Decision in UC Government Complex Project

For those looking for that 21-page judicial ruling mention in the story, here it is.

Notable excerpts below:

We agree with the trial judge that the procurement process used in this case violated the LPCL; any argument defendants have advanced to the contrary is not worthy of discussion. (page 3)

We specifically rejected defendants’ claims the appeal was moot because significant sums had already been spent on the project. (page 4)

As project manager, [Bibi] Taylor was authorized to “approve all invoices…in connection with Phase 1 of the Project…not to exceed $12,098,586.” (page 7)

Plaintiff has clearly and convincingly demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits because his claim is on all fours with the successful claim of the plaintiff in Dobco….Additionally, plaintiff has clearly and convincingly demonstrated imminent irreparable harm, not personal in nature, but rather as representative of all taxpayers in Union County. (page 16)

Defendants made the decision to commit and spend public monies for this project despite knowing of, and indeed planning for, potential adverse results in this litigation. We do not conclude, as plaintiff contends, they acted with “unclean hands.” Nonetheless, defendants’ current posture and the concomitant expenditure of public funds resulted from choices they made; the consequences of those choices – delay or additional costs in bidding Phase 2 – cannot weigh in defendants’ favor, yet that is precisely what the judge concluded. (page 20)

As already noted, the public interest is presumptively served when public entities abide by the LPCL. The judge concluded the monies already spent by the UCIA, and the delays and additional costs alleged to be incurred if public bidding were now required, outweighed the public’s interest in compliance with the law. Yet, we cannot know what the result of public bidding Phase 2 of the project might be; we only know it will not violate the law. The entry of temporary restraints enjoining Phase 2 clearly and convincingly serves the public interest. (pages 20-1)


2 responses to this post.

  1. Wow!! Good for Dobco! Indeed the entire contacting process was illegal, unethical and corrupt. So glad the judges saw that too and ruled against the UC and UCIA. It’s also time to appoint an ombudsman or independent public advocate to the Board of Commissioners as we must protect the public from these unaccountable fools.


  2. […] an appeals court ruled a couple of weeks ago that Union County had illegally awarded contracts to build a government …, the state legislature took quick […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: