re: Great recap of the Baton Rouge Council on Aging mess

Well, fat Gravy claims these are the "facts" (and of course it's all a big conspiracy to undermine the COA):

Tasha Clark-Amar is the executive director of the East Baton Rouge Council on Aging. She has been under attack since November when voters passed a mileage to fund the Council on Aging. The most recent attacks come from the family of one of the seniors who was served by the COA. The family of Ms. Plummer who died in March of this year is upset that Clark-Amar was made the executor of their loved ones estate. We have obtained the will and want to put out the facts on the accusations against Mrs. Clark-Amar.

1. The Southern University Law Center provides seniors the Elder Law/Successions Clinic to allow students to gain an increased understanding of the substantive laws affecting the elderly. Students are exposed to various areas of elder law (which includes but isn’t limited to Medicaid and other government benefits) such as guardianship, wills, housing, consumer fraud, as well as abuse and neglect. The cases handled by the Elder Law Clinic consist primarily of civil matters. The students represent the indigent elderly in district court and in administrative hearings. The Elder Law clinic also handles all simple successions. The Elder Law clinic has been used by seniors from around the area to help with successions.

2. Ms. Plummer in her will left her estate to her great grandchildren and a great niece. Ms. Helen Plummer in her right mind decided that she would exclude her daughter and grandchildren from her will and leave the funds of her estate to smaller children and her young adult niece. I read the will and it states, “The trust is created for the benefit of Minor 1, Minor 2, and Ashley Smith. The trust property must be divided into three separate shares, one share for the benefit of each beneficiary. For accounting purposes, each share must be treated as a separate trust.” (We excluded the names of the minors to protect them from exposure.)

3. The family of Ms. Plummer removed all the funds from her bank accounts before having the probate hearing where a judge could rule for or against the family.

4. The family of Ms. Plummer moved her belongings out of the house she owned prior to having the probate hearing on the case.

5. The attorney the family originally hired is an employee of the East Baton Rouge Parish Attorney’s Office. Which means that the attorney who took the case works for Council member’s Buddy Armoroso and Dwight Hudson. The attorney has since resigned from the case, after allegedly tipping off council members and causing this story that would have been decided by a court to play out in the court of public opinion.

6. The Council On Aging is a non-profit, not a government agency. They are funded through tax payer dollars, but the Council on Aging is a not for profit entity. They are not bound by the rules of the Metro Council.

7. It is a standard practice that the trustee of an estate be paid for managing the estate.

These are facts. Understanding the facts that I’ve seen with my own eyes, Tasha Clark-Amar was asked by a senior to be the executor for her will. Clark-Amar has not received a dime of the funds from Ms. Plummer’s estate. The family has removed all the funds from the estate without the permission of the courts. Ms. Plummer made the decision NOT TO LEAVE her estate to her own children or grandchildren. She decided of her own right mind to leave the money to her great grandchildren.

Considering the facts I’ve seen, I’m left to believe that Ms. Plummer didn’t desire to leave the money to her children or grandchildren, she choose to leave them to her great grandchildren for whatever reason she had. In doing so, she choose to skip using a family member, possibly to avoid controversy over what she would do with her money. She asked Mrs. Clark-Amar to be the executor. In my opinion based on the facts I know, Clark-Amar has done more harm to herself by attempting to help Ms. Plummer carry out her wishes, because before she could appear in court and tell a judge she doesn’t want to be paid from the estate, the family has taken Ms. Plummer’s money without court approval, attacked Mrs. Clark-Amar, and helped Councilman Buddy Armoroso and Dwight Hudson in their fight to control the $80 million ten year tax that the East Baton Rouge Parish Council On Aging is set to receive. Anyone who believes that Councilman Buddy Armoroso and Dwight Hudson aren’t after control of the tax dollars, has not evaluated history very well.

The one thing that WBRZ, The Advocate, nor the Business Report has addressed is that the family has illegally removed the money from Ms. Plummer’s estate, because until a judge rules on the will, those funds are not suppose to be touched. Before the process of the judicial system could play out, the family took the law into their own hands, transferred the money into other accounts, and didn’t allow the courts to speak. The family has said that local lawyers won’t touch the issue. I’ve talked to several lawyers who said, they would not take the families case, not because of Clark-Amar, but because the family has skipped over the process of court proceedings which makes an already hard case, even more difficult.

While some could question her choice being the executor on the estate, knowing her heart for seniors, I don’t believe there was malicious intent in Mrs. Clark-Amar serving Ms. Plummer. These are the facts as I appreciate them, however the court is going to ultimately separate fact from public opinion.