Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Regents’ Category

Could loss of that $80.6 million broadband internet federal grant last fall have been deliberately orchestrated by ALEC?

Posted in Broadband, Internet, Governor's Office, Grant, Grants, Higher Education, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Regents, Revenue on May 9, 2012| 6 Comments »

That $80.6 million Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) grant to provide high speed broadband internet to rural areas of Louisiana keeps rearing its ugly head.

That’s the grant—the second grant—that Gov. Bobby Jindal eschewed and eventually lost when the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a three-page letter of revocation last October. Jindal had earlier declined to apply for a $60 million grant for early childhood education.

LouisianaVoice has obtained information that indicates the forfeiting of the broadband grant now appears to have been the brainchild of none other than the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which last August bestowed its highest honor, the Thomas Jefferson Freedom Award, on Jindal at ALEC’s national conference in New Orleans.

The project would have created 900 miles of cable over 21 rural parishes in Louisiana and would have supported several Louisiana universities with expanded optical fiber networking capacity that could have complimented the Board of Regents’ $20 million Louisiana Optical Network Initiative (LONI) project, designed to extend high-speed networking capabilities in the state.

But Jindal, whose wife’s charitable foundation received funding from AT&T, preferred that the project be carried out by private companies—such as AT&T. He refused to re-apply for the grant because of what he called a “heavy-handed approach from the federal government that would have undermined and taken over private business.”

U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu called Jindal’s reasoning “hogwash.” She said the grant would not have interfered with private enterprise and in fact, just the opposite was true. “We weren’t trying to create a government broadband system; it’s granting money for private companies to lay the cable,” she said.

Even more ominous, that revocation letter from Arlene Simpson Porter, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Division (NOAA), informed the Jindal administration, “Consideration of this adverse action may be used in future funding decisions for your organization.”

That could mean that Jindal’s decision could be used against the state in any future grant applications.

The problems started March 17, 2011, when BTOP staff informed the Board of Regents that the project was nine months behind schedule. A formal response was requested by May 13, 2011, but on May 17, there still was no formal response and a corrective action plan (CAP) letter was sent to the Board of Regents.

That was followed on May 26 by a conference call between BTOP staff, the Board of Regents and the Division of Administration (DOA) to discuss the CAP response. On June 14, the Board of Regents and DOA issued a response letter in which it was noted that the DOA Office of Information Technology (OIT) would provide project oversight to ensure that implementation of the BTOP grant would not be in direct competition with private providers.

The state was notified on July 6 that it was even further behind on the project and additional problems were encountered on July 12. On July 27, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) requested that NOAA suspend Louisiana’s U.S. Treasury Automated System Application for Payment (ASAP) account pending corrective actions, including delivery of project benefits and compliance with award terms and conditions.

The Board of Regents on Aug. 8 provided BTOP staff with a chart outlining the planning process and goals. A month later, the Regents proposed an alternative design that included a new plan, new project schedule with new structure and milestones and a survey of service providers that would provide unspecified indefeasible right of use (IRU). An IRU is a contractual agreement between operators of communications systems, including fiber optics.

The Regents’ proposal was rejected by NOAA, which on Sept. 20 issued a 30-day notice of termination of award. That was followed by Simpson-Porter’s Oct. 26 termination letter.

Could the loss of the grant have been orchestrated by ALEC? Could the administration have deliberately stalled until the grant was pulled in order to comply with ALEC’s national agenda?

Perhaps we will never know the answer to that, but consider this:

As far back as August of 2010, at ALEC’s annual meeting in San Diego, its Telecommunications & Information Technology Task Force passed the following resolution:

• Whereas, it is the mission of the American Legislative Exchange Council to advance the Jeffersonian principles of the free markets, limited government, federalism and individual liberty, and

• Whereas, broadband information services sector is critical to growing the nation’s economy, enhancing quality of life through new and innovative applications, and enabling greater job creation, and

• Whereas, the rise of private investment in broadband technologies has dramatically transformed the way consumers work, live, learn, and conduct their daily lives, and

• Whereas, ALEC believes that innovation, private investment, and market competition, not additional regulations, should drive the continued deployment and adoption of broadband information services, and

• Whereas, the FCC has moved forward with a plan that would impose its authority on the internet and regulate the provision of broadband information services, and

• Therefore, be it resolved that ALEC voices its support of lawmakers and regulators avoiding the unnecessary, burdensome and economically harmful regulation of broadband internet service companies, including the providers of the infrastructure that supports and enables internet services, and further

• Be it resolved that ALEC urges that the FCC, Congress, and state regulatory and legislative bodies refocus their efforts on specific and limited initiatives targeted at ensuring that broadband service is made universally available and affordable to consumers, rejecting overly prescriptive regulation that would harm innovation, investment, and job growth, and further

• Be it resolved that ALEC’s opposition to the sweeping redefinition of broadband services be communicated to all ALEC members, and further

• Be it resolved that ALEC shall convey its support to the members of the United States Congress and Executive Branch.

The resolution was offered by Intuit, Inc., following a presentation by Eagle Communications on “concerns over federal grants being used to fund businesses to compete head-to-head with broadband service providers in areas that are already being served.” Intuit was one of the corporate members that recently pulled out from ALEC after the controversy over Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, a law strongly supported by ALEC, and the subsequent shooting death of a black youth by a neighborhood watch volunteer.

AT&T and Cox Communications, both major investors in cable TV and internet services, are also members of ALEC. AT&T even serves on ALEC’s corporate board.

Louisiana legislators attending that San Diego conference – at state expense – included:

• Former Rep. John LaBruzzo (R-Metairie);

• Rep. Robert Johnson (D-Marksville);

• Rep. Thomas Carmody (R-Shreveport);

• Rep. Tim Burns (R-Mandeville);

• Rep. Joe Harrison (R-Gray);

• Rep. Bernard LeBas (D-Ville Platte);

• Sen. Yvonne Dorsey (D-Baton Rouge).

Read Full Post »

Time for Hebert and Sibille to resign from the University of Louisiana Board of Trustees–in open session

Posted in Higher Education, Lobbyist, Public Records, Regents, Transparency, tagged , , , on February 7, 2011| 2 Comments »

The late Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, speaking of open meetings and above-board actions of elected and appointed officials, once said that sunshine is still the best disinfectant.

A metaphoric observation, of course, but nonetheless applicable in the case of the recent first-ever joint meeting of Louisiana’s five higher education boards.

Apparently at least two members of the University of Louisiana System Board of Trustees don’t see the necessity of making board decisions in the open and in public view.

Strangely enough, it took a suggestion from an outsider to inadvertently elicit remarks by the two ULS trustees that perhaps Louisiana should have no open meetings laws on the books.

Their utterances, whether made out of arrogance or ignorance, should anger every voter in Louisiana. Gov. Bobby Jindal’s “transparency in government” long ago turned into a sick joke, so there’s no need to add insult to injury.

Terry MacTaggart of the national Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (yes, it turns out even university governing boards have their own national lobby), served as moderator for the event and suggested to board members that they hold a “pre-meeting” in order to formulate policy.

Such “pre-meeting” would be in direct violation of the state’s open meetings laws which expressly prohibit any public body meeting in secret to discuss business. Board of Regents Chairman Bob Levy of Ruston, who also serves as district attorney for the Third Judicial District of Louisiana that includes Lincoln and Union parishes, was quick to set MacTaggart straight. He told MacTaggart, who works out of Washington, D.C., that Louisiana law strictly prohibits such activity.

It was at this point that ULS board member Gerald “T-Boy” Hebert and board Chairman Winfred Sibille contributed their opinions that should demand their immediate resignations.

Hebert, a major financial contributor to the University of Louisiana Lafayette, responding to Levy’s reminder of the requirements of the state’s “vigorous open meetings law,” hinted that perhaps a “joint effort to lobby the Legislature will change the law.”

Wait. What?

Did he really suggest weakening or worse, abolishing the state’s open meetings law? Sounds that way to us.

But in a statement that dripped with irony, Sibille said, “The worst thing that can happen at a board meeting is a surprise.” That remark in itself was something of a surprise. Apparently all public meetings are supposed to go smoothly with no debate or open discussion. Sibille then underscored that sentiment when he added, “All problems should be resolved before the meeting.”

Perhaps not since the days of Huey Long has anyone been so brazen as to suggest that public input be shut out of the decision-making process by any public body in Louisiana.

Open political debate has been the hallmark of this country’s government since its founding nearly 235 years ago. In New England they still have town meetings which are nothing like the orchestrated, controlled town meetings held by presidents Bush and Clinton and our current governor. Those are sound bite opportunities. New England town meetings are the bedrock of democracy. At those events, local citizens actively participate in policy-making decisions. To suggest otherwise to the citizenry there would be an open invitation to a new American Revolution.

If Hebert and Sibille are so arrogant as to have even a scintilla of conviction in what they said in that joint meeting, they should resign immediately.

If they are so ignorant as to not realize the ramifications of their remarks, then they have no business serving on any public board—certainly not the self-parody of a board of higher education—and they should resign immediately.

In short, there is no logical reason for either man remaining on any board.

There is no room for public men to advocate private decision-making by a public, taxpayer-supported board out of the sight of the taxpaying public. Their comments should incite outrage among voters.

Conversely, Louisianans owe a debt of gratitude to both Regents Chairman Bob Levy and ULS board member Jimmy Faircloth.

Faircloth, former executive counsel to Gov. Jindal, fired his own volley when he said board members get agendas and background information prior to the meetings so they should be prepared to discuss issues going in. But the public doesn’t always get the full story, he said. “Some of the substance is not discussed in meetings,” he said. “News about higher education is distributed through carefully-tailored press releases.”

Faircloth said none of the board members are elected but instead are appointed, so they should be prepared to make tough decisions and not be afraid of speaking their minds. “It would be healthy for open discussions to be on the record,” he said.

Levy was even blunter. Many board members are afraid of open discussions at open meetings, he said.

That begs the obvious question: Why are they afraid?

We’d be interested in hearing their answers.

Like Louisiana Music? Be sure to check out Louisiana Rocks! The True Genesis of Rock & Roll! This book is the only complete history of all genres of Louisiana rock and roll. Re-live all those great old songs that used to play late nights on WTIX, WNOE, KAAY. Learn about all the great artists like Elvis, Johnny Cash, Jim Reeves, D.J. Fontana, Floyd Cramer, and Hank Williams who got their start on the Louisiana Hayride. Check your local bookstore or log onto http://www.louisianarockstomaswell.com.

Read Full Post »

College mergers: the elephant in the room

Posted in Budget, Economy, Governor's Office, Higher Education, Regents on November 11, 2010| 2 Comments »

Perhaps, at long last, the time has come to talk about the elephant in the room.

Up to now, timid lawmakers have only dared whisper of the possibility of closing Louisiana’s two predominantly black universities and merging them with larger, mostly white schools. But now perhaps more serious, yes, even bolder consideration should be given not only to closing Grambling and Southern universities, but perhaps a few others four-year colleges in Louisiana as well.

Letter writers and bloggers have broached the subject more frequently as of late as the state’s economic plight worsens but as yet no member of the legislature, the Louisiana Board of Regents, nor the University of Louisiana System’s Board of Supervisors has summoned the political courage to address the issue.

Nor has Gov. Jindal or anyone else on the fourth floor of the State Capitol dared suggest what should be the obvious solution to erasing a substantial portion, if not all, of the state budget deficit.

The existence of three four-year public universities within 40-50 miles of each other, though a benign issue in better times, has suddenly become a topic that must finally be addressed in the interest of fiscal responsibility.

In north Louisiana, the University of Louisiana-Monroe (ULM), Louisiana Tech, and Grambling State universities are situated only about 40 miles apart on I-20.

In south Louisiana, Southeastern Louisiana University, LSU, and Southern University are in relative proximity to each other with Southern and LSU both in Baton Rouge and Southeastern only about 45 miles away in Hammond.

In the central part of the state, LSU-Eunice and LSU-Alexandria are a mere 50 miles apart. Granted, LSU-Eunice is a junior college, but does that justify the existence of two public institutions of higher learning so near each other serving essentially the same constituency?

For that matter, is there really a need for the University of New Orleans and Southern University-New Orleans to be located in the same city with Nicholls State less than 50 miles away in Thibodaux?

Three junior colleges, Bossier Community College, Southern University-Shreveport, and LSU-Shreveport sit within shouting distance from one another in the adjacent parishes of Caddo and Bossier.

That many junior colleges and four-year universities as close to each other as these schools do not represent the wisest investment of taxpayer dollars. When the state was flush with oil and gas money, it didn’t seem to matter. Political expediency was the order of the day and every part of the state wanted its own four-year school.

But that was before the existence of today’s $106 million state budget deficit. The combined budgets of ULM and Grambling were $126.3 million in 2009-2010 and the combined proposed budgets of the two schools for 2010-2011 approach $135 million. Add Northwestern to the mix and the numbers jump to $198.1 million and $210.3 million, respectively. Throw in the three junior colleges in the Shreveport area and, well, you get the picture. Strategic mergers in north Louisiana alone could wipe out the state’s budget deficit.

Merging two or more of the institutions would not produce an automatic savings equal to the combined budget of one or more of the schools being phased out because one school would have to absorb many of the displaced students, professors, and instructors.

But the elimination of athletic programs, (coaches’ salaries, athletic scholarships, and facility upkeep), administrative fees, including salaries for university presidents, the various vice presidents, deans, assistant deans, department heads, etc., by reducing the number of four-year institutions from the dozen we now have to only three or four would result in slashing expenditures by perhaps as much as several hundred million dollars.

Athletic programs and college administrations are not the only duplications that could be eliminated by a well-planned merger of universities. Curricula at many schools are nearly identical and replication could be eliminated in these areas as well. While some schools specialize in certain degree programs—the pharmacy program at ULM comes to mind—there is considerable overlap in curricula from school to school with many of those schools only a few miles from each other. The two existing law schools at LSU and Southern, for example, are located less than 10 miles from each other in Baton Rouge.

Why has this issue not been addressed by the powers that be? The answer is simple. Louisiana’s black political leaders and educators understandably want to protect their heritage at all cost and a big part of that heritage is represented by the two predominant black universities, Southern and Grambling and Southern’s Shreveport and New Orleans campuses. To close the black schools is to flirt with political disaster. The issue is an emotional powder keg that no one wants to ignite.

Even in cities like Lake Charles, Thibodaux, Alexandria, and Hammond, where the issue is not one of black heritage, the local political leaders, chambers of commerce, and legislators will do all in their power to retain their four-year institutions as part of their own identity. They would never agree to turning Nicholls, Northwestern, McNeese, UNO, LSU-A, or Southeastern into junior colleges. Most of those have already been there and they don’t want to go back.

Nor would they be likely to agree to merge Bossier Community College, Southern-Shreveport, and LSU-Shreveport even though virtually every economic consideration suggests it would be the fiscally prudent action to take.

That’s not to say it can’t be done. Gov. Dale Bumpers did it in Arkansas in 1971, when Arkansas A&M, a predominantly black school, was merged with the University of Arkansas and the planets and stars remained in alignment. Nationally, more than six dozen college and university mergers have taken place. One of the most notable was the merger of Marymount College and Loyola University in 1973 into what today is known as basketball powerhouse Loyola-Marymount.

But as one political observer said years ago, “They’ll close LSU before they close Grambling.”

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts