|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 1, 2007 0:36:42 GMT -6
It is generally called arrogance.
He is forcing staff to devote personal time to walk streets and pass out push cards for him. Is also "offering" signs and bumper stickers at the courthouse at quitting time. Ask any of the staff. If you do not "volunteer" to walk, put up signs or pass out stickers (and lists are being kept) what do you suppose will happen ?
Sort of a built in political staff that works for free for fear of keeping job. Want to guess how many people get fired after election ? Good staff, lost to bad politics. I hope the s.o.b. is defeated soundly.
I wouldn't release public record either were I Louis Perret. Sue me first. Wait till info leaks out; travel, vehicle,salary abuses, not to mention personnel abuses. EEOC violations and improper activity. Liable to see fireworks. Perret will cry dirty politics, but its not dirty if it's true.
|
|
|
Post by Dorothy on Oct 1, 2007 17:36:20 GMT -6
What do you mean will not give up public records ? Isn't the Clerk of Court charged with keeping public records ? Is it possible that the law has not been read? The purpose of public records laws are to make sure that the business of government is not conducted secretly like China or Cuba. Any good officeholder should welcome any concerned citizen who wishes to avail themselves of pertinent information. What type of politician would seek to not disclose anything ? I agree with another post that said if public money pays for it, public is entitled to see it. I accept that juvenile records are hidden. I accept that criminal files are hidden until criminal matter is resolved, but then the matter is public.
Shame on whoever is withholding information, but I sincerely hope that whatever is being hidden (must be something, or it would have been released) sees the light of the sun (that would be the Sunshine Law) so all of us may make an informed decision in this contest. And shame on you who do not vote to end this type of arrogant behavior.
|
|
|
Post by Southside Voter on Oct 2, 2007 7:12:25 GMT -6
Didn’t I see Louis Perret hobnobbing about at a Patrick LeBlanc Rally recently? Now I read in the Independent that he is a big backer of Cortez? What was he doing at Pat’s function, taking a head count for Cortez?
You know , Jay Dardonne, the Secretary of State, runs elections too. I don’t see Jay running around campaigning for his choice for governor.
The sheer audacity for Perret to engage in this kind of partisan political activity when he runs the elections is almost criminal.
God forbid the LeBlanc Cortez race be a close one and that there are no election problems in that race, for we know where Perret’s allegiance lies, not to the election process, but to Cortez.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Oct 2, 2007 8:49:41 GMT -6
I thought that the Michot- Robideaux camp was for Ethics, Good Government, etc. etc., now, according to some, they are conducting a whisper campaign about LeBlanc, getting the weekly rag, The Indy, to smear for them...they better watch out for blow-back. The Daily and TV 3 already posted retractions/corrections on their smear stories....They hold themselves up to be the standard bearers, but actually what it looks like is that we have the same "good ole boy" politics...different faces, different party, but the same game... People who are smearing LeBlanc need to check out the rules for reporting to Ethics Boards...IT IS THE RECIPIENT OF GIFTS/DONATIONS, ETC. WHO MUST REPORT - NOT THE DONOR...
|
|
|
Post by Southside Voter on Oct 2, 2007 9:20:22 GMT -6
Funny thing about ethics, you do not need a law to compel you to file whatever you want with whomever you want. Make it public record at the Clerk’s Office, but Louis has gotcha on those darn recording fees. And, yes, LeBlanc violated no law or ethics provision. That really has not been made clear, he did nothing wrong or illegal or unethical, yet he is smeared with innuendo because the Michot- Robideaux faction can do it.
Food for thought for all voters of all parties.
About ethics, Lehman has publically promised, and I have no doubt that he will do it, post his tax return as clerk of court on the internet, same with campaign reports as soon as they are available from BR. Perret has said nothing.
Same with wanna be reps and senators, there is nothing to prevent them, but they are not compelled to file reports. So as there is no law to require them to do so, they don’t .
Leadership is about example, leadership is about doing what is right in your heart, not what you are required to by law.
|
|
|
Post by Dorothy on Oct 2, 2007 17:34:26 GMT -6
This office is getting out of hand. Now the Clerk and Toto are trying to find out about "leaks" in the office. Why would a public office have to be concerned about a leak in an office that's purpose is to maintain PUBLIC RECORDS? That should make you wonder what is going on ?
The only way to stop leaks would be to not allow employees to talk to each other, not to talk to their spouses who work for the Sheriff, not to talk to family, not to go on vacations with non-approved persons, not to talk to the Judges staff, not to talk to the D.A.'s staff, you get the picture. Our Clerk issued an order to staff to notify his secretary any time his opponent is seen entering the building. I suppose that is so he can slither out the back and not confront reality.
Well mr clerk, you cannot stop people in America from speaking up when they are displeased, and evidently, they are displeased with you. People know much more than you think (which rhymes with "pretty in pink"). I can tell you that most of the people who are walking the neighborhoods at your request are not very enthused, and are somewhat resentful. It shows.
Finding out that you are on the "steering committee" of a candidate for representative along with mr Michot is very troubling. Looks like someone is trying to build a coalition of elected officials to control the parish, and you, our chief of elections, are involved. Very bad.
|
|
Cajunguy
New Member
Duhhh, who's got the boudin?
Posts: 42
|
Post by Cajunguy on Oct 2, 2007 18:20:17 GMT -6
Re-elect NO ONE![/size]
|
|
|
Post by Crpw on Oct 2, 2007 20:38:51 GMT -6
If you have nothing to hide, give the man what he wants. Avoiding him and refusing to turn over documents that are public records is not helping your campaign. Do your employees a big favor, stop abusing them and let them do what they were hired to do, because everyone knows they run the office and are the heart of the Clerk's office, you just have the title of Clerk.
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Oct 2, 2007 20:50:11 GMT -6
Sorry about that, guess I will never get a job at the Clerk's office, I can not even type my name correctly. But of course people do make mistakes, if you did, come clean, most people are forgiving.
|
|
|
Post by Southside Voter on Oct 5, 2007 7:00:00 GMT -6
One has to admire the convictions of Louis Perret. The Ind listed him as a major backer of page Cortez. But HE isn't. HIS CAMPAIGN FUND, IS.
According to Disclosure Reports, Louis J. Perret for Clerk of Court ( his campaign fund) gave Page Cortez $1000.00 on July 30, 2007.
Louis won’t risk a nickel of his personal money, won’t give a nickel of his personal money, but he sure doesn’t mind spending those hard earned contributor’s dollars for anything he wants.
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 5, 2007 10:41:00 GMT -6
That is not the best part; Louis Perret accepted $1,000.00 from Pat LeBlanc, who is an opponent to Page Cortez (Michot's dummy) and in turn gave that money to Cortez. That my friends is a principled person. Pat LeBlanc must feel like an absolute idiot.
|
|
|
Post by ronnief on Oct 5, 2007 16:14:06 GMT -6
That is the problem with people like that; In public they are always waving a flag and praying, in private life, they go out of their way to walk on the "little people" with no concern whatsoever for the harm they do them.
Pat LeBlanc is not a little people (remember whose house Cheney went to), and retribution will likely be forthcoming. I think it is safe to assume that LeBlanc's supporters will vote for the democrat in the race, I certainly will.
|
|
|
Post by ronnief on Oct 5, 2007 16:23:30 GMT -6
Okay, who is "Toto", besides Dorothy's dog in "Oz" ? "Pretty in Pink" ? Girlfriend or movie reference? Somebody is withholding information or gossip. I would like to hear it.
|
|
|
Post by Southside Voter on Oct 5, 2007 17:25:52 GMT -6
As for Cortez, I have never met the man but I do know Louis Perret. As Perret endorsed Cortez, that is reason enough for me to look elsewhere.
My vote for rep goes to Leblanc. Ditto for Lehman for clerk.
Politicians can only can get away with what we let them get away with. The worst thing any politician wants to hear is questions from those that elected them.
|
|
|
Post by Southside Voter on Oct 5, 2007 17:30:51 GMT -6
Better question:
Who is the wizard behind the curtain in the clerk's office? Sure is heck not Perret. He is nothing but smoke and mirrors.
Toto is, I presume the Chief Deputy who follows Perret around 2 feet behind just like a puppy dog.
You got me on pretty in pink
|
|
|
Post by Heidi on Oct 5, 2007 18:11:37 GMT -6
Zoe & Southside voter, you both ROCK ..... with the truth !!
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Oct 6, 2007 8:23:29 GMT -6
Mr. Perret I know you read this daily. Please response. It is rumor or fact that you said that after the election you were going to clean house? I think your employees would like to know.
|
|
percy
Full Member
Posts: 101
|
Post by percy on Oct 6, 2007 8:58:29 GMT -6
Snippets of truth says the incumbent Clerk in today’s Advocate:
Fact: Published Clerk of Court Budget (Friday, June 8, 2007) shows a surplus of $8,231,760.00
There is no $3,000,000.00 to cover future salaries and benefits.
There is no $1,000,000.00 for maintenance of Court House.
There is no $700,000.00 ( in addition to the $300,000.00 spent last year) for a criminal system.
THESE ITEMS ARE SIMPLY NOT IN THE BUDGET, just a surplus of $8,231,760.00!
Fact: The Clerk can not encumber funds beyond the end of his term. It simply is not legal.
Fact: Pensions for retired employees are not an expense of the local Clerk’s Office.
Fact: Future income pays for future expenses.
Fact: Loss of income insurance would easily cover a period of no income due to a catastrophic event at a cost far less than accumulating a “healthy surplus” and nonstop overcharging for fees and copies.
Snippets of truth, yes, the incumbent is all about “snippets of truth.”
Yes, we all have a choice to make on election day, Lehman’s absolute fact (visit his website) or the incumbent’s snippets of truth (visit his website, if you can find one).
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 6, 2007 12:25:01 GMT -6
Crow, that would be layne, who posted a few times on the board. He has already given his answer in the Morning Advocate : a wave of pending retirees with 20+ years of service. That means you and most like you will be run off ie. encouraged to retire. He does that by telling them that they are far as they will ever go in his administration, hint,hint. And that is why the office is going back-wards; its' major asset is quality people and they will be leaving in droves whether they want to or not.
And as for the "snippets", it is apparent that Perret grew up in the federal system. Keep telling a lie long enough and loud enough and it becomes the truth (Adolph Hitler/Himmler).
Any idiot knows that the surplus amassed will continue to grow unless Perret keeps hiring young underpaid people (office has grown from 90 to 120+ people), and that money will continue to come in to fund those programs. That is not, as he says good management, but a bureaucrats rationale. Besides, he has had 8 years to do that and it has not been done, what makes you think he will do it now ?
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
He will clearly have the better funded campaign, but once you get past his slick commercials, you will see no substance.
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Oct 7, 2007 10:05:09 GMT -6
Yall are definitely getting down to brass tacks, yall keep it up very interesting.
Btw, I do not control the advertisements on this page, it does it automatically. FYI
|
|