Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Governor’s Office’ Category

“This story is pure innuendo and drama—a fiction—under the guise of investigative reporting.”

—Superintendent of Education, in a Jan. 25 email to Southern Education Desk reporter Sue Lincoln, who was preparing a story on skewed data on student test scores released by White’s Department of Education.

“He (White) told me to ‘Check with people over you to be sure this is the right thing to do.'”

—Reporter Sue Lincoln, on a conversation with White over her story about student test score data.

Read Full Post »

Blind, unquestioning loyalty has long been a prerequisite for serving in the administration of Gov. Bobby Jindal.

Any administrator, of course, expects his appointees to be loyal, and rightfully so. There’s no argument at any level with that basic principle of employment, whether one works for a bicycle shop or the President.

Generally, though, an intelligent CEO will seek candid input from subordinates—even if that input differs from his management philosophy. The free exchange of ideas is, after all, the foundation for growth and progress in any organization.

Except with the Jindal administration.

At least a dozen firings/demotions have documented the belief that if you don’t drink the Jindal Kool-Aid, if you so much as give a flickering thought to dissent, you will be teagued.

Teagued, of course, is the term born of Jindal’s firing of state employees from rank and file workers to state board members to university presidents and cabinet officials and of the demotions of at least four legislators from their committee assignments.

To this point, the firings and demotions have been limited to state employees and legislators.

No longer.

Now there may reason to believe the Jindal retaliation team has reached into the private sector and the perpetrator is none other than Superintendent of Education John White.

The latest victim may be Sue Lincoln, formerly a reporter for Louisiana Public Broadcasting (LPB), and a veteran of 35-years’ reporting experience.

Lincoln, who lives in Baton Rouge, is careful not to say outright that White had her fired, but the evidence is pretty convincing.

The Southern Education Desk, headquartered in Atlanta, GA., is funded by a multi-million dollar grant from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and reports on education news from five states—Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee and Louisiana. While Lincoln worked for LPB as a reporter for the Southern Education Desk, her salary was paid from the grant.

It is, or was, a two-year grant administered through Georgia Public Broadcasting (GPB) and involved eight stations—five National Public Radio and three Public Broadcast System television stations. They included WLPB-TV and WRKF Radio, both Baton Rouge stations.

Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) President Chas Roemer feigned surprise and/or ignorance of reports of manipulations of student test scores by the Department of Education (DOE) during a Senate Education Committee hearing last week but the truth is Lincoln first reported on the department’s suppression of data as early as February 12.

It was that report that most probably ended her reporting tenure with LPB and the Southern Education Desk.

The report cited studies by Mercedes Schneider, Ph.D., a teacher in St. Tammany Parish which called into question dramatic jumps of up to 25 points in high school standardized test scores.

Lincoln noted that Herb Bassett, who holds a master’s degree in mathematics and who teaches in LaSalle Parish, also saw major discrepancies in statistics released by DOE. Bassett is the same one who at last week’s Senate Education Committee accused DOE and White of releasing fraudulent data.

It was that data about which Roemer denied any knowledge but promised he’d “look into it.”

Immediately after we posted Roemer’s denial, Schneider emailed LouisianaVoice to say, “I have a document that proves he (Roemer) is lying.”

She promptly followed that email with a copy of a letter she sent to White and BESE members (including Roemer) on Dec. 1, 2012 in which she called attention to what she said was “scoring bias” in the 2012 school performance scores. (We will elaborate more on the contents to that and other documents in subsequent posts as our coverage of this growing story continues.)

White apparently turned up the heat on Lincoln and her bosses in Atlanta in an effort to kill the story.

He first told Lincoln the story was “too complicated for television” and that “Even the New York Times doesn’t have enough ink and paper to do it justice,” Lincoln said. “He accused me of sucking up to Diane Ravitch.” Ravitch is research professor of education at New York University and a leading opponent of current education reform trends.

“He told me to ‘check with people over you to be sure this is the right thing to do,’” Lincoln said

A series of emails between Lincoln and White is even more revealing.

At 1:28 p.m. on Jan. 23, as White prepared for a weekend in New Orleans with his wife (She has never moved to Louisiana from their New York home, which should say something about White’s long-range plans for remaining in Louisiana), Lincoln emailed him:

“John, thank you for your call and the copy of the letter you sent out. After conferring with my editors here and in Atlanta, they want me to go ahead with the story. Please don’t let it affect your evening with your wife, but I will be coming down to N.O. to interview you at 10 tomorrow morning.

“I’ll give you a statement instead,” White tersely replied six minutes later.

As Lincoln delved further into the questionable data, she sought a comment from White who, instead of addressing the apparent problem, went on the attack.

Two days later, at 8:51 a.m. on Jan. 25, Lincoln emailed White: “Due to an electrical fire at LPB Wednesday night (Jan. 23), we were without video-editing capability for the majority of the day Thursday. As a result, the airing of my story on the 2012 SPS (school performance scores) analysis has been pushed back to Feb. 1.

“Because of this delay, I have to ask again—would you consider going on camera to make a statement?”

Four minutes later, at 8:55 a.m., White, apparently not having read Lincoln’s email asking for an on-camera statement, wrote: “Your source knowingly distorts facts in print, but you are using her as a source on the very issue about which she distorts facts.

“This story is pure innuendo and drama—a fiction—under the guise of investigative reporting.”

Then, 19 minutes later, at 9:14, White, sent another email saying, “Sue, take a look at what your source has written here. First she lies about my experience working in schools. But more than that, she goes out of our (sic) way to assert that my administration created this formula regarding graduation rate bonus points and such.”

Finally, at 9:29 a.m., 38 minutes after Lincoln asked him to appear on camera, White responded: “No thanks. If reported accurately, this is a story of a formula and a calculation by way of that formula. The number and the formula can speak for themselves.”

“I can’t say for certain that the story is the reason I’m no longer reporting for the Southern Education Desk,” Lincoln said. The grant is currently under consideration for renewal but LPB informed Lincoln they were “going in a different direction” should the renewal be approved.

WRKF was not a partner in the initial grant, but has asked to become a partner if there is a third year of funding.

“The Southern Education Desk managing editor at GPB was unfailingly supportive of doing investigative stories,” Lincoln says. “And he was insistent that there needed to be a ‘firewall’ between the financial and political concerns of LPB management and what Southern Education Desk reporters covered.”

So why would LPB crater to White’s demands?

First, there is the factor of Course Choice providers. Described by DOE as “an innovative educational program that provides Louisiana students with access to thousands of high-quality academic and career-oriented courses,” the program simply allows practically any provider to offer online courses to students—on the state’s tab. Not only may just about anyone, private or public sector, offer courses, but they also are free to charge just about whatever they want.

Bottom line: there’s big money for Course Choice providers.

One of the approved providers is Louisiana Public Broadcasting.

Follow the money.

Second, LPB has a contract with the Iberville Parish School Board to provide certain curriculum and instruction to the parish system. Elvis Cavalier is the Iberville curriculum director, or Chief Academic Officer. He also serves as Director of Academies, also known as principal of the little-known Math, Science and Arts (MSA) Academy.

Little is known about the school because it flies under the radar. It does not exist for all practical purposes. It is not listed among Louisiana public schools and its student scores are not reported to DOE or to the federal government.

Known informally as a “shadow school,” scores for its 1200 students are spread out among the other public schools in Iberville Parish. This allows Iberville School Superintendent Ed Cancienne to boast—and he does—that Iberville’s performance score “has grown.” He neglects to add that that growth is primarily the result of infused scores from the “non-existent” MSA Academy.

Lincoln said she began investigating that story and her editors at LPB kept telling her to get additional information. “When I’d get that, they’d want more. It kept on that way until I was finally informed there would be no story,” she said.

Follow the money.

“I can’t prove that I was terminated because of pressure or implied threats from White regarding the Course Choice program or because of the shadow school story,” Lincoln said.

“All I can do is connect the dots.”

Read Full Post »

“We rely on you as legislators to serve our public interests.”

—Brad Ott, Director of Advocates for Louisiana Public Health Care, testifying before the House and Governmental Affairs Committee on Tuesday in favor of the passage of HB 19 by Rep. Jerome “Dee” Richard (I-Thibodaux) and Sen. Rick Gallot (D-Ruston) which would have removed the deliberative process exemption from the governor’s office, thus giving greater access to public records.

“Deliberative process did not exist before 2009. It has become somewhat of a virus now. We see state agencies marking emails in the subject line as confidential and exempt from public records disclosure due to deliberative process. This is a problem.”

—Robert Travis Scott, President of the Public Affairs Research Council (PAR), speaking in favor of HB 19. The committee killed the bill by a 6-3 vote, a move that will likely encourage even more deliberative process claims by other agencies, thus choking off the public’s access to public records.

“This governor, in an effort at transparency, passed the first real change (in the public records law) in 2009. The deliberative process protects communications between the governor and his staff so that there can be an unfettered, all ideas welcome process.”

—Thomas Enright, executive counsel to Gov. Bobby Jindal, doing what he is paid very well to do: defend his boss.

“The executive counsel’s explanation falls pretty much flat.”

—Sen. Rick Gallot, in response to Enright.

Read Full Post »

This is going to rankle some folks in the Legislature, but the fact is there are at least six cowards on the House and Governmental Affairs Committee.

That’s how many members of the committee voted against HB 19 by Rep. Jerome “Dee” Richard (I-Thibodaux) and Sen. Rick Gallot (D-Ruston) on Tuesday.

HB 19 would have removed the deliberative process exemptions from the governor’s office, in effect, ending abuses of the public records privilege that has been extended throughout the executive branch of government and LSU when the original law passed in 2009 specifically limited the privilege to the governor.

But six members of the committee hearing testimony that was overwhelmingly in favor of the bill, had feet of clay and did not have the backbone to stand up to a lame duck governor who long ago stopped caring about this state.

The three who voted to send the governor a message included Reps. John Berthelot (R-Gonzales), Jared Brossett (D-New Orleans) and John Schroder (R-Covington).

The six who should bear the stigma of being forced to wear the yellow letter “Y” (with apologies to Nathaniel Hawthorne) emblazoned across the front of their freshly starched shirts are:

• Committee Chair Timothy Burns (R-Mandeville);

• Vice Chair Michael Danahay (D-Sulphur);

• Taylor Barras (R-New Iberia);

• Girod Jackson, III (D-LaPlace);

• Gregory Miller (R-Norco);

• Stephen Pugh (R-Ponchatoula).

Why should we be so upset with the Sorry Six? The Gutless Gang? Because they have just made it even more difficult than ever to obtain public records from state agencies, in effect giving them carte blanche to operate in secrecy as never before. If you thought it difficult to get routine public records in the past, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

One witness testified before the committee that she could not readily obtain something as routine as a copy of state contracts without receiving notification from the Division of Administration (DOA) that a “search” was being conducted for the documents (despite the fact that she requested the contracts by contract number) and that once located they would be reviewed for “privileged and confidential information”—something that does not exist with public contracts; they’re public documents, pure and simple.

Thomas Enright, Gov. Bobby Jindal’s executive counsel, offered a lame apology for the difficult in obtaining copies of contracts. “I made a note of this,” he said. “There is no reason you should have problems getting a copy of a state contract.”

Really? Wow, what a champion of the people.

But that weak effort at atonement was easily matched by his equally disingenuous attempt at painting his boss as some great emancipator of the public’s right to know. It was easily the most pitiful performance so far this session by a spokesperson for this administration. And that includes Commissioner of Administration Kristy Nichols’ incredibly naïve utterance that the administration would not tolerate corruption as she was canceling the $184 million CNSI contract with the Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH).

As one witness after another cited the administration’s outright contempt for the public’s right—your right—to know what your government is doing with your tax dollars and how those actions might be enriching certain campaign contributors, the committee members went through the motion of pretending to listen and a few even asked perfunctory questions—probably provided them by the governor’s staff, if claims made by at least two other legislators last year are accurate.

But guess what? It didn’t matter. The fix was in from the get-go and HB 19 never had a prayer despite support from the Public Affairs Research Council (PAR), Leaders with Vision, Advocates for Public Health Care, the Baton Rouge Advocate, the Louisiana Press Association, and others.

This is the government you voted for, folks. You send them to Baton Rouge to represent your best interests and they promptly fall in line with the governor’s or some special interest’s agenda, and then legislators and lobbyists adjourn each night to Ruth’s Chris or Sullivan’s steak restaurants. And one way or another, you pick up the tab.

But don’t bother asking for public records on those sojourns. Deliberative process, don’t you know.

Read Full Post »

News reporters from other states are quick to point out that Louisiana has one of the strongest public records laws in the country. A New York reporter, for example, was surprised to learn that LouisianaVoice was complaining about a month’s delay in obtaining public records from the Department of Education (DOE) and Division of Administration (DOA).

“I have an FOIA (Freedom of Information Act; the equivalent to Louisiana’s R.S. 44:1 et seq., better known as the Public Records Act) request that’s been pending up here for a year,” he said.

While it is encouraging to know we have one of the most liberal public records statutes in the nation, it may be a bit disheartening and frustrating to know that the law is only as strong as its enforcement.

To that end, Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell office has simply punted, the rationale being that should there be litigation, he is bound by the State Constitution to defend whichever state agency is named as a defendant.

But that is certainly not to say that inasmuch as his office is in fact the official counsel for all state agencies, Caldwell could whisper legal advice into an agency head’s ear as to his/her responsibilities under the public records law in an effort to avert a lawsuit by those with inquiring minds.

It could be that he is too busy with his side job as an Elvis impersonator to waste time on such trivial matters as the public’s right to know.

Because of the lack of a real watchdog to hold agencies’ feet to the fire regarding easy access to public records, many requests are simply ignored or denied with the tired catch-all “deliberative process” explanation.

DOA, however, has found a more original if unethical, immoral and fattening method of avoiding the disclosure of certain embarrassing documents: simply make sure the records no longer exist.

State agencies are required under Louisiana Revised Statute 44:411 to develop and submit a records retention schedule (a listing of their agency’s records with the retention requirements to meet their administrative, legal and financial needs) for review and approval by the State Archives. Until a retention schedule has been approved, La. R.S. 44:36 requires agencies to maintain their records for three years from the date the record is made (unless required longer by specific statute). It is important to note that La. R.S. 44:36 does not exempt agencies from developing a records retention schedule required under 44:411.

The above information was obtained from the Secretary of State website:
http://www.sos.la.gov/tabid/489/Default.aspx

RS 44:411: http://www.legis.la.gov/lss/lss.asp?doc=99732&showback=Y

RS 44:36: http://www.legis.la.gov/lss/lss.asp?doc=99704&showback=Y

Contrary to these requirements DOA does not currently have a records retention policy. What that means in terms of one particular type of public record, specifically email? Most state departments participate in Statewide Email which is operated and maintained by the Office of Computing Services (OCS). OCS is a subunit of the Office of Information Technology within DOA. The statewide email function is generally outlined at: http://www.doa.louisiana.gov/ocs/email/statewide_email_services.htm.

The OCS site makes reference to centralized archiving to help with records retention, but does not go into the details of how that is or is not utilized. The OCS will configure records retention settings in line with an agency’s policy; if no such policy exists, then OCS’s default is to retain the records for 30 days. Yes, 30 days. Not three years. Thirty days.

Thus, if a person deletes emails, those records can only be potentially obtained from OCS within 30 days of the email’s being received/sent. After that time, there is truly no record retained of those records (emails). This also holds true if an employee leaves the organization. The OCS deletes the entire mailbox when someone leaves. There is no process or policy in place to retain or maintain those emails.

As such, when a request is submitted for public records relating to email(s), it relies almost entirely on the chance that an individual included in the email chain kept those emails and a willingness on the employee’s part to provide those records to the person in the organization who ultimately responds to the request. In a world in which everyone is operating above-board, retains all of their email for at the very least their own purposes, and has no interest in hiding information, the lack of true centralized records retention policies or processes would not be as necessary. These attributes, unfortunately, do not exist in the current administration in general and in DOA in particular.

Moreover, even if individual employees were made aware of the 3-year law, it would be nearly impossible to monitor or enforce at the individual level. It would only be possible to ensure email records are maintained for 3 years if OCS were required to maintain those records.

In light of the all this, is it not remarkably convenient that DOA has never established a records retention policy? How easy would it be to simply delete emails, wait 30 days, and then simply respond with what will then be a simple truth: the records do not exist?

It has to induce some semblance of paranoia and cynicism to know that one can never be confident that everything that once existed still exists to be included in the response.

Of course, any sixth-grade computer whiz kid will tell you that nothing is ever completely erased. Everything you ever pulled up on your computer is filed away somewhere on your hard drive. You didn’t erase the document; you simply moved it to another file.

Another file that is extremely difficult to access, we might add.

Yes, an erased or deleted document can be retrieved, but it’s no walk in the park—and it’s not only complicated, but expensive.

When informed that a document does not exist, there are not many who can challenge that by fronting the cost of an extensive search—even if litigation ultimately awards the person seeking the document court costs and legal fees.

So, in the final analysis, the transparent and accountable administration does hold the cards and can on occasion dictate the terms of the game. But should some determined individual with the financial backing and necessary determination to not take no for an answer and if that individual eventually discovers documents that have been so concealed from public view, that game could change dramatically.

And it would not be pretty for the agency, the agency head or the administration.

We’re just sayin’…

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »