This is a classic case of the "court of public opinion" failing to be exposed to, let alone actually weigh, all of the facts ... that the State has been continuously operating on the State Center site for 60 years in now-antiquated buildings (which presumably cost far more to operate than new structures ever would), has developed significant transit hubs (light rail and subway – any other places in Baltimore where those intersect ?!) to support that employment base, and is merely seeking to keep those people “in place” but in a manner which helps an otherwise blighted area of Baltimore potentially be reborn, is being obfuscated by erroneous claims from a group of politically-connected owners of Class B buildings which could no more support a 100,000 sf law firm user than 500,000++ square feet of modern State space requirements.

Has anyone bothered to note that the State is not going to change its total use of space in that location at all ?! Were Angelos, Kornblat, et al the developer of State Center, would this litigation ever have been filed ?! Where were the cries of angst against Paterakis about his ever-expanding efforts at Harbor East – which truly have resulted in massive net relocations out of the core downtown area (Legg Mason being a very significant and prominent example) ?

Government is way too involved in development in Baltimore. Check out the Daily Record's series on the East Baltimore Biotech Park north of Hopkins. It seems no one cares tax dollars are financing large-scale risky ventures that don't cost anything up front but sacrifice future property taxes to pay down debt. Enough debt - no State Center - no EBDI - no more Harbor Easts - no Superblock. Lower taxes for everyone instead of enriching the few. Either way I'm moving out of the city before these debts come due.

There's a hole in the city where good new state buildings could be: the current state office buildings are just a desert separating Bolton Hill from Mt. Vernon. Construction and labor costs are way low, since so many people are out of work, which makes hiring them sooner rather than later a really good idea. I've been hearing about, but lazily deciding not to attend, public meetings on the plans for this site for at least a year. What exactly is the problem with moving ahead?

"Moving way too fast "?!? Far too little oversight and review ?!? I guess Mssrs. Hancock and Vanko only recently moved to the State, as this is the only way they could have missed the many many public meetings and 5 Board of Public Works hearings over the past 5 years ? This development should happen as soon as possible and should be warmly welcomed by all in the City, especially the downtown bellyachers.