New Orleans Public Belt Railroad - KPMG Evaluation

Here's an update on what's happening with NOPB and the KPMG evaluation that led the City to decide they would not seek a sale of the Public Belt in lieu of a "Private/Public" partnership to lease the City-owned asset.

In the last post, I introduced an interview I conducted with Mayor Landrieu about his intent to sell and/or lease the NOPB.  In that interview I asked him if the company the City had hired to provide an evaluation of the railroad was taking in to account the myriad contract agreements and trackage rights with Class/Tier 1 railroad companies the NOPB had developed over the past 100+ years since it's inception.

I didn't get a very clear answer...from the Mayor or his appointee to the NOPB Commission, Ryan Berni.

NOPB - Complications in trackage rights, etc. from Jason Berry on Vimeo.


I don't have the full evaluation from KPMG but I do have an abbreviated version and it states that it was created under the assumption that existing"rights and leases" would remain intact.

That is quite an assumption.

I have not seen the full KPMG evaluation but it appears they did not address the complications of "clear title" to the NOPB's assets and operations.

  

Here is the abbreviated KPMG Evaluation material I currently have:

KPMG Evaluation

Upcoming...In our interview, I asked Mayor Landrieu about the wisdom of selling off City assets, his affinity for public/private partnerships and his strategy of "bully politics" when it comes to appointments to public boards, e.g., Wisner.

Coming soon...stay tuned.


  

Caroline Fayard...keepin' it classy

I really had every intention of keeping my opinion to myself during this Senate race....I swear.  I have been admittedly absent from the AZ world, even though I have some upcoming stories on the Public Belt I've been working on. Including an interview with Mayor Landrieu regarding his perspective of the issue.

As my readers know, I've written extensively about Caroline Fayard's father, Calvin Fayard, in respect to his role as a plaintiff steering committee attorney with the BP oil spill settlement and as one of the law firms who bullied their way in to the Wisner Trust oil spill settlement.  While Caroline did play a part in both stories, especially the Wisner drama, I figured I would just let the stories speak for themselves if anyone wanted to read about it.

Then Fayard announced she was opposed to the lawsuit the state is filing against oil and gas companies to hold them accountable for the damage they've done to our state's coast.  She said, "It's very easy for politicians and people to say, 'Let's just sue. Litigation's expensive.  It's costly. It's time consuming. And there's no guarantees."

I literally spit coffee on my keyboard the first time I read that.

Still....I had nothing to say.

Now...well...now...her campaign went and did this absurd, tasteless bullshit:

Caroline Fayard chooses to continue running David Duke-themed anti-Foster Campbell ad, loses Alliance for Good Government endorsement

After she accused Campbell's campaign of being focused on attacking her family:



An act of desperation?  Absolutely...and a pathetic one at that.  But the blowback has been swift and merciless leaving even the little, penny-ante sycophants running for cover (i could link that but I won't).

There's only so much sanctimony and hypocrisy a zombie can take, homeys.

Sooooo.....let me remind you of a little Vanity Fair article that was published back in June of 2006 in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

It showcased Carloline's father, Calvin, playing Billy Joe Baddass in the front yard of his multi-million dollar wedding cake house (paid for with litigation that doesn't always work).

The online version of the story doesn't have the photos that were included in the magazine edition but luckily Zombie has a scanner.

Who you gonna shoot, Rambo?

Look at those swingin' dicks with their thousand dollar suits and Remington shotguns just waitin' for a "thug" to try and loot their mansion.

Finger on the trigger...judges on speed dial.

Here's the corresponding paragraph to the picture:

Some of the city’s richest residents stepped into the breach, taking security into their own hands. In New Orleans’s upscale Uptown neighborhood, well-heeled and well-armed property owners, sometimes with security guards to assist them, kept possible looters at bay, carrying firearms openly in their neighborhoods and looking after neighbors’ homes and valuables—even keeping a close watch on friends’ irreplaceable art collections. Attorney Calvin Fayard—one of the region’s major political fund-raisers for the Democratic Party, and the owner of the so-called Wedding Cake House, one of the city’s grand mansions—would remain at home and on guard with a coterie of like-minded friends. Some would use their powerboats to rescue the marooned. Their neighbors would dine on gourmet food from nearby specialty stores. Some would bathe in their stagnant swimming pools. One or two would take the opportunity to fly by helicopter to the office to shred potentially sensitive business documents—to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands, should law and order break down altogether.  

It cracks me up that he actually posed for this photo...replete with sunglasses and Armani, Perlis, (whatever) suit.  He must have been really proud of himself.  And something tells me even though Brinkley buried "Some would use their powerboats to rescue the marooned" in the middle of the paragraph as a compassionate caveat, Calvin was most likely not in that number.  

Fayard's campaign is trying desperately to associate Foster Campbell with something racist. Meanwhile, her Pops was flaunting that bullshit in Vanity Fair during the most vulnerable period this city ever experienced.

New Orleans Public Belt Railroad - A Mayoral Reminder

On July 7, 2016, at a District C Budget meeting in Algiers, I asked Mayor Mitch Landrieu about his intentions to sell The New Orleans Public Belt Railroad, an asset of the City of New Orleans since the turn of the 20th century.  His full reply is in the preceding post but I want to draw your attention to this particular sound byte:


New Orleans Public Belt Railroad - Mayor Landrieu quote on who appointed the Commission members from Jason Berry on Vimeo.


Transcript:

“Now Public Belt Railroad is an independent board…I make some of the appointments, the Governor makes some…and they forget who appointed them and say they want to do whatever they want to do.”

The quote seems to be contradictory.  If the NOPB Commission is an "independent" board is it their responsibility to serve the interests of the entity itself or to serve at the leisure of the Mayor as he implied at the end of the statement?

Last week Public Belt Railroad Commissioner and President/CEO of New Orleans Center for the Arts, Kyle Wedberg, abruptly resigned his position on the Public Belt Railroad Commission.  I emailed Wedberg today to seek comment on the reason he left the Commission at such a critical juncture but I have received no reply as of yet.  His handpicked replacement could sway the balance of power in a future decision to sell the NOPB.  

Wedberg's commission position was one of three Mayoral appointments allotted to the Mayor on the nine-person entity.

In the June 23rd NOPB Commission meeting, Wedberg was the one who originally made the motion to remove the option for sale from an evaluation being created by the company hired by the Commission to evaluate the Public Belt's worth, KPMG, after hearing the objections of major business interests that rely on the NOPB including The Port of New Orleans representatives.  The motion was subsequently voted on and passed but the Commission representative for the Mayor, Ryan Berni, informed the Commission that the City would move ahead with the valuation for sale even if they had to pay for it out of City coffers.

Last week the City made good on that promise and contracted KPMG independently of the Commission to complete the valuation for sale of the Public Belt.  The estimated cost to complete it was valued at about $50,000.

According to an off-the-record source, French based New Orleans RTA contractor Veolia Transportation has expressed interest in purchasing NOPB if the option for sale is eventually passed.

A source also suggested that the Mayor may be replacing Wedberg's commission position with long-time Landrieu cofnidante, Emily Sneed Arata.  Arata has worked in some capacity with Mayor Landrieu since his tenure as Lt. Governor, including serving as Deputy Mayor of Communications under his first Mayoral term.  Sneed left her stint with the City in January of 2016 to take a job with Ochsner Health Systems.

I contacted Arata to confirm or deny her appointment but have yet to receive a reply.

I confirmed through NOPB officials that the Mayor can fill Wedberg's vacated position on the Commission at his own discretion if his candidate is approved by City Council.

The appointment could prove to be the deciding factor on whether or not the Public Belt is offered up for sale.

If you are new to AZ, I would suggest you take some time to go back and read my reporting on Mayor Landrieu's efforts to seize full control of the Wisner Trust back in 2013, there are striking similarities in the story of that partially-owned city asset and what's unfolding now with NOPB:

Starting here:

American Zombie: The Wisner Fund - Battle for the Bayou - Part I

American Zombie: The Wisner Fund - Battle for the Bayou - Part 2

Unfortunately Blogger does not have the greatest ability for searching past posts in a chronological fashion but if you have further interest in the story you can read more simply by typing in "Wisner" in the search field window:

http://www.theamericanzombie.com/search?q=wisner 

Or you can simply ask me in the Comments section.

Bayou Cornehole - How deep does it go?

First, I want to make a comment bump:

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Bayou Corne - Comment Bump, Thursday, April 9 2015...": 

Calvin Fayard is on so many PSC/Class Counsels such as the Galveston Oil Spill, BP, this one here and others that one must wonder how many hours are in his day, 24 would not be enough. The pattern of poor notice, exaggerated settlement amounts vs. reality, and complete lack of transparency seems to be widespread. I expect that there will be plenty of objections filed against the BP Class Counsel fees. Too many good attorneys are watching and very pissed about the game being played. The PSC game of hide the ball and collect $600,000,000 as long as you fight to PRESERVE a horrible Class Settlement that looks as though BP drafted it w/o input from any Plaintiff's attorneys! 

All salient points but the real issue, even above the hidden billing methods, is what level of collusion is going on with the Good Ole' Boys and their oil and gas industry defendants.  I've already shown evidence of this in the Wisner story but I think the Bayou Corne case could be even worse.  

Here's why...

On Monday I sent the following questions to A. Shelby Easterly, III, the court Special Master in the Bayou Corne settlement:

- What is your current and past relationship with Connie M. Easterly, an employee of Kean Miller who publicly lists employment (connie.easterly@keanmiller.com) with Kean Miller, the law firm representing Texas Brine in the Bayou Corne settlement?  

- Were you in contact with Ms. Connie M. Easterly during the litigation period for Bayou Corne and at any point did you discuss the case with her?  

- Did you disclose to the court any relationship, present our past, that you had with Ms. Connie M. Easterly before you were chosen as Special Master for the Bayou Corne case?

- Did Calvin Fayard disclose to you, and/or, were you aware that James E. Kuhn, who served as council for Texas Brine was a former law partner of Mr. Fayard's? 

Predictably, I received no response.

I believe Connie M. Easterly is the former, possibly current, wife of Shelby Easterly.  I don't know if this officially constitutes a conflict of interest but I would think it should have been disclosed to the court before he applied for the Special Master position.  

But then again, in this state a judge could get caught in the sack with a juror and it would be overlooked.  Now a judge, a prosecuting attorney and a juror....that ménage à trois may raise eyebrows...maybe.  

Also note that Calvin Fayard was formerly a law partner of one of Texas Brine's current attorneys,  James E. "Jimmy" Kuhn.  Kuhn also served as a judge for Louisiana's First Circuit Court of Appeals. 

According to a 2014 article from The Hayride (which I will begrudgingly link to) , Kuhn actually wrote the opinion from the First Circuit which absolved Fayard of campaign finance violations revolving around his daughter, Caroline's, run for Lt. Governor back in 2010.  

Clearly Kuhn should have recused himself in that case but...hey...it's Looziana.  We're so bad, Harvard couldn't even measure us on their corruption scale.

You see....in our state it's very clear that some people are not only above the law....they actually own it.

Sidebar:  Hey!  I need all of you to do me a favor....to help me conduct an experiment, if you will.  Go to Nola.com...oh let's say.....here.  And type in the following comment:

Where does Fred Heebe come in to play on all this?

Just cut and paste that sentence into a comment....or make up your own comment but make sure you have "Fred Heebe" in there.

Get back to me on the results....as in did the comment actually make it through.  You can post the results in this post's comment thread.  Gracias amigos/amigas.   

The Wisner Trust - a peace offering

The heirs of the Wisner Trust sent a peace offering to Mayor Mitch Landrieu.

Essentially, they are offering the Mayor a cooperative endeavor agreement to move forward in the wake of the nightmare that's unfolded in the past few years.  It's an attempt to keep the Trust in order....not to dissolve its original mission....but to maintain this wonderful thing the City of New Orleans has going for it and to continue to fund the vision that Ed Wisner had for New Orleans.

A vision of a City that is dedicated to Art, philanthropy, education, culture....love.

Here is that suggestion.

The ball is in the Mayor's court.

The Wisner Trust - Grants get doled out along with a lot of misinformation

Mayor Landrieu doles out $1.13 million in Wisner fund grants

"The latest: a state 4th Circuit Court of Appeal ruling in September that Landrieu, as mayor, would remain the fund's sole trustee"

The 4th Circuit didn't declare the Mayor the sole trustee, he has always been the sole trustee.  But the real question is, "How can the Mayor be the sole 'trustee' if the trust itself is dissolved?"  If the trust is, in fact, dissolved then City Council now has total oversight over the grant money. It would seem the Mayor effectively sued himself out of the trustee position if the trust is actually dissolved.

In fact, he legally shouldn't even be doling out a dime of that money without City Council's approval.  CC just doesn't seem to have the will to challenge him on it.  I would humbly suggest they find the will soon because they are fiscally responsible for what is happening with the City's portion of the funds and I would humbly suggest there may be big problems with how those funds have been disbursed.

"The money is generated from 50,000 acres of lucrative coastal land that includes major land leases -- including the property under Port Fourchon -- to the oil and gas industry."

The bulk of the land bestowed in the Wisner donation is not coastal, only the Wisner Beach is technically coastal.  Here is a map:



"The City of New Orleans owns all the land that Port Fourchon sits on....." - Mayor Landrieu

No it doesn't...not even close.  The donation constitutes about 60% of Port Fourchon and includes Wisner Beach which is a small portion.  The importance of Wisner Beach is that the LOOP (Louisiana Offshore Oil Port) has piping which runs underneath it on its way in shore.  This particular lease generates a significant portion of the oil and gas royalties that comprise the fund but the primary money generators are the leases from the Port and Chevron.  And the city of New Orleans is not the sole owner of the land, there are currently four other owners:  LSU, Tulane, The Salvation Army and the Wisner heirs.

The sport fisherman's boat launch is on Wisner property but it certainly doesn't constitute "all the land that Port Fourchon sits on...".

It makes me wonder if Mitch is deluded or simply unaware of the reality.  It seems like he thinks he owns everything, including Port Fourchon, and he thinks he's going to do whatever he wants with it.  What he wants, as I suggested back at the beginning of this battle, is to sell the land while he's still in office using the proceeds however he sees fit.  And by the looks of many of the donation recipients he sees fit to pay off his peeps and lucrative voting blocs (I have more coming on that issue soon).

This article is the first time he's publicly admitted that intent (to sell), "Landrieu, who once considered selling the land, said his team is assessing the property's worth -- a study he compared to his administration's evaluation of the Public Belt Railroad."

Dream on.  He can't sell that land without the consent of the other four owners or by winning a protracted and vicious court battle that would run well past his tenure in office.  It's also worth noting that both the heirs and LSU filed writs regarding the 4th Circuit's decision to the Louisiana Supreme Court.

Wisner heirs writ to LA Supreme Court

LSU writ to LA Supreme Court

No surprise...the LASC denied the writs last week.

It's curious to me that neither The Advocate nor the TP bothered to ask the Mayor how much each of the recipients received out of the $1.13 million.  Last week I posted what I believe to be the allocation amounts to each respective organization, but I'm not sure this is 100% accurate.

If it is accurate the big winners are the mayor's pet projects: Ceasefire New Orleans ($348,600), Mayoral Fellows Program ($233,837), and a new organization created by Landrieu, the Network for Economic Opportunity ($250,000).  All totaled these three organizations, none of which arguably fit the definition of grant recipients, add up to $832, 437... about 3/4 of the entire grant allocation.

I've written extensively about the Ceasefire program here on AZ and some questionable accounting as to money that was disbursed to the organization's fiscal agent, the Urban League.  I've been digging deeper into some issues I've discovered with Ceasefire and some other grant recipients but I want to wait to publish that info as I think The Lens has done more extensive research and I hope to see a story from them soon.

The major increase in money going to the Mayoral Fellows Program from last year is curious as well. I published a post in August about how there was some screwy biz going on with how the program was listed in the municipal code.

I have no idea what the Network for Economic Opportunity is all about but I find it hard to believe that it even remotely fits the guidelines that were originally established for grant recipients.

More to come...





    

Wisner grant allocations...blah, blah...just fuck it

Here's this because I promised it...to the few folks I know who care:

Wisner grant allocation for 2014?  or is it 2015?

It's all fucked up...a bunch of political patronage from the mayor.  I could explain it all to you but you'd just browse over it, shake your head, and go get your Mardi Gras on.

The Wisner Trust: Heirs lose appeal, September 19, 2014

In a 5-0 ruling, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of Mayor Landrieu regarding the Wisner Trust.  I don't have the actual court decision yet and have not read it but I do know that the big take away from the decision is that the Trust is now officially done and done.  I'm anxious to read the decision because now the real fight begins as to what happens with the land and the decision may have set a precedent as to how that fight may unfold.

Here is a decision posted on the Fourth Circuit's website.

After reading the decision above it looks like these are the decisions:

1.  The Trust is dissolved as of last month, August, 2014.

2.  The Mayor should have gained consent from the Advisory Committee before disbursing the grant money.

3.  The Trust was a public body.

Of course I'm not sure why 2 or 3 matter at this point because if the Trust is dissolved, I would imagine the Advisory Committee will be dissolved along with it.


   

The Wisner Trust - How deep do the conflicts run?

If you've followed the Wisner story here on AZ, you know that some members of the Plaintiff Steering Committee for the BP settlement also serve as a team of joint venture (JV) attorneys for the City of New Orleans and The Wisner Trust Advisory Committee in their litigation against BP for economic and environmental damages sustained by the 2010 oil spill.

The JV attorneys that are also on the PSC are Stephen Herman, Calvin Fayard Jr., Walt Leger and James Roy.  A fifth attorney, Fred Herman, is also a member of the JV group representing CNO and Wisner but he is not on the PSC.

These JV attorneys were initially hired by Mayor Landrieu to represent the City's interests in their claims against BP.  They subsequently took over The Wisner Trust Advisory Committee's case through what amounted to a hostile takeover of the Committee's board members thanks to Mayor Landrieu's back room maneuvers.  The Trust was initially being represented by the environmental law firm Waltzer and Wiygul but Landrieu claimed they should be replaced because they had a conflict of interest due to a lawsuit they had pending against the City regarding the Old Gentilly Landfill.

The Wisner heirs, wanting to remain with Waltzer and Wiygul, filed a complaint stating that the JV attorneys were themselves conflicted due to their role as the City's attorneys and even their role as PSC attorneys.

Federal Judge Carl Barbier ruled that it was ok for the JV's to represent both stating:

"The mere fact that the city and the donation may have different types of claims does not create an actual conflict.  Consequently, the court will grant the motion to substitute counsel. If at some future time an actual conflict arises, the court can address the matter at that time."

Perhaps that time is upon us regarding JV firm Herman and Herman.

Turns out senior partner, Russ Herman, has a pending lawsuit against the City of New Orleans over the proposed Tracage residential development in the Warehouse District.  Herman first filed a complaint with the City back in November of 2013 objecting to the height of the building among other grievances.

Since then he's filed a lawsuit against the City of New Orleans, his own client, (as well as the Tracage developers) in an attempt to block the building's construction.  The suit is Herman v. City of New Orleans and the docket # in Orleans Parish Civil District Court is 2014-896.

This is the exact reason the Mayor used to justify the removal of Waltzer and Wiygul as the Trust's attorneys against BP.  I would expect the Mayor is going to remove Herman and Herman as the City's counsel and Wisner's council any day now?  I ain't holding my breath.

As luck would have it, City Council moved to waive the conflict back in April of this year.  Jump to about 02:10:18 in the video.

That's convenient but what say Judge Barbier?

It's become brazenly clear in the past few months that the conflicts of interest with these guys are numerous and detrimental to both the City and the Wisner Trust.  It's also become brazenly clear they are not environmental lawyers and were not properly vetted to handle the Wisner case which at its core is an environmental lawsuit.

In a recent memo regarding complaints against BP for abandoning the clean up on Wisner Beach, BP seems to be keenly aware to the bogus claim the JV attorney's filed on behalf of the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office for damages incurred to Wisner property from the oil spill.  As I pointed out in this post, OPSO has no interest in Wisner land and could not have incurred any economic loss in respect to Wisner.

BP recently referred to the claims mentioned in that post on page 5 of this legal filing.

Let us also consider that one of these JV firms serving on the PSC turns out to be the firm mentioned on page 60 of the first Freeh report....the firm that allegedly filed fraudulent seafood claims with the DHECC.  If that surfaces, does it become ammunition for BP and how would it affect the City and Wisner's claims against them?

Take it one step further and consider if these conflicts are possibly being used by BP to squeeze the JV attorneys on the City's case, Wisner's case or even in their role as PSC attorneys.

I don't have a law degree but I understand there's a damn good reason why potential conflicts of interest in litigation should be taken with the utmost scrutiny.  The conflicts that exist here could have a staggering monetary effect on both the BP settlement class the PSC/JV attorneys represent as well as the City and Wisner's litigation.

The Wisner Trust - What's in a name? An extra $163,837.

After a rather uneventful couple of months on the Wisner Trust battlefront, it seems the "cease fire" is over.  Or maybe it's not...first we have to figure out what the CeaseFire program even is and why it's getting the largest block of cash from Wisner next year.

(Forgive me, I couldn't resist the metaphor)

The 2014 Wisner Grant proposals have been out for a couple of weeks now and the two largest blocks of cash requested are going out to Mayor Landrieu's CeaseFire program ($348,600) and the Mayoral Fellows Program ($233,837).

Edward Wisner Donation 2014 Proposed Grants

Aside from muddy accounting issues, unclear objectives and the lack of performance measurements with the Mayor's NOLA for Life program The Lens has been reporting, you may also recall back in December of last year I made a post about some questionable accounting issues regarding the Ceasefire program:

American Zombie: The Wisner Trust - Are there missing funds from the Ceasefire New Orleans program?

In that story I posted a video of a Wisner Trust Advisory Committee Meeting where Wisner heir Michael Peneguy questions Mayoral appointee to the Trust and city attorney Erica Beck about the nature of the entities, NOLA for Life, CeaseFire New Orleans, and the Mayoral Fellows Program.

Start at about the 3:15 mark:

Wisner Advisory Committee Meeting - Nov. 26, 2013 from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

The main issue is that the Mayor's Office seemed to be shifting money from one program to another after the money had been allocated.  Beck attempted to explain the matter by stating that the Mayoral Fellows Program was simply an "outdated code" that had been changed....I still don't understand what that means or why it was "outdated".

At one point Beck tells Peneguy he is mistakenly conflating the two programs and Peneguy responds that he has to conflate them because the Mayor's office has purposely done just that.  After the meeting, Peneguy sent a series of questions to Beck including a further explanation of the budgetary relationship between CeaseFire and the Mayoral Fellows Program:

Peneguy: According to the proposed budget presentation to the City Council, the Mayoral Fellows Program is being renamed to something else and the program may not even currently exist.  My questions in respect to the $70,000 grant listed for this program are therefore:

A. What will the new name for the program be?

Beck:  The Mayoral Fellows program is not being renamed.  The budgetary fund code, which is named Mayoral Fellows, currently includes allocations for the Mayoral Fellows and Ceasefire.  The budget code may be renamed to accurately reflect everything contained therein.

B.  What is the actual intent of the current grant?

Beck:  The $70,000 Mayoral Fellows grant, which appears on 7 of the proposed grants, will be used to fund the Mayoral Fellows program.  The Mayoral Fellows program will continue to offer opportunities to young professionals who focus on mayoral priorities and gain experience in the public sector.  (The $108,180 CeaseFire grant will be used to fund CeaseFire.)

Got that?  Good because I sure don't from that explanation.  But there's a good reason why...she isn't telling us the whole story.

What Beck doesn't mention is what name they apparently renamed the fund in the municipal code. Look at this email exchange Peneguy was referring to in the video above:

So I suppose the question is what is "Fund 379" now named in the municipal code?  Are they changing the name of the Mayoral Fellows Fund to "Wisner" in order to funnel money to other programs?

Let's go back to Charles Maldanado's NOLA for Life story on The Lens:

In May, the city solicited applications. Early in July, before the participating organizations were announced, The Lens asked Landrieu spokesman Tyler Gamble how the process worked. A review panel made up of “community, educational, and philanthropic institutions,” would recommend applicants to the city, he wrote in an email. 

“There will not be a formal announcement of the review committee meeting,” Gamble wrote in the July 11 email. After the winners were announced, Gamble said the committee met on July 14 and named the participants. 

None of the Robert Wood Johnson money is being funneled to the groups, Gamble added. But the call for applications released in June mentions the possibility of “future funding opportunities.” Gamble said that refers to the pilot program.

"Future funding opportunities" is interesting fo' true.

What else is interesting is the amount o'cash being parked in the Mayoral Fellows program from Wisner in 2014...$233,837.  From my understanding of the program, traditionally a single person is awarded the grant to work with the Mayor's Office, essentially as a paid intern, and the amount paid to the fellow in the past has been up to $70,000.  Remember former appointee to the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee (predecessor to Erica Beck) Michael Sherman was a former recipient of the Mayoral Fellows grant.  Why are they now asking for $233,837 as opposed to the usual 70k?  Are they planning on increasing the single grant to that amount?  Are they going to name multiple grantees this year?

Or....are they planning on shuffling the extra $163,837 out to a different thingie altogether?

The other issue I want to point out is that the merits of the CeaseFire program are arguably just as questionable as the Nola for Life program if not more.  The New Orleans CeaseFire program was modeled off the one incorporated by the City of Chicago.  The Department of Justice audited Chicago's CeaseFire program and found it to be largely ineffective.

DOJ Evaluation of CeaseFire from Anti-Violence Strategy

This report was published in 2009, one year before Mayor Landrieu took office.  The program was already being questioned in Chicago when we decided to mimic it here in New Orleans.  In fact, the CeaseFire program was later scrapped by Chicago.

Chicago Drops CeaseFire from Anti-Violence Strategy

CeaseFire Cuts Back As City Grant Runs Out

Curious that the Mayor's administration is questioning the effectiveness of Nola for Life but not CeaseFire.  Neither program seems to have any real level of performance evaluation built in to the grant process so there's no way to judge the effectiveness of either one.

UPDATE:  Maldonado just published this story about the approval of the grants this morning on The Lens.  I did not realize Ceasefire was under the Nola for Life "umbrella".  Regardless, it adds more credence to my 2nd point about the merits of the program.  The article also states that last year the Mayoral Fellows program received the same amount as this year, $233,837 and that a single fellow received a $40,000 grant as opposed to $70,000 I stated had traditionally been paid to the recipient.  If correct that further exacerbates the question of where the money in the program is actually going.

CORRECTION:  The Mayoral Fellows grant amount has traditionally run between about $150,000 to $180,000.  Apparently only last year was it lowered to $70,000.    

The Wisner Trust - Update on Appeal, August 11, 2014

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal has issued an order moving the fate of the Wisner Trust to a five-judge panel with oral arguments set for September 10th.  The judges hearing the case are Dennis R. Bagneris, Sr., Terri F. Love, Max N. Tobias, Jr., Roland L. Belsome and Joy Cossich Lobrano.

I have another Wisner post coming later on tonight (hopefully), stay tuned.  I'm having some trouble with Blogger's CMS though so bear with me. 

DHECC - Mr. Mockingbird is singing a new tune

Folks, I want you to understand something if you don't already realize it....most mainstream media resources, on the whole, are bullshit PR printing presses....or rather pixel presses.  That holds true in our little swampy corner of the world in spades.

I'm not even going to link to the last TP article on Wisner because I don't want you to see what Herman and Herman are getting for their advertising dollars on NOLA.com but I am going to link to this amazingly ridiculous puff piece written by Lafayette's The Advertiser bemoaning the unfair scrutiny that's been heaped on DHECC Claims Administrator Pat Juneau by BP:

Lafayette lawyer takes heat handling oil spill claims

This thing reads like a Kim Jong Il biopic written by a North Korean press secretary held at gunpoint.

I love this quote:

"My wife and friends began asking me why I didn't just give this up and enjoy my fishing camp on the Atchafalaya Basin," said Juneau, who has a New Orleans apartment a short walk from his office, but spends weekends in his Lafayette home. "The attacks on my reputation are painful. I've had a long career that I'm proud of and never encountered anything like this. But I feel a duty to see this process out to its end." 

I'll tell you why he doesn't give it up....over 300k a month and billing for full work weeks while doing the same on other MDL cases.  That's why.

But the real kicker is that the main source filling the story up with ink/pixels is our trusty old "expert of experts" on the BP settlement, Loyola Law Professor Blain LeCesne.  LeCesne dutifully sings Juneau's praises like a good mockingbird and even suggests he may have nudged some Wall Street swinging dicks to make BP agree to the settlement in the first place.

As luck would have it (not really) within 24 hours of The Advertiser article being published, the Louisiana Record published this article on LeCesne:

Claims expert critical of BP under fire for alleged conflict of interest 

I have known about the NOLMAR issue and LeCesne for months.  If you read this post from December of 2013 I rhetorically queried LeCesne about attempting to expedite a claim, without naming NOLMAR, towards the bottom of the post.

The LA Record article states that Lionel Sutton said he didn't remember speaking to LeCesne but that's not right.  If Sutton actually said that to the Record I suspect he did so because he doesn't trust any MSM resource to tell the truth and can you blame him?  I actually asked Sutton about the NOLMAR issue when I conducted the interview but I decided not to publish it because he said he couldn't definitively say LeCesne was trying to expedite the claim.  Here is that response:

Lionel Sutton - NOLMAR LECESNE from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

* I mispronounced his name in the interview, mea culpa

Sutton also went on to say that it's not surprising that LeCesne specifically called him on the NOLMAR claim as he was the go-to guy on troubled claims.  He also stated that his phone number had been published publicly so he was getting a ton of calls anyway.  In the Record article LeCesne claims he got Lionel's number from a Loyola colleague but I don't think there's anything mischievous there.

What I do think is highly mischievous is this comment LeCesne made to the Record:

“There is a big difference between inquiring about the status of a claim and trying to have it expedited to go in front others who are in the queue,” LeCesne said. “And any attorney representing a BP plaintiff whose claim has not moved for a year would be engaged in malpractice to not inquire about their client’s claim.” 

No shit?  You're fucking with us right, B?

Aside from the fact that he's not NOLMAR's attorney on the claim, LeCesne suggests there is a "big difference in inquiring about the status of a claim as to having it expedited to go in front of others who are in the queue"?

I would love for him to elaborate on that difference...would simply love it.

Back in December LeCesne was chirping that expediting claims was "much ado about nothing" to the Southeast Texas Record:

 “BP has predictably exaggerated the nature and substance of the findings of the Freeh report, whereas the Freeh report actually validated the process in most respects,” LeCesne said. “The only wrongdoing is an ethical violation by an attorney and other unseemly conduct by some attorneys trying to get their claims paid ahead of others.” 

“When you look at that, it’s not really that bad,” he said. “They probably were overzealous in trying to get their clients and themselves paid before everyone else, but they weren’t trying to extract improper payments. There’s a big difference.”

Forgive me if I'm a little confused here but I'm trying to qualify and quantify all the "big differences".  I suspect it may have something to do with whether or not LeCesne, himself, is being accused of expediting.

I think Mr. Mockingbird may have cut his own vocal chords regarding the BP settlement.  

The Wisner Trust: Horse trading in Louisiana's wild, wild justice system

It was recently brought to my attention that the Wisner heirs had filed a complaint with the U.S district court, Eastern District of Louisiana in respect to the five JV attorneys hired by Mayor Mitch Landrieu to represent The Wisner Trust Advisory Committee in their case against BP for the damages inflicted upon Wisner properties during the 2010 Macondo oil spill.

I received that complaint last week.   Apparently it has already been dismissed by Federal Judge Sarah S. Vance:

Complaint against JV attorneys representing Wisner Trust v. BP

The five law firms I refer to as the "JV (joint venture) attorneys" are: Herman, Herman & Katz; Domengeuax, Wright, Roy & Edwards; Fayard & Honeycutt; Fred Herman and Leger & Shaw.  Three of these firms...Herman, Roy and Fayard....also serve on the Plaintiff Steering Committee for the Deepwater Horizon Economic Claims Center.

These JV attorneys also represent The City of New Orleans as well as Orleans Parish Prison in their lawsuits against BP.

Keep in mind that public entities are not allowed to enter the settlement program (DHECC), only private individuals.  Public claims against BP for the oil spill must be filed in open court.

The Great Wisner Train Robbery

For over a year, AZ has documented the shenanigans that occurred with the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee and how Mayor Landrieu, along with his appointee to the Trust, Michael Sherman, manipulated the five-seat committee in order to create a "hostile takeover":

American Zombie: The Wisner Fund - Battle for the Bayou - Part I

American Zombie: The Wisner Fund - Battle for the Bayou - Part 2

Immediately after two Mayoral cronies, Anthony Lorino for Tulane and Ron Gardner of LSU, were placed on the board by their respective entities; Michael Sherman called a vote to fire the Trust's existing legal counsel in their case against BP and replace them with the aforementioned JV attorneys.  Having the majority three-man vote needed to pass a motion, Sherman, Lorino and Gardner succeeded in their plan to fire the environmental law firm Waltzer and Wiygul in order to bring the JV attorneys on board.

After over a year of documenting this story, I've uncovered so many conflicts of interest with the JV attorneys and falsifications by City attorneys, specifically former Executive Counsel to the Mayor, Michael Sherman......it's difficult to keep up with them all.

In respect to conflict of interest issues, the most notable was in Part 2, when I posted an email chain between Sherman, Steve Herman and BP attorneys, Mark E. Holstein and  Nathan Block.  There, Herman was providing Holstein and Block with privileged information from a Wisner Trust Advisory Committee executive session.  Keep in mind....this is the plaintiff attorney providing the defense's attorney with privileged information from the claimant.  I'm not sure how a conflict of interest gets any more explicit than that and it's right there in black and white.

And the obfuscation and dissembling has continued even after Sherman quietly resigned his position as a city attorney to seek the brights lights of show business as an on-air legal analyst for WDSU (officially making him a public figure).

Indeed, the Mayor's counsel won a major victory in Orleans Civil District Court, per Ad Hoc Orleans Civil District Court (CDC) Judge Melvin Zeno, partially on the premise that The Wisner Trust Advisory Committee should have no oversight on the City's portion of the Wisner proceeds because an oversight body already existed in City Council.  Sherman's successor to the Wisner trustee postion, Erica Beck, sat through the entire hearing listening to her colleague, City Attorney Sharonda Williams, make the City Council oversight argument to Judge Zeno in order to avoid oversight from the Advisory Committee.

One month later Beck stood in front of City Council and told them no one in the Mayor's office envisioned City Council having oversight over the Wisner funds:

American Zombie: What wicked webs we weave...

One of the biggest revelations the blog uncovered was a complaint filed in may of 2013 against BP by the JV attorneys on behalf of the Orleans Parish Sheriffs Office (OPSO).  In that complaint, the JV attorneys claimed the Sheriffs Office had suffered economic losses, per taxes, because of the damage to Wisner property:

American Zombie: "Complaints"

1.  In item 31 of the Wisner complaint this grievance for OPSO is listed:  "...including New Orleans, was a foreseeable result of the oil spill. The adverse impacts to these industries resulted in reduced economic activity in New Orleans which is heavily dependent on the seafood, tourism and petrochemical industries. Due to the foreseeable adverse impact on these industries, the Sheriff of Orleans has lost, and continues to lose, ad valorem property tax revenues and other taxes."

The only problem with that is that there is no Wisner property in Orleans Parish.  This claim is fraudulent...pure and simple...and it was filed by the JV attorneys.

If you read the comment section of that post, you will see an exchange I had with an anonymous commenter who claimed the inclusion of Wisner in the Orleans Parish Sheriffs Office complaint was simply a "cut and paste" error.  A simple mistake on behalf of the law firm that filed it.  That would be a potentially multi-million dollar cut and paste error but the commenter assured me this happens all the time.

I'm curious if the legal filing was retracted or amended since last May....if not....it's still fraudulent... and it's still pending in Orleans Parish CDC.

I also noted that a "loss of natural resources" from Wisner land was claimed on behalf of the City and OPSO but was curiously absent from the Wisner claim filed by the JV attorneys:

Item #2  

Why would they fraudulently file a claim for OPSO in respect to Wisner while downplaying losses for the Wisner Trust, itself?  Let me provide a thesis.

Art of the horse trade:  

a clever and often secret agreement made by powerful people who are usually trying to get an advantage over others

Getting back to the Wisner heirs complaint filed with U.S district court, Eastern District of Louisiana  and the items within it I found to be of the greatest significance...the main problem with the JV attorneys representing the City, OPSO and Wisner is the potential for them to "horse trade", as Wisner heir Michael Peneguy refers to it on Page 28, item # 20 of the complaint.  The scenario being that the JV attorneys could be using the Wisner settlement as leverage to increase the amount on other settlements they are representing such as the City's or OPSO's:

After having followed this story for over a year, I believe this is exactly what is happening.  Keep in mind that any money awarded to Winser by BP has very strict guidelines in how it must be spent...but not so with the City.

In filing this complaint with  the U.S district court, Eastern District of Louisiana against the JV attorneys, the heirs hired University of Mississippi law professor, Benjamin Cooper, to offer a legal opinion on the possible conflict of interest issues.  In his affidavit, he offers the opinion that a conflict does indeed exist with bullet points to that effect in items 10 -12 on pages 10 through 13:

Click on the pic to expand or refer to the original document

These bullet points tellingly reflect Mayor Landrieu's MO with the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee since he took office and first placed Michael Sherman as his appointee.  Herman and Herman attorney and the point person for the JV attorneys on Wisner, Soren Giselson, echoes the Mayor's mantra perfectly, "...the ultimate decision-making authority should rest with the Mayor, as Trustee".

Waltzer and Wiygul were originally hired by the Committee after an extensive vetting process to find an environmental law firm that would have the best understanding of the damage incurred to the Wisner property from the BP spill.  Shortly after Sherman was appointed and the Committee was politcally stacked, W&W was then inexplicably removed at Sherman's suggestion and replaced with the JV attorneys.

But even with the crony votes on the Committee (Lorino and Gardner) following orders to approve the hiring of the JV attorneys the move was not congruent with Rule 1.0(e) of the Louisiana Rules of Professional Conduct regarding "Informed Consent" which states:

(e) “Informed consent” denotes the agreement by a person to a proposed course of conduct after the lawyer has communicated adequate information and explanation about the material risks of and reasonably available alternatives to the proposed course of conduct.   

In items 18 - 20 Cooper details how not only did they JV lawyers fail to obtain the required waiver from the Committee, they admitted that a potential conflict could exist due to their existing joint representation with the City of New Orleans in its case against BP.  However, they failed to explain to the Committee what that potential conflict may be.

Cooper also details how the JV attorneys presented the Committee with a proposed contract in the 11th hour, one day, before the September 25, 2012 meeting in which they were being asked to vote on its approval.  Cooper argues that there was no possible way the entire Committee could have vetted the JV attorneys' contract or sought outside legal advice as to their potential conflicts of interest within that 24-hour time frame.

Nonetheless, in that meeting Michael Sherman, Anthony Lorino, and Ron Gardner provided the 3 votes needed to contract the JV attorneys with the heirs and the Salvation Army casting the two minority dissenting votes.

Basically, the JV attorneys were steam-rolled in as the new counsel to replace Waltzer and Wiygul.  Later on in the complaint...we get a pretty good idea why.

In item number 23 on page 18, we discover that the JV attorneys created a contingency fee arrangment within their contract.  Cooper points out that under LRPC 1.5 (a), a lawyer "shall not make an agreement for, charge, or collect an unreasonable fee...".  He later points that there is almost no chance of the Donation not being able to recover a substantial damage amount and that even Soren Giselson has publicly acknowledged as much.  The Donation could have easily paid attorneys on an hourly basis and considering most of the leg work had already been accomplished by Waltzer and Wiygul the addition of a contingency fee is most likely inappropriate in this case.

He also points out that even though the heirs have requested the details of the contingency fee, the JV attorneys have failed to provide them.  Which brings me to a final point, independent of the complaint filed with the U.S district court, Eastern District of Louisiana.

There's only one Marshall in this town

Months ago, the heirs stopped receiving update statuses from the Wisner Field Inspector on the ongoing effects of the BP oil washing in on Wisner property.  Michael Peneguy contacted the Field Inspector by email asking why the update statuses had stopped.  The Field Inspector replied that he was told by JV attorney Soren Giselson to stop sending updates to the Advisory Committee.  After further inquiry by Peneguy to Giselson, City Attorney and current Mayoral appointee to the Advisory Committee, Erica Beck, informed Peneguy that she had instructed Giselson not to reply to him because she didn't want to "jeopardize the Committee's position with respect to its BP claim."

So understand this...Beck is ordering the JV attorneys not to share information with the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee....the counsel's clients.  Apparently the clients don't have the right to see information held by their attorneys in their own lawsuit.

This isn't surprising though if you look at the objectives of the Mayor and the JV attorneys.  The mayor believes the entire Trust is his...or rather the City's.  Actually I can't tell which.  The Lens calls actions like this being a bully (read the comment section)...the TP dutifully polished the turd and called it political hardball....other people call it being a productive asshole.

I call it not only unethical but quite possibly illegal.

The government, court and media roundup?

Both times I visited Wisner Beach, In February and October of 2013, to document the constant barrage of oil washing onshore there was a backlash from the Mayor's office towards the heirs for allowing me on the property.  The first trip I took in February resulted in Michael Sherman creating a "media policy" where the Advisory Committee would have to approve anyone wanting to visit the beach.  But Sherman didn't seem to think he needed Committee approval when he went on camera with John Snell of Fox 8.  Snell and Fox 8 had their cameras on the beach the same day I did.  (The beginning of that Snell story looks vaguely familiar does it not?)

Any rational legal person may look at this evidence and think at the very least there is an obvious malpractice suit waiting in the wings.  But the Mayor, his City attorneys and the JV attorneys may have even lassoed that bucking bronc....remember the City is now claiming that the heirs were never actually heirs to begin with.  Even though Ad Hoc Judge Zeno handed the mayor most everything he wanted in the hearing without much legal explanation, he refrained from ruling on the matter of the heirs' standing.  If the court decides the heirs aren't really heirs...they can't file a malpractice suit can they?

I recently made a post about "The $ Estate".  What I mean by The $ Estate is that I believe there are a a select few people within the city that have enough power and money to control all four estates of our democracy: executive, legislative, judicial and the press.  The three basic branches of government speak for themselves in this matter but the influence these power brokers have over the fourth estate, the press, may be a little harder to see.

If you scrape the surface, it reveals itself.  

I find it curious that the Times-Picayune's "Louisiana Purchased" series focused on politicians and campaign bundling but left Mayor Landrieu out of the fray.  I did point out back in February of 2013, a year ago, that three of the JV attorneys contributed at least 10%, possibly as high as 15% or more, of Mayor Landrieu's campaign contributions for 2012 through campaign bundling.  Herman and Herman alone accounted for approximately $71,000 of $755,882.

I guess it never occurred to the TP to look at the Mayor's campaign contributions.  I wonder why?

Seems like the $ Estate is truly above the justice system, eh?  Well....maybe not.  Stay tuned to AZ this week, cowpokes...this rodeo could get interesting.  

The Wisner Trust - Are there missing funds from the Ceasefire New Orleans program?

Last Tuesday, November 26th, the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee met and voted to approve the Mayor's list of grant recipients for 2014.  The vote went down exactly as one would expect with LSU and Tulane going along with Mayoral appointee to the Wisner Trust Advisory Committee, Erica Beck.

The three committee members, LSU, Tulane, and the Mayor, voted to rubber stamp the grants to the recipients as a whole.  They apparently saw no need to look at the recipients, individually.

The heirs and The Salvation Army cast dissenting votes, with two of the heirs making verbal objections to the process of lumping all the recipients together.  They expressed concern that the recipients weren't being examined individually to make sure they meet the philanthropic objectives Edward Wisner intended for the trust.

Wisner Advisory Committee Meeting - Nov. 26, 2013 from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

I think most of the grant recipients the Mayor has chosen are kosher but problems arise when it comes to his pet projects.

Beck was questioned about how the City is funding three programs:  The Mayoral Fellows Program (incidentally of which Michael Sherman was a former recipient), the Ceasefire initiative and Nola For Life.  It seems as if there is some confusion as to how the money is being channeled through the Mayoral Fellows Program to the other entities.

Beck offers an explanation around the 5:40 mark (video) by stating that funds are being disbursed through the "code" named "Mayoral Fellows" and subsequently disseminated to the other two entities: "CeaseFire New Orleans" and "Nola For Life".

 At the 7:09 mark (video), Mark Peneguy (Wisner heir) questions Beck about an email from the Mayor's "Innovation Team " leader, Charles West, to Deputy Mayor Judy Reese Morse about money that was supposed to be disbursed to the Ceasefire New Orleans initiative from the Mayoral Fellows program that may not have actually made it to the Ceasefire coffers.

I'm not sure what Peneguy was referring to, exactly, but I have been looking into the Ceasefire program myself.  I've found some accounting issues regarding the program's two fiscal agents, the St. Thomas Health Center and the Urban League of New Orleans that I think need some answers.   I believe there appears to be an issue with money that was disbursed from the Wisner funds to these entities...money that may be unaccounted for.

I have three memorandums (public record) issued from the Ceasfire program director, Johnetta Pressley, spanning from February 2012 to October 2012, that provide some detail as to how the program was laid out and also highlight an issue that occurred in October of 2012 when the program was suddenly notified of a shortage of funds from their newly acquired fiscal agent, the Urban League of New Orleans:

* You can blow the images up on Google drive by double clicking the image.

February 26, 2012 memorandum about St. Thomas Health Clinic's inability to serve as a fiscal agent and the suggestion that the Urban League of New Orleans become the new fiscal agent for Ceasefire New Orleans

October 17, 2012 memorandum (draft) requesting that Deputy Mayor Judy Reese Morse sign an amendment that increases Wisner funds by $155,000 to meet a budgetary shortfall of $15,000

October 24, 2012 memorandum notifying Mayor staff that fiscal agent Urban League of New Orleans has reported a shortage of funds to meet payroll and the existing budget for Ceasefire New Orleans

From what I've been able to glean from the public records I have, the original fiscal agent for Ceasefire New Orleans was The St. Thomas Health Clinic and it appears that at least some Wisner funds were disbursed to this entity.

However, in February of 2012, the St. Thomas Health Clinic informed Johnetta Pressley that they were unable to fulfill their role as the fiscal agent.  Upon former CNO Crime Commissioner James Carter's suggestion, Ceasefire then chose the Urban League of New Orleans as their new fiscal agent replacing the St. Thomas Health Clinic.

I am not sure how funds were transferred from one entity to the other but according to the February memo, St. Thomas did disburse at least some of the funds they originally received from the city to Ceasefire employees....therefore they served as a fiscal agent in some capacity.

By October 24, 2012, as detailed in the memo, the Urban League informed Pressley that they did not have the money to make payroll for the rest of the fiscal year.  Pressley sent an email denoting this to Deputy Mayor Judy Reese Morse:

I'm trying to put this all together from random puzzle pieces I have through public records and I fully realize I don't have a complete picture...yet I'm concerned about the budget discrepancy.  In an effort to understand what happened with this discrepancy of funds, I emailed Johnetta Pressley the following questions:

- How was the St. Thomas Community Health Center originally chosen as the Fiscal Agent for Ceasefire and was this process vetted publicly?

-  Why was the St. Thomas Community Health Center not able to fulfill their duty as the "fiscal agent" after they had verbally committed?

- Were any funds, particularly Wisner Funds, transferred to the St. Thomas Community Health Center and did they make any payments to Ceasefire employees as the February 26, 2012 memorandum suggests?

- How were funds transferred from the St. Thomas Community Health Center to the Urban League of New Orleans when they took over as the new fiscal agent?

- What happened with the balance discrepancy outlined in the October 24, 2012 memo when the Urban League informed you that they were not able to meet payroll from existing funds that had been transferred to them as the fiscal agent? 

- Exactly how much money constituted the discrepancy between the City and the Urban League?  

- If there was a shortage in the funds from the Urban League to meet the payroll on October 31, 2012, was it the fault of the Urban League, the St. Thomas Community Health Center, the City of New Orleans, a budgeting mistake....what happened?

- If there was a budget shortfall, as other records I have indicate, specifically in respect to the salary of the Resources Manager position, how was the budget shortfall dealt with?  

- In an October 17, 2012 memorandum you suggested $20,000 in Wisner Funds be utilized to support the salaried position, Resources Manager, from Nov. 1, 2012 - February 28, 2013 by increasing the cap in funds in the CEA between the Urban League and the City of New Orleans through an amendment to be approved by Deputy Mayor Judy Reese Morse.  In the memo you suggest that Morse's action item is , "Approval of an amendment to the current CEA between the Urban League and the City of New Orleans to raise the cap by $20,000 to $115,000", followed by a second action item, "Approval of disbursement of $20,000 to the Urban League per the Amended CEA".  Why did you suggest the cap should be raised to $115,000 when only $20,000 was required?  Was this amendment approved by Morse and for what amount?  

According to other records I have, the amendment was executed by Deputy Mayor Judy Reese Morse and the amount requested by Pressley was disbursed.

It's also important to note that these funds were disbursed before the Wisner hearing in September of this year and without the approval of the Advisory Committee.  Also, the "amendment" was signed by a Deputy Mayor, Judy Reese Morse, not the Mayor, himself.

I sent these questions out Monday and I haven't received a response...shocking, right?

When I first started writing the Wisner story, I was told by former Mayoral Press Secretary Ryan Berni that all I had to do was ask the administration for information and they would be happy to comply in an effort to increase transparency with the Wisner grants.  I've made repeated requests that have gone unanswered since that initial commitment by Berni...I suppose we can add this one to the list.

I want to point out that I'm not even questioning the merits of the Ceasefire New Orleans program, although I could considering it was based on the Ceasefire Chicago program that has been highly criticized as being mostly ineffective and a waste of funds:

Chicago Drops CeaseFire from Anti-Violence Strategy

CeaseFire Cuts Back As City Grant Runs Out

If you have 5 hours to waste...this is a comprehensive evaluation of CeaseFire-Chicago by the Department of Justice:

Evaluation of CeaseFire-Chicago

Aside from the fact that the Wisner grant money was never designed to fund crime-fighting initiatives, I do recognize we have a problem of epidemic proportions in our city in respect to violent crime.  I wouldn't even mind money being diverted to our crime problem so much if it was actually effective.

However, diverting funds to PR campaigns while we're facing a major shortage of "boots on the ground" with NOPD, is a jagged little pill I simply can't swallow.

But hey... it's not all bad news....at least 3 peepmeisters scored $1500 "smart phones" from the CeaseFire New Orleans program:

Jesus Homer Christ....I want to see those badass schwegcoms in action.  I just bought the Mrs. a gold iPhone that I thought was pretty amazing for a fraction of that cost so at $1500 a pop I'm assuming these suckers must have a direct line to Scotty in the transporter room.  I hope these Ceasefire Execs. join Chewbachhus and flash that bling.

Don't hold your breath on anything coming of this...City Council shirked their oversight responsibility and our MSM resources are simply waiting to repost the next press release from the Mayor's office.  At least I feel good for Ryan Berni knowing he isn't being plagiarized by Nola.com on a weekly basis anymore since he left his post as the Mayor's press secretary.

Meanwhile...the beat goes one....the murders stack up....NOPD numbers dwindle...and tourism futures are so bright I have to wear shades.  

What wicked webs we weave...

Friday, I received the portion of the transcript from the Wisner hearing which details the argument City Attorney Sharonda Williams made to Judge Zeno that the Mayor should be allowed to spend the City's portion of the Wisner funds without approval from the Wisner Trust Donation Advisory Committee.  Here 'tis:

Winser v CNO Court Transcript - Sept. 24, 2013 - City Attorney Sharonda Williams

As I stated before, the City's entire argument was predicated on the premise that the Mayor is not subject to the approval of the Advisory Committee in order to spend the funds because once the money is transferred into the city coffers it becomes a public issue.  That would mean the money is public and the legislative branch, City Council, then becomes the oversight body.

William's own words from the transcript:

"And when you look at the City Code that talks about establishment of the Advisory Committee, one of the portions of the Code is that; '...Direction and functions of the Advisory Committee are subject to the control and direction of the Council, which contemplates the normal checks and balances of any governmental entity, the Council and the executive branch.' That's the checks and balances"

....and...

"What if, just for hypothetical sake, what if the Mayor did decide to give grants to some entity, the Advisory Committee says, yes, we agree with the Mayor, we're going to give you our consent, but then the Council decides that they do not agree with that?  What would the Advisory Committee do then?  They just don't have a place in that process.  It's the traditional government model in a democracy.  It's checks and balanced, executive and legislative branch."

The Advisory Committee is here to give advice and consent that the Mayor may act on related to matters having to do with the Trust.  This is not a matter related to the Trust.  This is a matter related to civic city government."

Zeno goes on to ask her if City Council has the authority to amend the role of the Advisory Committee and Williams responds:

"They can.  They can amend it.  Of course they can.  That is part of their legislative ability."

So now...flash forward to the November 6th City Council meeting concerning the city budget.  Video here:



For some reason the video embed link only has 7 seconds.  You can find the video at the CC website here, scroll down to the November 6th City Council meeting.  The Wisner issues first start at about 28 minutes into the session with Head addressing Cedric Grant.  It picks back up at 57 minutes into the session...although you may want to skip over Jackie Clarkson cackling about how she doesn't think the Wisner funds should go through the Council because they never have before and this Mayor doesn't need to be scrutinized.  Then finally at 1:12, the conversation between Head and Erica Beck takes place.

Councilperson Head questions the Mayor's peeps about why the Wisner budget line item is "$0".  City Attorney and the Mayor's appointee to the Advisory Committee, Erica Beck, responds and tells Head the Council has no control over the Wisner funds.  She sat in the courtroom and listened to the argument made by her colleague, Williams, to Judge Zeno then she stood up in front of City Council and told them they have no dominion over the Wisner funds or how the Mayor spends the money.

The Mayor's office is either misleading the judge, misleading City Council...or it's misleading both.  I'm not going to go so far as to say Beck lied to Head...but she certainly dissembled in respect to the stance they took in court, particularly at 1:17 in the video when Beck claims that no one (in the Mayor's admin.) would envision a process where Council oversees the Wisner budget.  I guess no one but the city attorney arguing that point to the judge.

In fact, when Head asked Beck about a "check and balance system" (1:16 into the video), Beck retorted that she didn't know where Head was getting that language.  I know where that language comes from....from the goddamn case they, themselves, made to Judge Zeno...it's right there in the transcript in black and white.

As if this isn't schizo enough...Beck and the Mayor's office have now come back to the Advisory Committee seeking their approval to award the 2013 grants.  Yes...you read that correctly....after going to court and arguing that the Mayor didn't have to get the Advisory Committee's approval to spend the Wisner money, they are now coming back to the Advisory Committee and asking for approval.

Email from November 21, 2013 to all members of the Edward Wisner Trust Advisory Committee

Why would they do this?  I think for two reasons: 1. The mayor is desperate to spend this money in 2013 with his re-election campaign and a possible run for governor on the near horizon.  2.  They are freaking out because Head is actually threatening to exercise Counsel's right to oversight of the funds.  They would rather let the oversight occur with the Advisory Committee because they think they have that vote locked down....City Council, not so much.

The whole thing would be quite humorous if it wasn't hurting the legitimate entities who need the money.  The Mayor's own hubris and greed to take over the entire Wisner motherlode has lead to his inability to spend any of the money...all this done supposedly under the guise of "transparency".   Now they are forced to spin deceitful webs in a desperate attempt to undo the damage they've done to themselves and the City itself.  

And I know many people are interested in who the City is proposing to give the 2013 grants to....here is that List:

2013 Proposed Wisner Grants for CNO

One thing I just noticed is that in the City Council meeting when Head is questioning Cary Grant about the $600k (approx.) in Wisner line items for Ceasfire and Nola For Life (28 minutes in the video), they state that they included this money in the general budget because it's appropriated to salaries (I think that was the reason, not 100% sure).  However, they are also listing Ceasefire ($100,180) and Nola for Life (under Greater New Orleans Foundation - $250,000) in the proposed 2013 grants.