Letting the Cat Out of the Bag!

[XLFD]

Ludington Citizens as Cat's Paws

I have recently been investigating the 'cat problem' that City Hall has made a pressing problem since early July.  If we are to believe the caterwauling of citizen's John Cade and Dave Kozicki, the cat problem around the area of James and Filer is at crisis level, a sentiment that the City Council seems to believe as they try to prohibit at first the feeding of any animal you didn't own anywhere in Ludington and then 'clarified' it into prohibiting the feeding of cats or birds that are not your own, with a couple of minor exceptions.

I go through that area a lot, day and night, and I had yet to see, smell or hear a problem, so I have went there since, and my unscientific sensory observations from the sidewalks and alleys give it a clean bill of health.  But this is just my anecdotal findings, I don't live there and have them allegedly going through my windows and spraying my car, and causing all sorts of mayhem during the winter.  But there's more than one way to skin a cat, so since I didn't hear anything about this problem until City Hall decided to propose a ridiculous law about feeding animals/cats, I decided to look at what precipitated the making of such a far-reaching law, and brought John and Dave to the CC meetings.

Look at What the Cat Dragged In

We sent a FOIA Request to Ludington's Top Cat, City Manager/FOIA Coordinator John Shay.  Here's what it asked for: 

All public record's in possession of the City Of Ludington dated this year and prior to July 11, 2011 that are written complaints or notices (letters, E-mails, et. al.) from Ludington citizens to any agency of the City concerning problems with cats or with birds.   Please include any photos or other evidence of such problems with cats or birds submitted as well (either provided or gathered by the City).

 

I figured to see a deluge of reports from all the heinous actions attributed to the cats (as an aside, I don't know why City Hall is also going after those who feed birds as well-- I suppose many are upset with having bird poop on their car, but how will not feeding birds stop that?).  Anyway, I was deluged with absolutely nothing in the way of complaints or notices from citizens to Ludington agencies concerning problems with cats or birds.  No evidence of any problem, unless it was verbal hearsay like John and Dave's City Council rants, and no indication of any investigation by the City of the nonexistent 'problem'.

I didn't totally strike out, however, there were two police reports on the catastrophic cat problem of Ludington.  On March 26, two cats were found in a box at Copeyon Park, and were given over to Animal Control.  Cats LPD 3-26   On May 22, a house cat went wild on its owner and Animal Control was called in  Cat LPD 5-22.

 

Cat Got Your Tongue, City Hall?

So was there no animal problem before this law was considered?  Nothing documented, that's for sure.  But why create such an ordinance for public health and safety, if there really is no problem?  And why create a bunch of new laws for the beach and city parks earlier this year, when there were no reason to?  And why make laws that allow the City of Ludington to enter your home if they suspect you may not be hooked up with the City's water system or cross-connected without any sort of cause?  Why, City Hallers?

Could it be that we have a Manistee law firm (and Susan Sniegowski) as our City Attorney and no accountability for the laws that are written up?  Could it be that John Shay is just power mad and is trying to leave his mark before he moves on to another city?  Don't know; but we here in Ludington should all be as nervous as a cat in a room full of rocking chairs.

 

[XLFD]

But do we really want the Beach LPD or the Recovery Rangers out ticketing people for a municipal civil infraction for it?  Particularly when they're in the picnic area with the glass container(s).  The law was written broadly so there is no distinction between beer bottles and crock pots. 

What's the matter with putting "Please, no glass containers on the beach." on your rules sign with warnings issued and no sanctions unless a problem develops? 

[Lisa O'Brien]

I think they went with this approach to be proactive, rather than waiting for a problem to develop and then become reactive. I think the city wrote it vague on purpose so that there is No distinction - regardless whether it is a glass bottle or a crock pot. If the city narrowed down the scope - there would always be someone saying "the sign says no glass beer bottles, this is a glass ice tea bottle". and besides people can trip and fall in the picnic area just as easily as the beach area.

[Sweater Cows!]

As you know we got  alot of music festivals, and the number one rule of the places are NO GLASS.  When coming through the initial check points and getting searched they will confiscate glass over anything else, then tiki torches and charcoal grilles.

 

Glass, ceramic or whatever. none of it needs to be on the beach or in the park. And as much as we may wish it, getting people to pick up every shard if they broke something is unlikely.

[Sweater Cows!]

If there was a true crisis I believe one of the local animal welfare organizations would step in and help (along with the city and /or animal control)solve the problem. It would be taken care of before it ever became something the councilors looked at.

That said I think this more of political move than anyone at the city hall/council caring about the animals.  Since Shay is the so-called head honcho if he really cared what happened to the cats he would have been talking with AC, and LAF and Humane Society and getting himself and others out in the field to do something rather than put more rules on the residents and thereby lifting all responsibility from himself for having to actually do anything besides push some pencils.

[Marty Redman]

That Shay guy sounds like he couldn't find feathers on a bird.  Are these guys trying to show how little they are actually needed?  They're succeeding IMHO.

[AQUAMAN]

Sounds like a checkmate for us Marty......thanks.

[AQUAMAN]

I see the glass situation another waste of CC/taxpayers time. If we had written and verbal complaints galore about beach, sidewalk, and park grounds broken glass, then maybe. But, as I see the situation at hand, there is no serious problem that cannot be solved by just what X said, post it on the rules signage in these areas. Another case of trying, like the cat thread above, to make a mountain out of a molehill. Btw, what do people with any common sense expect when they go to a heavily visited beach like Stearns, to have a pristine beach with all that daily traffic in summers? Even a fish fin, bird feather, driftwood, rock, or beach grass can also cut your feet if you aren't careful and watchful of where you walk. Another unnecessary intrusion into our rights imho. Written, produced, and directed by Shay's follies.

[XLFD]

And just in case you missed the page 2 of Tuesday's LDN (not in the E-edition) or the City Council Meeting this last Monday, they had a first reading of the ordinance they will vote on the Monday after Labor Day. 

With page two news often being overlooked and no mention in the E-LDN you would think they are getting a little embarassed about the total inanity of the whole ordinance bit.  Here's what they got according to the LDN:  The ordinance would prohibit anyone from intentionally feeding or making food or water available to any cat on public or private property other than their own residence.  The ordinance would allow feeding for the purpose of baiting live traps or feeding on another person's property with permission of that landowner.  The ordinance also prohibits feeding of seagulls, geese, and other wildlife at City Parks, Marinas, and beaches

 

The one citizen who spoke against the ordinance said it came out of a complaint by two people who should have handled their problems themselves rather than involving the entire city.  Amen to that, but these two didn't even have a written complaint to the city, the human-rights-hating members of the City heard their oral hearsay of cats spraying cars and invading homes and saw the opportunity to swat down the folks once again.  I can just see those new beach rangers or LPD patrollers writing tickets for tourists sharing picnic food with the seagulls.  What a pathetic act of over-legislating the City of Ludington. 

[AQUAMAN]

Over-regulating, over-legislating, over-reacting to these petty issues seems to be the only way our local CC has to entertain and consume our precious taxpayer time these days. I do suppose we will shortly see where a favored contractor, well known for 18 carat gold signage work with the City, gets another new (no competitor type) contract to make signage for the cat problems here. Wonder what Hon. Judge Pete will say/do when these "cat & seagull tickets" start arriving in his court?