LA State Police Retirement System board meeting Scuttlebut

Share
CB Forgotston
CB Forgotston

by CB Forgotston

According to brief mention in today’s Sunday Advocate a meeting of the La. State Police Retirement System Board has allegedly been scheduled for September 4 to discuss SB 294.

government-transparencyThe meeting nor what is on the agenda cannot be confirmed.  Transparency and communication is not a hallmark of this board.

Any action by the board short of initiating a lawsuit against SB 294 is just another dilatory tactic to get the public off their backs.

Kudos to State Treasurer John Kennedy, the brave band of Retired Troopers and each of you for forcing the board  to announce a meeting.

Don’t let the pressure up on the board members; it is the only reason we have gotten this far.  This meeting could be merely a “red herring” to distract us from the mission of preventing this taxpayer rip-off by the State Police.

C.B.
“King of Subversive Bloggers” – James Gill

F-N NOTE: On the final day of the 2014 legislative session, lawmakers signed off on a measure that creates bigger retirement pay for just two people: State Police Col. Mike Edmonson and a lower-ranking state trooper. The enhancement — valued at $300,000 over a five-year period — was tacked onto legislation that had nothing to do with retirement benefits. By the sponsor’s own admission Tuesday, it was a do-nothing bill that incorporated a minor change to the rules that apply when law enforcement personnel are under investigation.

Irwin Felps, the La. State Police Retirement System board’s executive director, said Friday that the investigation into the circumstances and law surrounding the last minute amendment to Senate Bill 294, which was signed into law as Act 859, is nearing completion. Robert Klosner, a nationally recognized retirement attorney, then will prepare his analysis and recommendations to help with the research.

The Edmonson retirement provision was added to an unrelated bill on June 2, the last day of the legislative session. No hearings had been held on the provision that affected only Edmonson and one other veteran trooper.

Share