More on JPPJ Meeting

A motion on a resolution to schedule a public hearing at the 2/11/2013 meeting of the Jackson Parish Police Jury (JPPJ) for receiving public comment on a pay raise for jurors, failed at tonight’s meeting on a tie vote.

Making the motion was Ward Two’s Eddie Langston, with Ward Five’s Maxie Monroe seconding the motion.

On the roll call vote, voting yes were: Langston, Monroe, and Josh Peterson (Ward Three).

Voting no on the motion to set the public hearing were: Todd Culpepper (Ward One), “Chuck” Garrett (Ward Six), and Lynn Treadway (Ward Seven).

Abstaining was Billy Bryant (Ward Four).

None of the jurors commented on the issue, instead going to the roll call vote right after the motion was made. No one from the public commented during that part of the meeting.

Failure of the motion effectively kills the pay raise issue, unless and until it is brought up again.

Earlier in the meeting, Culpepper was unanimously elected President, and Monroe was elected Vice-President, also unanimously.

About these ads

18 Responses to “More on JPPJ Meeting”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    way to go todd, lynn and chuck!!!

    • Bruce Wayne Says:

      Good Job! You took the job knowing what it paid.

      Bless you!

    • Rain Says:

      Good goin? Todd,Lynn and chuck??? You think they were going to turn down a raise if it was elected in. Your the dumb ass they had it all planned out!!!!!!!! Just trying to make the othe 3 look like a fool

      • Anonymous Says:

        Your is not the same as YOU ARE….

        Othe is not the same as OTHER

        Your skill are using the written word does not make you look too bright.

        I know this was not a ploy to make anyone look like a fool….you are mistaken. Give them a call and find out information directly from them.

        By the way, you are forgiven.

  2. Anonymous Says:

    Wasn’t even at the meeting and I could have told you the way they voted. I knew the ones voting YES were going to be those. Peterson suprised me but Langston and Monroe didn’t. Those are two of the biggest ones on the jury that are only in it for the money!

    • Anonymous Says:

      Monroe can get ready because she will be move after showing her hand. Smart move Billy Bryant you look good on that decision just getting in office

    • At home in Jonesbor Says:

      Eddie Langston feels that he is worthy of a raise but why I can’t understand. He does nothing. Maybe he is channeling Donnie Brunson. Who knows? What to throw a scare into Old Eddie Boy? Just ask him how close were he and Brunson before Brunson was caught and disbarred?

  3. Anonymous Says:

    wise decision, thank you for putting the people 1st instead of your pockets

  4. sunrisesunset Says:

    Eddie, you still struttin’ your stuff? Hahahaha! Had to come down a notch or two, didn’t you?

    Goes for you too, Max!

  5. Anonymous Says:

    sunrisesunset Do you not think it WISE to say sorry to the three jurors you threw under the BUS before the vote. I wise man holds his TOUNGE a FOOL never does.THINK FIRST. IF YOU ARE SMART.

    • sunrisesunset Says:

      You and I KNOW in reality that the ultimate goal of the three I mentioned is to increase the pay raise of the jury. Some of those same named individuals have tried it before. ULTIMATE GOAL – pay increases!

      The only thing that may happen at a public meeting…….if there is one that is open to the public……is they would be chicken to vote “yes” in front of their constituents. I think it is called “cold feet”.

      And, no, I am not sorry for my blog. They do not need a raise. What in thunder do they DO that warrants an increase? After all, it is a parttime job, isn’t it? All have jobs except ol’ Eddie boy, do they not?

      I have my opinion just as you have. It is protected by the lst amendment and it is called “freedom of speech”, is it not? I am thinking first and I am not a fool. Do you need to wise up?

  6. Anonymous Says:

    It may have been better to have a public hearing, because then all of the jurors would have heard how the people felt about it, and the public probably would have been almost all critical of the raise. Anyway, at least three of the jurors (and maybe four if the one who abstained had voted against) have some sense of responsibility to those who elected them. It would have been interesting to hear those trying to promote the raise explain why they feel they are worlth more than those in the other parishes surrounding Jackson.
    But how could you abstain on an issue like this? Surely every juror has some opinion pro or con. Looks like we have another Lamkin to deal with.

    • Anonymous Says:

      Let’s hope the three that voted against the pay raise are not treated unfairly by the three that wanted a pay raise.

      It will be interesting to see if those who did not vote for a raise have issues in their districts that those voting for the pay raise turn a blind eye to….

      THAT would be SAD to hear about.

      Stand on the truth ….come into the light….and the three who voted no to a pay raise will be just fine….

      Good job Todd, Chuck & Lynn! Maxie and Billy follow these guys please.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 138 other followers

%d bloggers like this: