Closed Session. Closed Minds?

[XLFD]

Taking it easy this week, as I currently have another diversion or two to deal with, but here's an interesting thing I discovered this weekend.  The Ludington City Council had a meeting two weeks ago, the minutes of which I finally accessed.  Here is the twenty two minute meeting, for the most part pretty uninteresting.  Amended 2011 budget items, approvals of sign placements, a report from the treasurer.  The City still has over $6,000,000 tax dollars earning interest, and the City (Hall) had more revenues than expected.

 

 

The written minutes are included here  2012 Mar 19 Lud CC Meeting.  All fine and dandy, but then the end had a closed meeting that was never reported on in the news media, but was noted in the minutes.

The meeting started at 6:30 PM.  About twenty minutes into the meeting they decide to go into closed session, that would be around 6:50 PM.  They then do not come out of closed session until 8:00 PM, seventy minutes later.  They then pretty much have a non-important vote, and end the meeting.  A closed session is closed to the public, and in this case was either to discuss pending litigation or legal strategies penned by one or more of the City Attorneys.  This drawn out closed session apparently didn't warrant any attention by the LDN.

 

I can only presume by the timing and my name only being discussed, that they talked over the motion I had entered with my counsel earlier this year to dismiss the legal ramifications involved in the 2008-2009 litigation over a bicycle traffic stop.  It is nearly four years later; the City admittedly did not have a traffic control order for the sign (against the law), the city did have a stop sign over 25 feet of where it should be as per the MUTCD, the regulatory book of traffic control devices, and the presiding district court judge has admittedly said the probate court judge that ruled in 2008 did not have proper assignment to rule that day as per Michigan Court Rules. 

 

What do they have left to prove, that they can continue spending special assignment fees to attorneys (at $185/ hour) and overtime to City officials to obstruct justice further?  They don't have one of the City Attorney's fathers on the bench this time.  But if we don't favorably settle, we (my lawyer and I) hope to see the end of this later this month, with fairness and justice vindicated.

[Willy]

X

Is the 6 million dollars money that is budgeted for the current year and is waiting to be spent or is it money left over from previous budgets?

[XLFD]

That would be the money that Aquaman has frequently referred to in the City's financial holdings; their rainy day fund.  I believe in saving and investing for private entities, but when the City has over a year's budget in reserves, I believe that could be a sign the citizens are being overburdened, and maybe instead of raising taxes and fees for some annual 'budget balancing problem' like they have during this recessionary period (2008- now), maybe they could reduce some rates, and totally eliminate the two mills for the Downtown Development Authority now that they have lucrative TIF financing that brings in about twice that each year from the population at large. 

But with this crew at City Hall, that's just a pipe dream.  Look for more truth in taxation hearings this summer.

[Willy]

If that money is in reserve then the interest on that money over a period of 5 years or so would pay for sidewalks to schools and life guards and the 6 million would still be in reserve. Hard to believe that this City Council would ignore safety and put money into other non important projects.

[XLFD]

With the same rationalization, the City could say they need to buy more benches, wayfaring signs, and upgrade their trash cans downtown.  Or use it to put a walkway between the end of Ludington Avenue and the Lighthouse breakwall. 

[AQUAMAN]

Closed sessions, closed minds, pretty much hits the nail on the head again. Like I said many times before, the fixed agenda is there, to never say sorry, we weren't perfect, and need to rescind the prior ticket, and apologize for the error. This just will NEVER happen, too big egos running the show. As for the $6Million, it's there in the kitty, overtaxed and over-fees collected for some years now. If there was ever a rainy day to cut taxes and fees from the city, it should have already been here the last few years. Instead, just the opposite has happened, showing there is no end to the greed that festers in these peoples souls. Once they have our money, it's never to be returned, esp. if it's for the locals safety and prosperity, it always MUST be spent on tourist oriented projects, forever more.

[XLFD]

The seventy minutes of discussion before the court hearing took place (3-30-12) may have indicated something involved may have been contested, as one would think if everyone agreed, it would take a much shorter time.  But I don't know.

I do know that I have always been the one to try and get some conversation going on the topic, but the City has almost always passed on responding to me or doing the right thing.  Here is the latest concessions my attorney and I have drafted to get this matter concluded rightly:

[Willy]

You are much more generous than me. I would have asked for attorney fees and a letter of apology which stated that you were wrongly accused, convicted and jailed. That would be the least they could have done. If not that, then a lawsuit for a million dollars in damages would have awakened them from their stupor. Somewhere along the line they either have to stop this Nazi type governing or pay the price.

[XLFD]

In all fairness, I can't readily hold the City of Ludington or any of its officers responsible as the main antagonist in the proceedings of this ticket.  The court administrator (magistrate) of the 79th District Court was the most culpable entity in the process-- the City Hallers were just the beneficiaries of their actions. 

The rascals will still have their time to sweat, but not in this legal action, unless they decide to extend it further.

[Willy]

X

Didn't the City install a stop sign illegally and improperly? Didn't a City Police officer issue a ticket instead of listening to reason? Didn't wagging tongues at City Hall, the LFD and the courthouse relay your information back and forth and spread inflammatory stories regarding your situation? Didn't supervision at LFD and the LPD stick their noses into your situation and overstep their authority? Could the City  have dismissed your case at any point in it's process but instead  put you under their thumb just to teach you a lesson as to who is boss? Could this entire thing have been avoided if City officials weren't such a bunch of Aholes? And finally, do you think this forum would be in existence if City officials had treated you fairly and justly?

[XLFD]

To answer your ?s:

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

I don't know their nationalities, but yes.

No... but the terms of the settlement are concessions I am willing to make to get a positive result on several of those above "yes" answers. 

I doubt the City of Ludington will accept the terms, and at best I will get back a counter-settlement with some terms I could never agree on in principle.  Some of these issues you raise will come more into play in the background of future litigation. 

The record already shows the facts about the stop sign and the facts about Judge Raven's illegal assignment and the massive amount of disregard for court rules by the 79th District Court.  I can't put a half nelson on any of the City Attorneys and get them to admit any wrongdoing-- but I can illustrate that wrongdoing to the masses here and on the court and public record.