Attorney directs city to avoid learning the truth in bridge lawsuit?!

For those who might not have seen it yet, there has been some lively discussion over on the Galveston Daily News web site following their article on Saturday that the outside attorney for the city has overruled the decision of city council to release the title opinion obtained by the city with regard to the Glen Cove bridge properties.

Of particular note in this discussion, Marc Edelman has posted that the city's attorney has advised the city council not to get a title search. Allow me to reiterate; the city's attorney in the bridge lawsuit has advised the city to not take the most basic step to discover the truth about the ownership of the bridge properties. (A step which by all rights should have been taken before the city ever agreed to anything with anyone about the bridge.)

At least according to Marc's statements in the GDN comments, excerpted here:

Marc Edelman (medelman2k) August 29, 2010 11:16 AM

#17 of 30 Reply | Request staff review

@Evan, The larger issue at hand is who owned the bridge, HL&P, The City, or the residents of Glen Cove. [...] Of Course the City's Lawyer is not going to sign off on releasing executive session information. He advised them never to perform a title search, but they did it anyway. Now they want to release the results. Elected officials have a fiduciary responsibility to their citizens. These actions violate that fiduciary responsibility.

And again:

Marc Edelman (medelman2k) August 30, 2010 7:27 AM

#26 of 30 Reply | Request staff review

Let's see Jeff,
What I said was the City's attorney advised the City Council not to get a title search after the law suit was filed by Glen Cove residents. I think it is wise for clients to follow thei attorney's advice.

[...]

After pondering this astounding comment (and assuming Marc's knowledge of the attorney's comments is accurate), the question naturally arises;

Just why in the world should the city be advised to avoid learning the truth?!

Is there some other reason than the obvious suspicion that the attorney knows the truth that will be uncovered is not favorable for his client (and his continued billing to the city)?

Another question that comes to mind is just how does Marc Edelman have knowledge of the private advice the city's attorney is giving to the city?

§ 552.352

CC Baron's Executive Session

Councilman Attorney Baron’s Special City Council Executive Session
Tuesday August 31, 2010

“Discussion concerning possible amendments to Interlocal Easement Agreement between League City and MB Harbour, LTD” (Council Member Baron)

Also Discussions with City Attorney regarding pending and threatened or contemplated litigation. (Council Member Baron)


OK - So now Attorney Baron wants modify the easement agreement rather than rescinding.

What possible amendments could you have with an easement agreement on property the city can not prove it owns? The only amendment I can see is a termination date of yesterday rather than 96 years in the future.

Mr. Baron how about sharing your ideas with the citizens.
Please tell us what you are thinking.

As far as council's decision to release the title opinion, I have heard Helfand is NOT going to approve the release.

Here's my prediction: MB Harbor will not sue the city over the 99 year lease. It had little value. Suit will likely be over the developer's agreement that was approved by council in February 2006 under the supervision of City Attorney Polanco.


Scott Freudenburg - Glen Cove HOA Presidents Speaks:
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=7632459

Lipitor for the city

At 6 PM Tuesday the city council will hold a workshop on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for FY 2011- FY 2015. Take the time and go to the meeting to find out the direction our city will be taking. As we have learned from past projects, it is important to be informed.

What are your thoughts about the priorities of our city? Do you think the local economic situation has an impact on our priorities ? Should we concentrate on updating our streets and drainage? Do you think that the operating budget impact should be considered before a project is underway? As we taxpayers all tighten our belts should all departments be asked to do the same? Should automatic raises and cost of living adjustments continue or should they be put on hold until the economic situation is better ?

As you know tightening the city belt will not be easy. But if you consider our current CIP situation cholesterol and our city the heart, then this 5 year CIP may be the Lipitor needed to prevent a heart attack.

The White Elephant in the room

I find it interesting that while we discuss the location of the playground very few wish to discuss the white elephant in the room. Who was the elected official who had staff members tell Councilmember Phalen they would spend what he wanted extra on the park if he changed his vote to move it to the sportsplex? Seems to me that elected official is a snake in the grass and needs to be exposed. Or do you think that is how it should be?

If the merits of moving the playground are so great then why the attempt to change the vote?

Let me get this straight..Some council members wish to move the playground from a specific location to an area in the sportsplex to be determined? How much time will that take? But of course they are not attempting to delay the project? A councilmember says there will be a savings to the taxpayer by moving the project but proposes, without hesitation, an increase to the spending cap set by city council by $ 100,000 ?

Give me a break. In my opinion this project is being delayed because it appears that some who have not been keeping up with current events, woke up and decided they did not want such a project in “their” part of town.

The east side, west side argument is nothing but an attempts to motivate people to their side. Divide and conquer is the old way of doing politics in League City. Will we continue to drink the kool aid?

HAS ANYONE GONE OUT THERE TO LOOK AT THE LOCATION ? If they have they will see many problems that could possibly occur at this location that would not possibly happen in League Park. It is time to do some homework council members. Go out there and have a definite location by Tuesday. Walk the area, look at the boundaries you are attempting to place on the boundless playground.

Boundless Playground - Under Construction

TODAY - Demolition underway to make room for the Boundless Playground.






















The existing playground equipment will be relocated to the city's park at Countryside.

Some plead for "a little fiscal responsibility please?" while others suggest that any further discussion is just a waste of time.

I wonder how many emails have been sent to the Mayor and council members?