Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘State Police’ Category

State Trooper files discrimination lawsuit against LSP claiming harassment, selective punishment, promotions

Posted in ATC, Civil Service, Corruption, Ethics, Lawsuits, State Police on August 31, 2016| 6 Comments »

Does systematic racial discrimination as an unspoken policy exist on a widespread basis within the Louisiana Department of Public Safety (DPS)?

If claims contained in a LAWSUIT filed against Louisiana State Police (LSP) in Baton Rouge State District Court are borne out, allegations that include a claim that job openings were not properly posted so as to allow the promotion of pre-selected applicants, the answer would be an unqualified yes.

And what’s more, the silent policy of excluding blacks from promotional opportunities originates in the highest administrative offices of LSP, i.e. those of State Police Superintendent Col. Mike Edmonson, according to the petition filed by 21-year law enforcement veteran Kevin Sulcer.

 Sulcer, a Senior Trooper/Detective, who has been with LSP for the past 12 years, is “the only black Detective at headquarters in the Baton Rouge area,” his petition says. Moreover, he says, there is only one black LSP Detective in New Orleans and the LSP Narcotics and Intelligence Divisions have no black Troopers or Investigators.

“Every black Detective has either left the department or (has) been transferred,” his petition says.

Sulcer is represented by Baton Rouge attorneys Jill Craft and Crystal Bounds.

The claims laid out in Sulcer’s lawsuit, if true, would appear to be yet another in an ever-growing number of allegations of favoritism, mismanagement and poor morale among rank and file State Troopers. 

Sulcer claims he and other black Troopers have been subjected to harsher penalties for minor offenses than have their white counterparts.

As an example, he singled out Lt. Col. Charles Dupuy (Deputy Superintendent/Chief of Staff) who he said forced him to write a 3,000-word essay (reminiscent of Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control former director Troy Hebert who is currently polling 0% in his bid to succeed U.S. Sen. David Vitter) when he was attending LSP training academy but never required white Cadets to do so.

Besides Dupuy, Sulcer also specifically names Col. Mike Edmonson, his brother and Command Inspector Maj. Paul Edmonson, Dupuy’s wife, Commander Kelly Dupuy (can you say nepotism?), Head of Internal Affairs Maj. Catherine Flinchum, Internal Affairs Commander David McClendon, Internal Affairs Executive Officer Lt. Aaron Marcelle, Master Trooper Kevin Ducote, and Lt. Chris Holmes as being part of a pattern of discriminatory policy within LSP.

Sulcer said in his lawsuit that Holmes berated him because of his race for leaving his vehicle running while he interviewed an inmate. As he left the interview, Sulcer said he noticed another Trooper’s unoccupied vehicle idling. “Col. Edmonson was parked in front of this officer’s unit and did nothing to reprimand him,” the petition says.

The incident prompted an Internal Affairs investigation of what Sulcer says was a “minor infraction” that should have been handled by Sulcer’s supervisor. (This the same Internal Affairs Division that refused to investigate a Trooper’s harassment of a citizen in Lake Charles and which refused to conduct a thorough investigation of a Trooper habitually leaving his shift after only a couple of hours to go home to sleep—until LouisianaVoice drew so much attention to the two cases that IT finally was forced to conduct a superficial investigation.)

Sulcer received a letter of reprimand for leaving his vehicle running and for the encounter with Holmes on Oct. 30, 2015. He filed an official appeal of the letter to Mike Edmonson on Nov. 6, 2015. Edmonson has yet to respond to that appeal, the petition says.

But the most egregious act of discrimination, the petition says, concerns an opening for a polygraph position.

“LSP handpicked a white employee, Donnie Guitreau, to fill the polygraph position,” Sulcer said. But manner in which it was done, if Sulcer is correct, would appear to be a blatant violation of State Civil Service procedures.

“Mr. Guitreau was not qualified for the position (so) LSP sent him to polygraph school before the position opening was posted or formally announced,” the petition says. “After Mr. Guitreau completed the school, LSP then posted the position, leaving him the only ‘qualified’ applicant.”

Sulcer says he has more law enforcement experience than Guitreau. Moreover, he says, Guitreau “has a disciplinary history whereas (Sulcer) does not.”

He also claims that LSP failed to have in force an effective policy regarding racial discrimination/harassment and reprisal/retaliation in the workplace and that LSP has refused to address his complaints.

If LSP’s past history is any indication, reprisals against Sulcer have only just begun (with apologies to Karen and Richard Carpenter).

 

Read Full Post »

Research team polling news media to determine extent of legal, illegal administrative, legislative, judicial corruption

Posted in Corruption, Ethics, Governor's Office, Judges, Legislature, Legislators, Media, Politicians, State Police on August 12, 2016| 8 Comments »

A little more than five years ago, we launched LouisianaVoice in an attempt to bring political corruption in Louisiana into sharper focus. Two years ago, The Washington Post named Bob Mann’s Something Like the Truth and LouisianaVoice as two of the top 100 political blogs in the nation.

While we were quite proud to have been recognized by such a prestigious publication as the Post, that pride was tempered somewhat by the knowledge that we could never have achieved such a designation had political corruption not permeated all levels of government in Louisiana— from Shreveport to New Orleans, from Lake Charles to Monroe.

Now we learn that researchers Michael Johnston and Oguzhan Dincer, both former fellows at Harvard Law School’s Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, have been conducting a “one-of-a-kind” corruption survey over the past two years.

“The survey is designed to construct perception-based measures of different forms of corruption in American states,” Dincer wrote us recently. “We surveyed more than 1,000 news reporters/journalists covering state politics and issues related to corruption across (each state).

“…We were able to construct measures of illegal and legal corruption for each (branch of) government in 50 states,” Dincer said, adding that the results of the survey “quickly drew extensive and positive attention from the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Fortune Magazine, FiveThirtyEight, and a number of regional newspaper and broadcast stations.”

The results of that 2015 study were published by Illinois State University and the researchers are now in the process of conducting an updated survey. https://about.illinoisstate.edu/odincer/Pages/CorruptionSurvey2015.aspx

So just what is legal corruption as opposed to illegal corruption? Isn’t corruption just corruption without the adjectives? Dincer explained the difference. “We define illegal corruption as the private gains in the form of cash or gifts by a government official in exchange for providing specific benefits to private individuals or groups.”

Legal corruption, on the other hand, is defined as political gains in the form of campaign contributions to or endorsements of a government official, in exchange for providing specific benefits to private individuals or groups by “explicit or implicit understanding.”

“According to several surveys, a large majority of Americans, both liberals and conservatives, think that donations to super PACs, for example, by corporations, unions, and individuals corrupt the government,” the researchers’ report said.

The 2014 report indicated that the leading states for moderately to very common illegal corruption in the executive branch of government were Arizona, New Jersey, Georgia, Kentucky and Utah. States identified as “very common” in illegal corruption in the legislative branch included Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.

Legal corruption was found in many more states. Kentucky and New Jersey were identified as states where legal corruption in the executive branch was “extremely common,” while those where it was “very common” included Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Mexico, New York and Texas.

Legal corruption in the legislative branch was far more discouraging on a nationwide basis. States where legal corruption in the legislative branch was “extremely common” included Alabama, Illinois, Kentucky, Montana, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Wisconsin.

States where legislative branch legal corruption was called “very common” included Alaska, Arkansas, Hawaii, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma and Rhode Island.

When all factors were taken into consideration, the states leading in overall illegal corruption were Arizona, California, Kentucky, Alabama, Illinois, New Jersey, Georgia, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Florida, Indiana, Rhode Island and Texas.

Setting the bar for overall legal corruption were Kentucky, Illinois, Nevada, Mississippi, New Jersey, Alabama, New Mexico, Georgia and Pennsylvania.

