Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Media’ Category

Peter Schroeder, a writer for The Hill, has drunk the Kool-Aid.

The Hill is a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc. that covers the U.S. Congress with an emphasis on business, lobbying and political campaigns and is one of the first web pages accessed each day by those wishing to stay abreast of events in the nation’s capital.

But Sunday’s story by Schroeder has to leave readers in Louisiana scratching their heads and wondering about his credentials or his sanity—or both.

His story, The New and Improved Jindal, touts the prospects of Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-Iowa, R-New Hampshire, R-Anywhere but Louisiana) as a legitimate challenger for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/219759-the-new-and-improved-bobby-jindal

Perhaps unwittingly, however, the headline to his story may have provided an insight to what’s in store for the Boy Blunder.

By invoking the term “new and improved,” we immediately are left with the idea that he is being packaged and sold like so much washing powder or toothpaste—or perhaps more appropriately, toilet paper.

To bolster his evaluation of Jindal as a real comer, Schroeder relied on people like Tony Perkins, founder of the Louisiana Family Forum, former legislator, failed U.S. Senate candidate and president of the Family Research Council and Jindal’s former chief of staff, current political adviser Timmy Teepell and Baton Rouge political pollster Bernie Pinsonat.

The fact that Jindal and Perkins are in lock step on family values issues does not exactly make Perkins an impartial observer and Teepell certainly has much to gain if he and his consulting company, OnMessage, can ride Jindal’s coattails into the White House (or as Sarah Palin would say, 1400 Pennsylvania Avenue).

Schroeder also hangs his analysis on a single speech by Jindal last week when he cracked a couple of jokes that actually got chuckles from his conservative audience at the Values Voters Summit in Washington. “Jindal showed a dynamic style as he paced across the state,” he wrote.

What!!? Really? You’re staking your writing career on that thin bit of evidence?

Well, not exactly. There is this from Teepell:

“Most people’s impression of his speaking skills go back to his State of the Union response (of 2009), which was just a terrible speech.

“You’re having to do it (speaking) all the time, and on a number of different issues every single day, and so he just gets better and better.”

So, there you have it. By Teepell’s own admission, Jindal is making these speeches “every single day,” which leaves damned little time for him to devote his attention to the mundane duties of governor—a job to which he was re-elected by 67 percent of 20 percent of the state’s voters, a veritable mandate.

If he’s such a rising star, perhaps Schroeder can explain to us how Jindal managed to finish behind “nobody” in a recent straw poll. Maybe he can tell us why he remains a bottom feeder in the polls, along with Palin who can’t seem to get the address of the White House right.

Jindal’s supporters argue that his low numbers can be attributed to the fact that voters in the heartland don’t know him, not because they don’t like him.

News flash: we know him in Louisiana and his numbers have never been lower here and it’s precisely because we do know him.

Louisiana pollster Bernie Pinsonat said Jindal simply needs an issue that will give him national exposure.

We have several such issues:

  • He was for Common Core before he decided it would be politically expedient to oppose it.
  • He regularly hopped all over north Louisiana handing out stimulus money at Protestant churches and “awarding” military veterans’ pins during his first term but has not visited a single church of any stripe nor has he delivered any military pins since his re-election where only 20 percent of registered voters even bothered to vote.
  • He has bankrupted the state with tax giveaways to corporations while attempting to rip state employees’ pensions from them with a patently unconstitutional legislative bill.
  • He is now attempting to do the same thing with state worker health benefits while at the same time depleting the fund balance of the Office of Group Benefits.
  • He has handed out hundreds of millions of dollars in questionable state contracts to consultants and favored firms.
  • His hand-picked Secretary of Health and Hospitals has been indicted on nine counts of perjury in connection with one of those contracts.
  • He has given away the state hospital system to private entities though the move has yet to be approved by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
  • He has repeatedly cut the budgets of higher education in Louisiana.
  • He has consistently promoted school vouchers and charter schools at the expense of low-income students who are left in the underfunded public schools.
  • He attempted to give the State Police Superintendent a $55,000 a year retirement raise while ignoring rank and file state police and state employees.
  • He has broken his promise not to use one-time money for recurring expenses—not once, but six times.
  • He has enveloped the governor’s office in secrecy.
  • He has cloaked himself in a mantle of self-righteousness that is betrayed by his callous lack of concern for the people of Louisiana.

“People are going to have plenty of time to get a better impression of Gov. Jindal,” Teepell said. “That (2009) speech won’t be the only thing they remember about him.”

The business of remaking or re-packaging of the new and improved Jindal reminds of the wisdom of Mark Twain who said, “If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything.”

As far as we’re concerned, Jindal is going to have plenty to try to remember in his quest for the brass ring that is the GOP nomination.

Or, as we prefer to think, if you’re genuine—if you’re the real deal—there’s really no need for a makeover.

And if ever a person needed a makeover, it’s Jindal.

Read Full Post »

LouisianaVoice has not posted a story on last Thursday’s House Appropriations Committee hearings on the Office of Group Benefits because we did not want to do what the mainstream media under the pressure of a deadline must necessarily do: get the story out quickly and without going into a lot of detail—in short, an overview.

This is not a criticism but simply an observation of the nature of the job. Reporters must report the highlights of such lengthy hearings without going into too much detail. Both time and newspaper space (air time for TV news) dictate this.

We are not bound by such constrictions. Nor are we always tied down to deadlines. While the story is important, we would rather review the entire seven hours of testimony and give you the mood of the hearings, both the adversarial sparks and the heart-wrenching emotion of some of those who gave their testimony.

Accordingly, we will offer two installments on the hearing. The first will concentrate on the testimony of state employees and retirees who will be adversely affected if the proposed plans are implemented, with retirees taking the hardest hits. The second installment will relate the exchanges between the administration representatives and members of the legislature, most of whom ignored the warnings of three years ago when the administration first proposed firing about 150 OGB employees and hiring a third party administrator (Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana) and now must deal with the consequences of an angry constituency.

The hearing was one of repeated confrontation between legislators and the administration, and while both sides attempted to adhere to legislative protocol and professionalism, there were times when each side’s contempt for the other surfaced, albeit briefly. But it was sufficient for observers to see that members of the legislature, after six and one-half long years, have finally reached a point that they no longer trusts or have any real patience with the administration of Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-Iowa, R-New Hampshire, R-Anywhere but Louisiana).

In 2011 then-Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater said the state did not need to be in the insurance business but now, a short three years later, the administration has embedded itself in the day to day operations of the Office of Group Benefits, even to the point of bringing in two former BCBS executives to assist CEO Susan West in finding her bearings.

The following year, in 2012, Jindal attempted to “reform” state employee pensions. Our best example of what those reforms would have done, a story we’ve told several times now, is the one of the state employee who planned to retire after 30 years. If she never received another raise before her retirement, her pension, under the current retirement plan, would be $39,000 per year. Under Jindal’s plan, her retirement would have been slashed to $6,000 per year—a $33,000 per year hit—with no social security.

The courts ruled his retirement plan unconstitutional, so now he’s coming after health care benefits.

Rainwater’s successor, Kristy Kreme Nichols and West (the third or fourth CEO since the administration fired Tommy Teague—to tell you the truth, we’ve lost track) alternated in dodging questions, fumbling explanations and being generally unsuccessful in providing simple yes or no answers in their sparring with legislators. Division of Administration (DOA) Executive Counsel Liz Murrill, meanwhile, spent much her time sitting behind the witness table texting, seemingly oblivious to heartbreaking testimony of those who are seeing their coverage costs skyrocketing.

She texted, for example, while Janice Font, an art teacher from West Baton Rouge Parish, told the committee that she must take eight medications daily and can barely make the co-payments on her prescription drugs now. “And now you tell me I’ve got to pay double?”

Murrill continued texting as Font said she had to take five months disability “making $200 a month less than my house note” and how she “can’t even call the company to fix my air conditioning.”

The texting continued as Font implored legislators to explain to her what she had done to deserve such treatment. “I am a good teacher. I do a good job. And I’m barely making it. I don’t deserve this. I would like for somebody to come down here and tell me why this is being done to me.”

Henry Reed, a retired State Fire Marshal’s office employee, said he fought FEMA for hurricane recovery money on behalf of the state but has seen little in the way of gratitude on the part of that same state since his retirement. A victim of both epilepsy and narcolepsy, Reed said he has to take one medication that costs $2,000 per one-month supply.

His doctor prescribed two pills per day of that medication. “OGB changed to Medimpact (a San Diego company OGB contracted with in January to pay prescription drug claims) and Medimpact informed me they would pay for only one pill per day. Apparently someone sitting at a desk in California knows more about my condition than my doctor.

“I thought I had a good health plan,” Reed said. “I called OGB and they referred me to Medimpact.”

Roy Clement is retired from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). “I’m being asked to choose between plans that will decrease my benefits while increasing my costs,” he said. “In 2011 Paul Rainwater came before the committee and said OGB funds would not be directed to other programs after privatization. But if you cut premiums, the funds that were not earned (the state’s 75 percent contribution to premiums) go someplace else.

“Tommy Teague was forced out after he had more than $500 million (in the OGB trust fund). Now the fund is going broke.

“Our mandate at DEQ was to help the people of Louisiana,” he said. “Yet we’ve seen an administration plunder every agency for their use.”

Kay Prince, a retired school teacher from Ruston, said she and her husband “chose to work for the state because of good retirement and excellent benefits. Now that we’re older and not in as good health as when we were younger, we need these benefits and we feel we are not being treated as fairly by the state as we treated the state by giving of ourselves everything we had. This is not a good situation. OGB was a wonderful thing and that was what largely influenced us in our decision to remain in Louisiana.”

Vicky Picou said simply, “If you need one of these (proposed) plans, you can’t afford it. Most increases are loaded heavily on those least able to pay.

“It’s not open access if the costs are more than your monthly income. This administration has found deep pockets to subsidize corporations (but) has found nothing but contempt for OGB members who are ill. Under this administration, OGB has seen its CEOs come and go, its workers get terminated and now this administration wants to see its ill and elderly shoved off the OGB plans.”

Neil Carpenter said OGB is not living up to its own philosophy and goals. “Never in my career have I seen half a billion dollars played with so capriciously and arbitrarily,” he said. “I would at least think you would have an actuarial report whereby you could set premiums. From what I’ve seen, they’re based on nothing. There’s no methodology to the madness.” (We will have much more on this in tomorrow’s story.)

“I know the money was not transferred from the reserve fund to the general fund,” he said. “I know that. But if you reduce the amount coming out of the general fund by underfunding premiums that are supposed to be going to the insurance program, you have effectively done the same thing.

“Somehow, we were paying too little to fund the plans and our reserve fund got too big and now we’re broke because we had too much money.”

Ann Curry, a retiree from the Office of Juvenile Justice pointed out that because members from East and West Feliciana parishes are on the Vantage Health plan, they have been going to doctors in Baton Rouge but because of the structure of the new proposals, those members will not be eligible for the less expensive plan because the Baton Rouge doctors will not be in that network. Consequently, they would have to opt for the more expensive plan.

Mary-Patricia Wray, legislative director for the Louisiana Federation of Teachers, said the administration’s idea of “right-sizing” the OGB plan really meant right-sizing for the administration. “The right-sizing, according to this plan, means it will be suffered by state workers and teachers only. The costs to the state stay the same. Deductibles, co-pays, out-of-network costs will be going up—way, way up. Whenever the state’s position in right-sized, it comes out on top. The last time it right-sized, it saved $95 million by decreasing premiums. That decision led to financial problems and now the state is being ‘same-sized,’ not right-sized. Members of OGB will bear the burden of that poor decision.”

Frank Jobert, executive director of the Louisiana Retired Employees Association said the administration created the crisis. “This entire conversation today would not be necessary had we not reduced premiums and created the problem that exists today that you’re trying to solve on the backs of employees and retirees.”

Jobert said he had been told some legislators do not want to get involved in the OGB discussion “because they’ll be blamed. But if you don’t get involved, you’re going to share the blame. You’re going to leave some people out in the cold.

“This program was fine,” he said. “It was functioning; we were happy with the premiums and nobody was complaining. Now we’re doing everything in a completely different manner, adding confusion, giving programs new names and no one is happy. We need your help,” he told the legislators. “It’s your job. We elected you to do this for us.”

Tommy Teague, who was fired as executive director of OGB on April 15, 2011, when he failed to embrace Jindal’s privatization plan, was one of the last non-legislator to testify. His firing followed that of his wife Melody six months earlier for testifying before Jindal’s streamlining committee. And though she appealed and got her job back, the firing of the two gave birth to the often used term “teagued” as synonymous with being fired or demoted by Jindal.

Teague now serves as general counsel and Vice President of Provider Relations for the newly formed Louisiana Health Cooperative.

“There was never a rule change undertaken at OGB without going through the Administrative Procedures Act (APA),” he said. “We followed the APA every time there was a change in a benefit plan. We allowed for complete oversight of all changes as the APA called for.”

Legislators, as we will see in tomorrow’s installment, were highly critical of the administration’s reluctance to comply with the APA.

“I do have a business motive for being here,” Teague admitted. “Louisiana Health Cooperative is a new start-up health maintenance organization (HMO).

“OGB is required to seek out any Louisiana HMOs that would like to participate in the state employee health coverage during open enrollment. We asked OGB for an opportunity and they refused to let us participate even though we believe the law requires the solicitation process to include us. We offer a plan very similar to the current HMO plan and could save the state millions of dollars.

“We would encourage the oversight process and that you push back the open enrollment (now scheduled for Oct. 1—Oct. 31) and that we be allowed to participate and offer our plan through the open enrollment process.”

Then, deliberately and emphatically, Teague said, “When I was fired (from OGB) in 2011, the fund balance was $506 million and the Office of Group Benefits was running like a top.”

And Liz Murrill texted.

Read Full Post »

“It is to the credit of Col. Mike Edmondson (sic) and Master Sgt. Louis Boquet, of Houma, that they declined to accept the raise because of irregularities in its passage.”

—From a Baton Rouge Advocate editorial on Friday, Sept. 19, in an effort to paint Edmonson as a dedicated and noble public servant for “refusing” a $55,000 yearly increase in his pension resulting from a Senate bill amendment that he and his staff helped orchestrate—with assistance from State Sen. Neil Riser (R-Columbia), Gov. Bobby Jindal and Jindal’s executive counsel.

Read Full Post »

It’s seldom that I disagree publicly with members of the fourth estate. Besides preferring to focus my energy on reporting on the myriad ways state government falls short of its number one priority of protecting the interests of the state and its citizens, I generally have a deep professional respect for our peers in the media.

I worked for 30-plus years in various capacities—sports reporter, news reporter, copy editor, investigative reporter and managing editor—for several newspapers all over the state, including Monroe, Shreveport, Donaldsonville, Baton Rouge and four separate stints at the Ruston Daily Leader where I began almost 50 years ago. I kept returning at a higher position mostly because of my loyalty to my mentor, Publisher Tom Kelly. I even managed to pick up a few reporting awards along the way, including three for investigative reporting.

A news reporter will never get rich working for a newspaper; the pay just isn’t that good. Those who spend their time sitting through endless hours of city council, police jury, school board and even legislative committee meetings, mind-numbing courtroom testimony and who climb out of bed in the middle of the night to cover a shooting or a fire do so for the love of the profession.

So yes, I do maintain an abiding respect for these dedicated individuals.

But when I see facts deliberately being glossed over and key points ignored in order to protect or project a favorable image of a public official who has deliberately and blatantly attempted to use his position or to manipulate the political system to his financial advantage, I cannot in good conscience keep quiet.

The Baton Rouge Advocate editorial of Friday, Sept. 19, stands out as one of the most unabashedly transparent attempts to pin a bouquet on a state official who recently condoned one of the most underhanded attempts at abusing the legislative process in recent memory.

That attempt, of course, was the amendment by State Sen. Neil Riser (R-Columbia) to Senate Bill 294 in the closing hours of the recent legislative session. The bill, authored by State Sen. Jean-Paul Morrell (D-New Orleans) originally addressed procedures to follow in disciplinary cases for law enforcement officers but was amended to give State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson special treatment in awarding him an unconstitutional increase in retirement income of somewhere between $30,000 and $55,000 per year.

Riser added the amendment during a conference committee meeting on the bill. Riser was one of three senators and three House members on the conference committee and on the final vote for passage, House members were told, incorrectly, the bill’s passage would create no fiscal impact.

Bobby Jindal’s executive counsel Thomas Enright, Jr., whose job it is to review bills for propriety and constitutionality, gave the bill his blessings and Jindal promptly signed it into law as Act 859.

LouisianaVoice broke the initial story about how the bill allowed Edmonson to revoke his decision years ago to enter into the state’s Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP) which froze his retirement benefits at his then-pay level of $79,000 at his rank of captain. By allowing him to renege on his decision which was supposed to be irrevocable, it allowed him to retire at a rate based on his current colonel’s salary of $134,000. Because he has 30 years of service, he receives 100 percent of his salary as his retirement. Thus, the amendment gave him an instant yearly increase in retirement of something between $30,000 and $55,000.

The amendment inadvertently just happened to include one other person, Master Trooper Louis Boquet of Houma, though he was unaware of the amendment and its implications until the public outcry erupted.

A state district judge, ruling on a lawsuit brought by State Sen. Dan Claitor, said the amendment was unconstitutional on several grounds, thereby killing Edmonson’s retirement windfall.

The four-paragraph Advocate editorial on Friday noted that the matter had been “laid to rest” and noted that such furtive bills are common in the Louisiana Legislature. http://theadvocate.com/news/opinion/10299405-123/our-views-a-lesson-for

But it was a single sentence in that editorial that set me off:

“It is to the credit of Col. Mike Edmondson (sic) and Master Sgt. Louis Boquet, of Houma, that they declined to accept the raise because of irregularities in its passage.”

What?!! Besides the misspelling of Edmonson’s name, the editorial completely (and apparently purposefully) omitted key elements of this sordid story.

  • Edmonson defended the amendment and his additional retirement on Public Radio’s Jim Engster Show;
  • He admitted on that same show that “a staff member” had approached him about the possibility of increasing his retirement benefits via the amendment and he personally okayed that staff member to proceed with the legislative maneuver;
  • Neil Riser first denied any knowledge of how the amendment originated but later confessed that it was he who inserted the language into the bill;
  • The legislative fiscal notes (which detail the potential financial impact of pending bills) were not submitted until three days after the session adjourned, evidence that the entire episode took place on the down low, hidden from public view;
  • During a hearing on the amendment by the State Police Retirement System Board, it was revealed that the board’s actuary was initially approached about the amendment “a few weeks” before the close of the session, further evidence that the move was in the works long before that fateful final day of the session;
  • At that same hearing, it was also revealed that the “staff member” who initiated efforts to pass the amendment was State Police Lt. Col. Charles Dupuy, Edmonson’s chief of staff;
  • Edmonson did not reject the raise until the heat from the public and from retired state police officers became so intense that it was politically impossible for him to go through with the charade. The added threat of a lawsuit by retired state troopers and the attacks on the amendment by State Treasurer John Kennedy only served to ensure the foolhardiness of any continued attempts to claim the money;
  • The way the entire affair played out implicated everyone concerned—Jindal, Enright, Riser, Dupuy and Edmonson—in a pathetic attempt to conceal the deed from public view.

In short, Edmonson’s decision was anything but magnanimous. Quite simply, it was forced upon him by the glaring light of public scrutiny—the one thing he feared most.

This silly effort by the Advocate to make Edmonson’s decision seem noble and to make it appear to be anything other than the hands in the cookie jar scenario that it was is a disservice to its readers and an insult to their intelligence.

Perhaps the Advocate should stick to its previous hard-hitting editorials about how nice sunshine is and how lovely the Spanish moss-laden oak trees on the Capitol grounds are.

When John Georges purchased the Advocate from the Manship family, he went before the Baton Rouge Press Club where he made the utterly bizarre statement that he was focused on “not making people angry.”

I’m sorry Mr. Georges, but when you establish a policy of attempting to publish as little offending reporting as possible, that’s a cowardly decision and you’re simply not doing your job.

It was Thomas Jefferson who said, “If I had to choose between government without newspapers and newspapers without government, I wouldn’t hesitate to choose the latter.”

Georges has obviously chosen the former.

And that decision has made the Advocate less of a newspaper, good only for crawfish boils and housebreaking a puppy.

Read Full Post »

Occasionally we manage to strike a raw nerve with our blog posts about political shenanigans in Louisiana. Our post on Tuesday (Sept. 2) about U.S. Rep. John C. Fleming’s campaign contributions apparently was a case in point.

But it wasn’t the fact that Fleming, a Republican from Minden and a physician, has taken more than $200,000 from special interest political action committees (PACs) this election cycle.

Nor was there any dispute about our claim that Fleming brooks no dissenting opinion and blocks access to his Facebook page to anyone who disagrees with him.

But apparently, he doesn’t want it known that he once owned and/or operated a payday loan company.

On Friday (Sept. 5) we received a terse email from Fleming’s communications director, one Doug Sachleben, protesting that part of our post as being incorrect.

Sachleben did not say whether he works out of Louisiana or Washington, but that really is irrelevant. Here is the verbatim content of his email:

In your piece on my boss, the portion below is wrong. Rep Fleming has never owned or operated a payday loan company. I’d appreciate if you removed that.

 Doug Sachtleben

Communications Dir.

Rep John Fleming

He then lifted a quote from our Tuesday blog post, apparently for our benefit:

“Fleming, a doctor who apparently did not make enough money as a medical practitioner, once ran a payday loan company, an enterprise that offers short-term loans to low income families at the friendly annualized interest rate of up to 390 percent.”

Well, we hate being wrong. That’s why we researched our story in advance.

Accordingly, we went to our original source, the corporate records contained on the Louisiana Secretary of State’s web page.

In response to Sachleben, we copied and pasted a number of corporations listed in John C. Fleming’s name. These included Fleming Expansions, Fleming Acquisitions, Minden Family Care Center (a Professional Medical Corporation), Fleming for Congress, LLC, 1 Subway, LLC, Fleming Payday Loans, LLC.

Each of the corporations included the name of John C. Fleming as either an officer or an agent and in some instances, both. In a few cases, Fleming’s wife Cynthia also was listed as an officer.

More importantly, each of the six corporations had the same domicile address: 119 Homer Road in Minden.

Fleming and his wife also were owners, officers and agents in a dating service, Fleming Dating Development, Inc.

We replied to Sachleben, attaching a copy of the Fleming Payday Loans, LLC corporate records.

He wrote back this explanation:

At that time there were a lot of employees requesting advances on their paychecks. To pay people in advance of their work would have been problematic for many reasons and an accounting nightmare. The Fleming Group formed an LLC on paper with the thought of offering temporary interest-free loans to only its employees to accommodate their requests. The more it was considered, the more problematic it appeared; so they scrapped the idea entirely. There was never any desire or consideration to get into the payday loan industry as a business.

Wow.

In his incredulous clarification, he neglected to explain how a “problematic idea” managed to be incorporated on September 2, 2004, and the affidavit to dissolve was not filed until Aug. 4, 2009—a year after he elected to Congress. Why would Fleming leave a “problematic idea” on the books for five years when he would have been required to file annual reports, tax returns and other paperwork?

And while he’s at it, perhaps Sachleben can also offer either a denial of those campaign contributions (taken directly from Fleming’s campaign finance reports) or explain why his boss would accept funds from outfits with such tawdry records of fraud, influence peddling and other unsavory activity.

Here are the Secretary of State’s web page printouts on Fleming’s corporate entities:

 

FLEMING EXPANSIONS, L.L.C. Limited Liability Company MINDEN Active

 

Previous Names
Business: FLEMING EXPANSIONS, L.L.C.
Charter Number: 34627521K
Registration Date: 4/20/1998

 

Domicile Address
119 HOMER RD
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Mailing Address
119 HOMER ROAD
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Status
Status: Active
Annual Report Status: In Good Standing
File Date: 4/20/1998
Last Report Filed: 3/27/2014
Type: Limited Liability Company

 

Registered Agent(s)

 

Agent: MIKE TOLAND
Address 1: 119 HOMER RD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055
Appointment Date: 3/30/2011

 

Officer(s) Additional Officers: No 

 

Officer: JOHN C. FLEMING
Title: Member
Address 1: 119 HOMER ROAD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055
FLEMING PAYDAY LOANS, L.L.C. Limited Liability Company MINDEN Inactive

 

Previous Names
Business: FLEMING PAYDAY LOANS, L.L.C.
Charter Number: 35772196K
Registration Date: 9/2/2004

 

Domicile Address
119 HOMER ROAD
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Mailing Address
C/O JOHN C. FLEMING
119 HOMER ROAD
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Status
Status: Inactive
Inactive Reason: Voluntary Action
File Date: 9/2/2004
Last Report Filed: 8/18/2008
Type: Limited Liability Company

 

Registered Agent(s)

 

Agent: JOHN C. FLEMING
Address 1: 119 HOMER ROAD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055
Appointment Date: 9/2/2004

 

Officer(s) Additional Officers: No 

 

Officer: JOHN C. FLEMING
Title: Manager
Address 1: 119 HOMER ROAD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

FLEMING FOR CONGRESS, L.L.C. Limited Liability Company MINDEN Active

 

Previous Names
Business: FLEMING FOR CONGRESS, L.L.C.
Charter Number: 36736015K
Registration Date: 4/30/2008

 

Domicile Address
119 HOMER ROAD
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Mailing Address
119 HOMER ROAD
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Status
Status: Active
Annual Report Status: In Good Standing
File Date: 4/30/2008
Last Report Filed: 4/8/2014
Type: Limited Liability Company

 

Registered Agent(s)

 

Agent: MIKE TOLAND
Address 1: 119 HOMER ROAD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055
Appointment Date: 11/30/2011

 

Officer(s) Additional Officers: No 

 

Officer: JOHN C. FLEMING, III
Title: Manager
Address 1: 119 HOMER ROAD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

MINDEN FAMILY CARE CENTER (A PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL CORPORATION) Business Corporation MINDEN Active

 

Previous Names
PARK CITY HEALTH SERVICES (A PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL CORPORATION) (Changed: 3/14/2012)
Business: MINDEN FAMILY CARE CENTER (A PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL CORPORATION)
Charter Number: 34480626D
Registration Date: 12/19/1994

 

Domicile Address
119 HOMER RD.
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Mailing Address
119 HOMER RD.
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Status
Status: Active
Annual Report Status: In Good Standing
File Date: 12/19/1994
Last Report Filed: 12/3/2013
Type: Business Corporation

 

Registered Agent(s)

 

Agent: MIKE TOLAND
Address 1: 119 HOMER RD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055
Appointment Date: 12/2/2010

 

Officer(s) Additional Officers: No 

 

Officer: JOHN C. FLEMING, M.D.
Title: President, Director
Address 1: 1240 COUNTRY CLUB CIRCLE
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Officer: CYNTHIA B. FLEMING
Title: Director, Secretary
Address 1: 1240 COUNTRY CLUB CIRCLE
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

FLEMING ACQUISITIONS, L.L.C. Limited Liability Company MINDEN Inactive

 

Previous Names
MAIL BOXES 1, L.L.C. (Changed: 10/8/1999)
Business: FLEMING ACQUISITIONS, L.L.C.
Charter Number: 34525360K
Registration Date: 4/25/1996

 

Domicile Address
119 HOMER RD.
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Mailing Address
119 HOMER RD.
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Status
Status: Inactive
Inactive Reason: Voluntary Action
File Date: 4/25/1996
Last Report Filed: 5/2/2012
Type: Limited Liability Company

 

Registered Agent(s)

 

Agent: MIKE TOLAND
Address 1: 119 HOMER ROAD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055
Appointment Date: 4/8/2011

 

Officer(s) Additional Officers: No 

 

Officer: JOHN C. FLEMING, JR.
Title: Member
Address 1: 119 HOMER RD.
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Officer: CYNTHIA B. FLEMING
Title: Member, Manager
Address 1: 119 HOMER RD.
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Officer: MIKE TOLAND
Title: Manager
Address 1: 119 HOMER ROAD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

1 SUBWAY, L.L.C. Limited Liability Company MINDEN Active

 

Previous Names
Business: 1 SUBWAY, L.L.C.
Charter Number: 34529383K
Registration Date: 5/31/1996

 

Domicile Address
119 HOMER RD.
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Mailing Address
119 HOMER RD.
MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Status
Status: Active
Annual Report Status: In Good Standing
File Date: 5/31/1996
Last Report Filed: 5/12/2014
Type: Limited Liability Company

 

Registered Agent(s)

 

Agent: MIKE TOLAND
Address 1: 119 HOMER RD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055
Appointment Date: 5/16/2011

 

Officer(s) Additional Officers: No 

 

Officer: JOHN C. FLEMING, JR.
Title: Member
Address 1: 119 HOMER RD.
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Officer: CYNTHIA B. FLEMING
Title: Member
Address 1: 119 HOMER RD.
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

 

Officer: MIKE TOLAND
Title: Manager
Address 1: 119 HOMER ROAD
City, State, Zip: MINDEN, LA 71055

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »