[00:00:02]
[I. Call Commission meeting to order]
THE TIME NOW IS FIVE O'CLOCK, AND I'D LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION TO ORDER.CAN WE PLEASE HAVE A ROLL CALL SHA, AKA PRESENT CHRIS CLEMENT ABSENT.
[III. Review and approval of Minutes from the September 25, 2024 meeting]
UM, YOU ALL RECEIVED MINUTES FROM THE SEPTEMBER 25TH MEETING, AND HOPEFULLY YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THOSE IF YOU HAVE.ARE THERE ANY CHANGES, IF NOT, A MOTION TO APPROVE? I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
CAN I HAVE A SECOND? ABSTAINED? OKAY.
ARE WE ABLE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? YOU'LL NEED A, A VOTE OF YAY OR NAY.
UM, AND WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME JOEL MCKELLAN, UM, WHO IS A PROFESSOR, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT LOYOLA.
HE IS JOINING US ON THE COMMISSION, SO WELCOME.
[IV. Public Comment (Each speaker will be allowed a total time limit of two [2] minutes)]
WE WILL NOW MOVE INTO PUBLIC COMMENT.UM, EACH SPEAKER IS ALLOWED TO COME TO THE PODIUM AND SPEAK FOR TWO MINUTES.
GINA WILL BE KEEPING TIME AND WE ASK THAT AS YOU, UM, APPROACH THE COMMISSION.
I'M THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR AUDIT FOR THE JEFFERSON PARISH OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
KIM IS THE FIFTH INSPECTOR GENERAL THAT I'VE WORKED FOR.
I LEFT THE NEW ORLEANS INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE BECAUSE I RESPECT HER.
SHE SUPPORTS MY INDEPENDENCE IN DOING MY JOB AND DEMONSTRATES A TRUST IN ME TO DO MY JOB.
THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL IS NOT JUST THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, IT'S ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE THERE AND SOME IN THE BACK AS WELL.
THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING THE WORK.
THIS PUBLIC LETTER THAT WE ISSUED WAS RELATED TO OUR CORE MANDATE, WHICH IS TO PREVENT FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THERE WAS A PREEXISTING OPEN ITEM RELATED TO JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE CONDUCT AN ANNUAL RISK ASSESSMENT WHERE WE INQUIRE OF A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THE PARISH AND EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE RISKS ARE IN THE PARISH.
I ASKED ONE INDIVIDUAL WHAT THEY THOUGHT THE RISK WERE IN THIS PARISH RELATED TO CONTRACTS, AND THEY SENT THIS EMAIL ON SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2023.
I THOUGHT A COUPLE OF CONTRACTS THAT COULD BE EXAMINED.
JFI THEY OWN SLASH OPERATE THE PARKING GARAGE IN GRETNA.
THAT CONTRACT IS PARTICULARLY A MESS.
IT GOES ON THIS AND THE PREEXISTING MATTER IS THE PREDICATE FOR THIS WORK.
THERE'S ABOUT A HUNDRED DOCUMENTS IN THAT BOX RIGHT THERE.
20 YEARS OF FINANCIAL RECORDS, CONTRACTS, COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS.
THIS PUBLIC LETTER IS SUPPORTED BY THE WORK IN THAT BOX.
KIM HANDED ME EARLY ON, WELL BEFORE COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN WON HER ELECTION AGAINST RICKY TEMPLATE, HANDED ME A BOX OF INFORMATION FROM THE PREEXISTING MATTER AND SAID, I NEED YOU TO FIGURE THIS OUT.
SHE DIDN'T TELL ME WHAT TO CONCLUDE.
SHE DIDN'T TELL ME WHAT TO SAY.
SHE SAID, I NEED YOU TO FIGURE THIS OUT.
I JUST WANNA SAY IT'S AN EXCUSE FOR THE COUNCIL TO, TO DO THIS WHEN REALLY THIS WORK IS ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTED.
INSTEAD OF ENGAGING IN MEANINGFUL CONVERSATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS ABOUT $10.3 MILLION, THEY'RE ATTACKING THIS OFFICE.
THEY'RE ATTACKING THOSE PEOPLE AND THEY'RE ATTACKING HER.
MY NAME IS BRITTANY MAJEURE AND I HAVE PROUDLY SERVED AS A SPECIAL AGENT AND EVALUATOR FOR THE JEFFERSON PARISH OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL SINCE 2021.
WHEN INSPECTOR GENERAL SHADOW LANE WAS APPOINTED IN 2022, THE INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION EMBRACED THE MANTRA, JUST THE FACTS, MA'AM.
IN FACT, WE'VE EVEN PUT UP A PICTURE OF JOE FRIDAY FROM DRAGNET ABOVE OUR DESK.
AS A REMINDER, UNDER THIS NEW LEADERSHIP, WE'VE UNDERGONE RETRAINING TO SHARPEN OUR INVESTIGATIVE AND WRITING SKILLS AND TO RECOGNIZE WHEN THERE IS IMPLICIT BIAS, REINFORCING THE PRINCIPLE THAT OUR INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTS AND DAILY CHOICES MUST BE OBJECTIVE AND GROUNDED SOLELY IN THE FACTS.
ANOTHER CRUCIAL LESSON USHERED IN BY AGING, SHADOWING WAS THE IMPORTANCE AND BENEFITS OF LISTENING.
THIS EXTENDS BEYOND LISTENING BEYOND IN MEETINGS AND INTERVIEWS.
IT PERMEATES OUR OFFICE CULTURE.
WE MAY NOT ALWAYS SEE EYE TO EYE, BUT I KNOW THAT MY OPINIONS WILL BE VALUED, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO PLANNING INVESTIGATIONS OR DETERMINING THE CONTINUANCE OR CLOSING OF AN INTAKE OR INVESTIGATION.
THIS CULTURE OF CANDOR AND OPEN DIALOGUE ENRICHES OUR WORK AND STRENGTHENS THE INTEGRITY OF THE OFFICE.
I TAKE GREAT PRIDE IN THE WORK THAT WE DO WITH THE J-P-R-I-G AND OUR COMMITMENT TO THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF SCRUTINY, COMPETENCE, AND OBJECTIVITY.
AND ESPECIALLY WITH RESPECT TO OUR RECENT PUBLIC LETTERS, WE HOLD OURSELVES TO THE HIGHEST STANDARDS BECAUSE WE KNOW THE STAKES
[00:05:01]
ENSURING THAT TAXPAYER DOLLARS ARE SPENT WISELY AND RESPONSIBLY.AS SOMEONE WHO WASN'T ORIGINALLY FROM HERE, I DON'T CARE WHERE YOU WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL, I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T CARE WHAT BANK YOU LIVE ON.
MY MISSION EVERY DAY AT THE JPIG IS CLEAR TO FIGHT WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE FOR THE TAXPAYERS OF JEFFERSON PARISH.
AND TO DO THIS WITHOUT BIAS OR PARTIALITY, I COME FROM THE FEDERAL SERVICE AND HAVE BEEN PUT ON MANY MISSIONS IN THE FEDERAL SERVICE.
OUR TEAM FIGHTS EVERY DAY FOR THE EFFICIENCY, EFFECTIVENESS, AND TRANSPARENCY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
I'M A PROPERTY OWNER, JEFFERSON PARISH.
UH, AND, UH, I WISH TO ADDRESS YOU REGARDING THE RECENT CRITICISMS OF THE IG OVER A REPORT WHICH RAISED SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT SPENDING $10 MILLION OF TAXPAYER FUNDS ON A BILL BREWERY AND TACO RESTAURANT.
BY THE WAY OF BACKGROUND, I HAD A 28 YEAR CAREER IN MUNICIPAL FINANCE.
THE SITUATION EXEMPLIFIES WHY THE PARISH HAS AN ETHICS COMMISSION AND WHY YOU APPOINTED AN INDEPENDENT INSPECTOR GENERAL TO INVESTIGATE POTENTIAL WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS.
THE PARISH COUNCIL IS COMMITTING OVER $10 MILLION IN PUBLIC FUNDS TO BUILD A PRIVATE BREWERY AND RESTAURANT WITH NO GUARANTEED REVENUE FOR TAXPAYERS, NO COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND DISCUSSIONS THAT HAPPENED BEHIND CLOSED DOORS FOR YEARS BEFORE THE PUBLIC WAS INFORMED.
THIS CLEARLY HAS THE POTENTIAL OF WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS, AND IT CERTAINLY MERITS THE ATTENTION OF YOUR INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THE CRITICISM OF THE THE IG AND HER OFFICE FOR DOING ITS JOB IS NOTHING LESS THAN A SCHEME OF DISTRACTION.
WHEN OFFICIALS COMPLAIN ABOUT THE INVESTIGATOR, INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING HER FINDINGS, IT DEMONSTRATES SHE'S ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS.
THEIR AGGRESSIVE RESPONSE VALIDATES THE IMPORTANCE OF HER WORK AND THE SUGGEST THERE'S EVEN MORE TO UNCOVER YOUR IG IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL VIOLATIONS OF STATE LAW REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDS AND COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS, SHE'S DEMONSTRATING TRUE PROFESSIONAL COURAGE DESPITE INTENSE POLITICAL PRESSURE AND PERSONAL ATTACKS, SHE'S MAINTAINED HER FOCUS ON THE SUB SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES AFFECTING THE TAXPAYERS.
SHE'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT THIS ETHICS, ETHICS COMMISSION, AND THE TAXPAYERS OF THE PARISH NEED AND DESERVE.
THE REAL QUESTION IS WHY SOME ARE SO DESPERATE TO SILENCE HER RATHER THAN ADDRESS THE SERIOUS ISSUES SHE'S RAISED.
I URGE THIS BOARD TO STAND FIRMLY BEHIND THE IG AND SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE THAT WE WILL PROTECT, NOT PUNISH PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO HAVE THE INTEGRITY AND COURAGE TO SPEAK UP WHEN THEY SEE PROBLEMS. LET HER DO HER JOB.
I'M HERE TONIGHT IN TWO PARTS, FIRST AND FOREMOST AS A CITIZEN, AND SECOND AS A WEST BANK FIRE CHIEF.
I WANNA SPEAK ON THE CURRENT SITUATION WITH THE IG.
I'M 57 YEARS OLD AND WHEN I WAS 17 TO 27, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT A COUNCILMAN WAS.
WHEN I WAS 27 TO 37, I DIDN'T CARE WHAT A COUNCILMAN WAS.
AT 37 TO 47, I LEARNED WHAT A COUNCILMAN WAS.
AND BETWEEN 47 AND 57, I'VE COME TO KNOW WHAT A COUNCILMAN IS AND WHAT THEY, THE COUNCIL NEED TO REMEMBER.
IT'S NOT THEM THAT MAKE OUR PARISH GREAT.
IT IS THE CITIZENS THAT MAKE UP OUR GREAT PARISH FROM KENTE BRAH TO GRETNA'S GREATS FROM MET EAST HEIGHTS TO WMAN SIGHTS AND ALL BETWEEN THAT IT'S THE VERY CITIZENS AND THEIR DIFFERENCES THAT MAKE US A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE AND BE AND RAISE A FAMILY.
HOWEVER, IN STATING DIFFERENCES, THERE IS STILL ONE VERY IMPORTANT SIMILARITY.
THE CITIZENS VOTED FOR AND APPROVED AND WANT A IG IN PLACE WITH NECESSARY POWERS TO HOLD ACCOUNTABLE.
THE VERY POLITICIANS AND LEADERS WHO HAVE ACCESS TO OUR MONEY.
AS A FIRE CHIEF WHO HAS HAD PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE WITH MS. SHALENE, I CAN SAY I DON'T AGREE WITH EVERYTHING SHE DOES.
HOWEVER, SHE HAS ALWAYS BEEN PROFESSIONAL AND WILLING TO CONVERSE, AND I STAND IN SUPPORT OF HER IN THE JOB.
SHE IS DILIGENTLY TRYING TO KEEP TRANSPARENCY AMONGST OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND OUR MONEY.
AFTER ALL, IT WAS IN 2010 BECAUSE OF THE ACTIONS OF THEN PARISH PRESIDENT BRUSO AND HIS COHORTS THAT PUSHED FOR THE CREATION OF THE IG.
IN FACT, SOME OF THE POLITICAL LEADERS TODAY WHO ARE TALKING ABOUT THE POWERS WERE THE VERY ONES WHO SIGNED AND PASSED THE CO ORDINANCE BACK THEN.
IN FACT, FORMER US ATTORNEY JIM LETTON STATED THIS CASE HAS SERVED AS A BLUEPRINT FOR THE TAXPAYERS, THE CITIZENS, TO SEE HOW GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK, HOW IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO WORK, AND HOW GO GOVERNMENT CAN BE ABUSED.
IT'S ABOUT THE ABUSE OF POWER AND THE AUTHORITY BY INDIVIDUALS WHO WIELD IT.
IT'S ABOUT USING GOVERNMENT FOR PERSONAL GAIN.
[00:10:01]
ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF ON THE WEST BANK, AND I'LL BE CONTINUING OFF OF HIS STATEMENT.UH, THE POLITICAL LEADERS INVOLVED IN THIS SITUATION CONTINUALLY SAY THAT JFI AND JRI ARE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO NOT HAVE TO GO TO PUBLIC BID.
IT'S BEEN SAID MORE THAN ONCE AT COUNCIL MEETINGS WHERE EVERY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT OF JEFFERSON PARISH IS A 5 0 1 C3 CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION.
THE LOUISIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS OPINED THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO TO PUBLIC BID.
HOWEVER, THE VERY POLITICAL LEADERS HERE TODAY DEMAND THAT WE DO GO TO PUBLIC BID.
AFTER ALL, IT IS PUBLIC MONEY, BUT IF I NEED THE PUBLIC'S OKAY TO BUY A FIRETRUCK, THAT IS THE ESSENTIAL TOOL TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICE, THEN THEY TOO NEED TO GET PUBLIC APPROVAL ON THE MONEY USED BY AND FOR WITH JFI AND JRI, I ALSO STAND IN SUPPORT OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND THEIR OFFICE FOR HOLDING OUR POLITICAL LEADERS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ACCOUNTABLE TO THE CITIZENS AND THEIR TAX MONEY.
UH, THOMAS BERGMAN, FIRE CHIEF FROM THE WEST BANK.
UH, JUST WANNA SAY THAT I'VE HAD SOME, UM, INTERACTIONS WITH MS. CHATTER LANE IN HER OFFICE.
UM, PREVIOUSLY WE'VE BEEN AUDITED IN MY FIRE DEPARTMENT SEVERAL TIMES.
AND EVEN THOUGH SOME OF THE THINGS COMING IN AS AN AUDIT, WE MIGHT THINK, HEY, WHY ARE THEY LOOKING AT US? WHAT WE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG.
TALKING WITH HER STAFF AND TALKING WITH HER, WE FOUND THAT SHE'S WILLING TO, UM, HAVE OPEN DIALOGUE.
SHE'S EXPLAINED A LOT OF THINGS THAT, UH, EDUCATED ME TO SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST A LITTLE PART OF THE PARISH SPENDING A LITTLE BIT OF THE PARISH'S MONEY, BUT IT'S STILL MONEY THAT HAS TO BE, UH, ACCOUNTED FOR.
AND I'VE LEARNED THAT EVEN THOUGH WE MIGHT NOT AGREE ALL THE TIME, THAT THIS POSITION IS NECESSARY.
IN MY 48 YEARS IN THE FIRE SERVICE, I FEEL LIKE, UH, PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DEALING WITH PARISH MONIES, UH, THE CITIZENS MIGHT NOT HAVE THE ABILITY OR THE KNOW-HOW TO ASK THE QUESTIONS.
AND I FEEL LIKE THAT'S WHERE HER OFFICE COMES IN.
AND, UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT THE DEALINGS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THE OFFICE, UM, HAVE BEEN VERY PROFESSIONAL AND I LOOK FORWARD TO, UH, WORKING WITH THEM IN THE FUTURE.
GOOD EVENING, MICHAEL YOUNGBLOOD.
UM, THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU AND ALSO THANK YOU FOR HAVING A PUBLIC FORUM TO SUPPORT THE IG.
THE IGS OFFICE IS THE DIRECT RESULT OF THE AARON BROUSSARD ADMINISTRATION IS VOTED IN BY THE PEOPLE OF THIS PARISH.
NOW, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO ONE PUT A GUN TO ANY PARISH COUNCIL MEMBER'S HEAD AND SAID, YOU WILL RUN FOR PUBLIC OFFICE.
NO ONE LIKES IT, BUT IT'S VERY NECESSARY AND CLEARLY NECESSARY BY THE EVENTS WE'RE SEEING TRANSPIRE CURRENTLY.
IN FACT, AS THE COUNCIL'S CURRENTLY CONSTITUTED, IT'D BE A GOOD THING TO HAVE MORE OVERSIGHT.
THE CURRENT IG AND HER STAFF DO A GREAT JOB.
THEY'RE SPEAKING FOR THE PEOPLE OF JEFFERSON PARISH AND I COULD NOT SUPPORT HER MORE THAN I DO.
I PRESENTLY WAS ON THIS COMMISSION FOR FIVE YEARS, HAVING BEEN APPOINTED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS.
WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS FIRST WRITTEN, GAVE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AUTHORITY TO DO INVESTIGATIONS DURING MY TIME ON THE BOARD THAT WAS WATERED DOWN.
IT REQUIRES THE INSPECTOR GENERAL TO NOTIFY THE PARISH, WHO THEY WANNA TALK TO, WHAT RECORDS THEY WANNA SEE, AND THIS KIND OF THING.
I WENT TO THE COUNCIL MEETING AND PLEADED WITH THE COUNCIL PEOPLE NOT TO MAKE THAT CHANGE TO THE ORDINANCE.
I WAS, UH, EMBARRASSED, BUT THE CHANGES WENT THROUGH.
ANYHOW, THIS COMMISSION OVERSEES THE WORK OF THIS OFFICE, AND I GUARANTEE YOU THEY DO ASK QUESTIONS.
I WAS ONE OF THE MOST VOCAL ONES ON THE BOARD.
YOU NOTICE I'M NOT ON THE BOARD ANYMORE.
I ASKED MY UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR TO REINSTATE ME.
I WAS NOT SELECTED BECAUSE THE ORDINANCE PROVIDES THAT THE PARISH PRESIDENT SELECTS THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE COMMISSION.
SO YOU'RE ON THE COMMISSION, YOU DO YOUR CIVIC DUTY, YOU OVERSEE THE WORK THAT'S DONE HERE.
YOU QUESTION WHAT'S GOING ON AND IT WORKS.
SHE CAN TELL YOU SHE KNOWS ME BECAUSE I QUESTION EVERYTHING THEY DID.
[00:15:01]
BUT ANYHOW, THE POINT IS SHE IS DOING HER JOB.SHE DIDN'T HAVE TO TELL THEM WHAT I WANNA LOOK AT, WHO I WANNA TALK TO, WHAT RECORDS I NEED, BECAUSE SHE WAS RESPONDING TO A COMPLAINT SHE GOT FROM A PARISH EMPLOYEE.
IT'S ALSO IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THE PARISH PRESIDENT CAN'T REMOVE HER.
THANK THE COMMISSION REMOVES HER, BUT THE PARISH PRESIDENT, THANK YOU.
MS. HALL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING.
FIRST TIME MS. HALL TO CHANGE THAT.
I'M RUNNING OVER, BUT IF THAT'S THAT MEETING, PLEASE VOTE YOU, MS. HALL AGAIN.
I'M A PROPERTY OWNER HERE IN JEFFERSON PARISH.
I JUST WANNA MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ABOUT MS. SHADOWING'S INTEGRITY.
I'VE KNOWN HER ON A PROFESSIONAL BASIS AND ON A PERSONAL BASIS FOR WELL OVER 20 YEARS.
AND I CANNOT SPEAK HIGH ENOUGH ABOUT, ABOUT HER INTEGRITY IN HER PROFESSIONALISM.
I'VE TAKEN THE TIME TO READ THE ORDINANCE THAT CREATED THIS OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ALL SHE IS DOING IS WHAT THE ORDINANCE MANDATES THAT SHE DO.
IT'S NOT ABOUT HER DIGRESSING OR DIVERTING THE THE FACTS.
SHE'S INVESTIGATED THE FACTS AND SHE'S, SHE'S COME UP WITH A, A LETTER, A PUBLIC LETTER THAT HAS DONE NOTHING MORE THAN LAY OUT CERTAIN FACTS.
IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE RESULTS, DON'T DO THE BEHAVIOR THAT CAUSES THOSE FACTS TO BE CREATED.
THAT'S IT SHOULDN'T BE PENALIZED.
MS. SHADOW LANE OR THE COMMISSION ITSELF SHOULD NOT GO DOWN THIS RABBIT HOLE OF CHASING, OF CHASING THIS THING WHERE IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE CHASED.
SHE HAS DONE NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT SHE IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO.
I'M MINDY PUNCH MS OF A FELONY CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT BRIBERY, WIRE FRAUD.
SOUND FAMILIAR TO ANYONE? BETWEEN JANUARY AND MARCH OF 2010, THE PARISH PRESIDENT, HIS WIFE, A FORMER EMPLOYEE, THE JEFFERS JEFFERSON PARISH ATTORNEY, AND THE JEFFERSON PARISH, CAO RESIGNED, PENDING FEDERAL INVESTIGATION, LAID A PLEADING GUILTY AND OR CONVICTED.
IN 2010, AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE WAS FORMED BY THE PARISH COUNCIL WHO ULTIMATELY RECOMMENDED ESTABLISHING THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL WITH THE BROADEST AUTHORITY POSSIBLE IN 2011 VOTERS.
ME, EVERYBODY IN THIS AUDIENCE, WE THE PEOPLE TAXPAYERS APPROVED AMENDMENTS TO THE PARISH CHARTER TO ESTABLISH AND FOREIGN THIS OFFICE IN DECEMBER OF 2013.
IT BEGINS, THE IGS AUTHORITY IS LIMITED TEMPORARILY DENYING ACCESS TO PARISH EMAILS.
AND BY 2019, THE IG ORDINANCE WAS PERMANENTLY AMENDED TO LIMIT ACCESS TO ALL PARISH RECORDS AND SUBJECT ACCESS TO THE PARISH ATTORNEY.
WHY? NOW HERE WE ARE AGAIN WHERE THAT FEELS LIKE THE WA WATERING DOWN OF WHAT CITIZENS OBVIOUSLY WANTED AND PAY FOR.
TELL ME, HOW DO OFFICES THE INSPECTOR GENERAL HAS INVESTIGATIVE POWER OVER DECIDE WHAT THE RULES WILL BE? SO IF IT DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU, JUST CHANGE IT.
RIGHT? DO YOU EVEN HEAR US, ANYONE? THE INSPECTOR GENERAL IN HER OFFICE MAY NOT BE PERFECT.
NEITHER IS YOURS BY ANY STRETCH, BUT I BELIEVE THEY HAVE DONE A TREMENDOUS JOB IN GIVING US WHAT WE PAY FOR, LET THEM DO THEIR JOB.
WE DON'T WANT PERCEPTION ABOUT WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT IS.
I COME TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND STAFF.
IF YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED BY THE MOST RECENT ELECTION, WE, THE PEOPLE ARE EXHAUSTED.
CRIME, THE ECONOMY, HOUSING, HEALTHCARE, TRYING TO RAISE CHILDREN IN A HORRIFYING WORLD, IT'S A LOT.
THE LAST THING WE SHOULD HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT OR QUESTION IS EVERYTHING GOING ON IN OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT TOO.
AS WE VOTED FOR THIS OFFICE, WE VOTED FOR PEOPLE THAT ASKED FOR THE JOB OF DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS PARISH DAILY.
WE ARE THEN EXPECTED TO TRUST AND RESPECT THE DECISION YOU MAKE OR IN OUR BEST INTEREST.
WE WILL NOT ALWAYS AGREE WITH DECISIONS MADE, BUT I WOULD
[00:20:01]
LIKE TO BELIEVE MOST TRY TO WORK TOGETHER AS OUR INTERESTS ARE THE SAME IN WANTING THE BEST PLACE POSSIBLE TO RAISE OUR FAMILY'S WORK, LIVE, AND PLAY IN.WE NEED AND WANT CHECKS AND BALANCES.
AND THIS IS WHAT WE ARE PAYING FOR IN THE IGS OFFICE.
I BELIEVE WE ARE GETTING OUR MONEY'S WORTH.
IT IS NOT GOING, IT IS NOT LOOKING WELL.
THAT BECAUSE THINGS ARE BROUGHT TO LIGHT THAT MAY NOT BE LEGAL, BUT DEFINITELY SOMETHING, SOME OF US AS TAXPAYERS QUESTION THAT IT BECOMES AN UGLY BATTLE OF SORTS SUCH AS THIS.
WE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT IS BEING DONE WITH EVERY PENNY OF OUR MONEY.
WE ARE QUESTIONING FRIENDSHIPS AND THE EFFECTS OF THAT.
WHEN ARE WE GOING TO QUESTION THE FRIENDSHIPS OF OFFICIALS AND VENDORS, CONTRACTORS THAT DO BUSINESS WITH THE PARISH AS WELL? SHOULD THAT BE AN ISSUE? ALSO, CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS.
AND EVERYONE EVER, LET'S QUESTION ALL OF THIS TOO.
PROVERBS 29, 2, WHEN THE RIGHTEOUS OR IN AUTHORITY, THE PEOPLE REJOICE.
BUT WHEN THE WICKED BARTH RULE, THE PEOPLE MOURN.
WE NEED NO MORE TO MOURN ABOUT IN THIS LIFE.
LEAVE THE IGS OFFICE ALONE TO DO THE JOB WE WANT DONE.
I'M THE, UH, DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OVER INVESTIGATIONS AT THE J-P-O-I-G.
WHILE I USUALLY PREFER TO REMAIN BEHIND THE SCENES, I FEEL COMPELLED TO ADDRESS THE GROWING MISINFORMATION SURROUNDING OUR OFFICE AND ITS OPERATIONS.
COMPLAINTS OR ALLEGATIONS COME TO OUR OFFICE AS INTAKES.
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL PLAYS NO ROLE IN DETERMINING WHAT INTAKES GET CAPTURED IN OUR CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
ALL WRITTEN ALLEGATIONS GET CAPTURED AND ALL VERBAL ALLEGATIONS ARE CAPTURED.
PROVIDED THE OFFICE HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THE MATTER.
KIM SHADOWING DOES NOT HAVE, DOES NOT DICTATE INTAKE CONTENTS OR DETERMINE WHAT IS INVESTIGATED.
RESPONSIBILITY LIVES WITH ME AND MY TEAM.
IG SHADOWING'S INVOLVEMENT IS FOCUSED ON ENSURING WE HAVE THE RESOURCES NEEDED AND THAT OUR WORK IS COMPLETED TIMELY, IMPARTIALLY AND THOROUGHLY.
SHE HAS NEVER REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE ANY MATTER.
FURTHERMORE, SHE CONSISTENTLY ADVOCATES FOR FAIRNESS AND SUPPORTS OUR PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT VALUES THAT OUR OFFICE HOLDS, SACROSANCT IT.
ON OCTOBER 16TH, THE COUNCIL VOTED TO SELECT THE LAW FIRM TO INVESTIGATE THE J-P-O-I-G FOR POTENTIAL ETHICAL VIOLATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT.
PART OF THE BODY OF THAT RESOLUTION STATES THE INSPECTOR GENERAL HAS NOT CONDUCTED AND OR PROVIDED A REPORT ABOUT SEVERAL KNOWN AND PUBLICIZED COMPLAINTS AND ENLISTED THREE ITEMS. EVERY SINGLE ALLEGATION RECEIVED BY THE OUR OFFICE IS ASSESSED IF WE'RE UNABLE TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE FACTS, TO SUBSTANTIATE THE ALLEGATION IS CLOSED.
THIS, THIS REQUIRES US TO BECOME EXPERTS INDEPENDENTLY, COLLECT FACTS AND MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHETHER A POLICY OR LAW MAY HAVE BEEN VIOLATED.
YOU MAY NOT ALWAYS AGREE WITH OUR DETERMINATION, BUT I CAN GUARANTEE YOU OUR POSITION IS SUPPORTED BY FACTS.
SO TO BE CLEAR, WE ONLY REPORT FACTS AND WE CAN ONLY LOOK INTO THINGS THAT WE KNOW ABOUT.
I WAS THE STATE REPRESENTATIVE INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT THAT, THAT WE ARE REVIEWING AND IT'S SUBJECT OF ALL OF THIS.
UM, AND WHAT I WANT TO POINT OUT TO YOU IS THAT YOU HAVE A MANUAL, UH, THAT TELLS THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL HOW THEY PROCEED AND WHAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO AND HOW THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO IT.
AND IT HAS TO DO WITH REPORTS AND FINDINGS, WHICH IS SECTION CHAPTER 2, 2 7 REPORTING.
AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO, IT TELLS HER THAT HOW DO YOU DO YOUR JOB? SO AFTER YOU DO YOUR INVESTIGATION, PRIOR TO ISSUING A FINAL REPORT, WHICH HAS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO GIVE A DRAFT COPY OF THE PERSON WHO YOU ARE OR ENTITY WHO YOU ARE ISSUING A REPORT OR RECOMMENDATION TO.
THEY SHALL HAVE 30 DAYS WORKING DAYS TO SUBMIT A WRITTEN EXPLANATION OR REBUTTAL TO THE FINDING.
AND THEN THE OFFICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL HAS TO REVIEW IT, SEE WHETHER TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE, AND THEY HAVE TO ATTACH IT SO THEY'RE NOT JUST RELEASING A REPORT WITH FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR AN FOR A REBUTTAL.
THIS WAS DROPPED WITHOUT ANYBODY KNOWING THAT'S INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS THAT SHE WAS GOING TO PUT THIS OUT, THIS 35 PAGE LETTER, WHICH AFTER
[00:25:01]
THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING I POINTED OUT, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO POINT OUT, IT IS FACTUALLY WRONG.AND BUT THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT AFTER WE POINT THIS OUT, SHE CONTINUES TO GO OUT AND TALK ABOUT IT.
SHE CONTINUES TO GO OUT AND RELY UPON HER NON INVESTIGATION THAT DIDN'T INCLUDE TALKING TO ANYONE.
SO WHERE WAS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT TO SUBMIT THEIR REC, THEIR REBUTTAL TO SAY THAT'S NOT CORRECT.
AND, AND SO IF YOU HAVE TO DO IT FOR A REPORT AND SHE'S GONNA SAY, WELL, THIS WASN'T A REPORT.
IT DIDN'T HAVE FINDINGS AND IT DIDN'T HAVE A RECOMMENDATION.
TOP OF THE, THE FRONT PAGE FIRST THING, WHAT WE FOUND.
THAT TO ME, IF I'M THE PUBLIC SEEMS LIKE A FINDING.
IT DOESN'T HAVE A RECOMMENDATION.
WHAT WE RECOMMEND IS AT THE BOTTOM.
THANK, SEE IF YOU CAN GIVE TO GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS AL AB WALLY AND I'M A SPECIAL AGENT WITH THE JEFFERSON PARISH OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
I WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO SPEAK ON THE RECORD.
AS PART OF THE INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION THAT HANDLES AND TAKES FROM THE PUBLIC, I ROUTINELY ENGAGE WITH MY COLLEAGUES AND SUPERVISOR THROUGH OPEN DISCUSSIONS ON WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE TO PURSUE OR CLOSE A COMPLAINT.
MANY FACTORS ARE CONSIDERED, NEVER DO I FEEL COMPELLED TO NOT PROPERLY VET ANY COMPLAINT FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES, NOR AM I GIVEN DIRECTION BY MANAGERIAL STAFF TO DO SO FOR POLITICAL REASONS.
IF I HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION FROM THAT OF LEADERSHIP, I RESPECTFULLY MAKE MY POSITION KNOWN AND OFFER COUNTERS EXPLAINING WHY THIS COMPLAINT DOES OR DOES NOT HAVE MERIT.
BASED ON THE EVIDENCE I WOULDN'T HAVE ACCEPTED, EXCUSE ME, I WOULDN'T HAVE ACCEPTED THIS POSITION, NOR WOULD I CHOOSE TO REMAIN EMPLOYED HERE IF I FELT LIKE I WAS NOT HEARD OR THAT I COULD NOT DO MY JOB DUE TO POLITICAL INTERFERENCE.
POLITICAL PANDERING, A HIDDEN AGENDA OR ANYTHING OF THE SORT.
MY BACKGROUND COMES AS A FORMER CODE COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT INSPECTOR FOR JEFFERSON PARISH ASSIGNED TO THE TERRYTOWN AREA.
AND MANY IN THIS ROOM KNOW IF THERE WAS A LEGITIMATE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE PARISH THAT VIOLATED AN ORDINANCE.
AFTER INVESTIGATION, I ISSUED CODE VIOLATIONS TO WHOEVER WAS IN VIOLATION THAT INCLUDED FRIENDS, UH, NEIGHBORS, AND EVEN SOME RELATIVES OF MINE.
I DID IT BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER PERSONAL.
I HAD A JOB TO DO FOR THE PUBLIC 15 SECONDS.
AND I BELIEVE IN GOOD GOVERNMENT.
I BELIEVE IN LETTING OUR OFFICE DO OUR WORK, LETTING THE INSPECTOR GENERAL DO HER JOB AS THE ORDINANCE AND THE CHARTER ALLOW.
AND IF I DIDN'T FEEL THIS WAY, IF I FELT LIKE WE WERE OPERATING IN SOME KIND OF MANNERISM WHERE WE'RE APPEASING, UM, A POLITICAL OFFICE.
HE, I'M A COUNCILMAN IN THE CITY OF GRETTA AND A RESIDENT OF GRETNA, OBVIOUSLY.
UM, AND I, WITHOUT GOING INTO DETAILS ABOUT THE PROJECT, UH, WHICH WE COULD, WE COULD BE HERE FOR HOURS.
THE, THE ONE THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS, UM, FIRST OF ALL, WE AGREE THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM WITH OVERSIGHT.
THE PROBLEM IS THE WAY THIS WHOLE SITUATION WAS HANDLED.
AND WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE, AS SOMEONE POINTED OUT EARLIER, WHAT THE RULES ARE IN THE ORDINANCE IS, MY QUESTION IS, I NEVER READ THE RULES.
I NEVER READ THE ORDINANCE, BUT MY CORRECT QUESTION IS, IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL TO IMMEDIATELY AFTER ISSUING THE LETTER, GO ON A ROAD TOUR TO ALL OF THE, ALL OF THE, THE, UM, CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS TO, TO TALK ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
AND IMMEDIATELY AFTER ISSUING THE LETTER WAS ON THE NEWS AT SEVEN 30 IN THE MORNING.
SO IT'S JUST ODD THE WAY THIS WHOLE THING WENT DOWN.
UM, I THINK IT WAS HANDLED INAPPROPRIATELY.
I THINK IT WAS HANDLED RECKLESSLY, AND I WOULD QUESTION THE WAY THE PROCESS WAS, WAS HANDLED FOR THE ENTIRE, THE ENTIRE LETTER, THE ENTIRE PROCESS.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S A CONCERN WE HAVE OR THAT'S A CONCERN I HAVE, IS HOW THIS, THIS THING, THE WHOLE THING WENT DOWN AND HOW IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC.
[00:30:01]
I'M ARTHUR LAWSON.I'M THE CHIEF OF POLICE IN THE CITY OF GRETNA.
I'VE BEEN IN LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR 50 YEARS.
I'VE ATTENDED BASIC TRAINING, MANY INVESTIGATIVE TRAINING CLASSES OF GRADUATE OF THE FBI NATIONAL ACADEMY.
IF YOU WATCH TV ON A REGULAR BASIS, YOU'LL SEE MANY LAW ENFORCEMENT OR INVESTIGATIVE AGENCIES MAKE THE COMMENT, I CANNOT DISCUSS THIS OR CAN'T MAKE A STATEMENT BECAUSE IT'S UNDER INVESTIGATION.
HOWEVER, THAT'S NOT THE WAY THIS WAS DONE.
THIS WAS DONE IN THE FORM OF MAKING SOME INNUENDOS AND ACCUSATIONS AND THEN GOING OUT IN THE PUBLIC AND SPEAKING ABOUT THIS INVESTIGATION OR THIS INQUIRY.
IT QUESTIONS THE INTEGRITY OF THIS INVESTIGATION WITH THE PUBLIC.
IT'S INFLUENCING PUBLIC OPINION WHEN THERE HAS NOT BEEN A CONCLUSION AND IT'S NOT RIGHT.
IT'S, IT'S BROUGHT A BAD LIGHT INTO TO THIS INVESTIGATION OR THIS INQUIRY.
AND TO THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THE CITIES AND THE PEOPLE OF JEFFERSON PARISH, ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR IS FAIRNESS.
NO ONE'S SAYING THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE LOOKED AT, IT CAN'T BE LOOKED AT, AND THERE'S A REASON NOT TO LOOK AT IT.
HOWEVER, I THINK THE MANNER AND WAY THAT THIS WAS CONDUCTED IS NOT THE USUAL WAY THAT SOMETHING'S DONE AND CERTAINLY LENDS A, A, A BAD LIGHT TO THE THIS OFFICE.
MY NAME IS MICHELLE TES FITCH, AND I AM FROM WMAN AND I AM A MEMBER OF THE CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS AND THAT, THAT SHE HAS WENT TO.
ALL I CAN ADD TO THAT IS IS THAT WHEN WE WERE VISITED BY THE PACIFIC ASSOCIATIONS AND HAD FOR THE ATTORNEY GEN GENERAL'S OFFICE, THERE WAS NO DETAILS GIVEN TO US.
THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC INFORMATION GIVEN TO US.
WE WERE ONLY MADE AWARE OF THE SITUATION IN GENERAL, AND NO SPECIFICS WERE GIVEN TO US.
WE WERE JUST MADE AWARE OF WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE OF AS CITIZENS AND THE INFORMATION WAS BROUGHT TO US.
SO WE WERE JUST BEING INFORMED AS CITIZENS, WHICH IS PART OF HER OFFICE, AND THAT IS HER JOB TO MAKE US AWARE OF WHAT IS GOING ON.
SO I JUST NEEDED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
SO WE WERE NOT GIVEN ANY SPECIFIC DETAILS AS FAR AS WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THIS INVESTIGATION OR ANYTHING.
WE WERE JUST TOLD WHAT AS A CITIZEN WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN TOLD.
SO I JUST NEED MADE THAT VERY CLEAR.
CONSTANT MAYOR, CITY OF GRETNA.
UM, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE ARE WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
I THOUGHT MONTHS AGO THIS WOULD'VE BEEN PUT TO BED AND WE WOULD BE CUTTING.
UH, WE BROKE GROUND AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO CUTTING A RIBBON ON A PROJECT.
UM, A KINGFISH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, NOT A RESTAURANT AND A TACO.
A TACO STAND AND A BREWERY, UM, THAT CONTINUES TO AMPLIFY ALL OF THE MISS, UM, ALL OF THE THINGS THAT ARE BEING PUT OUT PUBLICLY THAT IS WRONG.
AND THE FACTS ARE DISTORTED ABOUT THIS KINGFISH DEVELOPMENT AND THE REALITY OF HOW IT DEVELOPED OVER TIME FOUR YEARS AGO, COUNCIL HAS VOTED ON THIS SO MANY TIMES UNANIMOUSLY, WHY FOUR YEARS LATER ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS NOW? LOOK, I GREW UP PROFESSIONALLY IN THE COURT SYSTEM.
I RESPECT EVERY STEP OF WHAT PROTECTS DEMOCRACY.
AND I HAVE NOTHING BUT RESPECT FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THEIR DIRECTOR.
BUT THERE WAS A WAY TO DO THINGS PUBLICLY THAT SHOULD NOT INVOLVE REPUTATIONS BEING SLANDERED LIKE MINE AND THE CITY THAT I SERVE, BEING SLANDERED FOR NO REASON.
IT HAS BEEN STATED, THERE IS NOTHING, UH, ILLEGAL ABOUT THIS.
THERE WAS NOTHING UNETHICAL ABOUT THIS.
I'VE REACHED OUT MORE THAN ONCE TO TRY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE? THIS IS NOT THE WAY THIS OFFICE SHOULD BE.
THIS HAS BEEN WEAPONIZED AND IT'S BEEN FOCUSED ON GRETNA PROJECTS, NOT JUST THIS ONE.
GRETNA HAS DEALING, BEEN DEALING WITH SEVERAL THINGS OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST MONTHS IN FRONT OF THIS COUNCIL.
I HAVE NOT BEEN TO THIS COUNCIL IN THE LAST 10 YEARS.
[00:35:01]
BEEN HERE EVERY MONTH FOR THE LAST FOUR MONTHS BECAUSE OF THINGS THAT ARE BEING INVESTIGATED IN THIS CITY.FOR WHAT REASON? THERE'S A LOT MORE.
AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT I AM HELD TO TWO MINUTES BECAUSE YOU NEED TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN OUR COMMUNITY ON THE WEST BANK WITH THE IG, WHO SHOULD BE AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR GOING TO COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND TELLING THINGS THAT ARE WRONG.
IT'S LIES, IT'S MISINFORMATION.
I, IT'S, A LOT OF THINGS HAVE BEEN SAID HERE THAT I WAS TOTALLY UNAWARE OF.
I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHO IS, UH, AT FAULT FOR KNOWING, UH, WHAT, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THIS HERE.
AS AN 86-YEAR-OLD RETIREE, I HAVE NOTHING BETTER THAN DO THAN HANG AROUND WITH A BUNCH OF OLD BUSINESS ASSOCIATES AND CLASSMATES.
SOME OF 'EM ARE FORMER PARISH COUNCILMAN, JUDGE, FINANCIAL PEOPLE, DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS.
ANOTHER SET OF GUYS ARE ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS.
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS IN THE PAST.
WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON AND TO THE, TO THE PERSON.
NOW, ONE OTHER, THE GUYS HAVE FOUND OUT THAT HOW THIS THING HERE IS BENEFIT, UH, BENEFITING THE PARISH MATTER, NOT ALSO ONE LADY, I GOTTA PUT HER IN HERE.
UM, WE'D LIKE TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S WHAT NOW FROM WHAT WE UNDERSTAND, UH, IG HAS, UH, TRIED TO BRING THINGS UP UP THE FRONT AND STOP THE PROJECT TILL IT COULD BE, UH, BROUGHT, UH, TO BEAR AND SEE EXACTLY WHAT'S WHAT THE PROJECT CONTINUED TO MOVE FORWARD.
WELL, I CAN UNDERSTAND AND BEING A CON EX CONTRACT AND EVERYTHING ELSE, ONCE YOU GET SOMETHING STARTED, YOU CAN'T STOP IT WITHOUT HAVING SOMEBODY SUFFERING THE DAMAGES.
UH, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW FAR THE SINK CAN GO BEFORE IT STOPPED, BUT ANYWAY, I I'M NOT GONNA BE BELABOR THIS HERE, IT SEEMS LIKE AS IG, WHICH WE HAVE, WE, WE, WE WANTED AN IG, WE GOT AN IG.
WHAT I WANNA KNOW IS WHO OF EVERYONE SITTING HERE OR HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS WOULD TAKE MONEY FROM YOUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT, 401K AND BUILD A BUILDING FOR 30 YEARS AND LET SOMEBODY HAVE IT FOR A DOLLAR A YEAR.
WOULD Y'ALL BE WILLING TO DO THAT WITH YOUR MONEY? BECAUSE IT'S A LOT.
YOU KNOW, SHOW, GIMME A SHOW OF HANDS.
WOULD Y'ALL BE WILLING TO DO IT? THAT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE GIVING AWAY OUR MONEY.
RONALD WIM BRYAN, R-O-N-A-L-D-W-I-M-B-R-I-N.
UM, CURRENTLY COUNCILMAN HANS JEBERG'S, CHIEF OF STAFF, FORMERLY COUNCILMAN RICKY TEMPLATE'S CHIEF OF STAFF.
I DO NOT HAVE PREPARED COMMENTS BECAUSE I WAS NOT PREPARED AND I WASN'T PLANNING ON SAYING ANYTHING.
HOWEVER, I BELIEVE WHAT I DO HAVE TO SAY IS SOMEWHAT RELEVANT.
AND I, MR. ADOLF, YOU SAID SOMETHING THAT STRUCK ME.
YOU ARE AN EMPLOYEE OF THE IGS OFFICE.
YOU DO THE WORK OF THE IGS OFFICE.
I'M AN EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNCIL OFFICE.
I DO THE WORK OF THE COUNCIL OFFICE.
I HAVE BEEN THRUST INTO THE MIDDLE OF HEADLINES AND INTO THIS SCENARIO BECAUSE A 35 PAGE LETTER WAS ISSUED WITHOUT ASKING ME OR ANYBODY ELSE INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT.
THERE'S A LOT OF MISINFORMATION.
FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THERE WAS NO IDEA THAT STATE MONEY WAS INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT.
AND WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT PARISH DOLLARS.
THERE'S A BIG ISSUE WHEN SOMEONE GETS ACCUSED OF SOMETHING OR WHEN A PROJECT IS PAINTED IN A CERTAIN LIGHT.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT I PUT A LOT OF TIME, EFFORT, VOLUNTEER HOURS INTO MY COMMUNITY AND IT'S DONE WITH A GOOD HEART.
AND I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN TO A VISITOR OF MY HOME WHY MY NAME IS COMING UP IN THE NEWS.
AND THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN YOUR INTENTION, BUT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
SO WHY WAS I NOT ASKED A QUESTION WHEN YOU NEEDED SOMETHING FROM THE COUNCIL? FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS NOW, I'VE BEEN WORKING HERE, PEOPLE KNOW HOW TO GET IN TOUCH WITH ME.
MY PHONE RINGS UNTIL 11 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT.
[00:40:12]
COMMISSIONER, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.I'M PARISH PRESIDENT CYNTHIA LEE SHANG, AND I DID WANT TO, UM, SAY MY COMMENTS MORE ON THE PROCESS OF THINGS.
UH, JUST JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT ME.
I WAS A FORMER CPA, UM, SPECIALIZING IN FORENSIC ACCOUNTING, UH, ESPECIALLY IN FRAUD.
UM, AND SO WHEN I WAS ALSO ON THE COUNCIL, WHEN WE ESTABLISHED THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE, AND I WAS A BIG PROPONENT OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE, AND I WAS ON THE COMMITTEE THAT ACTUALLY FORMED THE REGULATIONS WHEN PARISH PRESIDENT TERRY WAS IN OFFICE, UH, HE WAS, HE WAS THE PARISH PRESIDENT FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
I CERTAINLY RESPECT ALL OF THE WORK THAT THESE PEOPLE DO BECAUSE I COME FROM THAT WORLD.
UM, I WAS, I WAS, UH, COURTED AT ONE TIME TO BE IN THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE IN NEW ORLEANS.
SO, UM, WHEN I CAME INTO OFFICE, I WANTED ALL THE DRAMA TO END WITH THE PRIOR COUPLE OF YEARS.
AND I TOLD MY STAFF THAT THE WORK THAT THEY DO IS VERY IMPORTANT AND WE'RE GONNA PAY ATTENTION TO IT, AND WE'RE GONNA IMPLEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY, THAT 'CAUSE THEY'RE VERY SMART PEOPLE AND THEY'VE LOOKED AT IT FOR A LONG TIME.
I'M A SUPPORTER OF THE WORK OF THE INSPECTOR GENERALLY OFFICE.
I'M ALSO ASKING FOR OVERSIGHT.
WE ALL NEED OVERSIGHT, INCLUDING MYSELF.
I CAN BE INVESTIGATED BY THE PARISH COUNCIL.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE PEOPLE WANNA GET RID OF A PARISH PRESIDENT.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT THREATENS THE OFFICE OF A PARISH PRESIDENT.
IT JUST MEANS THAT I MYSELF, UM, HAVE TO HAVE OVERSIGHT AS WELL.
AND THE COUNCIL CAN CALL ME UP TO THE MAT AND ASK ME QUESTIONS.
THAT'S PART OF A DEMOCRACY THAT WE HAVE.
UM, AND I WILL SAY SINCE MAY, THERE'S BEEN A BIG DEPARTURE IN THE WAY THIS OFFICE HAS BEEN DOING THINGS IN THE FORM OF LETTERS.
THIS WAS NEVER EVER DONE BEFORE SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE OFFICE LETTERS.
I WILL REPEAT WHAT, UM, FORMER REP MARINO TALKED ABOUT, THAT IF YOU ARE THE SUBJECT, IF WE'RE A DEPARTMENT OR A PERSON, UM, ARE THE SUBJECT OF A REPORT OR AN INVESTIGATION.
UM, YOU, YOU HAVE 30 WORKING DAYS TO SUBMIT A WRITTEN EXPLANATION OR REBUTTAL OF THE FINDINGS BEFORE THE REPORT OR RECOMMENDATION IS FINALIZED.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THAT MEANS IN THE LAW, IN THE LAW, IT INCLUDES, IT'S NOT AN ASSUMPTION.
IT INCLUDES THAT THE ENTITY REPORTING ON WHEN YOU'RE A SUBJECT, WHEN YOU'RE BRETT LAWSON, WHEN YOU'RE GRETNA, WHEN YOU'RE ANYONE, WHEN YOU'RE ME, YOU HAVE TIME TO READ THE REPORT.
YOU HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT THE DATA.
YOU HAVE TIME TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS TOGETHER.
NOT IN 24 HOURS, BUT YOU HAVE TIME TO DO SOME RESEARCH.
WE'RE NOT, THIS IS NOT A GOTCHA THING.
PUBLIC POLICY CANNOT BE MADE ON GOTCHA.
AND NEWS, NEWS, MEDIA STORIES THAT YOU HAVE TIME TO RESPOND.
YOU HAVE TIME TO PUT YOUR RESPONSE IN THERE.
AND THIS, THE LAW ALSO INCLUDES THE FACT THAT YOUR RESPONSE BECOMES PART OF THE FINAL REPORT.
THAT THE FIRST TIME THE PUBLIC SEES THE REPORT, IT'S BALANCED.
YOU'RE NOT ON THE DEFENSE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE DAY WATCHING THE MORNING NEWS.
AND ALSO THAT WE HAVE TIME TO CATCH ERRORS.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE WRONG.
WE CATCH ERRORS ALL THE TIME THAT WE'VE CAUGHT THEIR ERRORS.
IT MAKES FOR A CLEANER, MORE ACCURATE REPORT.
SO MY ONLY ASK IS THAT THERE'S OVERSIGHT AND THAT THE REGULATIONS ARE FOLLOWED, THAT THE RULES FOLLOWED.
IF WE DO THAT, WE HAVE, WE WILL PRODUCE A STRONGER INSPECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL WITH CREDIBILITY AND INSPECTOR GENERAL, THAT NOT EVERYBODY'S WHISPERING ABOUT IT, WONDERING WITH PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS.
AND THIS ISN'T GONNA BE INVESTIGATED BECAUSE OF THIS PERSON, BUT THIS WILL BE INVESTIGATED BECAUSE OF THIS PERSON.
THAT DOES NOT MAKE FOR A STRONG INSPECTOR GENERAL WHEN ALL THESE WHISPERS ARE GOING AROUND THE COMMUNITY WITH THIS.
THAT'S MY ONLY ASK IS THAT WE HAVE OVERSIGHT, NOT AN ABOLISHMENT OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE.
I'M THE CURRENT REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISTRICT 85.
AND, UH, SINCE THIS REPORT'S BEEN RELEASED, UH, WHAT IT'S DONE FOR ME IS MAKE HALF MY DISTRICT MAD AT THE OTHER
THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT'S COME DOWN TO FOR ME.
BUT THOSE POLITICS ASIDE, UM, MY ASK IS FOR IMPARTIAL INDEPENDENT.
UH, I RUSH FROM BATON ROUGE TO THE LAST TARRYTOWN CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETING.
AND DURING THE MEETING IT WAS IMPARTIAL, INDEPENDENT.
BUT AFTER THE MEETING, I'M USING THESE WORDS 'CAUSE MR. RANDOLPH USED THEM.
HE'S GIVING A BIASED AND POLITICAL OPINION TO A MEMBER OF THE TERRYTOWN CIVIC ASSOCIATION.
I WOULD BE MAD TOO IF I LIVED IN TERRYTOWN AND GRETTON WAS GETTING EVERYTHING.
SO IF WE'RE GONNA BE IMPARTIAL AND INDEPENDENT, DO IT EVERY DAY OF YOUR LIFE.
DON'T BE IMPARTIAL AND INDEPENDENT WHEN A MICROPHONE'S
[00:45:01]
ON.AND THEN GO SPEW BIASED OPINIONS TO TURN NEIGHBORS AGAINST NEIGHBORS.
UM, I'M JUST HERE TO SPEAK, UH, ONCE AGAIN ON AN ITEM THAT YOU ARE ALL VERY MUCH AWARE OF.
UH, THIS IS PROBABLY THE SECOND TIME PROBABLY IN WHAT THE 10 YEAR HISTORY THAT THE IGS OFFICE HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH JEFFERSON PARISH.
I WAS HERE WHEN THE VOTERS VOTED TO HAVE AN IG OVERSEE THE PARISHES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES OF NOT HAVING FRAUD THEFT OR, UM, CORRUPTION.
UH, AND THE PEOPLE SPOKE LOUDLY ABOUT THAT, AND IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THAT POSITION.
UH, I TOO, UH, HAVE HAD PEOPLE WANTING TO KNOW ABOUT THE 37 PAGE REPORT OF WHICH IS NOT A REPORT, BUT IS A LETTER, UH, WANTING TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
UH, WE'VE MADE SURE EVERY T WAS CROSSED AND EVERY I WAS DOTTED THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THIS.
WE HAD SEVEN COUNCIL MEETINGS THAT I KNOW THAT WE VOTED ON UNANIMOUSLY, THAT EVERYBODY VOTED FOR THIS, MAKING SURE IT WAS A GOOD PROJECT FOR JEFFERSON PARISH AS A WHOLE.
UH, THIS MONEY THAT WAS DEDICATED TO THIS WAS FROM THE RECOVERY DOLLARS FROM COVID, UH, THAT WAS DESIGNED FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
THIS IS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
UH, TO SIT HERE AND SAY, UH, I THINK, I THINK REPRESENTATIVE, UH, OR PAST REPRESENTATIVE JOE MARINO STATED THAT, UH, THE FACTS OF OF THE REPORT ARE NOT CORRECT.
UH, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS TRUE.
THE FACTS OF THE REPORT REPORT ARE NOT, IS NOT CORRECT.
THERE'S NOT A LEASE FOR $1 A YEAR.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT COMES FROM OR WHERE, WHERE IT'S AT, FOUND AT, BUT THERE, UH, YOU SHOW ME WHERE THERE IS A DOLLAR A YEAR FOR 30 YEARS FOR THIS PROPERTY BEING LEASED.
UH, THERE'S A LOT OF, IN THINGS THAT ARE INCORRECT IN THE INFORMATION ON HOW IT WAS GATHERED.
UH, I WAS NEVER ASKED A SINGLE QUESTION ABOUT THE PROJECT, AND I WOULD'VE BEEN GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT CAME MY WAY.
I'M WILLIAM LAZARO, WHO'S PRESIDENT, PRESIDENT OF JFI.
AND JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS TO MAKE CLEAR THAT EVERYBODY'S SAYING THAT THIS JFI AND OR J-F-J-R-I HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED SO THAT WE CAN CIRCUMVENT PUBLIC BID LAWS AND ALL THOSE THINGS, WHICH IS NOT TRUE.
I'VE BEEN, I WAS APPOINTED IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR AND I SERVE, UM, I'VE BEEN SERVING SINCE THAT TIME.
I WAS, UM, THE JEFFERSON PARISH COUNCIL APPROVES ALL THE APPOINTEES TO THIS BOARD.
AND SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD, HAVE NEVER RECEIVED ANY RECALLS.
AND I TALK TO OUR ATTORNEY, UH, EVERY DAY AND NEVER HAVE RECEIVED ANY CALLS FROM ANYBODY ASKING US RELATING TO THESE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKED ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
UM, WE HAVE NEVER RECEIVED ANYTHING IN WRITING OR VERBALLY ANY MEETINGS, ANYBODY COME TO OUR OFFICE OR CALLED US TO THEIR OFFICE ASKING ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT.
AND IT'S VERY, IT'S, IT, IT AFFECTS ME DEEPLY BECAUSE I'M A BUSINESSMAN, BEEN A BUSINESSMAN ALL MY LIFE.
WORKED FOR THE PARISH COUNCIL, BY THE WAY, BACK IN THE DAY.
I THINK A, UH, CLOUD OVER MY INTEGRITY AS PRESIDENT.
UH, EVEN THOUGH I'VE ONLY BEEN THERE SINCE MARCH OF THIS YEAR.
UH, I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE NEVER SKIRTED OR TRIED TO IMPLEMENT ANYTHING.
ALL THE PROJECTS THAT WE ARE INVOLVED WITH, EVERY ONE OF THEM, WHEN I HAD BEEN ON THIS BOARD, WE HAVE GOTTEN BIDS.
WE HAVE VETTED THOSE BIDS, WE DID SCORE SHEETS AS THE PARISH DOES.
EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE NOT DONE JUST BY SELECTING PEOPLE.
IT HAS BUN, IT HAS BEEN DONE THROUGH THE PROCESS.
UH, AND TO SAY THE JFI, WHICH IS A PAR, WE ARE JEFFERSON PARISH.
I, I DON'T, I JUST, IT FEELS, UM, VERY AWKWARD TO HAVE JFI AND WHO I REPRESENT, UH, BEING SORT OF SMEARED AS TO A, A POLITICAL MACHINE OR A TOOL TO DO THINGS THAT ARE NOT RIGHT AND THAT'S UNTRUE.
[00:50:05]
ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHO CAME FORWARD TO SHARE.IT'S NOT EASY TO STEP IN FRONT OF A ROOM OF PEOPLE, UM, THAT YOU MAY KNOW OR MAY NOT KNOW AND SHARE YOUR OPINION.
SO THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE FOR THEIR FEEDBACK.
[V. Jefferson Parish Council members to address the Ethics & Compliance Commission]
FOR THE JEFFERSON PARISH COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ADDRESS THE ETHICS COMMISSION.I HAVE, UM, COUNCILMAN BONANNO COULD NOT MAKE IT.
HE HANDED ME, UM, A LETTER THAT I HAVE COPIES OF FOR YOU ALL IF I MAY DELIVER.
ALSO, BEFORE YOU GO, I ALSO HAVE SOME HANDOUTS FOR THE BOARD NOTE FOR THE RECORD.
FRANK, DO YOU KNOW SIX 15 BEFORE I SAY ANYTHING, I'M GONNA TELL YOU WHY I'M NOT HERE.
I'M NOT HERE TO ATTACK THE IG.
I DON'T WANT MS. CHATTER LANE DISMISSED.
ON THE CONTRARY, I BELIEVE THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL IS IMPORTANT AND I WANT TO STAND IT UP.
I WANT IT TO RISE ABOVE POLITICS.
I WANT IT TO BE INDEPENDENT AS THE ORDINANCE CREATING AND ITS OWN RULES AND VISION AND THE FACT THAT THE IG AND A COUNCILWOMAN HAVE PUBLICLY STATED THE IG IS UNDER ATTACK WITHOUT READING A WORD OF THE ANTICIPATED ORDINANCE IS PRECISELY WHY I AM HERE.
I WANTED TO MEET WITH YOU IN PAIRS SO THAT I, I WOULDN'T, WE WOULDN'T HAVE THIS POLITICAL THEATER.
MR. SULLIVAN INSISTED THAT HE'D BE HERE, HE'D BE THERE WITH YOU WHEN I MET WITH YOU AND SAID THAT I COULDN'T DO IT AFTER HE SCHOOLED ME IN OPEN MEETINGS LAWS.
AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, MY NAME IS HANS BERG AND I'M THE NEW COUNSEL PERSON FOR DISTRICT FIVE.
FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS, I HAVE WORKED AS AN ASSISTANT PARISH ATTORNEY, PROSECUTOR, DISTRICT JUDGE, AND APPEALS COURT JUDGE.
I'VE WORKED IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, PARTICIPATED IN COUNTLESS INVESTIGATIONS AND PRESIDED OVER MANY MORE.
AS YOU LIKELY KNOW, A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL HAS SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH POLITICIZING THE IGS OFFICE.
I AM HERE HAT IN HAND ASKING YOU TO OPEN YOUR MINDS.
PLEASE TAKE WHAT I SAY IN THE VEIN IN WHICH IT IT IS INTENDED.
I WANNA RE I WANT YOU TO RESTORE CONFIDENCE IN THE OIG.
I SIMPLY WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES AND I WANT YOU TO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION, EVEN IF THAT'S SIMPLY AN, AN ADMONITION.
PLEASE PARDON MY CANDOR, I'M NOT A GOOD SUGAR CODER, BUT I'M HONEST.
I KNOW YOU'RE HERE BECAUSE YOU CARE ABOUT YOUR COMMUNITY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH TRAINING YOU'VE RECEIVED REGARDING YOUR DUTIES AS A COMMISSIONER, IF ANY, BUT I KNOW, AND I KNOW YOU'VE DEVELOPED A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH MS. SHA LANE.
WE ALL LIKE HER AND NONE OF US WANT ANYTHING BAD TO HAPPEN TO HER, BUT IT'S NOT MY DUTY TO POLICE HER.
I'VE BEEN ON BOARDS WHERE I'VE HAD TO CORRECT EVEN FIRE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS.
IT'S NOT FUN, BUT THAT WAS MY DUTY AS A COMMISSIONER.
YOU ARE SWORN TO MONITOR HER FOR, AMONG OTHER THINGS.
AND I QUOTE FROM THE ORDINANCE, ETHICAL MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE, UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT AND OTHER ACTS TARNISHING THE INTEGRITY OF THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THAT'S AT SECTION TWO, UH, 1 55 POINT TEN FIVE.
THE ORDINANCE CREATING THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AT SECTION 2 1 55 9 IS ENTITLED QUOTE, REPORTING THE RESULTS OF INVESTIGATOR GENERAL FINDINGS.
AND IT ENUMERATES HOW THE IG MAY DISSEMINATE ITS FINDINGS.
IT HAS BUILT IN DUE PROCESS REQUIREMENTS.
IT MAKES SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
NOWHERE DOES IT PROVIDE FOR A PUBLIC LETTER WHEN ISSUING REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
SECTION 2.55, 2.1559 C REQUIRES THAT THE PERSON OR ENTITY QUOTE BEING REPORTED OR WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF AN INVESTIGATION, BE GIVEN 30 WORKING DAYS TO REBUT THE IGS FINDINGS.
THIS IS OBVIOUSLY DESIGNED SO THAT WE DON'T
[00:55:01]
RUIN THE ACCUSED REPUTATION.IT WAS ALSO DESIGNED TO KEEP THE IG FROM ISSUING IG USING THE IG SEAL TO BULLY SOMEONE.
SECTION TWO DASH 1 55 POINT 10 11 SPELLS OUT THE QUOTE SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THEY INCLUDE ISSUE REPORTS AND RECOMMEND REMEDIAL ACTIONS.
THAT'S A SECTION 2.1 5 5 10 11 I AND ISSUE REPORTS AS SET FORTH IN SUBSECTIONS NINE AND 10.
NINE AND 10 IS WHERE THE SUBJECT IS GIVEN A CHANCE TO REBUT.
WHEN I TOOK MY SEAT AS A COUNCILMAN FOR DISTRICT FIVE, I HAD NO REAL EXPERIENCE WITH THE IGS OFFICE.
EARLY IN MY TENURE, MS. CHAT LANE MET WITH EACH COUNCILMAN ALONG WITH YOUR ATTORNEY, MR. SULLIVAN, TO LOBBY FOR LEGISLATION EXPANDING HER POWERS REFERENCE WAS MADE TO THAT EARLIER TODAY.
MS. CHAT LANE HAD PRACTICE BEFORE ME.
WAS I WHEN I WAS A 24TH JDC JUDGE AND I TOLD HER AT THE TIME I DIDN'T HAVE, I DIDN'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH EXPANDING HER POWERS BECAUSE I TRUSTED HER.
IF I MIGHT DIGRESS FOR ONE SECOND, I DON'T KNOW WHY THOSE MEETINGS THAT MS. CHAT LANE AND YOUR ATTORNEY MR. SULLIVAN HAD WITH EACH COUNCIL MEMBER INDIVIDUALLY DIDN'T VIOLATE THE PUBLIC.
THE OPEN MEETINGS LAWS LIKE MY PROPOSED MEETINGS WITH YOU ALL, BUT MR. SULLIVAN SAID IT DID.
SHE WAS SPECIFICALLY THERE TO LOBBY FOR LEGISLATION, MET WITH EACH COUNCIL PERSON INDIVIDUALLY, BUT THAT WAS OKAY.
I THINK THERE MAY BE A DIFFERENT SET OF STANDARDS.
I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL WAS POISED TO GRANT THOSE EXPANDED POWERS HAD SHE NOT ISSUED THE FIRST PUBLIC LETTER, WHICH CALLED HER INDEPENDENCE INTO QUESTION FOR THE FIRST TIME.
I WANNA BE CLEAR, I AM 100% IN FAVOR OF OVERSIGHT.
WE HAVE AN INTERNAL AUDITOR, A LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, AN ETHICS AND COMPLIANCE LAWYER AND INSPECTOR GENERAL AS WELL AS FEDERAL AND STATE AUTHORITIES.
WE CAN'T HAVE ENOUGH OVERSIGHT.
IN SEPTEMBER OF 2023, THE COUNCIL COMMITTED FUNDS TO THE MAJOR CRIMES TASK FORCE.
THE FUNDING SOURCE WAS IDENTIFIED IN DECEMBER OF 2023.
ON MARCH 6TH OF THIS YEAR, COUNCILMAN EDWARDS INTRODUCED A CEA TO REFLECT THE 2024 ADOPTED BUDGET.
COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN MOVED TO DEFER UNTIL APRIL 17TH.
ON APRIL 17TH, THE CEA UNANIMOUSLY PASSED, BUT NOT WITHOUT QUESTIONING FROM COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN.
THE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE BUDGET TO FUND THE TASK FORCE WAS SCHEDULED FOR MAY 1ST, 2024 AT 9 21.
THE NIGHT BEFORE THE COUNCIL WAS TO TAKE UP THE AMENDED BUDGET AND ASK AND, AND TO FUND THE TASK FORCE THE IG ISSUED HER FIRST PUBLIC LETTER, WHICH ECHOED COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN'S CRITICISMS OF THE FUNDING FOR THE MAJOR CRIMES TASK FORCE.
THE FOLLOWING MORNING AT THE COUNCIL MEETING, COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKEN AND THE IG TANK TEAM, THE OPPOSING THE MAJOR CRIMES TASK FORCE COUNCILWOMAN VAN VACAN BOLSTERED BY HER, HER IG UH, PUBLIC LETTER, WAVED IT AROUND.
THE INK WAS STILL WET, REFERRED TO IT AS UNPRECEDENTED.
SHORTLY AFTER YOU RECEIVED SEVERAL ANONYMOUS LETTERS, THE LETTER STATED, AND I'M GONNA, UH, THIS IS A LOT OF READING.
THERE'S A LOT HERE I DON'T WANNA MISS, BUT I'M READING STRAIGHT FROM, FROM THIS ANONYMOUS LE THE FIRST ANONYMOUS LETTER.
WE ARE WRITING ON BEHALF OF CONCERNED CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON PARISH TO EXPRESS OUR SINCERE CONCERNS ABOUT THE DIRECTION OF THE ECC AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE.
WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE ANONYMITY OF THIS LETTER, BUT DO NOT TRUST THE ECC OR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND ARE CONCERNED ABOUT RETALIATION.
YOUR PRESENT IG IS PARTYING, HANGING OUT AND GOING ON TRIPS WITH COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN.
ISN'T THE IG SUPPOSED TO BE INDEPENDENT? AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY? SHOULDN'T SHE BE FREE FROM THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST? SHE CERTAINLY CANNOT OVERSEE THIS COUNCIL MEMBER WHEN SHE'S OUT IN PUBLIC DRINKING ALCOHOL WITH HER BOTH HERE AND EVEN ABROAD.
THEY UNABASHEDLY POST PICTURES ON SOCIAL MEDIA FREE OF ANY WORRIES THAT THIS BOARD WILL TAKE ANY ACTION PITIFUL AND DESPICABLE.
YOU SHOULD ALL RESIGN AND LET THE POWER START OVER WITH A NEW BOARD, ONE THAT WE CAN BE PROUD OF, NOT ONE THAT SUPPORTS THIS SHAMEFUL BEHAVIOR BY THE PRESENT IG.
AND PERHAPS YOU SHOULD ASK FOR ALL THE EMAILS AND TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN THE IG AND JVV SURROUNDING THE ACTIVITIES THAT THEY HAVE BEEN, THAT THEY HAVE ATTENDED TOGETHER.
THIRD, PLEASE WATCH THE LAST TWO COUNCIL MEETINGS AND LOOK AT THE BEHAVIOR OF YOUR IG AND THE INTERPLAY WITH COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN.
IT'S THEATRICAL PREPLAN C PRE-PLANNED CIRCUS THAT EVEN THIS BOARD CAN FIGURE OUT.
THE IG IGS I G'S BEHAVIOR IS EMBARRASSING AND SHE CLEARLY WANTS TO PLEASE
[01:00:01]
HER FRIEND JVV.FINALLY, THE ECC BOARD CANNOT BE TRUSTED AT ALL AS YOU HAVE FAILED TO FOLLOW THE ETHICS PLACED UPON YOU.
THE LETTER THEN LISTS WHO HADN'T FOLLOWED FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORMS, WHICH NAMED ALL OF THE THEN EXISTING MEMBERS, BUT ONE, IT ENDED, QUOTE, GET US A NEW IG THAT KNOWS NOT TO ENGAGE IN CONDUCT AND QUESTIONS OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE ECC AND THE POSITION OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND STOP IGNORING THE LAW AND FILE YOUR DISCLOSURE FORMS. THAT LETTER WASN'T AN INDICTMENT OF MS. CHAT LANE OR COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKEN AS WAS AS MUCH AS IT WAS RESPECTFULLY OF THE ECC.
IT HIGHLIGHTED THEIR LONG AND CLOSE FRIENDSHIP, NOT TO EMBARRASS THEM, BUT TO ASK YOU TO INVESTIGATE IT.
THEY ALSO HIGHLIGHT AGAIN, RESPECTFULLY, THE ECCS SHORTCOMINGS AND THE LACK OF INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVICE YOU'RE, YOU'RE RECEIVING.
YOU HELD A MEETING ON MAY 10TH AND DISCUSSED THE LETTERS IN PREPARATION FOR THIS APPEARANCE.
I WAS FRANKLY AMAZED AT WHAT I SAW INSTEAD OF AN INVESTIGATION.
EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM CIRCLED THE WAGONS TO PROTECT THE IG.
THE ONLY THING REMOTELY RESEMBLING AN INVESTIGATION WAS THE ASSERTION THAT A BOARD MEMBER AND THE ECC LAWYER REVIEWED THE, I REVIEWED THE IJ IGS INTAKE PROCESS AND WERE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS NO CONFLICT.
I WAS STUNNED THAT NO ONE ACTUALLY READ THE ENABLING OR ENABLING ORDINANCE.
SECTION TWO DASH 1 55 POINT 10 11 Q DOESN'T SPEAK OF SATISFYING A CONFLICT WITH A CHINESE WALL OR SOMEHOW MAKING THE CONFLICT GO AWAY THROUGH AN INTAKE PROCESS.
IT STATES WHEN THE INSPECTOR GENERAL HAS A REASON TO BELIEVE HE MUST RECUSE HIMSELF FROM A MATTER BECAUSE OF A POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL SHALL REFER SUCH MATTER TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, OR ALL APPROPRIATE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OR, OR OTHER, EXCUSE ME, APPROPRIATE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
IT'S NOT DISCRETIONARY, IT'S A SHALL.
MS. SCHNABEL WHO HAS PRACTICED LAW BEFORE ME AND WHOM I RESPECT AS A LAWYER WAS TOUTED AS AN ETHICS EXPERT.
SHE OPINED THAT THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY BECAUSE THERE WAS NO IMPROPRIETY, FOR EXAMPLE, OR THAT IS THE IG ONLY ISSUED A LETTER CRITICIZING THE FUNDING OF THE TASK FORCE, NOTHING IMPROPER.
SHE ALSO LIKENED THE IGS FRIENDSHIP WITH COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKEN TO FRIENDSHIPS BETWEEN JUDGES AND LAWYERS AS A JUDGE FOR TWO DECADES THAT ANALOGY WAS WAY OFF THE MARK.
JUDGES CAN BE FRIENDS WITH LAWYERS.
THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM, BUT JUDGES CANNOT BE FRIENDS WITH LITIGANTS APPEARING BEFORE THEM.
IN THIS CASE, THE COUNCILWOMAN WAS NOT ADVOCATING ON HER OWN BEHALF LIKE A LAWYER DOES ON A CLIENT'S BEHALF LIKE A LAWYER DOES.
SHE WAS ADVOCATING HER OWN POSITION, WHICH MAKES HER MORE LIKE A LITIGANT.
SO WHILE I DISAGREE WITH BELS, MS. SCHNABELS, I'M SORRY.
JUDGES MUST REC MUST, JUDGES MUST RECUSE WHEN THEY ARE FRIENDS WITH THE LITIGANTS.
SO WHILE I DISAGREE WITH MS. SCHNABEL'S ANALOGY, I WAS EVEN MORE STUNNED AGAIN THAT NO ONE CITED THE PROPER STANDARD.
MR. SULLIVAN SAID THE IGS INTAKE PROCEDURE SATISFIED HIM AND MS. SCHNABEL SAID THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.
EVERYONE'S HAPPY, KIM'S PROTECTED, LET'S GO HOME.
BUT THE STANDARD IS NOT APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.
THE STANDARD IS APPEARANCE OF INDEPENDENCE.
THE RULES GOVERNING THE INSPECTOR GENERAL USE SOME VARIATION OF THE WORD INDEPENDENT OVER 120 TIMES.
AND THE IN INAUGURAL ANONYMOUS LETTERS TRIED TO POINT THAT OUT.
UNFORTUNATELY, THAT PERSON HADN'T CRACKED THE BOOK EITHER, SO THEY DIDN'T KNOW THE PROPER STANDARD.
SO EVEN AS, AS IF MS. SCHNABEL ARGUED, THERE IS NO IMPROPRIETY, THE CONCERTED EFFORT AND TIMING OF THE FIRST PUBLIC LETTER COUPLED WITH THE WORLD TRAVEL AND CLOSE FRIENDSHIP CREATES THE APPEARANCE THAT THE IG IS CARRYING WATER FOR A COUNCILWOMAN.
THAT'S THE VERY DEFINITE DEFINITION OF APPEARING, NOT APPEARING INDEPENDENT.
MR. SULLIVAN RECOGNIZED THAT THE ANONYMOUS LETTERS OF ASSERTION THAT THE ECC WAS REMISS IN FAILING TO FILE HIS FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES.
HE SAID HE OWNED THOSE MISTAKES AND THAT, AND THAT HE WOULD CORRECT IT.
MANY OF YOU HAVE FILED YOUR LAST FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE, BUT YOU ARE REQUIRED TO FILE ALL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORMS FOR YOUR TERM IN OFFICE.
AS FORMER BOARD MEMBERS, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO FILE, TO FILE THEIR DISCLOSURE FORMS EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT HERE ANYMORE.
WHATEVER ONES THEY MISS STILL NEED TO BE FILED.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE STILL IN BREACH.
I DON'T BLAME ANYBODY HERE FOR NOT FILING.
AND TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST, I THINK IT'S AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN FOR YOU AS VOLUNTEERS TO HAVE TO FILE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES.
BUT YOU SHOULD BE PROPERLY ADVISED OF THE REQUIREMENTS AND I'M CONFIDENT WITH THE PROPER LEGAL ADVICE, YOU'D ALL BE IN COMPLIANCE.
SO THAT MEETING ENDED ENDED WITH NOT A WORD ABOUT ANY INVESTIGATION OR DELIBERATION ON THE INDEPENDENCE
[01:05:01]
OR THE APPEARANCE OF INDEPENDENCE OF THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.YOU WERE NEVER APPRISED OF THE PROPER STANDARD.
FIVE MONTHS LATER, THE IG ISSUED A SECOND PUBLIC LETTER, LIKE THE FIRST ONE THAT ADVOCATED THE POSITION OF COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN.
THE B BREW PUB PROJECT IS BY ALL ACCOUNTS LEGAL BEFORE INFUSING MONEY, THE STATE DID A DEEP DIVE ON THE PROJECT AND DEEMED IT LEGAL.
EVERY CEA SIGNED BY THE PARISH WAS STAMPED BY THE PARISH ATTORNEY AS LEGAL COUNCILWOMAN.
VAN FRANKEN VOTED FOR IT SEVEN TIMES.
SHE DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT UNTIL THE GRETNA INCUMBENT REFUSED TO STEP ASIDE WHEN SHE ANNOUNCED FOR A SEAT.
EVEN MS. CHAT LANE HAS SAID THE BREW PRO PROJECT IS LEGAL.
THE ONLY PERSON NOW SAYING THE PROJECT IS NOT LEGAL IS COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN.
AND THAT'S DONE AT CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETINGS WITH THE IG IN ATTENDANCE.
WHO DOESN'T CORRECT HER? THE PUBLIC LETTER WAS CRITICIZED BY THE PARISH PRESIDENT, THE PARISH ATTORNEY, THE ENTIRE COUNCIL, EXCEPT FOR COUNCILMAN VAN RANKEN.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ALERTED TO THE PUBLIC LETTER BY THE IG SAID QUOTE, WE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE TIMELINESS OF THE COMPLAINT AND THE SUFFICIENT SUFFICIENCY OF THE INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY THE INSPECTOR GENERAL DR. ROBERT COLLINS.
A POLITICAL PUNDIT OPINED THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS LEAVING UP TO EVEN LEAVING IT UP TO THE LOCAL POLITICIANS TO FIGHT IT OUT.
DID YOU HEAR THAT? THE LOCAL POLITICIANS, THE IG IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A POLITICIAN.
SHE'S SUPPOSED TO APPEAR INDEPENDENT.
THE BREW PUB WAS SUPPORTED BY JET CO GNO INC.
THE JEFFERSON CHAMBER GATA, AND A MYRIAD OF OTHER BUSINESSES, INCLUDING VIKING CRUDE LINES.
THE JBC WAS THE ONLY BUSINESS GROUP THAT WAS NOT ON BOARD WITH THE PROJECT.
SO COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKEN AND THE IG LOBBIED THEM TO OPPOSE IT.
THEIR RESPONSE, THEY UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TODAY TO ENDORSE THE PROJECT.
REMEMBER, THE FIRST PUBLIC LETTER WAS CALLED UNPRECEDENTED AND RARE, AND DEFENDING THE SECOND PUBLIC LETTER, MS. CHATTER LANE, REPORTED THAT CRITICIZING THIS METHOD OF DISSEMINATING DISSEMINATING HER ATORY INVESTIGATORY RESULTS SHOWED IGNORANCE OF THE WORKINGS OF INSPECTORS.
I'M SURE SHE'LL TELL YOU THAT TODAY.
I'M NOT HERE TO DEFEND HOW WE FUNDED THE MAJOR CRIMES TASK FORCE.
I WOULD HOW, HOWEVER, NOTE THAT THE FIRST PUBLIC LETTER WAS SENT TO THE AG AND OTHERS, AND THEN NOTHING.
THE AG DID INTERVENE, INTERVENE.
THE POINT HERE IS THAT THE NIGHT BEFORE WE TOOK UP THE MEASURE, THE IG ISSUED HER FIRST PUBLIC LETTER ARGUING THAT COUNCILWOMAN VAN ARGUING COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN'S POINT.
THEY SAID THE SKY WOULD FALL, BUT IT DIDN'T.
AND I'M NOT HERE TO DEFEND THE BREW PUB.
IT'S A DISTRICT ONE PROJECT, AND MY DISTRICT WOULD NEVER SEE A DIME OF THAT MONEY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
I THINK I SPEAK FOR FIVE OF MY SIX COLLEAGUES ON THE COUNCILMAN.
I SAY, I DON'T WANNA TELL COUNCILMAN EDWARDS WHAT HE CAN, CAN OR CAN'T DO WITH DISTRICT ONE MONEY.
IF THIS PROJECT IS ONE LEGAL AND TWO SUPPORTED BY EVERY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP IN THE GREATER NEW ORLEANS AREA, AND THREE, ALL OF THE BUSINESSES IN THAT AREA, COUNCILMAN AVERAGE CAN DO WHATEVER HE WANTS.
THE POINT HERE IS THAT THE IG ISSUED HER SECOND PUBLIC LETTER ARGUING COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN'S POINT.
MY CONCERN IS WITH THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND HER USE OF THESE UNVETTED PUBLIC LETTERS TO ADVANCED COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN'S AGENDA, THERE IS NO MECHANISM FOR PUBLIC LETTERS.
THE ENACTING LEGISLATION AUTHORIZES ONLY REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
WHEN THE IG WANTS TO ISSUE FINDINGS WITH THE SEAL OF HER OFFICE, SHE MUST FOLLOW THE LAW.
THIS, THIS LAW DOES NOT PERMIT PUBLIC LETTERS.
THE TWO PUBLIC LETTERS WERE REPORTS.
I CAN CALL 'EM DUCKS, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE FEATHERS OR WEBBED FEET NO MATTER WHAT I CALL 'EM.
THEY'RE REPORTS AND THEY'RE SUBJECT TO THE LAWS GOVERNING THE ISSUANCE OF ISSUANCE OF REPORTS.
YOU CAN'T CALL IT A CALL, A REPORT, A PUBLIC LETTER JUST TO CIRCUMVENT THE DUE PROCESS THAT'S PROVIDED IN THE LAW.
THE IG HAS DEFENDED THE PUBLIC LETTERS BY ARGUING THAT THEY ARE DESIGNED TO WARN AND THEREFORE STOP WASTE AND ABUSE.
BUT THEY IMPACT REPUTATIONS AND THEY SHOULDN'T BE ISSUED HAPHAZARDLY WITHOUT THE PRECAUTIONS.
THE LAW REQUIRES THE PUBLIC LETTER ATTACKING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HAS IMPACTED EVERY OTHER DISTRICT'S ABILITY TO USE THESE VALUABLE TOOLS, AND IT AT LEAST CUR A LITTLE BIT CURIOUS THAT BOTH PUBLIC LETTERS ARE TARGETED AT GRETNA.
EVERY GRETNA PUBLIC OFFICIAL SUPPORTED THE INCUMBENT FROM GRETNA THAT COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN RAN AGAINST.
I HONESTLY DON'T CARE IF COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN WANTS TO PAY GRETNA BACK.
THAT'S BETWEEN COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN AND GRETNA.
BUT I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT HER USING THE IG IN THAT ENDEAVOR.
AND I CARE THAT THERE IS AT BEST THE APPEARANCE
[01:10:01]
THAT SHE'S ENLISTED THE IG IN THAT BATTLE WITH INDEPENDENCE AS A CORNERSTONE OF THE OFFICE OF THE OF INVEST INVESTIGATOR GENERAL, SHOULD THE IG AND A COUNCILWOMAN JOIN FORCES CREATING HANDOUTS AND ATTENDING CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETINGS, ARGUING AGAINST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN GRETNA, THE ENACT ENACTING LEGISLATION SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZE THE IG TO APPEAR AT PUBLIC OUTREACH MEETINGS TO APPRISE THE PUBLIC OF OUR OFFICE.AND WHAT IT DOES, IT DOES NOT WHOLESALE AUTHORIZE THE IG TO PUBLICLY TOUT UNVERIFIED, UNSUBSTANTIATED AND UNVETTED LETTERS THAT NEGATIVELY IMPACT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN EVERY DISTRICT.
I HAVE REVIEWED EMAILS WHERE THE IG AND COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN COORDINATE THEIR ATTACK ON THE GRETNA PROJECT THAT IS NOT INDEPENDENT, AND IT CERTAINLY DOES NOT APPEAR.
INDEPENDENT PRESIDENTS OF TWO OF MY LARGEST CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS REPORTED THAT COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN AND THE IG ATTENDED THEIR MEETINGS APPEARED WITH, APPEARED WITH THE IG TO CRITICIZE THE GRETNA PROJECT.
THEY ATTENDED OR WATCHED THE COUNCIL MEETING, LEARNED ABOUT THE BREW PUB PROJECT, AND RECOGNIZED THAT THE CRITICISMS WERE A POTENTIAL VENDETTA.
BOTH INDEPENDENTLY CONTACTED ME TO INFORM ME THAT THEY FELT AND INDEPENDENTLY BOTH OF THEM DUPED APPEARING ARM IN ARM WITH A COUNCILWOMAN TAKING OUT HER POLITICAL VENDETTAS ON GRETNA AS NOT A DISPLAY OF INDEPENDENCE.
ONE OF THOSE PRESIDENTS PLANS TO POINT THIS OUT IN A NEWSLETTER TO HER ASSOCIATION BECAUSE SHE'S WORRIED ABOUT THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEMBERS THAT ATTENDED THEIR CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETING AND DIDN'T SUBSEQUENTLY ATTEND A COUNCIL MEETING TO LEARN THE TRUE MEASURES OF OF THE AND AND, UH, THE TRUTH ABOUT THE BREW PRO PROJECT.
THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION HAS MODEL RULES THAT GOVERN PROSECUTORS PUBLIC COMMENTS.
IT PROHIBITS PROSECUTORS FROM MAKING EXTRA JUDICIAL STATEMENTS THAT THEY QUOTE NO OR REASONABLY SHOULD KNOW, WILL BE DISSEMINATED TO THE PUBLIC.
AT YOUR MAY MEETING EVEN MR. SULLIVAN HAD SPOKE OF, SPOKE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CONFIDENTIALITY AND IG REPORTS AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE SUBJECT TO REVIEW REPORTS BEFORE THEY'RE PUBLISHED.
THE PURPOSE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE IG GETS IT RIGHT AND TO PROTECT REPUTATIONS IN THE EVENT THAT IG IS WRONG.
THESE SO-CALLED PUBLIC LETTERS DO NOT HAVE THOSE PROTECTIONS AND ENACTING LEGISLATION.
THE ENACTING LEGISLATION RECOGNIZES THIS AS WELL.
THAT'S WHY THERE'S NO PROVISION FORM.
I SPENT TWO GA TWO DECADES ON THE BENCH AND I NEVER LET A LAWYER BREACH THE ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES, EVEN IF THAT LAWYER WAS A PROSECUTOR, NOR SHOULD YOU, EVEN IF IT'S THE IG.
THE SECOND LETTER SPURNED ANOTHER ANONYMOUS LETTER.
JUST LAST MONTH, THIS LETTER WAS A LAUNDRY LIST OF SIS SIX SPECIFIC ETHICAL LAPSES ON COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN'S PART ASKING WHY THE OOIG HAS BEEN SILENT ON EACH OF THESE LAPSES.
ONE OF THESE BREACHES WAS THE COUNCILMAN'S EFA CITY PROJECT.
LOOK AT THE HANDOUTS THAT YOU HAVE COMPARING AND CONTRASTING FAT CITY.
AND TELL ME HOW ON EARTH DID THE IG DECIDE TO INVESTIGATE, EXCUSE ME, ISSUE A PUBLIC LETTER ON THE BREW PUB PROJECT, BUT NOT EAT FAT CITY.
THE LETTER ALSO POINTS OUT COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKINS YEARS OF VOTES FOR HER FAMILY'S A BO PERMITS, BUT NOTHING HAS COME OF THIS.
NO REPORT, NO PUBLIC LETTER, NO CIVIC ASSOCIATION TOUR.
BUT WHATEVER HAPPENED APPEARS TO BE ENOUGH FOR THE ETHICS BOARD IN BATON ROUGE TO LOOK AT.
FINALLY, I'D BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T POINT OUT OTHER ETHICALLY CURIOUS ITEMS. THE IG WENT ON A PARISH WIDE CIVIC ASSOCIATION TOUR WITH COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN TO CRITICIZE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN GRETNA.
WHEN ASKED WHY SHE COULD NOT DISCUSS, WHEN ASKED WHY SHE COULD NOT DISCUSS THE PROJECT AND WHY SHE COULD DISCUSS THAT PROJECT AND NOT THE ETHICAL CHARGES AGAINST COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN, SHE SAID SHE COULD NOT DISCUSS INVESTIGATIONS.
BUT THE GRETNA PROJECT WAS ONLY A PUBLIC LETTER.
WHEN THE COUNSEL AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL POINTED OUT THAT THE PUBLIC LETTER WAS ERRONEOUS AND LIGHT ON INVESTIGATION, THE IG, I INSTITUTED AN INVESTIGATION, OR AT LEAST SHE ISSUED SUBPOENAS AND BEGAN SCHEDULING INTERVIEWS.
BUT THE PUBLIC CRITICISM CORPS STORE TOUR STILL HASN'T STOPPED.
IN FACT, SHE WAS IN TARRYTOWN JUST LAST WEEK.
SO THE BREW PROBE INVESTIGATION IS STILL FAIR GAME FOR PUBLIC CRITICISM.
I GUESS SHE'S GONNA SAY SHE'S TALKING ABOUT THE PUBLIC PUBLIC LETTER AND NOT THE INVESTIGATION.
AND WHEN I RECEIVED THAT PUBLIC LETTER, IT SAID IT COULD NOT BE DISSEMINATED UNTIL MIDNIGHT.
A REPORTER CALLED ME ABOUT AN HOUR AFTER I GOT IT BY ITS OWN TERMS. I COULDN'T SHARE IT UNTIL MIDNIGHT, BUT SOMEHOW THE PRESS ALREADY HAD IT.
[01:15:01]
THE NEXT MORNING AT 7:00 AM I SAW A PRERECORDED INTERVIEW WITH THE IG.AGAIN, RULES FOR THE, BUT NOT FOR ME.
I ALSO WATCHED A FOX EIGHT REPORTER ASK THE IG IF COUNCILWOMAN VAN BRECKEN GAVE HER THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE BREW PUB AND SHE SAID, NO, BUT IT WAS A COUNCIL MEMBER.
IF IT WASN'T COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKEN, THAT LEAVES SIX OTHER PEOPLE IN THE WHOLE WORLD.
NOW, I HAVEN'T RESEARCHED THE ETHICS OF BURNING SOURCES, BUT IT'S A HEAVY LIFT TO, IT'S NOT A HEAVY LIFT TO NARROW THAT DOWN TO ONE PERSON.
IN THE 30 YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN REALLY CLOSE TO INVESTIGATIONS, I'VE NEVER SEEN A SOURCE BURNED.
NOT UNTIL THEN THE IGS PROPENSITY TO ISSUE REPORTS, SORRY, PUBLIC LETTERS WITH NO PROPER INVESTIGATION AND THEN POLITIC FOR SUPPORT OF THOSE AARON FI UNVERIFIED AND ERRONEOUS PUBLIC LETTERS IS WHAT PROMPTED THE LEGISLATION CURRENTLY BEING DRAFTED.
IT IS NOT INTENDED TO HAMPER OVERSIGHT.
IT'S INTENDED TO STAND UP THE OIG BY PROVIDING MUCH NEEDED ETHICAL GUIDANCE AND HOPEFULLY TAKE THE POLITICS OUT OF THE OFFICE.
BUT AS PER USUAL, SHE'S POSTED THAT THE IG IS UNDER ATTACK AND BEFORE COUNCILWOMAN, AND THAT SHE'S UNDER ATTACK.
AND COUNCILWOMAN VAN REEN HAS BLASTED OUT EMAILS THAT THE IG IS UNDER ATTACK BEFORE EVEN READING ANY PROPOSED LEGISLATION LIKE THE PUBLIC LETTERS, FIRE READY, AIM.
THE ENACTING LEGISLATION INVESTS A LOT OF POWER IN THE IG, AND THAT'S GREAT.
WE WANT OVERSIGHT, BUT IT DOESN'T TAKE LONG FOR AN IG TO REALIZE THAT THEY'RE UNTOUCHABLE.
WHAT'S APPOINTED OUR IG ISN'T ANSWERABLE TO VOTERS.
THE IG ISN'T ANSWERABLE TO THE PARISH PRESIDENT.
THE IG ISN'T ANSWERABLE TO THE COUNCIL.
YOU'VE HEARD THE SAYING POWER CORRUPTS AND ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY WITHOUT YOU.
WHEN THIS BODY TOOK UP ITS FIRST SET OF ANONYMOUS LETTERS, MR. SULLIVAN MENTIONED THE IMPORTANCE OF ECC INVESTIGATIONS.
THAT'S AT HOUR 1 35 MINUTES AND 30 SECONDS.
AT THAT SAME MEETING, THE COMMISSION DID A CURSORY REVIEW OF THE ANONYMOUS LETTERS, THEN DISPLAYED A CLEARLY ORCHESTRATED DEFENSE OF THE IG WITH THE IG, MR. SULLIVAN AND MS. NOBEL.
SO I AM HERE HUMBLY AND RESPECTFULLY ASKING YOU TO ABIDE BY YOUR OATH.
I SINCERELY APOLOGIZE IF I APPEAR CRITICAL OR ACCUSATORY OF THE ECC.
UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S NO GENTEEL WAY TO HIGHLIGHT THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR DUTY TO WATCH THE WATCHDOG.
YOU ARE VESTED WITH UPHOLDING THE INTEGRITY OF OUR OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
YOU HAD A CHANCE IN MAY AND YOU DID NOTHING.
YOU DIDN'T EVEN SAY WE'VE INVESTIGATED THIS AND FIND NOTHING.
YOU SIMPLY SAID THE IGS INTAKE PROCESS IS FINE AND THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY, BOTH OF WHICH ARE TOTALLY IRRELEVANT UNDER THE LAW AND REGULATIONS.
THERE WAS NO MENTION OF THE CORRECT STANDARD.
NO ONE BROUGHT UP AN APPEARANCE OF INDEPENDENCE.
I LIKE KIM, I LIKE KIM A LOT, AND I DON'T WANT TO TERMINATE IT, BUT I DO WANT HER TO ABIDE BY THE LAW AND THE RULES THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO HER OFFICE.
I WANT HER TO ABIDE THAT BY THE RULES THAT HAVE HER SIGNATURE AT THE BOTTOM OF THEM.
YOU HAVE THAT POWER AND RESPECTFULLY, IT IS YOUR DUTY TO FORCE HER TO.
THE OIG IS AN IMPORTANT OFFICE.
AS MS. SCHNABEL NOTED AT YOUR MAY MEETING, THE POWER OF THE IG IS IN THE PEN.
IT IS TASKED WITH ISSUING REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND TO FERRET OUT FRAUD, WASTE AND ABUSE.
IT IS NOT THE IGS FUNCTION TO LOBBY SUPPORT FOR HER REPORTS OR EVEN HER PUBLIC LETTERS.
IT'S CERTAINLY NOT THE IGS FUNCTION TO JOIN FORCES WITH A WELL-KNOWN ALLY TO CALL OUT TO CARRY OUT WELL-KNOWN POLITICAL AND VENDETTAS.
I TRIED TO MEET WITH YOU ALL PERSONALLY SO THAT YOU COULD ASK ME ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAD.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE, PLEASE CALL ME.
UM, I, YOU KNOW, I I, AGAIN, I I WANNA LEAVE YOU WITH THIS.
I DON'T WANT ANYTHING I, ALL I WANT IS FOR YOU TO RECOGNIZE THAT, THAT THE OFFICE DOES NOT APPEAR INDEPENDENT.
WHAT Y'ALL DO ABOUT THAT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME.
BEFORE I GO TO MY, MY PREPARED NOTES, I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW, UM, I'M MARITA BOHANNAN.
I'M THE COUNCILWOMAN FOR DISTRICT FOUR.
[01:20:01]
AND ALTHOUGH IT MAY JUST BE HANS AND I THAT SPEAK TONIGHT, I KNOW THAT COUNCILMAN GAVE YOU A LETTER.UM, WE HAVE COUNCILMAN BYRON LEE HERE WITH US AND THE SUPPORT OF COUNCILMAN MARIAN EDWARDS.
THE FIVE DISTRICTS ARE HERE ASKING FOR YOUR HELP.
UM, BUT I HAVE TO TELL YOU MY EXPERIENCE LIKE HIS IS NOTHING NEW.
I AM A PRACTICING ATTORNEY FOR OVER 20 YEARS NOW.
AND PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL, I WAS A MAGISTRATE JUDGE IN, IN KENNER FOR OVER SEVEN YEARS.
MORE IMPORTANTLY TO YOUR MEETING AND THE TOPIC TODAY, I WAS APPOINTED BY THE SUPREME COURT AS A CHAIRMAN FOR THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE.
THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE, UM, PRESIDES OVER THE NAUGHTY LAWYERS, LAWYERS THAT ARE ACCUSED OF DOING SOME KIND OF WRONGDOING.
WE SIT IN A PANEL OF THREE, TWO LAWYERS AND ONE NON-LAWYER, AND WE HEAR THE TESTIMONY AND THE EVIDENCE ABOUT THAT LAWYERS ACCUSATIONS, AND THEN WE MAKE A FINDING AS TO WHETHER THEY ARE GUILTY OR INNOCENT IN SOME MANNER AND SANCTION THEM IF THAT'S WARRANTED.
SO IN THIS REGARD, WHAT WE DID WAS VERY MUCH LIKE WHAT YOU DO.
I SAT THERE ON THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE FOR EIGHT YEARS.
SOME OF THE PROUDEST YEARS OF MY LIFE, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE TO ADMIT SITTING JUDGMENT OVER ANOTHER ATTORNEY AS A PRACTICING ATTORNEY AND KNOWING HOW HARD IT IS TO BE AN ATTORNEY WAS NEVER, NEVER EASY.
SO ME BEING IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY, IT'S ONE OF THE HARDEST THINGS I'VE DONE IN MY PROFESSIONAL CAREER TO STAND AND ASK FOR YOUR HELP AGAINST ANOTHER ATTORNEY IN LOUISIANA.
WE HAVE A VERY RICH HISTORY OF POLICING OUR OWN.
THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE IS MADE UP, LIKE I SAID, OF THE TWO LAWYERS AND THE ONE NON-LAWYER, BUT IT WAS ALWAYS THE LAWYERS THAT WANTED TO ISSUE THE HARSHEST SENTENCE.
THIS IS BECAUSE FOR MOST OF US, THE SKILL OF PRACTICING LAW IS HARD EARNED.
IT'S STEEPED IN TRADITION AND IT'S KNOWN FOR HONOR.
DISCIPLINING A FELLOW LAWYER IS VERY, VERY HARD AND HEARTBREAKING AT TIMES, BUT IT'S NECESSARY.
PEOPLE NEED TO TRUST LAWYERS AND JUDGES IN ORDER TO BELIEVE THAT THEY'LL BE TREATED EQUITABLY.
IT IS WITH THIS HU THIS HISTORY IN MIND THAT I HUMBLY AND VERY SADLY COME TO YOU TODAY.
YOU ARE THE ONES WHO NOW WE ARE ASKING TO POLICE THEIR OWN.
WHAT WE ARE ASKING YOU TO DO IS DIFFICULT.
GOD KNOWS I KNOW, BUT LITERALLY IT IS WITHOUT ALTERNATIVE.
LET ME TELL YOU HOW WE GOT HERE IN MY PERSPECTIVE.
SUMMARY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2 6 3 1 3 WAS PROPOSED AT THE RESPECT AT THE REQUEST OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ON THE 22ND OF MAY, 2024, IT SOUGHT TO EXPAND THE TERM OF EMPLOYMENT FOR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, LOWER THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND INCREASE THE INVESTIGATIVE POWERS OF HER OFFICE.
THE ORDINANCE FAILED WITH A SIX ONE VOTE WITH ONLY COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN VOTING TO APPROVE IT.
THIS IS HOW I CAME TO MEET MR. SULLIVAN.
UH, HE CAME TO MY OFFICE TO LOBBY FOR THAT THIRD TERM.
UM, HE CAME TO THE COUNCIL MEETING TO LOBBY FOR THE THIRD TERM.
AND IT WASN'T UNTIL I WAS SOMETIME IN THAT I REALIZED HE ACTUALLY DIDN'T WORK FOR THE IG, THAT HE ACTUALLY WORKED FOR THE ECC.
UM, SINCE HER REQUEST FOR THE THIRD TERM FAILED NEARLY FIVE MONTHS AGO, THE JPO I'S OFFICE HAS BEEN, HAS ISSUED NOW TWO OF WHAT SHE'S CALLING PUBLIC LETTERS WITHOUT HAVING CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION AND AUDIT INTERVIEW, A WITNESS REQUEST DOCUMENTS, OR UTILIZE ANY PREFERRED INVESTIGATORY PRACTICES.
THIS CONDUCT IS IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION TO THE JEFFERSON PARISH CODE OF ORDINANCES AND SPECIFICALLY SECTION TWO DASH 15 15 10 AND ALL THE SEQUENCING PARTS OF THAT.
THAT ORDINANCE, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES THAT PER, THAT PERMITS THE IG TO ISSUE A PUBLIC LETTER.
AND THESE TWO LETTERS ARE THE FIRST OF THEIR KIND IN THE HISTORY OF THE IGS OFFICE IN THE ORDINANCE, WHICH DISCUSSES THE OIG.
THEY ONLY ACKNOWLEDGE ONE TYPE OF WRITING TO BE DONE BY HER OFFICE.
AND THAT IS A REPORT WHICH COULD CONTAIN AN AUDIT, A RECOMMENDATION, OR AN INVESTIGATION.
THE ORDINANCE IS VERY CLEAR, BUT THE REPORT MUST FOLLOW VERY SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING, UM, INCLUDING NOTICE AND TIME TO RESPOND.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT WERE NOT FOLLOWED WHEN ISSUING HER PUBLIC LETTER IN THE ORDINANCE, I'M SORRY, BOTH PRIOR TO AND FOLLOWING THE RELEASE OF THESE PUBLIC LETTERS, THE IG BEGAN A PUBLIC RELATIONS TOUR MAKING SEVERAL TELEVISION APPEARANCES AND ATTENDING, ATTENDING CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETINGS WITH COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN, WHERE SHE HANDED OUT A FLYER THAT WAS TITLED THE FACTS.
DESPITE THE CONFUSING AND POTENTIALLY MISLEADING
[01:25:01]
NATURE OF THESE FACTS, A PUBLIC RECORD RECORDS REQUEST WOULD LATER SHOW THAT BOTH MS. VAN RANKIN AND THE IG WORKED ON THIS FLYER TOGETHER AND SOUGHT EACH OTHER'S PERMISSION AND APPROVAL BEFORE RELEASING IT TO THE PUBLIC.SO IT WAS NOT DONE INDEPENDENTLY, IT WAS DONE WITH THE INPUT OF COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN.
THESE TELEVISION AND PUBLIC APPEARANCES TO LOBBY SUPPORT FOR HER PUBLIC LETTER IS NOT A STATED PURPOSE IN THE ORDINANCE, NOR IS IT A PERMITTED ACTION OF THE OIG AND AS A LAWYER IS POTENTIALLY A VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT, SPECIFICALLY SECTION 3.6.
JUST DAYS AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE PUBLIC LETTER, THE INSPECTOR GENERAL APPEARED BEFORE THE JEFFERSON PARISH COUNCIL.
IT WAS SEPTEMBER 25TH OF 24, WHERE SHE PUBLICLY ADMITTED THAT SHE HAD NOT SPOKEN TO A WITNESS, BUT HAD DONE THE LETTER LIKE A PRIVATE CITIZEN, DESPITE IT BEING ON HER LETTERHEAD WITH HER LOGO AND RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC.
SHE THEN ADMITTED THAT SHE SAW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ILLEGAL, UM, AT ALL REVOL IN, UH, IN, IN HER REPORT, IN, IN HER PUBLIC LETTER TO THIS DAY, SHE WILL TELL YOU THAT SHE HAS FOUND NOTHING ILLEGAL DESPITE SOUNDING THE ALARMS ACROSS THE PARISH.
HOWEVER, THIS IS STARKLY DIFFERENT FROM HOW THE IG HAS RESPONDED TO OTHER WELL-KNOWN AND HIGHLY PUBLICIZED COMPLAINTS.
SHE FAILED TO INVESTIGATE THE ALLEGED FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE SURROUNDING THE PUBLICIZED IMPROPER ACQUISITION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY BY AN EMPLOYEE OF COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN, WHICH HAPPENED BEFORE COUNCILMAN BERG AND I HAD BEEN SWORN IN.
SHE FAILED TO REPORT, INVESTIGATE, OR AUDIT THE ACQUISITION OF LAND NEGOTIATE AS PART OF THE EAT FAT CITY PROJECT THAT RESULTED IN A MULTIMILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT AT THE EXPENSE OF TAXPAYERS WITH CONTINUED LEGAL EXPOSURE TO THE PARISH.
THAT WAS A PROJECT DONE BY COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN.
SHE FAILED TO INVESTIGATE THE ALLEGATIONS THAT THAT SAME COUNCIL MEMBER MAY HAVE VOTED ON ISSUES RELATED TO THE LICENSING OF A COMPANY OWNED OR REPRESENTED BY HER FAMILY AND OR HER SPOUSE.
SHE FAILED TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER THAT SAME COUNCILWOMAN HAD VOTED ON A SETTLEMENT ON A CASE TO WHICH HER HUSBAND HAD A CONNECTION.
LIKE YOU, THE MEMBERS OF THE JEFFERSON PARISH COUNCIL HAVE RECEIVED NUMEROUS ANONYMOUS LETTERS FEATURING MANY OF THESE ALLEGATIONS AND VOICING COMPLAINTS OF THE PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKING, INCLUDING TRAVELING ABROAD TOGETHER.
UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT THEIR RELATIONSHIP, WHETHER REAL OR NOT, HAS BEEN THE FOCUS OF TELEVISION STORIES, NEWS ARTICLES, AND SOCIAL MEDIA GOSSIP, IT GIVES US GRAVE CONCERN WHETHER THEIR RELATIONSHIP IS REAL OR NOT.
IT IS CLEAR THAT THERE IS AN APPEARANCE TO THE PUBLIC THAT IT IS THAT WOULD BE A CURRENT, A VIOLATION OF THE CURRENT POLICY.
PLEASE KNOW IT IS VERY COMMON FOR ATTORNEYS TO KNOW EACH OTHER AND TO HAVE RELATIONSHIPS OUTSIDE OF THEIR JOBS.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT UNLESS YOUR RELATIONSHIP IS WITH THE IG AND UNLESS IT COMPROMISES YOUR INDEPENDENCE, NOT JUST IN FACT, BUT IN APPEARANCE.
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND THE STAFF MUST BE FREE IN FACT AND APPEARANCE FROM ANY KIND OF IMPAIRMENT TO THEIR INDEPENDENCE, AND THEY HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN THAT INDEPENDENCE.
SO THEIR OPINIONS, CONCLUSIONS WILL BE IMPARTIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR OWN QUALITY STANDARDS.
CURRENTLY, OURS, INSPECTOR GENERAL HAS ISSUED TWO PUBLIC LETTERS WITHOUT HAVING CONDUCTED ANY TYPE OF IN INVESTIGATION.
AS WE'VE DISCUSSED MANY TIMES TODAY, WITHOUT ASKING THE PARISH PRESIDENT, WITHOUT SPEAKING TO ANY COUNCILMAN INVOLVED, WITHOUT ANY REGARD TO THE OUTCOME, WHEN SAYING ON THE RECORD, EVERYTHING IS LEGAL, I'M NOT SAYING ANYTHING WAS ILLEGAL.
I'M NOT SAYING ANYTHING WAS ILLEGAL, I JUST THINK IT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER.
SO SHE SOUNDED THE ALARMS. SHE THEN TOLD US THAT SHE HAD BEEN INVESTIGATING THIS FOR A YEAR.
SHE IS SUPPOSED TO ACCOUNT TO YOU ALL ABOUT THE INVESTIGATIONS AND JUSTIFY THE SPENDING THAT SHE'S USING ON THOSE INVESTIGATIONS.
DID SHE, IF YOU GO BACK ON YOUR NOTES, DID SHE EVER TALK TO YOU ABOUT THIS? DID SHE TELL YOU HOW MUCH TIME AND MONEY WAS SPENT ON THIS INVESTIGATION? WHICH SHE SAYS NOW SHE TOOK A YEAR TO DO.
THESE ACTIONS ARE IN DIRECT CONTRAVENTION TO THE JEFFERSON PARISH CODE OF ORDINANCE, SPECIFICALLY SECTION TWO DASH 1 55 11.
THERE IS SIMPLY NO PROVISION WHICH WOULD PERMIT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL TO GIVE A PUBLIC LETTER MUCH LESS, MAKE PUBLIC APPEARANCES AT CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETINGS AND GIVE TELEVISION INTERVIEWS IN AN EFFORT TO LOBBY SUPPORT AND, AND A CALL TO ACTION TO REACH OUT TO COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAKE SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS.
IT WAS AS IF THE IG AND COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN WERE ON SOME KIND OF BIZARRE PUBLICITY TOUR
[01:30:01]
ABOUT AN ISSUE THAT HAD BEEN VOTED ON FOR OVER A YEAR.IF SHE WANTED TO SOUND THE ALARMS, THE TIMES TO DO THAT WOULD BE BEFORE, BEFORE IT WAS VOTED ON SEVEN TIMES NO MATTER AT THIS POINT, IT WAS TOO LATE, THOUGH I'S MANUAL OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ALONG WITH THE ORDINANCE, ARE WHAT GUIDES HER ACTIONS AND NEED TO GUIDE YOUR DECISIONS.
IT STARTS WITH THIS EXACT QUOTE, ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE KEY TO MAINTAINING THE PUBLIC'S TRUST.
INSPECTORS GENERAL ARE ENTRUSTED WITH FOSTERING AND PROMOTING ACCOUNTABILITY AND INTEGRITY IN GOVERNMENT IN ORDER TO EARN AND MAINTAIN THE PUBLIC'S TRUST.
THE J-P-O-I-G WILL ADHERE TO THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF INTEGRITY, OBJECTIVITY, INDEPENDENCE, PROFESSIONALISM, CONFIDENCE, COURAGE, TRUST, FAIRNESS, HONESTY, FORTHRIGHTNESS, PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPECT FOR OTHERS AS FULLY DEFINED IN THIS POLICY.
THE POLICY GOES ON FOR 285 PAGES.
THE WORD TRUST IS MENTIONED 19 TIMES.
THE WORD INTEGRITY IS MENTIONED 24 TIMES, BUT THE WORD INDEPENDENCE IS MENTIONED 121 TIMES.
THE WORD PUBLIC LETTER IS NEVER MENTIONED.
IN FACT, A LETTER OF ANY KIND IS ONLY REFERRED TO ONCE ON PAGE 69 WHERE IT SAYS THAT THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SHALL BE REPORTED BY THE IG TWO U, THE ECC UNDER A SEPARATE COVER LETTER.
WAS THAT EVER DONE? DID YOU ALL RECEIVE A LETTER EXAMINING HER FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR EITHER THE GRETNA BREW PUB PUBLIC LETTER OR THE GRETNA TASK FORCE PUBLIC LETTER? WAS IT MADE AVAILABLE TO YOU BEFORE IT WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PRESS? THAT'S IT.
285 PAGES AND NO MENTION OF A PUBLIC LETTER.
IN FACT, THE PUBLIC LETTER IS SOMETHING THAT THIS IG HAS CREATED AND SENT OUT IN WHAT EVERYONE CALLS AN UNPRECEDENTED MOVE.
FIRST, YOU NEVER WANT YOUR IG DOING SOMETHING UNPRECEDENTED.
THEY SHOULD USE ONLY PRACTICES THAT ARE TRIED, TRUE, RELIABLE, UNBIASED, AND INDEPENDENT.
THEY SHOULD BE CONSISTENT AND STEADY.
YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF WHY YOU HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS PUBLIC LETTER BEFORE.
IS IT THAT MS. SHALENE IS JUST SO CREATIVE AS TO HAVE INVENTED IT? OR IS IT THAT EVERY OTHER IG IN THE COUNTRY STICKS TO INVESTIGATORY PROCESSES THAT ARE CONSISTENT, FAIR AND TRIED? YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF WHY YOU HAVE NOT SEEN ANY IG ANY OTHER IGS ON TELEVISION PRIOR TO A FULL INVESTIGATION.
IS IT THAT MS. SHADOWING WAS THE FIRST TO DISCOVER THAT THE NEWS LIKES CONTENTIOUS STORIES? OR IS IT THAT EVERY OTHER IG IN THE COUNTRY MAINTAINS THE DECORUM OF THEIR OFFICE AND SIMPLY DOESN'T LOWER THEIR OFFICE TO ANY KIND OF VILE MEANS? IN FACT, IN HER MANUAL OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, THE NEWS MEDIA IS MENTIONED ONLY ONCE, AND THAT IS THAT INQUIRIES FOR NEWS MEDIA SHOULD BE DIVERTED TO THEIR ATTORNEY.
OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S NOT MENTIONED BECAUSE IT'S JUST NOT DONE.
YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF WHY THERE IS NO POLICY.
UM, I'M SORRY, I LOST MY SPOT.
UM, YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF ON WHY THERE IS NO POLICY ON HOW AND WHEN TO APPEAR ABOUT A PUBLIC LETTER ON THE NEWS BECAUSE IT NEVER HAPPENS.
BOTH THE CREATION OF THE PEP, THE PUBLIC LETTER, AND THE WEAPONIZING OF THE IGS OFFICE TO THE NEWS MEDIA IS NEW.
AND LET US NOT FORGET ABOUT THE SOCIAL MEDIA POST.
I WANNA READ A POST TO YOU THAT WAS JUST POST IN THE MIDDLE OF ALL THIS HAPPENING, OUR IG POST THIS, SPEAK UP FOR THE INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT IN JEFFERSON PARISH.
CONTACT YOUR COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES AND LET THEM KNOW YOU SUPPORT A STRONG INDEPENDENT OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
YESTERDAY, THE JEFFERSON PARISH COUNCIL READ INTO A SUMMARY, A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE APPOINTMENT, AUTHORITY AND INVESTIGATIVE POWERS OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL DETAILS.
THEY HAVEN'T BEEN SHARED WITH THE PUBLIC OR THE J-P-O-I-G.
ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT ARE UNDER ATTACK.
WE HAVE OUR IG ON SOCIAL MEDIA WITH A CALL TO ARMS OVER AN ORDINANCE THAT SHE HAS NOT READ THAT SHE HASN'T READ.
SHE WENT TO THE PUBLIC, BUT THAT'S NOT THE ONLY ONE.
THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE IN HER OFFICE WHO HAVE TROUBLING POSTS.
UM, ONE THAT SPOKE WITH YOU TODAY, WHO APPARENTLY IS A BIG SUPPORTER OF ISRAEL AND MADE A BUNCH OF SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS INCLUDING INAPPROPRIATE LANGUAGE LIKE F THE NOPD AND JPSO FOR THAT MATTER TOO.
HE SPOKE TO YOU TONIGHT ABOUT INTEGRITY AND ETHICAL AND, AND, AND ETHNIC AND
[01:35:01]
ETHICS.AND HE GETS, THIS IS HIS SOCIAL MEDIA POST.
YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF, EVEN THOUGH NOT BEING PERMITTED IN THE MANUAL, WHY SHE SAID ABOUT ATTENDING SEVERAL NEW AND NUMEROUS CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETINGS, NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS, AND A REPUBLICAN WOMEN'S ORGANIZATION TO SPREAD INFORMATION THAT HAD CLEARLY ALREADY BEEN DEBUNKED.
I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING.
THIS IS AFTER THE COUNCIL MEETING WHEN WE HAD A STATE REPRESENTATIVE, TWO STATE REPRESENTATIVES STAND UP, EXPLAIN FROM THE FIRST LINE OF THE 35 PAGE LETTER TO THE END, THE MISTAKES IN IT LITERALLY DEBUNKED IT.
AND IT, OUR MEETING WENT ON FOR EIGHT HOURS THAT DAY.
TWO DAYS LATER, THE SHOW WAS BACK ON THE ROAD WITH THE IG AND COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN WITH THE SAME FLYER, THE ONE THAT THEY HAD ALREADY PROVEN UNTRUE, HANDING IT OUT AND STILL DISCUSSING IT AND ASKING THEM TO CONTACT US, UNDERSTAND THE VOTE WAS OVER AGAIN, WHY IT'S UNHEARD OF.
WE SHOULD NEVER HAVE AN IG THAT NEEDS TO LOBBY FOR SUPPORT.
AN IG SHOULD DO HER INVESTIGATION, ISSUE THE REPORT, STAND BY IT.
BUT SHE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GO TO THE PUBLIC AND LOBBY FOR SUPPORT.
THE FACT THAT SHE FEELS THE NEED TO LOBBY SHOULD TELL YOU THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM.
IT SHOULD SCREAM TO YOU THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM.
YOU WANNA KNOW WHY IT'S NOT IN THE MANUAL AND WHY YOU HAVE ANOTHER SEEN OTHER IGS DO IT.
BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T, THEY MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THEIR OFFICE.
SO WHILE A PUBLIC LETTER DOESN'T EXIST, A REPORT CERTAINLY DOES.
SO WHY DIDN'T MS. ADELINE JUST CALL IT A REPORT, MAKE IT EASIER FOR EVERYONE? SHE COULDN'T DO THAT BECAUSE A REPORT HAS TO FOLLOW VERY SPECIFIC RULES.
PEOPLE HAVE A CHANCE TO RESPOND AND THEY GET DUE PROCESS.
YOU DON'T GET TO SEND THE E MIDNIGHT EMAIL AND CALL IT A PUBLIC LETTER AND SAY, I DID IT LIKE A REGULAR CITIZEN, EVEN THOUGH I PUT IT ON MY LOGO ON IT AND PRETEND LIKE IT'S NO BIG DEAL.
YOU'RE THE IG, YOU'RE OUR OVERSIGHT, YOU'RE OUR WATCHDOG.
YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE, THE SPECIFIC RULES THAT ARE LAID OUT.
IF YOU'RE NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES, THEN WHO WILL? YOU'RE THE IG.
YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF WHY.
OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE LOUISIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL FELT THE NEED TO STEP IN AND SAY THAT OUR IG ACTED INAPPROPRIATELY.
SHE SAID, AND I QUOTE, WE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE TIMELINESS OF THE COMPLAINT, THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE INVESTIGATION CON CONDUCTED BY THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
HOW HUMILIATING FOR ALL OF US, BUT ESPECIALLY FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE HER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
I DO FEEL LIKE WE'RE FORTUNATE THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS NOT JUST STEPPING IN.
SHE'S GIVING US AN OPPORTUNITY TO SELF-POLICE.
SHE'S GIVING US AN OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT OURSELVES.
SO I'M ASKING YOU TONIGHT TO DO WHAT YOU'RE MANDATED TO DO.
YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF, WHY IS THIS HAPPENING IN THE MOST TRANSPARENT PARISH IN THE STATE? WHY WOULD SHE RISK HER GOOD NAME, HER CREDIBILITY, HER BAR LICENSE, HER JOB? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER.
I CAN KNOW, I KNOW THAT IT STARTED AFTER WE REFUSED TO GIVE HER A THIRD TERM.
I KNOW THAT THE RUMOR MILL SAYS THAT WHEN COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANKIN RUNS FOR AND IF SHE'S SUCCESSFUL BEING PARISH PRESIDENT, THAT THIS WILL BE OUR NEW PARISH ATTORNEY.
THAT'S WHAT THE RUMOR MILL SAYS.
I KNOW THAT WE'VE RECEIVED NUMEROUS ANONYMOUS LETTERS, ALL OF WHICH HAD VERIFIED DOCUMENTS, UM, ATTACHED TO THEM WITH PICTURES THAT INCLUDED THESE TWO OVER THE YEARS.
UM, AS FRIENDS, I KNOW THAT THE TIMING OF THOSE LETTERS OF OF THE PUBLIC LETTERS THAT WERE ISSUED BY THE IG WERE AT THE EXACT SAME TIME THAT SOME RATHER EMBARRASSING ISSUES REGARDING LAWSUITS WERE COMING OUT ABOUT MS. VAN RANKIN'S OFFICE.
I KNOW THAT YOU THE ECC WAS COPIED.
UM, BECAUSE I'M SURE THAT CI EXPECTED YOU GUYS TO TAKE ACTION JUST AS WE DO.
I HONESTLY, I DO HAVE THE SAME HOPE SO FAR.
YOU KNOW, THE ECC HAS REMAINED QUIET EVEN AFTER THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS WEIGHED IN.
YOUR MEETINGS CONSIST OF AN HOUR LONG PRESENTATION BY MS. SHADOWING.
YOU COME TO BELIEVE HER AS I DID, AND I THINK I COULD SPEAK FOR MOST OF THE COUNCIL.
BUT YOU CANNOT GET SO CLOSE AS FRIENDLY AS YOU ALL MAY BE, TO LET YOUR OWN INDEPENDENCE IN FACT OR APPEARANCE
[01:40:01]
BE CALLED INTO QUESTION.IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AT THE LAST MEETING, ONE OF YOU ACTUALLY CLAPPED WHEN SOMEONE SPOKE IN HER DEFENSE.
YOU ARE OUR ONLY HOPE IN CORRECTING WHAT COULD BE SOMETHING OUT OF CONTROL AS THE LINES AND THE RELATIONSHIPS SOMETIMES BLUR.
WE NEED YOU TO TAKE A STEP BACK, ASK THE DIFFICULT QUESTIONS, AND TAKE THE APPROPRIATE ACTION NECESSARY TO PROTECT OUR PARISH.
REMEMBER, THE OIGS MANUAL SAYS INDEPENDENCE 121 TIMES.
SHE HAS TO BE INDEPENDENT, NOT JUST IN FACT, BUT AN APPEARANCE.
IN FACT, IT SAYS THE J-P-O-I-G WILL CONSIDER NOT ONLY WHETHER THEY ARE INDEPENDENT AND WHETHER IN THEIR ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS, BUT ALSO WHETHER THERE IS ANYTHING ABOUT THEIR SITUATION WHICH MIGHT LEAD OTHERS TO QUESTION THEIR INDEPENDENCE.
SO IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO JUST BE INDEPENDENT.
YOU HAVE TO APPEAR INDEPENDENT AT THIS POINT.
THERE ARE NEWS STORIES ABOUT THEIR RELAT, HER RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER.
THERE'S NEWS ARTICLES ABOUT HER RELATIONSHIP WITH THE, WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER.
UM, THERE'S SOCIAL MEDIA INSANITY HAPPENING ABOUT THEIR RELATIONSHIP.
I THINK AT THIS POINT, IT'S CLEAR EVEN IF IT'S NOT REAL, THAT THE APPEARANCE THAT THE TWO OF THEM HAVE AN INAPPROPRIATE RELATIONSHIP EXISTS THAT WOULD QUESTION OUR IGS INDEPENDENCE.
THE CONDUCT BY THE IG APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN ABUSE OF POWER IN MY OPINION AND ABUSE OF HER AUTHORITY.
AND AT THE VERY LEAST, IT CALLS INTO QUESTION HER INTEGRITY.
STATE REP COX SAID AT OUR LAST MEETING THAT ONE OF HIS GREATEST EXPERIENCES IS BEING PART OF THE JEFFERSON DELEGATION IN BATON ROUGE.
HE SAID THAT EVERYONE LOOKS TO US AS AN EXAMPLE.
SO TODAY I'M ASKING YOU TO CONTINUE THAT PROUD JEFFERSON PARISH TRADITION OF LEADING EVEN WHEN IT'S DIFFICULT.
TODAY I AM ASKING YOU TO POLICE YOUR OWN, NOT FOR PUNISHMENT'S SAKE, BUT FOR THE SAKE OF EQUITY, OF OF EQUITY ETHICS, AND FOR A BETTER JEFFERSON PARISH.
WE DO NOT WANT OUR IGS OFFICE WEAPONIZED.
WE'RE ASKING YOU FOR THAT PROTECTION.
IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON PARISH THAT PROTECTIONS AND RULES BE IMPLEMENTED TO PROHIBIT PRO POTENTIAL UNETHICAL CONDUCT, UM, INCLUDING PROCEDURES FOR HOW TO SPEAK TO THE PRESS, WHEN TO SPEAK TO THE PRESS PROHIBITING PUBLIC LETTERS AND A SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY.
WE, THE MEMBERS OF YOUR GOVERNING BODY AND THE PEOPLE OF JEFFERSON PARISH ARE COMING TO YOU, IMPLORING YOU TO HELP US.
FOR ME, THIS IS NOT A QUESTION OF WHETHER THE GRETNA PROJECT IS A GOOD IDEA AND WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED A TASK FORCE.
THOSE ARE ALL SUBJECTIVE QUESTIONS THAT ARE LEFT TO THOSE OF US THAT ARE ELECTED TO DECIDE AND ANSWER TO ME.
THIS IS A QUESTION OF POLICY AND PROCEDURE.
DO WE WANT AN IG WHO DOES NOT APPEAR INDEPENDENT? WHO DOES MEDIA TOURS? WHO IS CHASTISED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL? OR DO WE WANT STRONGER POLICIES THAT CREATE TRANSPARENCY AND SAFETY FOR THE PUBLIC? WELL, I SUPPORT OUR IG EVEN THOUGH I KNOW TODAY, IT MAY NOT FEEL TO HER THAT I DO AS A LAWYER.
I THINK WE DESERVE BETTER AND WE DESERVE INDEPENDENCE.
YOU HAVE FIVE COUNSEL MEMBERS HERE.
YOU HAVE THE PARISH PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE STATE REPRESENTATIVES IN THE AUDIENCE.
YOU HAVE NEARLY THE ENTIRE GRETNA GO GOVERNMENT HERE.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT UNPRECEDENTED MOVES, THAT'S AN UNPRECEDENTED MOVE.
AND IT SHOULDN'T JUST SPEAK TO YOU.
IT SHOULD BE SCREAMING AT YOU THAT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG AND THAT WE NEED YOUR HELP.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO STAY AFTER AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I KNOW WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO IS HARD AND IF IT WEREN'T ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY, NONE OF US WOULD BE HERE.
HUH? I CAN TELL YOU COUNCILMAN BERG AND I LABORED OVER HAVING TO DO THIS.
WE'RE BOTH FORMER JUDGES AND HAVE A LOT OF A GREAT DEAL OF AFFECTION FOR OUR IG, BUT WE CAN'T LET THAT HINDER OUR, OUR PARISH.
ANY OTHER COUNSEL? IS THERE ANY OTHER COUNSEL? OKAY.
AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO ASK MS. SHALENE.
WE WILL, UM, TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
WE'LL TAKE ACTUALLY A SIX MINUTE BREAK.
WELL NO FIVE NOW WE'LL RECONVENE AT SIX 50.
AGAIN, WE'RE RESUMING THE MEETING NOW.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO STAY, PLEASE HAVE A SEAT.
[01:45:02]
UM, I'D LIKE TO BEGIN BY REMARKS TONIGHT BY ACKNOWLEDGING EVERYBODY WHO CAME HERE, WHETHER I'M CRITICAL OF THE OFFICE OR IN SUPPORT OF THE OFFICE OR SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN.UM, I DID MY BEST TO TAKE NOTES AS PEOPLE WERE SPEAKING AND I'M DOING, I'M GOING, I'M GOING TO DO MY BEST TO SEE IF I CAN AND WORK, UM, A COHERENT LINE OF THOUGHT THAT CONSIDERS SOME OF THE REMARKS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE.
UM, I WANNA BEGIN BY ACKNOWLEDGING A BELIEF THAT I HAVE.
UM, THIS PROCESS IS NOT ENTIRELY KNOWN TO ME.
WHAT THESE COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT YOU TO DO IS NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR TO ME.
ALTHOUGH I'M INCREDIBLY RELIEVED THAT AT LEAST COUNCILMAN BERG DOES NOT WANNA SEE ME REMOVED.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT HE WANTS TO HAPPEN, BUT I I'M, I'M RELIEVED THAT HE DOESN'T WANNA SEE ME REMOVED.
BUT I DO SORT OF HAVE THIS BELIEF THAT WHATEVER WE'RE DOING HERE TONIGHT, EYES ARE ON US.
AND I BELIEVE THAT HOW I RESPOND TO THIS MOMENT, BUT IT'S NOT JUST ME HOW I RESPOND, I THINK IT'S HOW YOU RESPOND IS GONNA SPEAK TO OUR RELATIVE COMMITMENT TO INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT AND, AND WELL BEYOND INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT.
I THINK IT'S GONNA SPEAK TO OUR RELATIVE COMMITMENT TO ENCOURAGING OR SUPPRESSING A CULTURE OF SPEAKING UP.
IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS SINCE THIS PUBLIC LETTER, UH, CAME OUT IN 2024, UM, I'VE BEEN CONTACTED BY NUMEROUS PEOPLE INSIDE OF GOVERNMENT AND OUTSIDE OF GOVERNMENT.
UM, SOME OF THEM INSIDE OF GOVERNMENT BEGIN WITH, UH, WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.
SOME OF THEM ARE, DON'T LET 'EM GET TO YOU.
BUT THE ONLY COMMENT THAT TENDS TO BE REPEATED ACROSS THESE CONVERSATIONS IS, KIM, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND.
JEFFERSON PARISH IS NEVER GONNA CHANGE.
SINCE MY APPOINTMENT IN MARCH OF 2022, I HAVE ISSUED NINE AUDITS OR INVESTIGATIONS, ACTUALLY THREE PUBLIC LETTERS.
THEY GO OUT UNDER DIFFERENT, UM, NOMENCLATURE, BUT THEY ALL GET RELEASED THE SAME WAY.
THREE OF 'EM, UM, THREE ANNUAL WORK PLANS AND TWO, UM, ANNUAL REPORTS.
THAT'S I THINK 18 PRODUCTS THAT THIS OFFICE HAS PUT OUT PUBLICLY IN THE TWO AND A HALF YEARS SINCE MY APPOINTMENT.
UM, ONE OF YOU WILL KNOW THAT I PRESENT ON THOSE PRODUCTS AT YOUR MEETINGS.
I BRIEF YOU ON WHAT I'M DOING AT YOUR MEETINGS FOR THE LAST TWO AND A HALF YEARS.
AND NONE OF THESE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ENGAGED IN OVERSIGHT IN THAT TIME TO HEAR WHAT WE'RE DOING OR HOW WE'RE DOING IT.
SO CONSIDERING THE MARKS TONIGHT AND THEY ARE PERSONAL, I'M STILL GONNA LAY AT YOUR PLATE A VALID QUESTION THAT I HAVE.
IS THIS A PRINCIPLED POSITION OR IS IT RETALIATION AGAINST ME FOR ISSUING A PRODUCT THAT THEY DIDN'T LIKE? AND THAT'S A FAIR QUESTION THAT I HAVE.
YOU'VE HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE COMMENT THAT THE OFFICE CAME ON THE OTHER SIDE OF INDICTMENTS THAT DID.
WE HAD OUR PARISH PRESIDENT INDICTED, WE HAD OUR COO INDICTED, WE HAD OUR PARISH ATTORNEY INDICTED.
WHEN I CAME HERE IN 2011 AS THE DIRECTOR OF ETHICS AND COMPLIANCE, UM, THE INK ON THOSE INDICTMENTS WAS STILL WET.
AND I GET HERE AND I, AND I MET A LOT OF PEOPLE AND GOT TO KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE, A LOT OF REALLY GOOD PEOPLE IN JEFFERSON PARISH.
BUT I MEAN, I AM A RESIDENT OF JEFFERSON PARISH.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I WAS A COMPLETE OUTSIDER, UH, WHEN I STARTED IN THIS PARISH.
AND SO I'M MEETING PEOPLE AND I'M WONDERING LIKE HOW DID YOU GET TO A MELTDOWN POINT WHERE YOU HAVE THAT MANY INDICTMENTS HAPPENING AT THAT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT'S HAPPENING AT THAT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT.
YOU DON'T JUST HAVE A PROBLEM AT THAT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT.
YOU HAVE A PROBLEM THROUGHOUT.
AND SO I WONDERED LIKE HOW DO YOU GET THERE?
[01:50:01]
AND I'VE SUSPECTED, AND FRANKLY I'VE COME TO BELIEVE JEFFERSON PARISH DOESN'T HAVE A TRULY POSITIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY BECAUSE WHENEVER THERE IS A MESSAGE THAT IS UNFLATTERING OR INCONVENIENT OR WORSE YET POLITICALLY DAMNING, THEY HAVE AN UNRELENTING REFLEX TO SILENCE THE MESSENGER AND KILL THE MESSAGE.AND I AM THE MESSENGER AND THEY WERE NOT ENGAGED IN OVERSIGHT BEFORE SEPTEMBER.
BUT THE MESSAGE IN SEPTEMBER WAS IN FACT WE'RE GIVEN $10.3 MILLION TO A NONPROFIT TO BUILD A BREWERY AND BUY BREW EQUIPMENT THAT WE'RE GONNA OWN.
BUT WE ARE NOT SEEING ANY RETURN ON THAT VALUE.
THAT'S VALID CONCERNS, THAT'S VALID QUESTIONS.
BUT INSTEAD OF ENGAGING ON THOSE CONCERNS, IT WAS ACTUALLY THEM WHO WENT ON THE CAMPAIGN TO ATTACK.
'CAUSE THE PUBLIC LETTER WENT OUT.
AND THE NEXT THING I KNOW, I'M AT A COUNCIL MEETING WITH A PARADE OF PEOPLE REPRESENTING WHAT THE PUBLIC LETTER WAS, WHO CLEARLY HAD NOT READ IT.
WHEN WE DO OUR WORK, WE DO IT WITH INCREDIBLE SPECIFICITY BECAUSE WE DO KNOW WHAT'S AT STAKE AND WE BASE OUR WORK ON THE FACTS.
SO LET'S JUST THINK, IF I, IF I CAN, I'M GONNA WALK YOU THROUGH THE LIST OF FACTS OR COMPLAINTS THAT I THINK THEY'VE PRESENTED TONIGHT, STARTING WITH THE CLARIFICATION OF OUR AUTHORITY.
SO SEVERAL PEOPLE, CERTAINLY COUNCILMAN BERG AND COUNCILWOMAN BOHANNAN HAVE SAID WE CANNOT ISSUE ANYTHING OTHER THAN REPORTS, AUDITS AND INVESTIGATIONS.
COUNCILWOMAN BOHANNAN SAID THAT THE PUBLIC LETTERS THAT I ISSUED THIS YEAR IS THE FIRST OF THEIR KIND IN THE HISTORY OF THE OFFICE.
UNDER OUR ORDINANCE, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU THE RESPONSIBILITY TO ENGAGE IN PREVENTION ACTIVITIES BY WAY OF REVIEW OF LEGISLATION, RULES, POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND TRANSACTIONS.
YOU DO NOT AUDIT AND YOU DO NOT INVESTIGATE LEGISLATION.
SO IF YOU'RE REVIEWING IT, THEN IT'S NOT AN AUDIT AND IT'S NOT AN INVESTIGATION, IT'S SOMETHING ELSE.
UNDER OUR ORDINANCE, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO QUOTE, POSE QUESTIONS AND RAISE CONCERNS.
SO HOW EXACTLY DO WE DO THIS? AND LET ME AGAIN, COUNCILWOMAN BOHANNAN SAID THAT THE PUBLIC LETTERS THAT I ISSUED ARE THE FIRST OF THEIR KIND IN THE HISTORY OF THE OFFICE.
EVERY YEAR I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR ISSUING AN ANNUAL REPORT TO YOU.
AS OF OUR 2023 ANNUAL REPORT, WE TRACK OUR MILESTONES.
THIS OFFICE HAS ISSUED 64 REPORTS, AUDITS OR INVESTIGATIONS.
AND IT HAS ISSUED 16 POSITION PAPERS, MEMORANDUMS, OPEN LETTERS, PUBLIC LETTERS.
THEY GO UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES, BUT 16 OF THEM SINCE THE OFFICE WAS CREATED.
SO THE PUBLIC LETTERS THAT I ISSUED AREN'T THE FIRST OF THEIR KIND.
20% OF ALL OF OUR PUBLISHED PRODUCTS HAVE IN FACT BEEN SOME VARIATION ON A PUBLIC LETTER.
IT INCLUDES A PUBLIC LETTER REGARDING FIRE SERVICES.
I THINK THAT WAS LIKE IN 2016.
[01:55:02]
IT INCLUDES LESSONS LEARNED.WE PUT IT OUT IN THE FALL OF 2023.
IT INCLUDES A MONITORING MEMO ON COVID MASKS THAT WAS ISSUED IN A PANDEMIC BECAUSE THE PARISH COUNCIL WASN'T APPROVING THE PAYMENT OF AN INVOICE ON MASKS BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T COMMUNICATING WITH THE PARISH PRESIDENT AND ARGUING OVER HER AUTHORITY IN A DECLARED EMERGENCY.
AND WE CAME IN AND ENTERED A MONITORING MEMO AS A PREVENTATIVE ACTION CALLING OUT THE PARISH PRESIDENT HAS DEFINITE AUTHORITIES IN TIME OF EMERGENCY AND SHE EXERCISED THE AUTHORITY.
AND NOW WE HAVE AN INVOICE THAT WE COULD GET REIMBURSED FOR PREVENTATIVE.
IF IT JUST GETS PAID, WE CAN SEEK REIMBURSEMENT.
WE HAVE ISSUED PUBLIC LETTERS ABOUT THE PARISH TOUCHING OUR DEDICATED VILLAGE.
SO THE PUBLIC LETTER EARLIER THIS YEAR, WHICH WAS DEDICATED TO HOW THE PARISH WAS SPENDING DEDICATED MILLAGE, WAS NOT EVEN THE FIRST PUBLIC LETTER ON DEDICATED MILLAGE.
COUNCILWOMAN BOHANNAN SAID THAT THIS IS SOMETHING NOT ANY OTHER INSPECTOR GENERAL DOES.
NEW ORLEANS HAS ISSUED 12 PUBLIC LETTERS IN THE LAST TWO YEARS.
THEY'RE PUSHING 'EM OUT ONE EVERY OTHER MONTH.
BUT SINCE THE OFFICE'S CREATION, WE HAVE PUT THEM OUT AT LEAST ONE A YEAR AND SOMETIMES MORE THAN ONE A YEAR.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S RIGHT OR IT'S WRONG.
I BELIEVE THAT PUBLIC LETTERS SERVE A VALID PURPOSE.
I HAD THE PRIVILEGE TO RECENTLY HEAR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, THE FEDERAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SPEAK.
CONGRESS CRITICIZED HIM, STOP AUDITING US, START TELLING US HOW TO PREVENT THE WASTE BEFORE IT HAPPENS.
DON'T WAIT UNTIL IT HAPPENS BEFORE YOU CRITICIZE US FOR WHAT WE'RE DOING.
IT'S NOT A PERFECT SCIENCE, BUT PREVENTION IS AN IMPORTANT FUNCTION AND OUR MISSION IS TO DETECT AND PREVENT FRAUD, WASTES AND ABUSE.
SO IF YOU RELEGATE US TO AUDITS AND INVESTIGATIONS, YOU ARE TELLING US WE CANNOT PREVENT FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE.
AND YOU'RE DEVIATING FROM THE HISTORICAL PRACTICES OF THIS OFFICE THAT I INHERITED BUT I DIDN'T CHANGE.
LET'S MOVE ALONG TO THE NEXT THING THAT I THINK THEY CALLED OUT AND I WAS LISTENING AND I THINK I CAUGHT IT, UM, ACCURATELY.
AND THAT IS UM, 'CAUSE THEY WERE RUNNING THROUGH IT AND IT WAS IN THE CONTEXT OF THEM QUOTING FROM THESE ANONYMOUS LETTERS.
BUT BASICALLY THE THRUST OF IT WAS, UM, OUR OFFICE HASN'T INVESTIGATED CERTAIN ETHICS VIOLATIONS BY COUNCILWOMAN BEN BREEN OR ETHICS VIOLATIONS FROM PEOPLE RELATED TO COUNCILWOMAN BEN BREEN.
SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT UNDER OUR ORDINANCE, WHENEVER IN THE COURSE OF OUR WORK WE DISCOVER FACTS THAT INDICATE EITHER AN ETHICS VIOLATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL OR AT THE STATE LEVEL, THEN WE ARE OBLIGATED TO NOTIFY, LET'S NOTIFY YOU OR NOTIFY THE STATE BOARD OF ETHICS.
UM, SAME GOES FOR ANY VIOLATIONS OF LAW.
SO IF IT'S STATE LAW OR FEDERAL LAW, WE HAVE TO REFER IT TO THE APPROPRIATE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
WE HAVE 64 REPORTS SINCE THE CREATION OF THIS OFFICE AND WE HAVE INVESTIGATED 591 COMPLAINTS.
AND THAT'S AS OF OUR 2023 ANNUAL REPORT THAT I PRESENTED TO YOU AT PROBABLY YOUR MARCH MEETING OF THIS YEAR.
OF THOSE 93 REFERRALS, ANYWHERE BETWEEN FIVE AND 13 HAVE BEEN REFERRED TO YOU OR THE STATE BOARD OF ETHICS.
[02:00:01]
BEYOND THAT WE IDENTIFY IN OUR REPORT THERE'S EIGHT ARREST OR PROSECUTIONS THAT RESULTED FROM OUR WORK WORK PRODUCT.IF YOU LOOK AT OUR WEBSITE, YOU ARE NOT GONNA FIND ANY CORRELATING INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS.
SO WHAT THEY'RE CALLING ME OUT FOR IS THAT YOU DIDN'T INVESTIGATE THESE ETHICS VIOLATIONS BECAUSE THERE'S NO INVESTIGATIVE REPORT.
PROVING TO ME THAT YOU INVESTIGATED THESE ETHICS VIOLATIONS.
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THE ABSENCE OF A REPORT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT WHAT WE INVESTIGATED BECAUSE WE DON'T COMMENT ON INVESTIGATIONS.
BUT IN THE HISTORY OF THE OFFICE,
I AM NOT GOING TO PUBLISH AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT THAT SAYS WE CONCLUDE SOMEBODY VIOLATED THE STATE CODE OF ETHICS AND THEN WE REFER IT TO THE STATE BOARD OF ETHICS AND THEY CONCLUDE THE PERSON DIDN'T VIOLATE IT.
THEN I HAVE AN ADJUDICATION BY THE PEOPLE WITH THE JURISDICTION TO ADJUDICATE IT, DECIDING THAT THEY DIDN'T VIOLATE THE CODE OF ETHICS.
AND YOU HAVE AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT DOWN HERE SAYING THAT THEY DID SO MUCH LIKE COUNCILWOMAN BOHANNON WANTS TO SAY THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS QUESTIONING OUR INVESTIGATIVE WELL ABOUT, I DON'T NEED MULTIPLE INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS ABOUT ETHICS VIOLATIONS ONLY TO HAVE THE STATE BOARD OF ETHICS NOT PURSUE IT OR NOT ADJUDICATED AND HAVE A REPORT DOWN HERE.
IN SHORT, WE DON'T STEP ON OTHER AGENCY'S JURISDICTIONAL TOES AND HAVEN'T SINCE THE OFFICE WAS CREATED.
SO THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT ON ANY ETHICS ISSUE AND PARTICULARLY THE ABSENCE OF AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT WE'RE NOT DOING OUR JOB.
IT'S EVIDENCE THAT WE ARE IN A CONSISTENT MANNER.
LET'S DRIFT ALONG TO THE BREW PUB VERSUS THE EAT VET CITY THAT'S DEPICTED.
WE HAVE A SPECIFIC METHOD FOR FIGURING OUT, UH, BETWEEN TWO DEPUTIES AND FOUR AGENT AUDITORS WHAT WE HAVE THE BANDWIDTH TO LOOK AT.
AND IT'S EITHER GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT HITS OUR RISK ASSESSMENT OR IT'S GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT COMES IN AS A COMPLAINT.
UM, AND MS. SMITH MENTIONED IT AND MR. ADOLPH MENTIONED IT.
I'M NOT REALLY A PROPONENT IN LIVING IN A STATE OF REACTIVITY BECAUSE YOU WASTE YOUR RESOURCES WHEN YOU DO THAT.
SO WE WORK TO PLAN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON BASED ON OUR RISK ASSESSMENT.
AND AGAIN, WE PROVIDE YOU WITH OUR RISK ASSESSMENT EVERY YEAR, WHICH MEANS IF ANY OF THESE COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD BE ENGAGED IN OVERSIGHT BEFORE TONIGHT, THEY WOULD KNOW THE RESULTS OF OUR RISK ASSESSMENT.
NOT THAT THEY DON'T GET IT BY EMAIL 'CAUSE I SEND IT OUT TO EVERYBODY, BUT THEY WOULD KNOW WHAT'S ON OUR RISK ASSESSMENT.
WE CONSIDER RESOURCES, WE CONSIDER EXPERTISE.
WE HAVE TO CONSIDER WHAT IS THE AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS.
'CAUSE GETTING RECORDS FOR US IS A CHALLENGE.
UM, I CONSIDER CAN WE LEVERAGE PAST EXPERTISE TO A CURRENT PROJECT BECAUSE THAT'S THE THING.
AS OF OUR 2024 RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN AS WELL AS OUR 2025, WE IDENTIFIED COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENTS AS AN AREA OF HIGH RISK, PARTICULARLY
[02:05:02]
CALLED IT OUT IS THE PARISH GETTING WHAT THE PARISH NEGOTIATED FOR UNDER COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENTS.AND THEY KIND OF EXIST IN A SPACE UNTO THEMSELVES.
THE AGREEMENT THAT UNDERLIES THE BREW HUB PROJECT WAS A COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT.
IT'S ACTUALLY A COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT THAT GOES BACK 20 YEARS.
SO IN THAT ISSUE, WHEN THAT EMAIL CAME TO ERICA SMITH CALLING OUT THAT CONTRACT, IT ROSE TO THE TOP ON OUR RISK ASSESSMENT AND BECAME ONE THAT WAS ON OUR RADAR.
THAT CONTRACT, THAT RELATIONSHIP, JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC.
WAS SOMETHING PUT ON THE RADAR OF THIS OFFICE THE DAY THE OFFICE WAS STOOD UP.
THERE WAS SOMEBODY IN THE PARISH WHO BROUGHT TO ME A BOX THAT SAID HERE, I'VE NEVER HAD ANYBODY WHO COULD UNDERSTAND IT UNTIL ERICA SMITH.
AND A LOT OF THE FACTS AND THE DOCUMENTS IN IT SORT OF GO PAST ME BECAUSE IT'S FINANCIAL IN NATURE.
THE BOX ITSELF WAS SITTING IN OUR OFFICE AND I DID IN FACT GIVE HER THE BOX BECAUSE IT RODE TO THE TOP OF THE RISK ASSESSMENTS, NOT THE ONLY CEA THAT WE WERE WORKING ON.
WE'RE WORKING ON ASSESSING PERFORMANCE BY WEST JEFFERSON HOSPITAL, A $210 MILLION DEAL THAT WE ARE OWED, UM, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ON.
AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HAS LOOKED AT THAT IN 10 YEARS.
AND THAT'S A PROJECT THAT WE'RE DOING BECAUSE IT BUBBLED TO THE TOP OF OUR RISK ASSESSMENT AND MAYBE THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THAT ONE.
THE BREW PUB WAS ALSO DIFFERENT INSOFAR AS IT WAS OVER $10 MILLION BEING GIVEN TO A NONPROFIT TO CONSTRUCT A BUILDING THAT WE WERE GOING TO OWN MEANING TO CONSTRUCT A PUBLIC BUILDING.
AND I HAVE NEVER SEEN A NO BID CONTRACT HANDLED LIKE THAT, THAT DOLLAR VALUE IN THE ENTIRE TIME THAT I'VE BEEN HERE IN THE PARISH.
SO WHY THE BREW PUB? BECAUSE IT INVOLVED A COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT.
COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENTS WERE ON OUR RISK ASSESSMENT.
WE HAD THE DOCUMENTS IN THE OFFICE SO WE KNEW THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO FIGHT TO GET THE DOCUMENTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE WAS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
LET'S TALK ABOUT MY CAMPAIGN, MY MY PUBLIC RELATIONS TOUR.
WE ARE ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.
TRANSPARENCY DOESN'T TAKE PLACE IN THE DARK AND IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T TAKE PLACE SECRETLY.
AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN TERMS OF GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY, UM, ISN'T REALLY ACHIEVED IF NOBODY KNOWS WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
SO WHETHER IT'S MEDIA INQUIRIES OR SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS OR CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS OR DOING REGULAR REPORTS TO YOU AT YOUR MEETINGS, TO ME IT IS ALL ENGAGEMENT.
AND I CELEBRATE THE ENGAGEMENT THAT WE HAVE SEEN HERE TONIGHT.
BUT I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T CALL OUT BECAUSE IT'S AN ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED.
WHEN WE GIVE OUR REPORTS TO YOU, WHEN I GIVE MY REPORT TO YOU, I THINK WHEN I WAS APPOINTED, THE REPORTS STARTED OUT AS THREE PAGE.
I THINK I MIGHT BE UP TO FIVE PAGES.
NOW I CAN TELL YOU THIS, COMMISSIONER LAROCCO WILL REMEMBER MY PREDECESSOR DID NOT GIVE WRITTEN REPORTS TO THE ETHICS AND COMPLIANCE COMMISSION BEFORE I MET.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I STARTED WHEN I WAS APPOINTED.
THE REASON I STARTED IT IS BECAUSE I AM ACTUALLY AN INDIVIDUAL THAT BELIEVES, LIKE YOU PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH AND I DO BELIEVE IN TRANSPARENCY.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, WHEN I GIVE YOU OUR REPORTS, I NOT ONLY LET YOU KNOW I'VE EVALUATED THE EMPLOYEES ON TIME, I'M SUPPORTING THEIR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT.
I TELL YOU EVERYTHING THAT I'VE BEEN DOING AND PARTICULARLY I GIVE
[02:10:01]
YOU STATUS UPDATES ON AUDITS, EVALUATIONS, OR INSPECTIONS.THE PUBLIC LETTER THAT WAS PUBLISHED IN SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR WAS PUBLISHED AS J-P-O-I-G 20 24 0 0 0 1.
IT WAS THE FIRST NUMBER PULLED IN 2024.
SO IF ANYBODY IN THIS CHAMBERS TONIGHT HAD CHOSEN TO ENGAGE IN OVERSIGHT IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, THEY WOULD'VE KNOWN THAT WE HAD EYES ON JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC.
I WASN'T HIDING IT AND I'M VERY ACCESSIBLE.
SO IF YOU HAD QUESTIONS ON WHAT WERE WE DOING OR HOW WE WERE DOING IT OR WHY WE WEREN'T DOING SOMETHING ELSE, THE INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE TO YOU IF YOU WERE DIALED IN, IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.
AND WITH EVERY REPORT THAT I GIVE TO YOU AND I APOLOGIZE COMMISSIONER 'CAUSE YOU'RE NEW, UM, I SHOW THE LITTLE GRAY BARS.
SO LIKE EACH TIME YOU MEET LITTLE GRAY BARS, MOVE OVER FROM REPORTS IF THEY'RE AUDITS INSPECTIONS OR EVALUATIONS.
SO YOU SEE OUR PROGRESS AND I REPORT TO YOU ANY CHALLENGES WE'RE ENCOUNTERING THAT'S GOING TO DELAY THE RELEASE OF SOMETHING.
SO BY DEFINITION, BECAUSE WE DON'T DISCUSS INVESTIGATIONS, AND THIS MATTER WAS ON YOUR REPORT IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, IT CLEARLY WASN'T AN INVESTIGATION.
I DIDN'T ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT IT WAS GOING TO BE 'CAUSE I REALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT ERICA SMITH WAS GONNA MAKE OUT OF THE BOX OF DOCUMENTS, BUT I KNEW IT WASN'T AN INVESTIGATION.
NOW WHAT WE DO TELL YOU WHEN WE REGULARLY REPORT IS THAT WE'LL TELL YOU HOW MANY COMPLAINTS CAME IN AND HOW MANY COMPLAINTS ARE CLOSED JUST SO THAT YOU KNOW WE'RE KEEPING UP WITH OUR WORKLOAD.
THIS IS SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU SEE ON YOUR REGULAR REPORTS, CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS.
WHEN I ENGAGE IN CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS, I PUT IT ON MY REPORT TO YOU AS OUTREACH, WHICH MEANS AGAIN, IF ANYBODY HERE WANTS TO COME BACK THE NEXT TIME YOU MEET, THEY WILL SEE WHAT THE OUTREACH HAS BEEN.
I DIDN'T START GOING TO CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS.
UM, AFTER MY APPOINTMENT, I ACTUALLY DID DO CIVIC ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS.
UM, IN MY PRIOR POSITION AS THE FIRST ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL, UM, COMMISSIONER, I SERVED IN THAT CAPACITY FOR NINE YEARS BEFORE BEING APPOINTED.
I MADE CIVIC ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS THEN AS WELL AS PRESENTATIONS TO PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS.
BUT SINCE BEING APPOINTED, UM, I HAVE MADE PRESENTATIONS, UM, NO LESS THAN 16 TIMES AND I HAVE IT SOMEWHERE HERE.
YEAH, WHEN I DO THOSE CIVIC PRESENTATIONS, THOSE CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS ACTUALLY GET THE VERY SAME INFORMATION THAT YOU GET, MEANING I DO A POWERPOINT TO THEM.
IT'S EITHER A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION OR IT IS A POWERPOINT HANDOUT.
IT'S THE SAME ONE THAT I DO FOR YOU.
WHEN I RELEASE A REPORT AT YOUR MEETING, YOU GET BRIEFED ON IT VIA A POWERPOINT.
NOT SURE WE'RE GOING TO GET TO IT TONIGHT, BUT WE ACTUALLY HAVE A POWERPOINT ON OUR MOST RECENT REPORT, WHICH IS AN EVALUATION 16 DIFFERENT CIVIC ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS.
NOW, THEY SAID SOME HARSH WORDS ABOUT ME AND WHAT I'M DOING AT THOSE CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS AND SORRY, BUT AGAIN, IF THEY WERE ENGAGED WITH OVERSIGHT, THEY WOULD SEE THAT I REPORT TO YOU WHAT CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS I GO TO.
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, I'LL TELL YOU THIS, 16 CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS AND NOT A ONE OF THOSE COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE THERE.
SO WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY WANT YOU TO DO TO ME TONIGHT, I CAN TELL YOU THIS, THEY'RE MAKING REPRESENTATIONS TO YOU ABOUT SOMETHING THEY DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T THERE.
[02:15:01]
AND THAT'S OKAY BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY ONLY INTERESTED IN THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS ABOUT THE PUBLIC LETTER.THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS ABOUT THE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY REPORTS THAT WE BRIEF THE CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS ON THE WORK THAT WE DO, OUR ANNUAL WORK PLAN, OUR ANNUAL REPORT.
BECAUSE THE CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS, WHEN I GO, I BRIEF THEM ON ALL THE WORK THAT WE DO.
AND THE ONE PERSON WHO SPOKE TONIGHT WHO IS FROM THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION DID ACCURATELY REPRESENT, I DON'T GIVE A LOT OF DETAILS, I JUST GIVE A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW.
NOW, WHAT'S AN ADDED COMPONENT AND PRESSURE THAT'S UNIQUE TO OUR OFFICE? WHEN THIS OFFICE WAS STOOD UP, THE PARISH DECIDED THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE FUNDED.
AND WHEN I SAY WE, I DON'T JUST MEAN THIS OFFICE.
I MEAN YOU, WE WERE GOING TO BE FUNDED BY THE REDEDICATION OF MILLAGE.
AND AT THAT TIME, JOHN YOUNG, WHO WAS THE PARISH PRESIDENT, WENT AND STUMPED FOR THIS OFFICE AND FOR THE DEDICATED MILLAGE.
BUT SINCE THIS OFFICE WAS CREATED, THAT MILLAGE CAME UP FOR RENEWAL.
AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT ELECTED OFFICIAL STUMPED FOR THIS OFFICE THEN? NONE OF 'EM.
SO BY DESIGN AND BY CREATION, INEVITABLY, WE ARE IN THE AWKWARD POSITION OF BEGGING FOR OUR MONEY FROM THE PUBLIC.
AND WE HAVE TO DO THAT BY MAKING SURE THAT THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHAT WE DO.
I DON'T THINK THAT ANY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER STOP AND THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS.
AND WHEN THE MILLAGE CAME UP FOR RENEWAL, OUR OFFICE CARRIED THE WATER THAT ENSURED THE FUNDING FOR NOT ONLY US, BUT FOR YOU, WHICH INCLUDES MR. SULLIVAN.
WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY WITHOUT INDEPENDENCE.
I APPRECIATE THE COUNCIL PERSON'S EFFORTS TO COUNT THE NUMBER OF TIMES THAT INDEPENDENCE APPEARS IN THOSE POLICIES.
I TAKE INDEPENDENCE VERY SERIOUSLY.
I TAKE THE WORK THAT WE DO VERY SERIOUSLY.
I TAKE INITIATIVES TO INFORM PEOPLE ABOUT THE WORK WE DO.
VERY SERIOUSLY IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR, KIND OF ON SUGGESTION OF AN INTERESTING PERSON, AND I TOOK THEIR FEEDBACK BECAUSE I WAS PASSIONATE ABOUT THE WORK WE DO.
I SET UP AN OVERVIEW OF OVERSIGHT.
IT WAS AN HOUR AND A HALF SET ASIDE IN MARCH OF 2024, BECAUSE WE DID JUST HAVE AN ELECTION AT THE END OF 2023.
SO WE DID HAVE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS.
SO BEING EAGER AS I WAS, UM, I SET UP A TRAINING SESSION AND SENT OUT AN INVITATION TO 84 PEOPLE, EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL PERSON, THEIR AIDE, PARISH ATTORNEYS, DIRECTORS, AND HAD IT IN THIS CHAMBERS COORDINATED WITH MR. SULLIVAN SO THAT HE WOULD HAVE DEDICATED TIME TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT YOU DO.
I WAS A LITTLE SCARED THAT NOBODY WOULD SHOW.
THE ROOM ACTUALLY FILLED UP FAIRLY DECENTLY, NOT LIKE TONIGHT, BUT IT WAS A GOOD ATTENDANCE.
NONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO STAND BEFORE YOU TONIGHT TO CRITICIZE ME, NONE OF THE FIVE CHOSE TO COME TO THAT OVERVIEW OF OVERSIGHT.
THERE WAS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS.
THERE WAS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE DO.
THEY WAITED UNTIL NOW TO GO COUNT THE NUMBER OF TIMES THAT INDEPENDENCE APPEARS IN OUR POLICIES.
[02:20:01]
INDEPENDENCE ISN'T SOMETHING THAT GIVES AND SWAYS WITH A POLITICAL AGENDA OR IN MY MIND, A SINGLE PRODUCT.INDEPENDENCE HAS GOT TO BE BUILT ON A COMMITMENT TO A STRUCTURE, AND IT'S GOTTA BE RESILIENT ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND POLITICAL PRESSURE, A POLITICAL AGENDA, INDIVIDUAL RELATIONSHIPS, ANY SINGLE MOMENT YOU BUILD IT TO WITHSTAND THOSE MOMENTS, AND THAT IS HOW YOU ACTUALLY ACHIEVE INDEPENDENCE.
SO HOW DO WE MANIFEST OUR INDEPENDENCE? NUMBER ONE, JEFF ADOLPH AND ERICA SMITH ALLUDED TO IT.
WE HAVE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ABOUT HOW WORK COMES IN AND HOW WORK GOES OUT.
I PRACTICE TRANSPARENCY WITH YOU EVERY TIME YOU MEET.
WE WITHSTAND THE SCRUTINY OF SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS EVERY THREE YEARS.
WE JUST WITHSTOOD THAT SCRUTINY.
WE ARE SUBJECT TO PEER REVIEW BY THE ASSOCIATION OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THREE PEOPLE ARRIVE IN OUR OFFICE, PICK THROUGH ALL OF OUR AUDITS, ALL OF OUR INVESTIGATIONS, ALL OF OUR COMPLAINTS, AND JUDGE US ON WHETHER OR NOT OUR WORK IS SUPPORTED.
EVERY YEAR WE UNDERGO A QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW.
I SIT IN FRONT OF THEM ONCE A YEAR AND THEY QUESTIONED ME.
AND THEN ANYBODY WHO'S COME TO YOUR MEETINGS ALL KNOW THAT YOU QUESTION ME, AS WELL AS MR. SULLIVAN QUESTIONS ME.
OUR WORK IS TESTED AND IT'S ISSUED UNDER THE STRICTEST OF SCRUTINIES.
THAT'S HOW WE MAINTAIN OUR INTERNAL INDEPENDENCE.
EXTERNAL INDEPENDENCE IS ANOTHER PROBLEM.
THE LAST TIME THE PARISH COUNCIL VOTED TO SUPPORT THIS OFFICE WAS THE FIRST TIME THE PARISH COUNCIL VOTED TO SUPPORT THIS OFFICE.
I WASN'T LOBBYING TO GET MORE POWER EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND I WASN'T LOBBYING TO GET MORE TERMS EARLIER THIS YEAR.
IN 2019, A COMPLAINT WAS MADE AGAINST MY PREDECESSOR.
IT ACTUALLY CAME BEFORE THE ETHICS AND COMPLIANCE COMMISSION.
AT THE TIME, THE ETHICS COMPLIANCE COMMISSION DIDN'T FIND ANY MERIT IN THAT COMPLAINT.
I THINK IT WAS LIKE NOVEMBER OF 2019, BECAUSE IN DECEMBER OF 2019, THE PARISH COUNCIL WENT IN AND SUBSTANTIALLY AMENDED OUR ORDINANCE AND TOOK AWAY POWERS THAT WE HAD TOOK AWAY POWERS THAT THE VOTERS EXPECTED US TO HAVE AND PUT TERM LIMITS ON THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, OPTIMISTIC AND HOPEFUL.
I WAS ACTUALLY COUNTING ON THIS PARISH COUNCIL NOT TO GIVE ME MORE POWER, BUT TO RESTORE THE POWERS THAT THE PARISH COUNCIL HAD TAKEN AWAY.
NOW, THEY CHOSE NOT TO RESTORE THOSE POWERS AND WE'RE STILL FUNCTIONING GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS.
WE CAN STILL PUT OUT A PRODUCT THAT THEY DON'T LIKE AND THEY GET ANGRY AT DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY TOOK AWAY SOME OF OUR POWERS.
WE ALSO HAD A LOT OF COMMENTS TONIGHT THAT FRANKLY I THOUGHT WERE INFLAMMATORY AND SEASON WITH NARRATIVES AND INNUENDO AND SUBJECTIVE FACTS.
I CAN TELL YOU THIS,
WE GET COMPLAINTS OF ALL SORTS.
WE JUST FINISHED ATTENDING THE ASSOCIATION OF INSPECTOR GENERAL'S CONFERENCE.
AND ACTUALLY SOMEBODY PUT IT UP ON THE SCREEN.
WE ACTUALLY RECEIVE TRAINING TO READ A COMPLAINT AND STRIKE OUT ANY SUBJECTIVE FACTS.
IDENTIFY THE OBJECTIVE FACTS, AND THAT IS WHAT YOU INVESTIGATE.
SO IF SOMEBODY CALLS OUR OFFICE AND SAYS, MY NEIGHBOR AND CODE IS HARASSING ME ABOUT MY GRASS, WE GO AND LOOK HOW TALL THE GRASS IS.
AND IF THE GRASS IS EIGHT OR 10 INCHES, THEN WE'RE LIKE, WELL CUT THE GRASS.
[02:25:01]
CONSPIRACY THEORIES BETWEEN CODE AND THEIR NEIGHBOR BECAUSE EITHER THE GRASS IS TOO TALL OR THE GRASS IS NOT TOO TALL.WE LIVE AND DIE BY OBJECTIVE FACTS AND WHY OUR WORK PRODUCT IS SUPPORTED WITH OBJECTIVE FACTS.
IF ANYONE HAS TAKEN THE TIME TO READ THAT PUBLIC LETTER, IT IS INCREDIBLY DRY.
THE PARISH COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION.
THE PARISH COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION.
THE ENTIRE LETTER READS, THE PARISH COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION, AND THERE'S A FEW LAWS IN BETWEEN.
EITHER THE PARISH COUNCIL PASSED THE RESOLUTION OR THEY DIDN'T PASS THE RESOLUTION.
BUT IT'S NOT A FACT THAT YOU NEED TO NEGOTIATE OR ARGUE.
IT EITHER DID HAPPEN OR DIDN'T HAPPEN.
WHY DO WE RELY ON OBJECTIVE FACTS? BECAUSE IF OUR WORK PRODUCT IS SUPPORTED WITH OBJECTIVE FACTS, THEN YOU CAN TRUST THE PRODUCT.
IF YOU CAN TRUST THE PRODUCT, YOU CAN TRUST THE OFFICE.
IF YOU CAN TRUST THE OFFICE, YOU CAN TRUST ME IN ANY REALM OF ACCOUNTABILITY, WHETHER IT'S US, WHETHER IT'S CODE, WHETHER IT'S THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WHETHER IT'S JPSO IN ANY REALM OF ACCOUNTABILITY, PEOPLE CAN ASSIGN AN ILL MOTIVE OR A MAL INTENT.
WHATEVER THE MOTIVES, WHATEVER THE INTENT, FAIR, UNFAIR, GROUNDED, OR UNGROUNDED.
THE MOTIVES DO NOT CHANGE THE FACTS.
RELATIONSHIPS DON'T CHANGE THE FACTS, FAMILIAL FRIEND OR FOE.
AND WE HAVE ENOUGH OF THAT IN PARISH.
THE RELATIONSHIPS DON'T CHANGE THE FACTS.
AND IF THE PRODUCT IS SUPPORTED BY THE FACTS, THEN WE'RE DOING OUR WORK.
ONE OF THE TENETS OF AN INDEPENDENT INSPECTOR GENERAL, AND I'LL CLOSE WITH THIS, IS THE CONCEPT OF TERM.
FEDERAL INSPECTOR GENERALS ARE ALMOST TANTAMOUNT TO A FEDERAL JUDGE APPOINTED FOR LIFE.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE PERFECT, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEIR OFFICE DOESN'T COME UNDER SCRUTINY.
BUT ONE OF THE REASONS THAT INSPECTOR GENERALS ARE IN FACT APPOINTED FOR A TERM IS BECAUSE INVARIABLY, YOU'RE GOING TO PUT OUT A WORK PRODUCT THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FIND OBJECTIONABLE, PARTICULARLY THE POLITICIANS WHO ARE IN POWER.
AND YOU DON'T WANT SOMEBODY SITTING IN THIS CHAIR WHO SITS AND LOOK AT A WORK PRODUCT AND SAYS, I DON'T WANNA PUT IT OUT.
IT'S GOING TO UPSET THE POLITICIANS AND I'M GONNA LOSE MY JOB.
THE MINUTE YOU HAVE AN INSPECTOR GENERAL AFRAID OF LOSING THEIR JOB, THEN YOU HAVE IN FACT LOST INDEPENDENCE.
THEY'VE CRITICIZED THAT PUBLIC LETTER.
I WROTE DOWN SOME NOTES ABOUT THINGS THAT THEY'VE SAID, THEIR CONCLUSIONS, THEY HAVE NOT IDENTIFIED A SINGLE FACT IN THAT PUBLIC LETTER.
THEY'RE COUNTING ON YOU TO SUBSCRIBE TO NARRATIVES AND INNUENDO AND SUBJECTIVE FACTS.
WHATEVER YOU DECIDE TONIGHT, I AM NOT AFRAID OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE WORK THAT WE HAVE DONE BECAUSE I KNOW IT WILL WITHSTAND ANY AMOUNT OF SCRUTINY.
MY BIGGER FEAR IS IF WE MAKE IT A PRACTICE TO INVESTIGATE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, EVERY TIME YOU GET A REPORT THAT UPSETS YOU, WE'RE LOSING INDEPENDENCE.
[02:30:09]
OKAY, WE'RE NOW GONNA MOVE[VI. Discussion regarding whether to appoint independent counsel to review actions by the Inspector General]
INTO DISCUSSION ON WHETHER TO APPOINT AN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO REVIEW ACTIONS BY THE INSPECTOR GENERAL COMMISSIONERS.THIS IS OUR TIME TO ASK QUESTIONS AND HAVE ANY OPEN DISCUSSION.
I'D LIKE TO JUST SAY SOMETHING BEFORE WE MOVE INTO THIS SECTION.
THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING TONIGHT.
THIS IS MY THIRD MEETING AS A COMMISSIONER.
I ASSURE YOU THAT WHEN I SAID YES, BECAUSE I ALMOST DIDN'T SAY YES WHEN MY UNIVERSITY SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND YOU ONE OF THREE PEOPLE.
I HAVE LIVED IN THIS TOWN FOR 30 PLUS YEARS.
AND I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT WHEN I COME, I COME WITH AN OPEN MIND.
I DON'T APPLAUD WHEN THE IG MAKES AN
I'M HERE TO HELP AND SERVE THE PEOPLE OF JEFFERSON PARISH.
SO I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT, THAT SOME OF WHAT WAS SAID OFFENDED ME BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW ME, YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE I'M COMING FROM.
YOU DON'T KNOW THAT FOR THE LAST WEEK I HAVE, I WON'T SAY DREADED THIS MEETING, BUT I HAVE RESEARCHED, I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT IT.
I HAVE PRAYED ABOUT IT BECAUSE I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS.
AND I TOO AM CONCERNED THAT IF THERE IS AN A REPORT OR A LETTER OR SOMETHING THAT SOME GROUP DOESN'T LIKE THAT WE'RE ALWAYS HAVING SOME INVESTIGATION OR HAVING AN INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL REVIEW.
I WANNA HEAR WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE TO SAY, BUT DO KNOW THAT MY DECISION IS BASED UPON WHAT I FEEL IS THE BEST INTEREST FOR THE PARISH.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? IF I MAY JUST ECHO HER COMMENTS.
THIS IS MY FIRST MEETING, NOT MY THIRD MEETING.
SO THANK YOU ALL FOR THE, UH, LOW STAKES ONBOARDING HERE.
UM, BUT, UH, TO SAY SOMETHING SIMILAR, YEAH, I DID NOT EXPECT TO HAVE MY INTEGRITY QUESTIONED EITHER, CONSIDERING THAT I'VE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE.
AND I BELIEVE THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS ROOM I'VE EVER MET IS, UH, JERRY SULLIVAN, WHO BASICALLY HELPED, UH, GET ME, UH, ONBOARDED HERE.
SO, UH, THAT WAS NOT PARTICULARLY APPRECIATED.
AND I'LL HAVE MORE QUESTIONS IN A MOMENT.
I TOO TOOK NOTES, UH, DURING, DURING ALL OF THE PRESENTATIONS.
AND I DO COME HERE OPEN WITH AN OPEN MIND AND I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT HOW OUR MONEY IS SPENT.
BUT I'M NOT MOVED BY ANONYMOUS LETTERS OR POLITICIANS OR ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SIT HERE AND READ ANONYMOUS LETTERS.
BUT WHEN I HUMBLY ACCEPTED THIS POSITION, I IMMEDIATELY READ ALL OF THE REPORTS GENERATED BY THE JEFFERSON PARISH OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL IN THE HISTORY OF THAT OFFICE.
IN REVIEW OF THE GREAT WORK THAT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE HAS DONE, I INSTINCTIVELY IN MY GUT FOUND THAT THE GRETNA TASK FORCE LETTER WAS OUT OF CADENCE.
WITH THE HISTORY OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REPORTS, I FOUND THE LETTER PERTAINING TO THE BREW PUB.
THE SAME I FOUND THE MIDNIGHT RELEASE AND SUBSEQUENT TV INTERVIEW TO BE OUT OF CADENCE WITH WHAT I BELIEVE AN INVESTI AN INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE SHOULD LOOK LIKE.
YOU KNOW, WHETHER THE BREW PUB BECOMES, UH, THE GREATEST ECONOMIC ENGINE OF GRETNA OR THE GREATEST JEFFERSON PARISH COUNCIL BOONDOGGLE HISTORY WILL BE THE FINAL JUDGE.
BUT I THINK THAT HERE, THE ECC, UH, HAS TO SPEAK, EVEN IF IT'S AS LITTLE AS AN ADMONITION, UH, TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR DUTY HERE.
UNLIKE YOUR PREDECESSOR, I THINK YOU'RE A LIKABLE CHARACTER, AND IT'S NOT EASY TO DO THIS, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M IN FAVOR OF AT A MINIMUM
[02:35:01]
ADMONITION.I THINK THAT IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT TONIGHT IS SOME OF YOUR FIRST TIME COMING TO OUR MEETINGS.
TYPICALLY, UM, IT IS JUST US IN THESE CHAMBERS WHO SIT AROUND AND LOOK AT WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE, AND LISTEN TO REPORTS.
SO PLEASE ACCEPT MY FORMAL INVITATION TO COME TO ANY OF OUR MEETINGS, UM, THAT WE WILL BE HAVING IN THE NEXT YEAR TO ENGAGE IN PUBLIC COMMENT AGAIN AND REVIEW ANYTHING THAT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL IS WORKING ON.
AS A CITIZEN OF JEFFERSON PARISH, I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE A QUESTION OF INTEGRITY OF THIS OFFICE.
THE AMOUNT OF TIME, ENERGY, EFFORT, SLEEPLESS NIGHTS, LOTS OF PRAYERS THAT HAVE BEEN SPENT
AND I FEEL AS IF, UM, TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S POINT THAT IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE NEED TO PULL BACK THE CURTAINS AND SAY, WE HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.
AND SO I TOO AM IN FAVOR OF THAT BECAUSE THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO.
RIGHT? THE INTEGRITY OF THE OFFICE IS THERE.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS COUNCIL DECIDES, EXCUSE ME, THE COMMISSION DECIDES THAT PUBLIC LETTER BE ADDED INTO THE OFFICE ORDINANCE, AS WELL AS A PROCESS OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
BECAUSE, UM, MS. CHAING, YOU HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THERE HAVE BEEN ABOUT 16 AND WE'VE CALLED 'EM DIFFERENT THINGS.
SO LET'S JUST, UM, FORMALIZE THAT PROCESS AND PROCEDURE GOING FORWARD.
UM, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DISCUSS AT A LATER MEETING.
BUT I THINK, ONCE AGAIN, BRINGING TRANSPARENCY, THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO OUTLINE IT.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY'D LIKE TO ASK? YEAH, SO I HAD A COUPLE OF THREE QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY FOR, UH, THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
ONE OF THE, UH, ALLEGATIONS WERE THE, WAS BASICALLY THAT YOU DIDN'T GIVE AN UP.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF BASICALLY ALL ABOUT PROCESS, NOT ABOUT THE SUBSTANCE OF THE REPORT.
UM, BUT WITH RESPECT TO THE PROCESS, THEY'VE COMPLAINED THAT YOU DIDN'T GIVE THE, UH, THEM ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND BEFORE IT'S RELEASED.
COULD YOU SPEAK TO WHY YOU DID IT IN THE WAY THAT YOU DID IT? FIRST QUESTION.
COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE TIMING OF IT? AND THIRD, YOU SAID A LOT, BUT YOU DIDN'T SPEAK TO YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH COUNCILPERSON AND BRACKEN AT ALL.
WELL, I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
'CAUSE THE OPTICS ARE PROBLEMATIC THERE.
AS TO RELEASE, UM, I INDICATED THAT I SERVED AS THE FIRST ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE OFFICE FOR NINE YEARS.
UM, SO THE EARLIER PUBLIC LETTERS, OPEN LETTERS, POSITION PAPERS THAT WERE RELEASED BY, UM, BY MY PREDECESSOR SOMETIMES WERE ACTUALLY DROPPED LIKE THE MORNING OF A COUNCIL MEETING.
UM, THE POLICY OF THE OFFICE AT THE TIME WAS THAT, UH, PUBLIC LETTERS, POSITION PAPERS, OPEN LETTERS, WHATEVER THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN CALLED, DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT.
THE, UM, THAT THE NOMENCLATURE SHOULD BE CONSISTENT, UM, WE'RE RELEASED WITHOUT A RESPONSE PERIOD.
UM, AND THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER INSPECTOR GENERALS WHO RELEASE PUBLIC LETTERS.
UM, I'M NOT SURE IF ANY INSPECTOR GENERAL MIGHT DEVIATE IT FROM PUBLIC LETTER TO PUBLIC LETTER, BUT SORT OF, UM, IN OUR WORLD, AND YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT A LOT OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL WORLD, UM, SORT OF BEGAN OFF OF AUDIT MODELS.
AND SO THE CONCEPT OF A MANAGEMENT LETTER, I THINK IS HOW THIS PUBLIC LETTER MADE ITS WAY INTO OUR WORLD.
AND THEN THE IG WORLD AND INVESTIGATIVE WORLD MERGED.
SO THEY, THEY, THEY ARE MERGED NATIONALLY, UM, IMPERFECTLY, BUT THAT'S SORT OF LIKE THE HISTORY OF HOW THESE THINGS MAKE IT INTO OUR WORLD.
UM, AS WELL, MY PREDECESSOR RELEASED, UH, FOLLOW-UP REPORTS.
SO ALL OF OUR FOLLOW-UP, UM, INVESTIGATIVE AND AUDIT REPORTS WERE LIKEWISE RELEASED WITHOUT A RESPONSE PERIOD.
WHEN I TOOK OVER, UM, I RELEASED A FOLLOW-UP REPORT THE SAME WAY THAT WE HAD ALWAYS RELEASED FOLLOW-UP REPORTS.
AND ACTUALLY THE CURRENT COO STEVE UTE CALLED ME OUT AND SAID, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE NOT GETTING 30 DAYS.
AND AND I WAS HONEST WITH THEM.
I SAID, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE NOT GETTING 30 DAYS EITHER.
I WAS JUST DOING IT THE WAY WE HAD ALWAYS DONE IT.
AND AT LEAST AS TO FOLLOW UPS, I NOW GIVE THEM A DRAFT AND THEY HAVE THE CUSTOMARY, UH, 30 WORKING DAYS OR MORE, UM, TO RESPOND TO THAT DRAFT.
[02:40:02]
THE PUBLIC LETTERS THAT I HAVE PUSHED OUT, UM, I DO TRY TO GIVE, UM, IT'S NOT 30 DAYS, BUT I DO TRY TO GIVE THEM, UM, ADEQUATE NOTICE TO RECEIVE IT IN ADVANCE.SO OUR CURRENT PROTOCOL IS THAT, UM, THE PUBLIC LETTER GOES OUT EMBARGOED TO ALL OF THE COUNCIL, DEPENDING, COULD BE THE PARISH PRESIDENT, DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE PUBLIC LETTER.
IT GOES TO YOU, UM, IT GOES TO MR. SULLIVAN.
IT GOES TO MS. SCHNABEL, AND IT GOES TO THE MEDIA.
AND SO EVERYBODY HAS 24 HOURS, AND THEN THE PUBLIC LETTER BECOMES PUBLISHED AT MIDNIGHT.
AND THAT IS THE WAY, THAT IS THE WAY I DO IT, WHICH GIVES MORE TIME THAN MY PREDECESSOR.
I'M NOT SAYING IT'S RIGHT OR IT'S PERFECT.
I'M SAYING I IMPROVED ON THE PROCESS THAT I INHERITED.
UM, I'M GONNA BE, UH, BLUNT AND HONEST.
UH, JENNIFER VAN RANKIN AND I MET WHEN I CAME TO WORK, UH, FOR THE PARISH IN 2011.
UM, SHE WAS WORKING UNDER, UH, JOHN YOUNG AT THE TIME, AND I WAS THE DIRECTOR OF ETHICS AND COMPLIANCE.
UM, I MOVED OVER TO THIS OFFICE AS THE FIRST ASSISTANT I WHEN THE OFFICE WAS STOOD UP.
UM, I HAVE RESPECTED HER FOR ALL OF THIS TIME.
UM, I RESPECT HER WORK AND AS AN INDIVIDUAL.
UM, CERTAINLY COUNCILMAN BURG HAS INDICATED HE'S KNOWN ME FOR 20 PLUS YEARS BECAUSE WE WERE ACTUALLY CROSSED OVER IN LAW SCHOOL.
SO THERE'S PEOPLE IN THIS PARISH I'VE KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME, UM, COUNCILWOMAN VAN FRANKEN, AND I HAVE NOT ALWAYS NECESSARILY SEEN EYE TO EYE, MEANING SOMETIMES SHE HAS MADE DECISIONS THAT I DON'T AGREE WITH IN TERMS OF THIS OFFICE.
SOMETIMES SHE'S MADE DECISIONS, UM, THAT I DO AGREE WITH, WITH THIS OFFICE.
SO IT KIND OF LIKE FALLS DEPENDING ON THE ISSUE.
SHE'S GOT HER JOB AND I'VE GOT MY JOB.
BUT IN TERMS OF THIS PUBLIC LETTER AND COUNCILWOMAN VAN RANK, IN FACT, THE MATTER IS, IS THAT THE PUBLIC LETTER WAS ISSUED TO THE PARISH COUNCIL.
IT WASN'T INTENDED TO BE CRITICAL OF ANY ONE COUNCIL PERSON, BUT IF IT WAS CRITICAL OF ANY ONE COUNCIL PERSON, THEN IT WAS CRITICAL OF ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
AND THAT INCLUDES JENNIFER VAN RANKIN BECAUSE THE FACT IS, IS THAT SHE VOTED FOR THIS BREW PUB.
THE TRIP WAS A BAR ASSOCIATION TRIP.
SOMEBODY MADE REFERENCE THAT WE WERE TRAVELING ABROAD TOGETHER.
UM, SHE WAS ON A BAR ASSOCIATION TRIP, AND I WAS ON THE BAR ASSOCIATION TRIP.
I WAS ACTUALLY TRAVELING WITH MY BEST FRIEND OF 30 SOMETHING YEARS, WHO'S ALSO A LAWYER.
I DIDN'T TRAVEL ABROAD WITH JENNIFER VAN FRANKEN.
I TRAVELED ABROAD WITH THE LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION IS SINCE YOU'RE BEING HONEST AND OPEN, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD DO DIFFERENTLY BASED UPON WHAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT, HOW THE LAST FEW WEEKS HAVE BEEN INTENSE, AND THE POSITION THAT WE, YOU FIND YOURSELF AND THIS OFFICE FINDS ITSELF IN? IS THERE ANYTHING THAT I WOULD DO DIFFERENT? UM, I MIGHT NOT HAVE ISSUED THE PUBLIC LETTER EARLIER THIS YEAR.
I, UM, DEDICATED MILLAGE MONEY MEANS A LOT TO ME.
UM, OUR OFFICE GOT SQUEEZED, UH, YEARS AGO, UH, WHEN THE PARISH WENT IN AND LITERALLY SWEPT OUR DEDICATED MILLAGE AND MOVED IT INTO GENERAL FUNDS.
SO I GOT A LITTLE SENSITIVITY TO PROTECTING DEDICATED MILLAGE MONEY.
UM, BUT, SO IF I COULD DO THAT ONE OVER AGAIN, UM, MAYBE I WOULDN'T DO IT, BUT I'M BEING INCREDIBLY HONEST AND SINCERE.
THE REASON I'M TELLING YOU THAT MAYBE I WOULDN'T DO IT IS NOT BECAUSE I DIDN'T BELIEVE IN WHAT I WAS DOING BECAUSE I DID.
BUT IF I WOULD'VE KNOWN THE HAILSTORM THAT IT WAS GONNA BRING DOWN, I MIGHT'VE SAID, IS IT WORTH IT? AND I'LL ADMIT, I'M EMBARRASSED TO EVEN SAY THAT BECAUSE I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ASKING MYSELF, IS IT WORTH THE STORM? I'M SUPPOSED TO BE DOING WHAT I THINK IS RIGHT.
[02:45:01]
I THOUGHT WAS RIGHT.BUT IF I WAS ENGAGED IN RISK ANALYSIS, I WOULD SAY, WELL, WAS IT WORTH MAKING ALL THOSE PEOPLE ANGRY? THE PUBLIC LETTER ABOUT THE BREW PUB, I HAVE ZERO REGRETS ABOUT, THERE'S PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THAT TRANSACTION WELL OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THIS PARISH.
AND I THINK THAT JEFFERSON PARISH SHOULD BE A BEACON.
UM, AND I THINK A A LOT OF THE, THIS IS WHAT A LOT OF THE CONSTERNATION IS OVER.
UH, FOR INSTANCE, WHEN YOU, YOU BROUGHT UP A $10 MILLION NO BID CONTRACT, THAT'S, THAT'S SCARY.
UM, BUT WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS IF YOU, YOU BOTHER YOU OR YOUR OFFICE BOTHERED TO ASK THE PEOPLE THAT WERE INVOLVED, INVOLVED WHAT PROCESS THEY USED TO ISSUE CONTRACTS AND DID, DID YOU FIND THAT OUT? DID YOU FIND OUT THAT THEY, THEY DID SOMETHING CROOKED AND THEY DID SOMETHING WRONG? THE ENTIRE SCOPE OF THAT PUBLIC LETTER CAN BE DIVIDED INTO TWO PARTS.
UM, PART A WAS THE CREATION OF JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC.
AND THE GARAGE, BECAUSE WE STARTED OUT WITH THOSE ENTITIES IN THE GARAGE.
SO ABOUT HALF OF THE 39 PAGES IS ACTUALLY DEVOTED TO UNDERSTANDING WHERE THESE ENTITIES CAME FROM.
NOBODY'S TALKING ABOUT THAT HALF OF THE 39 PAGES, BUT I MEAN, HALF OF THE 39 PAGES IS WHERE DID THESE INTERESTING THE ENTITIES COME FROM? SO IT WAS A HISTORY LESSON TO SEE LIKE, OKAY, AND NOW THEY'RE HERE.
AND WHAT ARE WE UTILIZING THEM FOR? THE BALANCE OF THE, OF THE PUBLIC LETTER STRICTLY LOOKED AT, UM, THE PARISH'S RESOLUTIONS TO GIVE MONEY TO THAT ENTITY UNDER THE CEA.
AND BEAR IN MIND THAT WE HAVE ISSUED MORE THAN ONE REPORT.
IF YOU'VE READ ALL OF THE REPORTS, THEN I'LL CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE NEW A SECURITY SERVICES REPORT IN WHICH WE CALLED OUT THE DANGERS AND THE RISKS OF TAKING ONE CONTRACT THAT WAS WRITTEN FOR ONE PURPOSE, IE TO BUILD A GARAGE WITH BOND MONEY AND APPROPRIATING IT TO GO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT YEARS LATER WITHOUT REASSESSING WHETHER THE TERMS AND THE CONDITIONS OF THAT CONTRACT ARE GOING TO MEET THE RISKS THAT ARE PRESENT HERE TODAY.
AND SO ALL WE LOOKED AT WAS THE PARISH WAS GIVING MONEY TO JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC.
AND IF YOU READ THAT CEA AND ITS TERMS AND CONDITIONS, IT DID NOT GIVE US PROTECTIONS.
NOW, HOW JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC THE OTHER SIDE OF THE EQUATION, WHICH I THINK YOU'RE REFERRING TO, HOW JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC CONTRACTS OR SPENDS THE MONEY IN A NO BID, A NO BID CONTRACT.
CORRECT? WE DID NOT LOOK AT THAT.
WE LOOKED AT THE PARISH, GAVE THE MONEY TO JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC.
THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT ANYTHING BE BID.
THE CONTROL'S NOT PRESENT WHETHER JEFFERSON FACILITIES INC CHOOSES TO BID OR HOW IT DOES ITS WORK.
THE CONTROL WAS NOT PRESENT IN THE PLAYING LANGUAGE OF THE CONTRACT IN FRONT OF US.
BECAUSE KEEP IN MIND, LIKE WE'RE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF THE ENDS JUSTIFIES THE MEANS, AS YOU INDICATED, IT'S GONNA BE A HUGE SUCCESS OR BOONDOGGLE.
WE DON'T LIVE AND DIE BY WHETHER IT SUCCEEDS OR FAILS.
WE LIVE AND DIE BY HOW WE GOT THERE.
BUT WE DIDN'T FIND, I'M SI DID READ THE LETTERS.
BUT I WAS SPEAKING ABOUT THE $10 MILLION COMMENT.
IT WOULD BE LOVELY TO KNOW WHAT PROCESS THEY USED TO, THEY PASSED A RESOLUTION AND GAVE THEM THE MONEY.
YEAH, NO, YOU DIDN'T ASK, ASK MS. CHATLINE, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY A REPORT, WHY A, EXCUSE ME, ME, WHY A PUBLIC LETTER AS OPPOSED TO A REPORT IN THIS INSTANCE?
[02:50:02]
IT IS INVARIABLY A DELICATE BALANCE TO STRIKE IT ON WHEN YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PREVENT.SO AN AUDIT IS AN AUTOPSY, AND AN INVESTIGATION IS AN AUTOPSY.
WE COULD HAVE NOT ISSUED THAT PUBLIC LETTER, AND WE COULD HAVE JUST WAITED AND WATCHED.
SO YOU GOT THE FACTS, WATCHED HOW THEY SPENT THE MONEY WATCHED, WHETHER IT WAS BID WATCHED, HOW MUCH IT ULTIMATELY COSTS, AND THEN COME BACK AND AUDITED HOW WE DID IT AND SAY WE COULD HAVE DONE IT BETTER.
OR THESE CONTROLS WERE NOT THERE.
BECAUSE AGAIN, WE DON'T JUST LOOK AT THE OUTCOME.
WE REALLY FOCUS ON HOW THE PARISH IS GETTING THERE.
BACK TO THE QUESTION EARLIER, I AM A RESIDENT, IF I HAVE ANY BIAS, MY BIAS IS THIS.
I DROVE DOWN AN AIRLINE AND SAW JPAC.
IT WAS A COLOSSAL MISTAKE ON THE PARISH.
I DON'T THINK THE PARISH INTENDED IT FOR BEING A MISTAKE.
I JUST THINK IT WAS A MISTAKE BECAUSE IT WAS POOR PLANNING.
THAT DOES INFLUENCE MY DECISION.
AND BRUTALLY HONEST, I'M NOT SURE HOW THE BREW PUB IS GOING TO TURN OUT, BUT IT WAS A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY.
AND IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT THE BREW PUB MONEY.
THERE IS A QUESTION OF THE GARAGE BEING BUILT AND WHETHER OR HOW MUCH PARISH FUNDS IS GONNA HAVE TO GO TOWARDS THAT GARAGE AND WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GET THE MONEY TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE, THE STATE ISN'T GONNA GET US.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS.
AND I WAS AFRAID THAT IT WAS GONNA GO SOUTH, AND I WAS AFRAID THAT THE PUBLIC WAS GONNA ASK WHERE WAS OUR INSPECTOR JOURNAL.
SO IF I HAD ANY FEAR IN ISSUING THIS AS A PUBLIC LETTER VERSUS AN AUDIT, MY BIGGEST FEAR WAS DISAPPOINTING THE PUBLIC.
I HAD NO IDEA THAT ALL OF THIS WOULD BE HAPPENING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE CLOSE DISCUSSION? I WILL SHARE FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THAT IN THE EVENT WE VOTE TO APPOINT INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO REVIEW THE ACTIONS OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, THAT WILL BE FUNDED THROUGH THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL'S BUDGET.
WELL, IT WILL BE FUNDED THROUGH OUR JOINT BUDGET.
WE HAVE A JOINT BUDGET BASED ON A MILLAGE.
SO WE WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THE BUDGET.
IT WOULD COME OUT OF THE ECCS BUDGET THROUGH AN AMENDMENT.
UH, BUT THERE ARE SUFFICIENT FUNDS.
SO THAT IS, THAT SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.
BUT IT IS, IT DOES COME FROM OUR MILLAGE AS OPPOSED TO PARISH MILLAGE OR PARISH GENERAL FUNDS.
IF, IF THE COMMISSION APPOINTS COUNSEL, AND USUALLY THIS PROCESS COULD TAKE, HOW LONG ARE WE VERY SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT SOMETHING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? I, I THINK WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A VERY FINITE, UH, ISSUE.
UM, THAT'S ONE TO, TO LOOK AT TRANSPARENCY, TO LOOK AT STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES.
WERE STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES ADDRESSED, HOW ARE THEY ADDRESSED? UM, SO I THINK IT'S A LIMITED, LIMITED SCOPE OF AN EXAMINATION, BUT WE WANT IT TO BE THOROUGH.
I, I THINK PROBABLY IT COULD BE DONE, AND I'M NOT GONNA BE THE ONE TO DO IT.
WE WOULD SEEK OUTSIDE COUNSEL, BUT I WOULD HOPE IT COULD BE DONE WITHIN 60 DAYS.
BUT I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK FOR SOMEBODY THAT HA DOESN'T COME BEFORE YOU.
BUT I, I THINK IT COULD BE DONE QUICKLY, BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE DONE QUICKLY IF YOU APPOINT SOMEBODY, BECAUSE I THINK THE CLOUD THAT OVERSHADOWS BOTH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE AND THE ECC TO SOME EXTENT, IF, DEPENDING ON HOW YOU ACT, IS, IS IMPORTANT.
AND TO REMOVE THE CLOUD IS, AS YOU SAY, OPEN THE CURTAINS AND, AND SHOW CLEAR TRANSPARENCY TO EVERYBODY.
SO IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR INDEPENDENT COUNSEL GOING TO STRANGLE THE BUDGET OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE? I'M GONNA SPEAK FROM OUR REVIEW OF THE BUDGET.
THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY IN, IN A POT THAT HAS NOT BEEN USED.
KEEP IN MIND THAT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND THE VC CANNOT, UH, KEEP MORE THAN ONE YEAR'S BUDGET.
ANYTHING IN EXCESS GOES BACK TO THE PARISH, OR IT CAN GO BACK TO THE PARISH GENERAL FUND.
HOWEVER, THERE IS SUFFICIENT FUNDS THAT IT WILL NOT STRANGLE THE BUDGET THIS YEAR OR IN THE YEARS TO COME.
IN THE EVENT THAT THAT IS AUTHORIZED
[02:55:01]
ONE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DID IN ANTICIPATION OF THE MEETING, I LOOKED AT JEFFERSON PARISH'S LIST OF COUNSEL FOR DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES THAT THEY HAVE ON THEIR OWN LIST THAT THE COUNCIL HAS APPROVED.AND, AND ONE OF THOSE SECTIONS IS ETHICS COUNSEL.
UH, AND I CONTACTED A, A FEW OF THOSE ON THAT LIST TO SEE IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING, BECAUSE I, I DID, UH, READ THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE LEGAL COMMITTEE, OF THE COUNSEL INDICATING THAT THEY HAD CONTACTED PEOPLE AND THAT THERE WAS A RELUCTANCE TO, TO UNDERTAKE THIS BECAUSE OF CONCERNS.
SO I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPERATIVE TO CONTACT AND SAY, IS THERE RELUCTANCE? ARE YOU WILLING TO UNDERTAKE THIS? AND I SPOKE TO TWO, BOTH OF WHICH DID NOT FEEL LIKE IT WOULD BE A PROBLEM FOR IN, FOR THEM TO UNDERTAKE AN INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS.
BOTH ARE COUNSEL THAT'S BEEN OUT PROBABLY AS LONG AS I HAVE OR MORE OVER 40 YEARS.
HOW DID YOU ARRIVE AT THOSE TWO AND HOW WELL I ATTEMPTED TO CALL A COUPLE OF THE OTHERS.
I DIDN'T GET RETURNED PHONE CALLS.
I DID SPEAK TO BILL AARON, WHO WAS COUNSEL INVOLVED WITH THE, UH, CHARTER ADVISORY COMMISSION, UH, IN THE PAST FEW YEARS.
UH, HE WAS CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS MANY, MANY YEARS AGO.
UH, HAS A STRONG ETHICS BACKGROUND AND, AND STANDING.
I ALSO SP SPOKE TO DAN RANSON AT, AT GUIDRY RANSON HIGGINS, WHO HIS OFFICE HERE IS ON THE WEST BANK, UH, WHO IS SEMI-RETIRED.
HE ALSO SAID HE WAS WILLING, AS DID MR. AARON.
SO BOTH ARE WILLING AND BOTH ARE VERY CAPABLE, A PLUS RATED COUNSEL.
UM, I DID ATTEMPT TO CONTACT SOMEBODY AT, UM, BRAZIL SACKS, WAS NOT UNABLE TO REACH THEM.
AND ALSO, UH, BLUE WILLIAMS WAS UNABLE TO REACH THEM.
BUT I DO THINK ANYBODY ON THE LIST IS QUALIFIED UNDER THE ETHICS, UM, LIST THAT THE PARISH HAS, THAT THE COUNCIL HAS VETTED PREVIOUSLY.
AND I, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT ONE OF THOSE BE, UM, BE APPOINTED AGAIN FOR, FOR TRANSPARENCY AND TO REMOVE WHAT IS A, A POTENTIAL CLOUD, UH, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THAT OUTCOME IS.
I, I THINK YOU DESERVE IT AS A COMMISSION, AS DOES INSPECTOR GENERAL CHAT LANE.
THAT, THAT, UH, UH, HONEST VETTING OF EVERYTHING FROM AN OBJECTIVE SOURCE BE MADE.
BUT, BUT THAT'S ENTIRELY THE COMMISSION'S DECISION.
AND, AND JUST FOR ULTIMATE TRANSPARENCY, HOW CAN WE BE ASSURED THAT, THAT THOSE FIRMS ARE INDEPENDENT THEMSELVES? WELL, I, I BELIEVE IT'S, IT WARRANTS PROBABLY A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THIS COMMISSION.
UH, BE APPOINTED, MEET WITH THE COUNCIL, DIFFERENT COUNCIL, UH, THAT THE COMMISSION AUTHORIZED THE APPOINTMENT OF, OF THE COMMITTEE SELECTION.
AND THE COMMITTEE SELECTION WOULD BE IN AN OPEN MEETING, OBVIOUSLY, UH, DISCUSSING, DISCUSSING WITH THEM, AND THEN THE APPOINTMENT BE MADE RATHER THAN WAIT TO THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING.
I BELIEVE IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE TO ACT IN A, IN AN EXPEDITED FASHION.
OF COURSE, THAT'S, YOU'RE CONFIDENT WE CAN TURN THIS VERY QUICKLY IF WE DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE.
I THINK IF WE DO DUE DILIGENCE AND GET THE APPOINTMENT MADE QUICKLY.
UH, I BELIEVE, I'M SURE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S GONNA MAKE HERSELF AND HER OFFICE AVAILABLE, UM, AS WILL COUNSEL OR ANYBODY ELSE.
UH, SO I, I THINK IT CAN BE DONE ON AN EXPEDITED BASIS WITH COOPERATION.
I HAD, UH, ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION IN RESPONSE TO SOME SUBSEQUENT STUFF.
UH, SO YEAH, UH, DID TRUST ME.
I SAY I DID MY HOMEWORK ON THIS DESPITE IT BEING FAIRLY SHORT, BUT I AM COMING IN, UH, MIDSTREAM.
SO, UM, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD WAS WITH RESPECT TO THE TIMING, UM, 'CAUSE THAT WAS A CRITICISM, BUT THE WAY THAT YOU RESPONDED THAT THIS WAS NOT, THIS WAS PREVENTATIVE MEDICINE, NOT AN AUTOPSY.
YOU'RE BASICALLY, IS IT ACCURATE TO SAY THAT YOU, THE TIMING WAS ESSENTIALLY DELIBERATE? THAT THAT'S A, A STRENGTH, NOT A WEAKNESS OF, OF THE WAY THAT YOU, YOU DID THINGS.
DO WE NEED TO DO A ROLL CALL? VOTE FOR THIS.
YOU DON'T NEED TO DO A ROLL CALL VOTE, BUT YOU'LL NEED TO DO TWO DIFFERENT RESOLUTIONS.
ONE TO AUTHORIZE THE APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, AND TWO, TO AUTHORIZE A COMMITTEE TO MEET WITH THOSE COUNSEL AND TO SELECT AND PROCEED.
SO THE FIRST IS DO TO AUTHORIZE A RESOLUTION TO APPOINT INDEPENDENT COUNSEL.
AND IT'S NOT A ROLL CALL VOTE, BUT YOU WILL NEED A MOTION A SECOND, AND THEN A, A, A VOTE I MOVE TO APPOINT, UH, OUTSIDE COUNSEL, INDEPENDENT COUNSEL.
UM, MR. SULLIVAN HAS, UM, MENTIONED SEVERAL LAW FIRMS, UM, ALL OF WHICH I'M FAMILIAR WITH.
[03:00:01]
OFFICE IS INDEPENDENT, I DO NOT THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR ANY INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO BETAIN BY THIS ECC TO LOOK INTO THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL BECAUSE WE ARE INDEPENDENT.IF THAT FIRM HAS ACTIVE LITIGATION IN WHICH IT IS REPRESENTING THE PARISH COUNCIL, THAT IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
AND, AND WE WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
UH, I I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DISPUTE OVER THAT.
OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD HAVE TO BE PURE INDEPENDENCE AS OPPOSED TO, UM, HAVING ANY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARISH AT THIS POINT.
SO AGAIN, I BELIEVE A COMMITTEE THAT'S APPOINTED ARE GONNA ASK THOSE VERY POINTED QUESTIONS AND, AND I THINK YOU'LL GET, YOU'LL GET A SELECTION THAT YOU'LL BE COMFORTABLE WITH TO HAVE A MOTION FOR RESOLUTION TO
AND I WOULD, I WOULD ASK FOR VOLUNTEERS IN THAT AS PART OF THAT RESOLUTION.
SECOND, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING EVERYTHING CORRECTLY, DID WE HAVE THE COMPLETE IT PASSED MOTION? OKAY.
NOW THIS IS A RESOLUTION RIGHT? FOR US AS A COMMISSION TO HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE MM-HMM.
AND IS THAT AS I, AS I APPRECIATE IT.
AND NOW YOU ALL NEED TWO, TWO VOLUNTEERS.
I WOULD RECOMMEND TO BE ON THAT COMMITTEE.
YOU'LL GET THE SAME PAY YOU GET NOW AND TIME AND A HALF.
INSPECTOR GENERAL, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO THE PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF YOUR REPORT.
I WILL ASK, WE ARE EIGHT 30 RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT.
WE HAVE A PRESENTATION OF OUR, A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION OF OUR DRUG EVALUATION, AS WELL AS A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION OF, UM, OUR 2025 ANNUAL WORK PLAN.
IS THE PLEASURE OF THE COMMISSION THAT WE PRESENT ALL OF OUR PRESENTATIONS, OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO DEFER UNTIL JANUARY? I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER UNTIL JANUARY IF THE COMMISSION AGREES.
I IF I MAY MAKE A SUGGESTION IN THAT CONSIDERATION, KEEP IN MIND THAT WE HAVE TWO MATTERS THAT HAVE TO BE DISCUSSED TONIGHT AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED COMPLAINTS, ETHICAL COMPLAINTS, THEY ARE CONFIDENTIAL.
WE MAY NOT DISCUSS THEM UNTIL A HEARING IS IS CONDUCTED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
SO AGAIN, FOR, FOR THE SAKE OF ALLOWING EVERYBODY TO GET OUT OF HERE BEFORE 10 O'CLOCK, I WOULD, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT DEFERMENT.
[VII. Presentation and discussion of Inspector General Report, to include public discussion of any recently published reports, open letters, data, and statistics by the Office of Inspector General]
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A CHANGE TO THE AGENDA.UM, A MOTION TO MOVE THE PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT TO THE JANUARY MEETING.
I MOVE, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED.
NOW WE ARE GOING TO MOVE INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO DO SO? I MOVE THAT WE LINE ITEM, OH, EXCUSE ME.
CAN, CAN WE DEFER THAT TILL AFTER THIS? CAN WE JUST, OH, OKAY.
[VIII. Determination of Commission Meeting Schedule for 2025 (subject to ability to reserve Council Chambers for meeting) - Jan. 15, Mar. 19, May 21, Jul 16, Sept. 17, Nov 19, 2025.]
MEETING SCHEDULED FOR 2025 AVAILABILITY, UM, BASED ON THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR THE MEETING.JANUARY 15TH, MARCH 19TH, MAY 21ST, JULY 16TH, SEPTEMBER 17TH, AND NOVEMBER 19TH.
AND MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU ALL CAN JUST CHECK THOSE DATES SO WE HAVE QUORUM.
[IX. Executive Session for Consideration of Complaints against Parish Elected Officials]
MOVE TO EXECUTIVE SESSION MOVE THAT WE MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND AND A ROLL CALL VOTE.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO MOVE OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION? I MOVE, I'M SORRY.
I MOVE THAT WE GET OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION.
AND NOW WE HAVE TWO ETHICS MATTERS.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CLOSE ETHICS COMPLAINT NUMBER ONE WITHOUT ACTION.
UH, I MOVE TO ADDRESS ETHICS COMPLAINT NUMBER TWO AT THE JANUARY MEETING.
[03:05:02]
SECOND.[X. New Business]
BUSINESS? YES, MA'AM.UM, IF I MAY ADDRESS, UM, MR. SULLIVAN BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION THE NAME OF, UM, SEVERAL POTENTIAL LAWYERS, UM, AND TRUTH.
IN FACT, MR. SULLIVAN WAS, UH, RETAINED BY THIS ETHICS AND COMPLIANCE COMMISSION SUBSEQUENT TO A, UM, ADVERTISED STATEMENT FOR QUALIFICATIONS TO WHICH HE RESPONDED.
UM, MS. SCHNABEL ALSO, UH, GOT HER POSITION BY WAY OF AN ADVERTISED STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS.
UM, I AM NOT COMFORTABLE HAVING ANY LAW FIRM ON THE PARISHES LIST ACT AS THE INVESTIGATOR FOR THIS OFFICE.
BY DEFINITION, ANY LAW FIRM ON THAT LIST WOULD HAVE RESPONDED TO AN ADVERTISED STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS.
MEANING THEY MADE IT KNOWN TO THE PARISH THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO ACCEPT WORK FROM THE PARISH.
AND, UM, WE WILL FULLY COOPERATE WITH ANY INDEPENDENT COUNSEL THAT COMES IN TO INVESTIGATE OUR OFFICE.
BUT WE NEED AN ASSURANCE THAT THAT INDEPENDENT COUNSEL HAS NEITHER AN ONGOING FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARISH, AN ANTICIPATED FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARISH, OR THAT THE PARISH ISN'T GOING TO OFFER TO START UP A FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THAT LAW FIRM AND IMPEDE UPON THEIR INDEPENDENCE.
AND THE ONLY WAY THAT INDEPENDENCE CAN BE GUARANTEED IS IF WE ENGAGE IN A STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS ADVERTISED TIMELINE ON THAT.
I, I, I BELIEVE WE CAN, CAN, THE COMMITTEE CAN VET COUNCIL, UM, AND THE COMMITTEE CAN MEET AND, AND DISCUSS HOW BEST TO DO THAT.
BUT AGAIN, WE, WE WERE VERY CLEAR THAT ANYBODY WHO DOES BUSINESS WITH A PARISH ONGOING BUSINESS HAS DONE BUSINESS OR IS GOING TO DO BUSINESS.
MERELY BECAUSE YOU'RE ON THE APPROVED LIST DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE BUSINESS OR YOU'RE GOING TO DO BUSINESS.
WE KNOW ONE OF THEM WAS COUNSEL ON THE CHARTER ADVISORY COMMISSION TO OVER THREE YEARS AGO, BUT WE DON'T KNOW BEYOND THAT.
BUT AGAIN, I THINK THE COMMITTEE CAN VET THAT AND MAKE THAT DECISION.
AND HOW DO WE KNOW THAT? HOW DO I KNOW THAT? I THINK YOU EITHER VET IT.
I EVEN IF YOU DO A STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS, AS, AS MS. SHA LANE SAYS, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STILL COME IN AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO ASK THE PARISH THAT QUESTION AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO ASK THEM THAT QUESTION.
UM, BECAUSE THAT QUESTION WAS ASKED OF ME WHEN I CAME TO INTERVIEW WITH THIS COMMISSION, AND I INTERVIEWED WITH YOU IN, UH, AN OPEN MEETING WHERE EVERYBODY WAS WATCHING
UM, AND, UH, I, I, THAT WAS THE FIRST QUESTION I ASKED, ARE YOU INDEPENDENT FROM THE PARISH? DO YOU HAVE ANY, DO YOU DO BUSINESS WITH THE PARISH? WILL YOU ACCEPT BUSINESS WITH THE PARISH? ALL OF WHICH WAS A, A, A NEGATIVE RESPONSE BEFORE I WAS EVEN CONSIDERED.
I THINK THAT SAME QUESTION HAS TO BE ASKED OF ANYBODY THAT YOU CONSIDER.
SO THAT WAS, WAS DONE IN AN OPEN MEETING? ABSOLUTELY.
AND, AND I THINK THAT COMMITTEE MEETING WILL BE IN AN OPEN MEETING.
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MR. SULLIVAN'S ENGAGEMENT IS AN ONGOING ENGAGEMENT.
I ANTICIPATE THAT THIS ENGAGEMENT WILL BE A SINGULAR ENGAGEMENT, WHICH MEANS IF WE PICK FROM THE PARISH'S LIST, WE WILL NEVER KNOW WHETHER THE PARISH, THE PARISH WILL ABSOLUTELY KNOW WHO YOU PICK.
WHAT YOU'RE NOT GONNA KNOW IS WHETHER THAT LAWYER SEES A PHONE CALL PROMISING THEM FUTURE LEGAL WORK.
THEY ANSWERED A STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS TO REPRESENT THE PARISH.
AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, THEY HAVE AN ONGOING OPPORTUNITY FOR FINANCIAL ADVANCEMENT, WHICH PRECLUDES THEM FROM INDEPENDENCE AND TERMS. NOW, AS FAR AS LIKE ADVERTISING FOR A STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS, YOU KNOW, THAT CAN BE DONE IN AN ASSORTMENT OF DIFFERENT WAYS.
IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE ADVERTISED IN THE PAPER, BUT THERE ARE ATTORNEYS THAT WORK IN THIS CITY THAT ARE NOT ON THAT LIST AND HAVE NO FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARISH.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR INDEPENDENCE, THEN WE NEED INDEPENDENCE BECAUSE THEY'RE COMING INTO OUR OFFICE AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE EXPOSED TO CONFIDENCES.
YOU DID MENTION MR. SULLIVAN TO OTHER FIRMS, INCLUDING, OH, THERE'S SEVERAL FIRMS AND, AND BUT NOT OUTSIDE OF JEFFERSON.
MOST OF THEM ARE OUTSIDE OF JEFFERSON.
RANSON GUIDRY IS THE ONLY FIRM THAT I EVEN TALKED TO THAT WAS INSIDE.
I TRIED TO REACH BLUE WILLIAMS. THEY, THEY WERE INSIDE, BUT, BUT I DID NOT RECEIVE CALL BACK.
BRAZIL SACHS IS, IS OUT OF BATON ROUGE.
THEY HAVE A NEW ORLEANS OFFICE.
BUT I THINK THE ISSUE IS WHETHER THEY ARE ON A LIST FROM WHICH JEFFERSON PARISH CAN PICK AND HIRE THEM, AND THEN THEY HAVE AN ECONOMIC INCENTIVE TO MM-HMM.
[03:10:01]
PARISH.AND THAT REALLY IS A POTENTIAL CONFLICT.
AND IT'S PARTICULARLY A CONFLICT WHEN, UH, WE WOULD ASSUME THAT THIS INVESTIGATION WILL INVOLVE REVEALING OF CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATORY THING.
SO WE WANNA BE CAREFUL ABOUT THAT.
LOOK, WE WANNA BE TRANSPARENT, BUT IN, IN MY WORLD AND AND MARTA'S WORLD TOO, WE ALL BID FOR WORK AND, AND TO SUGGEST, AND, AND QUITE CANDIDLY, MARTA SAT IN MY CHAIR INTERVIEWING AT THE SAME TIME I DID THIS POSITION.
I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T GET THE JOB AND SHE DIDN'T GET THE JOB, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
SHE INTERVIEWED WITH A STATE AGENCY THAT I DO CONTROL OVER, AND I DIDN'T OVER, I DIDN'T THAT JOB EITHER.
I'M JUST, BUT, BUT, UH, A AGAIN, THE COUNCIL'S A SMALL WORLD.
I I, I THINK YOU CAN DO IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOMEBODY THAT'S GONNA BE FAIR.
I, I DON'T WANT TO IMPUGN THE INTEGRITY OF A POTENTIAL COUNSEL THAT HE'S GONNA GET A CALL FROM THE, THE PARISH AND SAY, OH, I WANNA HIRE YOU.
LET'S, LET'S LOOK AT THIS PROCESS AS A, AS THE COMMITTEE AND DO IT FAIRLY.
THERE'S A HOST OF LAW FIRMS IN THIS CITY THAT'S NOT ON THE LIST.
I SAID, I'M WILLING TO COOPERATE AND I'M WILLING TO COOPERATE BECAUSE I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.
BUT ABOUT THE LAST THING I WANT IS SOMEBODY WHO'S SUPPOSED TO BE INDEPENDENT AND THEY'RE ALREADY ON A PRE-APPROVED, SELECTED LIST BY THE PARISH.
I MEAN, THAT IS NOT INDEPENDENCE.
SO LET'S NOT START THIS PROCESS OUT WITH SOMEBODY WHOSE INDEPENDENCE IS ALREADY IMPAIRED.
BECAUSE WE'RE ALL ABOUT LOOKING AT BEYOND FACTUAL INDEPENDENCE.
WE'RE ABOUT LOOKING AT THE PERCEPTION OF INDEPENDENCE.
AND I'M THE ONE THROWING THE RED FLAG.
I MEAN, I'M ALL ABOUT IT, I THINK, BUT I NEED TO HAVE FAITH.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK I WAS SAID THAT WE HAD TO PULL FROM THE LIST.
NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PULL, YOU HAVE TO JUST GET INDEPENDENT COUNCIL.
SO THE COMMITTEE CAN MEET, MAKE, MAKE A DETERMINATION ON HOW YOU SEEK THOSE QUALIFIED PEOPLE.
UH, THE QUICKER WE MEET, THE BETTER WE CAN MEET OVER A ZOOM OR A PHONE CALL.
I DON'T TO INITIALLY HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW YOU WANNA DO IT.
ONCE THE SOP GOES OUT, THE MEETING WILL BE PUBLIC.
I'M IN FAVOR OF THE COUNCIL BEING AS GEOGRAPHICALLY AND PERSONALLY AS FAR REMOVED AS IS.
BUT KEEPING IN MIND YOU PAY FOR TRAVEL TIME.
WE DON'T WANT SOMEBODY FROM BATON ROUGE.
UM, I MEAN, WE HAVE TO BE AWARE OF ECONOMICS AND WE CAN ONLY PAY UP TO THREE 50, WHICH LIMITS OUR ABILITY TO GET COUNSEL.
UH, I KNOW THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT OF MONEY, BUT IT'S NOT IN, IN THE WORLD OF THE LAW PRACTICE.
BUT AGAIN, I THINK WE CAN SECURE SOMEBODY IN NEW ORLEANS OR THE, THE SURROUNDING METROPOLITAN AREA THAT DOESN'T HAVE TIES TO JEFFERSON PARISH COUNCIL OR I HAVE NO TIES TO THE COUNCIL OR THE ADMINISTRATION.
NEVER HAVE, WE'VE ALWAYS DONE CORPORATE WORK OUTSIDE OF, OF, UM, OF POLITICAL WORK FOR THIS VERY REASON.
WE DON'T LIKE TO GET INVOLVED IN MESSY THINGS.
I DON'T, A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BE INVOLVED.
SO I THINK WE CAN SECURE, LET'S, LET'S REGROUP IF I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE ARE USING MILLAGE FEES TO FUND THIS AND WE HAVE TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE.
AND, AND WE CAN ALSO ASK, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TAKE LESS THAN MAXIMUM RATE THAT THE STATE PAYS? BECAUSE JUST BECAUSE STATE AUTHORIZES UP TO THREE 50 DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO ENGAGE AT THREE 50.
I DON'T GET PAID THREE 50 BECAUSE I CHOSE TO ENGAGE AT THE, THE 2 25 RATE ORIGINALLY.
AND I NEVER HAVE RAISED THAT BECAUSE OUR MONEY IS LIMITED
AND I THINK YOU ASKED QUESTION.
I HAVE A POINT OF INFORMATION AND I'M OFFERING THIS UP.
I JUST ASKED, UM, ERICA SMITH.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW THE PERSON'S NAME OR ANYBODY.
UM, I HAVE CONCERNS, UH, ABOUT, UH, AND I'VE DISCUSSED THIS WITH MARTA SCHNABEL.
IT'S, IT'S A CONVERSATION I'M BRINGING UP AND I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S PREMATURE AT THIS POINT.
UM, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT INDEPENDENT COUNSEL COMING IN AND NOT UNDERSTANDING LIKE, THE NATURE OF THE WORK WE DO.
UM, I'VE HAD THOSE CONCERNS THAT MARTA, I BELIEVE EXPRESSED TO JERRY IF HE HADN'T.
UM, I DO NOT KNOW IF CHAFF MCCALL IS ON THE PARISH'S LIST.
UM, BUT I DO KNOW THAT CHAFF MCCALL, UH, PROVIDES OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO THE NEW ORLEANS INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE.
I DON'T KNOW WHO, I DON'T KNOW THE NAME OF THE ATTORNEY.
I JUST KNOW AT CHAFF MCCALL THERE IS A LAWYER WHO HAS, UH, REPRESENTED AN INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE.
SO, UH, THEORETICALLY WOULD AT LEAST UNDERSTAND, UH, THE WORK THAT WE DO.
I DON'T KNOW THE PERSON, BUT THEY WOULD TAKE GOVERNMENT RATES.
THEY TAKE GOVERNMENT RATES LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
THE ONLY CONCERN I WOULD HAVE IS WE WANNA STEER AWAY FROM SOMEBODY WHO HAS TIES TO ANY INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE TOO.
I WILL TELL YOU, I DID MAKE A PHONE CALL TO THE ASSOCIATION OF INSPECTOR GENERALS.
[03:15:01]
I WANNA BE VERY TRANSPARENT ABOUT THAT, AND CALLED THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION, WHO IS THE BALTIMORE INSPECTOR GENERAL, AND SAID, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO BE ON THIS LIST? AND SHE SAID, NO, BUT WE WILL BE WILLING TO PROVIDE EXPERTISE AND STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES TO ANY INDEPENDENT COUNSEL YOU DO SEEK.SO THEY HAVE OFFERED THAT, UH, BOTH THE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT ARE WILLING TO OFFER EXPERTISE IN STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK KIM AND, AND EVERYBODY IN HER ARENA WOULD CALL THE GREEN BOOK.
WELL, AND FAIR FOR FRANK AND I WHO WILL SERVE ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
I MEAN, WE HAVE TO DO OUR HOMEWORK, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY.
AND SO WE'RE NOT PREPARED TO MAKE ANY KIND OF DECISION ON WHO? WELL, YOU DON'T NEED TO MAKE ONE TONIGHT.
I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME DISCUSSIONS.
MAYBE NEXT WEEK IF Y'ALL HAVE SOME, I ASSUME YOUR SCHOOLS ARE CLOSED MAYBE NEXT WEEK.
WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY YOU'RE COOKING.
UM, I JUST DON'T WANNA DELAY IT.
AND I'M NOT INTERESTED IN BEING AN OBSTRUCTIONIST, BUT AN EFFORT WORTH UNDERTAKING IS WORTH UNDERTAKING WITH DUE CARE AND ADEQUATE PLANNING.
WELL, I DON'T INTERPRET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AS BEING AN OBSTRUCTIONIST.
I, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, EVERYTHING IS ABOVE BOARD.
AND SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT TO OUR ATTENTION AS WELL AND EXPRESSING YOUR CONCERNS.
ANY OTHER NEW BUSINESS? I HAVE LOST MY AGENDA IN MY PILE OF PAPERS.
IS IT TIME
[XI. Next Meeting Date: January 15, 2025]
JANUARY 15TH.UM, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? I MOVE THAT WE ADJOURN.
EVERYONE HAVE A HAPPY THANKSGIVING.