"I'm from the Government and I'm Here to Help"

[XLFD]

The nine most terrifying words of the English language according to Ronald Wilson Reagan.  On the 100th birthday of this American icon, I invoke these words to describe the local situation. 

We have recently been blessed with the addition of Ludington City Councilor Wanda Marrison to our small group of concerned citizens and area visitors.  I had pointed out in another thread that Ms. Marrison had done nothing yet to distinguish herself.  This was no dig or dis. 

I served for eight years on the Ludington Fire Dept. which met twice a month for the business/training meeting for a few hours on Wednesday nights.  I did nothing to distinguish myself at these meetings of which I missed only one in that span.  I pretty much would let the officers decide the course of the LFD, as did many other of my peers. 

I had looked through 2010 CC meetings and noticed that both Wanda and Wally Taranko, who both were freshmen councilors last year, both remained in the background at these meetings.  According to the City Clerk's minutes, in these 24 meetings, here were her contributions:

 

In 20 of the meetings, she had done nothing more than second motions and/or vote with the majority.  In 3 of the other meetings, she made a motion to approve contracts that concerned her Parks Committee (of which she chairs) regarding a vending machine,park-managing software, and re-paving some of Cartier Park's campgrounds.  In the other meeting, she sided with CC Holman (in the minority) to restrict a beer tent at one of the FNLs.

In reviewing the 27 ordinances and decisions voted on in council in 2010 that either 1) Influenced the amount of taxes/fees paid by citizens  or  2) Had the effect of impinging citizens rights/expanding government's power   3)  Unfairly taxed one entity differently than another  I noticed the following.  Wanda Marrison sided  with either higher taxes, government power, and/or unfair taxes 26 of those times. 

The one vote she did fall on the side of less government was when she voted to allow certain districts to have second story residences w/o applying for a special use permit, Ordinance 218-10. 

1) However she voted to raise the millage rates for the DDA, Police Pension, and Operating; she backed the onerous $20,000 Municipal Services Fee on the Arbors, a substantial raise to the Grand Patio Rental fee, and raised a surcharge on the House of Flavors.

2) She voted against three FOIA appeals based on the FOIA law, agreed to further restrict the City's FOIA policy, voted for 4 traffic control orders (3 of which were debated here), expanded the city's power over sewer and water systems, and the splitting of lots.

3) Like all CCs, she voted for all tax abatements.  Tax abatements are corporate welfare, pure and simple, and they should be eliminated.  Lower taxes for all, otherwise these tax breaks are little more than bribing the businesses to stay here, or at worse, showing blatant favoritism.  I want a tax abatement!

 

I am not going after CC Marrison, as everyone on that council besides Pete Engblade have voted with her on at least 25 of the votes.  I single her out just because she has joined us and shown a willingness to talk. 

Plus, I am just stating the facts as someone who is concerned about expanding governmental power, higher taxes, and how those will destroy the very fabric of this community and this country over time.  Perhaps I'm just channeling some of Ronald Reagan's spirit.  Happy 100th Dutch!

 

 

 

[Max]

Reading this made this Reagan quote pop into my mind:

 

"One way to make sure crime doesn't pay would be to let the government run it."

[AQUAMAN]

Big Dittos to that Max.

[Edie Lindsey]

The more intrusive the Obama Administration gets, the fonder I look back at Ronnie's shining city on the hill.

Is it possible to 'detail' LOL some of those  votes you speak of and how the councilors voted.  Heaven knows, the Daily News could care about such things. 

Heaven also knows the last time I've heard of a tax or fee decrease, or a business tax abatement defeated. 

But what about the Sunday morning liquor sales?  Wasn't that a vote for people's rights?

I hope Councilor Marrison can let us know more about this topic you've introduced X.

 

[XLFD]

The vote to allow Sunday morning liquor sales was a vote to limit City Hall's power, but that was passed the first meeting this year.  We can hope it betokens a positive trend for this year.  Here's the votes I refer to, summarized for your protection, and the CC meeting it occurred.  A 'U' stands for a unanimous vote for it, an 'O' stands for ordinance, a 'LT thread' means we have a thread discussing why it was a negative result.  Anybody can feel free to do their own research at the City site http://www.ludington.mi.us/departments/city_clerk/2010_city_council...

 

1-25:  H of Flavors tax abatement:  U

2-08:  Stop sign Bryant and Washington:  PS Peterson 'no' , K Holman 'abstained' (LT thread)

2-22:  Surchargen on H of F outflow increased + adj. for inflation: U

3-01:  Municipal Service Agreement for Arbors ($20,000 tax):  U (LT thread)

4-12:  $20,000 raise for City Attorney:  U (LT thread)

----   FOIA Appeal 1:  U  (LT thread)

----   Division of Lots (new rules, more restrictive):  U

4-26:  KDMAC tax abatement:  U

5-10:  TCO 108A, Downtown parking restrictions:  U

6-28:  DUNA tax abatement:  U

7-12:  O 212 and 215:  Operations millage rate levy/increase:  P Engblade 'no' to both

----   O 213 and 216:  Police Pension MR levy/increase:  U ( 3 CC could not vote)

----   O 214 and 217:  Downtown Dev. Auth. levy/increase:  P Engblade 'no' to both

7-26:  Grand Patio Reservation Fee raised up to $300:  P Engblade 'no'

8-09:  O 218:  Make 2nd floor residential use not a 'special land use' in areas:  U*

9-27:  FOTOF tax abatement:  U

----   TCO Stop sign at end of Ludington Ave:  P Engblade 'no', (LT thread)

----   TCO No parking on Loomis for trailers:  U

10-11: GLC tax abatement (2):  U

11-08: FOIA appeal 2:  U  (LT thread)

----    O 219:  Building sewer, homeowner duties increased:  U

----    O 220:  Cross Connections for water (very invasive):  U

12-06: O 222:  Terrapin Contract (3% raise for 3 years):  P Engblade 'no'

----    FOIA appeal 3:  U   (LT thread)

12-20: FOIA policy revised:  U   (LT thread)

 

No tax or fee cut, no tax abatement dismissed; but as for municipal power-- that was increased.

 

 

[XLFD]

I invite CC Marrison or any other City Councilor to discuss any of these votes.  I also invite the City Manager and City Attorney to explain why recent ordinances have been dismissive of the taxpayers and their rights.

[XLFD]

Just in case, it was overlooked, I re-invite any or all city councilors to explain any or all of their 2010 votes. 

They offer us up 'free' events, ways to re-invent our city's image, choose who to give official favor... all the while, raising our taxes, depleting our rights, and making it harder for the citizens to get by.  Estienne de la Boetie in 1548 made the observation:

"Plays, farces, spectacles, gladiators, strange beasts, medals, pictures, and other such opiates, these were for ancient peoples the bait toward slavery, the price of their liberty, the instruments of tyranny. By these practices and enticements the ancient dictators so successfully lulled their subjects under the yoke, that the stupefied peoples, fascinated by the pastimes and vain pleasures flashed before their eyes, learned subservience as naively, but not so creditably, as little children learn to read by looking at bright picture books. Roman tyrants invented a further refinement. They often provided the city wards with feasts to cajole the rabble, always more readily tempted by the pleasure of eating than by anything else. The most intelligent and understanding amongst them would not have quit his soup bowl to recover the liberty of the Republic of Plato. Tyrants would distribute largess, a bushel of wheat, a gallon of wine, and a sesterce: and then everybody would shamelessly cry, 'Long live the King!' The fools did not realize that they were merely recovering a portion of their own property, and that their ruler could not have given them what they were receiving without having first taken it from them."

Is this not what we are seeing happen to Ludington through our most recent brainstorms, funded by the tax dollars of those who own property and reside here? 

[AQUAMAN]

The DDA's FNL events I imagine is a good example? Sheeple, not people, sayeth the guvner!

[Sweater Cows!]

WOw, how appropriate and when was that written?

[XLFD]

In the sixteenth century, 1548.  In an essay called Discourse on Voluntary Servitude, by Etienne Boetie, the person you probably never heard of, but is generally given the distinction as being the first Libertarian political philosopher and among the first advocates of civil disobedience.  His writing is quite graphic and quite profound for such a person as evidenced by the following, also from that essay: 

"Poor, wretched, and stupid peoples, nations determined on your own misfortune and blind to your own good! You let yourselves be deprived before your own eyes of the best part of your revenues; your fields are plundered, your homes robbed, your family heirlooms taken away. You live in such a way that you cannot claim a single thing as your own; and it would seem that you consider yourselves lucky to be loaned your property, your families, and your very lives. All this havoc, this misfortune, this ruin, descends upon you not from alien foes, but from the one enemy whom you yourselves render as powerful as he is, for whom you go bravely to war, for whose greatness you do not refuse to offer your own bodies unto death. He who thus domineers over you has only two eyes, only two hands, only one body, no more than is possessed by the least man among the infinite numbers dwelling in your cities; he has indeed nothing more than the power that you confer upon him to destroy you.

"Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you, if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with, if he does not borrow them from you? The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assail you if he had no cooperation from you? What could he do to you if you yourselves did not connive with the thief who plunders you, if you were not accomplices of the murderer who kills you, if you were not traitors to yourselves? You sow your crops in order that he may ravage them, you install and furnish your homes to give him goods to pillage; you rear your daughters that he may gratify his lust; you bring up your children in order that he may confer upon them the greatest privilege he knows – to be led into his battles, to be delivered to butchery, to be made the servants of his greed and the instruments of his vengeance; you yield your bodies unto hard labor in order that he may indulge in his delights and wallow in his filthy pleasures; you weaken yourselves in order to make him the stronger and the mightier to hold you in check. From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free.

"Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces."

If you are interested in more about this Frenchman, check out this link:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard78.html