SALISBURY – Minutes from a closed session meeting of the Wicomico County Council in March confirm there was a debate on whether to oust Council Vice President Bob Culver after being accused of divulging private legal information regarding the State’s Attorney office lease bid process.
Last October, the county went through a Request For Proposal (RFP) process to find the Wicomico County State’s Attorney’s Office a new home after 22 years of being located at the county’s Circuit Court building.
In early April, the council voted to accept the bid of G Plus Properties in a 15-year lease to renovate a building at 309 E. Main St. in Salisbury.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
So Bob has made it to the news for stepping in doo doo again. Last time it was something to do with his mother that made the news. Bob, it might be time for you to consider stepping down from your post. Let someone else take it from here.
ReplyDeleteWell, well, well. So the majority of the council wants to throw a colleague under the bus for representing the people who elected them. Tells me a whole lot about those who are sitting behind the table representing us. Let the campaign begin.
ReplyDeleteWhat was so wrong with telling a lawyer to call the county attorney to get directions for opposing a bid? I think that is what an elected official is elected to do.
ReplyDeleteLeaking information? Guess someone has to so we can see what our government is up to.
ReplyDeleteLet's get out the story about Vance Phillips. The start of many....
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure why telling inquiring citizens that there is a process for protesting a bid and whom to contact is revealing secret information. Don't we want folks to know how to question the spending of taxpayers' money?
ReplyDeleteTo 8 am. AMEN! Why was there a closed meeting in the first place. Was something trying to be hidden from us?
ReplyDeleteThe name Bob Baker doesn't sound right but regardless, does Baker not think that another attorney wouldn't know the legal term "protest the bid". It sort of seems like Baker is carrying out a vendetta against Culver. Just saying...
ReplyDeleteI watched that meeting and it seems to me the bidders had a point. It also appears the government doesn't like to be questioned - thought they worked for us. True colors always come out.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the council, it is clear who is toting water for who...and word on the street is that Prettyman woman can't get along with anyone. Always out to get someone....we don't need that. if Culver needs to go, she needs to be right behind him - if not in front!!!
How ironic that an Ocean City newspaper has to break this story for the taxpayers in Wicomico to know what is happening. Where the heck in The Daily Times?
ReplyDeleteThat name is Ed Baker not Bob. He is the Wicomico County attorney.
ReplyDeleteIf Bob Culver is reprimanded for transparency, maybe it's time to unseat the rest for lack of same.
ReplyDeleteWhat's with Bartkovich? The article reports she said she would have done the same thing and then thought Culver should be reprimanded. Does that mean she would have expected to be reprimanded too? Crazy thoughts.
ReplyDeleteStevie talks about integrity? Bashahahahahaha. Colluder of fraud.
ReplyDeleteStevie Prettyman is 'turn coat'. Look at what she did with the BMS project.
ReplyDeleteIt is no rumor that she can't get along with anyone - fact is she can't. Time for her to go.
11:06
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts exactly. She would have done and said the same thing but he should be reprimanded? If two seasoned members thought you could say there is a process for protesting a bid, then you can say it.
More importantly--WHO IS 'G PROPERTIES"???? Always follow the money --who owns that LLC? Brokered deals that exclude other parties behind closed doors--and they are reprimanding Culver for being honest? Typical facist cronyism at work. WHO IS G PROPERTIES????
ReplyDeleteOh Stevie.....your jealousy is showing. You want Bob out so you can get his position. It is so obvious. If they didn't want you before as VP - why would they want you now? Maybe we should go back and examine your decisions and actions on the council and most of all how you speak to people and treat them. You apparently haven't learned you reap what you sow in life. Have some class and accept it instead of seeking to destroy people.
ReplyDelete1l:11 am Fraud? Please explain. She is my representative and I need to know more information about this fraud.
ReplyDelete11:11 - Don't know who you are, but love that term - colluder of fraud. That's priceless! and so true. She likes to work behind the scenes to do people in - manipulating others (in who knows what ways) to do her bidding. Disgusting! There is one department head who can't make a move without checking with her. and like her, he thinks no one is on to him either. As far as the Culver deal -people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Ms. Prettyman - don't play holier than thou - when thou ain't holy.
ReplyDeleteYou can bet Stevie is in the middle of it. Look at every picture she is in for a ribbon cutting whether it is Pork in the Park, the Autumn Wine Festival or a new business grand opening. She has a slick way of making herself in the front of the picture. If you don't believe me Google these events.
ReplyDeleteAlso if you watch the council meetings on PAC 14 you will see that she always has something to say. She loves to herself speak. It's always about Stevie Prettyman. She runs that council in case you haven't noticed.
12:52 - G properties is Palmer Gillis and his son Brad. That should explain everything.
ReplyDeleteAnon 10:43
ReplyDeleteIn responce to your question about the DT . This rag would never do anything to step on Pollitts toes.
Maybe I've missed something in this post but it seems Bob Baker, the attorney, is the person who called Culver on this. Why are most of the comments about some of the council members? And, it seems to me, Culver did leak information from the closed door meeting since the council did slap him on the hand behind closed doors.
ReplyDeleteGo, Bob. This is our money and our government. Too much of this is cloaked under the guise of closed session.
ReplyDeleteI saw the testimony of the developer whose bid was rejected - and I tend to agree with his argument that the bid criteria was not interpreted as specified - thus should not have been awarded.
ReplyDeleteLook - the developer - I believe his name was Parker has a legitimate complaint. It appears that he had the cadillac of a proposal and that the County Council & Executive's officer erred in their award to the low bidder.
Just my humble opinion.
Bob is a developer and the lawyer representing the bidder that lost is good friends with Bob. The bid was fair...they are just sore losers.
ReplyDeleteInsider wheeling & dealing. Good ol' boys at work.
ReplyDeleteSo, all Bob did as a public servant did is to steer a complainant to the legal method of objection to a procedure, (which is is his elected job, by the way) Any public servant has this duty to inform the public as their rights to regress, and any official who interrupts this right would be guilty of an infringement of rights.
ReplyDeleteAnd, I'm sure he wouldn't want that. What the heck would you have him do, deprive a citizen of his rights to acquire information?
Anyone can file a complaint with the Open Meetings Act Compliance Board. If there was a violation they will order the materials released. Wouldn't that be interesting?
ReplyDelete