I am going to state with a bit of "Truth in Advertising", that no matter that Judge Beane did not as has been the case in the past arbitrarily dismiss the case on Friday the 20th, that I had not lost? He did not tell Mr. Bays who asked him once in the Hearing and once afterwards if he could submit an Affidavit for Charges because my case was Frivolous and without Merit which entitled the City to Sanction me for costs to do so. But the simple fact that Mr. Bays asked the second time after the Hearing ended does not make me happy. Case settled already, probably so?
But I will say that I addressed each misstatement, lie and innuendo by the Defense with gusto and a plethora of facts that must have caused Mr. Beane some question? Back to the drawing board to insure the dismissal meets some sort of criteria? I did NOT lose this case on Law and that is a FACT. Certainly can not say I was able to beat "The Machine"? And that too is a FACT.
I have stated before that I have been raising children since I was 8 years old. Was denied the most basic of rights for a Child. That of being a Child and having years of carefree play and day to day festivities as most if not all of you did. Can't get it back so can only envy you and wonder on it?
So Mr. Rapp sitting and glaring/ glowering at me for 30- 40 minutes was not a big deal. It is a common thing for a Child to show his/ her/ its displeasure when having to answer for the Cookie Crumbs on ones lips and on ones clothes. If it was an attempt to intimidate me, one should never send a boy to do a Man's job?
I clearly pointed out how Ms. Barr's Affidavit clearly contradicted her letter to me on how many documents were at the City Building for review on 10 August 2017. How I would be advised when the "in excess of 1000 documents" would be available in 2- 3 weeks. And when available I would be advised on reviewing and picking what I wanted.
THIS AFTER THE CITY HAD REVIEWED THEM. HOW COULD THE CITY UNDERSTAND HIPA LAW BETTER THAN HIGHMARK OR SCHWENDEMAN? THIS WAS I BELIEVE ABOUT HIDING OTHER INFORMATION THAN PERSONAL HEALTH ISSUES? I ALREADY KNOW ALL ABOUT MR. RAPP'S ISSUE AND WHAT HE HAS ALLEGEDLY DONE FOR YEARS?
How I would have a City Computer to use on the 23rd of August? Her position that there was a computer in the room on the 23d of August with documents on it that I refused to review was not true. There was NO computer in that room. Her very statement on there being 125 documents compiled from the City that day was True. But no mention in her letter of any number on a Computer or of a Computer.
Her statement that the only documents I did not get were the 24 I did not take on the 23rd. It was pointed out again and again on documents that were provided to me where they were page 1 of 23 (2 of 23 missing), or pages 1,3,5,7,9, 11, 13 and so on with no 2,4,6,8,10 or 12 for other documents missing? Did not want to hear that of course. Plus should have received those in the later provided CD from the Defense Attorney. Mr. Bays clearly said there "are no more documents, he has them all".
Her statement that Schwendeman did NOT send out "Request for Proposal" for Health Insurance while I had several "Thank you for your submission for a bid, but we are declining to bid" or words very similar too the above from Companies such as Cigna/ Tokio. I have the documents.
Her statement that while there "were no fully redacted pages, there were partial redacted pages so no requirement for a Vaughn Index". The facts of redacted partial pages is the reason for the Vaughn List to determine per West Virginia Appeals Court Rulings on what can/ should be provided to the Requestor (me) and what may not be. City exceeded its authority big time.
I pointed out per the Transcript of the 29th of January 2018 where when Judge Beane asked about "does the City have the records showing the annual cost coverage for Highmarks's healthcare insurance policies"? Mr. Bays stated "I think it was provided, Your Honor?" Judge Beane than asked And are these records stored on paper files or in the City's computer, or how are they stored? Mr. Bays than "sandbagged him after he started talking about how the City via Schwendeman to procure insurance products. There were NO documents showing that requested cost. And ONLY in a FOIA in November of 2017 did the City finally show the Document by Name that I had not known in August 2017 for the FOIA in that Lawsuit. It has been the practice before to demand an exact name for a Document before release instead of reasonable specificity which is usually the best a layman could do, so City could avoid disclosure?
It was noted in my 16 July response to Mr. Bays heaving of a pile of you know what against Lady Justice to see what would stick that the City had failed to follow the State's Liberal Purchasing Law but even worse was not following its own City Ordinance. Schwendeman who was the Representative for the City is obligated to follow State Guidelines and was running footloose and fancy free to do what it was deemed necessary to insure Highmark remained the winning bidder year after year as it has been the provider for the past 20 years? Does anyone understand Sole Source Bid; Sweetheart Deal and Conflicts of Interest?
I noted the other day that the problems of Health Insurance were well documented. I have just tripped over the tip of the iceberg and how rotten that bidding seems till now?
Mr. Elam, you are NOT asking the right questions.
City Council Meeting tonight 7:00 P.M. I will post more on that later. 'nuff said'.