The leaders of the City of Ludington want the Ludington Avenue 'road diet' (LARD), a plan to cut the mostly 5 lane thoroughfare down to three lanes, that they are willing to break the law in order to prevent the public from seeing relevant studies and maps provided to them by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) at a secret meeting at city hall on October 25th.  The MDOT, likewise, have also refused to supply the public with E-mails pertaining to that meeting.  Here are the facts of the matter.

On November 2, 2017, the City of Ludington (COL) website and Facebook page notified the public that a meeting had been held between the 'City of Ludington' and agents of the MDOT to discuss issues concerning the LARD.  The public was promised more data from that conversation and from the MDOT in 4-6 weeks and that it was likely the MDOT would be at the January 8, 2018 city council meeting to discuss it fully. 

It has been seven weeks since that announcement; the only thing that has been issued is an update on the original post that was posted on December 19 saying the meeting was going to be held either late January or in February due to personnel changes at MDOT.  

The knowledge that the meeting occurred on October 25th came only from the response to a FOIA request sent to the COL immediately following the November 2nd announcement.  Eight days later, the COL asked for an extension of ten days.  Seventeen days after that I finally got a response.  As you can see, I only received a series of E-mails between the two bodies.

Which seemed odd in itself since my request was:  "A public memo from John Shay recently spoke of a meeting between the 'City' and MDOT representatives and updated a timeline (see http://www.ludington.mi.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=103 ).  I am requesting the right to inspect the following records or receive them electronically in .pdf format or on CD for recordings: "Any written records (including notes and stats) made or passed between city officials and MDOT officials during this meeting, including E-mails/attachments before and after the meeting (expressly about the meeting's content/discussions), referencing any aspect of the proposed road diet of Ludington Avenue."

This suggests that no notes or minutes were made at the meeting by the city, nor were any studies, data, or maps exchanged to the COL by MDOT officials, rather all references to the meeting was done through the correspondence I was given.  Which seemed rather odd, since the E-mails made after the meeting indicated there was more than just some informal talk going on.  The first chronologically E-mail of interest occurred early in an E-mail chain:

The concept that the trial period might be short if the road diet flops and does not work out is a myth, it will be at least a year, this is an understated fact by those calling for this trial run.  But this E-mail was incidental, the next substantive E-mail came on October 26, referencing the meeting held the previous day from Shay to 3 MDOT agents with the proposed press release attached:

MDOT's Marc Fredrickson replied back a few days later with a couple of E-mails to Shay offering ways to make the press release more palatable to the public:

As you can see, both the COL and MDOT are hoping to present a united front in what they were doing, but what indeed had they done?  There is nothing in the E-mails to suggest what was communicated to the 'City of Ludington' or who from the COL was in attendance.  The lack of any substance at the October 25th meeting triggered another FOIA request, this time to the MDOT on November 27, the day I received the records from the COL, which was effectively for the same previously requested records; the only words changed was referential to the receiver of the request.

The next day, I once again received a ten day extension, and they used all of that in a response that arrived in my inbox on December 19.  One might think I would get the same records, but all of the E-mails between the COL and MDOT about the meeting content, sparse in content themselves, were not included.  

What was included, however, was a map of a reconfigured-to-three-lanes Ludington Avenue and a 6 page capacity analysis written by Geometric and Operations Unit member Jason Ealy (otherwise known as Lucien Featherstone a self-professed multi-classed geek) dated September 15.  Both were allegedly passed along to the City of Ludington at this October 25, 2017 meeting, a meeting where their FOIA Coordinator had no records thereof.  

This capacity analysis says quite a lot in those six pages and comes to a conclusion which most people who travel in Ludington would likely not agree with.  This analysis has been sitting unread by the public for nearly a 100 days, while some unnamed Ludington officials at the October 25th meeting have kept it their guarded little secret from the public for just a little over 50 days.  Just like they've kept a schematic map which covers the whole length of the avenue showing the proposed restriping, the Jackson Road area shown here.

I will keep it and the map a secret from the rest of the public until just after Christmas, so when you are out looking for post-holiday bargains or returning that ugly sweater, you can get home and review this late Christmas gift at your leisure, and emote at the findings that the city and state have decided not to share with you after all.  Probably waiting until they can spin it into something prettier.  Join me on December 26, when we will look at Jason's/Lucien's final products and find out whether this dungeon master is ready for role-playing as a highway engineer.

In the meantime consider the gravity of the situation.  Under the pro-disclosure laws of the FOIA, MDOT refused to send any of the E-mails of those actively conversing with the COL, and the COL failed to provide the map and capacity analysis the MDOT claims to have given them at this meeting.  This can lead to civil fines of $7500 and more to both bodies, and further sanctions to those involved.  If they can't be trusted to give out this public information when they are mandated to do so by FOIA, are they to be trusted in giving out other complete and factual information?

Views: 682

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

What on earth would they have to keep from the public other then the collusion between MDOT and Ludington to put this crazy idea unto the citizens?  Maybe names of who is for it, so citizens can determine if they should be reelected/reappointed or not?  All voted out if the refuse to be transparent.

Whenever Shay and the gang do something like this and try to keep most of it under wraps, one can guarantee that their are many under the table and unethical sideshows going on behind the scenes. I know of nobody who thinks this is a good idea. It never matters what the citizens think. By reducing lanes by 50% only insures that it will take twice as long to drive thru town. Will the lights be adjusted for the extra time it will take to navigate the business area? Who is paying for this nonsense? Of course it will be the taxpayers but will local citizen be footing the bill or will the State graciously pay the tab since it's their road. That will mean that outstate taxpayers will be paying for another of Shay and his cronies delusional extravaganza's, just like the idiotic Ludington Ave west end scheme.

Excellent post X. Thanks for the information

Thanks, Willy, tune back in next Tuesday to see what the capacity analysis says.  Some might say that Jason Ealy is living in a fantasy world in his off-hours, wait until you see the unsupported make-believe he passed onto the 'various city officials'.

A lot of people don't like going to the butcher and seeing what goes into the hot dogs they eat; that isn't me.  There is no plans on extinguishing the torch, our goal here is to make it even brighter as the local government goes darker.

Good info. and research again X, and you should start sharing this over at CLL FB on that particular thread I think. Let ALL the taxpayers that read that get updated as to the amazing mtgs. and discussions going on with MDOT, thanks.

The capacity analysis and map will be shared next Tuesday; spread the word that MDOT and COL are violating the law in order to circumvent giving the public the full data they need to make informed opinions.  

One reason is that I'd rather my fellow Ludingtonguers enjoy their Christmas without blowing up at their silly local and state officials too close to the holiday.  The other reason is to give them time to supply more rope for themselves.  In today's COLDNews for example, they pass along the fact that the lane change meeting was delayed (as per the COL's 12-19-17 update).  

It relates in part:  "Shay said he expects MDOT to have information and drawings ready to show how the lane configuration would look and what the potential impacts of the change would be.  He said the city will then release that information to the public so people can study it and decide if the proposed change would be good for the city."  

The two items I received from the MDOT do just that, and there is no reason why that data provided to several unnamed COL officials on October 25th, is not shared with the public now or then.  Unless, the MDOT and the COL don't want the public to vet it before they vote to institute it.  

We the People of Ludington have several discussions on this matter on FB forums, and nobody that I remember has commented in a Positive way at all. To the contrary, most ALL seem strongly against this whole fiasco of an idea that Shyster Shay dreamed up in his Bostonian Dreams. He is going to for sure recommend the COL CC vote yea on it, and they as usual are going to pass it unanimously, or by a strong majority. When that happens, a strong response of recalls on most of the yea councilors is in order imho. BUT, will the voters have the guts to do it?

The only people that seem to be for the road diet (outside of the MDOT) are those that serve at city hall or on city departments.  Does government service drain all the common sense out of your body, I wonder?

It always seems to be the same argument too.  Safety. Safety?  Safety! 

Holman claims it will be safer for pedestrians and bicyclists, but not only does the roadway remain the same width with the promise of impatient drivers going much slower than they want to paying their attention to the traffic before them, you additionally have studies that show such conversions increase accidents for such modes of travel.  

While it may cut down on certain types of vehicle collisions, such as the usually non-serious sideswipes, other accidents typically take their place.  If the daily traffic is higher than optimal conditions for sanctioning a road diet, the traffic will not only slow dramatically but so will accident frequency increase, according to reputable studies.

RSS

© 2024   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service