By Alex Morey August 26, 2016
Northwestern State University in Louisiana (NSULA) has revised the restrictive demonstration policy that FIRE named as our August “Speech Code of the Month” just a few days ago. The university has eliminated the most problematic parts of the policy and has told FIRE it is committed to protecting free speech on campus.
NSULA President Jim Henderson told FIRE today that the school’s Policy on Public Speech, Assembly and Demonstrations has been updated to better protect students’ free speech rights. President Henderson also reiterated the university’s broader commitment to students’ free speech rights.
As we wrote earlier this week, the policy had three major issues, including requiring students to apply a minimum of “24–48 hour[s]” before demonstrating on campus; limiting expressive activities to “one, 2-hour time period every 7 days, commencing on Monday”; and limiting expressive activity to a handful of free speech zones on campus.
The new policy is significantly improved, and includes the following changes:
No time limit on demonstrations;
adds “when practical and possible” to the advanced notice requirement; and
changes the free speech zones to “preferred areas,” noting that other areas would be considered.
The old policy sank NSULA’s speech code rating to our poorest, red light rating. With these encouraging updates, NSULA now earns a yellow light. Given that President Henderson conveyed the university’s strong commitment to free speech, we hope NSULA will continue moving in this positive direction and become Louisiana’s first green light school.
Archive for August, 2016
The budget for the City of Ruston’s Executive Department continues to grow significantly, according to budget documents for the upcoming 2016-2017 budget year. The budget includes personnel, operating services, materials & supplies, and travel.
For the fiscal year beginning 10/1/16, the total budget is $2.059 million, compared to to an original budget for the fiscal year ending 6/30/16 of $1.787 million.
As recently as two years ago (fy 10/1/13-9/30/14), the amount budgeted was $1.517 million.
See here the documents.
Most of the increase appears to be in personnel salaries and the corresponding benefits (retirement, Social Security, insurance, etc).
For the year ending 9/30/16, the original budget was $915 thousand, compared to the new budgeted amount of $1.122 million. For the year ended 9/30/14, that amount was $676 thousand.
The detailed salary breakdown of the personnel shows five new hires for next year. See here the documents:
Direct salaries fy 10/1/15-9/30/16
Direct salaries fy 10/1/16-9/30/17
Here is the complete budget for the city for all departments:
Some Lincoln Parish taxpaying property owners are beginning to grumble a bit, now that notices are hitting mailboxes showing some assessments increasing 15% or more since the last statewide reassessment in 2012.
The property values are open for public inspection each year for a period of fifteen days. The 2016 period is from August 15-August 29. All property owners have the right to inquire should they think the market value placed upon their property by the Assessor is in error. Owners should contact the office prior to August 29, 2016 if you have questions. Louisiana law provides that valuation appeals after this date shall not be considered by the Assessor.
So if you want to appeal, you have until next Monday, August 29 to do it.
Physical Address: 307 N Homer St., Ruston, LA 71270
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1218, Ruston, LA 71273
Office hours are 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday – Friday.
If you cannot come to terms, there is an appeal process whereby you can present your case to the local Board of Review. In Lincoln Parish, the Police Jury sits as the board of review. The meeting where you can present your case is set for Tuesday, September 13, 7:00 PM, Lincoln Parish Court House, third floor.
Some helpful data can be found at Nolo.com:
Useful Evidence for Your Appeal
In pursuing your appeal, several types of evidence may be useful, including:
A recent appraisal of your home.
A contractor’s report showing repair work needed on your home and how much the work will cost.
Documents showing actual sales prices in your neighborhood, and photographs of homes similar to yours, together with a list of their sales prices or taxable values.
At the hearing, you’ll probably have just five or ten minutes to present your case, so be succinct. Bring extra copies of your documentary evidence so that each hearing officer has a copy. Try to include a chart showing comparative sales prices and taxable values. You may want to arrive early so that you observe – and learn from – other people’s hearings.
You can appeal the local Board’s decision to the Louisiana Tax Commission. File your appeal with the Commission within 10 days after the local Board’s written decision is postmarked, or hand delivered to you.
Next, there is an appeal process to the Louisiana Tax Commission.
Here are the forms.
Finally, there is the ultimate check against taxes: vote against them whenever they’re on the ballot, and actively campaign with your neighbors, family, and friends to defeat them.
As we stated when we first began writing this newsblog over seven years ago, government at all levels never, ever does without.
Government can and does take care of itself – it has always prospered and grown, regardless of the local economy and the financial health of the citizens who fund its existence.
From The Hayride:
After Donald Trump visited Louisiana to help unload supplies for victims ravaged by the massive, unprecedented flooding, former Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) thanked the GOP nominee and actually called out Hillary Clinton and President Obama for refusing to visit.
Here’s what Landrieu said:
Byron York Verified account @ByronYork
Mary Landrieu: ‘I want to thank Mr. Trump for coming to LA…I hope Sec Clinton will make her way down. I hope Pres Obama will make a visit.’
Meanwhile, Obama is has remained on vacation at Martha’s Vineyard, while Clinton has yet to even make an official statement on the flooding.
Appearing on CNN, former U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Democrat, also praised Trump’s trip.
“I want to thank Mr. Trump for coming to Louisiana,” she said. “He brought attention to our state and we need that now.”
Landrieu said she hopes that Clinton and Obama will make similar trips to Louisiana in the coming days.
“It’s really a serious disaster,” she said. “We need all the attention and help we can get.”
Wednesday, August 17, 2016
U.S. Attorney Kenneth A. Polite announced today HARRY J. MOREL, JR., age 73, was sentenced today after previously pleading guilty to obstruction of justice in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1512(d)(1).
U.S. District Judge Kurt D. Engelhardt sentenced MOREL to 3 years imprisonment, a $20,000 fine, 1 year of supervised release and a $100 special assessment.
According to court records, MOREL served as the elected prosecutor of St. Charles Parish, Louisiana from on or about January 1, 1979 until May 31, 2012. Thereafter, he became an Assistant District Attorney in the Office of the District Attorney for St. Charles Parish and remained in that position until January 11, 2013. MOREL resided in, and his office was located in, St. Charles Parish, Louisiana, in the Eastern District of Louisiana.
As District Attorney and as an Assistant District Attorney for St. Charles Parish, MOREL was responsible for prosecuting individuals charged with criminal and traffic offenses against the State of Louisiana. As the District Attorney, MOREL had the authority and discretion to, among other things, make bail recommendations, make sentence recommendations and bring dismiss, forego or reduce charges.
MOREL freely admitted that he is guilty of Obstruction of Justice in that he harassed Individual “A” and attempted to prevent and dissuade Individual “A” from attending or testifying in an official proceeding, i.e., the federal grand jury, by telling Individual “A” to “get rid of” and to “destroy” the evidence of a meeting they had and to deny the inappropriate nature of the meeting to law enforcement officials. Furthermore, based on Individual “A”‘s representations, MOREL believed there would be a federal Grand Jury investigation, and as a result asked her to conceal information that would have likely led to her being a witness before that body.
MOREL also admitted that on other occasions, between 2007 and 2009, he solicited sex from other individuals who were defendants or who had family members who were defendants in the St. Charles Parish criminal justice system. While soliciting sex from these individuals, MOREL likewise used the office of the District Attorney to provide benefits to these other individuals, including falsifying community service reports.
U.S. Attorney Polite praised the work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the St. Charles Parish Sheriff’s Office in investigating this matter. Assistant U.S. Attorneys James Baehr and Mark Miller were in charge of the prosecution.
By Zach Parker email@example.com
Allyson Campbell, a law clerk at Fourth Judicial District Court in Monroe, who was accused of payroll fraud and concealing or destroying court documents, told state investigators her time sheets were “more of an estimate” than a record of hours worked, according to an audio recording of that interview obtained by The Ouachita Citizen.
During their questioning of Campbell, investigators with the state Office of Inspector General and with Louisiana State Police appeared to suggest answers and possible explanations for Campbell’s activities, which came under scrutiny amid complaints and ongoing lawsuits against her and the court’s judges.
The law clerk’s and investigators’ collaborative explanations were recorded in a Jan. 28, 2016 interview between Inspector General Investigator Heath Humble and State Police Investigator Ron Huey with Campbell at the law office of her attorney, Brian Crawford of Monroe, who also was present during the interview.
An audio recording of the interview is available online at http://www.ouachitacitizen.com where the recording displays at the bottom of the article.
The Ruston Police Department (RPD) will receive a significant budget boost for the 2016-2017 budget year, Chief Steve Rogers told Lincoln Parish News Online (LPNO) at last night’s Ruston City Council Meeting.
Rogers said the increase would be a little over $200 thousand, about a 5% increase over last year’s total of about $4 million.
Also, significant pay raises were included for the personnel, it was learned.
Said Ward 5 Alderman Bruce Siegmund, “I am glad to see the raise for policemen. I believe we should have the best police force around – part of that means they need to get paid for it. We’ve got some vacancies now – we need some new folks in there, and so I think that’ll help.”
The department has been short-handed LPNO had recently reported, and recently had to curtail vacations to keep sufficient manpower on patrol.
In other business, the council unanimously voted to rollback property tax rates to accommodate increase property valuations. The council also voted NOT to roll forward the rates to the maximum allowed.
This means, on average, a property owner should pay no more in property taxes than last year.
Taxpaying property owners in Ruston and Lincoln Parish have one more hurdle to clear if they are to escape higher taxes paid to local governments.
Ruston’s Board of Aldermen will vote on increasing millages to 5.88 mils from the 5.24 that has been established as the “roll back” rate.
See here the proposed ordinances.
Last week, the Lincoln Parish Police Jury defeated a roll forward attempt on four of the six taxes it collects.
The Lincoln Parish School Board and the Lincoln Parish Sheriff did not properly advertise by July 15 their intention of raising property taxes, so they are barred by law from proposing a roll forward.
The meeting will be at 6:30 PM, Monday, August 15, Ruston City Hall, 401 North Trenton, first floor courtroom/council chamber. The Personnel/Finance Committee will also meet.
Here are the agendas:
Twice this month duly elected members of two local legislative bodies were denied their right to fully participate in a deliberative process.
Last week, at Ruston’s Board of Aldermen meeting, Jim Pierce (Ward 4), moved to amend an ordinance that was duly moved, seconded, and was open for discussion. The original ordinance as moved extended alcohol sales in Ruston to 2 AM, from Midnight, among other provisions. Pierce wanted to amend it and delete only the extended hours.
Mayor Ronny Walker, who was chairing the meeting, deferred to City Attorney Bill Carter, who ruled that since Pierce’s amendment wasn’t “friendly,” that it was out of order. A friendly amendment is defined as one that the original mover has no objection to.
Last Tuesday, Lincoln Parish Police Juror Randy Roberson’s (District 4) duly seconded amendment to a motion was ignored by Jury President Jody Backus (District 7). During the discussion, there was again talk about whether it was a “friendly amendment.”
In both these cases, the proposed amendments could have had profound effects upon pending legislation, and consequently upon taxpayers and citizens.
The issue of “friendly” is discussed in Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised (11th Edition) thus:
Question 8: How do you deal with a “friendly amendment”?
Answer: On occasion, while a motion is being debated, someone will get up and offer what he or she terms a “friendly amendment” to the motion, the maker of the original motion will “accept” the amendment, and the chair will treat the motion as amended. This is wrong. Once a motion has been stated by the chair, it is no longer the property of the mover, but of the assembly. Any amendment, “friendly” or otherwise, must be adopted by the full body, either by a vote or by unanimous consent.
If it appears to the chair that an amendment (or any other motion) is uncontroversial, it is proper for the chair to ask if there is “any objection” to adopting the amendment. If no objection is made, the chair may declare the amendment adopted. If even one member objects, however, the amendment is subject to debate and vote like any other, regardless of whether its proposer calls it “friendly” and regardless of whether the maker of the original motion endorses its adoption.
This brings up another question. Under what parliamentary rules does the Ruston City Council and the Lincoln Parish Police Jury operate?
If the body wants it to be Robert’s, then it needs to be documented and put in writing. Many Louisiana parishes have done just that.
Otherwise, if there are no established rules, and the chair gets to make them up on the fly, then you get what happened in these two cases.
Edit 8/13/16 – Noon
We just found this pertinent ordinance for the City of Ruston
The conduct of all board of aldermen meetings shall be governed by the most recent edition of Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised to the extent such rules do not conflict with the provisions of R.S. 33:321—33:463 (the Lawrason Act).
(Ord. No. 1225, § 1, 4-15-1996; Ord. No. 1546, § 1, 12-3-2007)
For several years, we have tape-recorded all the meeting we’ve attended – city council, police jury, school board – mostly so that we can accurately report quotes from the participants, but also, as in this case, to recall exactly who said what and when. It is amazing sometimes how after the fact, several people who witnessed the same discussion, or actually participated in it, can come up with differing accounts of what happened.
On several occasions, we’ve confronted politicians about what they said, only to have them deny having said it. An audio tape is invaluable for times like that.
In this case during last Tuesday’s Lincoln Parish Police Jury (LPPJ) meeting, there was a critical point where Randy Roberson (District Four) attempted to amend Joe Henderson’s (District Nine) motion to adopt the roll-forward ordinance.
As we had reported earlier, Henderson’s motion was to adopt all six millage rates as a group. Roberson wanted to amend the motion to vote on each tax individually. Jury President Jody Backus ignored Roberson’s duly seconded motion, and called for the vote on Henderson’s original motion.
Herewith the word-for-word discussion:
Roberson: “Can we roll the millages back and change the library millage?”
Annette Straughter (District 12): “I think we have a motion on the floor first, don’t we?”
Roberson: “I’m going to amend the motion, if I can get a ruling that I can.”
Henderson: “If you get a second on the amendment.”
Bobby Bennett: “It’s been seconded.”
There was some more discussion on procedure before this final comment.
Walter Pullen (District 6): You’re not trying to change one little thing about the amendment, you’re trying to do a whole new motion.”
Roberson: “Well then I know what to do, so go ahead.”
By this point President Jody Backus (District Seven) had never acknowledged Roberson’s amendment motion and second, and said this: “We now have a motion on the floor. We have a second, and we’re going to call for a roll call vote at this time.”
After the vote failed, Backus then moved for ANOTHER vote on the identical motion. It also failed 7-5.