COUNTY COUNCIL,

EXECUTIVE MAKE

MONTGOMERY'S

FINEST BUDGET

SCAPEGOATS...

AGAIN!

Leggett, Floreen Attempt to Bankrupt County

Police Officer, Pass Blame for County's

Budget Shortfall

Once again, our county elected officials are trying to pass the blame for our $762 million budget shortfall to anyone but themselves, the architects of this fiscal catastrophe.

And once again, Montgomery County Police officers are finding themselves falsely accused by politicians desperate to get reelected despite their ghastly record of "leadership."

County Executive Ike Leggett and Council President Nancy Floreen are publicly cheering a lawsuit filed by the county against Officer Aaron Bailey.

Under the county's employee tuition program - approved by Leggett, Floreen, and their council colleagues - Officer Bailey broke no law and violated no regulation.

Yet Leggett, Floreen, et al are now suing Bailey for $908,000! Going out on a limb, and assuming that Officer Bailey is not a billionaire, Leggett and Floreen mean to bankrupt this officer and bring him to financial ruin. For not breaking any laws!

It's outrageous.

The Leggett-Floreen & Co. lawsuit fails the smell test for all kinds of reasons.

First, they have never filed such a suit against non-profit Centro Familia, which could not account for $900,000 in taxpayer funds it received from the county. In fact, even though Centro Familia was under investigation by the FBI(!!), the council approved another grant of over $400,000 for the group! So why the sudden legal fever in a case that should be thrown out of court by the first judge who hears it? You gotta wonder.

Second, no laws were broken. Here's the background. Years back, Leggett, Floreen & Co. approved a tuition assistance program. It, like many other perks and bonuses, were agreed to for the sake of getting reelected. Now that the county no longer has the massive funds available to pay for these perks, politicians are taking back all that they promised union members in the last election. COLAs, raises, bonuses, and the tuition assistance.

But attacking the program is sheer hypocrisy. This is their program; Leggett, Floreen & Co. own it. Lock, stock, and smoking barrel. They have admitted they failed to set rules, or provide the proper oversight they took an oath of office to provide. (Same thing with Centro Familia, in a not-so-strange coincidence!)

In essence, it would be as if you gave a man $50, thinking he'll buy 3 meals today. But, instead, he buys something else you personally don't approve of. And then you got angry, and filed a lawsuit against him. There's just one problem. The man broke no law. You have to first write a law before someone can break it.

Officer Bailey's course offerings were legitimate and legal under the vague program rules instituted by Leggett, Floreen, & Co. Fellow officers, according to a Washington Post article, say Bailey and other "instructors have good reputations as firearms instructors."

One controversy is that officers were able to purchase a Glock 9mm, 40SW or 45 ACP, for $99 upon completion of the course.

What's wrong with that?

Have gun control extremists reached the point where they've lost all reason?

Who among the population is more qualified to own and operate a firearm than a uniformed police officer? They have to be gun experts to be on the force! Meaning, there was a legitimate course offered, and then a legal gun purchase by a well-trained law enforcement officer.

Where is the "fraud" in that?

For example, after a flashlight course, officers received a free flashlight.

This isn't the first time the council and executive have tried to blame police officers for their financial troubles. Regular readers well remember the fake scandal Leggett, Phil Andrews, and Duchy Trachtenburg cooked up last year: claiming disabled police officers were scamming the taxpayers by "faking" injuries, and making the outrageous charge that there were convicted felons in the ranks of the department. This was reckless, dangerous speech by the council.

How dare Nancy Floreen refer to "an abuse of the public trust," when she and other councilmembers participated in an action last year that threatened to undermine the public's trust in its police officers.

The FBI investigated. The pro-County Council Washington Post investigated. Both concluded that no officer had broken the law regarding disability benefits. Period.

At the same time, I challenged council critics of the department to stop making broad smears of law enforcement personnel, and produce the actual names of "convicted felons" in the ranks.

Those councilmembers never produced one single name.

The whole thing was complete hogwash, and a horrendous example of our elected officials' lack of respect for the men and women of our police department.

At a recent meeting with MCPS students, one student told the council that there "are no positive role models in the police department." Not one councilmember challenged his assertion! Not one. That is outrageous as the charge is false.

But that just gives you some more perspective on your county elected officials: when the chips are down, their election-year support for the police mysteriously evaporates.

Finally, consider the council's newfound criticism for the tuition program it created. They're always talking about education. This program allowed county employees to "broaden their horizons," gain new skills, and become qualified for better jobs in some cases. That's a positive thing, the last time I checked.

If it's no longer affordable, then so be it.

But there's no justification for passing the buck to the police again. It's time for the council and executive to face the catastrophe they've created, and most importantly, face the consequences of their actions.

If they can't do that, they'll be held accountable by the voters in November.