Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

Retired State Trooper expelled from LSTA membership for asking questions is solicited by same LSTA for contribution

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Civil Service, Ethics, Finances, State Police on April 3, 2017| 72 Comments »

The Louisiana State Troopers Association (LSTA) must really be hurting financially.

First, there was the flak about the illegal campaign contributions LSTA’s board decided to launder through the private bank account of its Executive Director David Young that brought unwanted attention to the association.

Then there was the persistent objections to that decision by several retired state troopers who are members of the association but, like the rest of the LSTA membership, were never consulted on the decision to involve the group in partisan politics.

Their objections became such an annoyance that four of the retirees, men who dedicated their entire working life to protecting the public and trying to make our highways safer, were voted out of the association. Just booted out. No thank-you, no going away party. Nothing except a letter saying they were no longer welcome as members of the brotherhood.

Eventually, the State Ethics Commission investigated the illegal contributions—illegal because state classified employees are forbidden from participating in partisan politics or for contributing to political campaigns—and levied a $5,000 fine against the association.

On the heels of that action the FBI served subpoenas on 18 members of the association, directing them to appear before a federal grand jury investigating association activities. That grand jury convenes on April 13.

As all this was going on, many State Troopers were victims of the floods that plagued Louisiana during 2016 and the LSTA generously pledged $1,000 to members who were adversely affected by the floods.

Included on its WEB PAGE is the following statement:

“We are committed to improved pay and benefits; to assure a better working environment; to provide support when needed; and to increase the quality of life for our members. We also strive to improve the public services provided by our members to our community.”

Somehow, though, the retiree members, those who likely needed help the most, were overlooked when those $1,000 checks went out. Several retirees have contacted LouisianaVoice to say they never received any help from the association.

Obviously, LSTA is short of funds. Why else would it, instead of helping out those retirees who were flooded (among them excommunicated member Leon “Bucky” Millet), reach out to them instead for contributions?

That’s right. Millet, a retiree who was booted out for protesting too much and who had his home flooded, recently received a solicitation letter from LSTA.

The letter which went out over LSTA President James O’Quinn’s signature, noted that the association uses contributions “to persuade government (apparently through campaign contributions) to provide better and safer conditions for our troopers. We use it to support community oriented programs that serve to enhance positive relationships between troopers and the communities they serve.”

The letter contained no mention of how contributions are also used for elaborate parties and to pay for travel all over the country for members to attend such work-related events as the Washington Mardi Gras.

“Because we’re grateful to those who are grateful for us, we like to recognize our donors with gifts. For our spring fundraising campaign, we have our much-requested official LSTA Field Cap. We also have our new 2017 window stickers, our wonderful spring vacation drawing and special recognition for our high-end donors.”

We’re pretty sure that a long-standing member who was expelled for asking legitimate questions would love to affix that sticker to his windshield and cruise on down the road wearing his official LSTA Field Cap.

Ending its solicitation on a personal note, the letter said, “Please consider a donation, Mr. Millet. We could use it.”

Yes. No doubt, the association may even use some of those contributions for legal fees.

Read Full Post »

LSP heir-apparent Lt. Col. Dupuy booted back to State Police Academy—as a major; more changes, retirements speculated

Posted in Boards, Corruption, Ethics, Governor's Office, Retirement, State Police on March 31, 2017| 14 Comments »

The shakeup continued at Louisiana State Police (LSP) Friday afternoon with the reduction in rank of former Superintendent Mike Edmonson’s top aid and heir-apparent and the promotion and reassignment of two others, according to the email below that was sent out to all LSP personnel:

From: Rhonda Fogleman On Behalf Of Deputy Secretary
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 2:45 PM
To: _DPS_Personnel
Subject: Transfer & Promotion Effective March 31, 2017
Importance: High

The following personnel changes are made effective at close of business on Friday, March 31, 2017:

Major Mike Noel transferred and promoted to Lieutenant Colonel, Interim Assistant Superintendent/Interim Chief of Staff

LTC Charlie Dupuy transferred and reassigned as Major, Command Inspector, Training

Major Frank Ducote transferred and reassigned as Major, Command Inspector, Patrol Operations/Region I

Authority of:   Colonel Kevin Reeves, Superintendent

In another development, LouisianaVoice has learned that Lt. Stephen Lafargue has resigned his position as trustee for the Louisiana State Police Retirement System. He was considered one of six Edmonson supporters on the board which will take up Edmonson’s retirement later in April.

Dupuy, once the odds-on favorite to eventually move into Edmonson’s position, was implicated in that October trip to San Diego by Edmonson and 16 subordinates to see Edmonson receive a national award. The four who drove to San Diego via Las Vegas and the Grand Canyon did so in the state vehicle assigned to Dupuy.

Maj. Noel, who previously served as a command inspector for the Gaming Division, will take over as lieutenant colonel in the position of Interim Assistant Superintendent and Interim Chief of Staff to Col. Kevin Reeves who assumed Edmonson’s duties last Saturday.

Noel, a veteran of 27 years with LSP was earning $140,900 as a major but will receive a significant pay increase to $161,300 as lieutenant colonel as he takes over the day-to-day operations of LSP.

Those at LSP who are familiar with Noel told LouisianaVoice he was a good choice for the position. “He’s an excellent choice,” said one trooper who asked not to be identified. “He’s even-handed and has a great disposition. Col. Reeves couldn’t have picked a better person for the job.

Ducote’s reassignment to the position previously held by Reeves was described as a lateral transfer. He presently earns $140,900.

Dupuy, on the other hand, will realize a significant reduction in pay to $140,900 from his current level of $161,300 as he returns to the position he held at the State Police Training Academy before being tapped by Edmonson as his chief of staff.

It may not be the last change at LSP as Reeves settles into his position One State Police insider said the transfer of Dupuy could signal that the Reeves appointment by Gov. John Bel Edwards and the Noel appointment are permanent instead of interim and that more demotions, transfers and retirements could be in the offing.

Others who might yet be transferred to other positions include Master Trooper Thurman Miller, Lt. Col. Jason Starnes who now presides over the Management and Finance Section, and Trooper T.J. Doss who currently serves as the State Trooper representative and as chairman of the Louisiana State Police Commission. Doss has been considered by some as Edmonson’s plant on the commission. Doss, from Ruston, has been TDY’d (assigned temporary duty) to Baton Rouge and presently resides at the State Police Academy.

The shakeup at LSP has been a long time coming as the agency has been buffeted by one damaging story after another—all reflecting on Edmonson’s leadership and administration of some 1,500 troopers statewide.

The San Diego trip was the tipping point as Edwards seemed determined to stick by his decision to reappoint Edmonson following his election in 2015 despite the controversy swirling around LSP. Edmonson had the support of the Louisiana Sheriffs’ Association which had endorsed Edwards in his runoff against former Sen. David Vitter.

Even before the San Diego trip, there were disciplinary problems, illegal campaign contributions and other issues that proved to be a source of constant embarrassment to the governor.

LSP is currently under investigation by the Division of Administration, the Legislative Auditor’s Office, and the FBI, all of which eventually forced Edwards to make the decision to allow Edmonson to announce his retirement, which took effect March 24.

When Edwards appointed Reeves to succeed Edmonson, there was speculation within the department that Edwards had prevailed upon Reeves to retain Dupuy as chief of staff to mollify the sheriffs but with Dupuy’s demotion and transfer, that now appears not to have been the case.

LSP public information officer Maj. Doug Cain said Reeves has had a busy first week in his new leadership role. “He’s been meeting with (Department of Public Safety) unit heads and senior staff within LSP in an effort to communicate his agenda for the department.”

Maybe it’s just us, but it seems a lot of meetings weren’t necessary to know there is a real problem at LSP. But the first step in resolving problems is to first acknowledge them.

Read Full Post »

Remember the Edmonson Amendment of 2014 that boosted his retirement? It’s baaaack and he’ll get his $50,000 bump

Posted in Ethics, Legislature, Legislators, Retirement, State Police on March 27, 2017| 26 Comments »

It must be nice when you can get the rules written just for you.

There must come a time when even the most disinterested, blasé, apolitical person living has to look up from whatever else occupies his interest and say, “Wait a damned minute. This just ain’t right and we’re not gonna do it.”

Or, as Peter Finch as Howard Beale in the classic movie Network would say: “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!”

Just when you think you heard the last of Mike Edmonson, the erstwhile Superintendent of State Police, he comes back to haunt us and taunt us.

Remember way back in 2014 when LouisianaVoice first made you aware of SB 294, signed into law by Bobby Jindal as ACT 859? The bill, authored by Sen. Jean-Paul J. Morrell (D-New Orleans),  appeared only to deal with procedures for formal, written complaints made against police officers.

But thanks to a little back room deal between Edmonson Chief of Staff Charles Dupuy and State Sen. Neil Riser (R-Columbia and an announced candidate for State Treasurer), a last-minute amendment was tacked onto that bill that, contrary to verbal assurances to legislators that the bill would cause no financial impact, would have actually given Edmonson an additional $50,000 or so in retirement income.

Thanks to a timely anonymous letter informing us of the amendment, we were able to break the story and the resulting furor over that was such that State Sen. Dan Claitor (R-Baton Rouge) filed suit in 19th Judicial District Court to block the raise that Edmonson was already being forced to disavow. District Court Judge Janice Clark threw out the law.

Why?

Because Edmonson voluntarily and of his own free will chose some years earlier to lock his retirement in at $76,000 by entering into the state’s Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP) while he was still at the rank of captain. That decision, which is considered irrevocable, locked in his retirement at a rate based on his captain’s pay while netting him a higher salary at the time.

But now he’s back and because of a rather complicated quirk in the law—applicable, apparently, only to State Police—it appears he will get that extra retirement income after all—not $76,000 as dictated by his decision to enter DROP way back when, but $128,559, according to Jim Mustian’s Baton Rouge ADVOCATE online story.

Here is the way Retirement says it’s calculated, according to one retired Trooper:

Act 1160 relative to the re-computation of the pre-DROP benefit and the pre-DROP final average compensation applies to you if (1) you participated in DROP on or before June 30, 2001, 2) continued in state police employment after participation in DROP without a break in service, and (3) remained in such continuous employment on or after July 1, 2001. These special provisions do not apply to members who retired on or before July 1, 2001.

If You Entered DROP With 25 Years or More of Hard State Trooper Service:

Pre-DROP Benefit – If you meet the criteria set forth in (1), (2), and (3) above, and you entered DROP with 25 years or more of hard state trooper service, you are eligible for a re-computation of your pre-DROP benefit at 3 1/3% multiplied by the number of years of service to your credit prior to your effective date of participation in DROP, and further multiplied by your final average salary as computed when you entered DROP.

Post-DROP Benefit – Your post-DROP benefit will be calculated at 31/3% multiplied by the number of years of service to your credit after DROP participation, and further multiplied by your final average compensation. The final average compensation used will be the average determined at the beginning of DROP, or, a new current final average if you worked for an additional 12 or 36 months (based on your hire date).

If You Entered DROP With Less Than 25 Years of Hard State Trooper Service:

Pre-DROP Benefit – If you meet the requirements stated above and you entered DROP with less than 25 years of hard state trooper service, you may also be eligible for a re-computation of your final average compensation based on your hard 25th year of trooper service (or your highest 12-month average if you have not reached your 25th year) for the purpose of determining your new pre-DROP benefit. This re-computation of the final average salary will be based on any 12-month period of service (but limited to the first 25 years) while a member of LSPRS regardless of hire date.

Post-DROP Benefit – Your Post-DROP benefit will be calculated at 3 1/3% multiplied by the number of years of service to your credit after DROP participation, and further multiplied by the greater of 1) your final average salary as determined when we recomputed your pre-DROP benefit, or 2) your current final average compensation based on a 12-month average regardless of hire date.

The sum of any re-computed pre and post DROP retirement benefit shall not exceed 100% of your current final average compensation.

For purposes of determining the average compensation based on the first 25 years, (1) “state trooper service” does not include military service purchased, actuarially transferred service, or reciprocally recognized service, or any form of purchase of service credit, and (2) “average salary” does not include overtime, expenses, clothing allowances, or any remuneration resulting from military service.

If you are eligible for a re-computation under Act 1160, this does not change the amounts credited to your DROP account. The re-computation is for the monthly benefit amount you receive upon retirement only.

Got it?

Didn’t think so.

But the overriding question that’s impossible shake is this: If this rule existed, why was it necessary back in 2014 to try and sneak the benefit increase through the legislature as an amendment to an otherwise harmless bill?

Something doesn’t pass the smell test here and when you take a look at the makeup of the State Police Retirement System’s Board of TRUSTEES, six of whom are either active or retired State Troopers, the odor doesn’t get any better.

The bottom line here is this:

Whether or not special provisions are in place for State Troopers to circumvent the irrevocable provisions of DROP, if the State Police Retirement System’s Board of Trustees goes forward with giving Edmonson this $128,559, every single state employee who ever opted to enter DROP at any time should retain legal counsel and go after the additional retirement funds to which he or she is entitled.

 

Read Full Post »

Notable Quotable (in their own words)

Posted in Corruption, Ethics, Notable Quotables on March 26, 2017| 4 Comments »

“As an outsider (not living in Louisiana) doing disaster work in Louisiana, corruption is one element that defines Louisiana’s culture. There are many beautiful elements to your culture; corruption is not one of them. The voters talk about corruption as most people talk about their favorite sports team. You need to change it.”

—A reader whose comment says more about the ethos of corruption and the resignation to low expectations of our state leaders than anything anyone else could ever write. We should all be embarrassed and outraged over the manner in which the flood recovery is being handled.

Read Full Post »

Handling of $250 million contract for 2016 flood recovery illustrates the extent of political corruption in Louisiana

Posted in Boards, Contract, Contracts, Corruption, Courts, Ethics, Fraud, Governor's Office, Lawsuits, Politicians, RFP, Request for Proposals on March 25, 2017| 18 Comments »

Here’s a story no one saw coming:

There’s political chicanery afoot in Baton Rouge.

Who’d-a-thunk it?

Okay all that was said tongue-in-cheek.

Unfortunately.

The truth is, we’ve become so inured to political sleaze in Louisiana politics that it’s become difficult to be either surprised or outraged, leaving only indifference as our emotion of choice.

All the ingredients are in place for graft, corruption, and exploitation and there are plenty of those more than willing to take advantage of the opportunity:

  • A contract to manage Louisiana’s flood recovery program worth anywhere from 16 percent to 22 percent of $1.6 billion in federal funds;
  • A former state senator, Larry Bankston, convicted two decades ago on two counts of racketeering who now advises the State Contractor Licensing Board that has managed to insert itself into the debate over the proposed contract;
  • Claims of bid irregularities by a losing bidder;
  • Support of that claim by Bankston who neglected to mention that his son worked for one of the losing bidders;
  • Cancellation by the state of the $250,000 contract so that it may be re-advertised;
  • A potential 2019 gubernatorial candidate questioning the propriety of Bankston’s employment by that state board;
  • Up to 150,000 homes and nearly half-a-million residents affected by Louisiana floods in 2016, many of whom are still waiting for the political inertia called Restore Louisiana to start things moving so they can get back into their flooded homes.

Anytime there’s big money involved, especially federal money, the potential always exists for political and legal jockeying and manipulation. The temptation can be overwhelming.

Stephen Winham recently wrote a column for LouisianaVoice on this very subject: https://louisianavoice.com/2017/03/18/forget-blaming-fema-guest-columnist-area-reporters-correctly-place-fault-with-state-for-flood-recovery-failures/

The fact that the plight of the state’s flood victims has been obscured, seemingly forgotten, in the process of too-long delayed recovery only makes the state of affairs all the more shameful and disgusting. But when you have no voice, you are quickly forgotten in the scramble for big bucks.

And the bigger the bucks, the more greed manifests itself. And the more the greed, the less focus there is on the victims. That’s the way it’s always been and apparently that’s the way it will always be.

And hardly addressed is the issue of just what the deliverables on such a contract would be. Here we have companies crawling all over each other in order to obtain a contract which represents 20 percent of the total allocation for flood recovery.

And those companies won’t put up the first piece of drywall or sheetrock. They won’t perform any plumbing or electrical work. They won’t install any flooring or apply the first coat of paint, nor will they hammer the first nail. In short, they will do nothing meaningful toward flood recovery other than to approve payments to those who do the actual work.

But they will collect up to 20 percent of the recovery money—likely more if they can succeed at the usual practice of coming back for a contract amendment a few months down the road.

This story has received fairly significant play in the Baton Rouge area but if you’ve not kept up with The Advocate’s coverage, here’s essentially what has transpired:

A team led by IEM, a North Carolina company affiliated with several Baton Rouge engineering and consulting firms, easily had the best score—by at least 16 points—among the five teams submitting proposals and also quoted the lowest price—$250 million.

But PDRM, led by CSRS of Baton Rouge, whose bid was $65 million higher, filed an official complaint with the State Licensing Board for Contractors, pointing out that IEM did not possess a commercial contractor’s license at the time of its bid.

The Request for Proposals issued by the state, however, said only that bidding companies had to possess a license or be able to obtain one. IEM did, in fact, obtain a license prior to the time bids were opened. Ironically, PDRM, the company which blew the whistle on IEM, did not possess a contractor’s license at the time it submitted its bid either.

Bankston, legal counsel for the licensing board, opined that eligible bidders needed a contractor’s license at the time of bid submissions—and the licensing board agreed. The following day, March 17, the state decided to CANCEL IEM’s contract and re-bid the project.

By offering the opinion that he did, apparently disqualifying both IEM and PDRM in the process, the winning bid would have then gone to the third lowest bidder had not the administration decided to pull the plug on the whole thing and start over.

That third company whose bid was $350 million, $100 million higher than IEM, was Rebuild Louisiana Now and was led by a Texas firm called SLS. SLS also owns a company called DRC Emergency Services. Bankston’s son, Benjamin Bankston, works as regional manager for DRC. Larry Bankston said he was unaware his son’s firm had any relationship to any of the bidding companies when he wrote his opinion.

DRC had its own legal problems back in 2012 over payments and gratuities the company was accused of giving former Plaquemines Parish Sheriff Jiff Hingle after the firm received two CONTRACTS from the then-sheriff totaling more than $3 million.

In March 2002, the Louisiana Supreme Court REVOKED Bankston’s law license after his conviction on two counts of racketeering in 1997 in connection with then-State Sen. Bankston’s sham rental of his Gulf Shores condo to video poker operator Fred Goodson for $1,555 per week.

Bankston’s conviction was UPHELD by the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals in July 1999.

Contracting board Chairman Lee Mallett of Iowa, said he retains “full confidence” in Bankston.

Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry DISAGREES. But Landry’s desire to run for governor against John Bel Edwards in 2019 is the worst-kept secret in Baton Rouge, so he’s going to do and say anything he can to embarrass the governor.

U.S. Rep. Garret Graves, also being mentioned as a potential opponent for Edwards in two years and who was instrumental in obtaining federal flood recover money for Louisiana, also takes issue with the decision to cancel the IEM contract and to start the bid process all over.

“This is very disappointing news,” Graves said, adding that the decision will only serve to further delay needed flood relief funds. “It is impossible to explain to flood victims why $1.6 billion in recovery dollars are stuck in the bureaucracy while homes remain gutted, molded and uninsulated.”

Graves said obtaining the federal money “wasn’t easy and now every time we talk to the Appropriations Committee and leadership folks, they cite the fact that we haven’t spent what we already received. It’s a concern absolutely.”

That politicians, lawyers and contractors would put their own interests ahead of those of people who have been forced out of their homes—some for a year now—only serves to drive home the point that while there has been a change of administrations in Louisiana, nothing really has changed.

Yep, there’s political chicanery afoot in Baton Rouge.

Who’d-a-thunk it?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »