Whatever it was, it must have been bad
The city Board of Estimates this week approved a secret $200,000 settlement to a person who had sued the Baltimore Police Department, saying the terms and name would be kept confidential to avoid "unfair damage to the career and reputation of the plaintiff." It also keeps the public from knowing just what the police department did to harm this person so severely.
When questioned, officials first said they would provide a range - $100,000 to $250,000 - for the settlement, then later said that the exact figure could be disclosed and was wrongly left off the agenda by the comptroller's office. George Nilson, the city solicitor, provided the amount Friday but said the city agreed not to discuss the details of case. He called the secret nature of the settlement "extreme" but with good reason.
"It was an honest mistake, quite clearly, that resulted in unfortunate and unintended harm to a citizen's reputation," Nilson said. "The community reached a cruelly wrong conclusion about this individual, based on this mistake, and this individual was harmed in personal and professional ways. I'm just not going to participate in furthering that unfortunate harm."
Nilson said in his three years as city solicitor, such a private settlement was a first, and he did not anticipate the city handling future claims in a similar manner. He also said the plaintiff was not a city resident, but he declined to provide additional details, citing the settlement agreement.








Comments
What the hell?
Posted by: Me | March 13, 2010 5:34 PM
Didn't I just hear they settled with the former Police Commissioner for six figures?
That one would be new to me. They were, however, arguing his case before the Maryland Court of Appeals. Dwight Pettit and Neal Janey, two of the defense attorneys I quote in the article, represent Kevin Clark and said they didnt know what this settlement referred to. I'm quite sure Kevin Clark would want people to know that he finally got (some of) his back pay and damages. -Justin
Posted by: Anonymous | March 13, 2010 7:14 PM
As a leading media outlet in the Baltimore market, the Baltimore Sun should have the responsibility and obligation to fully pursue the details of the secret settlement using the Freedom of Information Act and any other tools at its disposal. Don't the Sunshine statues take precedence over side agreements when it comes to the use of public monies?
Working on it. But you should also know that the Public Information Act isnt worth the the paper its written on and there's no agency or official in the state willing to back us up in forcing government to adhere to it. The only recourse is legal action. I could start a separate blog dedicated just to the difficulty we have getting documents. -Justin
Posted by: concerned taxpayer | March 14, 2010 11:24 AM
I don't get it. How could your reputation be ruined if nobody knows who you are? I guess we'd have a better chance of finding out who just deposited $200,000 in the bank?
Posted by: Josh | March 17, 2010 8:17 AM