Lafourche Parish Facts And Opinions

FACTS:

There is a place on earth where:
an appointed board allegedly refuse to follow federal regulations, which could lead to loss of flood insurance coverage for the citizens of the area;
an elected local governing board passes an ordinance which allegedly violates its own ordinance, which could lead to the loss of state transportation funds to the citizens of the area;(stop signs and water lines)
an elected individual who allegedly over-steps his/her authority in an effort to acquire a luxury office building at citizens of the area’s expense;
a local government administration with elected and non-elected individuals allegedly violating laws and rules without worry of consequences;
an elected official who allegedly wrote a letter stating that it isn’t his job to investigate alleged criminal activities, it is the responsibility of the law enforcement;
new laws are constantly being introduced because it is alleged that the existing laws are not enforced;
an elected individual who appears on a local radio talk show and is alleged to have made up excuses of why he does not perform his job;
certain appointed board members fallacy of having more authority than the appointing authority.

OPINIONS:

Is it possible that all of the above could be happening in one place on planet Earth?
Could all of the above actually be happening in, lets say, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana?
Could the citizens be so fed up as to say, LET-EM-HAAAAAVE-ITTTTT?

In my opinion, public servants should have enough money available before it is spent, whether it is used for rentals or the purchase of buildings and construction.  If you purchase a lottery ticket, it is my opinion that you should not spend your winnings until after the drawing and the money is in your hands. 

A word of caution to all elected officials in Louisiana, do not spend the offshore revenue sharing money until the money (not the promise) is in the bank.

Visit with us again as we examine the reason behind the alleged statement of a Lafourche Parish Council employee, “ HOW LONG DO YOU EXPECT US TO PUT UP WITH THIS MADNESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” 

FACTS:

“Council debates about levee protection devices”, written by Alces P. Adams and “Offshore revenue sharing closer to reality”, written by Doug Cheramie, II are articles found in the July 19, 2006 edition of the Lafourche Gazette.

OPINIONS:

According to Mr. Adams’ article, referring to the alleged millions of dollars spent by the Lafourche Parish President on levee protection devices, the parish president stated that she has greater authority during an emergency.  Ms. Randolph, remember the words of my friend the D.A., “if it ain’t in the Charter, we Ain’t doing it.”  Ms. Randolph, simply go to the Charter and point out the section that gives the Parish President greater authority during an emergency. 

I am under the impression that the state of Louisiana is participating in offshore revenue sharing.  Mr. Cheramie’s article, “Offshore revenue sharing closer to reality,” is confusing to me.  I heard that some people are complaining about the state not getting its “fair share”.  I also heard that the issue is being considered in the US House of Representative and the US Senate.  In my opinion, this closer to reality syndrome will continue until after the mid-term congressional elections.  In the final Analise’s, I predict that if we receive any increase in offshore revenues, it may not be enough to cover Ms. Randolph’s unnecessary spending. 

The Nation and the state of Louisiana is watching.  Visit with us again, as we continue the effort to unleash the truth.

FACTS:

The following is an excerpt from an article on the Lafourche Parish Council meeting of July 11, 2006, by Alcess P. Adams, in the July 16, edition of the Lafourche Gazette. 
…….Following D.A. Cam Morvant’s advise, the Council also passed a resolution to crack down on parish boards violating one particular ordinance…………..Members of twenty-six boards currently face removal………….

OPINIONS:

It is my opinion that the above mentioned board members facing removal are either not connected or not members of the alleged silk stocking gang from the northern region of the parish.
EXAMPLE:It is alleged that the Lafourche Parish Council removed two members of a board in June of 2003.  It is alleged that D.A. Cam Morvant told both members that they didn’t have to step down, so they did not step down.  It is alleged that the District Attorney do not have the authority to over-ride the actions of the Governing authority.
1.Why didn’t the two board members challenge the Council’s decision in a court of law?
2.Did the D.A. over step his authority? (ACCOUNTABILITY?)

What is the real reason behind the District Attorney stopping the previous council’s meeting?  Why did the D.A. allegedly instruct this council, at its first meeting, to drop on-going litigation on an alleged group of connected individuals?  Why after 2 1/2 years did the D.A. mention at a public Council Meeting that he prevented the last council from spending all of this Council’s budget?

What is the real truth in this continuing saga?  The truth will be told in the near future; stay tuned.
It is said that one must not believe an elected officials words, but observe his/her actions with intellect. 

FACTS:
The following was extracted from the petition of the United Houma Nation for federal acknowledgement.

In addition to regional strategic change , local economic development near Burnside, Louisiana made the tribe’s (Houmas) move increasingly necessary.  Development was continuing apace, judging from an 1803 description of the site in the last days of the Spanish dominion.
…the hamlet of Lafourche [is] located on the banks of the river near a river which bears its name.  Its inhabitants, to the number of three hundred, have a heavy trade in pelts.  Travelers find good inns there, and the inhabitants ( sic ) stores in which to keep their merchandise and products.  The inhabitants of the provinces of Attakapas and Opelousas send their products down thither by water.  These consist of indigo, cotton, and all the other products which I have already described.

Specific policy of the United States to provide incentive for the tribes to relocate came only following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803.  In an act of March 26, 1804, the U. S. congress divided the purchase area into two territories–the Territory of Orleans and the Territory of Louisiana.  The act “provided also for the removal of such Indians as desired to make the change.  The plan was to give them acre for acre lands beyond the Mississippi in exchange for their old domains on the East side.”  Carrying out the wishes of the Washington government during the territorial era in Louisiana was W. C. C. Claiborne.  “Although he had not received specific guidelines from Washington, Governor Claiborne faithfully carried out the benevolent and paternalistic Indian Policies of his Washington mentor, Thomas Jefferson.”

Evidence that the “governor was concerned generally with the welfare of the small Indian tribes in the Orleans Territory…”  comes in part from his treatment of the Houma delegations to his office.  Oral tradition collected 1977 to 1981 documents the visit by the tribe’s leaders, which continued the historic link between the tribe and whatever government was in power in New Orleans.

Claiborne wrote to U. S. Secretary of War Henery Dearborne on April 4, 1806:
I have in this day drawn upon you in favor of Richard Claiborne an order for 48 dollars payable at five days’ sight; this sum has been paid by me, for two uniform Coats which I presented to two chief of a friendly tribe of Indians, called the hamos; they reside on the waters of the Mississippi in the county of Acadia within this territory, and have been in the habit of receiving small presents from Governors….

The County of Acadia had been formed the year before.  It included the First and Second German coasts on both sides of the river with the church parishes of Ascension and St. Jacques.

The presentation of “uniform coats” marks a significant carry-over from the Spanish era of Indian diplomacy.  The primary symbols of chiefly authority used by the Spanish, in addition to uniforms, included medals (which the Houma tribe received from earlier governors) , flags, staffs of office and commission papers.

OPINIONS:
This is part six of “Story of a People.”  If you wish to read the first five segments, click on archives and visit the entries made on June 6, 10, 11, 15 and 16, 2006.

Visit with us tomorrow as we examine Facts and Opions on Lafourche Parish local government and issues.  The Story of a People will be continued on future dates.

FACTS:

According to Webster, the definition of oxymoron is, combination of contradictory words.

OPINIONS:

In my opinion, on recent issues presented to the public by the Lafourche Parish Council and the office of Lafourche Parish District Attorney, brings to mind the term oxymoron.

1.At the Lafourche Parish Council meeting of July 11,2006, a presentation on Lafourche on the Move was made by Recreation Director Brennen Matherne.  Standing at the council podium, Mr. Matherne reminded me of a Macy’s Float at Thanksgiving, explaining the merits of walking around a one mile track (oxymoron no. one).  It is alleged that the Parish has spent over 1/2 million dollars on less than 1% of the population.  We applaud the efforts of this administration trying to get Lafourche Parish citizens to move, but good money management would serve the tax payers of Lafourche Parish better, in my opinion. 
2.The Lafourche Parish District Attorney’s office recently mailed out its 2006 Mid-Term report.  Under the heading of “Investigative Division” was a picture of District Attorney Cam Morvant and five other people.  I am only familiar with one of the other five people and in my opinion, here lies the second oxymoron, “Poochie”, as part of an investigative division.  In my opinion, Lafourche Parish tax dollars would be better spent if Poochie would visit the eateries less frequently and investigate the Lafourche Parish Council Administration.
EXAMPLE: In Charlotte Randolph’s campaign for parish president she stated that the rules are the rules, just follow the rules.  The Lafourche Parish Council collects a tax for drainage and the levee districts collect a tax for flood protection.  In my opinion, the responsibility of each entity is specific.  Why did the Lafourche Parish Council administration allegedly spend between 5 and 8 million dollars on inflatable levees in the levee district’s jurisdiction?  Wouldn’t FEMA reimburse a levee district for rentals on tidal flood protection rather than the Parish?  It is my opinion that all previous councils called a meeting and passed an emergency ordinance before the expenditure of public funds by the administration during an emergency.  Did this Parish President follow the correct procedure?  What section of the Charter authorize the Chairman (Brent Callais) and district councilman (Phillip Gouaux) to expend public funds? It is alleged that Mr. Callais and Mr. Gouaux were aware of this expenditure without the knowledge of the governing authority, the Lafourche Parish Council.  Take your head out of the sand and investigate.  5 million dollars and still climbing.  For What?

Visit with us tomorrow, as we continue our journey with the Story of a People.

FACTS:

The July 11, 2006 Lafourche Parish Council Meeting was aired on Vision Communications, Channel 5 television.
                                                   “THANK YOU”

OPINIONS:

In my opinion, anyone who viewed the council meeting spectacle can not in good conscious vote for a tax which will continue funding this moronic plague upon the good citizens of Lafourche Parish. 
1.Where was the DA, the Lafourche Parish Council’s legal adviser.
2.Where was the 5 minute time limit?
3.What planet was the Chair-person on?  Where was the orderly conduct?
4.Why does Councilman Phillip Gouaux insist on advertising his lack of intelligence? 
5.Why did the Council allow a special interest group to influence them into adopting an ordinance for the installation of illegal traffic devices (4-way stop signs)?
6.Why is Councilman Atzenhoffer still mumbling?
7.Why is Cullen Curole still Parish Administrator?

I will admit that I have no confidence what so ever in many of the individuals on the Lafourche Parish Council and its administration, but I never thought I would hear such a juvenile response to a legitimate question as I heard From Brent Callais.  When asked by a person from the audience, why are you considering installing stop signs which will disrupt the legal flow of traffic?  Mr. Callais’ response was something like, residents are backing out of their driveways onto the street, the stop signs will make it safer. Should each of us request a stop sign be placed at our driveways so we can safely back onto the street we live on?  What about the people living on state highway 1 and 308, should we impede the legal flow of traffic in order to allow residence to safely back onto the highway?

There is a wise old saying, “The acorn do not fall very far from the tree”.  Do you realize that the tree is running for public office on the Greater Lafourche Port Commission?  Isn’t that scary?  Will the moronic movement ever be stopped?

Join us again as we examine the expensive deeds of the Lafourche Parish Council.

NEWS ALERT———-NEWS ALERT————NEWS ALERT———–NEWS ALERT——–NEWS ALERT
During the Lafourche Parish Council term under the Breaux Administration, the news media (news paper and radio) criticized the majority five for attempting to maintain so-called private streets.  It is reported that a judge ruled just this week that the so-called private streets are public and the Parish must maintain them.  How come we are not reading about this court decision or hearing about it on the radio?  Are the majority five going to receive an apology?  The majority five could read the charter and interpret the charter correctly.

FACTS:

Tomorrow, Saturday, July 15, 2006 is an election day in Lafourche Parish.  The voting public has a choice of paying more or less taxes during the next ten years.

OPINIONS:

It is my opinion that the people who complain the most about government and paying taxes are the same people who make up excuses for NOT VOTING.  Your voice will be heard on Saturday, if you choose to speak, no excuses.

In the last administration, the parish president refused to do work on roads which the “majority Five” insisted were public.  The Parish President, not the “majority five”, initiated a law suit against the council.  The Parish President hired an attorney from Thibodaux to represent him.  The “majority five” won their case against the Parish President.  In my opinion, the people still lost, because the District Attorney under-handley removed the “majority five” before they could right the wrong against the people.  In a Lafourche Parish court room yesterday, because this Parish President refused to do work on one of the above mentioned roads, was sued by residents of a so-called private street.  This Parish President, Charlotte Randolph hired the same attorney from Thibodaux who lost in the last administration.  It is my understanding that the judge ruled, that the road is public and the administration must maintain it. 

FACTS:

Council once again delays FEMA map acceptance, is the title of an article by Alces P. Adams, in the July 12, 2006 edition of the Lafourche Gazette.  The article is a report on the special Lafourche Parish council meeting held on Thursday, July 6, 2006.

OPINIONS:

It is supposed that the Louisiana State Attorney General (AG) issues opinions based on law.  A recent opinion by the AG prohibits the placement of culverts in drainage ditches without receiving compensation from the individual property owner.  According to the above mentioned article, it appears that the State of Louisiana will withhold money ($3.5 million) from Lafourche parish if the Parish Council do not adopt the ABFE maps.  The money that will be withheld is tax payers money intended to mitigate or repair privately owned structures.  At what point does the law change Mr. AG?  If the parish cannot use tax payers money to install culverts in a public drainage ditch, how can the state use tax payers money on private property?

According to the news article, Councilman Mark Atzenhoffer objected to the state blackmailing the Parishes.  He (Atzenhoffer) said he will not “kiss their ring”.  Is Mr. Atzenhoffer going to be the first jellyfish to generate a spine?  Are his lips still sore from kissing the DA’s ring, or whatever councilman kiss when the DA delivers his sermon?  

Speaking of kissing the ring, it appears that the South Lafourche Levee District is considered as being a sacred cow (no pun intended).  It is my opinion, that the money not being received by the District is a direct reflection of a few of its arrogant leadership.  It is alleged that the citizens of South Lafourche will have to pay additional taxes because of one or two people affiliated with the South Lafourche levee district.  The citizens of South Lafourche do not have a choice on who sits on the levee district board, or its employees.  Could this be taxation without representation?  If one is on television, perhaps one ought to not brag on how South Lafourche took it upon itself to build a levee, the nation is watching.  South Lafourche needs federal funds.  Decisions made on behalf of the South Lafourche Levee District should be made by its entire appointed board and not by a couple of moronic advisers.

Will Vision air the last Council meeting tomorrow night?  The odds are that they will not, because it may have a negative impact on this Saturday’s election.  Visit with us tomorrow as we examine the actions and inaction’s of the Lafourche Parish Council.

FACTS:

January 13, 2006 marked the midway point of Cam Morvant’s term as District Attorney for Lafourche Parish, according to a report mailed out to the citizens of Lafourche Parish, by the D.A.’s office.

OPINIONS:

In my opinion, we should all take a couple of minutes to read the D.A.’s “Brag Rag.”  Take into consideration, the large print and many pictures, the report equates to about one 8 1/2 x 11 sheet per year (3 years=3 sheets).
1.How many criminal offenses were SUCCESSFULLY prosecuted per year?
2.Is there less crime in Lafourche Parish on this D.A.’s term?
3.Did you read a logical reason for GOD being replaced by the DA and sheriff in our public schools.
4.Do you think that our good friend the DA is a lot of talk?  Are you as a parent offended when he boast on how he can take care of our children if we can’t?  What is he doing about the countless murders of our un-born?

This Mid-Term report does not answer the general public’s number one question.  Where is the DA on all of the alleged criminal activities going on in Lafourche Parish?  Why is the alleged most powerful person in the parish, the DA, allegedly controlled by a couple of small minded individuals with large bank accounts?

Isn’t it past time that we replace the sheriff and the DA with God in our public schools?

Visit with us tomorrow as we examine some of the events of last evening’s wild Lafourche Parish Council Meeting.

FACTS:

“If it ain’t in the charter, we ain’t doing it.” This was a statement made by the Lafourche Parish District Attorney Cam Morvant, to the Lafourche Parish Council on June 27,2006, according to an article by Alces P. Adams, in the July 2, 2006 edition of the Lafourche Gazette.

OPINIONS:

In my opinion, some of the citizens of Lafourche Parish would like the D.A. to address the Lafourche Parish council publicly and point out where the alleged following activities are located in the Charter:
1.What section of the charter allows the parish president’s husband (private citizen) to drive a parish vehicle?
2.What section of the charter allows the Lafourche Parish Council to pay thousands of dollars in damages caused by a private individual wrecking a public vehicle while driving the parish vehicle?
3.What section of the charter allows the Parish President to use a parish issued credit card to pay for meals, drinks, and airline tickets for her family members?
4.What section of the charter allows the Lafourche Parish Council and a parish board to pay for the installation of an undersized water line, in violation of parish ordinances?
5.What section of the charter allows Councilmen like Brent Callais to attend a parish board meeting and request an expenditure by the board with a commitment of funds from the Lafourche Parish Council?
6.What section of the charter allows any parish elected official or parish employee loan out any public property?
7.What section of the charter allows the Parish President to enter into a 5 million dollar contract without prior council approval?

We are issuing you a challenge Mr. D.A., prove it(if it ain’t in the charter, we ain’t doing it).
 
As my good friend, the D.A. addressed the council, he requested a list of boards and board members.  Is providing a list to the D.A., a legislative function or an administrative function?  Where can we find this in the charter?

In my opinion, if the D.A. is correct when he said that a councilman cannot speak to an engineer or contractor on the sidewalk (about an on-going project) according to the charter, then the charter is apparently unconstitutional and should have been checked out by the D.A. before going out to the public for approval.

visit with us tomorrow while we examine the Lafourche Parish District Attorney’s office 2006 Mid-Term Report, AKA “The Brag Rag”.