EMAIL DETAILS
SUBJECT:
RE: FOIA/Legal
PRI: NORMAL
FROM:
S
ssingham@ssd.com
DATE:
2010-09-23 23:48:39
MSG_ID:
<1EC0BADDACA7EF4CB61E8D08EDFAA44B02E47693@wshsrv502.ssd.com>
RECIPIENTS:
TO:
A
Alex Slater
<aslater@skdknick.com>
B
Woolfolk, Brian P.
<bwoolfolk@ssd.com>
E
Eric Schwerin
<eschwerin@rosemontseneca.com>
H
hbiden@rosemontseneca.com
H
Hilary Rosen
<hrosen@skdknick.com>
J
Maiwurm, James J.
<jmaiwurm@ssd.com>
R
Lehman, Robert D.
<rlehman@ssd.com>
T
Jitendra Tomar
<tomar@cafusa.com>
V
Virginia Verdeja
<virginia.verdeja@cafusa.com>
CONTENT:
TEXT: YES |
HTML: YES
PROCESSED
Virginia: FOIA This is usually part of the judicial review procedure of FTA's action that we have discussed. The letter itself is a very straightforward letter (a one page request). That's ready to go if you want to do it. The reason to do that now is as follows. If we believe, and I think our intel strongly suggests this, that FTA is about to close the door on us, then we need to do everything we can to get them to hold it open for enough time that the political solution has a chance to work. So we are just buying some time with them. My view is that the most likely way is if Members of Congress ask FTA to do it. Another way would be to send a FOIA request which will put them on notice that we are likely to attempt to get judicial review of FTA's decision to deny our request. Given that the time that it has taken FTA in the past to respond to a Request for Reconsideration is between 1.5 and 6 months, that might at least buy us a few weeks. It would be very unusual for FTA to deny a Request for Reconsideration in less than 6 weeks from when the Request was made, and if they think they might be judicially reviewed they are less likely to do something that is so obviously different from their normal procedure. I'm not saying by any means that the FOIA request will definitely have this effect, rather that it has a chance, and there is little if any downside risk. In fact, I would only not file it if we were definitely not going to seek judicial review. But from the record I have so far seen, while getting judicial review is an uphill task, we definitely have some arguments both substantively and procedurally (and if they denied our Request in a very short period, that would be an additional argument). We would also want to make sure that the FOIA request was submitted before the door was closed. We can certainly get you a sense of a budget for a judicial review process, and I will include that in our options note to you. Litigation Options We will be sending you a note of all the litigation options that are available to us at the moment. This note will include our recommendations re the idea of publicly talking about the strategy we would follow. My last sentence, which will be expanded on in that note) refers to the fact that METRO can terminate us for convenience at any time, and the equitable adjustment is intended to account for losses we incur (not the full value of the contract). The contract also has provisions on limitation of liability for both contract and tort claims that may further limit the size of our claim. In any event we will outline all of this. Regarding Congressional actions, I will let Brian and Rob report on that, and also on Lou Stokes' reach out to Sheila Jackson-Lee. Shanker. ________________________________ From: Virginia Verdeja [mailto:virginia.verdeja@cafusa.com] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 6:32 PM To: Singham, Shanker A.; Jitendra Tomar; Maiwurm, James J.; Hilary Rosen; Alex Slater; Lehman, Robert D.; Woolfolk, Brian P.; hbiden@rosemontseneca.com; Eric Schwerin Subject: RE: FOIA/Legal Shanker and all, I'm puzzled by your last sentence. Also I just spoke with Josu and we are not sure why the FOIA request now. Also we need a budget for this task including review of documentation provided by FTA. Josu, Tomar and I think we have written enough legal letters for now. If we are not successful, we will get into litigation as a second phase. What we really need to do is reach the right people in Houston and Washington. In Houston, either the Mayor needs to understand the implications of her actions and make a move or the previous administration, which is looking like a bunch of crooks, needs to make noise. We either have access or not and if we don't we need to get people that do have it. Except meeting with FTA, it does not seem like we are making a lot of progress. Please consider all the avenues available to you and let us know if there is anything else we should be doing. I understand, for now, we have not made any direct contact with members of the Congressional delegation and we have been working on that since Tuesday. Please let me know if we are wrong. Our management is growing impatient since they believe we have the best team and cannot see we are moving forward. Maybe there isn't much hope but at least there should be movement in the background. Regards, Virginia ________________________________ From: Singham, Shanker A. [mailto:SSingham@ssd.com] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 3:33 PM To: Virginia Verdeja; Jitendra Tomar; Maiwurm, James J.; Brown, Amy L.; Sohar Henter, Christine J. Subject: FOIA/Legal Virginia: Jim and I just spoke - I am out in Tampa with a client, but he and I will be together in Orlando tomorrow. We both think that it is very important that we get the FOIA request out to FTA either today or tomorrow at the latest. The only amendment I have to the document sent this am is to also direct it to rogoff and carter. On the legal options, we will send you a note about our various options. We have to be careful about filing cases/press conferences because of the risks in the contract. S
METADATA:
THREAD:
TOPIC:
FOIA/Legal
INDEX:
ActbVheXWE5+oMT5TAuhsmjbd67t9wAE5e6gAALuDZA=
REFERENCES:
REPLY_TO:
<2A52328812B44243B226486CD322AF31357950@cafsrv09.CAFUSA.local>
REFS:
<1EC0BADDACA7EF4CB61E8D08EDFAA44B02E47685@wshsrv502.ssd.com>
<2A52328812B44243B226486CD322AF31357950@cafsrv09.CAFUSA.local>