“I’m not perfect but gosh, I try to be.”
—State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson at Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on his confirmation for another term.
Posted in Ethics, Legislature, Legislators, Notable Quotables, Politicians, Senate, State Police on May 18, 2016| 2 Comments »
“I’m not perfect but gosh, I try to be.”
—State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson at Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on his confirmation for another term.
Posted in Ethics, Governor's Office, Legislature, Legislators, Senate, State Police on May 18, 2016| 13 Comments »
To call Wednesday’s confirmation hearings by the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee on the reappointment of State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson a love fest would be grossly inaccurate.
What transpired during the 21-minute “grilling” of Edmonson more closely resembled a group hug—or more accurately, a group butt-kissing—than a real consideration of the candidate’s qualifications to serve another four years as head of the state’s law enforcement agency.
The committee took no vote on confirmation on Wednesday but will re-convene before the current session closes to vote on all nominees.
Before going any further, it is important to know which committee member asked specific questions about how a state trooper who twice had sex with a woman while on duty—once in the back seat of his patrol car—managed to keep his job under Edmonson.
It is vital to know which member asked how a trooper in Troop D was allowed to work a couple of hours and then go home to sleep the rest of his shift for years before LouisianaVoice revealed the payroll fraud and why three separate supervisors who knew of that activity but did nothing went undisciplined.
Which committee member inquired about the promotion of a Troop D lieutenant to captain and troop commander—after it was learned he was abusing prescription drugs on the job? And which member wanted more information about that same captain being caught lying (a firing offense) but who was never disciplined?
Likewise, voters should know which committee member demanded to know how a lieutenant in Troop F could be caught abetting an underage girl’s entry onto the gaming floor of a Vicksburg, Mississippi, casino, fined more than $600, and then promoted to captain and commander of Troop F.
It would be interesting to know which committee member probed the reason Jill Boudreaux was allowed to take an early retirement incentive buyout, receive 300 hours in accrued leave pay, retire for one day and return to work—with a promotion to a higher position—the very next day, all while pocketing about $59,000 to which she was not entitled.
And which committee member demanded to know why high-ranking state police administrative personnel were allowed to reside in the State Police Academy VIP quarters while going through marital problems? The latest to do so is Interim Undersecretary Custodian of Records of the Office of Management and Finance within the Department of Public Safety Maj. Jason Starnes who is reported to be currently living there, courtesy of Louisiana taxpayers. The VIP quarters are unofficially known as the “Dupuy Suite” in honor of Edmonson’s Chief of Staff Charles Dupuy reportedly stayed there on the state dime following the breakup of his first marriage.
And of course, we’d all love to know who spoke up to ask questions about that furtive amendment tacked onto an innocent bill in the closing minutes of the 2014 legislative session that almost gave Edmonson an illegal $30,000 per year bump in his retirement. Only a tip to LouisianaVoice from an anonymous source thwarted that attempt even though the bill, with the amendment intact, passed and was actually signed by Bobby Jindal.
With no need to keep readers in suspense any longer, here are the identities of the committee members vigilant enough to seek answers to those nagging questions:
No one, no one, no one, no one, no one, no one, no one, and no one.
Here is the link to the video of the 92-minute committee meeting. Scroll over to the 1:12 (that’s one hour and 12 minutes into the hearing) mark to hear Edmonson inspiration opening remarks and those of the committee members (if you can stomach it).
http://senate.la.gov/video/videoarchive.asp?v=senate/2016/05/051816S~G_0
That’s correct. The people you sent to Baton Rouge to look out for our interests never opened their yaps a single time to ask a single question about the string of improprieties linked to the administration of one Mike Edmonson. Not one, not once.
That’s not to say a few of the members didn’t speak up. Several did and their fawning and slobbering all over Edmonson was nothing short of nauseating.
Take Sen. Mike Walsworth (R-West Monroe): the guy was so infatuated with Edmonson that he couldn’t stop talking. Literally. The man didn’t seem to know when to shut up. Even Edmonson appeared embarrassed at Walsworth’s blathering about what a wonderful job he was doing as head of state police, keeping us safe and all.
At least Sen. Neil Riser (R-Columbia) did ask one question that was relevant. That was about the state troopers detailed to patrol the New Orleans French Quarter. (Surely you didn’t think it was Riser who asked about that amendment that nearly gave Edmonson that raise. It was Riser who authored the amendment in the first place, though he first denied it before finally fessing up.
Sens. Greg Tarver (D-Shreveport), Troy Carter (D-New Orleans), Jack Donahue (R-Mandeville), Jim Fannin (R-Jonesboro), and Committee Chair Karen Carter Peterson (D-New Orleans) each took turns trying to out-snorkel each other and folks, it was not a pretty sight. To say they were blowing smoke up his toga simply isn’t descriptive enough.
The nearest anyone came to alluded to any of the myriad of problems that have brought trooper morale down to ground zero was when Peterson made a passing remark about “disgruntled employees.”
Peterson then cautioned Edmonson that there are differences between Bobby Jindal and Gov. John Bel Edwards (no kidding?) and that there are not different philosophies that he should be cognizant of. The jury’s still out as to just what the hell she was talking about.
After the committee had strewn rose petals (and possibly even palm leaves) in Edmonson’s path, he was appropriately humble.
“I’m not perfect, but gosh, I try to be,” he gushed.
Posted in Ethics, Governor's Office, Legislature, Legislators, Senate, State Agencies, State Police on May 16, 2016| 8 Comments »
The Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee will meet Tuesday at 11 a.m. to consider confirmation of Gov. John Bel Edwards’ reappointment of Mike Edmonson as State Police Superintendent just as a complaint has been filed with the State Police Commission by a retired state trooper.
Even though Edmonson has been superintendent for eight years, going back to the beginning of the Bobby Jindal administration, his reappointment for another term must be meet the approval of the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee just as other gubernatorial appointees must pass muster with the committee.
Butch Browning’s reappointment as State Fire Marshal was confirmed by the committee last week.
The Edmonson confirmation hearing on Tuesday stands as the most controversial of all appointments by Edwards despite his having already served eight years as superintendent.
That’s because of reports of inconsistent and uneven discipline meted out for certain offenses to only token punishment for offenses ranging from abetting underage gambling to quotas for DWI arrests to payroll fraud to stalking by a trooper to a state trooper having sex in his patrol car while on duty—all documented by LouisianaVoice.
All those revelations came on the heels of LouisianaVoice’s story in 2014 about an attempt orchestrated by Edmonson to pad his retirement by about $30,000 a year despite his having locked in his pension years earlier.
That attempted came when Sen. Neil Riser (R-Columbia) slipped an amendment onto SB 294 by Sen. Jean-Paul Morrell (D-New Orleans) during the closing minutes of the 2014 legislative session. Morrell’s bill originally was a benign bill dealing with procedures for formal, written complaints made against police officers. Thirty-seven senators and 90 members of the House, including then-Rep. John Bel Edwards, voted in favor of the amendment.
And now comes retired State Trooper Scott Perry with his official complaint to the State Police Commission over the appointment of Maj. Jason Starnes as Interim Undersecretary of Management and Finance.
The problem with his appointment is that Starnes’s estranged wife, Tammy, is Audit Manager for LSP and Jason Starnes, with his promotion, will supervise her department.
Between them, the two earn more than $225,000 a year. Jason Starnes is paid $129,000 per year and Tammy receives $96,600.
While nepotism laws would seem to prohibit such an arrangement, and while it certainly appears to be unethical, there appears to be a loophole that has been cited in numerous opinions by the Ethics Board. That exception says if the employee, in this case, Tammy Starnes, has been in her position for a year or more, it is permissible for an immediate family member to supervise her.
When Tammy Starnes initially joined LSP after transferring from another state agency, her $92,900 salary at the time was $11,700 more than that of Jason Starnes and was in charge of monitoring LSP’s financial transactions, including those of her husband but now their lines of authority are reversed.
Jason Starnes, in addition to his $129,000 salary, also reportedly is receiving free housing, courtesy of LSP, according to one source.
Since separating from his wife, he is said to be living on the state dime in the LSP Training Academy VIP quarters.
Louisiana Title 42 covers the Code of Governmental Ethics. Part II, Section 1111 A(1) of Title 42 says in part, “…No public servant shall receive anything of economic value, other than compensation and benefits from the governmental entity to which he is duly entitled, for the performance of the duties and responsibilities of his office or position.”
Free living quarters would certainly fall under the description of economic value.
Depending on whether or not the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee has the cojones to give Edmonson’s record something other than a cursory look, the debate over his nomination could spark lively debate.
Sen. Karen Carter Peterson (D-New Orleans) is the only senator to vote against Riser’s amendment to Morrell’s SB 294 two years ago and she chairs the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Adding to the intrigue, if indeed there is to be any intrigue with Edmonson’s nomination is two other members of the committee are….Morrell and Riser. And Morrell would be justified if he was still smarting from Riser’s hijacking of his bill two years ago.
Given that Edmonson was originally appointed by Republican Bobby Jindal, it’s somewhat interesting that the committee is made up of four Democrats and three Republicans.
On the other hand, his nomination for reappointment now comes from a Democratic governor, which could put the four Democrats in an uncomfortable position of having to oppose a fellow Democrat’s nomination.
The bottom line, however, is that Edmonson is neither the fair-haired boy of the Republicans or the Democrats; he is the creation of the Louisiana Sheriff’s Association, one of the most powerful political influences in the state.
Make no mistake about that. It was the Sheriff’s Association that dictated that Jindal appoint Edmonson, who’s only qualification was his experience as an LSP public information officer. One former law enforcement official said unless an appointee has experience supervising personnel, there is no way he can be qualified to lead an entire department, especially one as large and far-ranging as LSP.
The association’s only criteria was the appointment of someone they could control.
And they got him.
But it would not be unprecedented for the committee to at least ask probing questions. Committee members threatened to withhold confirmation of Bruce Greenstein as Secretary of the Department of Health and Hospitals in 2011 if he didn’t reveal the name of CNSI, a company he formerly worked for, as winner of a huge DHH contract. And after being grilled over his dealings with with the Regents in a fiber optics projects involving eight Louisiana research universities, Ed Antie of Carencro abruptly withdrew his name for consideration for a seat on the Board of Regents.
Here are the names and email addresses of the members of the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee:
After Tuesday, we will know for certain if the committee members have the courage to make difficult but morally correct decisions or if they will collapse in the proverbial puddle at the feet of the Louisiana Sheriffs’ Association.
Posted in BESE, Cartoon, Education, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Politicians on May 4, 2016| 13 Comments »

Some things are difficult to understand.
Like, for instance, how voters returned State Rep. Nancy Landry (R-Lafayette) to the legislature for another term. Not only was she re-elected, but it was by a landslide. The only plausible explanation was that Bobby Jindal was running against her.
She received 85 percent of the vote in her district, which includes parts of Lafayette and Vermilion Parishes.
Public school teachers and their families alone, voting as a bloc in those two parishes, should have prevented that kind of mandate.
You see, Landry is on a one-person crusade to become Public Enemy Number One among school teachers. She has repeatedly pilloried teachers from her position in the legislature and now she has been named as chairperson of the House Education Committee. (Coincidentally, Denham Springs GOP Rep. Rogers Pope, a retired school superintendent and former Superintendent of the Year for Louisiana, stepped down from the committee about the same time Landry was elevated to the chairmanship.)
Why am I so critical of Landry?
Well, first, let’s go back to March 2012 when she opened proceedings by the committee by introducing a new rule that had never existed in House committee hearings. https://louisianavoice.com/2012/03/14/how-do-you-teague-a-legislator-ask-jindal-to-teague-a-teacher-just-change-the-committee-rules-for-witnesses/
The committee was hearing testimony on HB 976 by committee Chairman Stephen Carter (R-Baton Rouge) that would impose sweeping changes, including providing student scholarships for Jindal’s Educational Excellence Program, allow for parent petitions for certain schools to be transferred to the Recovery School District (RSD) and charter school authorization criteria.
Before debate began on the bill, Landry said she had received calls from “concerned constituents” to the effect that some teachers from districts that did not close schools for the day had taken a sick day in order to attend a rally of teachers opposed to Jindal’s education reform.
She neglected to mention, of course, that teachers are given 10 sick days per year, so if they want to use a sick day to attend a committee hearing in Baton Rouge, that’s their business and no one else’s. Moreover, if a teacher exceeds her 10 days during a school year, she is docked a full day’s pay at the teachers’s salary rate while the substitute teacher is paid a substitute’s salary, which is less.
Undaunted and undeterred by those facts, Landry made a motion that in addition to the customary practice of witnesses providing their names, where they are from and whom they represent, they be required to state if they were appearing before the committee in a “professional capacity or if they were on annual or sick leave.”
Democrats on the committee were livid. Then-Rep. John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) said he had never in his tenure in the House seen such a rule imposed on witnesses.
“This house (the Capitol) belongs to the people,” said Rep. Pat Smith (D-Baton Rouge) “and now we’re going to put them in a compromising position? This is an atrocity!”
Committee member Wesley Bishop (D-New Orleans) said, “I have one question: if we approve this motion and if a witness declines to provide that information, will that witness be prohibited from testifying?”
Carter, momentarily taken aback, held a hastily whispered conference before turning back to the microphone to say, “We cannot refuse anyone the opportunity to testify.”
That appeared to make Landry’s motion a moot point but she persisted and the committee ended up approving her motion by a 10-8 vote that was reflective of the 11-6 Republican-Democrat (with one Independent) makeup of the committee.
Edwards lost no time in getting in a parting shot on the passage of the new rule.
Then-Gov. Bobby Jindal was the first to testify and upon completion of his testimony, Edwards observed that no one on the committee appeared overly concerned of whether or not the governor was on annual or sick leave.
Jindal, who had entered the committee room late and knew nothing of the debate and subsequent vote on Landry’s motion, bristled at Edwards, saying, “I’m here as governor.”
Now fast-forward to yesterday (Tuesday, May 3) and once again we have Landry going for teachers’ jugulars. http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=980632
A substitute bill for House Bill 392 by Landry cleared the committee without objection and will now move to the full House for consideration but there are a couple of points that need to be made about the provisions of the bill that committee members may have failed to consider—or simply ignored.
Landry wants to pile on the 2012 law, Act 1, under which pay for teachers and other employees may be cut. She wants to impose salary cuts when teachers’ and other employees’ working hours are reduced. She said that Lafayette Parish had cases in which educators successfully sued the school board over pay cuts when they were moved from 12-month jobs to nine-month jobs. http://theadvocate.com/news/15675829-64/new-provision-for-teacher-pay-cuts-clears-house-panel
Historically, teachers have had the option of being paid a lower monthly salary extended over 12 months or higher a monthly salary on nine months. The annual salary was the same either way.
In the Lafayette case, two teachers who were displaced by the closure of their charter school for high-risk students sued and won back pay when their schedules were reduced from 244 days to 182 days. One of the teachers saw her salary cut from $80,104 to $60,214 while the second was cut from $74,423 to $56,207. Both cuts of about 25 percent coincided with the fewer number of days. http://theadvocate.com/news/11060641-123/appeals-court-sides-with-teachers
On the surface, the bill makes perfect sense. As is the case most of the time, however, one needs to look beyond the obvious for answers.
And when you do, you will find that no teacher ever simply works 182 days. That is a myth and one that needs to be debunked once and for all.
Landry is an attorney specializing in family law. As such, she likely earns considerably more than the average teacher. But that’s okay; the teacher made a career choice, so that isn’t my sticking point. But like a teacher, she sees all manner of humanity parade through her office and while her hourly fee is the same for all, there are times I’m pretty sure that some clients should be charged significantly more per hour because of the difficulty in addressing their multitude of problems. An amicable divorce, for example, is a much easier case for Landry than one in which the parents fight over every child and every piece of property right down to the pet gerbil.
It’s the same for teachers. The child whose parents are attentive to his or her school work and who see to it that all homework assignments are completed correctly is a pleasure to teach.
The child who comes to school in clean cloths, on a full stomach, and well-rested after a good night’s sleep is not the problem.
The child whose lives in a two-parent household where the parents are not constantly fighting and screaming is generally a well-adjusted student who poses no problems in the classroom.
The child who is respectful to the teacher and who applies himself or herself in class work isn’t the one who causes disciplinary problems.
But that child whose parents are on crack or meth and who comes to school unprepared, unkempt, in filthy clothing, hungry, sleepy and angry at the world is a challenge to the teacher whose job it is to try and help that child keep up with the rest of the class—which, of course, only serves to slow the progress of the entire class.
If Rep. Landry would take the time to volunteer in an elementary or middle school classroom for one week, she would come away from the experience with an attitude adjustment. I guarantee it.
When she does all that, maybe, just maybe, Rep. Nancy Landry will gain a new respect and appreciation for the sacrifice, dedication, hard work, and thankless job of educating our children.
Until then, she is just another politician with a kneejerk solution to perceived problems.
But as for me, I can honestly say that I struggled mightily in school and had it not been for at least a half-dozen of my high school teachers who took a direct interest in my well-being, nurtured my potential (what there was of it), and encouraged me to work a little harder, I truthfully do not know where I’d be today. I will carry my gratitude to those teachers to my grave.
Posted in Cartoons, Corruption, Ethics, Health Care, House, Legislature, Legislators, Politicians, State Police on May 3, 2016| 11 Comments »

How much does a legislator cost in Louisiana?
Certainly, that’s a loaded question, an ambush question, if you will.
Some go pretty cheap. Others not so much.
For the record, State Rep. Terry Brown (I-Colfax) says he is not for sale.
Brown, testifying before the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee last Wednesday in favor of House Bill 11, did what few legislators will ever do: he related payoff overtures he said were made by representatives of the target of the bill, Clean Harbors and its efforts to burn some two million pounds of explosives from Camp Minden in Webster Parish.
A massive explosion occurred at Camp Minden in October 2012, creating a mushroom cloud that loomed 7,000 feet over the town. That led to decision to burn 15 million pounds of explosives on open “burn trays” at the site.
That decision set off a firestorm of protests that involved citizens and officials from Baton Rouge to Washington and the plan was eventually scrapped in favor of moving the burn to the Clean Harbors location in Grant Parish where (surprise) the plan was met with an equally hostile reception.
Clean Harbors, Inc. was founded in Brockton, Massachusetts, in 1980 and has expanded to 400 locations, including more than 50 hazardous waste management facilities, in North America. Revenues for the company in 2016 totaled $3.28 billion, according to the Clean Harbors Web site. http://ir.cleanharbors.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=96527&p=irol-news&nyo=0
Clean Harbors in February withdrew its permit request to quadruple the amount it can burn at its facility located about five miles northwest of Colfax, although the company continued its open burning of explosives at the site. http://www.thetowntalk.com/story/news/local/2016/02/19/hb-11-next-battleground-colfax-open-burning/80565032/
HB 11, by Reps. Brown and Gene Reynolds (D-Minden), would prohibit open burning statewide as a method of disposal of explosive materials, such as those burned at Clean Harbors’ Colfax facility.
“…I was asked as a state representative by a person representing Clean Harbors, ‘What would it take for me to pull this bill?’” Brown testified. “They (Clean Harbors) started out by saying they would pay for our sewer system in South Grant Parish, that they would give my schools playground equipment, my Little League ball teams uniforms—and they would make me a part of it.
“Ladies and gentlemen of this panel, I am not for sale,” Brown said.
Here is the link to his testimony: http://house.louisiana.gov/H_Video/VideoArchivePlayer.aspx?v=house/2016/apr/0427_16_NR
It was a long committee meeting, lasting just more than five hours. To get to Brown’s testimony, move the cursor below the video to 3:04:30.
The bill barely made it through the committee by a 9-8 vote and will be debated on the House floor on Wednesday.
Representatives voting against the bill in its amended form were Committee Chairman Stuart Bishop (R-Lafayette), James Armes (D-Leesville), Jean-Paul Coussan (R-Lafayette), Phillip DeVillier (R-Eunice), John Guinn (R-Jennings), Christopher Leopold (R-Belle Chasse), Jack McFarland (R-Jonesboro), and Blake Miquez (R-Erath).
Amendments to the bill http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=998279 included a self-defeating provision allowing the Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources to authorize open burning of munitions or waste explosives by the military or by state police and one that would make the effective date of the bill January 1, 2018, which would allow continued burning for an additional 18 months.