AP: "Judge rules 2 whistle-blowers can sue King County"
A federal judge is giving a green light to a lawsuit filed by two King County traffic specialists.This trial will be particularly interesting to follow should Ron Sims get appointed to a high-ranking transportation position in the Obama administration.The two workers, Ho-Chuan Chen and Hossein Barahimi, were among five employees who came forward several years ago to say the county was using bad traffic data in approving a big development east of Redmond called Redmond Ridge East.
Chen and Barahimi say county officials unlawfully retaliated against them for speaking out, such as by excluding them from meetings, hiring an outside consultant to redo their work and ultimately targeting them for layoffs.
Left out of the article are the details surrounding the counties "arbitrary and capricious" acts, in the words of hearing examiner Stafford Smith. From inventing roads that didn't exist, to misusing and denying their failure to correctly run traffic modeling software, and even calibrating their models with mysteriously corrupted road data, KCDOT was hammered by Smith who recommended denial of the development, as well as the rescinding of the improperly granted traffic concurrency certificate.
But that was months after Chen, Barahimi and three DOT employees had voiced their objections to the sudden turnaround by DOT after denying Quadrant Homes a traffic concurrency certificate. In fact, after denying a local landowner a subdivision, who simply wanted to subdivide his lot into 4 parcels and add a couple cars to Novelty Hill Road, KCDOT reversed their position on Novelty Hill Road's zero available capacity and granted Quadrant a certificate to allow hundreds of homes added to a roadway that hasn't seen a cars-worth of capacity added to the road since well before Redmond Ridge was even proposed in the 80s.
Yes, Novelty Hill Road's capacity has actually decreased since Redmond Ridge was proposed nearly 20 years ago, as a result of no new lanes funded by the developer, but the additions of a half dozen stoplights that have restricted traffic from its pre-Redmond Ridge days.
Chen, Barahimi and the others tried every avenue to expose what they alleged included improper, unjustified, and possibly illegal acts by KCDOT, under the leadership of current director Linda Dougherty. They took their case to the county ombudsman, the prosecuting attorney, and then tried to get the local press to investigate. None of them were interested in investigating the sudden reversals by DOT, including the Times and PI. And that is when the five allege KCDOT came down hard on them in retaliation, including layoffs, reductions in pay and grade, and removal from their positions of influence in the agency responsible for maintaining the county's baseline traffic models.
To add insult to injury, King County has now spent millions of our tax dollars on private outside legal counsel to defend its alleged wrongdoing, as well as the alleged wrongful acts by several of its DOT managers.
And Marcia Pechman? Well, she heard one of the very first cases against Redmond Ridge while a King County Superior Court judge. Amazingly, she was alleged to have actually asked the developer's attorney in open court what ruling they wanted. Embarrassed, the developer's attorney quickly reminded her that the county was the defendant in the case. Then when she ruled in their favor, counter to the apparent arguments in the case on its two principal issues, she refused to explain her ruling. Why? Perhaps because judges don't have to explain themselves when they rule contrary to the facts and the law? The State Supreme Court would eventually overrule her, but not until years had passed and construction had already begun, making any victory, a victory that could not undo what had already gone too far.
And just when you might think the system is finally going to do something to bring some justice for the five, you must know that the King County Council approved Redmond Ridge East in 2005, despite the "arbitrary and capricious" acts by DOT, and despite the recommendation of the hearing examiner to both deny the project AND rescind its ill-gotten concurrency certificate.
And while Redmond Ridge East homes have been selling for a year or so now, local roads still have not seen any capacity improvements. No, those improvements are waiting for the taxpayers to cough up the hundreds of millions of dollars to construct them - someday.
Posted by: MJC on December 18, 2008 11:38 PMThis roundabout has two legs that one can drive though comfortably at a speed of 30 or 40 or 50 or 60 or 70 or 80 or 90 miles per hour. these two legs are at right angles to one another.
In fact I have documentation to the effect that there was no effort made on the engineer's part to design this roundabout to conform any recognized standard.
Roundabouts control vehicle speeds by way of their geometry. I forwarded photographs, aerial photographs, design documentation, corespondence I had with the City regarding this facility to the top recognized experts in roundabouts and there design and rec'd back confirmation of what I have alleged regarding this facility.
I forwarded this information to the City and the City has chosen not to act on this. I Made a complaint to the State of Washington Engineering Lisence Review Board and after reviewing the above mentioned documentation they chose not to take action.
Someone WILL be killed or left a cripple at this intersection and the City will not have a tennable defense that the design was not defective, grossly defective.
When this happens, I intend at that time to advance the case that everyone involved in designing this travesty and those politicians and people in City managment and the State Lisencing board should be held criminally liable and face prison time.
I encourage all to take a look either Google Earth or Local Live and see for yourself what I am talking about.
Posted by: JDH on December 19, 2008 08:07 AMNegligence shows the least level of culpability, intention being the most serious and recklessness of intermediate seriousness, overlapping with gross negligence. The distinction between recklessness and criminal negligence lies in the presence or absence of foresight as to the prohibited consequences. Recklessness is usually described as a 'malfeasance' where the defendant knowingly exposes another to the risk of injury. The fault lies in being willing to run the risk. But criminal negligence is a 'misfeasance or 'nonfeasance' (see omission), where the fault lies in the failure to foresee and so allow otherwise avoidable dangers to manifest. In some cases this failure can rise to the level of willful blindness where the individual intentionally avoids adverting to the reality of a situation (note that in the United States, there may sometimes be a slightly different interpretation for willful blindness). The degree of culpability is determined by applying a reasonable person standard. Criminal negligence becomes "gross" when the failure to foresee involves a "wanton disregard for human life"
I have all the bases covered and intend to bankrupt and jail everyone involved as soon as what is inevitable happens. the City has no obligation to defend the rogue actions of individuals. Actions that are 180 degrees removed from what their responsibility to the public is. They are also not shielded from responsibility in a civil sense because there is gross criminal negligence involved.
So, after all these years, MJC, your relentless references to this situation is finally coming to court. I never doubted you but just questioned whether anything would get done. Finally, it looks like you have some closure.
Posted by: swatter on December 19, 2008 09:21 AMThese developments were illegal throughout their construction, until just a few years ago when the "elected" state supreme court ruled unanimously to allow a previously-challenged and judicially-ignored illegal act by King County in 1989 to excuse all the wrongdoing and corruption of a decade and a half.
The case of these employees was a different matter while Sims and Quadrant were working to get Redmond Ridge East approved. At that time, the case brought by these employees was tied at the hip to the corruption in DOT that cooked the books again for Redmond Ridge East. There is nothing at stake now to the county, except some of our tax dollars to pay them off.
As I stated, the council approved Redmond Ridge East three years ago despite a recommendation to deny, and with millions of our tax dollars being spent to defend the "soldiers" in DOT who gave Sims that bogus study and the approval. Like the unlawful firing of former Ombudsman David Krull for doing his job, don't be surprised when Sims signs the order to pay these 5 a million bucks to put the last of this to rest.
Don't expect the issues of this case to ever make it into court.
Posted by: MJC on December 19, 2008 10:20 AM