jakeburdett

jakeburdett t1_jea3dr1 wrote

Reply to comment by awdrgyjilz in Rouse project 2.0 indeed. by hiruy2000

Giving corporations sweetheart deals to the tune of $1 million+ is quite conservative, actually. Holding corporate greed and corruption accountable is the heart of the modern progressive movement, in fact

−1

jakeburdett t1_jea2vhf wrote

Reply to comment by awdrgyjilz in Rouse project 2.0 indeed. by hiruy2000

That’s a fine takeaway to have, though many others do find the evidence presented in this blog to be quite damning, and perhaps the future parts will make you feel the same way

And I’m not sure how you could say I’m not open to feedback, when I’m reading your feedback, and engaging honestly with it

0

jakeburdett t1_je9sj20 wrote

Reply to comment by awdrgyjilz in Rouse project 2.0 indeed. by hiruy2000

I can see how you have these takeaways if you’re only viewing this situation in a vacuum, and are not familiar with the past actions and other figures involved. If you’re not convinced by Parts 1 & 2 yet, i at least encourage you to read Part 3 & 4 when they come out, as they deal with other shady things done by Lakey outside of this one contract. And I did cite some sources in the piece that reference norms in commercial real estate and leases (such as annual 3% monthly rent increase to account for inflation, as the previous CA President’s contract included)

1

jakeburdett OP t1_je75mgq wrote

HoCo/MD NAACP is run by a well-known predator. They’ve sadly become co-opted for corporate interests, as well, and are actually quite conservative. I do have respect for NAACP nationally, though, and was a big supporter of Ben Jealous’s 2018 campaign

1

jakeburdett OP t1_je5kddt wrote

It’s also consistent with CA’s duties to get top value for their resources to not betray their fiduciary duty to CA residents. It’s not clear that that was done here

The post was facts, followed by a judgment/conclusion. You are welcome to disagree with my judgment/conclusion, which it sounds like you do

−1

jakeburdett OP t1_je5epq4 wrote

This is a false dichotomy. The only choices aren’t to either have the space remain vacant, or to give away the farm. I’m sure there are many restaurants who’d kill to pay a fair rate for arguably the best outdoor dining space the County has to offer

−4

jakeburdett OP t1_je5eh10 wrote

This point was addressed in an Author’s Note at the end of the post:

“The title of this blog may beg the question “Didn’t Lakey Boyd resign as CA President months ago? Why does any of this matter still?”

While Lakey Boyd may no longer be CA President, she is still very much active in public life in the Howard County community. Unfortunately, many of the facts and evidence presented in this blog post have not been shared widely, leaving most Howard County residents gravely misinformed about Boyd’s tenure and abrupt resignation and believing a carefully-crafted false narrative that Lakey Boyd was an innocent martyr who was unfairly pushed by the CA Board.

Additionally, the elections for CA Board and Village Boards are on April 22, 2023, and without the record being set straight on this concerning, high-visibility situation, many CA Residents may otherwise vote for candidates solely based on their stances about Lakey Boyd and the CA Board, without knowing that these stances are misguided and that some of these candidates may be beholden to special interest entities that do not have Columbia’s longterm wellbeing as a priority.

Thus, before the upcoming 2023 CA elections, this series of blog posts will inform Howard County residents of exactly what Lakey Boyd was truly doing as CA President and will vindicate the CA Board members who wrongly had to endure months of character assassination simply for trying to provide oversight of a CA President/CEO who was suspected of catering to special interests at the expense of CA residents.

Even though Ms. Boyd is no longer CA President, the very same special interests and co-opted community members, groups, and media outlets/blogs that fought hard to keep her are continuing to grasp for control of the CA for completely self-interested reasons in new ways with the upcoming election and beyond, and CA residents need to be hyper-vigilant to watch out for that.

It is this Author’s opinion that any CA candidates who have overtly and enthusiastically expressed support for The Rouse Project and/or Lakey Boyd, and who have villainized community members for trying to shine a light on Lakey Boyd’s potentially unethical actions as CA President, should be considered with extreme skepticism.”

−1

jakeburdett OP t1_je5dp6k wrote

Sherman May mean well, and he’s certainly been around for a long time, but he has consistently supported politicians that have been very detrimental to the black community, and does not seem to care when this is pointed out to him.

The rest of your statement is baseless

1

jakeburdett OP t1_je5depi wrote

I agree CA residents should get more for their fees, which is why Lakey Boyd pissing away millions of dollars of potential revenue doesn’t help much. But I disagree with your assessment, and think it was much of the local media narrative that misunderstands the Board’s role. It is absolutely the Board’s role to provide oversight over the hired President, yet this was unfairly characterized as “Micro-management”

−4

jakeburdett OP t1_je5cis7 wrote

But again, the Board was legally not allowed to talk about this stuff, due to it being a personnel issue. The CA attorney works for CA STAFF, like Lakey Boyd, and so it is not uncommon for Boards to get outside legal counsel. Bottom line is Lakey likely would’ve cost the CA millions in the long run, so getting an Attorney to help put an end to the chaos was the harm reduction approach IMO

−4

jakeburdett OP t1_je58onp wrote

Again, it’s not my place to disclose people’s identities without permission, and there are very legitimate reasons why people would be scared to blow the whistle, because they know how whistleblowers tend to get treated (as is happening to me now, for example). All of these documents and the facts reported in the blog are legitimate, it sounds like you’re just reaching for an excuse to ignore it. I’m not working for anyone, I wrote a guest blog post…

I was removed from the Hickory Ridge Candidate Forum last night for… daring to post this blog in the chat! Is Hickory Ridge Village defending Lakey’s reputation?

−2

jakeburdett OP t1_je51cz9 wrote

My parents and student loans pay for my tuition and housing, plus money I saved between 4 year university and law school. Many young people who are students nowadays do this.

It’s not my place to reveal who the CA resident that requested and sent me the documents are—many community members trying to speak out against the dominant narrative have been aggressively ridiculed by Allies of Lakey Boyd, and so are understandably hesitant to publicly stick their neck out on the line like that. I know this resident’s motivation was to hold Lakey accountable for one of MANY of her highly questionable actions in office

You have an interesting definition of a bully. To me, a bully is someone who picks on the powerless and those weaker than them (I.e. what Howard Hughes Corporation, Lakey, and their defenders do). But calling out people in positions of authority for gross corruption and abuses of power (what I do) is accountability, not “bullying”. I guess we may have to agree to disagree on this one?

−4

jakeburdett OP t1_je4wy91 wrote

As an unemployed law student, that’d be nice if this conspiracy theory was true haha. But no, I did this all for free, and I’ve got years of unpaid activism and other writing to show for, as well

The documents I used were requested by a CA resident under the MD HOA Act and sent to me, but this was not assisted by the CA Board members involved in the dispute with Lakey Boyd.

My interest in this as a HoCo resident is that what happens in Columbia is not contained to just Columbia. Howard Hughes Corporation has sway county-wide, so them funding a slate of candidates for CA absolutely does impact the whole county

−1