you just might get it, and then, citizens, if you like the rate of juvenile crime in Louisiana now, you’ll love it when youth who commit serious offenses are sent back home and to the streets, the environment that caused the criminal behavior, rather than a place where they will receive things most did not have at home: structure, decent meals, educational, health care and mental health services, and pro-social skills training, in a therapeutic setting. But I digress.
So in a hearing where Dr. Livers received a beatdown for not having the financial wherewithal to maintain optimal operations due to an almost 40 percent budget cut by the very legislators doing the beating, adult Corrections Secretary Jimmy LeBlanc got a lot of love from those same senators. The senate committee members mentioned in passing some of the issues plaguing the Department of Corrections, but then played kissy-face with the secretary who has allowed egregious, unethical and probably illegal behavior by a host of favorites. Senators, do y’all read the news? Have you heard that “ol’ Burl” Cain was forced to retire as warden of Angola, and a bevy of his family members are retiring and being removed from their positions, due to revelations of their misdeeds? LeBlanc’s agency is rife with payroll fraud, nepotism and highly questionable behavior, not to mention self-serving investigations that turn up no wrongdoing, even when it is patently obvious that public employees have performed work on private interests while on state time, beaten and brutalized inmates, falsified payroll records, broken agency policy and procedures…..
Would you like to know why the senators, news reporters and LouisianaVoice, have not complained about similar infractions at OJJ? Because when the OJJ leadership became aware of nepotism, payroll fraud, staff brutality of youth, staff sexual behavior with youth, refusal to follow established policies and procedures, etc., those employees were investigated, and if the allegations proved founded, they were terminated and in some cases, arrested and turned over to law enforcement for possible prosecution. But let a handful of teenage offenders get out of line and it’s the end of the world.
To be fair and balanced, over the years there have been a handful of escapes from juvenile secure care, and some other unfortunate incidents. Dr. Livers and her staff are not perfect – no one is – but they have done credible work, with a challenging population, under difficult conditions. Our legislators are fond of telling agencies to live within their means like regular people must do. But who can maintain their lifestyle when presented with a budget cut of almost 40 percent?
I retired almost a year ago, so I have no dog in this hunt. Just making a few observations.
Well said, particularly the Jimmy LeBlanc part, which we did not address because of our desire to focus on the mistreatment of Dr. Livers by legislators who, by their own admissions (in case you missed that passing comment by Karen Carter Peterson), knew little about Bridge City.
It seems to me, that if they can’t fund Bridge City properly, which causes them to not be able to keep staff, they need to look at which kids can be released from the facility. How many of them are truly a threat to society? I’d bet that a good chunk of them are non violent offenders. Let them go. We simply cannot afford to lock up everyone who breaks a law and throw away the key.
OJJ has no control over the number or identity of youth placed in custody. The Office of Juvenile Justice is the agency that receives and serves juvenile delinquents placed in state custody by judges who have conducted trials or accepted pleas in which the juveniles have been adjudicated delinquent (convicted of criminal behavior).
Judges do not place youth into state custody unless they have been deemed a threat to society and/or in need of supervision or residential treatment. Judges place youth on probation (supervision) or recommend non-secure or secure residential treatment. Lower level, non-violent offenders are usually placed on probation and receive services while living at home or in the community, and others are removed from the home and placed in non-secure group homes. Secure care is reserved for youthful offenders who pose a threat to society and/or have not responded well to community-based services and treatment . The number of youth in secure care usually runs about 400 or less at any given time, not a large population, in housed in one of four facilities around the state.
OJJ cannot release a youth from custody before the end of the sentence imposed by the judge, but can recommend a sentence modification to the court, which has ultimate authority.
The average length of stay in secure care is less than one year, and in no case does a juvenile (in the OJJ system) remain in state custody past their 21st birthday.
I agree with Hunycat. We keep electing the same old faces over and over to office. As long as the public continues to send these incompetent and self-serving clowns to office will continue to have these problems. Colonel Edmonson should have been gone a long time ago. His leadership has put a blot on one of the finest State Police organizations in the nation.