- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: EPA claims no knowledge of Mayor Broome’s stormwater utility fee NDA
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:38 pm to man in the stadium
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:38 pm to man in the stadium
quote:
HNTB Corporation
Time for the OT to dig into who owns this and who they are paying. How much was the "study" they performed?
1
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:39 pm to lsuguy84
quote:
Mayor Broome didn’t have an NDA with the EPA, and why that’s okay”
At least it started a conversation.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:42 pm to BeepNode
quote:
WAFB said they confirmed that they had to sign a NDA.
That was October 10th. Graves did some digging and found out that the mayor and WAFB are full of shite.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:44 pm to BugAC
quote:
That was October 10th. Graves did some digging and found out that the mayor and WAFB are full of shite.
Or Graves is being dishonest.
A 3rd option is the mayor's office didn't have to sign an NDA with the EPA, but had to with whichever company is helping plan or will develop this system. So kind of talking with a half truth.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Or Graves is being dishonest.
He is up for reelection...
For the record, I like Garrett
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
3rd option is the mayor's office didn't have to sign an NDA with the EPA, but had to with whichever company is helping plan or will develop this system
1. I think this is likely.
2. If so, it's a massive lie on the part of the administration.
3. Still doesn't account for the supposed immediate timeframe. Which, in my massive experience with federal projects, REEKS of complete bullshite. When was the last time any of us saw the fed government do anything quickly?
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:48 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
A 3rd option is the mayor's office didn't have to sign an NDA with the EPA
The mayor's office specifically stated they had to sign an NDA with the EPA, and that's why the details of the $40 million fee could not be released to the public.
WAFB has confirmed that everyone in the administration involved in the negotiations with the DOJ and the EPA, has had to sign a non-disclosure agreement.
This post was edited on 10/18/22 at 2:48 pm
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:51 pm to BugAC
Baton Rouge and New Orleans going toe to toe on who has shittiest mayor.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:51 pm to BugAC
Gentleman at the first town meeting at Goodwood Library did his homework,
His review if the 2010 budget indicated the parish had budgeted 15 million dollars for drainage maintenance. Currently they budget around 10 million dollars, but they claim they need 48 million dollars.
If just show you the level incompetence in this administration.
For six years they have done nothing to comply with federal law. They cut the drainage budget to create a problem so they could go to the council and ask for a huge tax. They hide behind a faux NDA and try and ramrod a half arse proposal through.
All of this while they sit on millions of dollars in flood relief money that they won’t spend on flood control.
Bigger government, more jobs for their friends and more donations to their cause is the end game.
His review if the 2010 budget indicated the parish had budgeted 15 million dollars for drainage maintenance. Currently they budget around 10 million dollars, but they claim they need 48 million dollars.
If just show you the level incompetence in this administration.
For six years they have done nothing to comply with federal law. They cut the drainage budget to create a problem so they could go to the council and ask for a huge tax. They hide behind a faux NDA and try and ramrod a half arse proposal through.
All of this while they sit on millions of dollars in flood relief money that they won’t spend on flood control.
Bigger government, more jobs for their friends and more donations to their cause is the end game.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:52 pm to whoa
this is getting ugly. Council Members better vote no on this. Public is outraged.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:52 pm to jbgleason
Either they sign the NDA or the EPA takes over storm water management?? I'm all for the feds getting the crooks in City Hall out of the process.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:52 pm to BugAC
Let’s see the shitweasels try to explain their way out of this one.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:54 pm to Trout Bandit
Pitchforks, torches, rope, or just tying them down in the middle of areas where their constituents go street racing.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:56 pm to teke184
What is the plausible explanation for why the EPA would require an NDA preventing local officials from discussing the nature of the solution with their local constituents?
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:59 pm to Dingeaux
even if they signed a NDA with a consultant, how does that matter to the public. How is that even legal?
1) was there an NDA?
2) if so, between what parties?
3) if one of the parties is a private business (consultant/contractor) and not a federal regulating branch, I think city parish is in some deep shite.
1) was there an NDA?
2) if so, between what parties?
3) if one of the parties is a private business (consultant/contractor) and not a federal regulating branch, I think city parish is in some deep shite.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:59 pm to whoa
quote:
He is up for reelection...
It’s not like you have to be honest to win elections
Posted on 10/18/22 at 2:59 pm to BugAC
quote:
At the meeting, Hill and Parish Attorney Andy Dotson declined to provide more information on the need to quickly approve the proposal, pointing to a non-disclosure agreement signed by city-parish officials who are taking part in negotiations with federal regulators.
Advocate 9/26/22
So the parish atty lied to the metro council?
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:01 pm to LSUJML
Apparently.
Of course, I think that means the Metro Council can remove his arse.
Of course, I think that means the Metro Council can remove his arse.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
You should probably give up the whole contrarian to be contrarian shtick, because you keep getting bodied every time you try it
Page 2 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News