Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘BESE’ Category

Suddenly, BESE, DOE, RSD and Piyush caught up in swirling litigation over reform, funding, and bureaucratic SNAFUs

Posted in BESE, Campaign Contributions, Contract, Contracts, Education, Governor's Office, Teague on June 27, 2012| 2 Comments »

The Louisiana Department of Education could find itself mired in state and federal courtroom disputes for years to come, thanks to Gov. Bobby Jindal’s sweeping education reform legislation and to the confusing mishmash of educational bureaucracy in Orleans Parish.

Disregard for the time being the last week’s court ruling that could end up costing the Orleans Parish School Board upwards of a billion dollars for the wrongful firing of about 7,000 teachers in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. That lawsuit did not involve the state—just Orleans Parish.

But across the state, several parish school boards and teachers’ unions are lining up as plaintiffs in various lawsuits against Jindal, the Louisiana Department of Education and the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) to contest Jindal’s reform package that is being hailed by media everywhere but in Louisiana as groundbreaking, innovative and progressive.

One interesting development at the local level occurred in Ruston when the Lincoln Parish School Board recently voted to join litigation against Jindal’s move to usurp Minimum Foundation Program funds and local tax revenue from local school boards and to use those monies to pay for vouchers, or scholarships, to other schools—even if those other schools were in a different parish.

The local boards contend that those funds are dedicated to the parishes and should not be taken away.

In the case of Lincoln Parish, board member Trot Hunt was the only dissenting vote when the board voted to join as a plaintiff against the administration. He said the board could well do with a little more budgetary restraint.

But did Hunt have an ulterior motive other than fiscal prudence?

Well, consider this: his firm, Hunt-Guillot and Associates, has a couple of mega-contracts with the state which total more than $18 million, according to state documents. The largest, for $17.6 million, calls for the firm to administer HUD grant management activities for infrastructure and other projects undertaken as a result of damages from hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Gustav and Ike.

The other, a $900,000 contract, calls for the company to review applications for grant funds for the Department of Health and Hospitals.

Hunt-Guillot also contributed $4,750 to Jindal’s campaign in 2007 and Trot Hunt personally contributed $5,000 that same year.

If Hunt needed further incentive to vote against joining the lawsuit, there’s also the fact that his business partner, Jay Guillot, is a member of BESE, having been elected last fall thanks in part to strong support from Jindal that included a $5,000 contribution from Jindal’s own campaign. BESE, of course, overwhelmingly supported the Jindal reform package that calls for vouchers, the creation of charter schools and more teacher accountability.

And, of course, It’s pretty much a given that Hunt is keenly aware of what happens when anyone, be it an employee or legislator–or in this case, a contractor–crosses Piyush with a negative word or vote.

Can you say Teagued?

All that aside, there is yet another lawsuit brewing down in New Orleans, this one in the Eastern District of U.S. Federal Court.

If the Department of Education’s action earlier this month is any indication, it is taking this lawsuit quite seriously.

After eschewing Louisiana law firms and the Louisiana attorney general’s office, the department decided to enlist the powerful Washington, D.C. law firm of Hogan-Lovelis as its defense counsel. The initial contract was for $249,999, which is one dollar less than the $250,000 threshold at which the approval of BESE President Penny Dastugue would have been required.

But on May 30, it was decided to go for broke in defending this lawsuit when State Superintendent John White requested that Dastugue approve a $1.2 million amendment, bringing the contract to an eye-popping $1,449,000. Dastugue signed off on White’s request on June 6.

The lawsuit was filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center in October of 2010 on behalf of 10 lead plaintiffs and approximately 4,500 Orleans Parish students with learning and physical disabilities. It names former State Superintendent of Education Paul Pastorek, the State Department of Education and BESE as defendants.

The suit claims that 16 Orleans Parish schools fall under the parish school board, 23 are run by the Recovery School District (RSD) and 49 more are stand-alone charter schools. This arrangement, the lawsuit claims, results in the creation of 51 separate school districts, or local education agencies (LEA). Each charter school, it says, is an LEA.

This arrangement, the petition says, creates a confusing, impossible-to-navigate system for children with disabilities who, under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA), are entitled to “the appropriate resources, policies and procedures” to provide unfettered access to special education services—“from evaluations to related services and supports.”

Federal law prohibits public entities from discriminating against individuals with disabilities but, the lawsuit claims, students have been subjected to systemic violations that included:

• Discrimination and denial of access to educational services;

• Failure to develop and implement child find procedures are required by law;

• Failure to provide free appropriate public education;

• Failure to protect students’ procedural safeguards in the disciplinary process.

The petition cites a survey conducted by Educational Support Systems which said that schools “under-identify students with disabilities in an effort to escape their legal obligations under IDEA.

Some students referred to the RSD for initial evaluations “frequently must wait months before an evaluation occurs—losing valuable educational time during the wait,” the suit says.

“New Orleans is the only geographic region in the state in which students cannot receive child-find services until they are actually admitted and enrolled in a public school,” it added.

The lawsuit also claims that the RSD has an “abysmal” graduation and school completion rate for students with disabilities. “On average, across the state of Louisiana, 19.4 percent of all students with disabilities graduate with a diploma,” it says. In comparison, only 6.8 percent of RSD students with disabilities obtain a diploma, the petition says.

While he tries to put positive spin on the recent legislative session, there can be no denying that Jindal fell far short of getting what he wanted in terms of state employee retirement reform and the sale of state prisons.

Even though he appears to have been successful with his education reform, there are signs that his support in the legislature may be starting to crumble in that regard as well.

Legislators, already miffed at demotions within their ranks, the use of one-time funds for recurring expenses, the veto of a major commercial project in Livingston Parish, drastic cuts to higher education and the closure of a prison in central Louisiana, are also hearing from their local school boards and public school teachers.

And what they’re hearing may be causing them to entertain second thoughts about their having allowed the governor to rip funds from local school boards.

Read Full Post »

Missed out on vouchers? No problem, just become a course provider; there’re big bucks to be had and no accountability

Posted in BESE, Education, Uncategorized, Vouchers on June 20, 2012| 6 Comments »

The controversy over Monday’s meeting of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) School Innovation and Turnaround “Committee,” while important, could be a mere smokescreen for a far murkier and more complicated issue.

To be sure, legitimate questions about teacher certification and accountability standards for charter schools and some 124 private schools accepting voucher money were raised at the meeting formally described as a committee meeting, but attended by the full board.

But lying beneath the surface is House Bill 976 authored by Rep. Stephen Carter (R-Baton Rouge) and signed into law as Act 2, or the “Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Act,” by Gov. Piyush Jindal.

The bill, which passed in the House by a 60-43 vote and 24-15 in the Senate in the legislature’s rush to placate the governor, will allow course providers to “offer a quality, individual education to students.”

So, what exactly, is a course provider?

That’s the same thing that Reps. Sam Jones (D-Franklin) and John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) wanted to know during debate on the bill. No one else seemed interested, including the media whose job it is to explore the issues, but who seem more interested, as one observer put it, to play sycophant to Jindal.

Under terms of the act, postsecondary education institutions may serve as quality course providers for students who seek advanced level course work or technical or vocational instruction. Because “technical” and “vocational” were included in the bill’s language, could that mean that “postsecondary education institutions” would include not only traditional universities and colleges, but vocational and technical schools and proprietary schools like University of Phoenix and IT Technical College, as well?

But the bill goes on to specify that business and industry may also serve as “quality course providers that offer course work in their particular field or expertise.”

“‘Course provider’ means an entity that offers individual courses in person or online, including but not limited to online or virtual education providers,” the act says.

BESE member Chas Roemer of Baton Rouge, meanwhile thumbed his nose at state ethics laws by openly discussing certification of charter school teachers. BESE member Walter Lee, who is superintendent of the DeSoto Parish school system, asked why there is no requirement that charter school teachers be certified when public schools require certification.

Roemer, whose sister is executive director of the Louisiana Public Charter School Association, which would thereby create an apparent conflict any time he addresses issues concerning charter schools, said the policy was in line with the administration’s goal of allowing charter schools to try new approaches. “There are going to be differences and there should be differences,” he said.

State Superintendent of Education John White, who deleted without responding two emails from LouisianaVoice formally requesting public records, said accountability rules for private schools accepting voucher money would be completed by Aug. 1.

That would appear to putting the horse ahead of the cart when one considers vouchers that have already been approved for schools in Ruston, Westlake and DeRidder that are woefully understaffed and which have inadequate facilities to accommodate students they already have, much less up to 300 new voucher students.

But back to HB 976, aka Act 2, aka Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Act, projected to cost the state $44.5 million over a five-year period. The initial authorization of the course provider shall be for three years, with BESE charged with carrying out a “thorough review” after the second year.

Courses would be available to students attending a public school that receive a letter grade of “C,” “D,” or “F,” or who is attending a public school that does not offer the course in which a student desires to enroll, the act says.

BESE is directed by the bill to create a reciprocal teacher certification process for teachers who reside in other states by next January. The teachers must be employed by authorized course providers to teach virtual education courses.

Moreover, prior to the 2013-2014 school year BESE must create a course catalogue for all courses offered by each parish.

The act even contains a veiled threat to would-be recalcitrant local school systems: “No local public school system shall actively discourage, intimidate or threaten an eligible funded student or an eligible participating student during his course enrollment process or at any time for that local school system.”

Of course, no proposal by the Jindal administration would be complete without the obligatory provision for payoffs. “The course provider shall receive a course amount for each eligible funded student,” the act says. The per-course amount means an amount equal to the market rate “as determined by the course provider” and reported to the state Department of Education (DOE).

One Louisiana native, now a retired school principal in Arizona, examined the 47-page bill (something that most legislators probably did not bother to do) and offered several observations about costs, administration and unethical course providers.

“I am struck by how complicated and expensive the oversight of these programs will be and how time consuming it will be for local districts,” she said.

“Districts want to make sure that these providers are sound and ethical and really providing an education. You would be amazed at the number of unethical providers that will pop up when there’s money to be had,” she said. “This is just another burden on your local district which is not staffed well enough to take on one more onerous responsibility.

“This is the shotgun approach to education—a scattering of this and that in terms of learning—instead of a coherent, articulated approach over several years.”

She said that oversight is always expensive and questioned the manner in which it would be done. If a student receives an “A” rather than an “F” that he might deserve, “will the school be judged to be superior or will the students be re-tested to see if they learned anything?” she asked. “Grading is a complex issue and unethical operators are happy to give the A’s if they get the money.

“Unless I missed something, I don’t know who is approving these course providers for the first year. Is there a list of them—perhaps providers who’ve been operating in other states? I can’t see that the bill addresses that and that is important.

“This is just one more step in totally dismantling public education and finding ways for businesses to take money from the public coffers—just more privatization using taxpayer dollars. Capitalism is about risk that capitalists take to establish their businesses. Where is the risk in this if the funding is capitalized by taxpayers’ dollars?” she asked.

Read Full Post »

House ready to rubber-stamp Jindal’s education reform package, but read about campaign contributions anyway

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, BESE, Campaign Contributions, Education, Governor's Office, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Lobbyist on March 22, 2012| 14 Comments »

The Louisiana Legislature, beginning with the House today, is about to take one of the most hurried, most ill-conceived actions in its long and notorious history when it passes House Bills 974 (teacher tenure/due process) and 976 (school vouchers, charter schools).

The votes are in, both bills will pass with comfortable majorities—some say perhaps by as much as two-thirds.

There also will be a surprise for House members who don’t read the bill closely enough: there have been a few last minute surprise amendments that will pull the rug out from under the bills’ opponents if they’re caught off guard.

If you still think there’s a snowball’s chance of the bills being defeated, consider this: at least eight political action committees that have poured more than $800,000 into the campaign funds of at least 103 of the 144 members of the Legislature—including 32 of the 39 Senate members.

Each one of these PACs has a vested interest in the passage of Gov. Jindal’s education package. Besides the Louisiana Federation For Children (an affiliate of the American Federation of Children) and its predecessor, the scandal-tainted All Children Matter, there are four separate PACs run by the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI). You do remember, don’t you, that Jindal unveiled his education reform package at the LABI’s annual convention? Finally, there is FuturePAC and LAMP, the latter being the lobbying arm of the Louisiana Manufacturers’ Association.

FuturePAC, LAMP and the four LABI PACS, EASTPAC, WESTPAC, SOUTHPAC AND NORTHPAC are all affiliated with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which has been tutoring and coaching legislators, including a double handful of Louisiana lawmakers, for a number of years now on how to pass legislation on privatization, state retirement reform, Medicaid reform and yes, education reform.

The votes are in. They have been for some time and it was evident at last week’s Senate and House Education committee meetings. With the exception of a few like Reps. Patricia Smith (D-Baton Rouge) and John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) and Sen. Eric LaFleur (D-Ville Platte), members were simply going through the motions of rubber-stamping Jindal’s rashly conceived idea of education reform.

There are those who defend Jindal’s reform package because, they say, the system is broken and needs fixing. We are willing to concede that point, but the way this plan is drawn up is, to use a very old adage, throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There are so many wrong-headed ideas being bandied about by the administration that it is impossible to pick a place to start.

But back to the here and now.

In House District 72, represented by Edwards and which encompasses all or parts of Tangipahoa, St. Helena and East Feliciana, the Louisiana Federation for Children has sent a slick mailer out to every household.

The mailer bears the headline, “John Bel Edwards is holding back our kids,” and it goes on to say the legislature “is proposing a scholarship (read: vouchers) program for children in grades k-12. This bill provides students in low-performing schools with scholarships to attend the school of their parents’ choice, including private and parochial schools.”

The flyer fails to address the results at a dozen Baton Rouge schools taken over as charter schools and promptly saw their test scores and grades plummet ever further than when they were run as public schools.

Not that details of that nature have ever stood in the way of this administration’s pressing forward with its agenda.

It wanted the Office of Risk Management privatized and it was. Today, it is being run by the third private company in just over a year and has yet to post its annual report on line—an annual report that normally comes out in September. Could it be that the privatization has not realized the savings it trumpeted to the legislature and the administration does not want anyone to know that?

But let’s get back to that Louisiana Federation for the Children. On the front of the flyer, in small print is the statement that “LFC is a special project of the American Federation for Children” and above that: “Paid for by American Federation of Children.”

But who is the American Federation of Children? To borrow a phrase from Gov. Jindal: short answer, it’s a re-creation of All Children Matter after All Children was fined $5.2 million for funneling campaign money into Ohio in 2006 through the organization’s various state networks. All Children Matter was also fined for political hanky panky in Wisconsin. A federal “527” organization, it changed its name to the American Federation for Children after its legal problems.

Who is American Federal for Children and who was All Children Matter?

Both organizations were and are run by Dick and Betsy DeVos. They started the organization in 2003 to recruit, train, and fund candidates who would promote vouchers across the country. Dick DeVos owns Amway.

Betsy DeVos is the former chairperson of the Michigan Republican Party. Her little brother, Erik D. Prince, is the founder of Blackwater USA, the private security firm that made international headlines in 2007 when its guards killed 17 Iraqi civilians and then tried to bribe Iraqi officials to quell criticism of their actions.

In 1997 she wrote an op-ed for the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call: “I know a little something about soft money as my family is the largest single contributor of soft monty to the national Republican Party. I have decided, however, to stop taking offense at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now I simply concede the point. They are right. We do expect some things in return.”

These are the people who want to tell the citizens of Louisiana how to run education and our governor is eating out of their hands. He, in turn, is spoon-feeding pablum to legislators.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Let’s now take a look at some of the big money winners among the House and Senate members who will be deciding the fate of teachers and public education in a completely “impartial, pragmatic, and unbiased manner” in the days to come:

• Sen. Conrad Appel (R-Metairie and the author of SB 597 and SB 603 which are virtually identical to HB 974 and HB 976)—$22,000 in combined contributions;

• Sen. Gerald Long (R-Natchitoches)—$$25,000;

• Sen. Daniel Martiny (R-Metairie)—$10,500;

• Sen. A.G. Crowe (R-Pearl River)—$9150;

• Sen. Jonathan Perry (R-Kaplan)—$$14,500;

• Sen. Bodi White (R-Central)—$4500;

• Sen. Ronnie Johns (R-Lake Charles)—$6500;

• Rep. John Berthelot (R-Gonzales)—$8000;

• Rep. Christopher Broadwater (R-Hammond)-$37,500;

• Rep. Timothy Burns (R-Mandeville)—$7500;

• Rep. Stephen Carter (R-Baton Rouge, Chairman of the House Education Committee and author of HB 974 and HB976)—$22,175;

• Rep. Simone Champagne (R-Erath)—$21,500;

• Rep. Patrick Connick (R-Marrero)—$7500;

• Rep. Gregory Cromer (R-Slidell)—$10,250;

• Rep. Raymond Garofalo (R-Chalmette)—$15,000;

• Rep. Brett Geymann (R-Lake Charles)—$6000;

• Rep. Hunter Greene (R-Baton Rouge)—$12,000;

• Rep. Kenneth Havard (R-Jackson)—$32,500;

• Rep. Lowell Hazel (R-Pineville)—10,000;

• Rep. Frank Hoffman (R-West Monroe)—$8400;

• Rep. Paul Hollis (R-Covington)—10,000;

• Rep. Chuck Kleckley (R-Lake Charles, House Speaker)—$13,000;

• Rep. Nancy Landry (R-Lafayette)—$4500;

• Rep. Christopher Leopold (R-Belle Chasse)—$7500;

• Rep. Gregory Miller (R-Norco)—$15,000;

• Rep. James Morris (R-Oil City)—$13,250;

• Rep. Erich Ponti (R-Baton Rouge)—$6000;

• Rep. Stephen Pugh (R-Ponchatoula)—$6000;

• Rep. Clifton Richardson (R-Baton Rouge)—$17,000);

• Rep. Joel Robideaux (R-Lafayette)—$$11,100;

• Rep. Clay Schexnayder (R-Sorrento)—$25,000;

• Rep. Alan Seabaugh (R-Shreveport)—$7000;

It must be more than a little frustrating to know PAC money roars like a lion in the House and Senate chambers while a $25 donation from a constituent who opposes the bills goes unheard and unappreciated.

There were many more who took lesser amounts from the PACs. But you can bet the donors and Jindal will be watching to see how each of the recipients of their money votes. And if past is prologue those who dare go against the governor will incur his wrath. Cherished committee seats will be lost and construction projects back home run the risk of the governor’s veto.

That’s the sordid, seamy side of politics and until something is done to rein in PACs, it’s never going to get better.

If this is accountability and transparency and the standard of good ethics, then Uncle Earl was correct when he said, “One of these days we gonna get good guvment and the people ain’t gonna like it.”

Read Full Post »

Following campaign money through the House and Senate Education Committees: or why teachers never had a chance

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, BESE, Campaign Contributions, Education, Governor's Office, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators on March 19, 2012| 15 Comments »

Perhaps it is time for a quick lesson on how things are really done in government. For starters, you can throw out that civics book and forget those lessons about checks and balances and separation of powers. That’s pure theory with the current administration in Baton Rouge and about as close to reality as those flying pigs you hear about.

Consider for a moment the theory of separation of powers. In what other state else does the governor get to pick the Senate President and Speaker of the House? It’s absurd that the Legislature would sit still for one minute for that kind of power grab.

But wait, let’s back up. We’re talking reality here, so never mind.

LouisianaVoice is going to be offering a new feature during this legislative session, one that we feel our readers will find interesting and enlightening.

We’ve written quite a bit of late about the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and its undue influence on legislators in every state, including Louisiana. ALEC has spent untold millions of dollars in efforts to influence public pension reform, public education reform (some say destruction and they may not be too far off), privatization of state agencies and a laundry list of other so-called reforms.

Louisiana has not been immune from that influence as we shall see in the coming days and weeks.

Nor have our legislators been immune from the influence of our governor. And if you think it is his charisma and his instant recall of facts and figures that help him to pull votes in the legislature, think again.

Oh, there’s no doubt that he is intelligent and it’s a certainty that he can spew statistics and factoids in much the same manner that Mauna Loa spews hot molten lava.

But if you really want to know how he was able, for example, to push his education bills through the House and Senate Education Committees with only token opposition, there’s an old trick to learning his method:

Follow the money.

And that’s what LouisianaVoice is going to be doing as the current legislative session slogs through the current 85-day session.

If those attending the two committee meetings last week got the uneasy feeling that the committee majorities were simply going through the motions, patronizing the witnesses as they spoke out against the bills, the reason was simple: the members’ minds were already made up and were not subject to listening to meaningful debate.

The only ones who did listen were the minority opposition, led in the House committee by Reps. John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) and Patricia Smith (D-Baton Rouge).

It is truly sad when our elected representatives become so condescending of their constituents because, quite simply, money talks and B.S. walks.

And make no mistake: money—$124,700, in fact—ruled the day with the two committees.

Why else would Rep. Nancy Landry (R-Lafayette) offer a motion to require witnesses to state if they were on professional time or on annual or sick leave before being allowed to testify before the House Education Committee? That has never—repeat, never—been done before. Even when committee Chairman Stephen Carter (R-Baton Rouge) ruled that he could not prohibit witnesses from testifying if they refused to say whether or not they were on annual or sick leave, Landry still pushed for a committee vote which, astonishingly enough, passed by a 10-8 vote.

Just so you know, those voting in favor of the amendment were Carter, Landry, Christopher Broadwater (R-Hammond), Henry Burns (R-Haughton), Thomas Carmody (R-Shreveport), Simone Champagne, (R-Erath), Cameron Henry (R-Metairie), Paul Hollis (R-Covington), John Schroder (R-Covington), and Jeff Thompson (R-Bossier City).

Voting against the amendment were Patrick Jefferson (D-Homer), Wesley Bishop (D-N.O.), Edwards, Edward Price (D-Gonzales), Jerome Richard (I-Thibodaux), Rob Shadoin (R-Ruston), Patricia Smith and Alfred Williams (D-Baton Rouge).

Each committee considered virtually identical bills. HB 976 by Carter, and SB 597 by Sen. Conrad Appel of Metairie both dealt with vouchers and the expansion of state aid for students to attend private schools.

HB 974 and SB 603 by the same two legislators, respectively, would make teacher tenure more difficult to obtain and to retain.

HB 974 was approved by a 13-5 vote and HB 976 sailed through with a 12-6 vote. Richard voted against HB 976 but in favor of HB 974.

Others voting favorably on both bills were Carter, Jefferson, Broadwater, Burns, Carmody, Champagne, Henry, Hollis, Landry, Schroder, Shadoin and Thompson.

Voting against both bills in the House Committee were Bishop, Edwards, Price, Richard, Smith, and Williams.

In the Senate Education Committee, SB 597 was approved by a 5-1 vote with Sen. Elbert Guillory (D-Opelousas) not voting. SB 603 was approved by a 6-1 vote with Sen. Eric LaFleur (D-Ville Platte) casting the lone no vote on each bill.

Others voting for the two Senate bills were Sens. Dan Claitor (R-Baton Rouge), Jack Donahue (R-Mandeville), Mike Walsworth (R-West Monroe) and Bodi White (R-Central).

LouisianaVoice has already written about the long list of corporations that are members of ALEC and their campaign money was in evidence in the votes in both committees.

But even more interesting, Gov. Bobby Jindal’s money, with only a couple of exceptions, was even more evident in the voting results.

In all, 13 members of the two committees received $124,700 in campaign contributions from ALEC corporate members or Jindal—or both.

Here’s the breakdown of campaign contributions to members of the Senate Education Committee with the amount followed by the source of the contribution(s):

• Conrad Appel—$2500 from Jindal;

• Dan Claitor—$2500 from Jindal;

• Jack Donahue—$2500 from Jindal;

• Mike Walsworth—$9,000 from ALEC member corporations, $2500 from Jindal;

• Elbert Guillory—$45,200 from ALEC member corporations, $7500 from Jindal.

Additionally, Walsworth attended ALEC’s national convention in New Orleans last August with ALEC picking up the tab for his cost of nearly $1500.

On the House side, eight Education Committee members received the following campaign contributions:

• Carter—$2500 from Jindal;

• Broadwater—$5000 from Jindal;

• Burns—$5000 from Jindal;

• Carmody—$1500 from ALEC member corporation;

• Champagne—$16,000 from ALEC member corporations, $2500 from Jindal;

• Henry—$2500 from Jindal;

• Landry—$2500 from Jindal;

• Schroder—$2000 from ALEC member corporation, $2500 from Jindal.

Besides accepting the contributions, two senators and five House members are members of ALEC. Those include Walsworth and White in the Senate and Carmody, Champagne, Henry, Schroder and Richard in the House.

Richard was the only one of the five House members vote against requiring teachers testifying before the committee to divulge if they were on annual or sick leave and he also was the only one of the five to vote no on HB 976 but he voted in favor of HB 974.

That can turn a lot of deaf ears to opposition and elicit key favorable votes.

None of those voting against either of the bills in either committee received campaign funds from ALEC corporate members or Jindal.

That’s the reality of civics.

Another reality is that we are going to be doing this on key votes on public pension reform, the privatization of the Office of Group Benefits, the sale of state prisons, Medicaid, and any and all other controversial issues being pushed by the Jindal administration.

Follow the money.

Read Full Post »

‘Gold Standard’ rules: You got the gold? You write the rules

Posted in BESE, Charters, Education, Ethics, Teague, Transparency, Vouchers on December 20, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Here’s a news flash: if you are Chas Roemer and you never inquire into the propriety of voting on issues that directly affect the financial well-being of your sister, you will most likely never be challenged for your obvious conflict of interest.

It’s all part of the regulations of the State Board of Ethics, regulations that Gov. Bobby Jindal holds up as the “gold standard” of ethics whenever he travels out of state for fund raisers or book promotions, which is quite often.

Roemer is a member of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) from District 6, which comprises all or parts of the parishes of East Baton Rouge, Ascension, Livingston, Tangipahoa and Washington.

His sister, Caroline Roemer Shirley, is executive director of the Louisiana Association of Louisiana Public Charter Schools.

The Board of Ethics, on April 21, 2010, issued a ruling on Docket No. 2010-222 concerning Ms. Shirley’s appearing before BESE on behalf of the association.

In that ruling, the board concluded that Ms. Shirley was prohibited from:

• appearing before BESE;

• representing the association in matters before BESE;

• discussing with individual BESE members matters or positions of the association, and

• interacting with the staff of the Department of Education on matters under the jurisdiction of BESE.

That opinion was a clarification of an earlier ruling issued on Feb. 15, 2008, in response to an inquiry from Chas Roemer. Because Roemer did not request an opinion on the legality of his voting on charter school issues, the one-page opinion did not address that issue.

Because his practice of voting on charter school matters has never been addressed, Roemer has continued to not only vote on those matters but has on occasion even made motions or offered seconds to motions concerning charter schools.

Louisiana Voice on Nov. 2 raised that question along with that of the legality of Jay Guillot’s serving on the board in light of state contracts worth nearly $17 million that his company, Hunt-Guillot & Associates, holds.

It turns out, apparently, that a Louisiana citizen/taxpayer/voter is unqualified to question the ethics of any state elected official. LouisianaVoice’s owner was deemed by the board to have “no legal standing” to seek an ethics ruling on either Guillot or Roemer.

Several attempts were made to contact ethics board staff attorney Stacy Barker, to whom the LouisianaVoice inquiry was assigned but she never returned phone calls. She took our call only after a fake name was given to the receptionist and thus confronted, said the board’s rules state that only someone who is directly affected by an action may seek an ethics determination.

Here are the verbatim procedures for requesting advisory opinions as contained on the Board of Ethics web page:

“Requests for advisory opinions must be in writing, signed and submitted by a person or governmental agency with a demonstrable and objective interest in the opinion requested (emphasis ours). The Board does not render advisory opinions with respect to past conduct, but can provide crucial advice on how to avoid problems in the future.”

The procedure for filing complaints is even more restrictive, requiring a vote of at least eight members to refer a complaint to investigation. A sworn complaint before a notary may be referred to investigation by a simple majority of the board.

The board is comprised of 11 members, seven of whom are appointed by the governor. Two each are elected by the House and Senate. On the surface, it would appear rather difficult to muster an investigation what with the governor holding a solid majority on the board.

If one of his appointees even acts like he is entertaining thoughts of independence, Jindal can pull a Donald Trump and fire them or at least apply sufficient pressure so as to force a resignation. That would not be an unprecedented move; he replaced four black members of the Board of Regents with white males a year ago. And one of his BESE appointees, Tammie McDaniel of Oak Ridge, resigned in February of 2010 after first resisting Jindal’s efforts to force her out.

Apparently one who resides in Roemer’s BESE district and who is concerned for the public schools that his grandchildren attend, is not qualified to seek an ethics ruling. It seems that only someone named Roemer or Shirley has a “legal standing” to request an opinion.

Don’t hold your breath for that request.

If this is an example of what Jindal calls a “gold standard” of state ethics, then the joke is on all of us.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »