Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Media’ Category

Louisiana Department of Education does poorly combating public records requests; Rep. Richard bill seeks trasparency

Posted in Corruption, Education, Ethics, Governor's Office, Lawsuits, Legislature, Legislators, Media, Politicians, Public Records, Transparency on April 6, 2016| 6 Comments »

Second of four-part series:

When the conversation turns to public records, there’s seldom a reporter, governmental watchdog agency, or a private citizen active in the public arena who doesn’t have a personal story to tell about obstacles encountered in efforts to obtain documents.

Nowhere in state government is that more evident than in the labyrinth known as the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) and in the governor’s office over the past eight years.

And if State Rep. Jerome “Dee” Richard (I-Thibodaux) gets his way, his HB 166 would make records of the governor’s office more accessible to the public. HB 166

The House Governmental Affairs Committee will hold hearings on his bill Thursday at 9 a.m.

Bobby Jindal is gone and there is reason to hope for a new era of openness in the governor’s office. But across Third Street from the towering State Capitol, John White remains at DOE and if what’s past is truly prologue, to borrow a phrase from Shakespeare’s The Tempest, any fantasizing about change is just that: fantasizing.

All you have to do is ask anyone who has suffered through the process of obtaining anything of substance in the way of public records from LDOE.

Ask James Finney, Ph.D., about his efforts to get answers to his records requests.

Finney began his quest for records from White back in April 2013 and in the ensuing years has filed dozens of other public records requests with DOE, all to no avail. Finally, after giving up on getting DOE and White to comply with state law, he sued on May 22, 2015. The suit will be heard by 19th Judicial District Court Judge William Morvant, which is not necessarily good news for Finney as we shall see later. It’s also unusual for a public records lawsuit to take nearly a year for trial in that they are supposed to be put on a fast track for hearing.

FINNEY LAWSUIT

White has been taken to court at least three times in the past. He has lost no fewer than three times. In two of those three cases, monetary penalties handed down by the courts still have yet to be paid.

Barring any delays the trial in Finney’s case is set for April 29. If he prevails and if he is awarded monetary damages (and there is no reason he shouldn’t, Judge Morvant notwithstanding), he stands to reap quite a financial windfall, given the number of unmet requests and the time periods involved—all at taxpayer expense, of course.

The lone exception is LouisianaVoice, which sued and won back in 2013 and was awarded damages of $2,800 plus court costs and attorney fees. In our case, the records were produced and the monetary damages paid. But not since then.

Ask Barbara Ferguson, Ph.D. and Charles J. Hatfield.

In April of 2013, exasperated at their failure to obtained requested documents from DOE, they sued. http://www.louisianaweekly.com/research-on-reform-files-lawsuit-against-la-doe/

RESEARCH ON REFORMS LAWSUIT

Ferguson is the first female superintendent of New Orleans public schools and an attorney. Hatfield is managing partner of a company specializing in diverse information retrieval and data analysis for public opinion researches. Together, they head up a non-profit organization called Research on Reforms.

Research on Reforms was founded after Hurricane Katrina and the subsequent takeover of 107 New Orleans public schools. Ferguson agreed that the Orleans Parish School Board “was a mess.” She said she was initially “delighted” at the conversion of the schools into charter schools but soon came to the realization that things were not as they appeared, particularly with the Recovery School District (RSD).

Data requested by Research on Reforms for the ’06-’07 and the ’07-’08 school years was provided but beginning in the ’08-’09 school year, the organization began to experience roadblocks thrown up to block its requests. Among the records it did receive was one with the absurd claim that one RSD school boasted a 100 percent attendance rate.

“You don’t have 100 percent attendance at a high school, ever,” Hatfield said.

“Research on Reforms, Inc. is not interested in obtaining privileged student-level data,” the organization said on its Web site after the lawsuit was filed.

But because LDOE was providing raw data to other national reporting organizations, Ferguson and Hatfield felt they had a right to the same information.

“LDOE is becoming increasingly less transparent through its recent actions to modify its website, removing historical databases and removing actual current school enrollment counts,” the Web site said.

“Because Louisiana’s state takeover of public schools was an experiment in how to improve failing schools, data had to be collected, aggregated and analyzed to determine whether the experiment was working or not,” it said. “While the Louisiana Department of Education collected, and continues to collect, the raw student level data needed for analysis, the LDOE has developed its own rules for releasing this data.”

LDOE dug in its heels and the lawsuit proceeded to trial in Baton Rouge’s 19th Judicial District Court before District Judge…..William Morvant.

Incredulously, Morvant sided with LDOE and White that the citizens of Louisiana had no right to information about how the state’s ballyhooed school reform movement under Bobby Jindal and White was progressing or if the reforms were even remotely successful.

In effect, it was none of our business.

Fortunately, in the interest of transparency and open government, the First Circuit Court of Appeal disagreed with Morvant and on Sept. 19, 2014, it upheld Research on Reform’s appeal, reversed the lower court judge and remanded the case back to Morvant’s court for the awarding of damages. The $675 cost of Research on Reform’s appeal was assessed against LDOE.

FIRST CIRCUIT RULING ON FERGUSON

The decision by the three-judge panel was unanimous.

“We agree with the plaintiffs (Research on Reforms) that the Louisiana Public Records Law does not conflict with FERPA,” the First Circuit ruling said. FERPA is the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, a federal law that protects the privacy of student education records.

“FERPA allows an educational agency to create a record to be used for education research only if the personally-identifiable information of the students is de-identified, or that the records are coded,” the ruling continued. “According to FERPA, an educational agency can release a student’s record if the agency removes personally identifiable information and replaces it with a code….Once the document is legally created, the document becomes a public record under the Louisiana Public Records Law.

“For the reasons set forth above, this court maintains the appeal, the judgment of the trial court is reversed, and this matter is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.”

With the issue of whether or not the records were public settled, the only remaining proceeding was the awarding of damages.

“We went back into district court and Judge Morvant was not happy he’d been reversed,” said Ferguson.

In its memorandum in support of motion for attorney fees, court costs and penalties, Research on Reforms requested that Morvant award for the trial and appeal litigation $29,779 in attorney fees and $3,121in court costs, a total of $32,850.

FERGUSON REQUESTED JUDGMENT

Research on Reforms requested the documents on Jan. 27, 2012, and LDOE did not release the documents until three years later, on Jan. 22, 2015.

L.R.S. 44:1 et seq. provides penalties for non-compliance:

  • If the court finds that the custodian arbitrarily or capriciously withheld the requested record, it may award the requester any actual damages proven by him to have resulted from the actions of the custodian. It may also award the requester civil penalties not to exceed $100 per day, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and legal public holidays, for each such day of such failure to give notification.

Taking into account weekends and the 10 official legal holidays per year in Louisiana, there were 684 working days over the three-year period, according to the motion. At $100 per day, Research on Reforms was within its rights in asking for penalties totaling an additional $68,400—a total of $101,250 (actually, LouisianaVoice calculated 745 days, which would have increased the penalty to $74,500 in addition to court costs and attorney fees).

The Louisiana Public Records Law further says:

  • The custodian (in this case, John White) shall be personally liable for the payment of any such damages and shall be held liable in solido with the public body for the payment of the requester’s attorney’s fees and other costs of litigation, except where the custodian has withheld or denied production of the requested record or records on advice of legal counsel representing the public body in which the office of such custodian is located. In the event the custodian retains private legal counsel for his defense in connection with the request for records, the court may award attorney’s fees to the custodian (Emphasis added).

So, when all parties reconvened in Morvant’s courtroom on Nov. 9, 2015, what did Morvant, in his magnanimous administration of justice under Louisiana’s Public Records Law, award Research on Reforms? How did he protect the rights of Louisiana’s citizens to access public records without future unnecessary and unfair challenges while sending a message to politicians and bureaucrats that defiance of the law was not to be taken lightly?

Why, he slashed attorney fees and courts exactly by more than half, of course, to a paltry $18,121—$3,121 in court costs and $15,000 in attorney fees. (You have to wonder what Morvant’s attorney fees would have been had he been in private practice and handled this case.)

But, but…what about the $100 per day penalty, the $68,400?

Surely you jest. “It is ordered, adjudged and decreed that …Louisiana Department of Education shall pay to plaintiffs $3,121 in court costs and $15,000 in attorney fees, for a total of $18,121. Period. MORVANT GRANTED HALF OF REQUESTED FEES

No mention of penalties for LDOE’s openly defying the law. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

It would be egregious enough if that was the end of the story, but it isn’t.

Now LDOE refuses to pay the judgment.

Department legal counsel Chris Frugé informed Ferguson and Hatfield that they must now find a legislator who will introduce an amendment in the current legislative session for payment not by LDOE, but by the Legislature.

That procedure is followed in payment of judgments against the state and the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) involving automobile accidents. That’s because of some misapplication of federal funds by DOTD several years ago, but that has never been the case with any other agency—and it certainly was not the case in LouisianaVoice’s $2,800 award in 2013.

Unless there is some provision that we don’t know about, that is not the law; it’s just another hoop LDOE is making citizens jump through in order to hold John White’s feet to the fire of Louisiana law.

Tomorrow: In a case in which John White was held personally liable for $49,000 in fines, attorney fees and court costs, he has chosen to ignore the court’s decision and has made no effort to pay the judgment. But that may be about to change when the plaintiff attorney unveils his fallback plan in court.

Read Full Post »

Louisiana’s Public records laws being routinely ignored by officials; lawsuits, fines increase – all at taxpayer expense

Posted in Corruption, DOA, Education, Ethics, Governor's Office, Lawsuits, Legislature, Legislators, Media, Politicians, Public Records, Transparency on April 5, 2016| 6 Comments »

First of four-part series:

Officially, it’s Louisiana Revised Statute (L.R.S.) 44:1 et seq., or informally, the Louisiana Public Records Act.

It’s a sister statute to L.R.S. 42:4.1 et seq., otherwise known as the Louisiana Open Meetings Law.

Both are state laws enacted to give us the right to examine public documents and to attend meetings of public bodies in order to know what our elected representatives and political appointees are doing that affect our lives.

But to some in positions of authority, from city marshals to the previous governor’s office, they are merely suggestions.

And that’s what’s keeping Louisiana courts a little busier these days.

Today begins a four-part installment on ways in which certain public servants circumvent or even ignore the state’s public records law.

Under L.R.S. 44:1 et seq., a public body is defined to include a “political subdivision, or any committee, subcommittee, advisory board, or task force thereof.”

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

Custodian is defined as “the public official or head of any public body having custody or control of a public record, or a representative specifically authorized by him to respond to requests to inspect any such public records.

“It shall be the duty of the custodian of the public records to provide copies to persons so requesting.

“In any case in which a record is requested and a question is raised by the custodian as to whether it is a public record, such custodian shall within three days, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays, of the receipt of the request in writing for such record notify in writing the person making such request of his determination and the reasons therefor. Such written notification shall contain a reference to the basis under law which the custodian has determined exempts a record, or any part thereof, from inspection, copying, or reproduction.” (Emphasis added.)

Under L.R.S. 44:31, the right to examine records is clearly spelled out:

  • Providing access to public records is a responsibility and duty of the appointive or elective office of a custodian and his employees.
  • Any person may inspect, copy, reproduce, or obtain a reproduction of any public record.
  • The burden of proving that a public record is not subject to inspection, copying, or reproduction shall rest with the custodian.

LOUISIANA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT

There is no ambiguity in the law. It’s all right there in black and white. Yet, there are those, notable of them Superintendent of Education John White, former Commissioner of Administration Kristy Nichols, the LSU Board of Supervisors, a city marshal, and some judges who steadfastly abide by their own set of rules that were—and are—in stark contrast to what the law enunciates in concise language that any layman can easily comprehend.

Two key words are now routinely ignored: Public, as in public records, and Servant, as in public servant.

Almost exactly three years ago, in April 2013, the Baton Rouge Advocate and the LSU Daily Reveille filed suit against the LSU Board of Supervisors to obtain a complete list of candidates for LSU President, a position awarded to F. King Alexander. After winning at the district court level, the First Circuit Court of Appeal split the baby by partially reversing 19th JDC Judge Janice Clark’s ruling that the names of all 35 candidates must be turned over to the public. The First Circuit ruled that only the four finalists for the post and not the entire 35 names must be made public. http://theadvocate.com/news/11213914-123/lsu-wins-partial-reversal-in

The First Circuit also overturned Judge Clark’s sanctions against LSU which would have had the university having to pony up some $50,000 in fines.

LouisianaVoice has participated in the running battle over public records, winning one, losing one and winning a partial victory in a third that is currently on appeal.

The first case involved a request for records from the Louisiana Department of Education. When those records were not forthcoming, we sued and won a judgment of $2,800 plus court costs and attorney’s fees. That judgment was paid by DOE shortly after the decision by Judge Clark.

We later sued the Division of Administration but our suit was tossed by District Judge Mike Caldwell who helped DOE attorneys formulate their objections from the bench. But soon we were back before Caldwell in a second public records suit that rendered a strange decision, a token slap on the wrist to Nichols who then appealed.

In that case, we had several public records request outstanding, including one in which we made our request in October 2015. On the same day we made our request, we had a state representative file an identical request through House Legislative Services. The legislator had the records in two days. In January of 2016, three months later, we still did not have the records, including the one given the legislator within two days, so we sued. Wonder of wonders, no sooner was the lawsuit served than presto! DOA hand delivered a disc containing the requested records.

Prior to trial, DOE offered to settle our case for attorney fees and court costs. We declined.

So we again entered the courtroom, again presided over by Judge Caldwell, confident that we had a solid case. According to our calculations, DOA owed fines of $100 per day for each day in which each of the requests went unanswered—a total of about $45,000. Caldwell, in his infinite wisdom, awarded us eight days on one request, or $800, plus court costs and attorney fees. He also ruled that Nichols would be personally liable, meaning a check would not be forthcoming from DOE but from her personal checking account.

Then Nichols did a curious thing: she appealed. She appealed an $800 judgment to the First Circuit. And even though Caldwell held her personally liable, the taxpayers are picking up the legal costs of her appeal and those costs aren’t cheap. But since she appealed, we did likewise, asking the First Circuit to overrule Caldwell and assess the full $45,000. Arguments have not been scheduled on the appeals but it is our contention if the lower court decision is upheld or better yet, if the appellate court decides to impose the full amount, or somewhere in between, Ms. Nichols should be required to pay her own legal costs. It was her decision, after all, to take a personal penalty up the ladder.

Tomorrow: Superintendent of Education John White personifies the contempt with which officials treat requests for public records—and adverse court judgments by concocting non-existent rules along the way that delay justice by requiring plaintiffs to jump through imaginary hoops to collect what’s owed them.

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 »

Iberia Sheriff’s life is hotter than Tabasco on a fever blister after beatings, deaths, political payoffs, fight with reporters

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Congress, Corruption, Courts, Crime, Elections, Ethics, Jobs, Lawsuits, Media, Politicians, Prison, State Police on March 2, 2016| 3 Comments »

Though it is probably far too late, Louis Ackal would be wise to take the advice of an adage steeped in indisputable wisdom of the ages.

The sheriff of Iberia Parish, however, apparently has never heard the expression attributed to a host of well-known politicians, amateur philosophers and gifted writers: “Never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel.”

We’ll get to Ackal momentarily, but first a little background on that famous quote.

Mark Twain didn’t say it, though he is often cited as the one who coined the phrase. Neither was the quote original with publicist William Greener, Jr., as quoted in the September 28, 1978, Wall Street Journal.

The phrase of uncertain origin has also been attributed to the late Louisiana Congressman F. Edward Hebert, who served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1941 to 1977. A former newspaper reporter and editor for the New Orleans Times-Picayune, Hebert, who died in 1979, covered the Louisiana Hayride scandals of 1939 that led to the convictions of Gov. Richard Leche and LSU President James Monroe Smith. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Edward_H%C3%A9bert

Hebert, according to legend, added to the phrase when he said, “I never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel and paper by the trainload.” (Emphasis added.)

The quote was intended to illustrate just how futile it is to pick a fight with a crusading newspaper. Some clarification is needed here for our younger readers: the term crusading newspaper is passé, long gone from the vernacular used to describe the style of journalism depicted in the classic movies The Front Page (the 1931 original starring Pat O’Brien and Mae Clark or the 1974 remake starring Walter Matthau, Jack Lemmon, Susan Sarandon, Charles Durning, and Carol Burnett); 1940’s His Girl Friday, starring Cary Grant, Rosalind Russell and Ralph Bellamy; or of course, All the President’s Men, the 1976 movie about Watergate and the fall of Richard Nixon, starring Robert Redford, Dustin Hoffman, Jason Robards, Jack Warden, Hal Holbrook, Martin Balsam, Ned Beatty and Jane Alexander.

No, sadly, those days are long gone. Newspapers have felt the impact of the perfect storm of shrinking ad revenue and declining circulation along with waning influence as reflected in inverse proportion to the explosion of the Internet and the fourth estate. Once the epitome of independence, newspapers now find themselves subjected more to corporate pressure than to any need to inform its readership. The same gots for television news, of course, only if anything, to an even greater degree.

That famous and once chillingly accurate phrase could now be replaced by any one of several similar but equally relevant versions currently floating around out there in cyberspace:

  • Never pick a fight with someone who buys their bandwidth by the gigabyte.
  • Never pick a fight with someone who has a camera and a Twitter following.
  • Never pick a fight with someone who knows how to use the Internet better than you.
  • Never pick a fight with someone who has access to Google to prove you wrong immediately.
  • Never pick a fight with someone when your own video cameras or those of witnesses may contradict you.

To those might be added another pearl of wisdom: Never underestimate the intelligence of your constituency (the emergence of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz notwithstanding).

Ackal previously served as a Louisiana State Trooper where he served for awhile as a captain and Commander of Troop I. He retired abruptly in 1984 after being placed in charge of the narcotics squad of Region II which covered all of Southwest Louisiana.

He later resurfaced as a private investigator before running for High Sheriff of Iberia Parish in 2007. Now, not even four months from winning re-election sheriff, he seems not to have absorbed an iota of any of that advice about picking quarrels with those possessing generous supplies of ink and paper—and online access.

Even before he beat challenger Roberta Boudreaux last November in a runoff election, Ackal was already fighting a public relations disaster that culminated in his choosing to pick a fight with the Acadiana Advocate, sister publication of the Baton Rouge Advocate.

In March of 2014, a 22-year-old black man, Victor White, III, died after being shot while handcuffed in a sheriff’s department patrol car. Deputies said he pulled the gun and fired one round, striking himself in the back. The Iberia Parish coroner, however, ruled he was shot in the chest, immediately raising the question of how he could shoot himself in the chest with his hands handcuffed behind his back. The Iberia Parish district attorney, following a State Police report that the wound was self-inflicted, has declined to pursue criminal charges against deputies. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/da-charges-handcuffed-man-police-car-shooting_us_56b8f75de4b08069c7a8548b

The U.S. Attorney’s office likewise concluded an investigation of more than a year with the announcement that it would not pursue charges against the sheriff’s office. http://www.iberianet.com/news/feds-no-charges/article_087eda70-9e8f-11e5-a1e6-03aa54a2fd19.html

None of those findings, however, kept the Advocate group from publishing a May 6, 2015, story revealing that eight prisoners had died in Iberia Parish Sheriff’s Office custody over a 10-year period. http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/12248374-123/8-die-in-custody-of

The family of one of the victims, Robert Sonnier, settled its resulting lawsuit with the sheriff for $450,900 and the family of Michael Jones was awarded $61,000 in his wrongful death. There were other incidents, all of which prompted U.S. Rep. Cedric Richmond’s May 19, 2015 LETTER TO ATTORNEY GENERAL LORETTA LYNCH requesting an investigation “into alleged civil rights violations of members of the Iberia Parish Sheriff’s Office.”

Moreover, incriminating video of beatings of and dog attacks on prisoners were reported on by the Acadiana Advocate https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/05/04/disturbing-video-surfaces-highlighting-pattern-of-abuse-and-death-in-louisiana-jail/

Easy to see why Ackal may not be too enamored with the Acadiana Advocate, but to declare the paper and its reporters as “persona non grata” is foolish at best. http://theadvocate.com/news/acadiana/13886833-37/iberia-sheriff-mum-on-salary

It’s a war he can’t possibly win. As much adverse publicity as LouisianaVoice has given to the Louisiana State Police administration, Superintendent Mike Edmonson has never gone that far.

But, as those cheesy late-night TV commercials say: wait, there’s more.

First, there was his re-election campaign last fall.

He nearly won in the first primary, pulling in 47 percent of the vote. Parish Jail Warden Roberta Boudreaux got 25 percent and Spike Boudoin received 18 percent. Joe LeBlanc and Bobby Jackson won 7 and 3 percent, respectively.

That was on Oct. 24. On Oct 30, just six days later, Ackal hired Boudoin as something called director of community relations at a salary of $50,658 a year. http://theadvocate.com/news/14013818-123/iberia-sheriff-to-pay-defeated

Coincidentally, Boudoin announced at the same time his endorsement of Ackal in the runoff against Boudreaux. But other than the distribution of a news release announcing Boudoin’s hiring, Ackal said he would not entertain questions about the newly-created position.

Ackal won the runoff election on Nov. 21, receiving 56 percent of the vote against Boudreaux’s 44 percent.

To Jackson, it was déjà vu all over again. In 2007, he finished third with 11 percent of the vote behind Ackal and David Landry, both of whom got 42 percent. LeBlanc, who also ran in 2007, got the remaining 5 percent. After that primary, Jackson endorsed Ackal and was rewarded with a job as intelligence analyst, a role he had held in the U.S. Army. The difference with the sheriff’s department was he was denied working space, equipment and any direction as to his duties, all while being paid. He quit in disgust after little more than two months walking around “with my thumb in my rear,” he said, adding that he now sees “history repeating itself.”

Public servants are prohibited from using their positions to “compel or coerce any person or other public servant to engage in political activity,” according to the Louisiana Code of Governmental Ethics. Political activity is defined, in part, as “an effort to support or oppose the election of a candidate for political office in an election.”

It is also illegal for anyone to give money or anything of value “to any person who has withdrawn or who was eliminated prior or subsequent to the primary election as a candidate for public office, for the purpose of securing or giving his political support to any remaining candidate or candidates for public office in the primary or general election.” (Emphasis added.)

Robert Travis Scott, president of the Public Affairs Research Council, told the Acadiana Advocate that Ackal’s simultaneous hiring and endorsement raises questions of whether taxpayer money, i.e. Boudoin’s salary, was used to secure an endorsement.

Tomorrow: ethics complaint, sexual harassment lawsuit and guilty pleas over beatings and dog attacks are beginning to clutter embattled Louis Ackal’s desk.

Read Full Post »

Baton Rouge publisher, Jindal confidant evokes pot-kettle comparison for Edwards team’s lack of transparency claim

Posted in Boards, Campaign Contributions, Education, Ethics, Governor's Office, Legislature, Legislators, LSU, Media, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, Politicians, Privatization, Public Records, State Police, Transparency on December 23, 2015| 27 Comments »

I am certain that I will not agree with every move John Bel Edwards makes as governor. The re-appointment of Mike Edmonson as Superintendent of State Police comes immediately to mind. Such is the nature of politics. No man alive can please everyone every time.

And when I do disagree, as in the Edmonson re-appointment, I will say so. I believe Edwards understands and respects that.

In the meantime, I am willing give him a chance. He has a monumental task before him in his efforts to help the state overcome eight years of Bobby Jindal’s reign of error. He must form coalitions with Republicans in the legislature in order to even approach a successful administration. But I certainly don’t expect legislators to be the whipped puppies they were during Jindal’s misrule.

I gave Jindal that same benefit of the doubt. If I am to be honest, I have to admit that I voted for Jindal not once, but twice. I voted for him in 2003 when he lost to Kathleen Blanco and again in 2007 when he won. I honestly thought he meant it when he said he supported state employees and that he stood for transparency and a high ethical bar. I believed him when he said his appointments would be based on “what you know, not who you know.”

Well, we all know how that went down. He tried to gut state retirement, he destroyed the Office of Group Benefits, gave away the state charity hospital system, drove higher education to the brink of exigency (bankruptcy), and worse, he set a new low in the areas of transparency and ethics. And one only has to examine his appointments to the myriad state boards and commissions. They are dominated (and that’s putting it lightly) with major donors to his various political campaigns. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bobby-jindals-biggest-donors-benefited-from-his-administration_55e9e976e4b002d5c075fb17

https://louisianavoice.com/category/campaign-contributions/

Moreover, “what you know” didn’t go too far in other areas, either. The number of state employees and legislators he teagued for daring to disagree with him is a very long list. And his “deliberative process” catch-all denial of public records threw a heavy blanket on any hopes of transparency.

So, it was with some surprise that I read Rolfe McCollister’s diatribe in his Baton Rouge Business Report this week. https://www.businessreport.com/article/publisher-whats-big-secret

Of all the ones to whine about any lack of transparency on the part of the governor-elect who has yet to even take office, Rolfe stands alone as the singular standard-bearer of double standards.

He contributed $17,000 to Jindal’s campaigns in 2003, 2006, and 2008. He was treasurer of Jindal’s 2007 gubernatorial campaign and served as chairman of Jindal’s transition team after his 2007 election. He served as director of Jindal’s first fundraising organization, super PAC Believe in Louisiana, and most recently served as treasurer of Believe in Louisiana as it raised funds for Jindal’s presidential campaign.

His Louisiana Business, Inc. partner, Julio Melara also was a player. Melara and his wife contributed an additional $8,500 to Jindal campaigns

And what did Rolfe and Julio get in return for all that?

Well Julio wound up with a pretty nice appointment to the Louisiana Stadium and Exposition District (Superdome Board), complete with all the perks that go with the appointment.

McCollister was named to the LSU Board of Supervisors and that’s where the hypocrisy really boils to the surface. Board members get choice tickets to LSU sporting events (including a private suite in Tiger Stadium). http://forgotston.com/2013/07/16/need-a-lsu-tuition-break/

And until the quota was reduced earlier this year, each member could award up to 20 tuition-free scholarships to LSU. Even after the reduction, they still get 15 scholarships each. http://theadvocate.com/news/11898955-123/lsu-board-revamps-number-of

Those perks could mean more than $100,000 per year per board member. In 2012 alone, the board handed out $1.3 million in scholarships to their friends—even as college tuition was skyrocketing for the average student with no contacts on the board. http://thelensnola.org/2013/07/11/lsu-board-of-supervisors-awards-1-3-million-through-little-known-scholarship-program/

Rolfe didn’t invent the perks and though he tied with two other members for the fewest scholarships awarded—five. But you never heard him raise a single objection to their abuse.

Rolfe, as publisher of the Business Report, purports to be an objective chronicler of political news. You would think that as such, he would champion all efforts to obtain records of a public body.

You would think wrong. He, along with four other members, did not respond to an email from reporter Tyler Bridges, then writing for The Lens of New Orleans, seeking comment. How’s that for transparency?

He certainly came off as a bit petulant this week when he went on a rampage about Edwards’s education transition team’s meeting in private “at least four times.”

There’s more. “McCollister notes it was Edwards who proclaimed at a Public Affairs Research Council forum in April that his administration would be more transparent than previous administrations, saying ‘a scope of secrecy’ has been allowed to exist,” his staff wrote today (Wednesday, Dec. 23). https://www.businessreport.com/article/publisher-gov-elect-edwards-transition-committees-discussing-public-education-big-issues-behind-closed-doors?utm_campaign=dr_pm-2015_Dec_23-15_05&utm_medium=email&utm_source=dr_pm

“But what does conducting all of the discussions of the transition committees behind closed doors in secret do for the citizens? What I haven’t seen yet is an editorial from The Advocate or The Times-Picayune objecting to the discussion of ‘public’ education in private. Why not? I thought transparency was their big issue.

Rolfe has a very short memory. I can’t recall the Jindal transition team over which Rolfe presided ever holding a public meeting prior to Jindal’s taking office. And when The Advocate, the Times-Picayune and the LSU Reveille were demanding the release of the names of all the candidates for the LSU presidency, where was he?

It’s hard to tell because the very one who should have been front and center in championing the right of the public to know who those candidates were, was strangely mute.

Not a peep out of Rolfe who was in a unique position to reason with the boy blunder to release the names.

Likewise, when the LSU Board agreed to that hospital privatization contract with the 50 blank pages, he should have been the first one on his feet shouting that a blank contract was not just questionable, but also not a legal document. Instead, he sat quietly as the contract was approved, laying the groundwork for the litigation over state hospitals in Shreveport and Monroe now winding its way through the courts.

Likewise, not one word of protest when the contract was awarded to a foundation in Shreveport whose CEO was…(wait for it)…a fellow member of the LSU Board.

“The public knows very little in specifics about what Gov.-elect John Bel Edwards will propose and how far he will take some issues,” McCollister wrote. “Transition teams are made up of a majority of his friends, advisers and supporters—or those who think like he does (and Jindal’s wasn’t, Rolfe?). While this exercise is often ceremonial, it can reflect the views and direction of the new governor—and his closest friends and allies who will be whispering in his ear for the next four years (and of course, you never once “whispered in Jindal’s ear, right?). The public education committee has had five meetings in secrecy. What did they talk about, and who said what? We won’t read or hear about it in the media because they weren’t allowed inside—and the press never uttered a peep (Perhaps they learned from your example on the LSU Board, Rolfe.).

To those who don’t know your history, you sound like a champion of pure, open government.

Unfortunately, your words fall far short of matching your actions. Those indignant protests would carry a lot more weight if you had the track record to back them up.

That’s called hypocrisy, Rolfe. And that’s unfortunate, though not necessarily unexpected.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »