Instead, the County Council now plans to spend at least $4,210,000 of the Recordation Tax Premium on legal fees for the infamous Silver Spring Transit Center debacle. You know, the overblown garage that took nine years to construct, and still wasn't built right?
When running for reelection in 2014, the Council repeatedly insisted that taxpayers would not be on the hook for any more SSTC-related money, beyond the massive $47,000,000 over-budget spending by that point. They immediately broke that promise only a month after election day, by appropriating another whopping $21 million for a slapdash patching of serious structural weaknesses in the transit center. Those fixes were only effective in the minds of the Council, as the building itself lacks the slip joints needed to handle the loads of buses. By the time these weaknesses become fatal flaws, of course, the current Council will be out of office.
But not before ripping off taxpayers again this year.
Instead of spending on needed transportation and facility projects which have been postponed, money is being taken from this specific funding source for the transit center legal costs.
The County is unlikely to win this lawsuit, primarily because neither the executive branch nor the County Council with oversight authority took action when flaws were first discovered. Only after the structure was essentially complete in 2012 (it would not open until 2015) did the County begin to press contractors about the flaws. And it remains to be determined if the County's contracts even allow for recovery of legal fees, including this new $4.2 million.
After witnessing the Council's approval of an illegal use of funds by the Parks Department, and a $900,000 cost overrun for a Bethesda drainpipe that puts the Pentagon's $640 toilet seat to shame, you may want to follow this latest (ab)use of your money by the County Council.
The Council will hear public testimony on the proposed appropriation on February 7, at 1:30 PM at the Council Office Building, at 100 Maryland Avenue in Rockville.
40 comments:
So what is your proposal for covering the legal fees related to the SSTC? Stiff the attorneys, as Trump does with his contractors?
I have to agree with @5:15...I understand your anger but fail to see what alternatives the (admittedly terrible) County Council have. Vote 'em out.
Maybe have a Council smart and responsible enough that we don't wind up in this position to begin with? They approved contracts that apparently don't allow the County to reimburse its legal fees from the contractors if they sue them. They failed to execute their oversight role during the construction.
So how do you propose to pay the bills that are actually due? Going back in a time machine and waving a magic wand is not an option.
6:07: A couple of issues - one is, they lied about where the additional taxes were going to be spent for political reasons. Second, maybe accept that they blew it and own it, instead of trying to pursue an unlikely court victory at our expense? Their case is extremely weak. Bad money after worse.
So how do you propose that these bills that are actually due, be paid?
6:26: You shouldn't lie and raise taxes under false pretenses. They should have had to take it out of existing funds, and suffer the wrath of the voters (which they are already feeling). But it's not my responsibility to guide them out of their fiasco. Why don't you ask them how they're going to pay for all of this? They'll answer as soon as they can find the doorknob to get out of the room. This could take a while.
"They should have had to take it out of existing funds"
Whatever this means.
Also Dyer, it sounds like you believe that the contractor who made a clusterfuck of this, need not be held accountable.
6:40: Yeah, they should have to tell their "friends" in the non-profit world, for example, that there ain't gonna be no loot drop this year. And then see if those folks still pony up a donation to their campaign, and organize fundraisers for them, in 2018. Don't bet on it!
They should have to pay the contractors by sacrificing their big spending, unless you are advocating they "do as Trump does with his contractors."
Isn't it the County that made a CF, by not addressing the structural flaws known earlier before the end of the process? Isn't that why they're now in a Don Quixote legal maneuver, hoping for a politically-"correct" judge to bail them out? It could happen, not impossible, but we'll likely never recover the millions in legal fees.
And then they'll just raise our taxes again. Time for a Bell, California-style investigation. I want the FBI to turn over every rock in Montgomery County Government and Parks and Planning. You'll get dozens of perp walks, for sure, when the lower tier employees start squealing to make a plea deal in exchange for incriminating the higher-ups.
The same FBI that just helped make a Russian agent president?
6:54: The same FBI that said there was no basis to charge Hillary Clinton for knowingly mishandling classified information? Tell me more. If you think Trump is a "Russian agent," you may need to adjust your tinfoil hat. You can disagree with his policies, but let's stay in the real world.
"They approved contracts that apparently don't allow the County to reimburse its legal fees from the contractors if they sue them."
Robert, you are uneducated as fuck. Of course the county's suing for legal fees. But of course the defendant doesn't pre-pay the plaintiff's legal fees for them prior to the court's judgement on the matter.
10:46: Wrong, Mr. Vulgar. Bill Turque reported months ago that the contracts may not permit recovery of legal fees in this case. Facts.
"May not permit recovery" /= "will not permit recovery".
Meanwhile, Rockville residents believe that Robert Dyer would be a good candidate for busboy at he new Little Dipper Hot Pot restaurant. (However, this Bethesdian disagrees with that overly optimistic assessment.)
12:23: Elected officials aren't supposed to be in the gambling business. If there's serious doubt, as there is, it's reckless to pour millions more dollars down the drain.
You don't seem to have the slightest idea how litigation works, Dyer.
Of course Dyer takes the side of the shitty developer. Ugh.
We need more fact checkers like Mr. Dyer covering the Council.
The Council outright lied about where the tax funds were going.
The SSTS debacle is like a horror movie monster that you think is dead but keeps coming back. Will be haunting this Council for years to come.
You really should wait more than four minutes before posting two comments in a row, #UnsignedDyer.
Yay...minute counting guy makes an appearance!
Disagree with Dyer on this. The SSTS litigation is intended to recover monies for the County to compensate for the contractor's errors. This is not frivolous litigation and a successful result will benefit the taxpayers.
#UnsignedDyer @ 8:58 PM - You really should wait more than just two minutes before responding, Birdbrain.
Deleting this again? Afraid of the truth?
Not Putin agent. Toy.
Putin is playing with his toys: Authoritarian Trump, Neo-Nazi Stephen Miller and White Supremacist Steve Bannon
6:50: It's a clear sign of an intellectual lightweight to immediately falsely brand people you disagree with as "Nazis" and "white supremacists." You could say the County Council is white supremacist for opposing every black candidate for U.S. Senate over decades. So you probably don't want to go there.
Imagine if the guy who counts between minutes between comments on here paid the same attention to fact checking the Council? That would keep him busy!
It takes less than 5 seconds to subtract one time stamp from another, #InnumerateBirdbrain #UnsignedDyer
I testified against the council's action to give us a 30% increase in the real estate transfer tax as an "emergency" measure. The money was supposed to go for school construction and low income housing. Nobody said anything about using the case for legal fees for the Sarbanes Center.
The result of the council's action is to keep minorities stuffed in apartments because they have made it much more difficult to buy a single family home.
No wonder Term Limits got 70%.
Dyer... I've been your IQ, you haven't been mine. You couldn't debate your way out of a paper bag.
Read their own writings. That's all it takes.
You could call the county council that. Most wouldn't. But you'd be wrong and completely distorting facts. Since you're gonna challenge med about it,
You're going to need to verify your statement that
"or opposing every black candidate for U.S. Senate over decades"
I do want to go there. You made the statement, now back it up, buster. With provable facts. Not the usual assumptions and opinions. Facts.
We're all waiting.
5:54: Kweisi Mfume, Michael Steele, Donna Edwards. All opposed by the County Council. All black candidates for U.S. Senate in the last two decades.
Your first sentence makes no sense at all, by the way.
Thanks for confirming my first sentence.
Those are names that you have listed. Still waiting for the proof. "Because I said so" isn't real proof.
"All opposed by the County Council. All black candidates for U.S. Senate in the last two decades. Show me. Links are fine.
If you're going to say it, someone will require proof. Hey, if you don't have it, just admit it. Everybody's entitled to be wrong.
8:01: This is common knowledge to anyone following politics in the state of Maryland. The Council publicly backed Cardin and Van Hollen against those black candidates. Were you out of the country for the last two decades? If you are so ignorant and poorly informed on local politics, why are you arguing about it? How do you know you are right and I'm wrong if you claim to not know the basic facts of what's being discussed?
Using Robert Dyer's "logic", anyone who voted for him instead of George Leventhal is an anti-Semite.
So, you can't come up with proof. Admit it.
I am neither ignorant nor misinformed. I've lived here, voted here, and seen more politicians sand wannabes in my 50 years here than you. I follow local politics.
Your thin-skin is obvious. Your @2:07PM reply:
Sentence1: Insult of a broad nature
Sentence2: Statement of assumptions without proof (black was their reason? proof please)
Sentence3: Insult veiled
Sentence4: Insult direct
Sentence5: Question using facts not previously presented (I've never claimed to be right nor claimed you were wrong)
I'm asking you to prove a statement you made. Links are fine. If the council publicly opposed them over 2 decades, it should be on record.
6:52: If you follow local politics, how would you not be aware the Council did not endorse any of the black candidates for U.S. Senate in either decade? Did you vote last year?
Why so resistant? Why are you questioning me? It's all distraction and has nothing to do with what I'm asking.
I'm asking you to support/prove a statement you made. Links are fine. If the council publicly opposed them over 2 decades, it should be on record.
Yes, I have voted in EVERY election since I've been of age, not just ones with national implications. And I voted FOR term limits.
Have you ever voted?
No proof. Fake news.
1:06: They're having a public hearing on it, and they're voting on it. How is that "fake news?" You must be thinking of the other website in town with their fake bobcat sightings and reporters marching against Trump.
Nope, wrong again. I'm not sure what other website you are referring to, the Washington Post? WSJ? NYT? That's what I read daily.
Why would you rather insult a long-time county resident than answer a question?
This will be a great talking point if you ever run for office again. You're not the only one who keeps detailed records of people's comments.
Attack me all you want. Insult me all you want. I'm just asking you to prove a statement you made. I ask, you insult.
The only person looking bad here is you.
Post a Comment