Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

By Robert Burns (Special to LouisianaVoice)

Two months ago, Louisiana Voice reported on Livingston Parish DA Scott Perrilloux’s determination to prosecute Corey delaHoussaye.  Perrilloux, working with the State Inspector General’s Office (IG), has charged delaHoussaye, an FBI informant responsible for FEMA denying $59 million to contractors for Livingston Parish’s hurricane Gustav cleanup due to rampant fraud, with falsifying public records.  Specifically, Perrilloux and the IG allege delaHoussaye submitted paperwork for some time periods for which he claimed to be working but which the IG asserts he was at times golfing, visiting his doctor, working out, and tending to other personal matters.

Perrilloux failed to procure an indictment of delaHoussaye in December of 2013, but he nevertheless proceeded forward with a bill of information.  Meanwhile, delaHoussaye filed federal and state civil suits against the parish as a result of incoming Parish President Layton Ricks stopping payment on a $379,000 check to delaHoussaye for his final invoice.

The civil matter ended Friday when delaHoussaye agreed to accept $325,000 as payment for his final invoice and to dismiss both his federal and state civil actions against the parish.

For now, the state criminal trial continues even though Judge Brenda Ricks ruled on February 23, 2015 that insufficient evidence exists to proceed with a trial.  Mere minutes after Ricks’ ruling, Perrilloux angrily stated to reporters that he would appeal Ricks’ ruling, and he added, “Just because they wear a black robe doesn’t mean they know everything.”  True to his word, Perrilloux recently filed an appeal with the First Circuit Court of Appeal seeking to overturn Ricks’ ruling and proceed with the criminal trial.

On Monday, April 20, 2015, delaHoussaye’s attorney, John McLindon, argued before Judge Ricks a motion to suppress and motion to quash the evidence gathered by the IG on multiple fronts.  Judge Ricks’ ruling, expected sometime this week, may go a long way on clarifying just what authority and powers the IG has.

First, McLindon asserts that the IG is entitled to access the records only of a “covered agency.”  Thus, IG access is limited to only executive branches of state government, of which Livingston Parish, with whom delaHoussaye executed his contract, clearly is not.  In an obvious admission that Livingston Parish is not a covered agency, Greg Murphy, Assistant District Attorney, placed Ben Plaia, an attorney for the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (GOHSEP), on the witness stand.  Murphy utilized Plaia’s testimony to buttress Murphy’s argument that, because GOHSEP controls access to federal emergency funding and because those funds flow through it to the parish, delaHoussaye’s records were fair game by virtue of GOHSEP’s standing as a covered agency.  Essentially, Murphy argued that, by virtue of funds flowing through GOHSEP, its own presumed covered agency status is imputed unto Livingston Parish.

McLindon attacked that assertion during cross examination by asking Plaia a series of questions.  When asked if GOHSEP, delaHoussaye, or C-Del (delaHoussaye’s company) were covered agencies, Plaia responded, “I don’t know.”  Obviously, if GOHSEP isn’t a covered agency, nothing can be imputed, and Plaia would not testify that GOSHEP is a covered agency.    When asked if delaHoussaye or C-Del were contractors of a covered agency, Plaia again responded, “I don’t know.”  Similarly, when asked if delaHoussaye or C-Del were subcontractors, grantees, or sub-grantees of a covered agency, Plaia again responded, “I don’t know.”  When asked if GOHSEP had any contractors or subcontractors, Plaia indicated that it did not.  When asked if it would be proper for GOHSEP to pay delaHoussaye or C-Del directly if invoices seeking payment were submitted directly to GOHSEP, Plaia responded, “No.  In fact, I believe it would be improper for us to do so.”

Based on Plaia’s testimony, not only was there no foundation to establish that GOHSEP could impute any covered status unto Livingston Parish, but there was no foundation for establishing that GOHSEP is even a covered agency with anything to impute.  Nevertheless, taking no chances, McLindon continued to attack the IG’s powers and authority even under the assumption that somehow covered status were deemed to exist and be imputable to Livingston Parish.

In doing so, McLindon is not the first attorney to fire a shot across the bow at the IG’s investigative powers and techniques.  In December of 2013, during the trial of Murphy Painter, former Commissioner of the Alcohol and Tobacco Commission (ATC), both Mike Fawer and Al Robert, Jr., Painter’s defense attorneys, sharply criticized the IG in terms of overreach regarding search warrants and sloppy investigative techniques.  Robert asserted to Federal Judge James Brady that the IG’s execution of the search warrant entailing Painter was both sloppy and that the agency acted well beyond the authority the judge granted.  In perhaps the most stunning quote of the entire trial, Robert, outside the presence of the jury, stated to Judge Brady, “Your Honor, this is not the FBI!  This is the OIG!  These people do not know what they’re doing!”

Similarly, when Fawer had IG investigator Shane Evans on the witness stand, he asked him to confirm his notes documenting that ATC officer Brant Thompson indicated Painter was “out of control, manic-depressive, and selectively enforcing alcohol statutes.” Evans confirmed that Thompson made those statements to him.  Fawer then asked Evans what investigative procedures he used to substantiate Thompson’s allegations against Painter.  Evans stated that he’d performed no investigative procedures at all and instead that he “merely wrote down what Thompson said.”  Fawer then inquired, “And based on your notations, my client (Painter) was summoned to the Governor’s Office later that evening, and he was fired by the Governor, wasn’t he?”  Evans responded that it was his understanding that Painter had resigned, to which Fawer responded, “Resigned, fired, whatever the case.  The bottom line is that very evening my client was out of a job all based on a few notes you wrote down with no attempt whatsoever to substantiate what you wrote, correct?”  Evans, who has left the IG and now serves as an investigator for the EBRP Coroner’s Office, didn’t challenge Fawer’s assertion.

McLindon takes Fawer and Robert’s assertions a step further and indicates his firm belief that the IG has no search warrant authority at all.  He argues that the Louisiana Legislature specifically granted the IG subpoena power but was silent on search warrant authority.  He said that fact, combined with the fact that, for criminal matters, “statutes are to be given a narrow interpretation and any ambiguity resolved in favor of the accused,” (the Doctrine of Lenity) means that the IG has no search warrant authority.  McLindon said that, prior to this case, nobody has ever challenged the IG on its search warrant authority, but he is formally doing so in this case and seeks for Ricks to make a formal ruling on whether they have such authority.  Murphy countered that Ricks must believe the IG has the authority to execute search warrants since she signed one dated June 21, 2011.  He then provided a copy to Judge Ricks, to which she responded, “You went way back to find that one, didn’t you?”

Next, even if covered status is somehow deemed to exist for Livingston Parish and search warrant authority is deemed by the court to be vested unto the IG, McLindon next argued that the IG failed to conform to the statutory requirement regarding an added step for subpoenas sought by the IG.  Specifically, McLindon argued the statute says that the judge shall issue a written decision within 72 hours of the application for the subpoena.  McLindon indicated that the IG and prosecutor have taken the position that the Motion for the Search Warrant is the decision, but McLindon counters that the motion is merely the application.  Furthermore, he stressed heavily that the Legislature could have granted unfettered subpoena power to the IG in the same manner as that which exists for the Attorney General, but it intentionally meant to provide an added layer of review in the case of the IG.  McLindon argued that the IG has been wrong to merely ignore that added layer as it has historically done.  Again, McLindon argued nobody has challenged the IG on this requirement, but he’s doing so in this case.

McLindon concluded his arguments by indicating that failure to suppress the evidence obtained by the IG for the reasons he argues “gives agencies carte blanche to engage in fishing expeditions into the private, sensitive information of citizens.”

In yet another added challenge to IG authority on obtaining its evidence, McLindon cited a case, State v. Skinner, in which the Louisiana Supreme Court made clear the need for a warrant, and not a mere subpoena, to obtain an individual’s medical records.  McLindon thus seeks for delaHoussaye’s medical records indicating he was visiting a physician during a timeframe that the IG alleges he reported working to also be suppressed.  He seeks such suppression based upon the IG obtaining the records via subpoena rather than a warrant.

Readers may read McLindon’s full post-trial memo outlining his arguments.

Louisiana Voice has interviewed several attorneys about the wisdom of the Louisiana Legislature granting the IG law enforcement authority even with the provision of no arrest powers, silence on search warrant authority, and an added hurdle for subpoenas which McLindon asserts has historically been simply ignored by the IG.  The consensus among the attorneys with whom Louisiana Voice has interviewed on the subject is that the Legislature made a mistake and that the IG is often abusing its power and, in at least some instances, acting in a reckless manner.  Perhaps Judge Ricks’ ruling later this week will provide guidance as to whether she may be inclined to agree and, more specifically, to concur with arguments McLindon has advanced in this case.

Read Full Post »

Editor’s note: Normally, we do not make a practice of publishing letters from readers as a guest column. But in this case, we make an exception because we were struck by the manner in which this writer expressed his concern for our state. With only minor editing for punctuation, syntax, etc., we offer here an essay written by a retired state employee now living in Pointe Coupee Parish.

By Kerry Phillips (Special to LouisianaVoice)

After reading this article:  https://louisianavoice.com/2015/04/24/it-wasnt-the-best-week-for-louisiana-as-state-hit-with-triple-whammy-at-least-no-1-lsu-beat-no-2-tex-am-in-baseball/,  and this article: http://bobmannblog.com/2015/04/24/for-jindal-if-the-choice-is-tax-hikes-vs-closing-lsu-its-bye-bye-lsu/, and after watching The Ed Show on April 24 on MSNBC regarding Jindal’s religious freedom bill and how he is truly now a national joke…..and finally, after reading Bobby Jindal’s op-ed in The New York Times, and not hearing anything about any of this in the news with the exception of a small article in The Advocate on the OGB fiasco, I have to say that as much as we love this great state of Louisiana, the heritage, the diversity, the culture, the beauty this state has to offer with many aspects, we will be moving AWAY from this state as soon as we possibly can.

We are at the bottom of every list possible nationwide, and thank God this info is getting out nationwide. We are a laughing stock. And I am sad. Sad for my state. Sad for the people, the young, elderly, poor, government workers, fire fighters, teachers. Should I go on?

I was born here.  I was born in Baton Rouge and attended fantastic schools there. I went to college in this state. I worked for over 30 years as a state employee. I was so proud when I first got my voter’s registration card and I have voted in every election. I retired, thinking my state would honor the commitments they made to me throughout my career.

Sadly, it seems I was fooled.

To know that our legislators are basically bought and paid for by lobbyists and special interests groups who truly have no interest in our state that we call paradise is sad. We have always been known nationwide as a “banana republic.” Now I see why.

No one should say that our citizens move away from this state because of a lack of jobs. They now move away because of this cruel joke that has been perpetrated on us by a handful of people within the last decade. None of these people even care about this state, our education, our colleges, our government workers, our healthcare, etc. What we’re seeing is robbery and pilfering by people who only care about one agenda. And that agenda has nothing to do with the welfare of the citizens of Louisiana. Nor does it have anything to do with our hospitals, our children’s education, or the workers of this state.

So when you turn on the local news and see people with arms folded, waiting and complaining about long lines at their Motor Vehicle offices, thank yourselves. When there is no hospital emergency system available for your loved ones, thank yourselves. When LSU does not exist anymore, God forbid, thank yourselves. When you fail to register your outrage when a contract giving away our state hospitals—with 50 blank pages—only to have the deal rejected by the federal government, thank yourselves.

My family and I plan to move to a more progressive state—to a state where citizens actually live in the current year/century and do not want to take us back to 1915, a state where people want to move forward in a way that benefits all citizens, not just the few. And no, it’s not because of my legislator, who has worked to improve the economy and to help state employees where I live. It’s because I am now becoming ashamed of our state and most of our legislators who helped get us in our current predicament.

I lived in Baton Rouge until we moved to the Central/Greenwell Springs area where I lived for more than 27 years. For the past 15 years, we have lived in Pointe Coupee Parish. And while I’d absolutely hate to leave this state (and it’s an extremely hard choice for me), I do think we’ve made our decision. Our state appears to be done, over with….unless…..our legislators decided to truly quit being Jindal’s lapdog. They need to quit being afraid to buck his system because his system has ruined and bankrupted our state. They need to stop allowing him to be a dictator in this state. He is not our God.

And when religious leaders—from north Louisiana, no less—oppose his religious freedom bill, we welcome their voices. We do not live with the Old Testament laws because with Jesus, a new testament was founded. Do we really want to go back? Are we going to go against what Jesus preached? I’m not. Are we going to allow Jindal’s religious freedom bill to become the hot topic offered only to deflect attention from the real issues, the disasters of his creation: the financial issues we now face that are the direct result of his ineptness?  Come on.

I pray so very hard that all of our legislators, men and women, will grow some courage and principles and do what is right for the whole of this state. I’m not stupid, though. I know legislators get benefits that no average citizen—or state employee—can get.  But, isn’t it time for them to sit back and ask themselves, “Do I really want to sell my soul for some Saints tickets or concert tickets or a fantastic meal at some expensive restaurant? Do I want to sell my soul? Or do I want to do what the citizens of this state want?”  “Do I want to do what Jesus would do?”

Heavy, thought-provoking questions to ask, I know. But, I know what I would do.

This is going to be one of the most historic legislative sessions in this state’s history. It is going to make or break our state. And I am afraid the state is going to break. And the poor, the sick, the elderly will be the ones to suffer.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with people prospering and living a great life. What’s wrong is people prospering and living a great life on the backs of other people.

And so I have this one simple plea for our legislators: For once, do what is right for the whole of the state.  I pray in earnest for that. My friends and I pray hard that the right things will be done. I would love to live here and pass on the culture and treasures this state has to offer to my grandchildren. But, if things continue on as they have for the last decade, we will have to choose differently.

 

Read Full Post »

One might think the Jindal administration and the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) might have learned something from the Bruce Greenstein fiasco over at the Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH).

Greenstein, you will remember, was the DHH secretary when that $280 million contract was awarded by his agency to his former employer, CNSI.

That scenario could be repeated at OGB.

Even though Greenstein insisted he had established a “firewall” between himself and CNSI, it was subsequently revealed that Greenstein had hundreds of email and text message exchanges with his old bosses during the contract selection process.

That eventually led to Greenstein’s forced resignation and criminal indictment and a civil suit by CNSI the entire messy episodes are slowly making their way through the Baton Rouge District Court system.

Which brings us to OGB and its $35 million-a-year contract with Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Louisiana (BCBS) to administer OGB’s Preferred Provider Organization—a task that apparently proved somewhat daunting to BCBS during the first year of its contract, costing the contractor more than $3.1 million in performance penalties.

One of five contracts with the state totaling $1.2 billion, that three-year contract will end on Jan. 1, and OGB is currently accepting proposals for a new three-year contract.

OGB issued its request for proposals (RFP) on March 13, giving an April 20 deadline for proposals but that deadline was extended to April 30 in an addendum issued on Wednesday (April 22). OGB RFP

LouisianaVoice, however, has learned that OGB Administrator Elise Cazes has been put in charge of the evaluation committee which will make recommendations on awarding a winner of the new contract.

The problem? Cazes was appointed Group Benefits Administrator on June 23, 2014.

Cazes was previously employed by BCBS of Louisiana, raising the possibility of a conflict of interests. https://louisianavoice.com/2014/07/26/ogb-laying-of-24-more-blow-softened-when-ceo-assures-affected-employees-losing-their-jobs-not-like-losing-a-child/

She earns $106,000 per year in her current position.

Not only does she head up the evaluation committee, but she also was given the responsibility of naming other members of the committee. To date, the name of only one other evaluation committee member, OGB Interim Deputy Director Bill Guerra, has been revealed.

At the same time, LouisianaVoice has learned that BCBS in 2013 was fined more than $3.1 million for performance deficiencies in connection with its contract with OGB. BLUE CROSS PENALTIES

BCBS was paid slightly more than $32.2 million to administer the PPO plan for calendar year 2013, the first year of its current contract.

Under terms of its contract with OGB, BCBS could be fined up to $9.7 million for failure to meet a variety of standards. Those include:

  • General Standards (10 percent of total medical administrative fees): $3.52 million;
  • Data Submission Standards: $10,000 per day, or a maximum of $20,000;
  • Mental Health & Substance Abuse (MH&SA) Standards (17.5 percent of total medical administrative fees): $6.2 million.

