Public-ishy-ness

I got to watch a short segment today of the City Council meeting where the City's portion of the Wisner Funds was discussed in respect to what responsibility and oversight the Council has over how the funds are spent.  I'll defer to the Lens and Maldanado who was actually there:

Council members seek more accountability in Wisner, NOLA for Life spending

The budget does not, however, include more than $1.5 million in Wisner-funded grants the city usually gives to local charities. As long as the lawsuit is winding through appeals courts, the city doesn’t plan to allocate any Wisner grant money. That could put some of those charities in a bind. 

But even if the money were included, Landrieu’s General Counsel Erica Beck said, the council would have no control of it. 

“The council has traditionally not appropriated any of that grant money,” Beck told the council. “We’ve received no indication from the judge that we need to change.” 

But as blogger Jason Berry recently pointed out, New Orleans Municipal Code appears to give the council control of the fund. In fact, Berry reported, that “check and balance” was central to the city’s argument that the fund should be declared public. 

“If there is in fact council oversight,” asked Head, “and there is a check and balance for this government fund, when do I have that council oversight that is part and parcel to that check and balance?” 

During her remarks on the Wisner Fund, Head also objected to the process for handing out NOLA for Life grant funds, saying it wasn’t transparent, which led to funds going to charities that lacked proper financial documentation.

That is....almost incomprehensible to me....Beck's statements.

She sat in the same courtroom I did and listened to her fellow City Attorney, Sharonda Williams, argue to Judge Zeno that there was no need for the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee to review and provide oversight of how the Mayor spent the City's portion of the money because there was already a check and balance system in place with City Council, who oversees all expenditures of public money by the Mayor.

If they're now arguing that City Council has no oversight or control of the money we need to have another hearing and inform the judge that Sharonda Williams totally misinformed him in the courtroom.

As it stands right now, there is no oversight of how the Mayor spends the money...PUBLIC money.  He could go take out a Wisner Amex and blow millions of dollars on Cheetos, blow jobs, Miller Hi-Life and Angry Bird apps and there would be no legal recourse to stop him....none.

The judge ruled the Trust was PUBLIC.  As of right now, this money is PUBLIC money.  It's not "publicy" money.  It's not kinda-sorta public.  It's not a little bit public....it's fucking PUBLIC.

There shouldn't even be a question of whether or not City Council has control and oversight of how the executive branch spends the money but even if there was a question the City Code clearly states City Council has dominion.  Beck's argument that Council hasn't traditionally appropriated the grant money is moot....when the Mayor decided to attempt to bust the trust and bypass the "traditional appropriation of the money" he negated whatever M.O. was in place.

In fact, City Council now has a fiduciary duty to provide oversight.  If the Mayor did blow the money on Cheetos and blow jobs,  according to the City Code, Council could be held accountable as well.

Yes, I'm being outrageous but not so much in a city that is vaunted for corruption and misappropriation of public funds.  It's not only possible that the Wisner funds will be used as a personal slush fund for the Mayor's pet projects and to pay off political cronies....it's likely.

So Beck is saying that the judge gave them no indication that they need to change yet they must have misled the judge in their legal argument if this is the position they're taking now.  I think City Council needs to get a clarification from Judge Zeno on this matter and find out if he truly intended to turn over millions of public dollars generated annually to the Mayor without any oversight or action for recourse.

Hell, I may run for Mayor and go bankroll all my peeps' private ventures with Wisner funds if that's the case.

I'm waiting for the archived video to be loaded on City Council's website so I can watch the whole thing.  I'm also trying to obtain the transcript from the hearing...I went by Div. D today but the court reporter is on vacation and I wasn't able to get it.  I'll keep you posted.

The Wisner Trust - Not so fast, Mr. Mayor

The Wisner heirs recently filed a suspensive appeal in Div. D to stop the Mayor from spending the City's portion of the Wisner Trust funds until the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals can hear the case.  To my utter surprise, Judge Zeno granted the suspension.

Suspensive Appeal Order by Judge Zeno

This basically cock blocks the Mayor from spending any of the money he's allocated (without oversight) from the City's Wisner fund.  I would also note that it gives City Council time to take up their responsibility as an oversight body as dictated by the City Code, a role that was acknowledged by the Mayor's counsel in the hearing.

I'm betting this puts the Mayor in a bind as I'm sure there are a lot of folks waiting to get their hands on that dinero.

Speaking of that, I was excited to see a tweet last week from The Lens' Charles Maldonado that he had finally received the Mayor's Wisner budget (not sure which years) per a public records request he had file some four months ago.   I guess transparency is like a fine wine, it needs time to age.

UPDATE:  actually a clarification...the heirs did not file the suspensive appeal to block the money being spent by the City, it was filed in order to suspend the overall effects of Zeno's judgement until the Appellate Court can hear the case.  The heirs have deferred to the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee to decide whether or not the Mayor should be allowed to spend the City's portion of the Wisner money until the case is heard by the 4th Circuit.    

It's time to take Mayor Landrieu on his word regarding the oversight of Wisner Trust Funds

In my post on the Wisner hearing I noted that Sharonda Williams, New Orleans City Attorney, made an argument to Judge Zeno that there was no need for the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee to serve as an oversight body to how the Mayor spends the Wisner funds because there is already a check and balance system in place.  She suggested that oversight body is New Orleans City Council.  

I found it to be a specious claim the moment I heard it but apparently Judge Zeno took her word and granted the Mayor full control of the City's portion of the Wisner funds.

In fact, he apparently took the city attorneys' word on everything,  even going so far as cutting and pasting part of their counter-motion into his own "judgement".  That cut and paste job was just about the only explanation he provided in any of his rulings which gave Mayor Landrieu practically everything he asked for.

I was pretty sure the City Council claim was a smoke screen when I heard it but I wanted to check and see if City Council members were aware that the Mayor's office considered them to have any oversight with the City's portion of the Wisner funds.

I spoke with two City Council members about the issue, Stacy Head and Susan Guidry.

Councilperson-at-Large, Stacy Head, told me she had looked into the matter back in February and had asked the Assistant Fiscal Officer to the Council, David Gavlinksi, to do the same.

Councilperson Head forwarded me an email chain between her, Gavlinski and City Council President, Jackie Clarkson.  I condensed the messages into this document according to date:

City Council Email Thread on regarding the Wisner Trust 2013

This is what the municipal code states in respect to the Council's involvement with the Wisner funds:

DIVISION 4. – EDWARD WISNER DONATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Sec. 2-159. - Function.
Subject to the control and direction of the council, the powers, duties and functions of
the Edward Wisner Donation Advisory Committee shall be the supervision, direction
and administration of all of the lands, funds and avails constituting and comprising the
Wisner donation, or the avails or fruits thereof, and to consult with and advise the mayor in his capacity as trustee upon all matters pertaining to such trust and the mayor when acting upon the advice of the committee, or a majority thereof, shall be deemed to be acting for and in behalf of all the parties at interest. To that end all matters relating to the trust shall in the first instance be referred to and handled by the committee.  (Code 1956, § 19-4) 

Gavlinski goes on to offer an opinion (not legally binding mind you, just an opinion) of City Council's role with the Trust:

Of interest is a section on page six of the attached, which reads:

“… the Mayor of the City of New Orleans, with the approval of the Commission
Council (or its successor body), may act as such Trustee upon the advice and
with the consent of the majority of said Commissioners, and such action, so
authorized, shall be binding on all parties hereto.”

My reading of that is that the Mayor, on behalf of the City, has but one vote
on the committee. That vote is subject to approval of the Council, and must
accompany a majority of the committee member. I’m fairly certain that this is a
level of restraint that has not occurred over the years as any Mayor has seldom
come to any Council for their “approval.”

I think what he's saying is the law states City Council does have legal oversight but it was never actually put into practice.

Soooo...note to City Council:  The Mayor is ultimately subject to the oversight and approval of City Council on all matters regarding Wisner.

In fact, his lawyers just made that exact argument in Zeno's court.  They claimed that they shouldn't have to answer to The Wisner Trust Advisory Committee because they are already legally bound to answer to City Council....Zeno agreed.

The problem is City Council had no idea that they were responsible.  At least the two At-Large members on the Council didn't know, as evidenced in this email chain.  Nor did the third councilperson I spoke with, Susan Guidry.

I'm not criticizing the council members in any way for not knowing this, they are elected officials that came into their jobs following the practices of the council members before them.  The modus operandi and annual budget agenda never included a breakdown of The Wisner grant money.

I believe Gavlinski states as much in his response to the council members after researching the matter:

"It appears as if we have nearly a century of operational inertia whereby the
Council has not appropriated all the funds, even though this practice may
be contrary  powers in the above referenced code. Alas, the Mayor may be
right in one respect, but it seems clear that the fund has operated outside of
complete Council authority in the past.

I believe that historically, there has been more harmony between the chair
of the Committee and the rest of its membership, so this issue may have not
arisen as acutely. " 

Apparently, the issue never came up until now.  Regardless, once again, here's a note to City Council: YOU ARE THE OVERSIGHT BODY.  In fact City Council is now the ONLY oversight body.  The Mayor's counsel just lobbied this admission in a court of law....and the judge agreed.  

I suppose the person we should consult is the Special Counsel to the City Council.  I'm sure that appointee could provide an objective legal opinion on the matter, eh?  Because whoever holds that position would not be privy to the mayor in any way, eh?

As luck would have it, the City just accepted RFQs for that position and four law firms applied.  I'll give you three guesses as to who one of those firms is and the first two don't count.

Funny stuff, huh?  The one critical position with City Council that is supposed to be objective and independent of the executive branch of city government (the Mayor's office) and Herman and Herman are applying for it.  I'm sure there's no conflict of interest there...nah....

...seeing as how they are representing the City and the Wisner Trust in their settlement case against BP...

....seeing as how Herman and Herman members and family members comprised the single largest bloc of campaign contributions to Mayor Landrieu in 2012...

....no....no conflict here.....Where's that Uddo or Zeno opinion when you need it?