Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for June, 2016

Starnes promotion pulled by Edmonson after complaint; Gov. fails to approve LSP pay, plan is rescinded by LSPC

Posted in Commissions, Ethics, Finances, Governor's Office, Legislature, Legislators, Public Records, State Police, Transparency, Uncategorized on June 6, 2016| 6 Comments »

An official complaint over the appointment of Louisiana State Police (LSP) Maj. Jason Starnes as Interim Undersecretary of Management and Finance has produced another LSP major: a major CYA maneuver at State Police headquarters to backtrack and act as though the “promotion” never occurred.

At the same time, the Louisiana State Police Commission has rescinded last November’s action by the commission to approve a last-minute longevity pay increase plan for state police who last year received two separate pay increases totaling about 30 percent.

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/07/state_troopers_get_hefty_back-.html

The longevity pay plan would have locked troopers into automatic pay raises based on years of service and was part of Bobby Jindal’s exit strategy as he headed out the door of the governor’s office near the end of his term.

But on June 1, Cathy Derbonne, LSPC Executive Director, published TRANSMITTAL SHEET NO. 58  on the LSPC Web page that pointed out that Article X, Section 48(C) of the Louisiana Constitution mandates that “any rule determination affecting wages or hours shall have the effect of law and become effective only after approval by the governor and subject to appropriation of sufficient funds by the Legislature (emphasis Derbonne’s).

“As of June 1, 2016, an approval by the Governor has not been received and there is currently insufficient funding to implement the revisions,” she wrote.

“The Revision of State Police Commission Rule Chapter 6 Uniform Pay and Classification Plan is hereby rescinded in its entirety,” she wrote (emphasis Derbonne’s). The pay plan approved by the LSPC last November is contained in GENERAL CIRCULAR 180

Starnes, a classified member of LSP, was recently transferred by State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson to an unclassified non-state police service position as Interim Undersecretary, Custodian of Records of the Office of Management and Finance within the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections (DPS).

That move, the complaint says, was in violation of Rule 14.3(G), which says:

  • No classified member of the State Police shall be appointed, promoted, transferred or any way employed in or to any position that is not within the State Police Service.

In addition to the points cited in the official complaint, LouisianaVoice pointed out last month that the promotion of Starnes placed him in direct supervision of his estranged wife, Tammy, Audit Manager for LSP. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/05/16/mike-edmonsons-appointment-not-official-yet-senate-committee-set-to-consider-his-confirmation-on-tuesday/

LouisianaVoice also revealed that since his separation from his wife, Starnes had been residing in the LSP Training Academy’s VIP quarters. The VIP quarters at the academy is also known as the “Charlie Dupuy Suite,” so named because Edmonson’s Chief of Staff Charlie Dupuy also resided there during his own divorce from his first wife.

Starnes has since denied he is staying at the LSP Training Academy and more significantly, he has said he is not acting in the capacity of Undersecretary of Management and Finance despite this February memorandum from Edmonson announcing his appointment:

EDMONSON NAMED

(CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

Starnes’ name has since been quietly removed from the DPS Management and Finance Web page and replaced by that of Edmonson who is listed as Deputy Secretary and Custodian of Records. http://mfn.dps.louisiana.gov/

The Office of Management and Finance page contains a link to the undersecretary but when readers click on the link, a “Message from Undersecretary” heading pops up. Beneath that are only the words “Coming Soon.”

That has to be one of the more obvious moves by Edmonson to obscure a major departmental administrative blunder on his part.

The effort to promote someone in his inner circle illegally, Taken with his clumsy but almost successful effort to steer a bill amendment through the Legislature in the waning hours of the 2014 session that would have given him a retirement pay hike of some $30,000 and the documented cases of inconsistent and inadequate investigations and punishment (or outright ignoring) of wrongdoing within his agency, should give pause to the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee which is scheduled to vote on his confirmation today (Monday, June 6).

 

Read Full Post »

OGB contract actuary cites need for premium increase; conflicts with earlier testimony of OGB Director West

Posted in Budget, Finances, Governor's Office, Legislature, Legislators, OGB, Office of Group Benefits on June 5, 2016| 13 Comments »

It was only last Nov. 20 that a joint meeting of the House Committee on Appropriations and the Senate Committee on Finance was told that the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) was in improved financial condition.

By April 21 of this year, however, serious discussion had begun about a premium increase for state employees and retirees even as state workers have been told they will not get merit pay raises for the sixth straight year.

OGB Executive Director testified before the joint committee last November that the agency’s fund balance, nearly depleted by the reckless fiscal policies of Bobby Jindal, had recovered to $122 million at the end of the 2015 fiscal year (June 30, 2015) and was projected to be $146 million by the end of the current fiscal year. http://house.louisiana.gov/H_Video/VideoArchivePlayer.aspx?v=house/2015/Nov/1120_15_AP_SenFinance

Neither amount, of course, is anywhere close to the $500 million fund balance accrued by former OGB Executive Director Tommy Teague before he was teagued in April 2011. (for those who may have forgotten, the term coined by a reader for those who dared disagree with Jindal who were quickly fired or demoted).

It is, however, a significant increase from the low balance that came perilously close to double digits in 2014.

Jim Fannin (R-Jonesboro), at the time a member of the House and chairman of the House Appropriations Committee though he had already been elected to the Senate, asked West what the OGB “burn rate” (the amount paid out monthly in benefits in excess of premiums) was.

“It was $16.3 million,” West replied. “It’s now $7 million. Changes that were made have had a positive impact on the fund balance.”

She said OGB has held no public hearings “because there are no planned benefit changes for 2016.”

But wait. Her testimony does not quite jibe with the April presentation of OGB consulting actuary Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. in that OGB ESTIMATING CONFERENCE

At that estimating conference, Gallagher said a 7 percent rate increase would increase the fund balance to $156.9 million by the end of fiscal year 2017 (June 30, 2017), which it said was “within the target range” of $130 million to $240 million.

Gallagher recommended that the new rate increase go into effect in January 2017 “for ease of communication and administration due to annual enrollment timing.”

Gov. John Bel Edwards, then a state representative, openly opposed the 2014 OGB rate increase plan proposed by West and then Commissioner of Administration Kristy Nichols.

https://louisianavoice.com/2014/08/25/louisianavoice-learns-of-jindal-plan-to-force-state-retirees-out-of-ogb-by-raising-members-premiums-cutting-benefits/

Edwards even went so far as to request an attorney general’s opinion on the method by which Nichols and West were attempting to implement the new premium increase and when the Jindal administration learned in advance that the AG’s opinion would be detrimental to its premium increase plan, Nichols quickly shifted gears in saying that the state would go through the required rule-making process spelled out in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

That move only served to further invoke Edwards’ ire because, he said, the changes had already been implemented without the required public hearing. https://louisianavoice.com/2014/09/23/smackdown-attorney-general-opinion-on-ogb-proposals-hands-jindal-administration-another-stinging-legal-setback/

Now Edwards finds himself in the ticklish position of having to either uphold his original position of opposing a rate increase, which originally brought him to the attention of state employees as their White Knight, or backing his OGB Executive Director.

As our late friend C.B. Forgotston was so fond of saying: You can’t make this stuff up.

Read Full Post »

Baton Rouge Advocate said to be facing new round of layoffs; ad revenue and subscriptions reportedly continue to decline

Posted in Media on June 2, 2016| 26 Comments »

When John Georges purchased the Baton Rouge Advocate three years ago, he set about on an ambitious program of expansion into New Orleans and Lafayette.

Taking advantage of the New Orleans Times-Picayune’s contraction to publishing on three days a week, he began hiring reporters and editors from the New Orleans newspaper and it looked as though The Advocate might actually buck the trend of newsroom cutbacks plaguing publications across the country.

It looked for a while as if it might actually work but it turns out that a retired Advocate reporter was most probably correct when he recently said, “We’re all dinosaurs now.”

There’s no joy in this latest trend or in the retired reporter’s assessment of an industry in indisputable decline. And after having entered the profession 50 years ago at the Ruston Daily Leader, I certainly took no pleasure in watching the New York Times as it first sold its office building in 2004 and only last week announced buyouts to encourage early retirement in order to further cut costs.

The Advocate had already laid off some very good reporters and now LouisianaVoice has learned that additional cutbacks are expected to be announced at the end of this month.

The layoff syndrome has become a vicious cycle in the newspaper industry and the thinking behind it defies logic. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/22/the-declining-value-of-u-s-newspapers/

Tom Kelly, the man who gave me my first newspaper job exactly 50 years ago, recently said that the one commodity a newspaper has to offer its readers is fresh, thorough and compelling news stories. “The ads pay the bills, but people buy a newspaper for news and it defies logic that they cut back on the one thing that sells their papers,” he said.

Kelly, who now publishes The Piney Woods Journal, a monthly publication geared mostly to the timber industry in Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Arkansas, also had some decidedly uncomplimentary words for Gannett, which he said is gobbling up newspapers at an alarming rate.

Gannett’s initial foray into Louisiana included The Shreveport Times and Monroe Morning World (now The News-Star) but it has expanded its reach into Lafayette (The Advertiser), Opelousas (The Daily World), and Alexandria (The Town Talk). Along the way, it gutted their news staffs to a fraction of their former size.

Besides its national publication, USA Today (referred to by critics as “McNewspaper”) Gannett now runs 117 newspapers in 33 states and Guam. “And now, Gannett is trying to buy the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times,” Kelly said. “Their news coverage is pitiful and they want to buy two of the largest papers in the country.” His voice trailed off as he just shook his head in disgust.

So now, one of only two major dailies left in private hands (The Lake Charles American Press is the other), is about to undergo yet another cut. It’s almost as if Bobby Jindal was making the decisions on how to heal an ailing industry. http://newspaperdeathwatch.com/

Advertising revenue is down as are subscriptions. That’s generally true at all newspapers. And just in case no one has noticed, the actual physical size of newspapers has shrunk from broadsheet (23.5 by 29.5 inches) to Berliner (12.4 by 18.5 inches) to save money on newsprint. http://www.papersizes.org/newspaper-sizes.htm

The Jena Times was perhaps the last Louisiana publication to switch to the smaller page, making the conversion only a few months ago.

So, in order to attract more advertising and increase subscriptions, the only logical thing for The Advocate to do is to lay off more personnel. http://www.journalism.org/2015/04/29/newspapers-fact-sheet/

At least the beat reporters may be spared this round. Word is the cuts will be to the copy desk. The reports we’re getting is that The Advocate will be converting to an updated automated system that will make much of the copy desk’s work obsolete. All the copy desk does is edit reporters’ stories, select the local and wire stories the paper will run, write the headlines for them and decided where in the paper they will run.

For the life of me, I can’t comprehend how automation will be able to make those decisions without benefit of the human element.

The demise of the Times-Picayune and the recent and future cutbacks at The Advocate are not something this old dinosaur subscriber takes pleasure in watching.

It’s like witnessing the slow, painful death of an old friend.

 

Read Full Post »

John White follows 4th JDC judges in suing Baton Rouge citizens over access to LDOE records; is this a new trend?

Posted in Corruption, Education, Ethics, Governor's Office, Judges, Lawsuits, Legislature, Legislators, Media, Politicians, Public Records on June 2, 2016| 20 Comments »

It seems that certain state officials are finding a new means of discouraging Louisiana citizens from seeking information about the way the public’s business is being conducted. This new tactic is nothing less than a form of official harassment that is both chilling and dangerous.

Transparency and accountability in government are currently hot news topics. Last week (May 26), a local Baton Rouge group, Leaders with Vision, held a lunch meeting and discussion with the theme, “Are Louisiana Sunshine Laws adequate in today’s 21st Century World?” Participants included Sen. Dan Claitor; Rep. Dee Richard; Former Baton Rouge Advocate Executive Editor and transparency advocate Carl Redman and LouisianaVoice Editor Tom Aswell.

Both the state and the federal government recognize the need for transparency in the democratic process. Louisiana passed the Louisiana Public Records Act, also known as Louisiana’s Sunshine Law, in 1940 – more than 25 years before President Lyndon Johnson signed the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in 1966. Anyone can request public records and the purpose of the request does not need to be stated. In fact, the custodian of the record is not allowed to ask the purpose. The major exemptions are pending criminal litigation; juvenile status offenders; sexual offense victims; security procedures; trade secrets; and some public employee information.

Unfortunately, not everyone in government agrees with the concept of transparency and accountability. We have public officials suing constituents in an obvious effort to prevent them from accessing public records. Two recent examples follow.

On May 27, A LouisianaVoice REPORT revealed that several judges in the 4th Judicial Circuit Court filed a lawsuit against The Ouachita Citizen and Publisher Sam Hanna, Jr to prevent the publication from seeking public records to which they were legally entitled. In this case, judges are suing a publication to prevent them from accessing public records concerning the court operation and their presumably dirty laundry.

Now we find that closer to home, John White has likewise filed a LAWSUIT against Mike Deshotels and Dr. James Finney over public record requests that they made to the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) – most likely because they have hit a nerve.

On May 31, 2016, Dr. James Finney detailed the history of the suits in a letter to the Governor, John White, the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) members, and various state staff how the lawsuit came about:

As you may recall, I sent you an email March 12 (attached below) describing the status of several pending record requests that I had placed with John White and the Department of Education.  I also mentioned the existence of a lawsuit (Finney vs White, 6395333, attached).  That lawsuit, which was filed May 22, 2015, was set for trial in late April.

However, on April 11, Mr. White’s attorney requested and was granted a continuance, presumably to become better prepared for trial and to resolve a scheduling conflict with the Department’s sole witness.  Rather than prepare for trial, however, it seems that Mr. White instead instructed his attorney to file two lawsuits against me which appear to be groundless, unnecessary, and against the public interest. Meanwhile, Mr. White and his staff have made no effort to address the 35 pending requests which are subject of my lawsuit.

The first new lawsuit (White vs Finney, 647827, attached) addresses five requests I made in fall 2015, five that I made in February of this year, and one that I made in March. In the lawsuit, Mr. White apparently is asking the judge to create special conditions on Louisiana’s public records law. It seems that, for whatever reason, Mr. White is bending over backward to make sure the public has no idea what statistical distributions LEAP, iLEAP, or EOC test scores follow.  Are they symmetric?  Skewed?  Bimodal? Uniform?  Nor does he, it seems, wish the public to have any means of verifying that School or District Performance Scores have been fairly and accurately calculated.

The second new lawsuit (White vs Deshotels et al, 647953, attached) attempts to reverse favorable judgments Mr. Deshotels received in two prior lawsuits, and apply that reversal (which seems unlikely given that the 19th JDC is not an appellate court) to a subsequent request by Mr. Deshotels and also to one of my requests.  He seeks to use Mr. Deshotels and I as pawns, and cost us additional time and money, to establish a data-suppression policy that was already soundly rejected at court.

I have repeatedly requested meetings with Mr. White and/or his staff to work out arrangements that allow the public to have access to important public records without compromising student privacy nor causing the Department undue burden. I have consistently been rebuffed. And now we’re tangled in litigation in three different divisions of the local district court.

Most of my requests to date, and all that are subject to litigation thus far, could be collected into the following six categories. I trust you would consider these all to be important and of potential public interest:

  • calculation details regarding Value-Added Modeling as performed by the Department
  • voucher programs’ exact enrollments and costs, and demographics of voucher students
  • test-score distributions and technical reports
  • details of School and District Performance Score calculations adequate to verify accuracy and credibility
  • charter schools’ enrollments, charters and leases, and other information
  • exact enrollment numbers with no more suppression than is absolutely required to protect the anonymity of an individual student

I urge you as a body to ask Mr. White to defend his position regarding data secrecy, and his preference for litigation over useful dialogue. Is the department in service to the public, or to test-creators, charter networks and private schools? Have the school grades and Value-Added measures been calculated fairly?  How will we ever know? Is Southern politeness more important than democracy? Is it appropriate to sue citizens rather than responding properly to public record requests?  Please ponder those questions carefully, and provide the appropriate guidance to the Superintendent who is employed at your pleasure.

Thank you.

Dr. James Finney

As one might expect, the suits against Deshotels and Finney are funded by you, the taxpayer, as the LDOE has brought the suit using LDOE funds. Deshotels and Finney are on their own when it comes to legal fees related to these suits. Just to be clear:  You are covering the costs for John White to sue private citizens to prevent them from exercising their constitutional rights.

Of course, Deshotels and Dr. Finney intend to pursue the suit in the courts, rather than ask for a dismissal, to press forward on their requests to this public information that is critical to determining the impact of various policies on our children’s education and the efficacy of the charter experiment in Louisiana. (Remember the last time the government experimented in the south? It happened at Tuskegee.)

As Mercedes Schneider recently noted in her blog deutsch29, “Suing private citizens over public record requests is a new low for an already sorry excuse of a state superintendent. However, it seems that with White, no low is too low.” https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2016/05/31/la-superintendent-john-white-sues-citizens-who-made-public-records-requests/

The use of virtually unlimited financial and legal resources (at taxpayer expense, no less) to beat down citizens with limited funds to fight back poses an unprecedented and dangerous threat to the very checks and balances upon which our government is founded.

When will Governor Edwards tire of this excuse for a superintendent and encourage the BESE board to bring John White’s tenure up for a vote? Let’s get the BESE members on record as to whether they stand for Louisiana’s children or for the out-of-state interests that bought their seats. Let’s decide, once and for all, if BESE stands for accountability or for secrecy.

For Edwards, the Legislature, and BESE to sit back and do nothing about this infringement upon the public’s right to know should be seen as an endorsement of clandestine activity worthy only of our distrust and fear.

Read Full Post »

LSP stakes out claim that investigation reports are exempt from LA. public records law if no disciplinary action taken

Posted in Corruption, Ethics, Exemptions, Fraud, Media, Public Records, State Police, Transparency, Uncategorized on June 1, 2016| 7 Comments »

LSP has manufactured its own loophole for denying public records requests.

Col. Mike Edmonson apparently has come to the conclusion if he makes the decision not to formally punish, the public has no right to know why. In other words, if someone is victimized by a member of the department of public safety and Edmonson deems it is not worthy of punishment, the public has no right to review the decision.

On the contrary, it would seem to us that when someone is exonerated, this is all the more reason to produce the information. LSP further claims when those who resign in lieu of the completion of an investigation the investigative report is not subject to release.

We think Edmonson is tired of the public’s learning of far too many instances of misconduct at LSP followed by a mindset of circling the wagons. He has initiated a pattern of issuing no punishment in an apparent effort to hide misconduct. The reason for not administering punishment is in the investigation file. Many of the investigation files from LSP have shown to be seriously biased in favor of some while very severe for others.

Typically, LSP has denied public records requests for investigation files when the department finds no wrongdoing stating. The standard response to requests for the information generally reads: “The investigative report you requested is not subject to release as the individual right to privacy afforded by Article 1 Section 5 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974 outweighs the public’s right to review.”

We maintain the investigation file is a public document and serves a legitimate public interest.

The reference to Article 1 Section 5 of the LA Constitution is a mirror of the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution to protect citizens from unreasonable search and seizure. The amendment specifically lists, “person, property, communications, houses, papers, and effects.” We have no access to those nor does LSP without a properly issued warrant as the amendment states. If it is illegal for us to access, it is also illegal for LSP to have obtained it.

We have accumulated a growing list of denials based on this fantasyland God-like authority bestowed upon himself by himself (Edmonson).

Captain Chris Guillory

LouisianaVoice has received a response to a complaint filed against Captain Chris Guillory for lying to LSP internal affairs investigators. A citizen said that Guillory refused to accept his complaint against a State Trooper in Troop D. The response to the complaint from LSP states in part, “A determination has been made that Captain Guillory did not make a false statement to IA” with his denial that he refused to accept the complaint. The complainant provided an audio tape directly contradicting two documented statements made by Guillory to LSP internal affairs. You can review it here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd-JV3rKjko.

LSP will not release the investigation file because Edmonson did not punish his friend Guillory. The public is denied the right to know why Guillory was not found in violation. We have the tape and we have the LSP documentation listing Guillory’s statement two times denying unequivocally he refused to take the complaint.

LSP has found no wrongdoing by Guillory involving the recently terminated Trooper Ronald Picou even though he was responsible for the investigation of the exact same allegations in 2013, the “Brady Day” investigation, or the investigation involving the padding of time sheets by Brady. He has emerged without any formal discipline.

Guillory has since been removed from his command at Troop D. He has been given a larger command in Baton Rouge. Sources have informed us Guillory’s new position is in violation of state police commission rules on residency because he lives in Sulphur but works in Baton Rouge. Sources further report Troopers are authorized three hours one way for travel to Baton Rouge. That means Guillory works two hours out of every eight hour day.

LT Paul Brady

We requested the documentation involving the investigation into “Brady Days,” paid time off for arresting someone for DWI in violation of quota and payroll fraud laws—so named the Troop D supervisor who allowed, indeed, encouraged the practice. Sources indicate Brady days was an unwritten policy at Troop D under some supervisors and this was confirmed by IA investigators. We were informed there was no finding of wrongdoing on Brady’s part. But again, we were denied access to any investigation findings.

Brady was cleared even though he was the supervisor for Trooper Picou who was recently terminated. Picou was proven to be neglectful of duty. Brady was paid to be a supervisor and sources say if he would have simply done his job Picou might still have his.

But again, because there was no disciplinary action taken against Brady, the investigation record remains out of the public’s reach.

A recent complaint has been filed against Troop D personnel alleging a wrongful DWI arrest. Sources say the arresting Trooper was a beneficiary of paid time off for Brady days but was also punished for not accumulating a sufficient number of DWI arrests.

Trooper Jimmy Rogers

Rogers suddenly resigned amid the beginning of the massive investigations at Troop D. We were denied access to his records because LSP did not complete the investigation. This is another method of Edmonson escaping culpability for poor leadership—ask them to resign so no one finds out. Sources report Rogers resigned after it was discovered he was committing payroll fraud on parish-funded overtime details known as Local Agency Compensated Enforcement (LACE). Rogers was reportedly issuing citations on his regular shift but claiming them on different dates in order to accrue overtime.

Accepting excess money for violating state issued permit/bribery

We requested the investigation files involving a Trooper who accepted extra money for moving oversized loads in violation of the state issued permit and possibly bribery. It was discovered after another Trooper refused the extra payment. The response was to make the Trooper give the extra money back. We were notified no complaint was filed so they did not investigate it.

In a letter from LSP dated April 27, 2016, we were again notified no complaint was filed. All of our other requests resulted in the investigation of the allegations but they skipped this one. The excuse that they do not investigate misconduct until someone files a complaint is silly. A complaint has since been lodged with LSP so maybe they will finally investigate.

We are not done

The failure to release records at the discretion of one man with a proven track record of unethical behavior and poor decision making should not be allowed to stand. The public has a right to know about the circumstances surrounding a resignation in lieu of termination amid an investigation.

They further have a right to know why a public employee was found to have committed no wrongdoing—if for no other reason than to fully clear the employee’s name and his public standing. There is no reason to hide such information unless indeed, there is something to hide.

LouisianaVoice is exploring legal remedies for these denials.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts