Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

2011 DOC memo asks probation officers to refer non-violent offenders to facility run by LSU Board member, Jindal donor

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Courts, Ethics, Governor's Office, Judges, LSU, Prison on October 11, 2013| 20 Comments »

The Jindal administration two years ago attempted to influence parole officers and district judges throughout the state to refer violators to a private facility operated by a major Republican campaign contributor whom Gov. Bobby Jindal subsequently appointed to the LSU Board of Supervisors.

LouisianaVoice obtained a four-page memorandum through a public records request of the Louisiana Department of Corrections (DOC) which indicates that state probation and parole officers were directed to funnel offenders into the Academy of Training Skills (ATS) in Lacassine.

ATS, owned and operated by Chester Lee Mallett of Iowa, LA. in Calcasieu Parish, is a 200-bed transitional work program ostensibly set up to provide employment and training in various industrial trades in order to return offenders to the work force. http://www.aattss.com/

On July 13, 2012, Jindal appointed Mallett to the LSU Board of Supervisors. He was previously appointed by Jindal to the State Licensing Board for Contractors in June of 2010. Mallett and companies controlled by him have contributed more than $30,000 to Jindal personally, $242,000 to the Louisiana Republican Party and $75,000 to the Republican Governors Association, of which Jindal is currently president.

The memorandum, from Barry Matheny, Assistant Director of Probation and Parole, to his boss, Probation and Parole Director Gerald Starks, was dated Oct. 3, 2011, and noted that DOC had amended its policy to include probation violators as eligible for the program. Forwarded to parole and probation officers throughout the state, it directed them to “get with your respective judges at your earliest convenience to make them aware of this alternative program.”

Matheny further said, “I would ask that you look at all technical violators…and see if (you) can get some offenders into this program.”

What followed was an outline of the ATS program which essentially was an endorsement of Mallett’s facility which does not accept state or federal funding but rather charges a housing fee to the residents, many of whom are said to work for Mallett’s construction companies.

ATS’s website says that salaries residents receive from job placements by ATS are kept in special accounts in residents’ names. Several former residents, however, have told LouisianaVoice that upon their release from the program, they actually owe ATS money. They said ATS “forgives” any outstanding rent balances owed. But when those who work for Mallett’s companies have to use their salaries to pay Mallett for lodging at ATS, Mallett is basically getting free labor in exchange for the lodging.

Moreover, the ATS website, which apparently has not been updated for some time, says it is certified by the Department of Public Safety and Corrections and the American Correctional Association (ACA).

The value of the ACA accreditation, however, is somewhat suspect in that the association has come under criticism that it routinely accredited facilities which experienced charges of abuse or poor conditions, according to a 2001 Boston Globe report. http://www.prisonpolicy.org/aca.html

One of ACA’s past presidents, Richard Stalder, while serving as Louisiana State Corrections Secretary in 1993, canceled spending on psychiatric counseling for troubled teens so that he could give out $2.7 million in raises to his staff.

By 1995, ACA had accredited all 12 prisons in Louisiana, passing the last two with 100 percent scores, all while the head of Louisiana’s prison system was serving as ACA’s national president—an arrangement some might consider a conflict of interests. That same year, however, more than 125 prisoners sued Stalder for mistreatment within the prisons and a month after it accredited the state prison at Angola, it was reported that about $32 million in repairs were needed for it to meet safety requirements. Prisoners with fractures were splinted and then not seen for months.

Stalder rejected all the claims, saying that he and his staff deserved “a pat on the back” but in June of 1995, Federal Judge Frank Polozola criticized Stalder for the way in which he ran the state prison system.

In 1998, the new Jena Juvenile Center came under fire for widespread problems, including a near-riot, poor teaching and security and physical abuse and in 1999 the juvenile facility in Tallulah was taken under state control after five years of repeated problems with private ownership despite its having received accreditation and a positive report only six months earlier from ACA and Stalder.

http://www.prisonsucks.com/ACA/ACAofficers.html

In 2010, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) trumpeted the re-accreditation of five of its private prisons by ACA. But what CCA did not reveal was that it had paid ACA more than $22,000 for those five accreditations, that CCA employees serve as ACA auditors, that CCA is a major sponsor of ACA events or worse, and that accredited CCA facilities had experienced major security problems. http://www.privateci.org/private_pics/PCIACApr.htm

(CCA, it should be noted, is one of several private prison companies that have made major contributions to the campaigns of Gov. Jindal.)

Despite the memorandum from DOC, most judges and district attorneys have shied away from ACS. One judge said he threw the letter in the trash can “as soon as I received it,” and a district attorney told LouisianaVoice he wanted nothing to do with the facility.

Both Mallett and his son are major players in politics, having contributed $670,000 to assorted state and national candidates—mostly Republicans—and Jindal’s Believe in Louisiana “527” tax exempt political organization which is little more than a political slush fund used to push Jindal’s agenda such as his failed state income tax repeal last legislative session.

Lee Mallett contributed the yearly maximum of $30,800 to the Republican National Committee on three separate occasions between the summer of 2011 and the spring of 2012 and son Brad Mallett also contributed another $30,800, records show.

Following is a partial list of contributions by Lee Mallett and nine of his corporate entities:

Academy of Training Schools

• Billy Nungesser (lieutenant governor bid), $5,000, July and August of 2011;

• State Sen. John Alario Jr., $1,000, September of 2011;

• Republican Party of La., $12,000, September and November of 2011;

• Jane Smith (who lost her State Senate race but was subsequently appointed Assistant Secretary of Revenue by Jindal), $1,000, October of 2011;

Air Vac Inc.

• Bobby Jindal, $5,000, September of 2010;

• State Sen. Dan Morrish, $1,000, November 2010;

• Chuck Kleckley (La. House Dist. 36), $2,500, Feb. 8, 2011;

• State Sen. Jonathan Perry, $2,500, February 2011;

• State Sen. Ronnie Johns, $2,500, May 2011;

• Billy Nungesser, $2,500, August 2011;

• Republican Party of La., $27,000, September and November 2011;

Best Buy Industries

• Billy Nungesser, $2,500, August of 2011;

• Republican Party of La., $27,000, September and November 2011;

Caddy Shack Enterprises

• Bobby Jindal, $5,000, May 2007;

• Agriculture Commissioner Mike Strain, $2,500, August 2007;

• Republican Party of La., $15,000, May and September 2008;

Mallett Inc.

• Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, $2,500, November 2007;

Mallett Buildings

• Republican Party of La., $25,000, April 2011;

Nature’s Best Inc.

• Dan Morrish, $500, November 2010;

• Bobby Jindal, $1,500, March 2011;

• Republican Party of La., $12,000, September and November 2011;

Progressive Buildings

• Dan Morrish, $1,000, November 2010;

• Bobby Jindal, $3,500, March 2011;

• Bobby Jindal, $1,500, April 18, 2011;

• Sen. Ronnie Johns, $2,500, May 2011;

Progressive Merchants

• Republican Party of La., $107,000, May, October, February, 2007, December, 2009, September and November 2011, and April 2012;

• Mike Strain, $2,500, August 2007;

• Bobby Jindal, $5,000, December 2009;

• Louisiana Committee for a Republican Majority, $25,000, June 2011;

• Billy Nungesser, $2,500, August 2011;

Lee Mallett

• State Treasurer John Kennedy $2,500, February 2007;

• Republican Party of Louisiana, $1,000, April 2007;

• Dan Morrish, $2,500, November 2010;

• S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley, $3,500, April 2012;

Federal contributions

• Republican Party of Louisiana, $16,000, April 2007, June 2008, September and December 2010, and June 2011;

• Cong. Charles Boustany, $7,200, September 2007 and October 2011;

• U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, $4,600, September 2007;

• State Treasurer John Kennedy (U.S. Senate bid), $2,300, December 2007;

• Donald Cazayoux (La. 6th Congressional Dist.), $16,100, February and April 2008;

• Kennedy Majority Committee, $28,500, April 2008;

• National Republican Senatorial Committee, $28,500, April 2008;

• U.S. Sen. David Vitter, $1,200, June 2008;

• Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachman, $2,500, July 2011;

• Republican National Committee, $61,600, August 2011and March 2011;

• Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry, $2,500, October 2011;

• Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, $2,000, November 2011;

• Republican National Committee Recount Fund, $30,800, December 2011;

• Cong. Bill Cassidy, $2,500, April 2012;

• Romney Victory Inc., $14,200, June 2012;

527 contributions

Lee Mallett

• American Solutions Winning the Future, $1,100, January and December 2009;

• Republican Governors Association, $50,000, October 2010 and February 2012;

Mallett Inc.

• Republican Governors Association, $25,000, June 2009;

Air Vac Inc.

• Believe in Louisiana, $1,000, March 2012;

Academy of Training Schools

• Believe in Louisiana, $6,000, March 2012;

Nature’s Best Inc.

• Believe in Louisiana, $1,000, March 2012;

Progressive Merchants

• Believe in Louisiana, $1,000, March 2012;

Progressive Buildings

• Believe in Louisiana, $1,000, March 2012;

Brad Mallett

• David Vitter, $3,100, June 2008;

• Republican National Committee, $30,800, August 2011.

Read Full Post »

State misses IT consolidation contract deadline; DOA met with 3 potential vendors before RFP release; legal eagles playing with semantics in effort to stall records requests

Posted in Contract, Contracts, Ethics, IT, Privatization, RFP, Request for Proposals, State Agencies on September 3, 2013| 11 Comments »

The Division of Administration (DOA) is more than two weeks late in announcing the awarding of a contract and nearly a week late on the effective date of a contract for the consolidation of the information technology (IT) departments of more than 20 departments within the state’s Executive Branch.

The Request for Proposals (RFP) for Information Technology Planning and Management Support Services was first issued on June 28 with a July 31 deadline for the submission of proposals.

Oral interviews were to be held on Aug. 14, according to the RFP, with the announcement of intent to award set for Aug. 16 and the contract work to begin on Aug. 30. The mere fact that the announcement of intent to award was set for only two days after oral interviews smacks of a done deal; how else could the administration make a decision of this magnitude (hundreds of millions of dollars) after only two days of interviews? How could an intelligent decision be made on such complex, complicated proposals in a mere two weeks’ time?

Interim Chief Information Officer Richard “Dickie” Howze, at a meeting of Council of Information Service Directors, stressed two main points, according to those in attendance. First, he said, IBM had not already been selected (strange how he would deny something before it had been alleged) and second, the consolidation goal was not to fire people. Yeah, right.

Howze also distributed a memorandum cautioning DOA section heads and Council of Information Services directors against any contact with vendors who are potential proposers or who may be part of a proposal as a subcontractor. “If you work with a contractor who is a potential proposer, there shall be no private communications, discussion of the upcoming process, timelines, RFP content, evaluation or award,” the memo said.

“Additionally, it is not appropriate for any current state employee to provide a reference for a vendor responding to this procurement.

“These restrictions will remain in effect until the contract(s) has been awarded and the protest period has past (sic). Anyone failing to follow this policy may face disciplinary action, up to and including termination.”

Amazing what the CNSI debacle can do in helping public officials find their moral compasses, isn’t it?

Those restrictions may have been in place with the awarding of the $200 million CNSI contract by the Department of Health and Hospitals but apparently someone neglected to get the word to then-DHH Secretary Bruce Greenstein who maintained constant contact with his old bosses at CNSI right through the billing, selection and contract awarding process. Now the FBI is investigating that contract, Greenstein is gone, and the folks at DOA appear to have learned from that experience.

Or have they?

Howze, in laying out the ground rules for the current RFP, neglected to address a pre-RFP request by DOA for presentations from IBM, Deloitte and Northrop Grumman to discuss what those companies could do for the state.

Is it possible that these three players may have gained some insight and advantage in those meetings? Who attended from the state and should they now be terminated as per Howze’s memo?

We’re just sayin’….

Meanwhile, DOA’s legal staff appears to have gone into a stall mode over public records requests by LouisianaVoice, apparently preferring to bicker over semantics rather than providing public records.

On Monday, LouisianaVoice submitted the following request to DOA:

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

“According to the Request for Proposal (RFP# 107-28062013001) for Information Technology Planning and Management Support Services, under Section 1.6 (Calendar of Events), the ‘Announcement of Intent to Award’ was scheduled to be made on Aug. 16, 2013 and the ‘Contract Begin Date’ was Aug. 30, 2013.

“In accordance to that information and pursuant to the Public Records laws of the State of Louisiana, please provide me immediately with:

  • “The name and address of the winning bidder;
  • “The name of the company to whom the contract was awarded;
  • “The amount of the winning bid;
  • “The amount of the actual contract;
  • “Also, please provide me the opportunity to review all the proposals submitted in response to RFP#: 107-28062013001.

The response we received on Tuesday from attorney Joshua Paul Melder said:

“We have received your public records request regarding Request for Proposal No. 107-28062013001. You have requested information rather than documents, therefore the Public Records Act is inapplicable. Nevertheless, in an effort to be helpful we have identified some documents that may contain the information you seek, including the Notice of Intent to Award the Contract and the proposals submitted for the RFP.  Please advise if you would like to inspect these documents and we will collect them for copying or for your review.

“The contract has not been executed yet, however, we will be happy to provide a copy to you upon its final execution.”

At least he did extend an offer to provide a copy of the contract upon its execution, whenever that may be.

We fired off our response:

“You have a very narrow definition of what is public record and what is information, one which does not square with the law as set forth in RS 44:2 (a). The Public Records Act (RS 44:2 (a) is quite broad in its definition of public records. You should familiarize yourself with it. As a courtesy, I am attaching the definition below:”

RS 44: (2)(a)  All books, records, writings, accounts, letters and letter books, maps, drawings, photographs, cards, tapes, recordings, memoranda, and papers, and all copies, duplicates, photographs, including microfilm, or other reproductions thereof, or any other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, including information contained in electronic data processing equipment, having been used, being in use, or prepared, possessed, or retained for use in the conduct, transaction, or performance of any business, transaction, work, duty, or function which was conducted, transacted, or performed by or under the authority of the constitution or laws of this state, or by or under the authority of any ordinance, regulation, mandate, or order of any public body or concerning the receipt or payment of any money received or paid by or under the authority of the constitution or the laws of this state, are “public records”, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter or the Constitution of Louisiana.

“I’m reasonably certain what I am seeking will fall within the public records law as defined above.”

However, just to demonstrate that we can be flexible, we are altering the wording somewhat and re-submitting our request thus:

According to the Request for Proposal (RFP# 107-28062013001) for Information Technology Planning and Management Support Services, under Section 1.6 (Calendar of Events), the “Announcement of Intent to Award” was scheduled to be made on Aug. 16, 2013 and the “Contract Begin Date” was Aug. 30, 2013.

In accordance to that information and pursuant to the Public Records laws of the State of Louisiana, please provide me upon final execution with:

  • Documents containing the name and address of the winning bidder;
  • Documents containing the name of the company to whom the contract was awarded;
  • Documents containing the amount of the winning bid;
  • Documents containing the amount of the actual contract;
  • Also, please provide me the opportunity to review all documents containing the proposals submitted in response to RFP#: 107-28062013001.

If it’s semantics they want, it’s semantics they’ll get.

Read Full Post »

Our random observations on freedom of expression, ATC, questionable meeting and action by Jindal’s LSU Board

Posted in ATC, Attorney General, Boards, Ethics, Governor's Office, Health Care, Politicians, Privatization, State Agencies, Transparency on August 26, 2013| 15 Comments »

We’ve come across a few odds and ends lying around that we feel might warrant a second look.

Another take on blood tests and one-vehicle accidents

First we would like to acknowledge that we initially wrote a piece based on erroneous information from certain people whose judgment we trusted but who were wrong. Because of their advice, we also were wrong in saying that blood alcohol tests are “routine procedure” in one vehicle accidents. It turns out that is not the case and we respectfully defer to the state trooper who investigated Attorney General Buddy Caldwell’s accident last week. The trooper said in his report that Caldwell did not appear to be impaired and accordingly, he did not take a blood sample for testing. We have been informed by State Police and others that it is not “routine procedure” to take blood tests in single-vehicle accidents.

ATC moves in with State Police, not so the ATC director

The Louisiana Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control has been moved from its former headquarters at United Plaza on Essen Lane in Baton Rouge to the Louisiana State Police compound on Independence Boulevard, ostensibly to save money.

ATC Director Troy Hebert and his administrative assistant Jessica Starns, however, were allowed to remain at the United Plaza offices and to even rent additional space for Hebert’s office.

What’s with that? Shouldn’t an agency director be physically located at the same address as his employees and not several miles across town? That would be like having a governor who spends all his time in other states. Oh, wait. We already have that, don’t we?

Baton Rouge publisher opposes freedom of expression

Normally, a member of the Fourth Estate would be up in arms at any suggestion at muzzling a critic of government, a suggestion any publisher, editor of reporter would quickly point to as a threat to the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech.

Such is not the case of one Baton Rouge publisher, we’re told. Reports have it that this publisher, a staunch supporter of Gov. Bobby Jindal, has gone on rampages in his office, ranting to his subordinates and anyone else who will listen that he wants Robert Mann stripped of his tenure at LSU—and fired.

Mann, who has worked with three U.S. senators (Russell Long, Bennett Johnston and John Breaux) and former Gov. Kathleen Blanco, currently holds the Manship Chair in Journalism at the Manship School of Mass Communication at LSU.

A journalist and political historian, Mann also just happens to author a controversial political blog called Something Like the Truth http://bobmannblog.com/ in which he generally takes the Jindal administration to task for its roughshod trampling of all who dare disagree with him, be they state civil service employees, doctors, college presidents or legislators.

Mann is careful to feature a prominent disclaimer which says, “Opinions expressed on this blog are solely those of the author, not LSU, the Manship School nor the Reilly Center for Media & Public Affairs.”

But that apparently is not enough for this publisher, who dutifully prints every inane press release by the governor that purports to make the state look good despite reams of negative national surveys on poverty, obesity and health care.

So much for a fair and independent press serving as a watchdog on behalf of the citizenry. We’re just sayin’…

Cerise Memo: LSU Board quorum?

Remember our story last week about that July 2012 meeting in the LSU President’s conference room where former Department of Health and Hospitals Secretary Alan Levine pitched the privatization plan for LSU’s 10-hospital system?

There was a key sentence then-head of the LSU Health Care System Dr. Fred Cerise included in his memorialization of that meeting regarding Levine’s presentation:

“The LSU board members present indicated they want LSU’s management to pursue this strategy,” the Cerise Memo said.

But wait. The LSU Board of Supervisors consists of 15 voting members, all appointed by the governor, and one student member who has no vote.

The Louisiana Open Meetings Law, R.S. 42: 4.2, headed “Public policy for open meetings; liberal construction,” reads thusly:

  • “Meeting” means the convening of a quorum of a public body to deliberate or act on a matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. It shall also mean the convening of a quorum of a public body by the public body or by another public official to receive information regarding a matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power.
  • “Public body” means village, town, and city governing authorities; parish governing authorities; school boards and boards of levee and port commissioners; boards of publicly operated utilities; planning, zoning, and airport commissions; and any other state, parish, municipal, or special district boards, commissions, or authorities, and those of any political subdivision thereof, where such body possesses policy making, advisory, or administrative functions, including any committee or subcommittee of any of these bodies enumerated in this paragraph.
  • “Quorum” means a simple majority of the total membership of a public body.

The statute further stipulates that “every meeting of any public body shall be open to the public unless closed pursuant to R.S. 42.6, R.S. 42:6.1 or R.S. 42:6.2.”

First of all, R.S. 42:6 clearly states that a public body “may hold executive session upon an affirmative vote …of two-thirds of its constituent members present.”

R.S. 42:6.1 simply lists the reasons an executive session may be held which you may explore in greater detail here: http://www.lawserver.com/law/state/louisiana/la-laws/louisiana_revised_statutes_42-6-1

R.S. 42:6.2, re-designated as R.S. 42:18 in 2010, applies only to the Legislature. http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=99494

But let’s return to R.S. 42:4.2, that pesky little law about quorums.

Remember, the Cerise Memo said that the “LSU board members present” indicated their desire for the LSU administration to move forward with the Levine proposal.

Remember also, the LSU Board of Supervisors is comprised of 15 voting members.

But there were only four members of the LSU board present at that meeting, according to Cerise’s notes. They included Rolfe McCollister, Bobby Yarborough, Dr. John George and Scott Ballard.

Hardly a quorum.

But then, it was the likely intent of those present to avoid having a quorum because a quorum (eight voting members, in this case) would necessitate public notices of such a meeting and making said meeting open to the public.

Obviously, that was not the wish of the board members who did attend. They wanted, above all else, to avoid a full quorum so that the meeting could be conducted in secret.

If you check out our masthead, we recently added an anonymous quote:

  • It is understandable when a child is afraid of the dark but unforgivable when a man fears the light.

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (Nov. 13, 1856-Oct. 5, 1941) is credited with coining the phrase, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

But in avoiding the necessity of opening up that July 17, 2012, meeting to the public by purposely skirting the requirement of a quorum so as not to qualify as an official meeting, those four board members were legally barred from taking any official action.

Yet, that minor point of law did little to deter them from directing the LSU administration to pursue Levine’s plan.

Yes, we are fully aware that the four board members not only spoke for the entire board but for Gov. Bobby Jindal as well. As Elliott Stonecipher recently noted in his blog Forward Now, state ethic laws prohibited Levine from conducting business with the State for two years after his departure as DHH Secretary. http://forward-now.com/?p=8403

Levine’s last day at DHH was July 16, 2010. The meeting at which he presented his plan to LSU administrators and board members was on July 17, 2012.

And we don’t believe in coincidences. And anyone who doesn’t believe Levine was in constant contact with the administration in the days, weeks and months leading up to that July 17 meeting is…well, a fool.

Such is the Gold Standard of Ethics that Jindal has bestowed upon the people of Louisiana.

Read Full Post »

RFP for IT consolidation goes out; DOA, perhaps fearing CNSI repeat, cautions employees against vendor contact

Posted in Ethics, IT, Privatization, RFP, Request for Proposals on August 5, 2013| 10 Comments »

BATON ROUGE (CNS)—The deadline for proposals (RFP) officially passed as of close of business last Wednesday (July 31) and oral interviews of potential bidders is set for Aug. 14 for the consolidation of the information technology (IT) departments of some 20 departments within the state’s Executive Branch. http://wwwprd1.doa.louisiana.gov/OSP/LaPAC/agency/pdf/5479100.pdf

The Division of Administration (DOA), which issued the RFP, is tentatively scheduled to announce the awarding of the multi-million dollar contract on Aug. 16 with work on the contract set to begin on Aug. 30 even as more and more horror stories surface about experiences of potential bidders/contractors with similar projects in other states.

Meanwhile, in an apparent effort to at least project an appearance of propriety with efforts to avoid any conflict of interest and to head off another possible CNSI public relations disaster sent out a pretty interesting email to all DOA section heads and the Council of Information Services Directors.

The “conflict of interest advisory,” a one-page memorandum from Richard “Dickie” Howze, interim state chief information officer, cautioned state employees against any contact with vendors, potential proposers or subcontractors regarding the RFP.

The IT consolidation contract could rival that of the $200 million CNSI contract which the state cancelled after a federal investigation was launched into the manner in which the contract was awarded. Former Department of Health and Hospitals Director Bruce Greenstein had previously worked for CNSI but told legislators he had built a “firewall” between himself and the contract selection process. That turned out to be false as documents subpoenaed by legislators revealed hundreds of emails and telephone conversations between Greenstein and CNSI officials during the selection process.

It was also learned that Greenstein had tweaked the contract requirements so that CNSI might qualify to bid on the Medicaid claims processing contract. He resigned in March shortly after the Jindal administration cancelled the CNSI contract but was allowed to remain on the job for nearly a month.

Greenstein’s name recently resurfaced. Now residing in Seattle, where he was living when first hired by Jindal, he was spotted at a July 8 dinner meeting in a Shreveport restaurant with Steve Skrivanos, board chairman of Biomedical Research Foundation of Northwest Louisiana. One report also placed foundation President and CEO Dr. John George in that meeting though Dr. George has denied that he was present.

Unconfirmed rumors surfaced that Jindal directed the foundation and LSU Medical Center officials to find Greenstein a job while the investigation in Baton Rouge was ongoing.

“The Division of Administration, Office of Information Technology (OIT) staff has been working on the development and release of (an RFP) for Information Technology Planning and Management Support Services,” the DOA memorandum of July 19 said.

“OIT has engaged the participation of the Council of Information Services Directors (CISD) for technical support in this endeavor and may request the support of other sections within the DOA throughout the process. OIT has gone to great lengths to maintain strict contact requirements to ensure all vendors have equal access and standardized information.

“Suring this procurement process it is crucial that you and your staff do not have any contact with vendors who are potential proposers or who may be part of a proposal as a subcontractor regarding this RFP or other related RFPs. If you work with a contractor who is a potential proposer, there shall be no private communications, discussion of the upcoming process, timelines, RFP content, evaluation or award,” the memo said.

“Additionally, it is not appropriate for any current state employee to provide a reference for a vendor responding to this procurement. These restrictions will remain in effect until the contract(s) has been awarded and the protest period has past (sic). Please ensure that your staff are (sic) made fully aware of these requirements. Anyone failing to follow this policy may face disciplinary action, up and including termination.”

Wow. Too bad that memo was not made available to Greenstein during the awarding of the DHH Medicaid claims processing contract.

Now, perhaps someone should send a similar note to the folks up at Biomedical Research Foundation of Northwest Louisiana in Shreveport.

Read Full Post »

Notable Quotables (in their own words)

Posted in BESE, Boards, Education, Ethics, Governor's Office, Notable Quotables, Transparency on July 28, 2013| 2 Comments »

“It is important that ethics board members are completely free of any and all conflicts of interest.”

—Gov. Bobby Jindal, in announcing his appointment of Scott Schneider to the State Board of Ethics on Sept. 23, 2008.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »