Do you pay any form of Taxes Mr. Rotta? Do you have a job that pays you a salary everyweek or two

Just wondering and for clarification.

Views: 2417

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You do realize(well obviously not) that  any  human on earth has a RIGHT to these records, not the council, they are the records of the public and belong to the public.

The only reason you are sick of hearing about this and it has become a big ordeal to you is because your fellow council has chosen to be douchebags. Your fellows seem to think they have the authority to decide who can and cannot see these records, well they are wrong, we all have a RIGHT to see them if we wish.

Members have chosen to do everything in there power to prevent the records from being easily reviewed by the public, whether it be Rotta or anyone else.

Picture it like this, there is a cabinet with all the records in it, and they are all in the proper files(as they should be) and easily grabbed by anyone who works with these files on a day to day basis, the workers grab a file to check this or that every so often, no big deal. But the minute someone comes in to foia a record, your council members send their  grumpiest member to sit on the cabinet and refuse to move and they wrap some duct tap around them and the cabinet and say "I ain't moving for anyone, I don't have to these are my files nah nah nah nah nah nah".

Now this is the council fault that the employee is sitting duct taped to  the cabinet refusing to get up and let someone retrieve the file and review it.

Every time someone walks in with a foia, ol' grumpy runs over and say's "mine mine mine".

The problem here is the files are NOT ol' grumpy's files, so ol grumpy needs to stop acting like a spoiled child tear off the duct tape and get the hell out of the way. See ol grumpy is shay/your council, they are causing this problem, not the person from the public who is asking for the file.

If you are sick of hearing about this from the council tell them to stop obstructing foia's and to stop wasting time and money with lawyers who are only in this to be douchebags and make a buck off the back of the COL, do you really think the lawyers give one turd about these foia's or do these see a council ready to pay them lots of money to help assist in obstructing foia's.

Your council needs to grow up and act like the public servants they are, they are not the board of a private corp who are keeping out a thief, they are the secretaries of the public who file papers for us to have at our beck and call and should be there at our beck and call like they are paid to be.

Getting back to the thread, Mr. Rotta has had his past employment disrupted by Mayor Henderson, both directly by strong influence with the LPD and LFD, and indirectly at the Oxychem sub-contractor doing security at that plant. Tom's previous boss was told to tell Tom, quit making public statements and accusations about the COL to the LDN and at CC mtgs., or your job is on the line. Tom refused and was fired, even with no absences, late arrivals, bad work habits, or anything else the employer could site as normal and reasonable practices for dismissal. Put blame at the door of the proper person, not Tom. You see, Henderson has and continues to use his position in politics and Oxy to wield power and iron fist fear from those that would expose anything he doesn't want the public to know, and how honest is that? Why would the City Clerk Luskin be the ONLY one that can and does access files for FOIA's, when she is the Highest paid employee of those offices, not the least expensive? as per FOIA rules. The whole scenario has been set up to make Tom look like the bad guy, instead of just answering those FOIA's with simplicity and small change costs, the entire circus atmosphere has been created by Shay, and Henderson. City Councilors need to focus attention at the "cause" of the FOIA requests, not the amount of nor need to answer them, that afterall, is their jobs, and what they are supposed to be duty bound by law to accomplish when the public requests it.

the owner of the security company was forced to get Rotta to shut up or fire him, and if they didn't then the security company would be without a contract at Oxy, it was either Rotta or the whole company w/o a job

I would punctuate Jane's poetic prose by posting you the first section of the FOIA.  Wanda, this is something I have sent to you at least once, read in front of the council at least once, but you still don't get it:  "  It is the public policy of this state that all persons, except those persons incarcerated in state or local correctional facilities, are entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of those who represent them as public officials and public employees, consistent with this act. The people shall be informed so that they may fully participate in the democratic process." 

And then the rest of that law describes exactly what can be exempted and what a public body can charge.  How surprising it was that the first time I showed up at the City Council for a FOIA appeal, none of the City Council had that simple law in front of them.  And these seven legal naifs were the judges!  When you hear those words "And to the republic for which it stands.." at the beginning of each meeting do you realize that a republic is a system based on law, not individuals? 

So even if you believe John Shay's recommendation to support his decision, because you trust him, trust the legal acumen of any one of our 6 Manistee City Attorneys, or if you believe I must be wrong because I am just an ignorant, indigent rock-lobber, you have failed to respect that pledge you have made.  You have made a legal decision without any knowledge of what the ---- the law is, or what you're doing. 


Don't know you, but, as you stated, being only one of seven, makes you an outsider.

I, for one, have to give you credit for at least being willing to get on this forum and listen to the other side.

Since I no longer live in Lud. I choose not to take sides on something that I haven"t all the facts, but, as the video shows, it appeared to be rather childish. And,I, like you, think this personal vendetta between Tom and Shay and the Mayor has gone on far longer than it should have. On the other hand, I am glad to see someone stand up to the powers to be for their personal rights.

Masonco, you at least have one CC willing to listen, work on getting others, even if you have to vote new members in. That's democacy

I might add that many who work full time are on government assistance such as Medicaid, food stamps, earned income credit subsidized day care, assistance and the list goes on. For some most of their income goes to unrealistic child support payments which equal more than 1/2 their minimum wage income.

The majority of those on disability, social security retirement are also on other government assistance (handouts as you call it.) But that is where our government wants everyone...Sitting at home collecting welfare money and not buying anything to keep the economy going.  After all small business owners do not profit from their own labor.

If you'll notice, the type of indigency I claim is the income exemption, where I earn less than 125% of the Federal Poverty Rate.  At the time this AI was written the FPL for a household of 1 was $11,170 Poverty Guidelines.  Multiplying that by 1.25, we get $13,962.50.  Divide that by 52 (weeks) and then by 7.4 (minimum wage) you get 36.3.  What this means is that if you work less than 36.3 hours for every week at minimum wage you still qualify for being indigent. 

When I was working at Oxychem(early 2008-March 2011), directly under Mayor John Henderson, I worked 24 hours each week at $9.25 an hour.  Do the math, you get $11,544 per year.  It had been my only job since August 2010.

"When I was working at Oxychem(early 2008-March 2011), directly under Mayor John Henderson, I worked 24 hours each week at $9.25 an hour.  Do the math, you get $11,544 per year." 

"It had been my only job since August 2010."

Thank you, for the explanation. I only know too well times are tough. Again thank you.

Wanda, unlike John Shay, I wouldn't sign an affidavit, swearing under oath that something was true, and then have it turn out false. 

By the way, did you know that John Shay has never took an Oath of Office?  Doesn't that mean anything to anybody at City Hall?  Can't you get Kaye Holman to stand up at the next meeting John Shay shows up and lead him over to the City Clerk and have him say:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of this state, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of Ludington City Manager according to the best of my ability."

Maybe then he will actually obey the laws of our state and nation, instead of having no regard for them. 

I've been told I can keep my lunch money, if I finish her Civics and Government homework for her.

As I read her post I think the question was more aimed at whether XL actually worked for the small stipend he receives. The answer being yes she is then happy to go back and make decisions effecting those who do not work for theirs.

This is still problematic to me, as anyone, whether working or not, is effected by the good or bad decisions those on the council make. And even in indigence.. many still pay higher rates for services in the city of Ludington.

In fact I would argue from a liberal standpoint it matters even more to someone on the lower end of the financial spectrum if the city government is transparent and working for not against them does it not?

Guido, seeing you argue from the liberal standpoint is always good sport, LOL.  But you raise a great point.  How has Ludington City Hall supplemented their revenue during these times with lowered revenues from property taxes?  Since 2008, they have been raising fees, utility rates, raising rates of taxes that Headlee automatically lowers, illegally conducting tax-increment financing. 

Indigent folks that own real property are probably the hardest hit and receive the least amount of benefits, as they are hit by all four; and if you look at where the City is spending the bulk of the extra money you would see that it's on the downtown and tax breaks for the wealthier citizens they freely give out.  Not on the poor folks, improving services, or improving the infrastructure. 

Let us not forget that even indigent folks that do not pay property taxes generally pay rent that goes to their landlord/lady who uses it to pay their property taxes.  They pay their water and sewer bills, they pay any user fees (without any discount) that apply, etc. 

And let us lastly not forget, the local taxes and fees are at a flat rate, so that unlike in income taxes, with the gradated rates depending on your earnings, an indigent person has to pay the same rate as anyone else.  And can you remember the last City funded project that actually benefitted the poor more than anyone else?  Please someone help me here.


© 2024   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service