Feeds:
Posts
Comments

What at first appeared to be a slam-dunk sexual harassment case against former commissioner of the Louisiana Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control (ATC) Murphy J. Painter is beginning to look more and more like reprisals on the part of Gov. Bobby Jindal because of Painter’s refusal to acquiesce to administration demands involving several major Jindal campaign contributors.

It wouldn’t be the first time Jindal has fired a subordinate or demoted a legislator because he or she had the temerity to disagree with him, of course. But it would be the first time such tactics were employed in conjunction with criminal charges.

Painter was indicted—somewhat belatedly—on 42 separate counts of computer fraud in connection with his conducting criminal records, background and driver’s license checks on 35 individuals over a three-year period but never on the sexual harassment claims. Nor was he ever indicted on charges that he stalked or conducted surveillance on individuals—even though that claim was given widespread publicity by State Inspector General Stephen Street on May 28, 2012, the day Painter was formally indicted.

That indictment, coincidentally, came down only days after the legislature voted to strip Street’s office of all appropriations for the current fiscal year. Funding for his office was restored only after Street testified before legislators and repeated details of his office’s investigation of Painter as justification of continued funding, Painter says in his motion to dismiss the charges against him.

Painter’s trial on the federal charges is scheduled to begin on April 22. Meanwhile, he has separate civil suits pending against the state and against the woman who accused him of sexual harassment—after she told an OIG investigator that Painter had never harassed her.

We’ll return to the allegations, denials and counter-accusations in due course, but the real issues swirling around Painter appear to be rooted deep in Louisiana politics and back door deals as only a saga of Louisiana political intrigue and corruption can be told.

It was in late summer of 2010 when a series of events in New Orleans and Baton Rouge—unrelated to sexual harassment, computer fraud or surveillance—would culminate in a meeting in the governor’s office which would end Painter’s 34-year career in law enforcement, 14 of which he served as chief criminal deputy under former Ascension Parish Sheriff Harold Tridico.

After losing the 1995 sheriff’s race to current Sheriff Jeff Wiley by fewer than 700 votes, Painter was appointed ATC commissioner by then-Gov. Mike Foster in February of 1996.

New Orleans Saints owner Tom Benson had purchased the 26-story building once known as Dominion Tower, or CNG Tower, a year earlier in September of 2009. The building is located across the street from the Mercedes-Benz Superdome. As part of the deal struck between Benson and the state to keep the Saints from moving to San Antonio, the Jindal administration agreed to a 20-year lease of some 325,000 square feet of office space at $24 a square foot for various state agencies, some of whom were paying as little as $12 a square foot before being forced to move to Benson Tower.

At the outset, the state’s obligation was about $7.7 million a year, $2.6 million more than the $5.1 million the state was paying before the move.

Included in the Benson Tower purchase was a 60,000-square-foot plot encompassing a one-block section of LaSalle Street and part of what once was the New Orleans Centre shopping mall.

Champions Square opened on Aug. 21, 2010, with the Saints hosting a pre-season game against the Houston Texans. The facility provided a tailgate party atmosphere and gave up to 8,000 Saints fans who did not have tickets a place to hang out and party while cheering on the Saints.

Champions Square soon became the catalyst in the struggle that would erupt between Painter’s office, the governor’s office and Mercedes-Benz Superdome management firm SMG (formerly Spectacor Management Group). On the fringes of this growing dispute were parties who had more than a passing interest: Benson, the Louisiana Stadium and Exposition District (LSED), Anheuser-Busch, brewers of Budweiser Beer, and local Anheuser-Busch distributor Southern Eagle Sales & Service.

LSED is a state political subdivision created to oversee operations of the Superdome, the John A. Alario Sr. Event Center, the New Orleans Arena, the Saints training facility, TPC Louisiana, and Zephyr Field, home of the Triple-A baseball team.

Benson, the seven LSED members (each of whom is appointed by the governor) and their families, businesses and business associates, SMG and Southern Eagle combined to contribute more than $203,000 to Jindal campaigns between 2003 and 2012.

In a lawsuit filed against Jindal, the State of Louisiana, the Department of Revenue and Taxation, its former secretary, Cynthia Bridges and Inspector General Street, Painter says that in May of 2010, some three months before Champions Square was officially opened, he met with representatives of SMG and its lobbyist about SMG’s request for a license to serve alcohol in Champions Square on Saints game days.

Budweiser and Southern Eagle stood to be the big winners if the license application was approved.

Painter says in his lawsuit that he informed SMG of several regulatory violations in its proposal and offered suggestions on bringing the proposal into compliance with state laws. SMG’s subsequent license proposal, however, failed to address a number of the problems Painter had outlined in their previous meeting.

When Painter rejected the proposal, SMG arranged a meeting between Painter and SMG attorney, Robert Walmsley, Jr., Painter says in his petition.

Walmsley is a member of the law firm Fishman, Haygood, Phelps, Walmsley, Willis & Swanson of New Orleans which also contributed $5,000 to Jindal’s campaign in October of 2008.

Walmsley, after meeting with Painter, agreed to provide “a written legal opinion to the ATC documenting how SMG’s proposal complied with, or was otherwise exempt from, Louisiana law,” the petition says.

That promised opinion was never provided to ATC, Painter or his counsel, according to the suit.

Within a matter of weeks, Painter was contacted by Jindal executive Counsel Stephen Waguespack, nephew of Ascension Parish Sheriff Wiley. Waguespack asked Painter to cooperate with SMG and to stop using ATC’s legal counsel to address concerns with the Champions Square project being pushed by SMG, Painter says in his petition.

Subsequent to that call, Walmsley sent Painter an email in which he outlined a purported rationale that would allow SMG to qualify for the sought after license but the email, Painter says, did not include Walmsley’s promised written legal opinion. The ATC legal counsel again advised that the SMG proposal did not satisfy legal requirements.

Painter advised Walmsley that the license would not be issued because SMG did not qualify for the proposed exception as had been suggested. Painter also advised SMG “that alternative legal means would be utilized to address any issues related to the forthcoming grand opening of Champions Square if a resolution was not reached,” according to the lawsuit.

Then, on Aug. 11, Waguespack again called Painter and advised that he, as executive counsel for the governor’s office, “saw no problem with issuing the requested license to SMG,” whereupon Painter said he would defer to Waguespack—if Waguespack was willing to issue a legal opinion in writing to the ATC as representing the governor’s position.

“The governor’s executive counsel refused and suggested that issuing such an opinion was not a good use of his time and/or position,” Painter says, adding that he understood from that conversation that he “was being ordered to issue the license requested by SMG in direct contravention of law.”

In more than 15 years as ATC commissioner, Painter said he had never received such a call from the governor’s office.

Painter and ATC again refused to issue the requested license and two days later, on Aug. 13, Painter was summoned to the governor’s office on the fourth floor of the State Capitol where he met with Waguespack, Louisiana State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson and another member of the governor’s legal staff.

Painter was advised that an unidentified law enforcement agency (later identified as OIG) was investigating him for alleged criminal violations, specifically sexual harassment, and that Jindal was asking for his resignation.

Painter said he asked if Jindal was asking for his resignation because it was his prerogative to do so or because of the criminal investigation and when informed it was because of the investigation, he refused to resign and was fired.

Despite, the manner in which his dismissal came about, it was subsequently reported to the media that he had resigned.

In what Painter described as another means of garnering publicity, an OIG investigator obtained a search warrant to search Painter’s office at ATC even though a previous investigation by the Department of Revenue had already cleared Painter of any wrongdoing.

The administration, through OIG, zeroed in on the sexual harassment charges for Painter’s former administrative assistant Kelli Suire. Suire did contact local news media in July of 2010 with claims of sexual harassment by Painter and on Aug. 6, an email purportedly sent from lindseyjarrrell@rocketmail.com to several media outlets outlined several complaints about Painter and ATC, including the alleged sexual harassment of Suire and that Painter stalked Suire by going to her home on several occasions. The email, Painter learned from his own investigation, originated from the Louisiana State Library near the State Capitol.

Painter also claims that Suire and ATC Deputy Commissioner Brant Thompson were cooperating with each other in efforts to undermine Painter’s authority.

Painter says he took his concerns to Thompson’s father, State Sen. Francis Thompson (D-Delhi) on Aug. 12 and the elder Thompson offered assurances that his son would cooperate with Painter in the future.

Painter then asked that Brant Thompson report to his office no later than Monday, Aug. 16, “to discuss his conduct and accept a suspension from his job duties.”

That meeting never occurred because Painter was fired the following day and Brant Thompson was appointed interim commissioner until the appointment of current commissioner Troy Hebert.

Almost a year before Painter’s dismissal, on October 16, 2009, Suire resigned her position at ATC. But three days later, on Oct. 19, Painter, on ATC business in Washington, D.C., received a call from his office informing him that Suire had been in his office for several hours that morning copying files, Painter says in a separate defamation lawsuit against Suire.

That suit was filed in 23rd Judicial District Court in Ascension Parish while his lawsuit against the state for wrongful firing was filed in 19th JDC in Baton Rouge. And while considerable coverage was given his firing and the subsequent charges of sexual harassment, minimal coverage has been given his lawsuits by Baton Rouge area media outlets.

Sometime following his Aug. 13 firing in 2010, Painter learned of a letter dated 11 days earlier, on Aug. 2, to LDR Deputy secretary Earl Millet, Jr. from Barry Kelly, assistant director of Revenue’s Criminal Investigations Division in which Kelly gave the results of his investigation of six accusations against Painter, including sexual harassment and stalking of Suire.

In that letter, Kelly said, an attorney was hired to conduct an investigation into the allegations and when questioned, “Ms. Suire admitted that there was no sexual harassment.”

Prior to that Aug. 2 letter, on March 29, the Department of revenue sent a letter to Suire reporting its findings. That letter said, in part, “The investigator met with yourself, Painter and other ATC employees. Based upon the information gathered during the investigation, LDR has determined Painter’s actions did not violate the LDR’s Anti-Harassment Policy…

“The finding is based upon information secured during your interview wherein you indicated Painter did not make unwelcome sexual advances toward you. You also indicated Painter did not request sexual favors or engage in verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature to you. Additionally, you also stated that your complaint against Painter was not one of sexual harassment.”

Despite that admission, the governor’s office, through OIG, proceeded with its investigation, accusing Painter of accessing the criminal records database 314 times in more than five years between February 25, 2005, and Aug. 13, 2010. Subsequent information obtained by Painter through legal discovery revealed that OIG received 1,063 complaints between June 20, 2009 and June 15, 2011 and determined that not all the complaints constituted a need for a law enforcement data base check.

Yet, during that same two-year period, three OIG investigators combined to access the criminal records database nearly 3,000 times—one of those more than 2,100 times.

Painter’s trial in federal district court in Baton Rouge on the computer fraud charges is scheduled for April 22.

And yet, despite the charges alluded to by Waguespack when he fired Painter, he has never been formally charged with sexual harassment, stalking or surveillance.

And charges of accessing the criminal records data bank 314 times over a period of more than five years—approximately five times per month—to most people would not appear excessive for the head of a law enforcement agency whose job it is to track criminal activity.

…Unless someone was looking for a reason to fire an uncooperative subordinate standing in the way of political expedience and opportunity—and inconveniencing campaign contributors.

LouisianaVoice has learned that Louisiana’s Chief Information Officer (CIO) Ed Driesse and three members of his staff have already or are quitting, apparently over ongoing disagreements with Gov. Bobby Jindal’s staff regarding the outsourcing of the State Office of Information Technology (OIT).

Driesse, who makes $167,000 a year, was contacted Tuesday and said his last day will be April 5.

Assistant Director Barbara Oliver and Deputy CIO Randy Walker retired on Jan. 18. The third, Assistant Director Mike Gusky, is also scheduled to leave, Driesse said.

Oliver presently earns $118,000 per year and Gusky’s salary is $117,000, according to State Civil Service records. Walker’s salary was unavailable.

As the state CIO, Driesse heads the Office of Information Technology in the Division of Administration (DOA) within the Office of the Governor.

The CIO is the state’s point person for matters related to IT and IT resources, including setting policies, standards, hardware and software deployment, strategic and tactical planning, acquisition, management, and operations in keeping with industry trends, both private and public. The CIO oversees several IT organizations within the DOA, acting as architect and primary executor of technical and business strategy for IT in Louisiana state government.

Act 772 of 2001set forth several policies of OIT, including:

• The implementation of IT standards for hardware, software and consolidation of services;

• The review and coordination of IT planning, procurement and budgeting;

• The providing of oversight for centralization/consolidation of technology initiatives and the sharing of IT resources;

• Assuring compatibility and connectivity of Louisiana’s information systems;

• The providing of oversight on IT projects and systems for compliance with statewide strategies, goals and standards.

Several additional legislative acts in 2001 provided for:

• The electronic government structure for the executive branch (governor’s office) of state government;

• The duties of the Office of Telecommunications Management (OTM);

• Electronic governmental transactions;

• Electronic transactions by certain state agencies.

Act 409 of 2009 abolished the Office of Electronic Services and transferred its duties to OIT. At the same time, it redefined the duties of the Louisiana Geographic Information Systems Council and the Louisiana Geographic Information Center.

Last February, the Civil Service Commission rejected a plan to terminate 69 IT employees in the Department of Health and Hospitals when DHH attempted to push through a privatization contract with the University of New Orleans (UNO).

Last October, eight months after that initial effort, the Civil Service Commission signed off on a revised proposal that called for revamping DHH IT services.

That plan, which involved no layoffs, called for various IT functions to be spread out among four different entities—DHH, the University of Louisiana Lafayette, UNO and a private vendor, Venyu Solutions. The move was projected to save about $1.12 million from the current $37.8 million expense, the administration said.

Venyu contributed $5,000 to Jindal’s re-election campaign in October of 2011.

In 2012, Louisiana was one of only seven states to receive an A-grade in national rankings on providing online access to government spending data. The state’s score of 92 out of 100 was tied with Massachusetts. Arkansas, by contrast, received a grade of F. The state received a score of only eight out of 100, for third worst in the nation.

The rankings were compiled by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PRIG) Education Fund, a consumer watchdog organization that promotes and evaluates transparency in government spending.

Louisiana’s OIT was also cited as having taken the lead among states in providing detailed performance evaluations of government agencies.

Driesse has 15 years’ experience as a chief information officer in both the public and private sectors, including three Fortune 500 companies.

Prior to his appointment, he served as CIO for DHH and also served as CIO for AECOM Technology Corp., a global design and management services company in Los Angeles, where he managed a budget of more than $50 million and a staff of 260.

He also served as CIO for Foster Wheeler, Ltd., a global engineering and construction company in Clinton, N.J., where he oversaw the global deployment of the JD Edwards integrated applications system.

Driesse also served as Vice President and CIO for Zimmer, Inc., of Warsaw, IN, and for HealthTrust, Inc., of Nashville, TN.

He holds a B.S. in mathematics and a M.S. in computer science, both from the University of Louisiana Lafayette.

There was no word on the planned privatization of OIT.

An email inquiry to the Jindal’s office got no response.

By Dayne Sherman

One of the greatest mysteries of Louisiana politics is a recent phenomenon: The Recovery School District.

The RSD, created under Governor Kathleen Blanco in 2003, began as a way for the state to wrest control of “failing” schools from local districts. Now it serves as the model for Governor Bobby Jindal’s unwise education “reform” agenda.

Let’s address some key facts about this failed agenda. According to the latest Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) District Rankings Based on 2011 District Performance Score, the RSD is the second worst district in the State of Louisiana. It is ranked number 61 out of 62 districts listed. Zachary School District is ranked first, and St. Helena Parish is last.

According to the LDOE’s own ranking, the Failed RSD is a district at the very bottom of Louisiana education achievement, and Louisiana as a whole is at the very bottom of the U.S., and this makes Superintendent John White’s model district one of the worst school districts in the developed world.

Please don’t forget, White was head of the RSD before he was promoted to State Superintendent. This alone is a scandal.

Sponsored by Louisiana Progress and the Daily Star, an Education Policy Forum was held in Hammond on January 29th. While at that forum, which was well-attended by concerned citizens, I had the misfortune of asking panelist John Ayers, Executive Director of Tulane’s University’s Cowen Institute, about the Failed RSD and the fraud of Bobby Jindal’s education “reform” scheme.

What proceeded from Ayers was a series of arrogant statements with no connection to the real facts. It was Jindal-White education “reform” spin faster than a new Maytag.

First, Ayers denied that the RSD was indeed a failed district or even one of the worst in the state. But he never countered the data as stated above using the LDOE’s own District Performance Score.

Second, his chief argument for showing the vitality of the RSD was that New Orleans has half of the number of failing schools now than they did prior to Hurricane Katrina.

Nice spin, Mr. Ayers. But New Orleans has about half the student population. It sure makes claiming victory easy.

Third, Ayers bloviated about the great parent satisfaction of the charter schools. However, that very night, parents from across the country and New Orleans appealed to the U.S. Department of Education about the civil rights violations of such education programs.

Fourth, later during the forum Ayers denied that the goal of the charter school movement was to make money for corporations. This, however, is a fairy tale. Just last week, an expose from In the Public Interest was released with thousands of e-mails showing that Jeb Bush’s pro-charter educational foundation was all about benefiting its corporate funders, not the children.

The Failed RSD is not a miracle. It is only magic, a sleight of hand shell game run by corporate profiteers and their well paid lackeys. The taxpayers, parents, and school children of Louisiana deserve better than the Cowen Institutes duplicitous spin.

The Failed RSD, the Cowen Institute, John White, and Governor Jindal’s unconstitutional education “reform” package are a disgrace.

Louisiana would do well to find a better approach to education “reform” and better people to lead our state.

(Dayne Sherman lives in Ponchatoula)

“…portions of your request seek information; not documents that may be public records. Such requests do not fall within the Public Records Act of Louisiana…” http://www.tulane.edu/~telc/html/prr.htm

—Louisiana Department of education legal counsel Troy Anthony Humphrey, in response to requests for information and public records by LouisianaVoice. (he copied his response to an individual in the department’s “Public Information Office,” whose existence, in retrospect, seems a bit superfluous.

Just how far will a state agency go to deny legitimate requests for access to public records or information?

Well, if it is the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) there apparently are no restrictions on the artful dodge—even if it comes down to a literal, as opposed to liberal, interpretation of the state’s Public Records Act (R.S. 44:1 et seq.).

Skewing statistics has become a perfected art of State Superintendent John White’s Education Department (that’s right, he does seem to consider it his department), so why should parsing the dictates of a pesky little state law addressing public records be a problem?

But first, a little background on developments that led up to the latest standoff between the public’s right to know and Herr White’s reluctance to share information that isn’t pre-cooked by his part-time, $12,000 per month PR hack, er, “communications manager,” who still resides somewhere in Florida.

A posting by Class Size Matters http://www.classsizematters.org/about-us/, a non-profit organization that advocates for class size reduction of New York City’s public schools, released information that Louisiana is one of four states planning to share confidential student and teacher data with the Shared Learning Collaborative (SLC), a project of the Gates Foundation.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funds a number of education initiatives and Gates’s company, Microsoft, has contributed $16,000 to several Louisiana political campaigns, including $2,500 to Gov. Bobby Jindal during his unsuccessful 2003 campaign for governor.

The Class Size Matters communiqué http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2013/01/parents-beware-ny-and-eight-other.html, was an alert for New York parents and said that New York “is one of five states that have agreed to share confidential NYC student and teacher data in Phase I with the Shared Learning Collaborative.”

The other states and districts in Phase I include districts in North Carolina, Colorado, Illinois and Massachusetts.

“Delaware, Georgia, Kentucky and Louisiana are in Phase II, according to the Gates Foundation, (and) intend to start piloting the system in 2013,” it said.

The claim by Class Size Matters was confirmed by the Gates Foundation’s SLC web page http://slcedu.org/states-districts/pilot-districts/about-pilot-districts.

“The data to be shared will include the names of students, their grades, test scores, disciplinary and attendance records—and likely race, ethnicity, free lunch and special education status as well,” the Class Size Matters document says.

“These records are to be stored in a massive electronic data bank, being built by Wireless Generation, a subsidiary of News Corp.,” it said. News Corp. is owned by Rupert Murdoch and was recently found to have illegally violated the privacy of individuals in Great Britain and in the U.S.”

Both Microsoft and News Corp. are members of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) which drafts model legislation to be introduced in states across the U.S. by member lawmakers. Both Microsoft and News Corp. serve on ALEC’s Communications and Technology Task Force and News Corp. is a member of ALEC’s Education Task Force http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ALEC_Corporations.

“Over the next few months, the Gates Foundation plans to turn over all this personal data to another, as yet unnamed corporation, headed by Iwan Streichenberger, former marketing director of a(n) (Atlanta) company called Promethean that sells whiteboards,” Class Size Matters said.

A foundation established by Jindal’s wife, the Supriya Jindal Foundation, has accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars from corporations, many of them ALEC members, for the purpose of providing whiteboards to Louisiana classrooms.

There are serious questions as to whether this plan complies with FERPA (Family education Rights and Privacy Act), the document says.

Class Size Matters also released a copy of the 68-page contract between SLC and the New York State Educational Department http://www.classsizematters.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/NYSED-SLC-Agreement-10-2012.pdf which said, in part, that there would be no guarantee that data would not be susceptible to intrusion or hacking, though “reasonable and appropriate measures” would be taken to protect information.

The contract also provides that the agreement may be reassigned to other service providers with prior written consent.

Similar language was included in the state’s contract with F.A. Richard and Associates (FARA) over the firm’s takeover of the Office of Risk Management ORM at an eventual cost of $75 million to the state. That contract, however, was reassigned not once, but twice within a year after FARA became the ORM third party administrator. Neither reassignment of the ORM contract received prior written approval from the state.

The Gates contract also allows for the unrestricted subcontracting of duties and obligations covered under the agreement.

All of which brings us to the ongoing standoff between LouisianaVoice and LDOE.

On Jan. 22, we submitted a request for public records and information pursuant to R.S. 44:1 et seq. specifically requesting the following information:

Any communications in any form or contracts relative to the Shared Learning Collaborative;

Information regarding Louisiana’s participation in Phase II of the SLC;

Any communication with or information relevant to Wireless Generation, a subsidiary of News Corp.;

• Any communication with or information relevant to Louisiana’s association or business conduct with any corporation or entity owned, led by or associated with Iwan Streichenberger;

• Any communication or discussion relevant to the sharing of confidential student information for the purpose of developing and marketing “learning products” or for any other purpose;

• All communication and/or contracts relevant to current or future association with Gates Foundation or its subsidiaries.

The request was addressed to White but of course, a departmental legal counsel was given the task of responding.

A Jan. 23 letter from attorney Troy Anthony Humphrey said:

“It is noted that portions of your request seek information; not documents that may be public records.”

Funny, that. Humphrey copied Willa LeBlanc with his response to us. Ms. LeBlanc was identified as being in the “LDOE Public Information Office.” Thusly, if portions of our request sought “information,” then why was Ms. LeBlanc not allowed to provide us with the “information” we requested?

“Such requests do not fall within the Public Records Act of Louisiana, which, except as otherwise provided by law, allows ‘any person of the age of majority’ only to ‘inspect, copy, or reproduce any public record,” Humphrey went on to explain in his best legalese.

“With regards to the above-mentioned request as written, and within the ambit of La. R.S. 44:1 et seq. the Department will identify and locate any public records in its possession that appear responsive to those requests which seek public records, by searching for the following items:

• “Written communications and contracts containing the phrase ‘shared Learning Collaborative’ or ‘SLC.’

• “Written communications containing the phrase ‘Wireless Generation.’

• “Written communications containing the phrase ‘Iwan Streichenberger.’

• “Written communications and contracts containing the phrase ‘Gates Foundation.’

“After any responsive items have been identified, the Department will segregate and set aside those public records that are available for your inspection. You will be contacted in order to make arrangements for this process.”

That, as we said, was on Jan. 23. The LDOE is now well beyond its three-day maximum for production of the documents as provided by law.

Last year, the agency attempted to withhold public records requested by the Monroe News-Star and only when the newspaper filed suit did LDOE surrender the requested documents.

So much for accountability and transparency.