|
Post by TBEAR on Oct 22, 2006 8:27:29 GMT -6
Then logan says part of it is the beautification of Jefferson st to Lee and in front the federal court house, how stupid to spend money on these places when we need roads to making something pretty.
How do yall like Durel's comment at the end of the story
"Without the new tax, local government is not going to come to a standstill, although traffic might," he said.
Arrogant s.o.b. aint he, like he's talking to a bunch of school children and trying to make a joke of the situation.
|
|
|
Post by abbd on Oct 22, 2006 8:38:41 GMT -6
Arrogance for sure T, I've known quite a few people who inherited daddy's business and I find that they always seem to be expert on all things in their own minds, and really don't like being questioned on their decisions. Just an opinion of mine. P.S. I'm still waiting for him to fulfill that campaign promise of his to...do more with less...Me thinks it's getting to be do less with more. Just my opinion ya know.
|
|
percy
Full Member
Posts: 101
|
Post by percy on Oct 23, 2006 5:55:37 GMT -6
I see that Assessor Conrad Comeaux is chiming in about a new court house. If memory serves me right, the Assessor's Office is across the street from the court house in a fairly new building. I do not believe that shackled prisoners are in that building, etc, etc etc. In other words, a new court house is not a real concern to him because he is not even in the building, so why is he chiming in?
Maybe because it would be funded by a new property tax?
Get it? Assessor, new property tax....
The other problem is there are no architectural plans for a new building, so no valid cost estimate exists. But I can tell you one thing, if the voters approve 70 MILLION dollars ( which is more than the new court house in Baton Rouge will cost) the Lafayette court house will come in at 70 million dollars!
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 23, 2006 10:26:32 GMT -6
Why all the crap about security. If that were such a concern, we could use the police jury meeting room in the parish courthouse annex to conduct criminal court. Is just an excuse to build a fancy building. And I want to know why we need more security than Baton Rouge has ?
|
|
|
Post by April on Oct 23, 2006 17:44:08 GMT -6
I am puzzled why our elected officials are so concerned about "security" to the tune of $70 million when it would seem that it is the public who is not very safe. There will always be criminals in the courthouse, and some are actually inmates. Aren't the inmates in handcuffs ? Police carry weapons in the courthouse, and statistically speaking, are far more likely to be involved in a violent domestic confrontation than most people.
Maybe it is because our officials are doing such a poor job, they wish to further isolate themselves from the public so we cannot find out what is going on. Please explain again why television stations cannot enter the courthouse with cameras. I think that is part of my right to know what is going on, and if there is no free press, how will we find out ?
Needless to say, i will vote No to all propositions.
|
|
|
Post by April on Oct 23, 2006 17:51:22 GMT -6
Oh, and thank you Percy for that observation regarding no plans for courthouse building yet. How on earth can we assume that $70M is enough. Does that include the marble and gold plate in our Clerk of Court Office and all the big leather chairs for judges and covered parking so their cars do not get hot? I voted for the bond issue when President Comeaux proposed it, assuming that projects were realistic. Now I find that only one road was built. I voted no on last prop, but only 7% voted, and new bonding was approved, much to my dismay. I will bet that no roads get finished this time either. I will also bet that whoever did the road cost estimates still works for us.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Oct 24, 2006 5:33:24 GMT -6
I have been told that there have been employee/ employer meetings of couth house people to “encourage” employees to put up yard signs to support the court house tax.
For those that have never worked in that building, “encourage” means do it or bad evaluations, no raise or even fired.
|
|
|
Post by abbd on Oct 24, 2006 7:49:41 GMT -6
Let's see if we can find out IF anyone is placing signs while being "on the clock". If anyone is placing signs or campaigning while on duty, it would be very nice to know. Maybe the daily fish wrap would print that story.
|
|
|
Post by SB on Oct 24, 2006 21:24:31 GMT -6
d**n, you people are jaded!!! ;D The Assessor's office is indeed across the street in the 1010 building. He is concerned about security because if something goes down while he is outside smoking, he will be at risk. Maybe he needs a secure place to run when he is finished putting signs on cars parked in HIS lot. Most of the district judges have not bought and don't plan to buy new office furniture for years! Their office expenses are reimbursed by state funds anyway. Still OUR money, but not local. We do desperately need a new courthouse. If you haven't had to spend time there, good for you. The sheriff has been hijacking the maintenance funds for years and now the courthouse is not repairable. The LAST thing the judges wanted to do was ask for an additional tax. They have done everything in their power to avoid that in the last 4 years (only time period I can speak for). That being said, I still plan to vote no.
|
|
quest
New Member
Posts: 49
|
Post by quest on Oct 25, 2006 5:51:16 GMT -6
Well, SB is correct. The state pays for the furnishing of a district judges office, all of it. Their offices are pretty nice too. I wonder if the cost of furnishing the building was included it that court house "study" and if the consultants know who is legally obligated to pay for what? and if they knew who the parish is required by law to provide offices for?
The parish for the clerk, da. They are the only offices left in the court house that the parish is legally obligated to furnish. Provide space for the da, clerk and district judges. The assessor and registrar are across the street in a fairly new building. Communication District should not be there at all and they have tons of money that they can legally spend for anything, just check their audits.
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 25, 2006 10:48:06 GMT -6
The Clerk of Court called employees in and told them they will support tax proposition, gave out signs and bumper stickers, and implied they would be checked to see if they voted. Many were not happy. And that was "on the clock".
And Quest, the parish is obligated to furnish offices for Assessor, and tax collector (sheriff) as well as supply computers etc. The judges furniture is paid for by the Criminal Court Fund. In addition, judges have MILLIONS of dollars in their Judicial Expense Fund that they spend at their discretion. The Judicial Expense Fund is funded by additional court costs assessed on every siut filed. In addition, Judges get a cut from every traffic ticket. Point being, it is local funds that suport a state office (DA is also a state office) . And this has nothing to do with anything, but did you know that the Judges receive "Supplemental Pay" of $15,000 per annum ?
As for the Communications District, I believe strongly that it should be part of the Sheriff's Office like it is in many other parishes, not a seperate kingdom.
And we do need more courthouse space, but I am opposed to the funding mechanism. I also believe the courthouse could be moved to another location (like K Mart Bldg) that would allow sheriff and new jail facility. Downtown is insane and costly. I say if they want a building so bad, the Clerk should part with some of his 7 MILLION dollar surplus and the Judges could kick in a few million as well.
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Oct 26, 2006 6:23:09 GMT -6
Check this out and he says we aint got money www.theadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061026/BUSINESS/610260305Thats just plain greedy, then he says at the end of the article "The widening project for Kaliste Saloom Road is estimated at $20 million alone", Durel said And? how much is enough, and while you wait ten years to do it, it will cost $30 million dollars at that time.
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 26, 2006 11:19:42 GMT -6
My grief is that the increased collections this year alone is sufficient to pay for K Saloom Road or Verot School, yet what is being done w/money ? Oh, we need an additional increase. The president does not answer questions that need to be answered.
|
|
|
Post by coolboy on Oct 26, 2006 14:21:22 GMT -6
My favorite quote in the artical was when Joey said, "Everybody's got to eat." He certainly would know with LCG & Airport Commission free meals. This guy must really enjoy food.
|
|
|
Post by SB on Oct 26, 2006 21:29:49 GMT -6
Zoe you are correct about a few things, but it is not as cut and dry as you are making it out to be. I know for a fact that the judges get reimbursed directly from the state for a number of items related to the running of their offices. The Judicial Expense Fund is used for a number of services for the community as well as support services to run the court system. It isn't some nice little nest egg for the Judges to use at will, on whatever they want to. If that wasn't the intent of you post, I appologize.
|
|
|
Post by SB on Oct 26, 2006 21:56:00 GMT -6
Oh....and another thing. This is just general informtion and not directed at anyone, but how much do you think judges make? So what if they get supplemental pay. I used to think judges made about $200-$250 K a year. Nope. They make about a 1/3 of what they could make in private practice. Everyone thinks, "oh, their cars are never there......" A) how do you know which judge drives which car? B) How many times have you gone by at 8 or 9 PM and seen a judge working to resolve a case so that taxpayer $$$ can be saved by not going into a lengthy trial process??? Resolution of civil cases without an expensive trial happens all the time. Two judges in our district VOLUNTEER their time for speciality courts. They volunteer their time to participate in the state association related to these speciality courts. The other judges chip in when those two can't make it. I know judges from around the country (I am not a lawyer) and I would take this crop over any other's any day.
We really need to be more worried about the Clerk's office and the Assessor than the judges. I am unable at this time to convey my feelings for those two without cursing,...........
|
|
|
Post by ronnief on Oct 27, 2006 14:19:00 GMT -6
District Judge salary - $113,606. Next year +4.9%. That includes the supplemental pay. I think most judges do not put in a 40 hour work week. They also get a 6 week vacation on top of all the holidays. That is by law. This does not say they are overpaid or underpaid, but look at the Lafayette District Judges to name a few: Marilyn Castle.Did not practice law. Her husband, Jack Castle does, and is in fact successful. Phyllis Keaty. Did not practice law. Husband is a dentist, and quite successful. Jules Edwards. Did practice, but probably got a raise when elected. Tommy Duplantier. Did practice, and likely took a small cut in pay to be judge, but then why would a young attorney give up a practice with Bob Wright to become an underpaid public servant ? Ed Rubin. Did practice. Likely got a raise when elected. David Blanchet. Did practice and was very successful. Just wanted the prestige of being a judge, plus has a wealthy wife and father.
point being, I doubt that a desire to perform a public service was why someone runs for judge. There is a certain prestige in being addressed as Judge or your honor. As for working into the night, that is indeed a rare occasion and it does not save taxpayer dollars because the litigants pay for the whole proceeding. Bear in mind that a judges decision can impact a persons life. I, for one do not think a young person like Duplantier, Castle, or Keaty have experienced enough life to make a judgement on mine.
All that being said SB, I agree that the Clerk and Assessor need to be retired. Neither serve the public.
|
|
sb
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by sb on Oct 27, 2006 22:03:15 GMT -6
I have personally worked with most of the Judges you mentioned. Have you asked THEM why they became Judges? ? There are trade-offs to every employment opportunity. I would HOPE that elected officials are not doing it for the money, but to serve the public. All of the Judges that you mentioned are very hard working and put in many hours. How many people call you at home at 2 AM from the jail? Maybe they aren't physically in their offices. That doesn't mean they aren't working. As for not saving taxpayer dollars. Who exactly do you think pays for the JURY to be there? The taxpayers, not the litigants. This also happens with criminial trials, but much more with civil.
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Oct 28, 2006 1:14:12 GMT -6
app1.lla.state.la.us/PublicReports.nsfAbove link will get you to Legislative Auditor Page. Look at Lafayette Parish, Then 15th Judicial District Expense Fund. You will see as of 12-31-03 there was over $3,000,000 accumulated in Expense Fund. The Judges are behind on their audits. By state law, must be at least every 2 years, and w/i 6 months of the close of the year ie. June 30, 2006 was deadline for 2004 & 2005. Now, that being stated with no prejudice against anyone; 1st, why aren't judges, of all people in compliance w/state law, which they are sworn to uphold ? 2nd, why on earth would they need so much money to accumulate ? If that is not enough, and you seem to be in the judicial loop, why were the judges fees increased when they already had a surplus of this magnitude, especially when, as you state, their costs or supported by the state? You are also in error regarding the 2am phone calls. We have a magistrate to set bonds in this parish so it is not necessary to contact judge at home. Also, Keaty and Blanchet run "family court" and certainly are not up at all hours. If magistrate was unable to perform duties, the chief judge will appoint a duty judge to take such calls. And yes, I have asked several of the judges why, and "desire to serve" or "not work so hard" seemed to pop up a lot. I worked in campaign of one of the aforementioned judges, and one day he was whining about how he was going to make it on $100K, and I said if it was that tough, don't run. They could not respond to that. A lawyer can make $200K (or more for a tort lawyer) but they have to work a lot harder than a judge. Also have to hustle clients. You are also incorrect on jurors; civil jurors are paid for by the litigants, not the taxpayers, and that is why civil trials are so expensive. La judges are among the highest paid in the nation, above the "southern average". Cannot say the same for law enforcement or teachers. Please do not take comments personally. I also have worked in the system for a long time, and think all of the judges and especially staff are conscientious. And I have also had court orders signed in a bar. That does not mean there is no room for improvement in our system. I think over $100K salary, car allowance, paid retirement, paid medical, shorter working hours, lots of prestige, are ample compensation for any financial sacrifice an attorney makes by becoming a judge. None of this has anything to do w/tax renewals, maybe 'Bear needs to set up a judge link. I too will vote for anyone over the current Clerk or Assessor.
|
|
sb
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by sb on Oct 28, 2006 2:20:47 GMT -6
Ok, I am not in a position to answer all of that, so we will have to agree to disagree.
Just because there is a duty judge on call or the magistrate doesn't stop inmates or their family members from looking up other judges in the phone book and calling them. A desperate person in the middle of the night will do anything!
I certainly don't take you comments personally. I too have worked for many years in the system.
One thing that I do want to address is the idea that they are paid too much. A) They have an advanced level of education. B) This is considered a white-collar profession. Salaries mean that you are being paid for what you know, not sitting you butt in a chair for 40 hours a week. That being said, because some less-than-honest people in the past have abused this idea in government positions, all government positions are required to work 40 hours a week. Once again, just because they aren't in their offices, doesn't mean they aren't working.
|
|