You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Corruption’ category.
As previously reported Judge Pamela Washington is considering the issue of the missing evidence seized by the Anchorage Police Department in the arrest of Shailey Tripp. In particular, it is my understanding that a cell phone and lap top computer of Shailey Tripp’s have not been returned. Shailey Tripp has asked me to submit a statement to the court regarding my interaction with Dave Parker, and other officers at the Anchorage Police Department. I have today faxed the following affidavit and letter to the court with the articles referenced below. If I am called to testify in Court, I’ll advise you.
December 20, 2011
Re: In the matter of Shailey Tripp
Dear Judge Washington:
At the outset, please accept my apology for not referencing the case number re the matter of Shailey Tripp and the Anchorage Police Department. As I am not a party to the case I do not have that information. I also do not have the name and contact information for the attorney representing any of the police officers involved in this matter, or the Anchorage Police Department itself. If your clerk should provide me contact information, I will gladly copy any attorneys who should receive a copy of this amicus brief. I have enclosed my affidavit and exhibits that indicate my involvement as a fact witness in this matter. I will gladly make myself available in Dallas for a deposition for any party wishing my deposition, and if the Court will be having an evidentiary hearing on this matter, I will gladly come to Anchorage to give my testimony and make myself available for cross examination.
Sincerely,
Malia Litman
*******************************
In the Matter of Shailey Tripp
Affidavit of Malia A. Litman
My name is Malia A. Litman. I am over the age of 18 years, of sound mind, and have no disabilities from giving this my affidavit. The statements contained herein are based on my personal knowledge, and I will make myself available to any party who desires a deposition, and I will appear in Court to make myself available for cross examination if any party should desire that.
In December of 2009 I started a blog known as malialitman.wordpress.com. The primary purpose of the blog was to document and reveal the truth about Sarah Palin. Although there were occasionally funny articles included in the blog, the main focus was to reveal factual information regarding Sarah Palin and her family. In each of the serious articles I have provided sources for the information referenced. As part of my efforts to uncover the truth about the allegations made by Shailey Tripp and her relationship with Todd Palin, I contacted the Anchorage police department. My initial contact was a telephone call to Police Chief Mew as his name and phone number were available to me on the internet. Chief Mew never returned my call but instead I received a call from Dave Parker, who identified himself as a representative of the Anchorage Police Department, and the person with the APD who was responsible for the “press release” issued by the APD to the National Enquirer.
Attached hereto and incorporated by reference are Exhibits 1,2,3,4 which are true and correct copies of the articles I posted on my blog referencing conversations with members of the APD, or matters pertaining thereto. These articles were written at or about the time of the events contained therein, and are part of my business records. The statements contained therein are true and correct, and constitute my record of the conversations I had with members of the APD. I would also draw the Court’s attention to the statement of Dave Parker, as referenced in the New York Daily News on Jan. 26, 2011 where he is quoted as saying:
“It was just guilt by innuendo, nothing else,” Lt. Dave Parker told the Daily News on Wednesday. “There’s not one scintilla of evidence that Todd Palin had anything to do with this.”
I was not a party to this conversation, but I am aware that this quote was referenced in the New York Daily News. If Mr. Parker actually said this it would constitute an inappropriate commentary by the APD on evidence, is not limited to evidence in the possession of the APD, whether reviewed or not, and constitutes a specific misrepresentation of the evidence, as the statements of Shailey Tripp would constitute at least “one scintilla” of evidence that Todd Palin and something to do with the house of prostitution.
I am not a criminal attorney and do not present myself to the court as an expert in criminal matters. However even a lay person recognizes that it is inappropriate for police in any city to comment on the evidence before a criminal matter is resolved and it is highly inappropriate to issue a press release that is contrary to the evidence in a case. If the evidence in the matter of Shailey Tripp was destroyed, that would appear to a citizen as an obstruction of justice. If the “evidence seized” in the matter of Shailey Tripp is not returned to her in the condition it was in when confiscated, that would be evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the Anchorage Police Department. The APD should be held accountable for their part in this cover-up.
The Mission Statement of the Anchorage Police Department is to:
“To protect and serve our community in the most professional and compassionate manner possible“
Destruction of evidence does not constitute “protection” or “service” to the people of Anchorage, and it surely is not “professional” or “compassionate”.
Malia Litman
Shailey Tripp is not an attorney, wealthy, or an Alaska resident. Yet she is fighting for her rights in Alaska. As I have documented on this blog, the Anchorage Police Department have disparaged her by issuing false “statements” and “press releases” to the National Enquirer. According to Shailey, she gave not one, or two, lie detector tests , but three times she took and passed lie detector tests before the National Enquirer would publish her claim that Todd Palin was one of her customers. Todd and Sarah have never taken even one lie detector test regarding this matter. Todd has never given a public statement about the relationship. I wonder why? It would have been so easy for him to deny the allegations, and the press would have reported it in minutes. Instead it was Sarah who said the allegations were “all lies” and her statement came days after the story broke, and not until AFTER the APD issued their “press release”. It was Sarah’s lawyer who asked the police to issue the press release….according to Officer Parker. The press release sounded more like an attorney talking when they said that there was not one “scintilla” of evidence to indicated that there was a connection between Shailey and Todd. The “scintilla” of evidence was in the possession of the Anchorage Police Department. They had Shailey’s lap top, credit card machines, and cell phone.
O bviously that scintilla of evidence was going to become extremely important if it contained the information Shailey said it did. Obviously, Todd Palin would need that evidence to disappear if it implicated him. Obviously the APD was trying to help the Palins by issuing that press release, so we would have every reason to distrust them regarding that evidence. Thus I spoke with Officer McKinnon, the investigating officer to alert him to the importance of that “evidence” and to put the APD on notice that it was REALLY IMPORTANT that the evidence confiscated not mysteriously disappear, or somehow turn up as being magically erased.
Shailey Tripp was supposed to have her property returned back in June after she completed her probationary period. She has been trying to obtain the property for 6 months and the Judge has been kind to consider her letters a form of motion. It appears the Judge is starting to get mad, as we have been, at the apparent abuse and miscarriage of justice. We are waiting to hear from the Court as to the next step, but Shailey is not giving up. I won’t either, and I have told Shailey that I will travel to Anchorage to testify if the Judge needs my testimony. Sometimes justice is slow in coming, but nobody is giving up. Hang in there Shailey!
By way of update, I provide the following report regarding the “evidence seized” of Shailey Tripp, and which has not been returned.
Ms. Tripp has advised me by e-mail that she has contacted various departments at the Anchorage Police Department regarding her property which has not been returned, in spite of an order of the District Court requiring that it be returned. According to Ms. Tripp, Internal Affairs has started an investigation.
I attempted to reach Internal Affairs, the Property Department of the APD, and the Records Department of the APD. Even though I left my number for each it was Dave Parker who returned my call. He stated that if I were not Shailey Tripp’s attorney that he could not discuss this matter with me. Of course I am not, I told him that, but he already knew that from previous conversations.
Mr. Parker stated he was unwilling to discuss any matters regarding the evidence seized with anyone except Shailey Tripp or her attorney. I asked Mr. Parker to explain to me why he previously felt it appropriate to discuss this matter with the NY Daily News, and give a press release to the National Enquirer, but he was unwilling to provide any information to me. He did confirm that Shailey Tripp’s case is closed, and there is no further investigation underway. He explained that Ms. Tripp was charged with running a house of prostitution, it was a misdemeanor, and she pled no contest. He further admitted that it is the policy of the APD in cases such as this that “they don’t try to identify the Johns.” Without arguing the fundamental unequal enforcement of the law, it seems that if the APD were to issue a press release regarding this matter that it would have been more accurate to explain to the NY Daily News, and the National Enquirer, that it is the policy of the APD that “they don’t try to identify the Johns.” I guess the statement drafted by Sarah Palin’s attorney was a little different from that?!
Lt. Parker,
I’d like to believe you that you called me; however, after a thorough review of my cell phone log, I can find no evidence that you attempted to reach me. Perhaps you called the wrong number by mistake. 907-***-**** is the correct number.
Before discussing my property I need to correct a misstatement of yours: Anuradha Lawes, the person who picked up some of my property from APD is my mother, not my attorney. My attorney’s name is Kristen Foster. If you doubt Ms. Lawes is my mother or that she is not my attorney, I encourage you to call her to verify these facts.
The APD’s failure to return my property is as baffling as it is troubling. After speaking with various attorneys, officers, and others about this matter there seems to be no precedent, at least in the recent history of the APD, for the withholding of personal property in a dismissed misdemeanor case. Perhaps you can recall one.
To put things is their proper perspective a short review summary is perhaps in order. At a hearing on June 15, after it was shown that I had complied with all of the terms of my probation, my case was dismissed by Judge Pamela Washington. The return of my property was then discussed at some length. The judge ordered all of my property returned with the full consent of Municipal Prosecutor (MP) David Wallace. The sole exception was $209.00 in US currency. This agreement and order are in the public record.
Given the judge’s order, and the prosecutor having given his blessing, I anticipated a swift return of my property. I was sadly mistaken. David Wallace himself assured me that the return of my property would be expedited and told me to expect my property back within seven to ten business days. There ensued a frustrating two-month period of phone calls attempting to obtain the return of my property. During this time individuals at the APD attempted to stall by claiming that they were waiting for paperwork or authorization from the MP’s office. I subsequently learned this was not the case.
Someone named Matt at the MP’s office assured me that they had sent to APD all of the necessary paperwork and authorization they needed to release my property. I was both angered and disappointed to learn that the APD has not acted in an honest and forthright manner in dealing with my property.
As part of my efforts to obtain the return of my property I contacted Judge Washington’s clerk for assistance. Through a series of phone calls I learned that Judge Washington’s clerk had contacted both the MP’s office and the APD and had told both to comply with the judge’s order. The APD ignored her.
At length I was contacted regarding the return of property and arranged a Power of Attorney for my mother to act in my behalf to obtain my property. Some property was returned but not all of it. I am not going to itemize these items for you now because we both know you have these records in your possession. The items I am concerned about having returned to me are a credit card machine, a cell phone, and a computer.
The bottom line and undisputed fact is that the APD is continuing to withhold personal property of mine in defiance of a judge’s order and my constitutional rights. Furthermore it is clear from our correspondence that you have no intention of complying with the judge’s order and my continued pleas. This is unacceptable. The logical and obvious explanation for this is that the APD is protecting one or more persons whose names are contained in the property being withheld, apparently out of a fear that someone will be embarrassed or exposed in some way. The further proof of this is the bizarre issuance of a press release by you, discussed below.
I continue to demand the immediate return of ALL of my property, in accordance with Judge Washington’s order, the Anchorage Municipal Prosecutor, APD policy, and the United States Constitution. I furthermore put the Anchorage Police Department on notice to NOT attempt to destroy any of my personal property.
Regarding the press release, the most significant aspect of it is the multiple specific references to Todd Palin. It is these references that would lead the average observer to conclude that it is political in nature and that its issuance had absolutely nothing to do with my case except to discredit me. It is replete with fabrications and misstatements. Here are the major points:
You stated in the press release, “There’s not one scintilla of evidence that Todd Palin had anything to do with this.” However, you later admitted publicly that you had not examined all of the evidence that was confiscated from me; consequently, there is no way you could truthfully make this statement.
The press release cited “several errors” regarding the investigation and arrest as it was reported in the Enquirer article, stating that “None of the physical evidence examined by police showed any connection to Wasilla resident Todd Palin and his name did not appear in any of the records seized by APD.” Given that, again, the physical evidence was not fully examined (if at all), this statement is at best misleading and at worst a deliberate lie designed to achieve a political purpose.
The press release goes on to say, “The investigation of the prostitution operation was initiated by Anchorage Police Department’s Vice Unit responding to internet advertisements, not through information developed from any tips or other persons.” This statement is also untrue. A review of the police reports in the case reveals that the investigation was initiated when William Fortier, who formerly owned the building where I operated my business, lodged a complaint. So either the police report is incorrect or you were misinformed.
Finally, the press release stated, “No rolodex was seized and taken into evidence.” While no ‘paper’ Rolodex was seized, officers never searched my computers, which contained electronic address books, and in several of the officers’ reports references were made to ‘client lists’ that were seized.
I will note also that you are on record as publicly admitting (in telephone conversations with blogger/attorney Malia Litman) that you issued the press release at the request of John Tiemessen, Sarah Palin’s attorney of record.
This highly unorthodox behavior cannot be explained or justified in the context of any normal APD practice or procedure. On the contrary, it leads one to the inescapable conclusion that this was done for purely political purposes to aid Sarah Palin, with whom you are known to be allied politically as well as through church affiliation. In short, you placed political and religious allegiance before your duty as a sworn peace officer.
It is also telling that this press release was issued after normal business hours and does not appear on the APD website, along with APD’s other press releases, as if you were instructed not to do so, embarrassed to place it there due to its content, and/or because it was not authorized by higher authority and you did not wish it to be known that you had issued it.
You can rest assured that I will not let this issue rest until I have received a full accounting of why the press release was issued and on whose authority it was released. I am sending a detailed letter to APD Internal Affairs outlining the unusual and unethical behavior of its officers, including the issuance of the press release as detailed above. In addition, I am sending a copy of this correspondence to the ombudsman for the Municipality of Anchorage Ombudsman requesting that she investigate this matter, forwarding copies to the Municipal Prosecutor’s Office and to Judge Washington.
It gives me no pleasure to take these actions but I am sick of being misled by the APD after I acted in good faith. There is clearly something amiss in the APD. I am happy to speak or correspond with you if it leads to the return of my property.
Shailey Tripp
In the beginning I thought Mitt Romney was the most likely Republican to win the nomination. Until today I perceived that the most likely reason that he would NOT win the nomination was the fact that he is Mormon. However, being Mormon may be the least of his challenges in securing the GOP nomination. While the media is focused on the Herman Cain’s history of sexual harassment, Think Progress has been focused on Mitt Romney’s history of fraud and corruption. In what seems like the most important political news of the day, Mitt Romney, his 41 year old son,
and Spencer Zwick, Romney’s chief fund raiser, have “extensive” financial and political ties to three men who allegedly participated in an $8.5 BILLION DOLLAR PONZI SCHEME. Within a few months after the billion dollar Ponzi scheme collapsed, Mitt Romney, his son, and Spencer Zwick partnered with those three men to create “wealth management business.” Tagg Romney has admitted to the business relationship with the three men involved in the Ponzi scheme that cost investors billions of dollars, but he falsely reported that the three men, who were his partners, had been “cleared of any wrongdoing” Tagg also reported that the three collected a total of approximately $15,000 from their involvement in the Ponzi scheme. Court documents indicate that there has been no vindication, and that the men made over $1.6 million by selling fraudulent CD’s to investors.
After Think Progress’ report, the Romney campaign released a statement attacking Think Progress as a “left-wing blog” which has a “highly partisan agenda.” However Tagg Romney has yet to offer an explanation for issuing such a bald-faced lie. Attempting a further cover up, Solamere Advisors, the firm run by brokers who allegedly took part in the Stanford Ponzi scheme, deleted the reference in their website which identified Tagg Romney and Spencer Zwick, as part of their organization.
Tagg’s declaration of vindication is comparable to Sarah Palin declaration of vindication in the Troopergate matter.
The Romney campaign and the Romney family investment company are deeply entwined. A recent Boston Globe investigation found that top donors to the Romney campaign have invested into Tagg’s firm, and that Romney’s star campaign fundraiser, Spencer Zwick, doubles as a managing partner for Solamere Capital. The Romney campaign has paid Zwick’s firm, over $2 million in fees this year alone. Mitt Romney’s brother Scott Romney is listed as a senior advisor to Solamere Capital.
The Republican party now has Cain, Perry, Romney and Palin all promoting themselves as being chosen by God. Romney has said that, “My faith is not the issue because I have it.”
Yet Romney’s campaign has benefited, and he has partnered with people who wiped out the savings of thousands of retired people across America. Herb Cain was called by God to run for President. .
However, it appears Cain is also compelled by some higher power to harass women in the workplace. Rick Perry got the call from God to run. Luckily Perry had time to answer that call since he was working less than half time.
Unfortunately his devotion to God didn’t translate into ethical behavior as the Governor of Texas. It seems that the real motivation behind Rick Perry is money. The Holy Spirit whispers to Sarah Palin. God speaks to her too, but at a higher decibel. Yet, there seems to be some confusion. Each thought the other was going to have the “ethics” talk with her, and neither did.
If Mitt Romney is the best the Republican Party has to offer, the GOP deserves to lose the election of 2012. With a slate of candidates like this, the difference in political ideologies between Republicans and Democrats will become irrelevant. Corruption, ethics, graft, and sexual exploitation by the GOP candidates should be the most compelling reasons to eliminate them as potential leaders of the country. We don’t have to consider Mitt Romney’s willingness to increase the national debt by lowering taxes and increasing military spending. It is his choice of partners that should be enough to cause any American to refuse to elect him to be our President.
This article is Part III of the discussion of the Texas Emerging Technology Fund (TETF). The previous articles are here. In these articles the unequivocal facts indicate that Rick Perry, through the Texas Technology Fund has diverted tax payer money to his supporters. The State has produced virtually no accounting, and state auditors have cited over 20 infractions of common accounting practices regarding the fund. The Governor’s office hung up on me when I tried to get basic information relating to any revenue paid to the state by recipients of millions of dollars in state funds. E-mails were not returned. It has been one week since I made phone calls and placed e-mail inquiries to the Office of the Governor, the Emerging Technology Fund, and to the Governor’s press office. No information has been provided, no return calls have been placed, no return e-mails have been forthcoming.
This final article documents just a few of the outrageous payments of money to specific donors of Rick Perry. Undoubtedly there are many more examples, but it is difficult to connect the donors and recipients of the money, as the recipients are companies, and it is difficult or impossible to determine the identity of all the people associated with the recipients of the millions of dollars given out by the Texas Emerging Technology fund.
1. Charles Tate has donated a total of $424,000 to Perry. Tate had investments in ThromboVision, which was awarded $1.5 million from ETF on 4/20/07. ThromboVision declared bankruptcy on 9/2/10. Shortly before the declaration of bankruptcy, Charles Tate donated $100,000 to Perry’s campaign on 5-25-10. ETF did not know about bankruptcy filing until it was reported in the news. .
Tate also had investments in OrthoAccel Technologies, which was awarded $750,000 on 2/2008 from the ETF.
Mr. Tate also started the Texas Life Sciences Center for Innovation and Commercialization which vets applicants for ETF. Hence Mr. Tate himself, has become an integral part of the process of approving companies who are awarded millions of dollars of tax payer monies. Perhaps Governor Perry thought it would be convenient to consolidate the process of applying for state money and the awarding of state money in the same person to limit the expense associated with reviewing an application. After all, who better to know whether Mr. Tate’s companies should be awarded tax dollars, than Mr. Tate himself?
2. Charles Miller has donated $125,000 to Perry and also had investments in ThromboVision.
3. Phil Adams has donated $315,000 to Perry. Adams also went to Texas A&M with Perry. Adams had investments in Terrabon, which was awarded $2.75 million from ETF on 7/30/10.
Adams has also employed Perry’s children, given Perry Big 12 tickets, and provided transportation and lodging for games.
4. James Leininger has donated $265,000 to Perry and is investor in Gradalis, which was awarded $1.75 million from ETF on 2/2009.
Leininger has also taken Perry on hunting trips, paid for Perry’s airfare, room and board and given Perry tickets to Spurs game.
5. John McHale has donated $50,000 to Perry and is an investor in Gradalis.
6. Joe Aragona, general partner at Austin Ventures, donated $80,000 to Perry. His donations included the $25,000.00 award of 6/29/2006.
Austin Ventures was invested in, and had board members on, NanoCoolers, which received $3 million on 3/2009 from ETF. The company closed 8 months later on 11/2009.
7. William McMinn has donated $152,000 to Rick Perry. McMinn had investments in Carbon Nanotechnologies, which was awarded $975,000 from ETF.
8. David Nance has donated $80,000 to Rick Perry. Mr. Nance had only $1,000 of his own money invested in Convergen, it received $4.5 million from ETF in 2009.
The regional panel that reviewed Convergen’s application turned down the company’s $4.5 million request when it presented its proposal on Oct. 7, 2009. But Mr. Nance appealed that decision directly to a statewide advisory committee (of which Mr. Nance was once a member) appointed by Mr. Perry. Just eight days later, on Oct. 15, a subcommittee unanimously recommended approval by the full statewide committee. On Oct. 29, the full advisory committee unanimously recommended the approval of Convergen’s application. When asked why the advisory committee felt comfortable recommending Convergen’s grant, Lucy Nashed, a spokesperson for Mr. Perry, said that the committee “thoroughly vetted the company.” “Lucy” was one of the people in Governor Perry’s office that did not return my calls or e-mails, even though the Director of the ETF sent me an e-mail confirming that she would be calling me back.
9. Charles Amato has donated $32,000 to Perry. He had investments in Seno Medical Instruments, which received $2 million in ETF money.
This detailed analysis demonstrates a pattern or routine of Rick Perry and the Texas Emerging Technology Fund of giving away taxpayer money to supporters of Rick Perry. Thus Rick Perry used tax payer money to support his campaign for Governor, and now President. No wonder Rick Perry has so much money for his campaign. No wonder Rick Perry has been elected Governor of Texas for three terms. In Texas we have the best government that money can buy, and that’s a pathetic government.
As applicants to the Texas Emerging Technology Fund present their applications to Rick Perry, they likely feel like they are watching an excerpt of Jerry McGuire.
The only difference between Rick Perry and Cuba Gooding Jr. is hair.
This is the second in the series of articles on the Texas Emerging Technology Fund. The background of this fund is set out in this article. The entirety of the following post is based on the report from John Keel, CPA, of the State of Texas State Auditor’s Office. It was completed April 2011, and is know as “An Audit Report on The Emerging Technology Fund” Report No. 11-029. This report was compiled by a Certified Public Accountant from the State Auditor’s Office. It was not the result of a political adversary of Rick Perry, but an official state audit of a fund promoted and “overseen” by Rick Perry. The following are the Overall Conclusions of the Auditor:
“The Emerging Technology Fund (ETF) should make significant improvements to promote greater transparency and accountability.
Issues in a number of areas impair the ability to administer the ETF in the best interests of the State. It is important to hold recipients of funds accountable. Auditors identified the following weaknesses:
Decision making related to the ETF and recipients of funds is not open to the public.
The ETF conducts limited monitoring of recipient’s performance and expenditures of funds.
The Office of the Governor does not report the value of the State’s investments through the ETF on its financial statements.
The ETF does not administer its contracts with the seven Regional Centers for Innovation Commercialization (RCICS) and the Texas Life Science Center for Innovation and Commercialization…”
As of Aug. 31, 2010 a total of 153 grants and awards totaling $342,336,567 had been awarded to recipients.
The ETF application is considered confidential while an application for an award or grant. Ten other states with similar programs that auditors surveyed allowed significantly more public access to meetings and documents related to the award of public funds. (pg. ii)
The code of ethics policy for the Advisory Committee does not prohibit Advisory Committee members from accepting compensation from or investing in ETF recipients. (pg iii) ( This means that a person on the Advisory committee who recommends a company receive millions of dollars from the EMT could be the CEO of the company.)
The majority of annual reports required in 2007, 2008, and 2009 were NOT submitted.(pg iii)
The office of the Governor did not report the value of all investments held by the ETF on its annual financial report or on its annual report to the Legislature; the only investment that was reported was from the single award from which the ETF has profited. (pg. iii)
The ETF has not developed substantive criteria for the RCICs and the Texas Life Science Center to use when receiving and evaluating applications. (pg 3)(This means there are no standards to determine which companies receive grants, or any guidelines to determine how much money will be awarded.)
Because there is a lack of consistent documentation of votes and recusals, it can’t be determined whether board members appropriately addressed conflicts of interest. (pg. 3) (This means that there is no way to determine if the very people considering an application had a financial interest in the approval of the grant.)
RCICS and Texas Life Science Center do not follow consistent processes for evaluating and receiving applications. (pg 5)(This means that there is no uniformity in how an application is evaluated.)
Meetings of the Advisory Committee of the ETF are not open to the public, and the Advisory Committee does not even document its decisions in meeting minutes.
The Advisory Committee has been inconsistent in terms of which applications it will accept for review. (pg 7)
There is no documentation of how members voted, which members recused themselves, or any disclosures made. (pg 8)(This means that there can be no accountability for any action taken.)
The advisory committee has no written policies and procedures for how it receives, reviews, or recommends funding. (pg9)
While others may nominate people to serve on the Advisory Committee, it is the Governor who make the final determination regarding all appointments to the Advisory Committee.(pg 11)
There are no policies for the ETF application process. This has led to uncertainty in various areas. (pg 13)
The ETF doesn’t perform a credit check on award recipients, or a criminal background check. (pg 13)
Auditors were unable to determine from the documents available for the 21 applications tested whether the ETF Office performed any due diligence or independently verified the information provided by the applicant, such as intellectual property or financial information. (pg 15)
The ETF has not ensured that ETF recipients comply with requirements to submit reports. (pg 18) (This means there is no accountability by the recipients of the millions of dollare given by Texas.)
Three recipients declared bankruptcy or ceased operations in 2010 but failed to submit even one annual report. (Pg. 18)
In 2007 60% of recipients didn’t submit reports due.
In 2008 67% of recipients didn’t submit reports due.
In 2009 59% of recipients didn’t submit reports due.(pg 18)
The ETF does not require recipients to submit (1) financial information in their annual reports or (2) supporting documentation for expenditure of funds. Thus the ETF can’t verify whether recipients make expenditures only for authorized purposes. (pg 20)
The Office of the Governor is not reporting the value of the ETF investments as assets, and it is not reporting the net increase or decrease in the value of these investments on its annual financial reports.
One RCIC reported to the ETF that it spent $59,731 on “Meals and Entertainment” in fiscal year 2010. RCIC is not required to separate funds for the ETF and its operating funds. (pg 28).
Several conclusions are evident from this audit:
1. There is no criteria for the award of money from the ETF, and therefore Rick Perry is able to give state money to any company he chooses.
2. There is no documentation of any value received by Texas for any of the companies who received state money through the ETF, with the exception of a single company.
3. There is no attempt to independently assess the financial viability of a company receiving an award from the ETF, and thus a shell company could receive a gift of money from the ETF and immediately declare bankruptcy after the funds from the state are disbursed. Supporters of Rick Perry could be in a position to receive payment directly from the award of money by the state to their company through the ETF with the only benefit to the individual and/or Rick Perry, and the State of Texas might not realize any benefit!
4. There is no accounting required of a recipient of ETF funds, and thus any misuse of state money would likely never be reported.
5. Members of the Advisory Committee which recommend approval of an award may be financially connected to the applicant company and they are not required to disclose or report the conflict.
6. Rick Perry has ultimate control over any and all funds awarded by the ETF.
7. There is no expectation by the ETF that any funds will ever be paid back to the State of Texas.
8. Because Rick Perry is given the power to appoint every member of the Advisory Committee, “at his pleasure” Rick Perry controls the recommendations of the Advisory Committee “at his pleasure.”
9. There is a complete lack of accounting to the citizens of Texas, and the country, for the monies given to companies.
10. While Texans are deprived of basic services of Government, including education and fire fighting services, the State of Texas is giving away millions of dollars to Rick Perry supporters. This year alone Texas cut funding for public schools in Texas by 2 Billion Dollars. Dallas alone will suffer cuts to its education budget of 87 Million Dollars, which is less than half of the funds given away to Rick Perry supporters through the ETF
It is no wonder that Rick Perry is serving in his tenth year as governor and is the longest-serving chief executive in Texas history. Given the financial backing Perry has achieved using taxpayer money, he will likely continue to be re-elected for as long as he desires. Now the entire country is saddled with the effects of Rick Perry’s corruption.
He is among the top political fund-raisers in the country through his “vast network of wealthy supporters eager to bankroll his presidential ambitions.” In three campaigns for governor, Mr. Perry has raised $102 million, including more than $39 million during his successful 2010 bid for re-election. The Republican Governors Association, of which Mr. Perry is chairman, raised a record $22.1 million during the first half of this year. If allowed to occupy the White House, imagine the wealth he could transfer to his supporters at the expense of U.S. taxpayers.
“H” provided this link tonight which is an article about the lengths the Texas agencies will go to hide the facts that document the effects of global warming in Texas. It should come as no surprise that it is an agency that ultimately reports to Governor Perry that is trying to hide the truth. Thanks “H” for the link!
This is first in a series of posts dedicated to revealing the truth behind the Texas Emerging Technology Fund. The breadth of the corruption facilitated by Rick Perry is so extensive that multiple articles will be necessary.
I. INTRODUCTION
“The Emerging Technology Fund (TETF) was created by the Texas Legislature in 2005 at the urging of Gov. Perry to provide Texas with an unparalleled advantage in the research, development, and commercialization of emerging technologies.”
TETF grants are awarded in the following three areas:
• Research Superiority Acquisition — funds for Texas higher education institutions to recruit the best research talent in the world.
• Commercialization Awards — funds to help companies take ideas from concept to development to ready for the marketplace.
• Matching Awards — funds create public-private partnerships which leverage the unique strengths of universities, federal government grant programs, and industry.
In order to receive a TETF payment, the first step is to contact one of seven Regional Centers of Innovation and Commercialization (RCIC). RCICs receive applications for TETF awards each calendar quarter from companies within their regions and help guide companies through the application process. Applications are reviewed quarterly and TETF awards are granted throughout the year. Companies across the state have won TETF awards.
During the three fiscal years from Sept 1, 2007 through August 31, 2010 the TETF made 113 awards in the total amount of $259, 543,000.00. During the same time period, while Texas was giving away over $259,000,000 to companies employing supporters and donors of and to Rick Perry, Texas received $6.4 billion in federal funds from the Recovery Act money allowing Texas to retain $9.1 billion in its Rainy Day Fund. During this same time period Rick Perry advocated secession of Texas from the U.S. He also advocates less involvement of the federal government in state affairs, unless of course he is asking for money. Texas was the state most dependent upon stimulus funds to plug nearly 97% of its shortfall for fiscal 2010, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. On the very same day Governor Perry asked for the funds, he set up a petition titled “No Government Bailouts.”
During that same period, Texas was also unable to financially sustain much of its volunteer fire departments. During the same time frame Texas was ravaged by 21,000 deadly and devastating wild fires which have burned 3.6 million acres.
II. MAKE UP OF THE TETF
Section 490 of the Government Code of Texas establishes the method for appointment to the TETF Committee. Section 490.051 provides that a committee of 17 people will be appointed by the GOVERNOR. The Governor appoints the presiding member of the committee. (Sec. 490.053). The length of service for each member is at the “pleasure of the governor.” (Sec. 490.540). The Committee only makes recommendations ( 490.056). The final approval of any money to be paid from the fund is made by the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives (Sec. 490.056)
III. EQUITY POSITION OF TEXAS
Texas Government Code Section 490.005 requires the Governor to provide “a brief description of the equity position that the Governor, on behalf of the state, may take in companies receiving awards.” It was obvious that each of the companies receiving the award of money from the TETF would not be successful. The majority of new businesses fail in the first four years. However the express provisions of Section 490.000 contemplate the sharing of profit if it should occur, and repayment of the monies awarded by the state, creating the relationship between the state and recipient, of an investor in a business enterprise. If other investors realize profit from the company, then the state of Texas should likewise be a beneficiary of the success of that company. The TETF was clearly formulated with the expectation that the fund would be used to support companies that had a very promising future, and would likely result in a return on investment to Texas. Section 490.203 expressly states:
“An entity receiving funding or another incentive under this subchapter shall guarantee by contract with the governor’s office that the entity will perform specific actions that are expected to provide benefits to this state.”
“If an entity fails to perform an action guaranteed by contract under subsection (a) before a time specified by the contract, the entity shall return the funding received by the entity under this subchapter.”
No company in the history of the fund has ever returned the money given by the state, and the state has never demanded the refund of any funds.
IV. ONLY ONE COMPANY, CARDIOSPECTRA, INC. HAS RETURNED ANY MONEY TO TEXAS.
The January 2011 Annual Report to the Texas Legislature covers a period of three years. This report identifies 120 different companies that received millions of dollars from the TETF. The amount of money awarded to the 120 different companies varied between $500,000 to $ 50,000,000 which was awarded to TAMU. The average amount awarded was $1,000,000. The total amount of all awards was $259,543,000.00.
For each of the 120 companies identified in the annual report there is a reference to the “intended outcome,” and the “actual outcome.” Of all the companies listed that received money from the TETF only one company is reported to have paid any money back to Texas. At pg 26 of the report, “CardioSpectra, Inc.” is reported to have been bought by another company for $25,000,000 in cash, and a promise to pay an additional $38 million upon the achievement of certain milestones. The state of Texas was paid $2,277,792 in cash upon the sale, and stock “valued at $1,984,749.” Thus Texas received only 9% of the proceeds from the sale of CardioSpectra Inc. More importantly, less than 1%, or .008% of the companies funded by Texas paid back ANY of the monies given to them. This would be an indication of, at best, gross incompetence on the part of Texas employees running the TETF, or more likely, corruption.
V. LACK OF TRANSPARENCY FROM THE TETF FUND
The TETF identifies itself as having 7 employees. They are:
1. Jonathan W. Taylor, Director
2. Yvette Sanchez-Ramirez, Executive Assistant
3. Patrick Boswell, Investments Manager
4. Bryan Poe, Investment Analyst
5. Ashley Randall, Investment Analyst
6. Emily Vorlant, Investment Analyst
7. Laurie Rich, Special Advisor
On Oct. 6th, 2011 I called each of these people. The purpose of the call was to simply confirm that CardioSpectra Inc. is the ONLY company that received money from the TETF to ever pay any money back to Texas. I spoke with Jonathan Taylor and he said he didn’t know the answer. I asked him as the Director of the fund, who would be in a better position to know. He responded by defiantly saying that any such information would have to come from the press office. When I asked him if that wasn’t part of his job description, he hung up the phone on me. I have spoken to two different people in the press office for the Governor’s office ” Lucy” and “Veronica”, and each explained that they didn’t know the information and would get back to me. I then followed up with Ms. Ramirez, Mr. Boswell, and Mr. Poe to ask the same question, and each were unwilling to discuss the matter with me. I left voice mail messages for Ms. Randall, Ms. Vorlant, and Ms. Rich, none of which have been returned three days later. I have sent an e-mail to each of the people listed above, setting out my request for confirmation that CardioSpectra Inc. is the only company in the history of the TETF to return any money to the state. The only response I have received to those simple e-mail requests is to advise me to talk with the Governor’s press office.
The inevitable conclusion is that there is only one company in the history of the TETF to pay any money back to the state in the history of the fund. In the span of over 5 years only one company returning money on the state’s investment is pathetic. In articles that will follow, there is clear lack of accountability of the TETF for over $200,000,000.00 of tax payer money that has been given away. It is criminal that at a time when Texas is in desperate need of funds for public education and basic services, like fire fighting, that the state of Texas, under the guidance of Rick Perry is GIVING away money. Later posts will also establish that the TETF has been used to give money to companies associated with donations to Rick Perry. The obvious conflict of interest and corruption is transparent, blatant, and inexcusable.
“de” send this link to a story re corruption of Rick Perry. This story only touches the surface. There will be much more in the days to come.
Recent Comments