Landry attorney, legislators slam Louisiana ethics board for ‘abusive’ investigations • Louisiana Illuminator

A personal attorney for Gov. Jeff Landry delivered sweeping criticism this week to the Louisiana Board of Ethics for what he called “abusive” investigations into elected officials’ conduct. 

“Currently, the board’s vast investigatory powers are dangerous, unwarranted and threaten well-established fundamental constitutional rights,” Stephen Gelé said at a six-hour legislative hearing Wednesday in Baton Rouge focused on the ethics board’s role in government.

“The board, especially in the past couple of years, has not hesitated to use this power to bully respondents through years of costly and burdensome investigations,” he said. 

Gelé joins a growing chorus of political professionals who have criticized the board’s approach and professionalism in recent months. They might feel emboldened to find fault with the board because Landry, who became governor in January, hasn’t been shy about his own frustrations with the board. 

Since becoming attorney general in 2016, Landry has been reprimanded a few times by the board for ethics violations that range from missing campaign finance reporting deadlines to misusing campaign funds to pay off his auto loan. 

At present, Gelé is representing Landry in the governor’s 14-month dispute with the board over Landry’s failure to disclose trips he took on a political donor’s private plane to and from Hawaii. The flights were taken in 2021, when Landry was attorney general. 

Yet Gelé’s remarks this week were not inspired just by Landry’s case, he said. The ethics board has treated many of his clients poorly.

“It’s related to multiple cases and my experience overall,” Gelé said in an interview after the meeting. “This is not a Jeff Landry problem. This is an endemic problem.”

The ethics board oversees elected officials, political candidates and public employees for potential violations of state ethics laws. People can confidentially report concerns about government officials to the board, which then decides whether the matter merits further investigation. 

Gelé asserts the ethics board has been vague about how it interprets laws, particularly when it comes to using campaign and political action committee (PAC) funds  for “personal use,” which is forbidden. The rules sometimes change about what the board will permit without explanation, he said. 

Gelé also characterized the board’s investigations as too aggressive, with unreasonable demands for documents and sworn statements that are not always needed. It also spends a large amount of resources for petty offenses. Clients end up running legal bills defending themselves against violations that sometimes involve no more than a few hundred dollars, Gelé said. 

Perhaps most importantly to Gelé, he believes the ethics board is placing restrictions on campaign and PAC spending that violate the First Amendment. His line of thinking is aligned with the controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which upended federal laws restricting corporate and labor union spending in elections. 

“I believe the board needs a reevaluation of its mission so that it’s no longer conducting excessive, abusive investigations and costing people constitutional dollars,” Gelé said during Wednesday’s legislative.

“This all drains First Amendment dollars, which should not be drained,” he said.

Gelé said he has had both Democratic and Republican clients, though he is publicly aligned with conservative causes. He is also board chairman for the Pelican Institute for Public Policy, a conservative think tank that works closely with the Landry administration. 

In his remarks at the hearing this week, Gelé suggested the ethics board could be targeting Republicans for investigations, a notion that the ethics board’s administrator rebutted.

“It certainly has not been kind to Republicans,” Gelé said of the board.

Kathleen Allen, the top staff member for the ethics board, pushed back on the assertion that her organization was motivated by politics. She said her agency doesn’t track whether the people it investigates are Republicans, Democrats or independents, and party affiliation doesn’t influence their views. 

“You would be surprised to find out how some of our board members vote sometimes,” Allen told lawmakers at the hearing.

The current board is made up of 11 members, seven of whom former Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, selected from a list of nominees the leaders of Louisiana’s private colleges submitted. As Landry is governor longer, he will be able to replace Edwards’ appointees.

Ethics board members also face additional restrictions meant to insulate them from political influence. For example, unlike almost all other state boards, they are not allowed to be political campaign donors.

Nevertheless, one of Landry’s first acts in office was to approve a new law that gives the governor more control over the board’s makeup.

Starting in January, the board will expand from 11 to 15 seats, and neither Landry nor the Legislature, which selects four members, will have to pick from candidate lists private university presidents provide. 

Lawmakers indicated Wednesday they will be looking to make more changes to ethics laws next year as well.

Rep. Beau Beaullieu, R-New Iberia, is chairman of the Louisiana House and Governmental Affairs Committee that oversees the ethics agency. He expressed concern that elected officials and public officials being investigated don’t have enough tools to push back against an investigation into their affairs before it starts. He also said he thinks the board’s rulings on political action committee activity have been too restrictive.

“Y’all are the watchdog for ethics in Louisiana, but I guess, to his point, who watches over you all?” Beaulieu asked at the hearing.

Rep. Dixon McMakin, R-Baton Rouge, said the board needed to be more transparent about its procedures and the board’s meetings should be streamed online.

He also questioned the confidentiality that surrounds the complaints made to the board that result in investigations. McMakin suggested the person making a complaint shouldn’t be able to remain anonymous.

The board’s investigations are confidential, in part, to protect whistleblowers who might want to come forward about violations despite professional and personal risk. But McMakin suggested the privacy provisions are too broad in scope. 

The current conduct of the board is also annoying, McMakin said. Just last week, its members had to cancel a meeting because not enough were able to attend in person, which the lawmaker found inexcusable.

McMakin said he was also offended when a board member, former Louisiana House Clerk Alfred “Butch” Speer, made a sarcastic comment about one of Landry’s large political donors paying for upgrades to the ethics board’s meeting room .

“Do you think they wouldn’t be sarcastic if people were watching them?” on a live stream of the ethics board meeting, McMakin said.