May 29, 2013

Maryland Office of the Attorney General

Ms. Beverly Pivec, Custodian of Records

200 St. Paul Place

Baltimore, MD 21202

VIA EMAIL AND CERTIFIED MAIL

Re: Maryland Public Information Act Request; Expedited review requested

Dear Ms. Pivec:

Your office informed me that you are the appropriate contact for PIA requests. I am

writing on behalf of the Montgomery County Civic Federation and the more than 60,000

Montgomery County, Maryland residents it represents (the “Civic Fed”). The Civic Fed

is seeking information that resides within the records of any part of the Maryland Office

of the Attorney General, including but not limited to the offices of its Assistant Attorney

Generals which may be located within the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and

Regulation (“DLLR”), the Maryland Department of Planning (“MDP”), and the

Maryland Department of the Environment (“MDE”), all collectively the (“OAG”).

The Civic Fed is aware of the existence of information that indicates the OAG has failed

to investigate credible information regarding numerous matters and/or halted ongoing

active investigations due to influences unrelated to the subject matter under investigation.

By way of one example, the OAG received credible information regarding licensed

professionals, and in a related case, a layperson claiming to be a licensed professional,

submitting materially false documents to public officials and/or governmental entities, all

of which appear to put the public health, safety and welfare at risk. However, no

generally available data exists that indicates the OAG notified the proper authorities of

the public risks and harm associated with such matters. Consequently, pursuant to the

Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article §§10-611 to 628 (the

“Act”), the Civic Fed requests access to and copies of “public records,” as that term is

2

defined under the Act (hereafter defined as “Public Record(s)”), from the OAG sent to or

received via any method, including, but not limited to, electronic, mail, delivery service,

or hand delivery (collectively “Communications”).

The Civic Fed’s request relates solely to any and all Communications that have

occurred between the OAG and third-parties, as identified in paragraphs 1 – 4

below, beginning on January 31, 2007 and continuing until this request is fulfilled,

regarding any information that the OAG obtained, received or created; based upon

information provided by or obtained from (i) Steven J. Kanstoroom, Adrienne Lewis aka

Adrienne Gude-Lewis, aka Adrienne Gude, or Montgomery County, Maryland Inspector

General Thomas J. Dagley (collectively the “Relater’s Information”), or, (ii) any past or

current OAG official or employee, including but not limited to, Douglas F. Gansler,

Katherine Winfrey, aka Kay Winfrey, Daniel L. Barnett, Rakesh Patel, Shelly

Wasserman, Susan Cherry, Michelle Barnes (collectively “OAG Information”) or (iii)

any past or current MDE Official or employee including, but not limited to, Paul Stancil

and Brian Coblentz, (collectively “MDE Information”) and; (iv) any DLLR past or

current official or employee including, but not limited to, Thomas Edward Perez, Daniel

Parr, Pamela Edwards, Harry Loleas, Stanley J. Botts, and Leonard J. Howie III.

Specifically, the Civic Fed is requesting the following:

1) Public Record Communications between the OAG and any local, county or State

governmental agency that is responsible for the oversight and/or investigation of any

licensed professionals.

2) Public Record Communications between the OAG and any local, county, State or

Federal governmental agency that is responsible for oversight and enforcement of

environmental laws or regulations.

3) Public Record Communications between the OAG and any local, county or State

governmental agency that is responsible for creating, maintaining, modifying,

revising or deleting any real property data, including but not limited to: (i) mapping

data, (ii) land use data, or; (iii) property ownership data.

4) Public Record Communications between the OAG and the Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA), the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) or the

United States Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General

regarding any aspect of suspected or known non-compliance with Title 44, Chapter I,

Subchapter B., Parts 70 and 72, Code of Federal Regulations.

3

The Civic Fed is requesting a waiver of fees inasmuch as it believes:

I. The public has an urgent need to know and fully understand the contents of the Public

Record Communications requested herein, and/or the lack of any Public Records as

requested herein, to prevent detrimental life and safety issues to residents of, and

visitors to Maryland, the District of Columbia, Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey,

North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia (all states

collectively the “Affected States”). The potential life and safety issues pertain to, but

are not limited to:

(i) placement or leaching of solid and liquid materials on, in or under soil,

groundwater, creeks, streams, rivers and all bodies of water (irrespective of if they

are considered navigable waterways), and wells used for drinking water, thereby

subjecting them to deadly pollutants, including but not limited to toxic metals that

can cause cancer and neurological harm in humans;

(ii) damage due to flooding of structures within the Affected States that are

situated upon land, the topographical drawings for which were intentionally or

unintentionally created in such a way as to circumvent any part of Title 44,

Chapter I, Subchapter B., Parts 70 and 72, Code of Federal Regulations; thereby

placing (a) the property owner unwittingly in harm’s way of flood risk, and; (b)

all persons or entities with a beneficial interest in the property at risk of financial

loss and hardship;

(iii) damage due building collapse, structural failure and/or infrastructure failure.

II. The public also has an urgent need to obtain the information requested herein to

prevent financial loss and hardship due to improperly created public record

documents describing title and title interests to real property.

In the event you deny our fee waiver request, we agree to pay reasonable duplication fees

for the processing of this request in an amount not to exceed one-hundred fifty dollars

($150.00). However, please notify me prior to your incurring any expenses in excess of

twenty-five dollars ($25.00).

If the Civic Fed’s request is denied in whole or part, we ask that you justify all deletions

by reference to specific exemptions of the Act. We will also expect you to release all

segregable portions of otherwise exempt material. We, of course, reserve the right to

appeal your decision to withhold any information or to deny a waiver of fees.

4

Please provide an expedited review of this request as we believe that the public has an

urgent need for the information described above. We believe that the failure to timely

and fully respond to this request may likely result in irreparable harm to (i) residents and

visitors of the Affected States, (ii) users of the Washington, DC area Metro subway

system, and; (iii) users of Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay Bridge.

I certify that the statements concerning the need for expedited review are true and correct

to the best of my knowledge and belief. I look forward to your reply within 30 days as

the statute requires.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Carole Ann Barth, President

10602 Lockridge Dr., Silver Spring MD 20901

email: cbarth@mindspring.com

Attachments: Attachment 1 - 04/13/07 Email from Deputy A.G. K. Winfrey

Attachment 2 - 02/07/07 DLLR Complaint

Attachment 3 - 02/08//07DLLR Receipt Confirmation

cc: United States Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley

Maryland Attorney General, Douglas F. Gansler

Washington Metro Area Transit Authority, Richard Sarles, GM & CEO

National Governors Association, Chair, Governor Jack Markell (DE)

National Assoc. of Attorney Generals, President Elect A.G. J.B. Van Hollen (WI)

Attachment 1

1

Steve Kanstoroom

Subject: FW: Email to Kay Winfrey FW: OAG

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Kay Winfree [mailto:kwinfree@oag.state.md.us]  Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:27 PM To: sjk@femainfo.us Subject: Re: Follow‐up; Thank you  Dear Steve (if I may, and please call me Kay),  I am very interested in the issues you briefed me on today. I have some ideas about how to approach this and where to go from here, and I am working on getting the appropriate people together for a meeting.   Sorry that I was unable to stay longer. Let me assure you that my meeting in Baltimore was not nearly as intriguing.   Have a great weekend. I will be in touch early next week.     Katherine Winfree  Chief Deputy Attorney General  200 St. Paul Place  Baltimore, Maryland 21202  410‐576‐7051    

Attachment 2

Page:8Author:Steve Kanstoroom Subject:Note Date:2/7/2007 12:39:31 PMBy successor firm and predicated upon Mr. Sutherland's work.

1014 Ashton Road Ashton, MD 20861 February 7, 2007 Mr. Thomas Woods, Executive Director State Board for Professional Engineers 500 North Calvert Street, Room 308 Baltimore 21202-3651 Re: Alleged Unlicensed Engineer Dear Mr. Woods: I understand from the attached correspondence that your office has no record that the civil engineer I engaged for extensive engineering services, beginning in 1992, is or was licensed by the State. I also understand from your office that Maryland law does not permit individuals to hold themselves out as an engineer if they are not licensed. This issue is of great concern to me because I have encountered a number of problems related to my project that was ultimately halted due to conflicts in the engineering and related drawings. To date I have invested in excess of 1.5 million dollars in this endeavor. Two weeks ago I learned for the first time that my engineer’s partner, a Maryland licensed land surveyor, filed an affidavit in 1995 stating that his engineer partner had no professional education or certifications. Prior to my entering into a long term relationship with my engineer, I requested and received a copy of his resume. I subsequently received many invoices from his firm whereby I was billed for engineering services performed by him. The engineering services included, but are not limited to, tree surveys, road designs, bridge designs, culvert designs, storm water management and flood plain studies. All of the work was done within a forest or wetlands and much of the work included steep and, in some areas, rugged terrain. At all times I was under the belief, as was my architect of record as well as my landscape architect, that my engineer was appropriately trained and credentialed. I have a large number of documents. A small sample includes: 1) Resume provided by my engineer whereby he states he is an engineer, is the president of an engineering firm, and he has more than 30 years experience providing engineering and architectural services. 2) Certified copy of the affidavit filed in a Montgomery County Circuit Court

proceeding from my engineer’s partner, a Maryland licensed land surveyor that covers the period in question with regard to my loss whereby the surveyor states that the engineer had no professional education or certifications.

2

3) Invoices from my engineer’s firm, and my corresponding accounts payables records, whereby I was invoiced for engineering services for his time spent working on my failed project. 4) Recent Planning Board transcript whereby my engineer is introduced as a civil engineer. 5) Information concerning professionals that are introducing the individual as an engineer whereby a document indicates the professional is aware of the unlicensed individual’s non-licensed status. At this time my forested property is at immanent risk of irreparable harm from forest clearing in that a proposed subdivision is planned that infringes upon my non-development easement. My related easements and deeds are complicated by that fact that they were in part prepared by the unlicensed engineer who I believed to be fully qualified. The local Planning Board and its staff, comprised of State officials and employees, has taken the position that they are not compelled to halt any activity that is predicated upon false and misleading information and/or an unlicensed individual holding himself out as a civil engineer. Please let me know if you can provide me with any assistance. Thank you. Sincerely,

Steven J. Kanstoroom Cell 301 503-6078 Attachments: 01/31/07 Letters from DLLR Engineer’s Resume Example of Engineer’s Invoices Recent Planning Board Transcript – See lines 6 - 11 cc: Ms. Pamela Edwards

O S T - 1 6 - 9 2 F R I 1 5 : 1 7 D E Y E L O P M E H T C O H S U L T e N T S P . 8 1

DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SURVEYORS, ENOINEERS & LAND PLANNER5

8ulte 102, 17904 Georgla Ave. Olney, Maryland 20832

TO: .. ATTN : /<wI;,~o&M ,,

FROM: LEE 1

5, JZVM LA SENDER: , d f L <

DATE ; /O ' /6. , - 4 DCGP : 2( - YF6 FAX NUMBER: ?Vq - 2 3 S 5 CONTENTS :

0 0 b Y F L D I D W . P r a l j r . C Y W O T Z Q 1 9 1 ' Whir ~ m a m L m l L r aonCrSnr a c n r C b d r n C l a a

bn2ormrcLom wh&aA m r y m a r c b r Srprl%y p r i v A & r q e d rn4 wh&mh i w

int-nbra r m % u L m r Qhr u r m al *ha A l d a r m r r m ( r ) n r m * Q m k t o v r . X C

you r+r m o t f h m ihtmnbrd r - o S ~ i r n i ~ , w s e h m h a p % b w * r w p rgmn+

r r w p o n m l b ~ m C O o b m l L v m r l n a i + d a tk* d n * * h d r a Rrrai&?~lrnt~ you err

karagy n o t a l i m l W k r C rky I+rrrminrtlon o r OapyLnp o l tkir

arerrmilr, rr C h a r r k r n g 0 0 any r r o l e n in orlirn=r o n tka

aontzrh~r o g bhLr t r l r m o p t r d LnZarmm%bonc m m y br r c r b m t S y

wrrhlbik-a- Y r yau hrvr t k r e c m a r k m ~ a m ~n r m r o r c e L m r m m n a 6 4 # y

UU L m n r u + m C r ~ y by Q m l r p h o n r rnQ tnrurn +kr r n t S x e ~ r P r l m l 5 r tr ur

r* kh- rPove m 8 d E m a m W k m t h m Ur a. P e l t - & I m r v h a w r

17904 Georgia Ave, Suite 102, Olney, Maryland 20832 301424.4570 (FAX 924-5872)

June 16, 1992

Me 1,. SUTHERLAND

UUALIFICATSONS A S AN EXPERT WITNESS

IN SITE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING

M r . S u t h e r l a n d , currently President and Chief Engineer o f the Development C o n s u l t a n t s G r o u p , Inc., has had o v e r thirty one (31) years exper ience in engineering, surveying l and planning, construction sugervislon, a n d architecture, As an e x p e r t w i t n e s s In tnglncering, s i t e a n d l a n d planning, Mr. S u t h e r l a n d h a s q u a l i f i e d in t h e States of New J e r s e y , V i r g i n i a , Pennsylvania, Maryland, an? T h e District of Columbia, W i t h i n t h e State o f Maryland, he h a s qualified before the Zoning Wearing Examiners in Baltimore, Prince George's, Howard, Montgomery, Anne A r u n d e l , Charles, Frederick, and Washington Counties. Before the Boards of Appea l% i n Montgomery, Charles, and Howard Counties; C a r l n t y Councils I n Montgomery, Prince George's, and Howard Counties; City C o u n c i l s in the Towns of Gaithcrsburg, Pooiesq~ille, a n d R o c k v i l l e , Maryland, Mr. S u t h e r l a n d h a s a l s a guallfled an a n e x p e r t witness before the Federal Mediatjon Board in Washinglcn, D. C , as well as t h e Circuit C ~ u r t s in Howard, Montgomery, and Washington Counties and t h e Prince George's C o u n t y Ligucr R o d r d .

I n t h e l a n d deveiopment f i e l d , Mr. Suthezland has been involved f n t h e design, supervision :-' design, supervision and inspection of cc truction, as both an engineer and as a n owner. Over the p a s t t h - n t y (20) years he h a s been involved as an owr~er or part owner in residential developments in Howard and Washington Counties, In Maryland and in Sheanondcah County, V i r g i n i a . As a n engineer and l a n d p l a n n e r , his experience r a n q e s f r o m sxbdivlsions of t w o ( 2 ) lots u p t o and including planned r e s i d e n t i a l communities such a s Columbia and Rossmoor Leisure W o r l d ! 4 s t a t e s 1 .

A s an expert witness in the englneering f i e l d , Mr. Sucher1 ,and has testified in zoning matters (rezoning, special e x c e p t ions, variances, etc, 1 , site plans (hospitals, residential subdivisions, shopping cen texs , office buildings, s u r f a c e m i n i n g

RECYCLED -- GIVING BACK TO THE FUTURE

M . L. S u $ h e r l a n d Expert Wltness Vyige '2

operations, nursing homes, and s a n i t a r y landfills), l a n d use, l a n d s c a p e p l a n s , sediment c o n t r o l , s t o r m water management, and o t h e r general engineering disciplines, Ha has a l s o testified in C p u r t s o f Law as an e x p e r t witness i n t h e f i e l d of site gl3nning and engineering; Ln litigations involving planning, construction, a n d engineering I s s u e s .

MAJOR PROJECTS

1. Watson P r o p e r t y , Charles C o u n t y , Maryland 40 acres surface mjning site. Zoning, plans and permits.

2 . White Flint Shopping Mall, Rockville, Maryland A major shopping cen t e r . Including t h e coordination o f the M t x o System construction through the site and the d e s i g n o f a n undergtound storm water management detention s y s t e m .

3 . Rossrnoor Leisure World, Silver spr lng, Maryland A 2,000 acre residential subdivision. Project Engineer for a p e r i o d of f i v e ( 5 ) y e a r s .

4 . F o r t y ( 4 0 ) plus s u r f a c e mining operations in P r i n c e George's, Anne A r u n d e l , Charles and Cecil Counties, Mary l and .

5 J o h n s o n Property, Rising Sun, C e c l l County , Maryland A 150 acre site consisting of a concrete p l a n t , an a s p h a l t p l a n t , a and and gravel processing plant and a surface mining operation,

6 . P r o v i d e n c e Hospital, Washington, D.C. - design ad d l t i o n of a new power plant, materials handling facility, kitchen area a n d assacfated site improvcmcnta.

. !;eterans Hospital, Washington, D . C . - d e s i g n additlan o f a 160 bcd clinic, 750 car parking garage and nuclear m e d i c i n e facility at the existing hospital.

b . P b ( 2 v r r . t j s t H o s p i t a l , Takoma Park, Maryland - design a ; Fzur story a m b u l a t ~ z y c a r e c e n t e r , b l New parking facilities and studies. r ; New entrance t o hospital. 1 I Alternate utillty studies. ? C o n v e r s i o n o f Chapel t o Day Care C e n t e r , f l Three ( 3 ) level p a r k i n g deck. g ) Master p lan s t u d i e s f o r future programs . h Three ( 2 ) s t o r y addition with hellpad.

9 % ? x r e n H o s p i t a l , Phllllpsburg, New J e r s e y A C d S t i o t ? of new emergency room, operating room and support factllties.

1 . Wayne C o u n t y Hospital, Honesdale, Pennsylvania Addition daubling t h e s i z e of t h e existing facility.

il. Co!t ln~bl .a , Howard County, Maryland S u r v e y s , site p l a n s , subdivision p l a n s f o r major portions of a new town.

12. N e w nursing home facilities in Clinton, Mazyland; Easton, Maryland; Summit Coun ty , Ohio; Dundalk, Maryland; Roonesboro, Maryland; Silver S p r i n g , Maryland and Chester, Pennsylvania,

-3 -. L r .

Other h o s p i t a l s in 5 P l b y , O h l a ; Maume, Ohio; Miami, F l o r i d a ; P r e s t o n , West Vlrglcia; W i e r t o n , West V i r q i n l a ; C a p s May, N e w Jersey; Weymoutt?, Massachusetts; F a l r f a x , Virginla; W i l r n l n q t o n , Mr,rtli Carolina and Seoul, K o r e a .

Ralttr Reed A;.:.? Medical Centex, Washington, D.C. New helipad, addition to commissary, topograghlc surveys a ~ d building evaluation s t u d f e 5 .

A r linqtar! Vat i o n a l Cemete ry , V l r q i n i a Soad !litation prnSects, l a n d reclamat3on p l a n s a n d toll-lmbdr J A sltes,

F o r t Myer, V i r g i n i a D e s i g n 3f d heavy equipment and h u l k storage facility.

C r o v v Trai 1s Landfill, Che 1 t c n h a m , Maryland Cesign of a 200 a c r e l a n d f i l l with experimental s l u d g e d i s p o s a l and l e a c h a t e collection f a c i l i t 1 , e s .

A d a p t i v e reuse p l a n s f o r conversion of a n abandoned f a s t f o o d facility to a r e t a i l l i q u o r s t o r e , testimony b e f o r e Pr ince Georqc's C o u n t y tlquor E ~ a r d . The d e ~ i g n aild g l a n n i r ~ g of an t l - rhar~ renewal p r o j e c t - G r a y Street, B a l t i m o r e One b l o c k square shopping c e n t e r i n innex city of B a l t - i m o r e .

T t i ~ d e ~ i y : ~ Q E vax ious t ' e s i d c n t 1 - a : ~ t l b d i v l s ! o n s rang:tlq from t G a i 2 1 to over one h u n d r e d ( 1 0 0 1 I f i t s . : q , ?d i - l l cg t~n - B a l t f m o t c a r e a ,

I r 2 k a r a t : i o n Q L Maste-r D e ~ e l 3 p n e f ~ t Plans £91: 3 ) Q ~ U E Knob S k i Resort, P e n n s y l v a n i a b .! Daedalean Industries Faci 1 l ty, Wcodblne, M ~ r y l a n d L ) Washington Adventist Hospital, Takrma P a r k , Maryland

F r e g a r a t i ~ n and p r ~ c e s s l n y oE a t h r e e hundred 1300) plus a c r e s u b d i v i s l c n consisting o f over one h u n d r e d 1 1 0 0 ) l o t a o n w e l l and s e p t i c s y s t e m s In Howard County, M a r y l a n d .

G e s i g n o f d well a n d septic s y s t e a f o r a n e x i s t i n g s e v e n h u n ~ t e d ( 7 0 0 1 pupil elementary s c h z g l i n Laytonsville, ! l ; r ) . l a n d ,

L l c s i q n oL s e p t i c sysLems Lou shopping c e n t e r s on 6egtic sys'e~s I n Montgomery C o u n t y , MarylanB.

Attachment 3