News -> INDReporter TUE, NOV 1 11:19AM by Leslie Turk

Rubin: Durel in contempt

Fifteenth Judicial District Judge Ed Rubin ruled Monday that City-Parish President Joey Durel be held in contempt of court for removing three Lafayette Housing Authority members on Nov. 19 after Rubin had reinstated them late last year on an earlier dismissal (the city-parish council upheld both removals). The judge ordered Durel to pay a $258 fine and perform eight hours of community service. That time is to be spent speaking at local schools on the role of government, The Advocate reported, citing court minutes of the contempt hearing.

The judge also gave Durel a 15-day suspended jail sentence, which he would have to serve if he fails to pay the fine or perform the community service, the newspaper reported.

“We are disappointed by today’s ruling, but recognize and respect that this is part of the judicial process,” City-Parish attorney Mike Hebert said in the brief statement issued late Monday afternoon. “We strongly disagree with this decision and are considering our available options to seek further judicial review.”

The ongoing matter of the board members’ service is moot, as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is now running the troubled Lafayette Housing Authority and acting as its board of commissioners. Read more on the LHA's problems and the dismissal saga here.



Comments (21)add
...
written by Cracklin Patin , November 01, 2011 - 12:32 pm
It seems Rubin prefers governmental mismanagement of LHA. Can you impeach a judge?
...
written by Unreal , November 01, 2011 - 12:54 pm
We have a politician that stands up to corruption and fights for the taxpayer and that is who gets jail time? This world is getting upside down. Thank you Mr. Durel, you have always put what is right for the people first. We appreciate your courage! Don't give up, the people are with you on this.
...
written by ragin_cajun , November 01, 2011 - 01:23 pm
Durel needs to quit while he's ahead. Everybody has to "respect the power" at some point in their life. The man's a judge, and he's given Durel a very lite sentence for this. To even hint at "further judicial review" is petulant.
...
written by ragin_cajun , November 01, 2011 - 01:51 pm
"We have a politician that stands up to corruption and fights for the taxpayer and that is who gets jail time?" Agreed. It doesn't seem right. But, Durel did unquestionably defy the court.

"Thank you Mr. Durel, you have always put what is right for the people first." Let's not get carried away.
...
written by boohoo , November 01, 2011 - 03:11 pm
Ragin cajun really is ragin if he agrees with this decision. Mr. Durel defied a ridiculous court decision in the first place. It's time for checks and balances on the court!
...
written by NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN , November 01, 2011 - 03:17 pm
" Let's not get carried AWAY," Huh. This can only be The Missus DONUTTIN or boyfriend Zooschlag posting this outta of the Blue sky, comment. Zooschlag will bail him out !
...
written by ragin_cajun , November 01, 2011 - 03:50 pm
"It's time for checks and balances on the court!"

It's time for some history in the schools. Judges are insulated from retaliation by political opponents and mob rule in instances like this, where they have to render unpopular legal decisions in politically charged disputes.

What you call "checks and balances" is a perversion of the phrase. What you really propose is anarchy. There can be no perfect system with imperfect people. But to propose that we'll upset our system of laws by ousting a judge because we don't like how he treated Joey Durel, who is by no means above reproach himself, is ridiculous. And unacceptable. No matter how bad the judge's decision.

Wiser men than you, from centuries past, purposely set up our judicial system the way it currently for precisely this reason.
...
written by scottman , November 01, 2011 - 06:24 pm
So when did a judicial decision only become viable when we agree with them. Durel defied the court order to start with then did what he wanted, the judge should have had him arrested and put in jail. He should jump at the chance for community service.
...
written by republican , November 01, 2011 - 08:23 pm
Joel and Joey have both lost their minds with the power they think they have. Now they both picked for a fight they can't win. Could both of you please just join the Democratic party!
...
written by snaildarter , November 01, 2011 - 09:07 pm
So its OK for Durel to defy "the Man,"...

But Durel cannot stand it when people defy him, ie, disagree with sales tax increase, his TIFs, his Redflex, his shady contract du' garbage.

His crony says “We strongly disagree with this decision and are considering our available options to seek further judicial review."

But can we seek further judicial review of our garbage contract or TIfs or Redflex or property tax increase or even being called "crazy" or 'paranoid' for "joining the conversation". (Does Durel by any chance have a degree in psychology. Didn't think so.)

Hey Mr Durel and all your cronies: there are more powerful people than you out there.

Court's in session, here come the judge. (There went the judge.)
...
written by snaildarter , November 01, 2011 - 09:19 pm
"Thank you Mr. Durel, you have always put what is right for the people first."

Always put whats right for the people my endangered tailfin.

Always stepping just this side of what's legal or can me rephrased as legal, following the letter of the law whilst stomping all over the spirit of the law, except when they can change the law (their sacred little LCG charter) to make things possible, and all the while telling us that we just don't understand... all this guvment-legal-bidnid stuff is just beyond our comprehension and that whatever they want is on it's way, nothing we can do about it.

Why did almost as many people who voted for Durel for against the LPSS property tax?
...
written by Soop. , November 02, 2011 - 06:56 am
The timeline: Durel fires them the first time in August, 2010; Council upholds decision; Rubin reinstates them; THEN the three fired members allegedly hold illegal executive session on October 26; Durel fires them again; Council upholds decision again; Rubin reinstates again. Those are the facts.

What puzzles me is that Durel fires them for actions they took AFTER his first ruling. So how does that make him in contempt from the FIRST order? Does Rubin think his original order means they can never be fired for actions they take later? Wouldn't that be a license to steal?

And why wasn't the council cited as well? If Durel violated the order the Council did so as well. The fact that Durel was cited alone smacks of political retribution.

All the best,

Soop
...
written by realitycheck , November 02, 2011 - 07:48 am
"We have a politician that stands up to corruption and fights for the taxpayer and that is who gets jail time?"
If that is supposed to refer to Durel, you are UNREAL!!
Here's how it more likely "really" works: A nearly closed system is set up to direct all federal funds to a favored few developers and architects. The system is tested at the LHA under these guys who think they are just figure heads and sign freely whatever is put in front of them. After all, they have counsel, right? (counsel who represents LHA, the developer Gachassin, the City, Zoning and Permitting and also closes the deal in the end) Once the "system" is tested and works, greed sets in and Durel wants to control the vast sums available at LPTFA. He only got rid of these guys bc the first tests survived and there was more money coming. Durel's board replacements were all people of like mind who would have done his bidding with the excuse they needed "financial" background, trying to legitimize his reasons for firing the board.
...
written by James Melancon , November 02, 2011 - 12:26 pm
What if Durel had done nothing? What if he took no actions and never dismissed anyone?
...
written by realitycheck , November 02, 2011 - 02:13 pm
What if Durel opened up matters to bidding? What if Durel did not support people with ethics investigations? What if Durel busted up the conflicts of interest in his camp? What if fed money and programs were spread out across the whole parish; you know; not concentrating poverty, like HUD recommends.
...
written by NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN , November 02, 2011 - 09:53 pm
How in the hell, all of you peeps get the same "WAKE UP CALL. Suddenly you are all Sleuths, Sherrielocks & Dick Tracys..How in the hell did so many of you tune in to the fact that HJoey is a disgusting rapist of the Parish Coffers. DUH !
...
written by James Melancon , November 03, 2011 - 10:10 am
by realitycheck "Durel opened up matters to bidding? What if Durel did not support people with ethics investigations? etc...
--------------------

It would be nice if he could but he can only appoint members, and not all members, to the LHA Board. Other than that, I don't believe he has any control.

Besides, using the lowest bidder may not result in the best outcome.
...
written by realitycheck , November 03, 2011 - 11:00 am
James Melancon: Don't unerestimate the power of appointments to the boards. Sure, a low bidder may be just a bait and switch, like, remember, the airport? Or inferior products? Sure, but bids should be requested anyway.


...
written by James Melancon , November 03, 2011 - 03:03 pm
by realitycheck
James Melancon: Don't unerestimate the power of appointments to the boards.
---------------

I don't, but to UN-appoint is a power too or at least should be.
...
written by the original northsidian , November 04, 2011 - 07:40 am
So it's ok for Durel to send taxpayer money, but not the council on the garbage undercover, smelly deal? Do we have a dual system here in the village?
...
written by realitycheck , November 04, 2011 - 09:33 am
Yes, James, good point. Removal is supposed to be for "cause". There is no basis for Rubin's initial finding of "arbitrary & capricious". That ruling should not have happened. Of course, it was merely a convenient excuse for dismissal when the real goal . . .
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it