Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

On heels of possible ouster of three State Police Commission members, it’s learned required online ethics course ignored

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Corruption, Elections, Ethics, Governor's Office, Politicians, State Police, Uncategorized on March 27, 2016| 9 Comments »

ETHICS DILEMMA

(CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

The “investigation” by the State Police Commission of political contributions funneled by the Louisiana State Troopers Association (LSTA) through its executive director has taken a most interesting twist. And suffice it to say that the folks over at LSTA aren’t raising their champagne glasses in a celebratory toast.

Remember our story of March 10 that revealed multiple political contributions by three commission members, their wives and business interests? https://louisianavoice.com/2016/03/10/state-police-commission-members-probing-lsta-appear-to-have-committed-similar-campaign-contribution-violations/

Well, that bit of information has resulted in the probability that three commission members will be told that they must resign or be removed by Gov. John Bel Edwards, according to a story by Baton Rouge Advocate reporter Maya Lau. http://theadvocate.com/news/15297801-173/three-members-of-louisiana-state-police-commission-may-be-ousted-over-campaign-contribution-issue

In addition, LouisianaVoice has learned that two of the three have never complied with State Ethics Board requirements that they complete an annual one-hour ETHICS course. That information comes on the heels of a similar story that several members of the State Board of Dentistry had never taken the ethics training. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/03/25/dentistry-board-members-fail-to-take-required-state-ethics-training-board-policy-attracts-unwanted-attention-of-ada/

Debora Grier, Executive Secretary of the Louisiana Board of Ethics, said ethics training became a requirement for employees, contractors and board and commission members in 2012. Section VII of the Louisiana Code of Governmental Ethics says, “Each public servant shall receive a minimum of one hour of education and training on the Code of Ethics during each year of his public employment or term of office.”

A public employee “means anyone, whether compensated or not, who is…appointed by elected official to a position to serve the government or government agency” or who is “engaged in the performance of a governmental function.”

The one-hour training consists of an online course accessed through the Ethics Board’s Web page and the Web page also keeps records of those who have taken the course in a timely manner and there is where the three members of the State Police Commission appear to have a problem in addition to the one involving their political contributions.

Commission Chairman Franklin Kyle of Mandeville, appointed in 2013, and William Goldring of New Orleans have never taken the required training, according to Ethics Board records. The third member, former appellate court judge Freddie Pitcher of Baton Rouge, who has already indicated he will step down, took the online course in 2013 and 2014 but failed to do so in 2015. He and Goldring were appointed to the commission in 2010.

Commission member Thomas Doss, appointed last year, has taken the 2015 course but Donald Breaux, appointed in 2014, and Calvin Braxton, appointed in 2015, have not. Commission Vice-Chair Lloyd Grafton of Ruston, appointed in 2013, took the training that year and in 2014 but did not in 2015, records reflect. Neither of those four members has made any campaign contributions.

LouisianaVoice has also learned that Kyle and Goldring were also active in making political contributions at the federal level.

 http://www.campaignmoney.com/finance.asp?type=in&cycle=10&criteria=Kyle&fname=franklin

http://www.campaignmoney.com/finance.asp?type=in&cycle=12&criteria=Kyle&fname=franklin

http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/william-goldring.asp?cycle=16

Even as news of the likely exit of the three members was learned, the commission has hired Natchitoches attorney Taylor Townsend to lead the investigation into why the LSTA board allowed Executive Director David T. Young to give more than $45,000 to various political campaigns and to be reimbursed for “expenses.”  https://louisianavoice.com/2015/12/09/more-than-45000-in-campaign-cash-is-funneled-through-executive-director-by-louisiana-state-troopers-association/

That procedure was a major sticking point at the commission’s February meeting when member Calvin Braxton Sr. objected to approval of the January minutes because the minutes did not accurately reflect much of the discussion at that January meeting.

The key point, which was eventually incorporated into revised minutes, involved an exchange between LSTA attorney Floyd Falcon and commission vice chairman Lloyd Grafton of Ruston. In that exchange, Grafton said, “It (the method of making the contributions) almost makes me think there was something suspect here because of the check writing.”

http://theadvocate.com/news/14849801-128/state-commission-to-see-if-state-troopers-okd-money-for-political-candidates-including-gov-edwards

As an aside, there is no record of Falcon, who accused LouisianaVoice of being a “common complainer,” having ever taken the Ethic Board’s online ethics training.

Civil service employees and state troopers are prohibited from engaging in political activity, including making political contributions to candidates. In the LSTA case, the Code of Governmental Ethics, Section VIII of R.S. 18:1505.2(B) also lists the making of contributions or loans “through or in the name of another” as a prohibited practice. http://ethics.la.gov/Pub/Laws/cfdasum.pdf

The commission, the State Police equivalent to the State Civil Service Board, is charged with investigating wrongdoing on the part of state troopers but has no jurisdiction over the LTSA, a private organization.

Commission Chairman Franklin Kyle of Mandeville said on March 3 that a rule to show cause was issued to two retirees who have openly challenged the contributions “to produce the names of Louisiana State Troopers who allegedly violated State Police Commission rules in addition to any evidence they have that supports the allegations. Those gentlemen have until March 18, 2016, to do so, and additional subpoenas may be issued for any additional evidence that will assist the investigation. Upon receipt of sufficient evidence, a public hearing will be scheduled. There will be more information at the April meeting of the (commission), as well as subsequent meetings, until this investigation is completed.”

Kyle was putting the onus on two retired state troopers to come up with the names of LSTA members who may have initiated the contributions, a responsibility that would seem to be the job of the commission as an investigative board. The retirees have sought records from LSTA and their efforts have been thwarted at every turn, yet Kyle charged them with procuring the evidence need to conduct the investigation.

That apparently is not the way the administration wanted things done and the solution was quick in coming.

The attorney who had been spearheading the “investigation” was relieved of that responsibility and Townsend brought in. Townsend, a Democrat, is the nephew of former State Senator Donald G. Kelly and served as a state representative in his own right from 2000 to 2008.

He did not seek a third term but instead chose to run for an open state Senate seat formerly held by Kelly from 1976-1996. In something of an upset, he was defeated by Gerald Long (R-Natchitoches).

On March 10, LouisianaVoice revealed that Kyle and fellow commission members Freddie Pitcher, William Goldring, the wives of Kyle and Goldring and one of Goldring’s companies (Magnolia Marketing) had been active in making their own political contributions during their time of service on the commission.

We noted at that time that it would be interesting to see how the investigation of LSTA contributions would be handled in light of their own participation in political activity. We asked if they might recuse themselves, leaving the investigation to the four remaining board members.

Now that question has been answered. They will not be asked to recuse themselves, but may be asked to resign from the commission altogether.

 

Read Full Post »

Dentistry Board members fail to take required state ethics training; board policy attracts unwanted attention of ADA

Posted in Boards, Corruption, Ethics, Finances, Public Records on March 25, 2016| 7 Comments »

Even as the Office of Inspector General conducts its ongoing investigation of the Louisiana State Board of Dentistry, the board’s unorthodox practices have come to the attention of the American Dental Association (ADA) and the American Dental Education Association (ADEA).

At the same time, LouisianaVoice has learned that all but two members of the Board of Dentistry, including its executive director, may also have a problem with state ethics.

LouisianaVoice learned last Tuesday (March 21) that the Office of Inspector General was conducting an investigation into substantial fines levied against dentists for minor offenses. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/03/21/louisianavoice-learns-of-simultaneous-federal-and-state-investigations-of-lsta-la-state-board-of-dentistry/

On Friday, we obtained a copy of a Feb. 26, 2016, LETTER letter from the two national associations to State Dentistry Board President Dr. Russell Mayer of Hammond. The letter expressed a “high level of concern” of the ADA, its Licensure Task Force, the Council on Dental Education and Licensure, and the American Dental Education Association (ADEA).

The upshot of the letter appears to be a subtle message for the Louisiana board to cease in its efforts to bar competition from out-of-state dentists.

That concern is “with regard to the status of licensure for dentists in the U.S., particularly for dentists attempting to relocate to other states. The letter said that the Louisiana board engages “in conduct that restricts, rather enhances, that portability.”

The three-page letter was signed by Carol Gomez Summerhays, ADA President; Gary L. Roberts, President-elect; Gary E. Jeffers, Chair, ADA Licensure Task Force; Daniel J. Gesek, Jr., Chair, Council on Dental Education and Licensure; Huw F. Thomas, Dean of Tufts University’s School of Dental Medicine and Chair of the ADEA Board of Directors; Cecile A. Feldman, Dean of Dental Medicine, Rutgers University, Chair-elect of the ADEA Board of Directors, and Lily T. Garcia, University of Iowa College of Dentistry Associate Dean for Education and Immediate Past Chair of the ADEA Board of Directors.

The ADEA Allied Dental Program Directors’ Conference is scheduled to be held in New Orleans June 4-7, which makes the timing of the letter especially significant.

In addition to Dr. Mayer, copies of the letter were sent to Arthur Hickham, Jr., Executive Director of the State Board of Dentistry; Dr. Henry Gremillion, Dean, LSU School of Dentistry; Dr. L. King Scott, President of the Louisiana Dental Association; Ward Blackwell, Executive Director, Louisiana Dental Association; Dr. Raymond A. Cohlmia, 12th District ADA Trustee; Dr. Kathleen O’Loughlin, ADA Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer, and Dr. Richard Valachovic, ADEA President and CEO.

The letter pointed out that there are five clinical test administration agencies for dentistry:

  • The Commission on Dental Competency Assessments;
  • Central Regional Dental Testing Service, Inc.;
  • Council of Interstate Testing Agencies, Inc.;
  • The Southern Regional Testing Agency, Inc.;
  • The Western Regional Examining Board.

“The ADA…has come to the conclusion that these examinations adhere to a common set of core design and content requirements that renders them conceptually comparable,” the letter said. “It has been a longstanding policy of the ADA that it represents unnecessary and meaningless duplication to require a candidate seeking licensure in different states to demonstrate his or her theoretical knowledge and clinical skill on separate examinations for each jurisdiction, especially when it is clear that the core requirements, administration, and outcomes are virtually indistinguishable between each examination,” it said.

“It is our understanding that your state affirmatively elects not to accept the examination results from all of these test administration agencies. The decision of your board… to accept the test results of only a select number of clinical test administration agencies appears highly arbitrary. Moreover, those decisions have an arguably anticompetitive effect in restricting the mobility of dentists wishing to move from one state to another.”

“…We respectfully request that your board pursue the necessary steps to accept successful completion of all of the clinical test administration agency examinations for dental licensure in your state,” the letter said. “Recognizing that the dental board’s primary mission is protecting the public in your state, we believe that the board has the authority and autonomy to pursue this change. It will increase portability of dental professionals and access to quality dental care for patients.”

The letter is in addition to the controversy swirling around the board’s policy of forcing dentists to pay the costs of investigating them in addition to absurd monetary penalties that can run into six figures.

The most outrageous example is the board’s forcing a surgeon into bankruptcy because the oral surgeon, who “never filled a tooth, made a denture, made a crown, cleaned teeth, restored a tooth, or anything that anyone would consider a dental practice, did not have an anesthesia permit from the board.

The doctor, Randal Wilk, whose patients were mostly cancer victims, was told by the board that he could sign a consent decree and pay the board $5,000 and the matter would be resolved. When Wilk refused to pay the $5,000, he was told the board could levy fines of more than $100,000—a tactic that can be considered nothing other than extortion.

But a regulation that had been in place since 2012 could be the eventual undoing of board members.

Debora Grier, Executive Secretary of the Louisiana Board of Ethics, said ethics training became a requirement for employees, contractors and board and commission members. Section VII of the Louisiana Code of Governmental Ethics says, “Each public servant shall receive a minimum of one hour of education and training on the Code of Ethics during each year of his public employment or term of office.”

A public employee “means anyone, whether compensated or not, who is…appointed by elected official to a position to serve the government or government agency” or who is “engaged in the performance of a governmental function.”

The one-hour training consists of an online course accessed through the Ethics Board’s Web page and the Web page also keeps records of those who have taken the course in a timely manner and there is where several board members appear to have a real problem.

Beginning with former board investigator Camp Morrison who was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for drumming up charges against dentists, never took a single ethics course.

Others either on the board or employed by the board for whom there is no record of their ever having taken the ethics course as required include Dr. Isaac House of Haughton, Dr. Leonard Breda, III, of Lake Charles, Board Vice President Dr. Claudia Cavallino of Metairie, Dr. Mohammad Zadeh of Chalmette, Dr. James Hargrove of Baton Rouge, and Dr. Robert Foret of Thibodaux.

Moreover, there were several others who have taken the ethics training only one of the required years. Those include Dr. Wilton Guillory, Jr., of Alexandria (2014), Dr. Ronald Marks of Alexandria (2014), Dr. Jerome Smith of Lafayette (2013), Dr. Richard Willis of Monroe (2014), and the board’s Executive Director, Arthur Hickham (2014).

If that were not enough, Board President Dr. Russell Mayer of Hammond took the course in 2013 and 2014, but did not in 2015

So now we have a rogue board that:

  • Contracted with a private investigator whose sole responsibility was to hang some unsuspecting dentist out to dry for some obscure infraction;
  • Served as accuser, prosecutor, and judge in a special kangaroo court with the outcome of cases already predetermined;
  • Extorted backbreaking fines from dentists who balked at the lower fines by threatening to “find” other offenses;
  • Forced dentists to pay for the board’s and Camp’s investigations against them;
  • Maintained office suites in an expensive office building on Canal Street in the heart of the New Orleans Central Business District—and allowed non-state employee Morrison to enjoy a rent-free office in those suites.

And, while protecting the good citizens of Louisiana from those law breaking dentists who dared use lettering in their advertisements larger than the board permitted, somehow managed to look the other way as eight of its board members to neglect taking the required annual one-hour ethics course and six others, including its executive director to get by with taking the course only once.

Just another example of Louisiana politics at its finest, folks.

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

Read Full Post »

Citizen input? We don’t need no stinkin’ citizen input. We have LABI, the chemical association and campaign cash

Posted in Budget, Business, Corruption, Ethics, Exemptions, Incentives, Finances, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Lobbyist, Louisiana Purchase, Media, Politicians, Revenue, Taxes on March 18, 2016| 12 Comments »

Regular readers of this site know our disdain for the undue influence of lobbyists and special interests over lawmakers to the exclusion of the very voters who elected those same lawmakers to represent them and their best interests.

Our opposition to political decisions made with priority given to campaign contributions over what is best for the state is well-known—and uncompromising. Money should have no place—repeat, no place—in political decisions.

Unfortunately, we know that is not the case. Politicians for the most part, are basically prostitutes for campaign funds and those who choose to remain chaste usually find themselves at a serious disadvantage come election time.

To that end, you can probably look for State Rep. Jay Morris (R-Monroe) to attract strong opposition when he comes up for re-election in 2019. And that opposition, whoever it might be, is likely to have a campaign well-lubricated by the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI), the Louisiana Chemical Association, and the oil and gas industry.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, we have gone on record on numerous occasions as saying the voters are merely pawns to be moved about at will by big business in general and the banks, pharmaceutical companies, Wall Street and oil companies in particular. It is their money that inundates us with mind-numbing political ads that invade our living rooms every election year telling us why Candidate A is superior to Candidate B because B voted this way or that way and besides, good old Candidate A has always had the welfare of voters uppermost in mind.

The presence of that influence was never more clearly illustrated than in Tyler Bridges’ insightful story in Friday’s Baton Rouge Advocate. http://theadvocate.com/news/15225624-78/la-legislative-staffers-sort-out-changes-added-at-the-last-minute

In the very first paragraph of his story, Bridges wrote that a secret deal between Senate President John Alario (R-Westwego), House Speaker Taylor Barras (R-New Iberia) and lobbyists for LABI and the Louisiana Chemical Association.

We won’t bother to re-hash the details of that meeting and the agreement finally reached just before the closing minutes of the recent special session. You can read the details in the link to the Bridges story that we provided above.

But suffice it to say had it not been for Morris digging his heels in and threatening to kill his own bill when he learned of a manufacturing tax break that had been added to his bill, HB 61 that aimed at eliminating exemptions and exclusions on numerous sales tax breaks. Though a Republican, Morris feels that big business isn’t paying its fair share of taxes.

“I was not aware of the deal,” Bridges quoted Morris as saying. “I was not invited.”

Neither, apparently, were any spokespersons for consumers, organized labor, teachers, or the citizens of Louisiana.

Oh, but you can bet LABI President Steve Waguespack was invited to a meeting in Alario’s office earlier in the day, as was Louisiana Chemical Association chief lobbyist Greg Bowser.

Given that, we would like to ask Sen. Alario and Rep Barras why no one representing the people were invited to that little conclave. And don’t try to tell us that the Senate President and House Speaker were representing the people. You were not. You were representing the vested interests of the chemical industry and big business. Period.

Sen. Alario, Rep. Barras: the people of Louisiana are far more deserving of a place at the table in some furtive backroom meeting than LABI and the chemical association.

Either all factions are invited in or no one is. The playing field should be level.

By not excluding lobbyists or by not inviting those on whose shoulders are placed the greatest burden, the ones who placed you in office, you have not just failed at your job; you have failed miserably.

Our late friend C.B. Forgotston would have said of the meeting which produced that secret deal: “You can’t make this stuff up.”

Read Full Post »

Like Dental Board, LSBME survives on licensing fees, incentive for fining doctors for perceived violations

Posted in Boards, Corruption, Ethics, Finances, Lawsuits, Public Records, Revenue on March 18, 2016| 8 Comments »

First it was the State Dental Board exposed by LouisianaVoice as serving in the multiple capacity of prosecutor, judge and jury in investigating complaints against dentists, filing charges and then judging on their guilt or innocence. https://louisianavoice.com/2014/03/07/state-board-employs-intimidation-harassment-to-generate-funds-to-pay-for-lucrative-contracts-worth-millions-of-dollars/

Then there was the Auctioneer Licensing Board and the manner in which it failed to defend an 84-year-old widow against a case of shill bidding (efforts to drive prices up by a  plant) or to protect her from unscrupulous actions by an auctioneer.

Now we have another board, the Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners (LSBME) which, through its executive director, is being accused of tactics similar to those of the dental board. The result has been a spate of lawsuits, ethics complaints, and court hearings, all revolving around charges brought against a Baton Rouge doctor and encouraged, he says, by his competitor who sits on the board that brought the charges against him.

The one common thread running through each of the regulatory boards is that they receive no state funding. And with the dental and medical examiners boards, at least, there are expenses: staff, including attorneys, investigators and executive directors, and rent of nice, upscale offices in New Orleans central business district.

The lack of state funding coupled with the aforementioned high costs means the boards must necessarily generate funding—lots of it—through licensing fees and disciplinary actions against dentists and physicians. No dentist or physician in the state wants make waves because the boards literally hold the fate of their livelihoods, indeed their licenses to practice, in their hands.

In the legal profession, rainmakers are those within a firm who generate business by enlisting well-heeled clients who can afford expensive legal representation. Legal fees, after all, are the lifeblood of a law firm and the bigger the firm, the greater the pressure to bring clients through the door.

Taking the comparisons between the dental and the medical examiners board even further, the board acts in the capacity of investigator, accuser, and judge in disciplinary cases and, again like its counterpart, depends to a certain extent on penalties imposed on doctors for its operating revenue. Consequently, there is an undeniable incentive to generate revenue to ensure the boards’ survival.

So when it comes down to adding needed revenue to the coffers, it matters little whether the dentist or physician is guilty; if the need for revenue is present, as it usually is, then the boards, to paraphrase British politician and businessman Sir Eric Campbell-Geddes, “will squeeze the lemon until the pips squeak.” https://richardlangworth.com/pips

LouisianaVoice has previously documented strong-arm tactics by the Louisiana State Board of Dentistry whereby a dentist may first be assessed a modest fine for some supposed transgression. Should the dentist resist, he may quickly learn that that modest fine of a few thousand dollars somehow has run into six figures because he is also assessed the costs of the investigation of his practice—and because the board can. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/04/16/13976/

Sitting members of the dental board are allowed to initiate charges against a competing dentist in the same town—and often do just that.

And while physicians may not actually initiate charges against one of their peers, LouisianaVoice has learned that a board member who was a direct competitor with a doctor under investigation may have participated in the investigation, board discussions and votes affecting his competitor.

Baton Rouge pain management physician Dr. Michael Burdine, an LSBME member, has emerged as a key figure in the board’s investigation of Dr. Arnold Feldman, also of Baton Rouge because of his apparent reluctance to recuse himself from discussing Dr. Feldman’s case pending before the board.

The board’s legal counsel did produce somewhat belatedly a document that purported to recuse Dr. Burdine from participating in proceedings relative to Dr. Feldman’s case but board minutes indicate “unanimous” votes on matters pertaining to Dr. Feldman even as Dr. Burdine was supposedly recused. Moreover, Dr. Burdine repeatedly participated in executive session discussions when the subject of the closed session was Dr. Feldman’s case. Board member Dr. Mark Dawson, however, insists that Dr. Burdine did, in fact, recuse himself. “The pain management doctor’s attorneys are playing you for a fool,” he told LouisianaVoice.

The Dental Board until recently brought charges at the recommendation of a private investigator retained by the board whose offices were housed in the dental board’s suite on Canal Street in New Orleans. LSBME, on the other hand, employed its investigator as a full time employee. Following Dr. Burdine’s selection as vice president of the board, investigator Cecilia Mouton, a physician also, was appointed executive director of the board and immediately requested—and received—a 10 percent pay increase to $211,600.

Mouton, while still employed in 2010 as an investigator who looked into complaints about doctors, married attorney Jack Stolier who at the time represented physicians who were subjects of investigations and who had disciplinary action pending before the board and Mouton. Stolier ceased representing physicians before the board following his marriage to Mouton, Dawson said.

Taking the comparisons between the dental and the medical examiners board even further, LSBME acts in the capacity of investigator, accuser, and judge in disciplinary cases and, again like its counterpart, depends entirely on penalties imposed on doctors for its operating revenue.

Dr. Burdine’s Spine Diagnostics of Baton Rouge, one of the largest pain management clinics in the state, had annual receipts of slightly less than $9 million compared to Dr. Feldman’s $6 million in 2012. The two clinics are only about five miles apart. Dr. Feldman maintains that closure of his facility would necessarily mean that Dr. Burdine would inherit much of his caseload, thus enhancing the size of his clinic and providing an economic windfall for him.

The federal Healthcare Quality Improvement Act of 1986 provides that physicians are entitled to a professional review action “before a panel of individuals who are appointed by the entity and (who) are not indirect economic competition with the physician involved.”

Not only has the board, with the active participation of Dr. Burdine claimed by Dr. Feldman, plowed ahead with its prosecution of Dr. Feldman, Mouton, first as board investigator and later as executive director, denied Dr. Feldman access to his investigative file in order that he might formulate a defense, said Dr. Feldman in a 42-page complaint filed with the State Board of Ethics.

The specifics of the board’s complaint against Dr. Feldman have never been revealed but appear to stem from the death of a patient while in Dr. Feldman’s clinic even though the death was determined to be from natural causes and not connected to pain treatments being administered to the patient by Dr. Feldman.

The Ethics Board found no ethics violation in a decision that has become all too familiar since the ethics laws were amended in 2008, effectively gutting the ethics board. But that hasn’t stopped Feldman from seeking justice from what he feels is malicious prosecution, abuse of due process and violation of Louisiana commerce statutes.

He filed suit against Dr. Burdine in Civil District Court in New Orleans last August and the children of one of his patients has filed a separate suit in CDC naming LSBME, Mouton and board investigator Leslie Rye as defendants.

That lawsuit, filed by Alexia Senee James and Albert Lewis James of Baton Rouge, claims that Mouton and Rye intervened in Dr. Feldman’s treatment of their mother, Tonja Guitreau James.

After Tonja James was convinced by Mouton and Rye to leave the care of Dr. Feldman, she subsequently died from a prescription drug overdose, the petition says, adding that Mouton and Rye “violated the doctor-patient privilege, confidentiality and sacrosanct relationship between Tonja James and her physician.”

Read Full Post »

Son-in-law of former Gov. Kathleen Blanco appointed DNR Assistant Secretary days after mass layoff scenario predicted

Posted in Budget, Civil Service, Coastal Erosion, Corruption, DEQ, Economy, Ethics, Finances, Governor's Office, Jobs, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, Politicians, Revenue, State Agencies on March 16, 2016| 17 Comments »

You just have to love Louisiana politics.

It’s kind of like having someone pee down your back while telling you it’s raining.

Or maybe trying to run a marathon with a rock in your shoe.

And to no one’s real surprise, it doesn’t seem to matter much which political party is in power.

Take Thomas Harris, the newly-appointed Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), for example.

On Feb. 19, not quite two weeks ago, Secretary Harris testified before the House Appropriations Committee about the agency’s fiscal year 2017 budget. In his testimony, Harris, who spent about a dozen years at the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) before his Jan. 26 appointment by Gov. John Bel Edwards, lamented the fact that his agency was so strapped for funding that up to 66 employees face layoffs come July 1.

While it may difficult for some to feel much compassion for DNR, given the historically cozy relationship between the oil and gas industry and the agency’s top brass. It was DNR and DEQ, after all, which conveniently looked the other way all these years as our coastal marshlands were raped by the industry that curtailed the so-called legacy lawsuits filed against oil companies that neglected to clean up after themselves. http://theadvocate.com/home/9183574-125/house-oks-legacy-lawsuit-legislation

http://legacy.wwltv.com/story/news/2014/12/10/tainted-legacy-legislatures-fixes-create-obstacles-to-oil-and-gas-cleanup/17671639/

Harris gave his testimony during the afternoon session of the Appropriations Committee that met during the recent special legislative session called to address major budget shortfalls.

To save you some time, open the link HERE and move to the 41-minute mark. That’s where Harris begins his address to committee members, most of whom were talking among themselves (as is the norm) and not really paying attention.

So just why are we making such a big deal of this? It’s no big secret, after all, that budgetary cuts are hitting just about every agency and employees are going to have to be laid off. It’s a fact of life for anyone working for the state these days.

Unless you happen to be named David Boulet or Ashlee McNeely

Harris hired Boulet as Assistant Secretary of DNR, effective March 10 (last Thursday), less than three weeks after his calamitous testimony about projected layoffs.

But get this: Ashlee McNeely, wife of our old friend Chance McNeely (we’ll get to him presently), worked in Bobby Jindal’s office from Feb. 3, 2014, until last Oct. 22 as a legislative analyst at $78,000. On Oct. 23, she was promoted to Director of Legislative Services at the same salary (someone please tell us why Jindal needed a director of legislative services when he had less than three months to go in his term—and with no legislative session on the immediate horizon). Of course, come Jan. 11, the date of John Bel Edwards’ inauguration, she was quietly terminated along with the rest of Jindal’s staff.

But wait. Harris decided he needed a “Confidential Assistant.” And just what is a “confidential assistant,” anyway? Well, we’re told that the term is loosely translated to “legislative liaison.” No matter. Harris did the only logical thing: he brought Ashlee McNeely on board on Feb. 10, just nine days before his cataclysmic budgetary predictions. What’s more, he bumped her salary up by eight thou a year, to $86,000.

But back to our friend Boulet: His salary is a cool $107,600—to fill a position that has been vacant for more than five years. So what was the urgency of filling a long-vacated slot that obviously is little more than window dressing for an agency unable to fill mission-critical classified positions?

Had Harris chosen instead to allocate the combined $193,000 the two are getting, he could have hired four classified employees at $46,750 each. Not the greatest salary, but certainly not bad if you’re out of work and trying to feed a family. And still higher than the state’s family median income

So, what, exactly are the qualifications of Boulet? Well, for openers, he’s the son-in-law of former Gov. Kathleen Blanco and that’s of no small consequence. In fact, that was probably enough.

In fact, it’s not the first time he has landed a cushy position that took on the appearances of having all the right connections. We take you back to 2001, when Blanco was Lieutenant Governor and Boulet was hired as the $120,000-a-year Director of Oil & Gas Cluster Development for the Louisiana Office of Economic Development, a move that did not sit well with the scribes at the Thibodaux Comet: http://www.dailycomet.com/article/20011108/NEWS/111080313?tc=ar

And then there’s our old friend Chance McNeely, another holdover from the Jindal disaster. McNeely, all of 27, has seen his star rise in meteoric fashion after obtaining a degree in agricultural business and working four years as a legislative assistant for the U.S House of Representatives. From there, he found his way into Jindal’s inner circle as an analyst at $68,000. He remained there less than a year (March 6, 2014, to Jan. 12, 2015) before moving over to DEQ where the special position of Assistant Secretary, Office of Environmental Compliance (in circumvention of Jindal’s hiring freeze in place at the time and despite having no qualifications for the position)—complete with a $37,000 raise to $102,000. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/01/13/if-you-think-chance-mcneelys-appointment-to-head-deq-compliance-was-an-insult-just-get-a-handle-on-his-salary/

He held onto that job recisely a year, exiting the same day as his wife got her pink slip, on Jan. 11 of this year. Unlike Ashlee, who remained unemployed for just over three months, Chance was out of work for exactly eight days before being named Assistant to the Secretary at the Department of Transportation and Development, albeit at a slight drop in salary, to $99,000.

But by combining his and his wife’s salaries, the $177,000 isn’t too shabby for a state with a median income of $42,406 per household, according to 2014 data. And how many 27-year-olds do you know who pull down $99,000 per year? http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/Household-Incomes-by-State.php

So, Secretary Harris, as you struggle with balancing the high pay of your political appointees with cutbacks of the ones who do the real work, please know that we understand fully that we live in Louisiana where, no matter the rhetoric, things never change.

You will head an agency that will protect big oil from those of us with ruined pastureland and briny water. DNR will continue to shield big oil from those who would do whatever necessary to preserve our wetlands. And as those oil companies continue to fight back with whatever legal chicanery they can craft—including the buying of legislators.

And the merry-go-round of appointments to those with the right political connections will continue unabated—no matter what self-righteous rhetoric of freedom and justice for all is spewed by the pompous ass clowns we continue to elect.

Now ask me how I really feel.

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »