Annapolis Capital Punishment

This is getting really serious and could easily get out of hand and have long term repercussions. First it was the police station lawsuit, then the retired firefighters' lawsuit and now The Market House manager's lawsuit. What's next? City Dock contractors? Even if the City prevails (and who really ever clearly wins in such matters?) we are left stuck with a disastrous and dis-functional eyesore downtown, an imperfect police station and big legal fees on all accounts. There is also the issue of time and energy that city officials will have to exert in dealing with legal complications.

There is only so much a small municipal government can take. Perhaps we can call upon one of our many sister cities to lend us one of their lawyers? Yet another reason for a city manager form of government?

We don't expect perfection from the messy, complicated world of government. We do not necessarily expect or even deserve strong leadership all the time. But we do expect competent management, especially from a $70 million dollar a year enterprise that has a dozen or more employees earning over $100k per year--plus benefits.

RESPONSE FROM GILBERT RENAUT (retired lawyer, civic activist, former mayoral candidate):
The trouble, as I fear it anyway, is that the City gave so much away in the original lease (over multiple public objections), that it has little or nothing in the way of bargaining chips. What this means I think is that the City would have to take a very aggressive stance in litigation, be prepared to walk away from the lease and pay the damages, and the City rarely does anything that aggressive -- generally speaking it caves pretty easily in litigation. And it's a bit gunshy at the moment I imagine in the wake if the pension loss.

RESPONSE FROM C. CHRISTOPHER LEDOUX (Eastport civic activist):
Paul,
If I may lend a recovering attorney’s perspective on the Market House lawsuit … Site Realty could have filed the lawsuit for a number of strategic reasons: 1) to spur the Mayor and City Council into rectifying the HVAC situation (i.e., perceived foot-dragging); 2) to provide negotiating leverage to counter the City trying to renegotiate the lease terms to get Site Realty to pay for the HVAC upgrade; 3) to get the City to share in whatever settlement Site Realty has had to pay to the vendors that pulled out; or even 4) as a way to negotiate out of the lease all together. Or, it could be a combination of any of these reasons. And while I doubt number 4, it is a possibility and one that many would welcome.

Thanks to Gil and Chris:
All I can tell you is there are thousands and thousands of licensed HVAC contractors and engineers. A southerly-facing building with windows and lots of cooking equipment and hundreds of people coming and going during summer months needs more than the average tonnage and cooling apparatus. Our city is being mismanaged and there seems to be no accountability.