You are on page 1of 20

Ethics Complaint : Frederick County Ethics Commission

Citizen Testimony : Argument, Evidence, Citations and Opinion
Submitted by : Patrick Allen ... patrickwilliamallen@comcast.net

Executive Summary
There is a culture of corruption in Frederick County, Maryland which has resulted in a demoralized county workforce and a tangible distrust by the citizens of Frederick County toward those who have the responsibility to govern. As the governing framework for ethics oversight in Frederick County, Maryland, as it applies to County Commissioners, County Employees and Members of Boards and Commissions, citizens must rely on the interpretation of the county’s Ethics Ordinance by the county’s Ethics Commission members. In the opinion of the petitioner, based on a thorough review of the Frederick County Ethics Ordinance, reasonable judgment and common sense, the Frederick County Ethics Commissioners have a sworn obligation to the citizens of the county to consider and evaluate both direct and circumstantial evidence before arriving at a finding to any petitioner’s request. (see Definitions for clarification of Direct and Circumstantial Evidence) In addition to Sections, sub-Sections and Paragraphs contained in the Frederick County Ethics Ordinance, the Statement of Purpose, establishes a subjective component into the due process, which stipulates: The Board of County Commissioners, recognizing that our system of representative government is dependent in part upon the people maintaining the highest trust in their public officials and employees, finds and decrees that the people have a right to be assured that the impartiality and independent judgment of public officials and employees will be maintained. It is evident that this confidence and trust is eroded when the conduct of the county’s business is subject to improper influence and even the appearance of improper influence. While Ethics Commission members may desire the existence of “smoking gun” evidence, for the Commissioners to find in the affirmative on behalf of a citizen petitioner, a complaint request only needs to demonstrate that smoke is present and further investigation is warranted. It is the sworn responsibility and obligation of the Commissioners to initiate the appropriate investigative process to facilitate the completion of due process. It is important to note and consider … Based on comprehensive direct and circumstantial evidence, it is not incumbent on the petitioner to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an individual is unethical, but instead, through the use of direct and circumstantial evidence to raise reasonable doubt regarding an individual’s ethics. This document presents direct and circumstantial evidentiary artifacts which demonstrate a culture of unethical, if not illegal, activities between and among Frederick County government elected officials, appointees and / or employees. As an addendum to support an Ethics complaint filing to the Frederick County Ethics Commission and County Attorney, dated Tuesday, February 4, 2014, the content of this document is provided by the petitioner as testimony to the Frederick County Ethics Commission, to be entered into the record and available for other investigative entities.

1

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Definitions .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Circumstantial Evidence.................................................................................................................................. 3 Direct Evidence............................................................................................................................................... 3 Quid Pro Quo.................................................................................................................................................. 3 Expert Opinion and Testimony ........................................................................................................................ 3 Ethics Ordinance and / or Illegal Activity Allegations and Charges .......................................................................... 4 Allegation / Charge 1 – Frederick County Privatization........................................................................................ 4 Allegation / Charge 2 – Sale of Montevue / Citizens ............................................................................................ 5 Allegation / Charge 3 – Acquisition of Confidential Courthouse Records ............................................................. 6 Allegation / Charge 4 – Business / Development Community Quid Pro Quo ........................................................ 7 Allegation / Charge 5 – Planning Commission Appointment(s) : Political Quid Pro Quo ....................................... 8 Allegation / Charge 6 – Supervisor / Subordinate Relations................................................................................. 9 Relevance of Allegations / Charges to Frederick County, Maryland Ethics Ordinance............................................11 Ethics : Statement of Purpose and Applicability..................................................................................................11 Ethics : Conflict of Interest .................................................................................................................................11 Ethics : Enforcement..........................................................................................................................................12 Recommendation Summary ..................................................................................................................................13 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................13 Investigative Methodologies...............................................................................................................................14 Incorrect Investigative Methodology................................................................................................................14 Correct Investigative Methodology..................................................................................................................14 Conducting The Investigation.............................................................................................................................15 Allegation / Charge 1 – Frederick County Privatization....................................................................................15 Allegation / Charge 2 – Sale of Montevue / Citizens. .......................................................................................16 Allegation / Charge 3 – Acquisition of Confidential Courthouse Records. ........................................................16 Allegation / Charge 4 – Business / Development Community Quid Pro Quo....................................................17 Allegation / Charge 5 – Planning Commission Appointment(s) : Political Quid Pro Quo...................................17 Allegation / Charge 6 – Supervisor / Subordinate Relations. ...........................................................................18 Appendix : Supporting Documentation and Artifacts ..............................................................................................19 Quid Pro Quo eMail Between Blaine Young and Patrick Allen............................................................................19

2

Definitions: Circumstantial Evidence. Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact. [1] Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning..
There is a public perception that circumstantial evidence is weak ("all they have is circumstantial evidence"), but the probable conclusion from the circumstances may be so strong that there can be little doubt as to a vital fact ("beyond a reasonable doubt" [2] in a criminal case, and "a preponderance of the evidence" in a civil case). Evidence that tends to prove a fact by proving other events or circumstances which afford a basis for a reasonable inference of [3] the occurrence of the fact at issue.
___________________________

Direct Evidence. Direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion. In direct evidence a witness relates what he or she [4] directly experienced. Usually the experience is by sight or hearing.
Evidence in the form of testimony from a witness who actually saw, heard, or touched the subject of questioning.
___________________________
[5]

Quid Pro Quo. “Something For Something”, “Favor For Favor”.
In legal usage, quid pro quo indicates that an item or a service has been traded in return for something of value, usually when [6] the propriety or equity of the transaction is in question. Something that is given to you or done for you in return for something you have given to or done for someone else.
[7]

Quid pro quo Harassment is the most commonly recognized form of workplace harassment. It occurs when job benefits, including employment, promotion, salary increases, shift or work assignments, performance expectations and other conditions of employment, are made contingent on the provision of sexual favors, usually to an employer, supervisor or agent of the employer [8] who has the authority to make decisions about employment actions. This form of harassment is often prohibited as a matter of criminal law (the crime in some cases is labeled "abuse of power"), as [9] a form of sex discrimination or as a violation of labor or tort law. In politics quid quo pro can refer to the use of political office for personal benefit. For instance, an elected official might promise favorable governmental treatment to a person [business] in exchange for something of value [payment, campaign contribution]. This form of quid pro quo would be a violation of the law. On the federal level, the Hobbs Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 1951 [1994]) makes it a felony for a public official to extort property under color of office. Trading campaign contributions for promises of [9] official actions or inactions are also prohibited under the act.
___________________________

Expert Opinion and Testimony. Testimony about a scientific, technical, or professional issue given by a person qualified to
testify because of familiarity with the subject or special training in the field. is defined as the petitioner’s experience as a political strategist.
Sources and References: [1] Circumstantial Evidence : Wikipedia [2] Circumstantial Evidence : Law Dictionary [3] Circumstantial Evidence : Merriam-Webster Dictionary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=191 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/circumstantial%20evidence
[10]

For the purposes of this document, expert opinion

[4] Direct Evidence : State v Famber, 358 Mo 288, 214 SW2d 40 [5] Direct Evidence : Law Dicitonary http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Direct+Evidence [6] [7] [8] [9] Quid Pro Quo : Wikipedia Quid Pro Quo : Merriam-Webster Dictionary Quid Pro Quo Harassment : Advocates For Human Rights Quid Pro Quo : Law Dictionary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quid_pro_quo http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quid%20pro%20quo http://www.stopvaw.org/quid_pro_quo_sexual_harassment http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/quid+pro+quo

[10] Expert Opinion : Corpus Juris Secundum. 2002. St. Paul, Minn.: West Group. 3

Ethics Ordinance and / or Illegal Activity Allegations and Charges
The information in this section of the document provides allegations and / or charges of Frederick County Ethics Ordinance violations and / or violations of Maryland statute(s). Each allegation and / or charge of violation includes evidence and opinion related to the allegation and / or charge. Each of the cited allegations and / or charges is based on stipulation(s) within the Frederick County Ethics Ordinance, CHAPTER 1-7.1: ETHICS, to include the following chapter paragraphs and / or sections:    Statement of Purpose Section 1-7.1-2, Applicability  (A)

Section 1-7.1-5, Conflict of Interest  (G) Use of prestige of office, (1), (4)(a), (I)

Section 1-7.1-10, Enforcement  (A) The Commission may:, (3), (B)(1)(a)(b)(c), (C)(1), (D)(1)(2), (E)

Further explanation regarding linkage between allegations / charges presented in this document and the Frederick County Ethics Ordinance are discussed in the Relevance of Allegations section. Allegation / Charge 1 – Frederick County Privatization. “Privatization is a ruse”. Unethical and / or illegal use of prestige of office by the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners, Blaine R. Young, and possibly other members of the BoCC regarding the attempted privatization of Frederick County operations and workforce. Mr. Young’s statement, “Privatization is a ruse” is direct evidence and supported by circumstantial evidence presented in this allegation narrative. Evidence : During the twelve months that I worked closely with Mr. Young on his radio show, specifically the weekly Friday show referred to as Fun Fact Fridays, I got to know Mr. Young and his many personal and political nuances. During the period, early October, 2012 to late April, 2013, I worked as a paid adviser to Mr. Young with respect to political matters. It was during this period, and specifically January thru March, 2013, that Mr. Young provided me with information regarding his political activities as President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners. At one of the meetings in February, 2013, with the subject matter discussion focused on the privatization of Frederick County operations / services, Mr. Young stated his attempt(s) to privatize aspects of county government in Frederick County, Maryland, was a ruse. This included the contractual relationship with and county expenditures to Mr. Oliver Porter. The below image has been scanned from my personal notebook and presents my noted comment(s) to Mr. Young’s remarks during this meeting.

Additionally, the fact that taxpayer funded trips, outside Frederick County, Maryland, were discussed in which it was stated that these trips were attended by one of more members of the Board of County Commissioners and may have included non-spousal companions. These trips included one or more destinations in Georgia and one or more western United States destinations.
4

Opinion : Mr. Young was using privatization activities, paid for with taxpayer money, as a trial balloon to see how far he could push his agenda for the county and how much push back he might receive from citizens. For Mr. Young, with the probable collusion with one or more fellow County Commissioners, to engage in constructing a politically and emotionally charged hoax against the citizens of the county using county taxpayer dollars to pay the expenses is reprehensible and a clear abuse of his elected position as well as those who collaborated with him to effect the hoax.

Allegation / Charge 2 – Sale of Montevue / Citizens. “The deal is in the bag”. Unethical and / or illegal use of prestige of office by the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners, Blaine R. Young, and possibly other members of the BoCC regarding the attempted sale of Montevue Assisted Living and Citizens Rehabilitative Care Center located in Frederick County, Maryland. Mr. Young’s statements, “The deal is in the bag” and “I have the deal in hand” is direct evidence and supported by circumstantial evidence presented in this allegation narrative. Evidence : During the twelve months that I worked closely with Mr. Young on his radio show, specifically the weekly Friday show referred to as Fun Fact Fridays, I got to know Mr. Young and his many personal and political nuances. During the period, early October, 2012 to late April, 2013, I worked as a paid adviser to Mr. Young with respect to political matters. It was during this period, and specifically January thru March, 2013, that Mr. Young provided me with information regarding his political activities as President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners. At one of the meetings in February, 2013, with the subject matter discussion focused on the sale of Montevue / Citizens, Mr. Young stated, “The deal is in the bag”. With further clarification, Mr. Young stipulated that he had the “deal in hand” and it included individual(s) or business entity(ies) in or near Prince George’s County, Maryland.

Mr. Young made it clear that he had a deal in hand to sell the Montevue / Citizens for $35M. As can be seen from the notes, this amount is noted, along with a side note referencing the business relation he purported to have with an entity in Prince George’s County, Maryland.

5

The next image has been scanned from this same notebook page and presents notations of Mr. Young’s remarks during this meeting regarding Montevue / Citizens.

Opinion : Mr. Young’s remarks, that he had been, or was currently at the time, involved in backroom discussions, using handshake commitments to sell the Montevue / Citizen properties for an agreed upon price to a specifically selected buyer is both illegal and a direct contradiction to transparency and open meetings when conducting county business in Frederick County, Maryland.

Allegation / Charge 3 – Acquisition of Confidential Courthouse Records. Unethical and / or illegal use of prestige of office by the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners, Blaine R. Young, and possibly other members of the BoCC regarding the pursuit and / or acquisition of confidential county courthouse records for the purposes of political gain. Mr. Young’s statements that a possible political opponent is engaged in personal activities which can be surfaced from confidential courthouse records, with additional statements made over a several week period regarding his efforts to obtain the confidential courthouse records, is direct evidence and supported by circumstantial evidence presented in this allegation narrative. During the January to April, 2013 time frame, Mr. Young often discussed with me the upcoming 2014 Frederick County Charter Government County Executive race … his off and on thoughts of running for the office as well as who he considered to be potential political opponents. It was during one of our February, 2013 meetings that he told me he wanted to acquire confidential courthouse records, which he believed existed, which could and should be used to “smear” the person he believed would be his principal opponent. He stated he was “working” on getting the records. He also stated his interest in “staking out” a specific restaurant location in downtown Frederick where he believed direct observation and / or clandestine pictures could be taken to support his political campaign against this individual. When Mr. Young was confronted with the expense projections to place someone at the restaurant on the hope that the political opponent would show up and pictures could be taken, he gave up on that idea, but continued to discuss acquiring courthouse records. Over the course of three weeks, Mr. Young was asked at our weekly meetings, “What have you got” (referring to the courthouse records), to which Mr. Young would reply, “I’m working on it”. Evidence : The following images have been scanned from my meeting notebook and present Mr. Young’s identification of two possible and / or potential political opponents (first image) … noting his desire to investigate a specific individual. The second image, pixilated to obfuscate certain words and / or phrases, presents Mr. Young’s assertion / allegation regarding damaging information which Mr. Young believed is contained in confidential courthouse records.

6

Opinion : The information obfuscated by image pixilation presents Mr. Young’s specific allegation of damaging information against Jan Gardner, which he pursued with both investigation of Mrs. Gardner’s activities and the pursuit of confidential courthouse records which he believed would validate his assertion(s). The un-pixilated version of this image will be provided to the Frederick County Ethics Commission for review and authentication. Mr. Young’s comments were clearly offered from his position of BoCC President and the inference that he could / will use the power of that position to obtain confidential information which is not accessible by private citizens. For anyone, and especially an elected public official, to pursue the acquisition of confidential courthouse records of a potential political opponent, nevertheless a private citizen, is reprehensible and without a doubt, illegal.

Allegation / Charge 4 – Business / Development Community Quid Pro Quo. Unethical and / or illegal use of prestige of office by the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners, Blaine R. Young, and possibly other members of the BoCC regarding a quid pro quo relationship between the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners and members in the business / development community. Mr. Young’s statement, “…- the regional business community will keep their promise based on what I have done for them already…” is direct evidence and supported by circumstantial evidence presented in this allegation narrative. As a paid political adviser to Mr. Young, during the period October 2012 – April 2013, Mr. Young and I often discussed his communications strategies as it relates to his position of BoCC President in Frederick County and the extent to which that strategy could / should scale to a broader constituency. Evidence : The below image has been scanned from an email conversation between Mr. Young and Patrick Allen. The full email content is provided in the appendix.

7

Opinion : Based on over twenty years of experience as a political strategist, it was obvious to me that Mr. Young had no intention to run for Governor in Maryland, but he did want to keep the prospect of a Gubernatorial run alive in order to effect financial contributions from supporters across the state. In the eMail exchange snippet above (see Appendix, Quid Pro Quo eMail Between Blaine Young and Patrick Allen for the complete conversation), Mr. Young makes it very clear that he expects “something for something” … the very definition of quid pro quo.

Allegation / Charge 5 – Planning Commission Appointment(s) : Political Quid Pro Quo. Unethical and / or illegal use of prestige of office by the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners, Blaine R. Young, and possibly other members of the BoCC regarding the appointment of members to the Frederick County Planning Commission. Mr. Young’s statement, “I’ve stacked the Planning Commission” is direct evidence and supported by circumstantial evidence presented in this allegation narrative. During several meetings in February, 2013, Mr. Young made it clear that he had “paved” the way for two persons to join the Frederick County Planning Commission. Specifically because he believed: 1. They would vote in favor of development initiatives put forward by Mr. Young, and 2. Their ascension to the Planning Commission would place each of these individuals in a better / stronger position as candidates, should they desire to run for County Council during the 2014 Frederick County Charter Government County Council election cycle. Evidence : The following image has been scanned from my meeting notebook and presents Mr. Young’s identification of two individuals (Bill Hall and Dwayne Robbins) who he elevated to the Frederick County Planning Commission, as a political quid pro quo, to effect Mr. Young’s development agenda. Opinion : During the February-March, 2013 time frame, as Mr. Young described to me his political intentions as Frederick County BoCC President, to maneuver and manipulate process and people to effect his political agenda, he was very clear that elevating these two individuals to the Frederick County Planning Commission would serve his immediate political needs as well as position these two individuals for successful election campaigns should they desire to run for Frederick County Charter Government County Council positions. As stated by Mr. Young, with two members of his posse on the County Council, should he [Mr. Young} run for and win the Charter Government County Executive race, he would already have two votes in his pocket.
8

Allegation / Charge 6 – Supervisor / Subordinate Relations. Unethical personal relationship between the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners President, Blaine R. Young, and the Frederick County Budget Officer, Regina Williams Howell. This allegation and / or charge is significant insofar as it presents unethical, if not illegal conduct, based on the Frederick County Ethics Ordinance [Section 1-7.1-5, Conflict of Interest] and / or Maryland Adultery statute(s). The allegation that Blaine Young, President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners has been and / or is involved in an extramarital relationship with a senior Frederick County employee has been the topic of conversation and open discussion in and around Frederick for months. Often times referred to as the worst kept secret in the county. When Mr. Young was notified that these allegations would be published in a January 11, 2014 Frederick News-Post article, Mr. Young went on his radio show, January 10, 2014 and devoted five minutes to denying the allegation(s) and proffering to his radio show audience that this was nothing more than a political smear campaign. In addition to Mr. Young’s radio show denial of an extramarital affair with a county employee who is also married, the following comment(s) appeared in Frederick News-Post articles between the dates, January 11-15, 2014: January 11, 2014 : In a Friday phone interview, Young called Allen's request "garbage." "I've only ever maintained professional relationships with those that work in the workplace, be it as commissioner or alderman," said Young. Though Young and the employee might have been seen in public together, allegations of an affair between the two are untrue, he said. Young acknowledged that he and his wife, Karen, are "separated and having marital issues." January 14, 2014 : The Frederick County Ethics Commission today denied a request to investigate an alleged relationship between Commissioners President Blaine Young and a county employee. “I had no doubt that this politically-motivated smear tactic would be denied by the ethics commission,” Young said today in a prepared statement. January 15, 2014 : "These kinds of attacks are the lowest form of attack upon solution-oriented politicians like
me" .

Mr. Young had several opportunities, during the above dates, to correct the record and provide the general public and members of the Frederick County Ethics Commission with the truth. But, by his actions, he chose to continue lying, which resulted in Mr. Young’s comments to his radio audience that he in fact had left his wife and children in August of 2013 and was “seeing” and had been seen around town with a county employee. It is important to note that Mr. Young’s vehement denials ahead of the Ethics Commission meeting on Monday, January 13, 2014, clearly demonstrate and should be interpreted as Mr. Young’s attempt to manipulate due process by the Ethics Commission. The fact that Mr. Young attempted to influence the Ethics Commission with his denial remarks should itself be considered an ethics violation. In the February, 2014 edition of Frederick Magazine, Showman and the Showdown, the following is contained in the newsstand and online editions: Young’s contending with allegations of an affair with a county employee. Young’s response: No affair. He’s been separated from his wife since August 2013, and dating a county employee. County human resources have cleared him of wrongdoing, he says. If Mr. Young’s ethics are not governed by the county employee handbook, then questions have to be raised regarding his comments to the Frederick Magazine. Was Mr. Young seeking “clearance” for himself or his alleged paramour?

9

Mr. Young’s responses to yes / no questions have to be considered as suspect regarding any truth. Given the fact that Mr. Young lied for months regarding his separation from his family and his involvement with a senior county employee, Mr. Young’s “clearing” by county human resources can only be taken with a grain of salt. Statements provided by a senior county employee, public and confidential sources: Senior County Employee : Regarding the allegation of the relationship between Blaine Young and the Frederick County Budget office staffer, “The morale at Winchester Hall is horrible. You can cut the tension with a knife. You have to careful what you say, and who you say it to, so it does not get back to Blaine”. Public Source : But, if in fact there is an affair / dating going on with the county employee in charge of the budget, paid by our tax dollars, in charge of accounting for our tax dollars, then to me it is a different story, a news story. In all of the places I have lived, this would be an issue calling to be resolved [investigated]. I would hope it would be, for it is the public trust that is at stake. Confidential Source : I got the information from a very close friend of his new female of interest. I hear it’s going more public each day because they are in love! Confidential Source : The affair is all over town anyway.....I heard it in a downtown restaurant from someone over the weekend. Confidential Source : In August I went into Starbucks downtown and Blaine and the lady you just pictured were sitting at a table together and they were just SO into each other. Like staring deeply into one another's eyes and flirting. I thought at the time it seemed pretty odd.. like "who is this chick and why is she so into Blaine". Then when his affair was revealed and now with this picture it all makes sense. Confidential Source : Blaine spotted with county budget office gal on a secluded section of Carroll Creek during a lunchtime walk last week. It was odd. They were alone, or so they thought.
NOTE : Each of the above sources are well known, by name, in and around Frederick County, Maryland.

Opinion : Absent of “smoking gun” images showing Mr. Young and the senior county Budget Office employee naked in bed or coming out of a motel room together, the information provided in this section, and specifically statements by sources, provide strong circumstantial evidence of an unethical, if not illegal, relationship. It is important to note and seriously consider the possible ramifications – to workplace morale, if not questionable and / or unethical business practices – when a married chief executive is engaged in an illicit relationship with a married county employee who serves in a senior budget / financial position … each not married to the other. The information provided by above sources which place the two together in less than professional situations raises serious questions regarding Mr. Young’s previously stated, but currently retracted, denials of any relationship as well as contradictions regarding the relationship timeline as promoted by Mr. Young versus the timeline provided by reputable witnesses. There is a very strong indication that Maryland’s adultery statute(s) have been violated by one or both of the participants in this relationship. The state of Maryland still has what are known as "adultery laws" that afford relief to innocent spouses who file for divorce on those grounds. MD Code Family Law §7-103. Generally, adultery is defined as voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a person other than that person's husband or wife. The sexual intercourse necessary for adultery must involve some penetration of the female organ by the male organ, but a “completion” of the sexual intercourse is not required. MD Code Criminal Law §10-501. Many states, including Maryland, make adultery a criminal offense.

10

Relevance of Allegations / Charges to Frederick County, Maryland Ethics Ordinance

Ethics : Statement of Purpose and Applicability

The Frederick County, Maryland Ethics Ordinance Statement of Purpose (SOP) is a comprehensive and declarative overview from which Ethics Ordinance sections, sub-sections and paragraphs are derived. Two key and critical phrases within the SOP are: “…recognizing that our system of representative government is dependent in part upon the people maintaining the highest trust in their public officials and employees…”, and “…confidence and trust is eroded when the conduct of the county’s business is subject to improper influence and even the appearance of improper influence…” The evidence contained in this document clearly resonates with the spirit of governance reflected in these important words within Frederick County, Maryland’s Ethics Ordinance Statement of Purpose. A spirit of governance, which is enumerated in subsequent sections, sub-section and paragraphs, and defines the foundation on which the citizens of Frederick County place their trust in those who have been elected to office and those who have been appointed to governing boards and commissions.

Ethics : Conflict of Interest

Evidence presented in this document clearly demonstrates how Blaine Young and possibly others in elected, appointed or staff positions in Frederick County government used the prestige of office to facilitate questionable, if not illegal, practices for personal and / or political gain. Specifically, where the chief executive of the county is engaged in an extra-marital relationship with a senior county budget office employee, who is also married, questions have to be raised and answered regarding the impartiality and / or impairment of judgment by the chief executive and / or the senior county budget office employee regarding their professional responsibilities to the positions which they hold. An extra-marital affair between two Frederick County personalities, not married to one anther, is highly suspect and demands further investigation.

11

Ethics : Enforcement

Paragraphs (A) and (B) constitute negligible satisfaction to the citizens of Frederick County, insofar as these paragraphs present nothing more than a slap on the wrist to those alleged of illegal conduct. Paragraph (C), however, stipulates that the Ethics Commission can request relief by the County Attorney through the Circuit Court, which is where the investigation of unethical, if not illegal, conduct should be addressed with regard to Mr. Young and possibly other elected officials and employees in Frederick County, Maryland. Prior to a comprehensive investigation, it is premature to look toward Paragraph (D) for relief, but it is clear that a pathway is both available and possible to this conclusion. Based on an objective review of the evidence presented in this document, Paragraph (E) stipulates an obvious path to conclusion … A County official or employee found to have violated this chapter is subject to disciplinary or other appropriate personnel action, including removal from office, disciplinary action, suspension of salary, or other sanction. This paragraph in the Frederick County Ethics Ordinance should not preclude criminal prosecution.

12

Recommendation Summary
To deny the plausibility and probability of unethical, if not illegal, conduct and activities by elected offices and senior government employees demonstrates willful ignorance and a purposeful obstruction toward seeking the truth.
_____________________________________________________________

Introduction Obtaining truth is often times an elusive endeavor. The process is further complicated when those who are under the spotlight demonstrate untruthfulness. As an example:  Prior to the January 13, 2014 meeting of the Frederick County Ethics Commission, to review a complaint against Mr. Blaine Young submitted by a citizen, Mr. Young vehemently denied any allegations regarding a questionable, unethical and / or illegal relationship with a senior county budget office employee. The Frederick County Ethics Commission ruled to deny the complaint, but did not exonerate Mr. Young with its finding. The Commission did, however, provide a peculiar response to the petitioner: “The Ethics Commission cannot address general complaints that an official or employee has acted improperly or unethically unless there has been a violation of the Ethics Ordinance itself. Your request does not contain any facts that would, even if accurate, constitute a violation of the Ethics Ordinance”.  Following the January 14, 2014 release of the Frederick County Ethics Commission ruling on the complaint, Mr. Young, through his weekday radio program, news media and a featured article in the Frederick Magazine, made statements which clearly confirmed the authenticity and accuracy of the allegations proffered in the initial complaint document.

This document contains facts, supported by direct evidence, which are accurate and constitute a violation of the Frederick County, Maryland Ethics Ordinance, and with a high degree of probability, Maryland criminal statute(s). As noted in the Frederick County Ethics Ordinance, Statement of Purpose: “…recognizing that our system of representative government is dependent in part upon the people maintaining the highest trust in their public officials and employees…”, and “…confidence and trust is eroded when the conduct of the county’s business is subject to improper influence and even the appearance of improper influence…”

The citizens of Frederick County must be assured that allegations as serious as those presented in this document are taken seriously by those who have the sworn duty and responsibility to conduct an investigation absent of personal and / or political influence. There are several issues, which raise the question of eroded confidence and trust as well as the appearance of improper influence. They are:     The Frederick County Ethics Commission is hand-picked and appointed by the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC). BoCC President, Blaine Young and Ethics Commission Chairperson, Harold Otis, worked closely together on former congressman Roscoe Bartlett’s re-election campaign during the 2012 election cycle. BoCC President, Blaine Young, is cited in this document as one of the principals to be investigated. The Frederick County Attorney’s office, under the leadership of Mr. John Mathias, has made questionable statements and rulings regarding the sale of Montevue / Citizens, with Mr. Young’s participation in the Montevue / Citizens sale proceedings cited in this document.

The question of impartiality is justified and should be taken into serious consideration.
13

Investigative Methodologies There are generally two investigative methodologies utilized to seek and find the facts to support any allegations made toward a public citizen and / or an elected public official. They are:   Ask the public citizen and / or elected public official a series of yes / no questions and reach a finding based on the content of one or more interviews. Use investigative tools and techniques to reveal indisputable facts regarding any allegations made against a public citizen and / or elected public official.

During the course of any Ethics Commission proceedings, and based on the seriousness of allegations presented in this document, the Frederick County Ethics Commission is obligated to remain cognizant that these proceedings may lead the Commissioners to exercise one or more actions contained in Section 1-7.1-10 [Enforcement], Paragraph (C), sub-Paragraph (1), and Paragraph (D), sub-Paragraphs (1) and (2) and Paragraph (E) which stipulate:
(C) (1) Upon request of the Commission, the County Attorney may file a petition for injunctive or

other relief in the Circuit Court of Frederick County, or in any other court having proper venue for the purpose of requiring compliance with the provisions of this chapter.
(D) In addition to any other enforcement provisions in this chapter, a person who the Commission

or a court finds has violated this chapter:
(1) Is subject to termination or other disciplinary action and (2) May be suspended from receiving payment of salary or other compensation pending full

compliance with the terms of an order of the Commission or a court.
(E) A County official or employee found to have violated this chapter is subject to disciplinary or

other appropriate personnel action, including removal from office, disciplinary action, suspension of salary, or other sanction.

Incorrect Investigative Methodology Given Mr. Young’s documented pattern of deception, the underlying facts to allegations and charges presented in this document cannot be obtained through the use of casual question and answer interviews between the Ethics Commissioners and Mr. Young.

Correct Investigative Methodology As noted in the Introduction to this section of the document, the question of an impartial investigation weighs heavy over the citizens of Frederick County, Maryland. To remove any appearance of partiality between the principals or their associates cited through allegations in this document, it is strongly recommended that the following actions be taken by the Frederick County Ethics Commission and the Frederick County Attorney:  Frederick County Ethics Commission. Lacking subpoena power and forensic investigative resources, the Frederick County Ethics Commission should refer this matter to the County Attorney’s Office for resolution. Frederick County Attorney. To ensure investigative impartiality and fairness, the Frederick County Attorney should request a special prosecutor from the Maryland State Attorney General’s office to oversee and manage an independent forensic investigation.

The shear size and scope of the culture of corruption within Frederick County government cannot be brushed away as a figment of someone’s imagination. There is simply too much direct and circumstantial evidence to look aside and pretend that it does not exist.
14

Conducting The Investigation An investigation into the allegations and charges of unethical, if not illegal, conduct by one or more elected public officials and / or county employees can only be performed using fundamental investigative procedures and forensic investigative techniques. These aspects of investigation are defined as:  Fundamental Investigative Procedures. To overcome the inherent questionability of casual interviews, a polygraph examination should be conducted for each principal cited in this section of the document. The polygraph, alone, will give investigators what they need to determine if they should move forward with their investigation regarding the person under examination.  Forensic Investigative Techniques. Today we have easy access and archives of investigative information from video cameras, micro recorders, emails, text messages, sexting messages and phone records … a virtual blueprint and fingerprint from which dots are connected and indisputable evidence can be obtained.

NOTE: It is important to note that forensic investigative techniques should and must include professional and personal email accounts and phone records. With subpoena power and forensic techniques, personal email accounts, such as GMail, Yahoo, HotMail, etc., can be identified and evaluated even if the account has been terminated by the user.
_____________________________________________________________

Allegation / Charge 1 – Frederick County Privatization. Type of Investigation : Polygraph Examination and Forensic Investigation of phone records, text messages and email records. Scope of Investigation : The following individuals should be included in the investigation of this allegation:      Blaine Young, President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Billy Shreve, Member, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Kirby Delauter, Member, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Kelly Schulz, Delegate, Maryland House of Delegates Oliver Porter, PPP Associates, LLC, Sandy Springs, Georgia

Records Search Time Period : Professional and personal phone records, text messages and email records should be subpoenaed for the following time period : July 1, 2010 to Present, with a specific focus on 90 days prior to June 14, 2011 and 60 days following this date. Investigation Objective : Regarding this allegation / charge, the investigation should focus on communication and / or correspondence between and among the individuals cited looking for any indication of quid pro quo and / or misappropriation of taxpayer monies. In the case of Kelly Schulz, Delegate, Maryland House of Delegates, the investigation should look for any indication that Frederick County taxpayer money was expended to cover costs related to her travel, lodging, food or beverage when accompanying Commissioner Billy Shreve on any trips designated as county business.

15

Allegation / Charge 2 – Sale of Montevue / Citizens. Type of Investigation : Polygraph Examination and Forensic Investigation of phone records, text messages and email records. Scope of Investigation : The following individuals should be included in the investigation of this allegation:       Blaine Young, President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Billy Shreve, Member, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Kirby Delauter, Member, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners John Mathias, County Attorney, Frederick County, Maryland Real Estate Investment Brokers Marcus & Millichap Frederick County Manager Lori Depies, the Division Directors for Finance, Human Resources, and Procurement, as well as the County Attorney and a representative from The Community Foundation of Frederick County Unknown (To Be Determined) Officers and requisite staff personnel at Aurora Healthcare Management, Millersville, Maryland

Records Search Time Period : Professional and personal phone records, text messages and email records should be subpoenaed for the following time period : July 1, 2010 to the Present. Investigation Objective : Regarding this allegation / charge, the investigation should focus on communication and / or correspondence between and among the individuals cited looking for any indication of a pre-determined outcome and / or promise, to include quid pro quo, to Aurora Healthcare Management and / or Real Estate Investment Brokers Marcus & Millichap. Additionally, this allegation / charge, should focus on communication and / or correspondence between and among the Frederick County Manager Lori Depies, the Division Directors for Finance, Human Resources, and Procurement, as well as the County Attorney and a representative from The Community Foundation of Frederick County, insofar as their participation in the evaluation process of potential healthcare management firms and to what extent these individuals were instructed to conduct gratuitous inspections / evaluations of proposed candidate companies to effect the appearance of a comprehensive an professional process on behalf of the taxpayers of Frederick County, Maryland.

Allegation / Charge 3 – Acquisition of Confidential Courthouse Records. Type of Investigation : Polygraph Examination and Forensic Investigation of phone records, text messages and email records. Scope of Investigation : The following individuals should be included in the investigation of this allegation:   Blaine Young, President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Unknown (To Be Determined) Frederick County courthouse employee(s).

Records Search Time Period : Professional and personal phone records, text messages and email records should be subpoenaed for the following time period : July 1, 2012 to July 1, 2013. Investigation Objective : Regarding this allegation / charge, the investigation should focus on communication and / or correspondence between Mr. Blaine Young and unknown Frederick County courthouse insider(s) for any indication that Mr. Young solicited assistance from unknown Frederick County courthouse insider(s) to obtain confidential courthouse records associated with a private citizen and potential political opponent.
16

Allegation / Charge 4 – Business / Development Community Quid Pro Quo. Type of Investigation : Polygraph Examination and Forensic Investigation of phone records, text messages and email records. Scope of Investigation : The following individuals should be included in the investigation of this allegation:     Blaine Young, President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Billy Shreve, Member, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Kirby Delauter, Member, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Unknown (To Be Determined) Business / Residential development community person(s).

Records Search Time Period : Professional and personal phone records, text messages and email records should be subpoenaed for the following time period : July 1, 2010 to Present. Investigation Objective : Regarding this allegation / charge, the investigation should focus on communication and / or correspondence between and among the individuals cited looking for any indication of quid pro quo to the commercial / residential development community. Specifically, any promises and / or guarantees from Mr. Young or others to persons / businesses within the commercial / residential development community, or inferences to provide favored treatment to persons / businesses within the commercial / residential development community in exchange for personal and / or political financial gain for Mr. Young or others.

Allegation / Charge 5 – Planning Commission Appointment(s) : Political Quid Pro Quo. Type of Investigation : Polygraph Examination and Forensic Investigation of phone records, text messages and email records. Scope of Investigation : The following individuals should be included in the investigation of this allegation:      Blaine Young, President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Bill Hall, Member, Frederick County Planning Commission Dwayne Robbins, Member, Frederick County Planning Commission Billy Shreve, Member, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Kirby Delauter, Member, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners

Records Search Time Period : Professional and personal phone records, text messages and email records should be subpoenaed for the following time period : July 1, 2010 to Present. Investigation Objective : Regarding this allegation / charge, the investigation should focus on communication and / or correspondence between and among the individuals cited looking for any indication of quid pro quo toward installing Mr. Hall and Mr. Robbins to the Frederick County Planning Commission, for the purposes of providing favored rulings as well as Mr. Young’s statements that these persons were appointed to the Planning Commission to strengthen their political resumes toward any efforts on their part to run as County Council candidates during the 2014 Frederick County Charter Government County Council election cycle.

17

Allegation / Charge 6 – Supervisor / Subordinate Relations. Type of Investigation : Polygraph Examination and Forensic Investigation of phone records, text messages and email records. Scope of Investigation : The following individuals should be included in the investigation of this allegation:      Blaine Young, President, Frederick County Board of County Commissioners Regina Williams Howell, current Frederick County Budget Officer Spouses : Mrs. Young and Mr. Howell Debbie Williams, Mother of Regina Williams Howell Kelly Weaver, former acting Frederick County Budget Officer

Records Search Time Period : Professional and personal phone records, text messages and email records should be subpoenaed for the following time period : March 1, 2011 to Present. Investigation Objective : Regarding this allegation / charge, the investigation should focus on communication and / or correspondence between and among the individuals cited looking for any indication of an extra-marital (adulterous) relationship between Mr. Young and Mrs. Howell. In addition to investigating correspondence between Mr. Young and Mrs. Howell, critical information may be obtained by looking at correspondence between the spouses – Mr. and Mrs. Young and Mr. and Mrs. Howell – as well as correspondence between Mrs. Howell and her Mother, Debbie Williams. The forensic examination should also look for any indication of promise and / or favored treatment, from Mr. Young to Mrs. Howell, during the interview process for the permanent position of Frederick County Budget Officer when Mrs. Howell was chosen over five year acting Budget Officer, Kelly Weaver.

18

Appendix : Supporting Documentation and Artifacts
Quid Pro Quo eMail Between Blaine Young and Patrick Allen This conversation took place between Blaine Young, Frederick County BoCC President and Patrick Allen, paid political strategist to Blaine Young, who was operating as an opposition operative within the Blaine Young inner circle. -------- Original Message -------Subject: RE: RE: MORE INFO: Re: Emmitsburg News Sequestration Commentary Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 04:40:12 +0000 From: Blaine Young <BlaineYoung@clearchannel.com> To: Patrick Allen <patrickwilliamallen@comcast.net>, "blaine@blaineyoung.com" <blaine@blaineyoung.com>

Patrick - I have seen real name ID polls - Bongino blows everyone away - why he would want to run blows me away Hogan, Lollar and or Craig - do not concern me - I do not have an interest to blow 750,000 to win a primary - my ego is not that big or important to me Politics - is chess, checker, and poker
From: Patrick Allen [patrickwilliamallen@comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2013 10:33 PM To: blaine@blaineyoung.com Subject: Fwd: RE: MORE INFO: Re: Emmitsburg News Sequestration Commentary

you wrote : understand but you need to understand this - I do not have a lead at all BULLSHIT!! You don't have a lead because no one at this moment has a lead. You need to do what you are doing ... get out there and introduce yourself to constituents, no matter how many show up to see you. You are giving way too much credit to Bongino. FUCK HIM!! He doesn't have the chops to keep up with you across the State. While he may look and smell better during a General, Steele is is only competitor and he has serious issues getting through the Republican Primary. The moral of this story is that we don't talk and argue enough together. Patrick

-------- Original Message -------Subject: RE: MORE INFO: Re: Emmitsburg News Sequestration Commentary Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 02:41:32 +0000 From: Blaine Young <BlaineYoung@clearchannel.com> To: Patrick Allen <patrickwilliamallen@comcast.net>, "blaine@blaineyoung.com" <blaine@blaineyoung.com>

understand but you need to understand this - I do not have a lead at all Bongino is crushing everyone right now in the polls - because of his Senate run Craig - cannot fundraise at all - neither can Lollar Hogan will not run because he knows he can not win and his business is going to well to run Steele - will only run if it means he can make something positive out of it I will have a between - 750,000 to a million regards of what I say, do or write - the regional business community will keep their promise based on what I have done for them already The question they want to know is what I will run for or will I retire - that decision I will not make until the end of the year If Bongino or Steele runs it is over for Gov see you Monday
From: Patrick Allen [patrickwilliamallen@comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2013 8:03 PM To: blaine@blaineyoung.com Subject: MORE INFO: Re: Emmitsburg News Sequestration Commentary

Blaine,

19

The guys you are running against ... Craig, Bongino, Lollar, Hogan, Steele and others .... might be behind you in fundraising, but they only need one macaca moment to close the gap. That's what I am trying to say to you. We (you and me) have to be on full alert and on guard to ensure that your slim lead, based on fundraising, is not loast to a single word or statement. Regards, Patrick

-------- Original Message -------Subject: Re: Emmitsburg News Sequestration Commentary Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 20:49:50 -0500 From: Patrick Allen <patrickwilliamallen@comcast.net> To: Blaine Young <BlaineYoung@clearchannel.com>

Yo, Bro, ... calm down. I'm just reminding you that you are currently running for Governor of Maryland and every word you say or write is placed under the microscope. If you already have someone scrubbing your text ... for the reasons I've stated ... then disregard my comments. Reviewing for grammar, facts and legality is a far cry from reviewing for political context. I'll go with what ever your decision is, but I feel compelled to lodge my position on this. Regards, Patrick On 3/3/2013 7:31 PM, Blaine Young wrote: But what are you asking to review them also? Which is fine but that is what I am trying to figure out if that is what you are asking. I have several people that review them for grammar, facts and legality. I do not do it by myself. I have been writing for years - paid by the gazette for two years, the tentacle.com for several years off and on, The Emmitsburg Journal for around two years.
From: Patrick Allen [patrickwilliamallen@comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2013 6:08 PM To: Blaine Young Cc: blaine@blaineyoung.com Subject: Re: Emmitsburg News Sequestration Commentary

Political speak? I’m a politico, what the fuck did you expect? I'm talking about protecting you. I have multiple interests, but you are my first priority. I want to be sure that you are well protected, regardless of the current political path that you are on or a future path that you might take. As a friend to a friend ... you cannot isolate yourself and do things within a vacuum ... i.e., you can't do it by yourself. You have to have a trusted adviser and trust that adviser. Are you good? ... Yes. Do you have an ego? ... Holy shit, yes. Can you do it alone? ... No. Best Regards, Patrick On 3/3/2013 6:48 PM, Blaine Young wrote: so what are you trying to say - this is political speak
From: Patrick Allen [patrickwilliamallen@comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2013 2:59 PM To: blaine@blaineyoung.com Subject: Emmitsburg News Sequestration Commentary FROM : The Desk of your older brother, adviser and friend

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------The sequestration commentary you published in the Emmitsburg News is good ... actually, very good.
However, I just want to remind you of critical process. With your visibility widening ... new media articles and the in depth Feature in Fred Mag, the number of microscopes looking up your ass for anything they can find is increasing and will continue to increase. We have to be diligent regarding this and make sure we have a check-n-balance process step for anything that you are going to publish into the public domain. The purpose is not to imply that you have lessor writing skills ... your writing skills are fine ... it's to make sure that an unintended statement does not get loose or that one or two sentences get taken out of context resulting in the entirety of the text being overlooked and the message lost. Regards, Patrick
20