States that showed up as most corrupt in both legal and illegal corruption were Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, New Jersey, New Mexico and Pennsylvania.

So, where did Louisiana rank in all these studies?

“Surprisingly enough, we received no responses from Louisiana, which is historically one of the more corrupt states in America,” the report said. http://ethics.harvard.edu/blog/measuring-illegal-and-legal-corruption-american-states-some-results-safra

We knew there had to be a logical explanation. There just had to be.

Which brings us to the current survey.

“We are conducting the third wave of the survey this year and we would like you to take part in a short (5 minute) survey that will gauge your perception of government corruption in Louisiana,” Dincer wrote. “We will again be contacting as many news reporters/journalists as possible in this endeavor to ensure that our results are as reliable as possible. The responses are entirely anonymous and cannot be related to specific participants or institutions.”

So, to all political reporters—and that includes local government beat reporters and political bloggers—in Louisiana who may be reading this, here is the link to their survey.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KYNN5FC

Now that the legislative session is over and there is no gubernatorial election on the near horizon, there’s no reason for you not to participate.

Be completely truthful, candid and forthright and we can return Louisiana to its rightful spot at the top of the rankings.

Read Full Post »

Notable Quotables (in their own words)

Posted in Boards, Commissions, Ethics, Legislature, Legislators, Notable Quotables, State Police, Transparency on August 11, 2016| 5 Comments »

“Why are you going into executive session?”

—My question to the Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC) after it voted to go into closed session.

 

“We don’t have to give a reason.”

—LSPC legal counsel and former State Sen. Taylor Townsend of Natchitoches, who is under a $75,000 contract to the commission to provide legal advice.

 

“Yes, you do. It’s the law.”

—My response to attorney Townsend.

 

“To discuss personnel matters.”

— Townsend (did I mention he’s an attorney?), after a moment’s reflection on my citing law to him. Below is the statute:

 

RS 42:16

  • 16.  Executive Sessions

A public body may hold executive sessions upon an affirmative vote, taken at an open meeting for which notice has been given pursuant to R.S. 42:19, of two-thirds of its constituent members present. An executive session shall be limited to matters allowed to be exempted from discussion at open meetings by R.S. 42:17; however, no final or binding action shall be taken during an executive session. The vote of each member on the question of holding such an executive session and the reason for holding such an executive session shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the meeting.  Nothing in this Section or R.S. 42:17 shall be construed to require that any meeting be closed to the public, nor shall any executive session be used as a subterfuge to defeat the purposes of this Chapter. (Emphasis added.)

 

 

Read Full Post »

State Police Commission approves promotion of Starnes, but constitutionality of LSPC is called into question by retiree

Posted in Boards, Campaign Contributions, Commissions, Contract, Contracts, Elections, Ethics, Media, State Police on August 11, 2016| 3 Comments »

Like the proverbial farmer who hit his mule in the head with a two-by-four to get his attention, Leon “Bucky” Millet got the attention of the Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC) at its monthly meeting on Thursday (Aug. 11).

Millet, a retired State Police lieutenant, didn’t use a club; his weapon of choice was a tersely-worded, three-paragraph statement he read into the record in the meeting’s opening moments—a statement that called into question the very constitutionality of the board itself and the legality of any actions it has taken in recent months.

State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson also appeared before the commission to seek a promotion for Maj. Jason Starnes in order to legitimize Edmonson’s earlier appointment of Starnes as Interim Undersecretary, Custodian of Records of the Office of Management and Finance.

In another sticky matter, the board once again voted to kick the can down the road on the issue of the proposed 3 percent longevity raise for state police officers. That can was kicked down the road 30 days at the LSPC’s July meeting but this time they delayed action for 60 days.

That’s so they can continue to lobby Gov. John Bel Edwards to affix his signature to a revision to General Circular 180 of the Louisiana State Police (LSP) Uniform Pay and Classification Plan.

Bobby Jindal attempted to lock state troopers into an automatic longevity pay plan on his way out the door last November as part of his exit strategy but never signed the new plan as required by law.

But on June 1, Cathy Derbonne, LSPC Executive Director, published TRANSMITTAL SHEET NO. 58  on the LSPC Web page that pointed out that Article X, Section 48(C) of the Louisiana Constitution mandates that “any rule determination affecting wages or hours shall have the effect of law and become effective only after approval by the governor and subject to appropriation of sufficient funds by the Legislature (emphasis Derbonne’s).

“As of June 1, 2016, an approval by the Governor has not been received and there is currently insufficient funding to implement the revisions,” she wrote.

“The Revision of State Police Commission Rule Chapter 6 Uniform Pay and Classification Plan is hereby rescinded in its entirety,” she wrote (emphasis Derbonne’s). The pay plan approved by the LSPC last November is contained in GENERAL CIRCULAR 180

The proposed longevity pay plan would have given troopers raises of 3 percent per year for the last two years, or slightly more than 6 percent.

LSP currently has 18 majors and lieutenant colonels making at least $140,000 per year, or about $2.5 million. That $140,000 was up from $93,000 before the last pay raise of July 2015.

LSP payroll is currently more than $80 million. An across the board 6 percent pay raise would cost about an additional $5 million, plus retirement, medical and related benefits

at a time when state civil service employees are in their sixth year of no pay raises and at a time the state is anticipating yet another budgetary shortfall. Here is a copy of the State Police Pay Grid.

Millet’s statement that he read, which was in the form of a formal complaint, read:

Please accept this correspondence as a formal request pursuant to State Police Commission Rule Chapter 16, Investigations. I am asking for an investigation regarding the violation of the Louisiana State Constitution, Title 10, Section 43.

            Apparently the commission members, with the exception of one, were appointed in violation of the intent as well as the letter of the law in Title 10, Section 43.

            This would bring into question, what constitutional authority does this commission have to act in any official capacity, including any official acts taken at the July 14 (2016) commission meeting?

In his complaint, Millet was reference Article X, Part IV, Section 43(C) of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974 which stipulates the following:

  • The presidents of Centenary College at Shreveport, Dillard University at New Orleans, Louisiana College at Pineville, Loyola University at New Orleans, Tulane University of Louisiana at New Orleans, and Xavier University at New Orleans, after giving consideration to representation of all groups, each shall nominate three persons. The governor shall appoint one member of the commission from the three persons nominated by each president. One member of the commission shall be elected by the classified state police officers of the state from their number as provided by law. A vacancy for any cause shall be filled by appointment or election in accordance with the procedure or law governing the original appointment or election, and from the same source. Within thirty days after a vacancy occurs, the president concerned shall submit the required nominations. Within thirty days thereafter, the governor shall make his appointment. If the governor fails to appoint within thirty days, the nominee whose name is first on the list of nominees automatically shall become a member of the commission. If any nominating authority fails to submit nominees in the time required, or if one of the named institutions ceases to exist, the governor shall make the appointment to the commission.

LouisianaVoice had earlier made a public records requests for any such letters of nominations from the university presidents. Only a single letter from Centenary College President Kenneth Schwab to then-Gov. Mike Foster dated Jan. 15, 2003, was provided.

Upon hearing Millet read his complaint, Taylor Townsend, the Natchitoches attorney and former State Senator under contract to the commission to conduct the investigation into the LSTA funneling campaign money through its executive director to several political candidates in violation of state law, said, “We need to go into executive session.”

Commission member Jared J Caruso-Riecke immediately the motion and the commission voted unanimously to go into closed session. At that point, I asked the reason for the executive session.

“We don’t have to give a reason,” replied Townsend.

“Yes, you do, it’s the law,” I said, referencing Louisiana Revised Statute 42:16 which says, in part: “…the reason for holding such an executive session shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the meeting.”

Townsend hesitated for a moment and then said, “It’s to discuss personnel matters.”

That seemed rather odd in that the only “personnel matters” to have come before the board was Millet’s complaint about the legality of the board itself. Apparently, they went behind closed doors to talk about themselves.

Edmonson’s appearance before the commission was to correct his promotion of Starnes to Interim Undersecretary in violation of state police regulations. As a classified employee, Starnes was ineligible for promotion to a non-state police service position. By promoting him to lieutenant colonel, he moves into an unclassified position where he will be in direct supervision of his ex-wife, Tammy, an Audit Manager for LSP.

Starnes, who has no degree and who has no experience in accounting, will sign off on all expenditures in Management and Finance and was promoted into that position over Deputy Undersecretary Erin Bielkiewicz who is a CPA.

He succeeds Jill Boudreaux to the position. Boudreaux retired (again) in February after her faux-retirement-rehire in April 2010 in order to take advantage of a retirement buyout incentive offered by the state. She was able to pocket about $59,000 and return to work two days after her first “retirement.” She was ordered to repay the money, but never did. https://louisianavoice.com/2014/08/24/edmonson-not-the-first-in-dps-to-try-state-ripoff-subterfuge-undersecretary-retiresre-hires-keeps-46k-incentive-payout/

By putting Starnes into the position over the more qualified Bielkiewicz, Edmonson further shores up his fiefdom by placing his most trusted personnel in key positions within the State Police hierarchy.

Just another routine day for LouisianaVoice while sniffing around LSP headquarters.

Read Full Post »

Time has come for Gov. Edwards to turn his attention to ongoing attempts by State Police to consolidate power

Posted in Boards, Commissions, Corruption, Ethics, Governor's Office, State Police on August 10, 2016| 10 Comments »

Seriously, Gov. Edwards, it’s time you pulled your head out of the sand and took a long, hard look at the Department of Public Safety (DPS), notably the Louisiana State Police (LSP), beginning at the top.

The longer you wait to take action to rein in this runaway agency, the more certain it becomes you are going to be embarrassed at some point in the future.

Take tomorrow’s (Aug. 11) meeting AGENDA, for example.

Even as Commissioner of Administration Jay Dardenne was warning earlier this week that we can expect another budgetary shortfall, Item 5 on tomorrow’s commission agenda is to rescind a general circular relative to the revision of the Uniform Pay and Classification Plan. This is so that state police, already the recipients of two major pay increases totaling 50 about percent last year, may get yet another raise. It’s worth noting that state classified employees have gone without pay raises of any description for six years now.

Then there is Item 7 which calls for the creation of an additional unclassified position of Lieutenant Colonel as Deputy Superintendent, Chief Administrative Officer especially to accommodate Maj. Jason Starnes—the same Jason Starnes who briefly was allowed to live rent-free in the State Police Training Academy barracks when he separated from his wife.

That would bring to something around one and one-half Lieutenant Colonel positions but more significantly, this is a thinly-veiled attempt by State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson to consolidate his power at LSP.

This is a move to circumvent a complaint filed in May over Edmonson’s promotion of Starnes as Interim Undersecretary of Management and Finance, even going so far as to post his “new” position on the State Police Web page.

Starnes, a classified member of LSP, was transferred by Edmonson to the unclassified non-state police service position. That move, the complaint said, was in violation of Rule 14.3(G), which says:

  • No classified member of the State Police shall be appointed, promoted, transferred or any way employed in or to any position that is not within the State Police Service.

The proposed creation of the new unclassified position will place Starnes in direct supervision of his estranged wife, Tammy, Audit Manager for LSP.

We first announced the proposed appointment of Starnes by Edmonson in May https://louisianavoice.com/2016/05/16/mike-edmonsons-appointment-not-official-yet-senate-committee-set-to-consider-his-confirmation-on-tuesday/ and in June we announced that Edmonson had pulled the promotion following filing of the complaint. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/06/06/starnes-promotion-pulled-by-edmonson-after-complaint-governor-fails-to-sign-lsp-pay-plan-rescinded-by-lspc/

LouisianaVoice was first to report two years ago that Edmonson had orchestrated an attempt to tack an amendment onto a House bill on the final day of the 2014 legislative session which would have given him an additional $55,000 per year in retirement pay in contravention of an irrevocable option he had exercised years before that froze his retirement at a lower level. https://louisianavoice.com/2014/07/11/generous-retirement-benefit-boost-slipped-into-bill-for-state-police-col-mike-edmonson-on-last-day-of-legislative-session/

More recently, the executive director of the Louisiana State Troopers Association (LSTA) was found to have contributed tens of thousands of dollars to political campaigns on behalf of LSTA. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/12/09/more-than-45000-in-campaign-cash-is-funneled-through-executive-director-by-louisiana-state-troopers-association/

While individual state troopers, like their civil service counterparts in state government, are prohibited from taking part in political campaigns, including making campaign contributions, LSTA Executive Director David Young made the contributions in his name and was reimbursed by the association. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/12/09/more-than-45000-in-campaign-cash-is-funneled-through-executive-director-by-louisiana-state-troopers-association/

An attorney and former state legislator, Taylor Townsend of Natchitoches, was given a $75,000 contract to conduct an investigation of the money laundering scheme. But true to form for ethics investigations in Louisiana (an ethics complaint against LSP has been pending for months with no indication of a ruling forthcoming any time in the foreseeable future), Taylor made a 10-minute presentation at last month’s meeting in which he recommended that no action be taken. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/07/14/expectations-of-state-police-commission-report-on-lsta-campaign-contribution-probe-dies-with-a-pitiful-whimper/

A recording of the Troop I Chapter of LSTA was made available to Townsend but he has refused to release a copy of that recording in which it was admitted that the LSTA was in violation of state law in making the contributions. Taylor’s refusal to release the recording was based on his assertion that the tape “was never entered into evidence,” an explanation that makes no sense whatsoever in terms of conducting a thorough investigation.

Moreover, Townsend, in additional attempts to prevent his “findings” from being made public, did not prepare a written report to the board on which to base his recommendation of no action.

Which brings up a little problem regarding Commission Rule 16:18 regarding LSPC investigations. That rule says the following:

So for $75,000, we have a so-called “investigation,” but no written report, no written decision, nothing apparently submitted into evidence, and a recommendation of no action.

Really? I could have done that for $10,000 and given the commission change back.

There is only one person in the entire state who could have neutered that investigation in such a manner.

And we thought Bobby Jindal was underhanded and secretive.

John Bel Edwards is a man who confided in me of his intentions to run before he officially announced for governor. For whatever reason, he wanted my feedback. He then ran on the West Point Honor Code. He even told me he had no intentions one way or another as to the reappointment of Edmonson. Obviously, he was being less than truthful.

Now, it seems, he cares little for others’ opinions—unless they are members of the Louisiana Sheriffs’ Association. His West Point Honor Code has somehow morphed into a code of political expediency, expedience dictated by the sheriffs’ association.

Edwards needs to turn his attention from the sheriffs’ association’s whispers in his ear and direct his focus more on appointees who are working surreptitiously to build an impenetrable wall around their fiefdoms designed to enhance their own power bases.

Beginning with that abortive pension increase amendment and continuing through the personnel debacles in Lake Charles, to administering little or no discipline in cases of troopers having sex in their patrol cars while on duty, to sneaking underage women into a casino in Vicksburg, Mississippi, to allowing the LSTA to make campaign contributions (do you really think the LSTA would do something like that without his blessings?), Edmonson has brought a succession of embarrassments down upon the LSP.

The question now becomes: How much more is Edwards willing to tolerate?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »