City Council Meeting 10-8-2012: The Calm After the Storm

[XLFD]

At the previous City Council Meeting, a concerned citizen stood up three times for about five minutes and spoke to the City Council.  At the end of the meeting, when parliamentary procedures did not allow him to speak anymore, the Empire struck back, video, story, and commentary of that is here  city-council-meeting-9-24-2012.

I have to admit the heavy-handedness of their continued assault on this person surprised me since I felt they were likely going to try and behave so they could negotiate some sort of settlement of the federal lawsuit brought forth (and formally served earlier that day) because the facts of the matter are fairly incontrovertible, and all the public records show that both City Manager Shay and the Ludington City Council acted contrary to several Constitutional principles, primarily in the Workplace Safety Policy and its imposition.  Apparently, the memo finally got around to all within the intervening two weeks to a more tight-lipped policy concerning all matters related to this citizen.

In my public comment at this City council meeting, I made a left-handed compliment about revoking the OPRA tax break, discussed the City's refusal to give me the FOIA appeal process with a request I made that was denied in part, and finished out by showing how the Tye's records that I received only after the City manager perjured himself, showed illegal and unethical behavior on the part of Shay, Tykoski, and Mrs. Heather Tykoski, at the least.

On both sides of my comment, there were two people that got up and spoke that were critical of me and/or my tactics.  The first, Bob Hannah, a member of the Ludington Fire Department, showed exactly what represents the LFD nowadays, by launching into a public personal attack on me, a private citizen attending that meeting.  The latter, Wallace Cain, chose a more measured approach.  His ideas I may not have agreed with in toto, but his sentiment was more in line with decorum.  Their differing styles reminds me afterward of the "Goofus and Gallant" comic in Highlight's Magazine.

The denunciations made by these two individuals during the public comment period, was enough to soothe the egos of the baker's dozen behind the raised dais in front of me.  They revoked the OPRA, introduced a couple measures, and finished out the meeting without any reference to the person who has made a habit of berating them.

But by my count, this is the third meeting I have spoke of the City Manager's perjury, the third meeting I have spoke of the Tye-gate scandal, and the umpteenth time I've brought forth FOIA violations to the council, and still not one of those people that serve the public behind their elevated lecterns have made it an issue to look at or discuss.  If it were a cat problem or fireworks, we would have it resolved by now and they would talk about it freely, I'm sure.  But these are not so-called problems of the public; these are the problems of the public servants.

My presentation:

"I'm Tom Rotta, from 137 E Dowland Street.

Let me start of by commending the City for the likely revocation of the OPRA Certificate for Bob Neal's Community Garden during this meeting. I won't even quibble about it being long overdue.

Those looking at the agenda will notice the lack of a FOIA appeal. This doesn't mean that the City has not violated the Freedom of Information Act during the two weeks since the last meeting, but only that they have decided not to go through the administrative appeal process when they decided to make copies of my request when I asked to inspect the original copies. They also decided to charge me for labor even though it was less than $50, and even though the City Manager just a month ago said the City policy said that the City had no power to charge such fees. He's right, policy doesn't; nor does he have the power to make copies and charge for it, when it is not necessary to do so, by State law. Even though the policies and laws say that he is in the wrong, I am sure his decision would have passed the vote of this tribunal, so I can only believe that the decision to waive the appeal process is to limit my right to speak in front of this body down to only 5 minutes rather than the extra time afforded me by the appeal. Because of their fear of this simple, peaceful citizen you see before me, they have blocked me from this facility and now they block my ability to appeal a FOIA request. I remember Councilor Castonia complaining to the council just last year, that I never showed up to the meetings to defend my appeal, while knowing that the reason was because I had an illegal policy keeping me out of the City Hall and the Police Station for doing anything. All because of FOIA requests into suspicious activities by City Officials. Seriously!?

But I was cut off last meeting by a time-conscious Mayor before I got to my main point. Recall, I was commenting on a court appeal of a FOIA denial, ignored by the Council like this one. I had asked for business dealings between the City and Councilor Tykoski's sign company. He wasn't a councilor then but he was a public officer on the Downtown Ludington Board, making decisions on the spending of large amounts of money. As an official, he had a duty by the City Code: "No officer shall make an unauthorized use of his or her public position to obtain financial gain for himself or herself, a member of his or her immediate family, or a business with which such individual is associated." and also "No officer shall make unauthorized use of any confidential information received through holding such public position to obtain financial gain for himself or herself, a member of his or her immediate family or a business with which such individuals associated."

The documents I received after the City Manager perjured himself shows the complete disregard for these ethical laws, also found in state law not just by Councilor Tykoski, but also by his fellow DLB members, particularly the two that signed most of the invoices, Mrs. Tykoski and John Shay. As time permits, I will share some with you, the public (I was able to verbally share about a half dozen of the public records until my time ran out)"

You will note, there was no refutation regarding these concerns with the breaking of FOIA law and the breaking of varius public contract (or lack of contract) law I brought forth.  But neither did I respond to LFD's Bob Hannah's assertions, I had enough to get through with my five minutes.

[Willy]

Boy did you hit the nail on the head about Hannah and Cain. Here is my take on Cain. He says he moved to Ludington 3 years ago, I think he moved here with the impression this was Mayberry but his bubble has been busted by the fact that he is hearing about potential corruption in his town of choice and he can't admit to himself that Ludington is not the Nirvana he envisioned. His comment to the Council "you represent us" shows how woefully ignorant he is about local politics. He also states "we sometimes ask you to justity your [councils] actions". In what World does he live? No one has asked the Council to justify any action except Mr. Rotta who then was summarily banned from CIty Hall. Mr. Cain obviously does not believe in the appeals process because he states that Mr Rottas appeal regarding the closed meeting was an abuse of the citizens right to appeal because he [Mr Cain] didn't like how it was written. Mr. Cain, you can't have it both ways. If you feel Mr. Rotta had a right to file a FIOA then it stands to reason that an appeal of that FOIA should not be questioned, but here you are criticizing a citizen for exorcising his rights. Then Mr. Cain goes on to explain how the Fire Chief stands up at each meeting and disassociates Mr. Rotta from the Fire Dept. because Mr. Rotta wears a T shirt with the Ludington Fire Dept. logo on it. Then Mr Cain tells of eavesdropping on a conversation between the Fire Chief and Mr. Rotta and then broadcasts the essence of that conversation to the World via the City Council meeting. He states how the Chief asked Mr. Rotta not to wear the T shirt at a Council meeting. Mr Cain then says Mr. Rotta should grant the Chiefs wish. What country do you live in Mr. Cain where someone is told how they should dress and what they can and cannot wear. You talk out of both sides of your mouth. You begin your speech with sensible ideas then you explode into an ostrich type of citizen who buries their head in the ground. Haven't you been paying attention to what Mr. Rotta is saying. To all of you foolish people who back the Council, Mayor and Shay, stop making this an issue about the messenger and listen to his message. It seems, in Mr. Cains situation, that the City has  gained another backward thinking citizen who cares more about what T shirt someone wears than what Local politicians are up to. Mr Cains last statement says it all "We can't silence him [Mr. Rotta] we have to tolerate him." As long as Ludington has these types of people who back misdeeds by politicians by attacking those that stand up for our freedoms it will always be an uphill battle. Keep up the good work X. For every Hannah and Cain there are hundreds that back you.

[XLFD]

Thanks for your support, Willy.  Going into the lion's den to place my bared neck on the chopping stump is always a tough thing to do, particularly since I've traditionally been a shy and private person, but I will continue to do it, and I don't fault anyone who does believe in good governance to stay clear of Ludington's City Hall of Shame. 

It's obvious to anyone paying attention, they are operating under their own rules.  And the COLDNews recap of the public comments:  "Tom Rotta spoke during the public comment period about downtown signage work Councilor Nick Tykoski did for the city before becoming a councilor.  Bob Hannah said Rotta is costing taxpayers money with his legal challenges."  

The first sentence makes it sound like I was congratulating someone guilty of using his public office for private gain.  The second sentence is true, but presumes to assign the blame on me for my challenge to unlawful behavior by the City Manager and City Councilors.  But I'm beyond being surprised by the reportage, or lack thereof, of the COLDNews.

Wallace Cain's speech did confuse me, but I didn't recall him saying how long he's been here, and what he has probably heard about me in that time.  I've also been told he works as a high level employee at a major Ludington business that consistently comes to the City Council for help.  That may have influenced his decision to speak, and his speech, but I  hope it didn't.

[Willy]

I think the biggest hypocrites of all are the people like Cain. You hear them say ' I'm for a person's rights to do____ BUT. There's always that big BUT. What he really wants to say is, "I don't like what Rotta's doing and I wish we could shut him up but I would look bad if I told the truth". I'm wondering if our own Eye is in fact Mr. Cain?  Makes you wonder.

[Marty Redman]

I can't believe you got a whole room full of grown ups and they allow this city employee Bob Hannah Montana pummel a private citizen for wearing a T-shirt showing his link to the city and for expecting the FOIA to be run properly. 

Wallace Cain may not be a hypocrite but he doesnt understand the open meetings act.  Minutes from a closed meeting are available if the meeting was not properly closed, but are not if it was closed proper.  The city did not follow the rules as X explained at that meeting, at least the video I saw from the library.

[XLFD]

Yes, and I can only cover so much in only five minutes, so anyone who comes to the meetings who does not know the basics of the FOIA or OMA need to get their own copy.  Listening to the City attorney on either subject is bound to get your ideas screwed up-- read the laws.  Here's the Michigan Handbook that includes relevant Court cases and Attorney General Opinions on both.  Read up Bob, Wallace and whoever wants to be more informed.

Thanks for posting Marty, glad to see you've figured out your password finally.

[Willy]

X

Thanks for posting that link.