- 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 3:49 pm to udtiger
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:49 pm to udtiger
quote:
Bet it still passes, because frick the taxpayers
Yep, when the vast majority of your voters aren't footing the bill, it is easy to do things like this.
There is nobody a Progressive leader hates more than those who pay taxes.
0
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:49 pm to BugAC
quote:
There is no NDA, genius.
quote:
Hudson went on to mention they were essentially being stonewalled by the broome administration and were not given details on the desent decree due to an NDA.
So is there an NDA, or isn't there?
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:50 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Yes, in the form of a stormwater fee that will do nothing to address stormwater problems, but will definitely provide a new building, salary, and benefits to more useless City-Parish employees.
It seems like this has gone very sour for Broome. I'm curious if this is a Rubicon moment for many, like what Latoya is facing in Nola.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:51 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So is there an NDA, or isn't there?
The issue is whether there had to be an NDA, not whether there is one.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
It should be. This coupled with the crime would be enough to do most in, but I’m not so sure
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:52 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
The issue is whether there had to be an NDA, not whether there is one.
THAT is a different conversation, but only one that can be had after my question is answered. Some are arguing there are no NDAs at all.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:52 pm to BugAC
What we need, now, is evidence of whether or not there’s are NDA’s which have been signed, what parties are bound by them, and where these alleged NDA’s came from (who ordered them?).
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:52 pm to BugAC
keep voting democrat louisiana
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:53 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So is there an NDA, or isn't there?
There isn't. I know reading comprehension is hard for you, but the news about there not being an NDA came out about an hour ago. The MORNING SHOW with Haldane was either yesterday or friday morning. Sequence of events, and how time works, tells us that Hudson was being told by the mayor's office they couldn't discuss details because of an NDA. Clearly, the Mayor's office has been lying about this.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:54 pm to kingbob
quote:
EPA claims no knowledge of Mayor Broome’s stormwater utility fee NDA
What we need, now, is evidence of whether or not there’s are NDA’s which have been signed, what parties are bound by them, and where these alleged NDA’s came from (who ordered them?).
LINK TO WAFB ARTICLE
quote:
In response to Rep. Graves’ allegation, the East Baton Rouge Parish Mayor’s Office released the following statement:
The City-Parish is working to remain in compliance with our Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) Louisiana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (LPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Permit. This effort includes establishing a robust stormwater plan of improvements, maintenance, and monitoring. Our current deadline for providing a plan to achieve compliance with our permit and address the findings of the MS4 audit is the first quarter of 2023.
The non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is a City-Parish drafted agreement. The NDA is signed by City-Parish staff and City-Parish consultants to protect discussions regarding our stormwater permit and the City-Parish’s historic shortcomings in the area of stormwater compliance. No state or federal governmental agency has required the City-Parish to execute a non-disclosure agreement or confidentiality agreement as it pertains to stormwater compliance.
However, as is standard practice, settlement discussions that may lead to court action should remain confidential for the benefit of all parties.
There is no NDA regarding the stormwater proposal. There is an NDA with the Parish Attorney concerning our conversations with the Justice Department regarding our MS4 audit. Also, while there is no deadline regarding our stormwater proposal, there is a deadline from the Justice Department to submit our plan for MS4 permit compliance.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:54 pm to SlowFlowPro
So, the EPA and DOJ, as stated in multiple news articles as stated by the mayor’s office, asked them to sign an NDA, but not an NDA with the EPA or DOJ?
Just sign a random NDA with no one.
Just sign a random NDA with no one.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:54 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:Hudson went on to mention they were essentially being stonewalled by the broome administration and were not given details on the desent decree due to an NDA. So is there an NDA, or isn't there?
Why is this so hard for you to understand? That quoted text by you doesn’t confirm there is an NDA, it simply confirms Broome’s office has been saying there is one while not a single other source has said they’ve required an NDA to be signed. Hudson is merely stating why he was stonewalled, not that he’s seen or had to sign one.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:54 pm to kingbob
quote:
What we need, now, is evidence of whether or not there’s are NDA’s which have been signed, what parties are bound by them, and where these alleged NDA’s came from (who ordered them?).
Like I said earlier, these should be subject to FOIA.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:55 pm to BugAC
The news says there is no NDA between the city and the federal government. AFAIK it doesn't say that there is no NDA at all.
My suspicion is that HNTB and Broome's people signed one to attempt to avoid public backlash.
My suspicion is that HNTB and Broome's people signed one to attempt to avoid public backlash.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:55 pm to Scruffy
quote:
So, the EPA and DOJ, as stated in multiple news articles as stated by the mayor’s office, asked them to sign an NDA, but not an NDA with the EPA or DOJ?
Just sign a random NDA with no one
Perfect timing. Their response:
quote:
The non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is a City-Parish drafted agreement. The NDA is signed by City-Parish staff and City-Parish consultants to protect discussions regarding our stormwater permit and the City-Parish’s historic shortcomings in the area of stormwater compliance. No state or federal governmental agency has required the City-Parish to execute a non-disclosure agreement or confidentiality agreement as it pertains to stormwater compliance.
So yeah with nobody, basically.
ETA:
quote:
The NDA is signed by City-Parish staff and City-Parish consultants
SFP page 2:
quote:
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.
This post was edited on 10/18/22 at 3:57 pm
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:56 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:So, they lied.
The non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is a City-Parish drafted agreement. The NDA is signed by City-Parish staff and City-Parish consultants to protect discussions regarding our stormwater permit and the City-Parish’s historic shortcomings in the area of stormwater compliance. No state or federal governmental agency has required the City-Parish to execute a non-disclosure agreement or confidentiality agreement as it pertains to stormwater compliance.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:56 pm to sahikojones
quote:
The non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is a City-Parish drafted agreement. The NDA is signed by City-Parish staff and City-Parish consultants to protect discussions regarding our stormwater permit and the City-Parish’s historic shortcomings in the area of stormwater compliance. No state or federal governmental agency has required the City-Parish to execute a non-disclosure agreement or confidentiality agreement as it pertains to stormwater compliance.
However, as is standard practice, settlement discussions that may lead to court action should remain confidential for the benefit of all parties.
There is no NDA regarding the stormwater proposal. There is an NDA with the Parish Attorney concerning our conversations with the Justice Department regarding our MS4 audit. Also, while there is no deadline regarding our stormwater proposal, there is a deadline from the Justice Department to submit our plan for MS4 permit compliance.
Brazen fricking snakes.
The Metro Council is just as complicit in this. They do nothing but enable this behavior, and they're probably just going to go along with it.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:57 pm to Scruffy
quote:
So, they lied.
No they said they signed NDAs. That was truthful.
It's just they (and their media cohorts) made it seem like it was forced by fedgov, which was not truthful.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:58 pm to sahikojones
But the stormwater system is at the center of the MS4 permit 
Posted on 10/18/22 at 3:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:So, they lied.
It's just they (and their media cohorts) made it seem like it was forced by fedgov, which was not truthful.
Page 7 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News