|
Post by Crow on Oct 7, 2007 12:04:28 GMT -6
???What are you afraid of??? The payroll records are public record. Are you afraid that the public will be shocked at your salary, administrative assistant's salary, and a chosen few employee's salary. Give it up, people will find out one way of another. If you get an expense allowance of 10% of your salary (that's is probably more than I take home) why should you splurge at our expense? Maybe you could take some of the patrons that fund the Clerk's office every day out to lunch or dinner sometime, since you seem to have an expense account and public monies at your beckon call.
|
|
ij
New Member
Posts: 44
|
Post by ij on Oct 7, 2007 18:36:01 GMT -6
A free honest "press" should be informing us about all those things. A free unbiased press should be reporting on these things.
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Oct 7, 2007 20:20:01 GMT -6
Then why isn't the press doing something about it? They have the right to get public records just like any public citizen, except Mr. Lehman. Let them try and see if they will get the same run-a-round.
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Oct 7, 2007 20:50:35 GMT -6
Oh, one more thing, isn't it the job of a reporter to go out and get news, go out and earn your salary. This kind of news could make a big difference in the outcome of the Clerk's election. The Public needs to know what's going on. Come on do your job.
|
|
ij
New Member
Posts: 44
|
Post by ij on Oct 8, 2007 6:50:38 GMT -6
Good honest questions. Why doesn't the "press" ever investigate anything? All they do is report what the politicians tell them.
|
|
ij
New Member
Posts: 44
|
Post by ij on Oct 8, 2007 8:34:31 GMT -6
Has the clerk hired any of his relatives? I know Roger, I like Roger. I will vote for Roger.
|
|
Abraham Concerned voter
Guest
|
Post by Abraham Concerned voter on Oct 8, 2007 23:01:02 GMT -6
Zoe, thank you for your comment (Reply #135 of Oct 5), informing us of LeBlanc's contribution to Perret of $1,000 & Perret giving it to Cortz, LeBlanc's opponent. This is absurd & VERY disturbing to myself, as well as my family, my friends, my neighbors & my co-workers & should be disturbing to everyone ! Furthermore, Perret withholding public information from Roger Lehman is not only ignorant & child play, but relates to a Mandamus in re to violation against the said law. Is this all Perret has in his bag, putting off Roger Lehman, thinking he's causing delays.... Well, as I've mentioned in other postings, I know Roger Lehman & he is WAY too intelligent to play such childish games & he is NOT taking this sitting down, I can assure you all. If Perret thinks this childish act is an obstacle, do I have news for him!! The only way to wipe out a want-a-be bully is to face him & the citizens of Lafayette Parish, with the truth!
|
|
|
Post by In the know voter on Oct 10, 2007 7:04:04 GMT -6
Word on the street is that Perret and some of his staff are literally scrambling to assemble (perhaps, even manufacturing?) public records that have been requested by lehman since September 24th.
You would think that the clerk would be better at record keeping, wouldn't you?
Many black pens have been purchased to “redact” (that is a $1000.00 legal term for "black out") information they do not want made public.
I remember when similar requests were made of the previous Clerk, Guillot. He simply open the file cabinet and said "look at whatever you want, I have nothing to hide."
Guess that is the difference when someone with a "federal" background is running the show, the federal guys are always "why you want to know that, the information you asked for is confidential."
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 11, 2007 0:56:35 GMT -6
And now, the real person emerges. Perret has resorted to name calling because he has no substance to his administration. He thought he could sit back and suck up to certain people in our parish and no one would challenge his inept little kingdom. When it turns out he has been fleecing the public with excessive charges and at the same time claiming he is a "fiscal conservative" ; evidently he would not know conservative if it bit him on the a--. One of those fellows who wraps himself in a flag and says praise the Lord, but has not a shred of christian decency about him.
Truth hurts, doesn't it. Hope he is gravely disappointed come election day.
I read your conservative blog Nick, and it was good research. I think the entire Michot bunch needs to take a long walk off a short pier. I just love how these fellows (perret, michot,cortez) say one thing, do another, and assume we are too stupid to see. Phony, and hypocrite are words that come to mind. And Perret is still making his staff canvass neighborhoods.
|
|
|
Post by SeleR on Oct 11, 2007 18:06:35 GMT -6
Well, today was election commissioners class and that elected official who is in charge of conducting fair and impartial elections had the unmitigated gall to hint that he is running for re-election and that he expects our vote, and not only that; he reminded us that he helped get a raise for us (like he did that - it is up to the state, not him). I wonder what the D A would have to say about that . It must be against the law to politic at commissioner school.
|
|
|
Post by Southside Voter on Oct 11, 2007 18:16:38 GMT -6
Oh, come on. Let Perret tell the commissionors he got them the raise. The can't be that gullable, can they? I'll bet he did not invite the opposition up to the meeting, after all, he was in the office at the time, I saw him there. After all, fair is fair, isn't it?
Everyone knows that when Perret's mouth is open and his lips are moving and words are falling out of it, the truth is fair game. The problem is, Perret has surrounded himself with people that are afraid to tell him he is not wearing clothes, remember the fable?
|
|
percy
Full Member
Posts: 101
|
Post by percy on Oct 12, 2007 7:47:07 GMT -6
The incumbent has been there since November of 1999 and “in the last four years has addressed the needs of the office.” What the heck was he doing for the first four years?
|
|
|
Post by 360guy on Oct 12, 2007 16:12:16 GMT -6
Louis Perret is a good man and I have known him for quite some time.
Perret's salary is regulated by the State and he can not give himself a raise. If you don't think Lehman would accept the salary Perret is making your kidding yourself.
As for campaign donations to other candidates, study the donations made to other candidates in other races and you will see that all politicians give money to both sides in a race. The money is theirs to do with what they want. If you don't like it, don't give.
Lehman makes a lot of accusations on his website. Why don't you take the time to visit with Perret at his office and ask him about it. I'm sure he would be willing to talk. Also, contact Lehman and ask him why he no longer works for the Clerk's Office.
I'm for Louis Perret, he is the man for the job. He was eight years ago and will be for the future.
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Oct 12, 2007 16:20:54 GMT -6
Mr. Perret, the fees are set by the legislature, but it is the decision of each parish whether they want to raise their fees. To my knowledge the other parish did not raise their fees to the maximum set by the legislature, only you. Why
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Oct 12, 2007 16:30:06 GMT -6
360 Guy, New Member, Why don't you take a trip to the Clerk's office. If you could talk to the employees (which you can't) they would tell you the conditions they have to work in every day.
|
|
|
Post by 360guy on Oct 12, 2007 17:20:22 GMT -6
Okay Crow, I read your post. The Clerk's Office did not raise their fees to the max. The fees are in line with the other clerk's offices in surrounding parishes. I have talked to many employees at the clerk's office and they can talk and are happy.
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Oct 12, 2007 17:35:33 GMT -6
Oh, one more thing, since you are good friends with Mr. Perret, why not ask him when the employment situation went to court, who won? Certainly not him. Mr Lehman was fired unjustly according to the findings.
|
|
percy
Full Member
Posts: 101
|
Post by percy on Oct 12, 2007 17:37:00 GMT -6
Actually, 360guy, Perret HAS given himself every raise that he has received. The statute sets a maximum salary. It is up to each Clerk to determine his own salary, up to that maximum.
13§782. Compensation of clerks
A.(1) Clerks of district courts of the various parishes shall establish their own rates of annual compensation for their services, payable out of the clerk's salary fund, which rates shall not exceed the following amounts based on the applicable population of the respective parishes, according to the latest United States census or the population estimates published pursuant to the United States Bureau of the Census Federal State Cooperative Program for Population Estimates as follows:
Population Compensation
(a) Less than 50,000 $ 88,000
(b) 50,000-200,000 $ 98,000
(c) Over 200,000 $108,000
That is FACT.
It is generally known that Perret fired Lehman and Lehman makes no bones about telling people that. Perret accused him of something he did not do. It was later PROVEN that he did not do it and Lehman sued Perret. (Why is the suit hidden and not available on the civil racks in the Clerk's Office?)
Why don't you ask Perret why the settlment was sealed?
Perhaps because Perret did not and to this day does not want the taxpayers (and the users of the Clerks Office, are taxpayers,) to know how much was paid to Lehman to settle?
This is FACT.
It is also FACT, that the Clerk of Court is the Chief Election Officer of the Parish, runs the elections and should keep his dam^$# nose out of other races.
|
|
|
Post by Abraham on Oct 13, 2007 2:19:27 GMT -6
360, the employees you say you spoke to are obviously none of the 95% of the rest of the employees, ho are not happy due to scrutiny, interrogation & rigid control, which no one other than those employees endure on a day to day basis. But to Perret, the issues have nothing at all to do with the employees, for they are expected to work without the proper supplies needed. Who ever heard of having such an outrageous surplus, but can't afford to supply such simple items such as sticky notes, white out tape because it's "not in the budget". And, too, you need to be aware that employees dare not say they are not happy - don't be fooled into thinking they are happy; maybe the 5% he has exalted are happy. What he is concerned about is being found out & disclosure (which means brought into view, ie, exposed) & if you are not careful & I mean, VERY careful, you will be in the pubic eye as well when the truth is revealed. Your manner of expression on this Board is disrespectful & the only person who has used the word 'disgruntled' is Perret, himself! If I were you, I would pay heed to Percy's last posting & while you are at it, visit Roger's site & see how MANY are 'coming into the light'. Perhaps you will, too. Mr Lehman has made several requests to view documentation, to no avail up until JUST recently & was offered (for a high price) copies. BOTH candidates have EVERY right to these PUBLIC records in a timely manner & withholding this information as a tactic to control & delay has only caused him more harm in that the citizens now are really questioning his intent. Getting to view public records, as I'm sure you know, is one of the first steps in maintaining a campaign. It is an ordinary thing, an expected request from a candidate & I know for certain had the roles been reversed, Perret would have never been treated the way Mr Lehman was. Frankly, I am embarrassed to even have to be affilliated w/Perret.
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 14, 2007 14:37:59 GMT -6
Let's see; "disgruntled" def. "in a state of sulky dissatisfaction. I would say that applies to 75% of the employees of the clerk, judges staff, and district attorney when applied to our clerk. Do not really hate him, just not satisfied that he pays attention to his job, or really cares other than the fact that the job affords the opportunity to travel the country with his family on our dollar.
He has made no technological improvements to the office after spending hundreds of thousands on tech people. Why go to Dallas, Houston etc. when we have ULL right here with supposedly a top notch computer science department. What's up Louis, cajuns not good enough for you?
And 360; he has in fact raised his fees. Look at our neighbor parishes; None have accumulated this amount of money. Is available on the Legislative Auditors website. And they all went through Katrina/Rita, just like us. I think it is you who has made up your mind and nothing will change it. Really, why let facts get in your way ? Is ironic that you chose "360" as a name; means you are back to where you started.
|
|