Reply to DCPS students shafted again - sign petition to keep Jelleff field public

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "DCPS students shafted again - sign petition to keep Jelleff field public"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Marjo is now citing legal analysis related to the contract. This is actually the interesting part of the hearing. Her argument is that if the City backs out of the contract, the Council will be signaling that the city can not be relied to hold up other contracts.

Marjo claims that since the extension has been signed, it's a done deal. And yet they plead for the Council to not take action. [/quote]

She is fundamentally right as a matter of contract law- the extension was agreed upon and executed by both parties.

The reason they are pleading with the Council is because they realize they have a major problem if DPR/DGS didn't follow regulations in how they review and approve contracts.  If they did not, then the contract is void because DGS/DPR did not have the legal right to execute it.  All agencies are granted the right to bind the District government to contracts if they follow the laws and regulations as passed by the Council.  Would love to hear more about how the legal analysis was done and who signed off on it from OAG or the Mayor's Office of Legal Counsel.[/quote]

I believe Marjo was citing legal analysis from Maret's lawyers; nothing from the District.

And I completely agree with your argument as it relates to the legality of the contract between Maret and DPR/DGS. Based on my reading of the DC Code as it relates to procurement and public-private partnerships, this contract appears to be completely illegal and not compliant with DC laws and regulations. This is likely going to court and Maret will lose. It will be interesting to see if AG Racine sues, or if Hardy parents will need to initiate litigation. I'd also like to see if Bowser has District lawyers defend the contract. [/quote]

I doubt Racine will sue- I don't see how OAG can sue the District government when it is their responsibility to defend the District government in all legal matters.  Which is why OAG usually does a legal analysis of all contracts to ensure that they meet District law and are thus valid.  A big part of that analysis is ensuring that all statutory requirements have been met.  That analysis should absolutely be provided by DPR/DGS to the Council.  I am very much wondering if it wasn't actually done in this case.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics