The developer of the Monrovia Town Center is suing Frederick County government, including the county executive, the County Council and the Planning Commission.

Paul D. Rose Jr. — the attorney representing developer 75-80 Properties LLC — filed a lawsuit in Frederick County Circuit Court on Friday, seeking more than $500,000 from the county, as well as an injunction and a declaratory judgment. The suit claims the county’s actions have prevented the developer from building and selling lots at the Town Center, a prospective 1,250-house development.

Rose, reached by phone, declined to comment.

The saga of the Town Center goes back years. The former Board of County Commissioners approved the rezoning and development plan for the Town Center in April 2014. A local advocacy group, Residents Against Landsdale Expansion (RALE), challenged this, arguing that a letter entered into the record close to the vote tainted the process.

The letter from the Frederick Area Committee for Transportation (FACT) offered support for the project, but RALE claimed then-Commissioner Paul Smith influenced what was written in the letter, then voted on the Town Center.

In March 2015, Circuit Court Judge William R. Nicklas Jr. directed that the council hold further proceedings to determine the letter’s influence on the commissioners’ vote. The council decided in September to restart the entire case, starting with the Planning Commission, to establish a clean record.

The lawsuit states that the council “has ignored” the court order to determine the letter’s influence on the vote and that remanding the case to the Planning Commission extends “well beyond” the direction of the court.

“There is simply no basis, and more importantly, no legal right, for requiring the developer to present its case again to the Planning Commission and then to the County Council,” the lawsuit states. “Three of the former five members of the BOCC who voted to approve the Monrovia Town Center project have testified or sworn by affidavit that the FACT letter had no bearing on their affirmative votes. That is a majority of the BOCC, and the remand proceedings should have stopped there.”

The developer wants a judge to make a declaratory judgment that the purpose of the March 10 court order was for the council to investigate the letter, and that based on the testimony of the former commissioners, the letter did not influence the vote. It also wants the court to declare that the council has “taken a patently unreasonable amount of time” in addressing the court order.

According to the lawsuit, the council’s move to return the case to the Planning Commission constitutes a “temporary taking of the property” without compensation — known as inverse condemnation. The developer is requesting $500,000, as well as attorney fees and other costs.

Frederick County Attorney John Mathias said the court order provided the council members wide latitude, and he does not believe the point regarding inverse condemnation is valid.

Both County Executive Jan Gardner and Council President Bud Otis said they had not viewed the lawsuit and could not comment.

The developer also is seeking an injunction against the County Council and Planning Commission from proceeding in any actions related to the March 2015 court order, and that the case be taken back to Circuit Court. It also wants an injunction preventing county government from taking further action on a new traffic study of the area, which the county has nearly completed.

A traffic study was also completed before the commissioners took their vote. The lawsuit states that the new traffic study will be based on a broader scope than the original one.

The lawsuit states that the county has delayed in signing off on three documents — including final site plan — that are pieces in the developer’s process. A fourth document, a plat, has also not been recorded at the Frederick County Courthouse.

The developer and its representatives have continually contacted the county since early September, requesting that the relevant county representatives sign the documents, and that the plat be sent to the courthouse for recordation. The lawsuit refers to these as “mere ministerial acts” that were not completed.

The developer states that under its agreement with the county, known as a Development Rights and Responsibilities Agreement, or DRRA, the county is obligated to approve these pieces in a timely manner. It wants the expiration date of the DRRA and other deadlines extended by the number of months that the county has delayed approving the documents.

Mathias said this part of the lawsuit is easily remedied.

Also named in the lawsuit is RALE; its president, Steve McKay; and 22 Monrovia residents who were included in the petition for judicial review that was filed in circuit court in June 2014, challenging the approval of the Town Center.

In an interview, McKay said that naming all of the Monrovia property owners is a blatant attempt at bullying and intimidation.

He said the points made in the lawsuit won’t hold up in court. “I don’t think they have a prayer,” he said.

Follow Jeremy Bauer-Wolf on Twitter: @jbeowulf.

(71) comments

i70corridor

Just heard some exciting news that came from each church street. The project is court ordered to go through. It's about time the growth of our town begins. I for one have been a huge supporter of MTC and cannot wait for ground to break. I know alot of residents will be upset but remember one thing...before the majority of you were here, the area was all open land with very few houses. Residents complained back then about the homes being built along Penn shop, Lynn Burke etc so maybe you shouldn't throw stones if you live in a glass house. Then again, the majority of you live under the same motto "not in my back yard...unless it benefits me". Good day!!

KellyAlzan

The developer may intentionally be opening a can of worms as a way to expose Ba'Lane and friends for the corruption that they fostered.

Think about it - developer pays tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions and kickbacks and then everything explodes in his face.

This is the perfect way for the developer to get even with balane

KellyAlzan

Gonna try to subpoena the former rogue county commissioners

FrederickFan

This is all rubbish left over from Blaine Young. MTC should never have been approved. The new, uncorrupted traffic study should seal it's doom once and for all.

Tigerzord

For those nay sayers who say the development should move forward - let me just remind you why the community came together in the first place. Those that live here knew the negative impacts it would have on the community and the county as a whole. The roads are inadequate and we knew there would be no real fix or money to do so. You have the CSX bridge north on 75 - you have Ed McClain which is barely wide enough for 2 cars (and a bridge that two cars cannot fit). You have Weller Road which is also a 1 1/2 lane road along side a banked creek - the road is a heavily traveled cut through. You have windy, hilly roads that cars and trucks drive WAY too fast on - accidents are on the rise. We knew that the schools would be negatively impacted all across the county and that the overcrowding issues at Centerville would get worse. CE and County Council are now having to deal with the reprecussions of the bad decisions made previously by the BoCC. These were foreseen problems that those four board members ignored!

jsklinelga

I am not fully aware of all facts of this case but it seems the lawsuit is misdirected. Like the development or not, if the developers followed all the rules and went through an extensive and expensive proceeding, how were they injured? By Paul Smith's contrived letter. If it would not be for this letter MTC would be moving forward.
Should Paul Smith be liable? There is a large amount of money at stake. The perjurious nature of the letter, perjurious by misreprensentation, seems to be a criminal offense I was against subpoena power by the ethics commission because in time they will be just another political body, but it is understandable why people wanted it. Have any investigations of possible criminality taken place?

It is curious that the developers have not attacked or sued Paul Smith. It is his actions that have caused the development to be deRaled.

stevemckay

I strongly suspect that the reason that they have not gone after Paul Smith is because it wouldn't end with Paul Smith ...

I welcome that discovery process!

jsklinelga

stevemckay
It is curious though. I am sure you would welcome that discovery process as would many. To look at it pure objectively Paul Smith was the one that created the injury, unless.....

MAVRICKinc7

With this suit, in combination with the recent change to out ETHICS LAWS, opened up the BACK DOOR to real discovery that was not available in 2014-2015? No more retro-active applications of the the new ethics laws that has now been brought to the present and subject to discovery practices that weren't available 2 years ago. Isn't that what the last BOCC members, including Delauter, Shreve and Chmelik wanted most to dodge and flagrantly manipulated Council from making a decision on the TAINTED nature of the premeditated scam perpetuated by the likes of Paul Smith, Blaine Young, Delauter, Shreve and Chmelik and their development partners? Shouldn't 75-80 Properties have waited for at least another year before inviting RALE back to this stage...AGAIN?

DickD

In my opinion it should not stop with Paul Smith.

AstuteBusinessWoman

[thumbup]

DickD

Whatever happened to the FBI investigation, mentioned in True Blue?

From True Blue Politics Nov. 8, 2014

http://www.truebluepolitics.com/2014/11/08/blaine-young-orange-is-the-new-black-for-8-10-years/

Let’s not forget that there is this pesky FBI investigation that is still open, very active, and from what I know, will lead to felony indictments and prosecutions of not only Blaine but several members of the recently elected county council.

Now we must be aware that investigations take time, the FBI wants to be sure that all of the dots have been connected, the T’s are crossed and the I’s are dotted before they bring charges. When the FBI bring charges they want to make sure they have brought all the charges they can and they want to make sure they stick. Don’t want Blaine and the boys to slither away do we?


Steve McKay wrote a fantastic letter to editor about following Blaine’s money and where it leads. The money leads right to the shell company St. John Properties, and trust me the FBI is connecting the dots between Blaine’s money and St. John Properties.

Steve’s letter, his October surprise, just may have put the final nail in Blaine’s coffin in more ways than one.

KellyAlzan

FBI does not announce active open investigations. Pretty sure there never was any investigation ....

sofanna

If the FBI does not announce active open investigations, why are you qualified to be "pretty sure there never was any investigation . . ." THERE SHOULD BE a full investigation!!!

KellyAlzan

I believe someone may have filed a complaint with the FBI, but that does not mean that any investigating ever took place.

If the FBI announced their investigations - then evidence would be destroyed, suspects would flee, etc.

As far as "should be an investigation", probably. But that's only opinion(s),
Not fact :)

BlueDawn666

Trust me Kelly when I say the FBI is investigating...

KellyAlzan

Ok so who has been interviewed thus far? And what documents have been handed over?

stevemckay

Kelly - FYI, I know of at least three people that were interviewed. However, it isn't clear how active the investigation is currently.

KellyAlzan

I do hope there is an investigation. Something similar went on way up in West Virginia and some commissioners actually were ordered to personally repay the county

MAVRICKinc7

Don't count your chickens BEFORE they hatch. Testimony taken under OATH and subject to the consequences of perjury are only now available to Frederick County. A change of venue could change the outcome in a New York heartbeat. If I were to advocte FOR St. John Properties and their partner 75-80 Properties LLC, it would be my recommendation to QUIT this claim and let the matter stew a little longer.

DickD

Absolutely right, mav, they just may have opened a can of worms.

Tigerzord

"A traffic study was also completed before the commissioners took their vote. The lawsuit states that the new traffic study will be based on a broader scope than the original one"

I believe this is key - the previous traffic study was horribly flawed and didn't encompass enough to show accurate impacts on the area. So the developer is afraid of a more accurate and true reflection of a new study - they know how horribly they missed the mark! So they are scrambling and grabbing at anything they can do to save their butts!

DickD

This is all very interesting, who is right and who is wrong, hard to say and it will be up to a judge somewhere.

After looking at the below web sites and trying to determine for my self who is right and who is wrong, it appears to me that the Council did not have Paul Smith give testimony on the FACT letter, which I always thought should have been done. If my memory is right, the Council asked him to come and testify and he refused, possibly the motivation for the right of the Ethics Committed to have the subpoena power. It also seems wrong to me that they paid Smith's attorney for some legal requirements and I have no idea why they did that. There is a reference in one of these web sites about Paul Smith might have violated the law with potential criminal penalties. It would seem to me that the Council should have investigated that and I do not believe they did.


June 17, 2015 Monrovia Town Center Remand Order

http://friendsoffrederickcounty.org/monrovia-town-center-and-the-remand-order/


April 29, 2015

http://www.your4state.com/news/news/debate-over-monrovia-town-center-continues-with-remand-from-circuit-court-judge

"The Circuit Court of Frederick County remanded the case back to the county council last week,
after learning a letter from the Frederick Area Committee for Transportation, better known as the
“FACT letter,” was compiled with the help of an attorney and former County Commissioner, Pau
l Smith. The judge believed the commission’s decision to approve the Monrovia Town Center may
have been altered due to Smith’s involvement and decided it should be reconsidered by current
county council members."

http://envisionfrederickcounty.org/council-ignores-judge-on-monrovia-town-center/

udge Nicklas remanded the case for the council to conduct additional proceedings, including taking testimony, to resolve the issues identified by the court. So what issues did the court identify?

First and foremost, the court made two definitive findings — former Commissioner Paul Smith discussed the pending Monrovia Town Center case with the Frederick Area Committee on Transportation (FACT) and Smith failed to report those communications as required under the State’s ex parte communications laws applicable to Frederick County.

This is highly suggestive of an ethics violation, one that carries potential criminal penalties. Is the council addressing these issues? No.

Judge Nicklas also found that the letter from FACT incorporated Smith’s observations and that the letter was intended to influence the pending vote.

Lastly, he found that it was highly suggestive that the Board of County Commissioners relied on the letter. He specifically called out former commissioners president Blaine Young in his conclusions.

To summarize – a sitting county commissioner used an outside organization to help influence the vote on a pending zoning application before him. This is an important issue in the Judge’s remand order and it leads to questions. Were other commissioners involved? After all, the former commissioners rarely seemed to do anything this significant without Young’s awareness and approval. Was the developer or members of his team involved?

One of the reported letter writers is closely linked to the developer. We know that the Judge took great interest in FACT’s conflict of interest because it was being paid by the BOCC. I imagine he would take equal – if not greater – interest in the letter writer’s conflict of interest with the developer’s team.

Is the council addressing any of these issues? No.

MAVRICKinc7

The County Council, for the first time in decades, now has an ethics law that can bite back. Anyone recall how hard Delauter, Shreve and Chemlik tryied to get this new brand of law neutered, on so many occassions over the last 2 years?

AstuteBusinessWoman

Instead of Monrovia Town Center:
Here's an idea/brainstorm that could very well be a great option:
A combination of:
1. organic veggie and fruit farm where they not only sell harvested produce for consumers to take home to prepare, but actually have a carry-out of restaurant prepared meals (especially dinners) where locals can stop in and pickup already prepared evening meal on way home. All food would be the farm-to-table concept of their grown product made into veggie dishes that could be American, Asian, etc. Everything from fresh cole slaw, to stir fries, veggie subs, etc...
Maybe add a little eat-in area. The idea would follow the concept of a dairy/creamery , but be Veggies and Fruits for sale and prepared into meals to buy on the fly...
2. Added bonus - a vineyard and winery as well
3. Playground, tennis court,etc, and picnic area (some indoor basketball etc. for winter)
4. Educational seminars on gardening for those that want to learn
5. Weekend events??

The entire concept could follow the health and wellness idea of eating healthy, staying active, and consuming locally grown organic food.
This would provide jobs from growers/gardeners, to restaurant cooks and servers, customer service professionals, plus several operational management, financial, marketing, management positions. I do not know if anything quite like it exists with this combination, but if we added a bakery, Blaine could get his "Bread Basket" afterall. This would also help with the idea that the concept could be very seaasonal, but a bakery could carry through the winter months to help....The bakery could be all baked goods from organic products both grown there and perhaps shipped in from other local organic farms (hopefully from Frederick and surrounding area). Maybe they could use SMC dairy products too.
You see, for too long, it has been all about add more houses, and though people talk of adding jobs, they fail to get creative and utilize our great farm heritage to come up with some of the most creative, healthy, and possibly very successful business ideas that could make everyone happy.
I gave you my 2 minute creative brain-storm, now what do you think??
It could be a great model for others to come.
I can picture a Large Barn (several floors) built to look like the bank barns of our Frederick Co. Heritage, but it would be the produce processing, store, and restaurant..... It could even have a room dedicated to our farm history in Frederick Co...... With educational info., pictures, etc....
Aren't you tired of houses and strip malls??
I would love to be a part of the management of this....

stevemckay

These are fantastic ideas.

AstuteBusinessWoman

Thanks. I do realize somebody with much greater resource$ than me will put these ideas to use somewhere.... I can only hope it will be here.

ClareS

Fantastic. Frederick County needs jobs and culture and not more housesthatarethisclosetogether.

sofanna

EXCELLENT idea that would benefit many of the Frederick County citizens!

neilyoungfan25

Like it or not, this development was approved by a Board of County Commissioners put in office by the people of Frederick County. One can throw accusations right and left about closed door meetings, talks in sheds, etc, but in the end the development was given the green light to move on. It is grossly unfair that Stanley would have to through the entire process again - already done that. I don't think he is a bully at all, just frustrated. Personally, I resent one more tax dollar being spent on discussing this development. It has been approved, more on.

DickD

Thank you Blaine, save your comments for the judge.

AstuteBusinessWoman

An "approval" that was obtained through improper/illegal means is at question, like it or not! What would be unfair to the Entire community would be to let it go as "approved". Like it or not!!!!! Have a wonderful day

shiftless88

You forget to add that it was approved after a flawed and (to some extent) corrupt process. That is rather a key point to leave out, don't you think?

MAVRICKinc7

It's called LYING by OMMISSION.

stevemckay

Like or it not - the Circuit Court sent the entire case back to the Council and gave the Council broad discretion in how they could handle the matter. I haven't always liked how they handled it, and I've made that opinion clear. I've also been preparing to go through the new hearing process.

Comment deleted.
DickD

Did Blaine sell his Yellow Cab business?

KellyAlzan

Yes, according to an FNP comment submitted by Karen young

BstD59

If true I would then be able to use the cab company. No way would I have considered contributing to Blaine Young's livelihood.

ClareS

I don't feel sorry for the developer at all.

Dwasserba

Go RALE. Goliath is trembling.

jthompson

A "SLAPP" suit, i.e. a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.

Set forth below the asterisks is §5-807 of the Maryland Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article:

*********************************************************************************
Md. COURTS AND JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS Code Ann. § 5-807 (2016)

§ 5-807. SLAPP suits


(a) "SLAPP suit" defined. -- In this section, "SLAPP suit" means a strategic lawsuit against public participation.

(b) Nature. -- A lawsuit is a SLAPP suit if it is:

(1) Brought in bad faith against a party who has communicated with a federal, State, or local government body or the public at large to report on, comment on, rule on, challenge, oppose, or in any other way exercise rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution or Article 10, Article 13, or Article 40 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights regarding any matter within the authority of a government body or any issue of public concern;

(2) Materially related to the defendant's communication; and

(3) Intended to inhibit or inhibits the exercise of rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution or Article 10, Article 13, or Article 40 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights.

(c) Scope of immunity. -- A defendant in a SLAPP suit is not civilly liable for communicating with a federal, State, or local government body or the public at large, if the defendant, without constitutional malice, reports on, comments on, rules on, challenges, opposes, or in any other way exercises rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution or Article 10, Article 13, or Article 40 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights regarding any matter within the authority of a government body or any issue of public concern.

(d) Remedies of defendant. -- A defendant in an alleged SLAPP suit may move to:

(1) Dismiss the alleged SLAPP suit, in which case the court shall hold a hearing on the motion to dismiss as soon as practicable; or

(2) Stay all court proceedings until the matter about which the defendant communicated to the government body or the public at large is resolved.

(e) Applicability. -- This section:

(1) Is applicable to SLAPP suits notwithstanding any other law or rule; and

(2) Does not diminish any equitable or legal right or remedy otherwise available to a defendant in a SLAPP suit.

MCEDDE21

[thumbup]I would hope that the Court recognizes this attack on RALE and its members for what it is; to dismiss the suit while ordering the plaintiff to pay all costs; and to discipline Paul Rose for filing it.

armillary


He's back to this same old position
it's his own poor investment decision
at the end of the day
he can't get his way
without paying off some politician.

Near New Market

Suing individual property owners for exercising their rights as taxpayers is beyond the pale. I hope that the motion to dismiss them will be promptly granted, with an award of sanctions. This is flat out sleazy.

ClareS

Developers only care about money--they don't live in the developments they build and don't care what havoc they inflict on formerly rural residents.

AstuteBusinessWoman

Summary:
Mandatory community meeting supposedly held in a shed with no electricity, though nobody in said community recd invitation
Traffic study done after rush hour
Desperately attempted letter to make traffic study hold ground
Attempted intimidation and bullying
A failed re-election attempt....
All equals = You're spinning your wheels in the mud of Monrovia and your slinging of it is getting worse/more desperate.
There are better options for this land that can offer great rewards for the owner, and the community.
Monrovia can be open for business on greener pastures, rather than a mud bog.
Think outside the box, get on it, and move forward with the owner getting to make a nice retirement and the community having added jobs and healthy local options.
This is Really getting very old and wasting time and resources on what was never a good solid honest plan from the start.
Get creative with a win-win. Build a community resource, not more bedrooms.

jthompson

A developer tactic to avoid Maryland's Open Meetings and Public Information Acts. The MTC proceedings before the County Council and Planning Commission ordinarily take place in televised public meetings. By filing the lawsuit, the developers can shift the otherwise open MTC proceedings into closed door meetings under the guise of confidential settlement negotiations and court-ordered private mediation conferences. For a past example of the tactic, see: http://www.fredericknewspost.com/archive/commissioner-objects-to-closed-session-about-developer-lawsuit/article_f964e237-788c-5be3-99ac-abcda33794de.html

BlueDawn666

Fascinating...going to blog about this...love your comments BTW, you bring a lot to the table.

KellyAlzan

John Thompson is one of the best things that ever happened to Frederick County. I have nothing but respect for the man.

And someone else I respect and appreciate is former commissioner David Gray.

stevemckay

[thumbup][thumbup][thumbup]

DickD

David Gray is definitely a good person, I don't know John Thompson.

rbtdt5

The south and east of the county is exactly where we should be building as everyone is traveling that way so it only makes since. Jan bring on law suits.... shocker.

public-redux

I think it is true that the FACT letter didn't inform the votes of the Commissioners. Indeed, I think almost no facts informed their votes.

KellyAlzan

The court does not like blantant frivolous lawsuits. This could
Backfire in the plaintiff's face

BstD59

Sounds to me that the Court should be sued for what is in the developer's opinion an incorrect judgement. What? Can't sue a Court if you don't like their ruling? Oh, ok then, let's sue everyone and anyone who is not of the Court. Let's see, we can sue the County, and oh yes let's sue the CE as well, and let's throw in the Planning Commission and the Commissioners too. Then there are always those pesky RALE people let's toss them in so we can sound as if we are really big and tough. If we sue enough, make enough noise and scare the bejeebies out of everyone we will get our way! WRONG.

KellyAlzan

They should have appealed the court ruling

Hayduke2

When you can't get your way, bully and intimidate. This development should never have been approved and Stanley and Company took a gamble and lost the first round. So what do they do, use a car chaser lawyer to sue! Ah, the American way.

Tigerzord

The developers plot thickens.... let's try scare tactics and bullying on citizens who ate concerned on the impacts of their community.... the big bad community!

stevemckay

Far too much for the comments section, but since I just posted this to RALE, I share here too:

Yep, that's how my workday ended today. Finished work, got to my car and checked my voicemail for messages. The FNP had called late in the afternoon to ask me for comments about the lawsuit filed by the MTC developers, naming RALE, myself and all of our co-plaintiffs in our appeals against the development. Now the suit also names County Executive Jan Gardner, the County Council and the Planning Commission, but I was pretty focused on myself and my neighbors. Frankly, I was mostly focused on my neighbors and I was pretty pissed off - and I still am.

I won't drag this on any further and I'll get right to the heart of what this means for all of the named co-plaintiffs. These are 22 residents of Monrovia that adjoin the development and were so concerned about MTC that they joined RALE in our appeal. That's right, they are named in this suit simply because they care about their community and don't want to live alongside this travesty of poor planning. The fact that Roy Stanley and his lawyers individually named these people is a blatant attempt to bully and intimidate us. I suppose they're hoping that it will give us pause in pursuing these matters further. After all, it's not every day that you're named in a suit. It makes you kind of anxious. You worry what might happen. I know I did - and then I got mad.

You see, by the time I finished reading their complaint - particularly Count III, which is the only part of the complaint that involves all of these individuals - I realized that there is no "there" there. What it boils down to is that Roy Stanley wants to ask the Circuit Court to re-interpret the remand decision, hoping that the Court will tell the County that they're wrong in how they've handled the case (more on that in a moment). That's the only count in the complaint that involves RALE and our co-plaintiffs. So why even include us? Why have this suit served against all of these individuals? Simple - to scare us. Well I don't know about you, but it's done the opposite and I'm pretty ticked off right about now.

The bottom line - I see no risk or adverse consequences from this action to any of our co-plaintiffs. If you have any concerns, please contact me. Let me know and I'll send you the developer's complaint so you can make your own assessment. I know that Michele will also reach out to you, but give her a few days because she's under the weather right now.

Now about the real meat of the complaint. First, they're accusing CE Jan Gardner of holding up their permitting actions. These are the permitting actions based on a now totally invalidated case record, and a set of approvals rendered effectively moot based on the Council decision to restart the case. Good luck with that charge.

Second, they accuse the Council of over-stepping their mandate from the Court by directing the process to start over with the Planning Commission. They're even equating it to a public taking and are demanding at least $500,000 (plus legal fees) in compensation! Now let's see, the Court sent the case back to the Council with broad discretion in how they could handle the case. The Judge said "the County will do what the County does" in answer to a question from Stanley's lawyer, who was trying to limit the scope of the County proceedings. The Judge had none of that. So now, they think they can go back to the same Court and argue that the County was wrong in executing the very same discretion that the Judge afforded them. And they want to get paid off, too! Good luck with that one!

Third, they are asking for an injunction against any and all planning steps that the County is now trying to undertake to follow-through on their decision to restart the process. This part is ludicrous. The developers are even specifically trying to have the Court stop the County's new traffic study! It makes me wonder what they're scared of now that they don't have the entire system rigged in their favor. Not that I really wonder because I know that it never should have been approved in the first place.

In my opinion, the charges are baseless and smell of desperation. They haven't been getting their way so they're lashing out. They don't want the new hearing process to begin and they're trying whatever they can to stop it. Will this be the final straw that convinces the Council to take the next logical step following their September 1st vote - to vacate the prior zoning approvals? We'll see. What is RALE's next step? I don't quite know that tonight, but stay tuned!

KellyAlzan

Make a motion for:

A) case be dismissed
B) rale and the 22 residents be dismissed

Nicki

[thumbup] Steve!!!
Is there a link or address where we can send a donation to help RALE?

Comment deleted.
Nicki

Thanks, Tigerzord!

stevemckay

Thank you Nicki - you can send donations to: RALE, PO Box 181, Monrovia, MD 21770. Or, if you prefer, go to www.RALEMonrovia.com, and following the "'Donate" button for our PayPal account. Also, if you click on the "Updates" tab, you'll find information about our current fundraisers, including a raffle for a 1-week vacation stay. You get one entry for every $25 donation - please see the details on the page.

Nicki

Will do Steve!

DickD

Steve, looking at just the RALE and citizens part, it would seem to me that you have the right to say what you want about the development under the First Amendment rights of Free Speech. As you were not involved in the decision, other than attending meetings and giving opinions with any documentation, there is no way you can be liable with the possible exception that your testimony and/or documentation was knowingly false. And I cannot believe that was the case, knowing you from your writings and reputation.

stevemckay

Thanks Dick. We certainly do have that right and have exercised it faithfully. The bottom line is that our inclusion in the suit is based more on being parties to the original appeal, than to any real threat of punitive action. The Count 3 that includes us is seeking the Court to issue a new opinion about the remand order, which we were party to. But then you have to look at the affect of having RALE and these 22 people served the suit. I firmly believe this was done solely for the purpose of intimidation, to scare us off, and to drain our finances ahead of the hearing process.

KellyAlzan

kick off a hard and heavy campaign for donations and it will be the developer who's finances get drained. RALE should easily be able to get $25k in donations in (7) days.

stevemckay

Hah! I wish it were that easy Kelly, but I do appreciate your confidence. :-)

ClareS

I believe they are just trying to intimidate you into backing down.

sofanna

Excellent comments. Just last week the FNP printed an article about the County considering charging large trucks that get stuck under the bridge on Rt. 75 to pay a fine of $10,000. We definitely need a new, unbiased, transportation impact survey completed. Justice shall prevail!!

KellyAlzan

mathais done got the county into being sued again

I commented to jan a long long time ago that Mathais should have been the first person she fired

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. No vulgar, racist, sexist or sexually-oriented language.
Engage ideas. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, not personal attacks or ad hominem criticisms.
TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
Be civil. Don't threaten. Don't lie. Don't bait. Don't degrade others.
No trolling. Stay on topic.
No spamming. This is not the place to sell miracle cures.
No deceptive names. Apparently misleading usernames are not allowed.
Say it once. No repetitive posts, please.
Help us. Use the 'Report' link for abusive posts.

Thank you for reading!

Already a member?

Login Now
Click Here!

Currently a News-Post subscriber?

Activate your membership at no additional charge.
Click Here!

Need more information?

Learn about the benefits of membership.
Click Here!

Ready to join?

Choose the membership plan that fits your needs.
Click Here!