The actual penalties imposed for 2013, according to OGB’s own report, and the breakdown included:

  • Average speed to answer phones (39 seconds against an industry standard of less than three seconds): $352,325;
  • Claims Accuracy: $352,325
  • Membership Identification Cards Timeliness: $352,325;
  • Data Submission Timeliness: $20,000 (the maximum amount allowed);
  • MH&SA Appeals: $528,487;
  • MH&SA Ambulatory Follow-Up: $528,487;
  • MH&SA Medical Integration: $528,487;
  • MH&SA Member Satisfaction Survey Score: $528,487

TOTAL: $3.19 million.

In explaining the deficiency report, OGB noted that the contract between BCBS and OGB “contains 26 performance goals (called service level agreements, or SLAs) related to customer service and claims processing. During 2013 Blue Cross experienced challenges in meeting a handful of these goals.”

The report indicated that “all issues” had been resolved and that OGB and BCBS were “fully prepared for excellent performance during the 2014 calendar year.”

But LouisianaVoice recently received the following email from a retiree which would seem to indicate otherwise:

“Here’s a laugh; Look at the insurance health cards my wife and I received thus far:

  • Received 3/6/15:  deductible—$300
  • Received 03/09/15: insured deductible—$600
  • Received (date unknown): insured deductible—$600
  • Received 03/20/15: insured deductible—$1800
  • Received 03/20/15: spouse deductible—$600
  • Received 03/27/15: spouse deductible—$600
  • Received 03/27/15: insured deductible—$1800
  • Received 04/04/15: insured deductible—$600. 

“Do I get to pick our deductible from these cards?  You can tell that BCBSLA and OGB are on top of this matter, right? I plan to make a personal visit to the OGB office probably next week and show them this trash and find out what our deductible(s) really are. Do you think they know? I will ask while I am (at the OGB office) for the real executive director at OGB (to) please stand up.

“Our online monthly premium is a different figure from the letter received in the mail today from OGB. I am ready for someone to figure out what’s going on, and do something logically and correctly.  Health insurance is a serious matter for people and they are playing with us. Everything needs to be corrected and cleaned up for all state employees (retirees and actives).

“OGB use to be correct on these technical matters and they had in the past straightened out BCBSLA for me several times on what was to be paid, etc. Now OGB has gone crazy too! I guess it’s from all the new executives at the top.” 

 

 

Read Full Post »

The executive director of the Louisiana Housing Corporation (LHC) has resigned abruptly from his $260,000 a year job following an internal investigation into allegations of sexual harassment, LouisianaVoice has learned.

Frederick Tombar, III was appointed to head LHC after passage of Senate Bill 269 by State Sen. Neil Riser in 2011. SB 269, which became Act 408 upon the signature of Bobby Jindal, consolidated three former agencies into one: the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency, the Road Home Corporation, and Louisiana Land Trust. That consolidation became effective on Jan. 1, 2012.

Emails and telephone calls to LHC Tuesday by LouisianaVoice got no response but sources said that LHC Chairman and former Hammond Mayor Mayson Foster http://www.lhfa.state.la.us/index.cfm/page/117 had conducted an investigation into the allegations at the behest of the agency’s board of directors. http://www.lhfa.state.la.us/page/board-of-directors.

It was not immediately clear whether Tombar resigned voluntarily or was asked to step down. Nor did LHC respond to questions about whether or not Tombar’s resignation was effective immediately or when his last day on the job was.

Neither was it immediately clear as to the nature of the allegations or whether they involved an agency employee or employees.

He was appointed by Jindal in 2012 to execute the LHC strategic plan, to advise the board of directors on matters of policy and to manage day-to-day operations of the corporation. His $260,000 salary is twice what Jindal makes.

The LHC web page which is found under the heading of the Housing Finance Agency, which no longer exists, says that during fiscal year 2014, LHC built or rehabilitated 1,770 units of affordable housing and assisted 539 Louisiana residents in becoming first-time homeowners through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Soft Second Mortgage (SSM) and First-Time Homebuyers (FTHB) programs. LHC also assisted 1,130 Louisiana households in becoming more energy efficient through the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) and provided $33.5 million to ensure that more than 87,000 utility payments were made on behalf of distressed households, the web page says. http://lhc.la.gov/index.cfm/page/93

Prior to joining LHC, Tombar, a founding member and trustee of Advance Church of Silver Spring, Maryland, was appointed by President Barack Obama to serve as Senior Advisor to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan. In that capacity, he was responsible for leading the strategic direction, policy development, and assisting in the coordination of operations of HUD’s disaster and recovery programs.

He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Government from Notre Dame University and later attended Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government where he earned a Master in Public Policy degree.

He directed the Road Home Program following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Road Home served as the largest single housing recovery program in U.S. history.

LHC has 125 employees and a payroll of more than $7.9 million. Besides Tombar, eight other employees make more than $100,000 per year. http://doa.louisiana.gov/boardsandcommissions/viewEmployees.cfm?board=273

Read Full Post »

By Robert Burns (Special to LouisianaVoice)

Last May, a political firestorm surfaced on the EBR Parish Metro Council over then-Parish Attorney Mary Roper. Some council members asked Baton Rouge attorney Jack Whitehead to gather evidence. Later, in early September 2014, the Metro Council called a special meeting to discuss Ms. Roper’s termination. That meeting exposed what some leaders described as the complete dysfunction within the parish attorney’s office.

After the council’s special counsel, Murphy Foster, presented the case for Roper’s termination and Roper’s attorney, Wade Shows (Roper’s predecessor as Parish Attorney), presented her defense, EBRP Mayor Pro-Tem Chandler Loupe provided a laundry list of alleged wrongdoing by Roper. In the preceding video link, Loupe goes into great detail. A few of Loupe’s allegations against Roper include:

  • Often working no or very minimal hours even though she was paid as a full-time employee;
  • Failing to ensure that basic functions of the office were being performed, resulting in thousands of DWIs being dismissed and adjudicated properties experiencing a huge backlog;
  • Improperly providing an internally-developed software code to her husband, an information technology expert.

Another employee with the EBR Department of Public Works, Kyle Jones, subsequently attempted to sell the Parish its own software back to it for $500,000 which led to the discovery of Roper’s husband’s actions.

After Loupe made his presentation, a hostile and bitter exchange took place between Loupe and Councilwoman Chauna Banks-Daniel, with two of Banks-Daniel’s colleagues, Donna Collins-Lewis and C. Denise Marcell, becoming so furious with her over remarks she directed at Loupe that they exited the meeting. The council ultimately voted 8-3 to terminate Roper’s employment. Roper’s first lieutenant, Lee Anne Batson, assumed the position on an interim basis.

Several sources have expressed their concerns to LouisianaVoice that the selection process for the council naming Roper’s replacement is a sham. They claim the “fix has been in from day one” for Batson to obtain the position on a permanent basis. These sources have indicated that the process will become “Mary Roper, Chapter Two,” and they say morale within the parish attorney’s office is worse under Batson than it was under Roper. Further, these sources have said that the few dedicated attorneys serving in the office are frustrated that Batson has even worse supervisory skills than Roper and permits the majority of attorneys who work under her to “goof off most of the days on their iPHONEs and iPADs looking at new cooking recipes and other mindless activities.” These attorneys also have private practices and spend their time between “two masters,” thus placing the public in an inherent conflict.

It was that very office management style that permitted the huge backlog of DWIs to pile up which went unprosecuted and which had to be dismissed. Loupe, in the video clip, said one of the things that frustrated him most was for Shows, with whom he used to practice, to assert that no harm was done by Roper’s managerial style. Loupe countered that, beyond the stockpile of DWIs and adjudicated properties, in one instance which was particularly galling, the City of Baton Rouge was sued. The parish attorney’s office never provided a defense for the suit, refused a $20,000 settlement offer, and the result was a $550,000 judgment. Several attorneys said they felt that even a token defense would have resulted in the City not having been found liable. The attorney responsible for that case, Rick Nevels, recently retired.

Another indication of inadequate oversight occurred when Assistant Parish Attorney James Hilburn, failed to file an answer in Federal Court. Federal Court Judge Brian Jackson, who presided over the case, was livid at Hilburn’s failure and Hilburn was also reprimanded by the Louisiana State Supreme Court for filing a lawsuit for defamation against a party who had filed a complaint against him with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.

The private-practice attorneys with whom LouisianaVoice has consulted for this article agree that, of the Parish Attorney’s $7.37 million budget, around $800,000 – $1 million of taxpayer funds could be saved simply by insisting that attorneys in the office perform their jobs. One source familiar with the Parish Attorney’s operations said, “The problem is most of them simply want free money with health insurance and a lucrative retirement as they engage in their private practice. They want the check, but they don’t want to work for it. Taxpayers have a right to expect that people are paid to perform a job and not to let things fall through the cracks while cookbook recipes are discussed all day.”

Loupe’s investigation revealed that one attorney was paid $89,000 for a year yet worked only eight files during that year. Another was found to be part-time yet paid $127,000 for working 23 active files. Additionally, Batson is permitting her sister-in-law, Gwen Brown to collect $85,000 as a full-time Assistant Parish Attorney while simultaneously earing $96,000 a year as a supervising attorney for another public agency, the Louisiana Appellate Project, which represents indigent criminal defendants who file appeals to the Louisiana Courts of Appeal and Louisiana Supreme Court. Roper never raised any concern because Roper, who supervised Brown, also earned $56,000 annually as a brief writer for the Louisiana Appellate Project. Similarly, Batson is not expected to interfere with her sister-in-law’s collecting $181,000 a year from the two positions, plus retirement benefits and health insurance. Moreover, all inquiries of whether these setups entail dual office holding have been summarily brushed aside.

It’s not as if these arrangements haven’t been reported. In this July, 2014 Advocate article, Assistant Parish Attorney Tedrick Kinghtshead is cited as maintaining a demanding criminal defense practice, while working full-time with the parish attorney’s office. These arrangements have raised the obvious question of potential conflicts of interest.

Each private-practice attorney consulted for this article said that maintaining an accurate tabulation of hours worked on a given client’s casefile is critical and that it would be unthinkable for any attorney to practice and not maintain such an accurate log. Nevertheless, there appears to be zero accounting for time on cases within the Parish Attorney’s Office. One private attorney described the present operations of the office as being nothing short of “irresponsible and a slap in the face to the taxpayers.” Another said that the parish attorney’s office should maintain a bank of briefs, but no such bank is maintained by the office.

Several sources have predicted that the process for choosing Roper’s successor is a mere formality and that Batson has the position locked up and that Batson has fired attorneys on her staff and replaced them with friends of members of the selection committee (the composition of which is outlined in these minutes of their April 6, 2015 meeting) who have indicated their quid pro quo support of Batson.

Roper and Hilburn, meanwhile, seemed to have landed on their feet. Both are now employed by Shows’ office. Shows serves as Attorney General Buddy Caldwell’s campaign treasurer for this fall’s AG race. Further, in a report by WWL in New Orleans, Shows was identified as a huge beneficiary of Caldwell’s propensity to award lucrative multi-million-dollar contracts to his close friends and associates. LouisianaVoice readers may also recall Shows Cali attorneys, including Shows himself, came within an inch of receiving sanctions in the Angola prisoner lawsuit for a “lack of candor” (a polite phrase for lying) to Federal Judge Brian Jackson.

The EBR Parish Council is set to discuss the status of the selection of Roper’s replacement at Wednesday’s (April 22) meeting; however, if LouisianaVoice sources are accurate, the two other finalists, Lon Norris and Michael Adams, are only in the mix for public consumption purposes. Further, the selection committee deemed “unqualified” two private-practice attorneys, Jack Whitehead and Jerry Pepper, who received the highest possible rating (AV) from Martindale-Hubble, an attorney peer review rating agency. Whitehead and Pepper’s piers have placed their legal ability in the top ½ of 1% of attorneys in the United States. The votes are reportedly in and accounted for to anoint Batson as the new Parish Attorney and thereby continue the time-honored style of “good ol’ boy” politics that got the office in the position in which it finds itself today.

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »