It was a bad day in Queen Anne's County circuit court today, Dec. 18th for the state's Board of Public Works, particularly for Governor Martin O'Malley and Comptroller Peter Franchot as the honorable Judge John W. Sause Jr. laid down the law!

Judge Sause started out saying, that this case is intensely complex as John Zink, attorney for K. Hovnanian challenged the state's board of public works (BPW) claiming, for the first time the BPW refused a wetlands permit beyond the Dept. of the Environment. Zink added, that the law looks out for the people's riparian rights.

Judge Sause stated, "This is unconstitutional and preposterous for the Board of Public Works-the notion that a board may do what they want and is not accountable to anyone is dead wrong and bad law! According to Judge Sause, the BPW blatantly exceeded its authority that was granted by the legislature. They circumvented local planing and zoning departments and several state agencies.

Judge Sause was referring to the BPW (Gov. O'Malley, Comptroller Franchot and Treasurer, Nancy Kopp who voted 2-1) who denied K. Hovnanian, the developer of the Four Seasons project in QAC, Md. a permit to build a small bridge, a community pier and storm water system on May 23rd, 2007.

Treasurer Kopp dissented from the majority because she believed K. Hovnanian had met the letter of the law. The two issues under the purview of the BPW was dredging and filling in the wetlands area of which they addressed neither in their ruling, according to Sause.

Zink continued saying, "The denial is unprecedented on the basis of approval far beyond delegated authority and never before in the history had a Board of Public Works utilized judicial powers. K. Hovnanian have fought this battle nearly a decade to win regulatory approval.

According to Zink, they have gained the approval of the state Critical Area Commission and the Army Corps of Engineers -and have agreed to restore 24 acres back to working wetlands. The project meets all current environmental standards. Both Secretary of the Environment Shari T. Wilson and Secretary of Planning Richard Hall said the development met state guidelines.

Sause sounded off stating, "It's a cruel hoax that a landowner can spend millions of dollars to develop a plan, but in the end you are found to be completely ignored as a matter of law. BPW made it their business and this is bad common sense!" Sause continued, "There is nothing to suggest there's some super powers over all the rest of the agencies and without considering any of the criteria which would be necessary to do so. What is the purpose of zoning? The BPW can only act in boundary by the general assembly."

The lawyers from the attorney general's office argued that the BPW ruled in the best interests of the state, and the BPW has exclusive authority to the project to meet environmental standards.

Judge Sause shot back stating, "Are you telling me that an administrative agency has authority to make legislation? I am not going to sit here and listen to you try and tell me that advancing a regulation somehow becomes a valid regulation and expect me to turn a blind eye to the interpretation of the law."

The lawyers of the attorney general's office reminded the court that it is not solely a wetlands issue and the BPW is the screening legislature to maintain a balance for society and to look out for the detrimental effects to society.

Judge Sause interjected, "Ahhhh, they did not weigh it-they don't tell us why or what isn't aesthetically pleasing over Cox Creek."

The state argued that it's the only agency (BPW) to decide whether the project gets to utilize state wetlands. Judge Sause added, "They have to operate as a government power, not as individuals."

The state argued, "We are not persuaded that it is the best interest of the state." Sause concluded, that the BPW did not address one of the four issues that affect the wetlands.

The state asked if the court would entertain the rights of the BPW and requested to submit a statue of regulations of the BPW. Judge Sause granted their wish and asked that a five page response be submitted by January 15th. Judge Sause will hold up the decision til the end of January 2008.

Clearly, Judge Sause's comments throughout the hearing were based on the facts and merit of the Four Season's project and not intangled in political gamesmanship.


More information.