Ludington City Council 9-23-2013: Captain Courageous, City Outrageous

[XLFD]

This Monday's Ludington City Council meeting was symptomatic of what's wrong with the governing class in our fair city.  They are quick to deny responsibility, quick to propose and pass resolutions and ordinances, quick to solve perceived problems without regard to facts or listening to the people they are supposed to be representing.  I brought up five issues, could have easily brought up more, and another citizen argued around five more regarding his Ludington business and livelihood.  That person, a charter boat fisherman, named Richard Laaksonen, operating a family business out at Abrahamson's Marina within the rules since 1975, came to the meeting allegedly to take notes. 

But after hearing me take the council to task, he stood up and gave a great speech, which really highlighted a very real problem in Ludington, which is best personified by how the City is treating the charter boat issue, the dredging of the PM Bayou, and the Washington Bridge reconstruction problems.  These are all centered in one area of Ludington, an area of Ludington mostly held in contempt by a city who view these private marinas as competitors in the business of retaining watercraft in their borders and running charter boats. 

One could say, the City of Ludington's interests lie within the success of their marina, and the failure of these private marinas, that predate the City's effort.  The City marina was totally paid by taxpayer money, totally exempt from taxes, and totally capable of getting state funding for any improvement they may want (i.e. dredging, new docks, transient slips, bathrooms, fish cleaning stations, etc.).  The City Marina came in a while after these marinas showed that it was profitable to do so in Ludington.  Is this fair competition?   

Captain Laaksonen stood loyal to his  port of call while some of his fellow charter boat captains defected to the greener pastures of the taxpayer-funded amenities of the City Marina without proper authorization required by lawful agreements.  His courageous comments follow immediately after the video of that meeting, followed by his end-of-the-meeting comments, my opening salvo, and the end result of the night.  

 

 

(7:00 into video) "I didn't come here actually to speak, I didn't know we were allowed to.  I'm not very well informed, I am a fisherman.  I own some charter boats here in Ludington, operating out of Abrahamson's Marina.  As you know, there has been a bridge that has been in the process of being built there for quite some time.  At last years meeting that I didn't show up to.  (Interrupted by mayor for name and address)  My name is Richard Laaksonen, 279 North Jebavy.  I came here to take notes, I did not come here to speak, but since I have an opportunity to speak, I will. 

At the time of last years meeting, I believe this was the last meeting you had concerning the bridge, we were told that the bridge would be finished in the third week of July.  Now, I operate four charter boats; it is the only business that I operate.  I operate out of Abrahamson's Marina just across from Ray's Marina and the only access we have is exactly from Washington Street close to the bridge.  Our busy time goes from the fourth week of July-- the tourism season-- that ends on Labor Day.  So there' about six weeks where we make a living.

At the time, I was not concerned, because if it was the third week in July and the project is finished there is no problem-- at least to my business, I'm not sure about other people's business.  But since I own-- not own but occupy-- the first four slips closest to the bridge, we are definitely the most at-risk charter boat services there.  They have large cranes in there, moving large objects, a lot of noise, that you may know, or not know, is down there.  They drove forty-four pilings, forty-some feet into very hard ground.  There were days when it was absolutely unbearable to be there.  I did have a meeting with Mr. Shay and some other construction workers during the middle of August regarding this issue and they basically said it wasn't their fault, the State held everything up and we are where we're at. 

I went down there today to take a boat out of the water as our business is concluded for the most part, and my boats... I was always assured I would have access to my boats and to my business.  I can tell you as of today there was no access to my boats and my business, nor was I notified that there would be no entry or access to my business.  Or was I notified that my water was shut off.  So this time of year we pull boats, take them back to our marina, and we power wash them and that is how we store them and winterize them-- with water. 

 

 

So, a business owner, paying taxes, goes to operate his business to find out, number one, that he cannot get to his business, and if he did get to his business, he does not have water to use, to do the necessary things in ordinary life, to put a boat to 'sleep', winterizing it for the season.  No one called any marina operator, no one called me, and I expressed my concern to John (Shay) at our first meeting that this-- we only get a small shot at this, this is a tourism town. 

Without the fishing business on our end, I don't make a living.  I've been operating a business, a family business since 1975 from Ludington Michigan, okay.  I have never had a year when, since we started with one boat here, maybe ten trips in the first year of 1975, I run well over hundreds of trips each year, owning four boats in just a month and a half. 

And this is the first year ever, that I did not pick up one walk-on charter.  Now if you're not familiar with what a walk-on charter is, it's a person who comes and drives by your boat and ask you how the fishing is, what are your rates, and whether you have any availability.

The reason is because we have all these red and orange signs saying bridge closed, do not enter, go this way.  We did partially resolve this problem when I had a meeting with Mr. Shay and some other people he brought with him (Chime) (Mayor tells him to sum up, as five minutes has passed, he tries t conclude).  

The problem is that I did not have warning.  If this happened at the City Marina, everyone would have had a warning... OK I did not know we had a time issue, is there a time on each issue?   (Mayor explains further)  My public comment would then be this, there are forty-five listed charter boats in the Ludington Area Charter Boat Association.  You're saying that it is to be brought to eight.  If you went to the placard and I took a picture of it, I know of 15 (charter) boats that operate out of the City Marina, so your number, I don't know where you got it from, um, might be, not correct."

 

City Manager John Shay lie about the numbers of boats?  Well, Mayor-candidate Wally Taranko of the Municipal Marina Board could have chimed in and corrected the Captain or the City Manager, but remained silent, he could have set me straight about the legality of the charter boats at the city's marina, but his silence, and everyone else's, should speak volumes of their guilt. 

If I was on that City Council, the guilt of doing all these unethical, illogical, and illegal actions each meeting would weigh heavy on me like an anchor.  How can these people operate this way without any shred of conscience?  Their demeanor over their actions they offer, often without justification, should indicate how far from a responsible, accountable government Ludington actually has.  Here was my statement, which came in under five minutes, footnoted with links to the problem from this website, many will be expanded further:

 

"I'm Tom Rotta, 137 E Dowland Street

 

Again, I come before this panel with a variety of issues over what is being achieved and what is being contemplated in their actions in which I believe are inappropriate, unethical and/or just plain illegal. 

 

Issue 1, The City council voted to buy 808 East Danaher on July 22.  They stated publicly in their resolution that the only reason they did so was to demolish the property and to sell half of it to the neighbor, who would help in the costs of demolition.  The property was foreclosed, and by law the City had the right to buy it at minimal cost as long as they did so for a public purpose.  Making deals with the neighbors to get rid of half of it at a profit, and demolishing a residential house with no stated public purpose is against the law.  Without any credible public purpose, the City needs to forfeit their deed and allow this property to go to public auction, or face punitive measures for abusing their privilege and power.  This issue is currently being reviewed by the County Prosecutor, and if not remedied, will go to the Attorney General's office.  http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/public-purpose-and-ci...

 

Issue 2, the City Council is set to pass two resolutions for special liquor licenses at today's meeting, after passing one 'contingent' on approval of clerics within 500 feet of the event.  Last meeting's contingent permit, allowed the Oktoberfest beer tent to set up directly in front of the People's Church's front door without first asking their permission.  Fortunately, they have moved the event and now have permission from two of the three churches within 500 ft of the new venue.  But for New Year's Eve, the DLB must get permission from at least 5 clerics and I think it would be a good policy for this council to adopt a protocol to get their approval first before your approval.  http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/aaughtoberfest

 

Issue 3, in 1979 when state and federal funds were used exclusively in the creation of the Ludington City Marina, the agreement our City signed said:  "it is further agreed that commercial vessels of any type, including but not limited to charter fishing vessels, shall not be permitted to regularly use any of the said facilities without first securing the approval in writing of both the City and the DNR."  Over thirty years, the city marina has been in violation of that agreement, as none of the charter boats in the marina now or in the past have had such written permission approved by both entities.  It's beyond time to atone for such negligence.  http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/coldnews-is-cold-on-t...

 

Issue 4, the City proposes to close Planck and Slagle Avenues between October to April of each year to "prevent significant damage to pipes, signposts and grass".   These streets were paved in 2011 by the regular taxpayers of this city, to enhance the accessibility to this park, and now the City wants to close them to the citizens for over half of the year?  I don't recall these streets being paved so just campers could use them.  Remove the existing blockades, and keep the streets open fully, unlike they are now.   http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/ludington-council-to-...

 

Issue 5, the City proposes to assign a new FOIA Coordinator, a move which I believe is long overdue, and a move to blunt the impact of the decision that may come from the Michigan Court of Appeals on October 3, when they make a decision on our FOIA appeal wherein the current FOIA Coordinator committed perjury in court documents, and withheld information unlawfully.  The proper assignment of FOIA Coordinator should be the clerk's office, which is directly accountable to the people, assigning it to one of our seven city attorneys will only spell trouble for those who use the FOIA to find out exactly what our City is doing.  The City Clerk has done an excellent job in her capacity of getting out information in her tenure.   http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/john-shay-ludington-c...

 

Thanks for your time, I hope this body can set the record straight."

 

Of course, the body didn't set the record straight.  They said issue 1 was legal because the County said it was (at about 46:30 in).  For issue 2, they ignored the third church reference, and passed the New Year's Eve permit without any clerics signing officially on, effectively doing things backwards.  And they basically ignored all of the latter caveats in passing two resolutions and an appointment hastily after exposing the general public to them incompletely in Saturday's COLDNews paper.  Oh, they had fun lambasting the main consumer of FOIA requests (30:00 in).  Captain Laaksonen got some words in later, when the City Manager just rolled out too many uncontested fables: 

 

Laaksonen (47:00 in):  "I do not believe it is fair that a man can be up there and get the last word in on something he knows nothing about..."  And then cleared the air on Shay's characterization of fishermen at Abrahamson's swearing at the construction workers the previous week (at 45:00 in) among other hearsay allegations he is well-known for doing at the end of meetings.

 

Shay can say almost anything he wants at the end of the meeting with little regard for the truth, because he knows the public, the media, and even his complicit city council employers will not be able to offer any challenge to them.  Why would they?  He has been granted by this council the power to banish anybody in Ludington from any public facility, and has shown a willingness to use that power capriciously.  A camera is pointed at a urinal?  Shay tells us it isn't, and almost everyone believes it even when their senses indicate otherwise.  Hidden camera in the vents pointed towards the stalls?  It's there to protect against vandalism in the common areas of the bathroom. 

This is how business is done by City Hall; Captain Richard Laaksonen, don't even try to make sense of it, just try to fight it so we can rid the area of it. 

[AQUAMAN]

I spoke directly with a DNR official back in June about the illegal charterboats at both the city marina, and Harbor View marina. Both are in direct violation of the original state charter agreements to abstain from having ANY charterboats at their docks. The DNR official, being polite, stated it was too late this year to kick them out, but next year they would all be given notice to vacate, and find dockage at private facilities. Looks like the DNR and COL are NOT on the Same Page yet, and into the future. I don't understand how the COL can trump any decision of this nature, in advance of having DNR approval in writing beforehand, but, this again proves that indeed, the tail can wag the dog, whenever it wants to. As for a new FOIA coordinator, it's well past time. But, to have to contract with another attorney, for the crazy hourly rate of $125, seems grossly unreasonable, and just grand-standing in nature. This same attorney is going to have to call/visit city hall for all those records anyhow. So, why not just assign the coordinator position to the least costly hourly employee at city hall, capable of doing the tasks, just as State Law demands? Obviously, from the inuendo and repeated Holman quips that the COL will have to pay, whom exactly does she think the COL is? Just her and the council? It's the TAXPAYERS, and I doubt if the voters had a say in this, that they would approve what the council just did to divert those duties in the costly and perhaps illegal manner that they just did on 9/25/13!

[XLFD]

If it were just up to the DNR, the City of Ludington could do just about anything they want with the City Marina, the DNR and their Waterways Commission do not believe in micro-managing the public marinas they constantly upgrade with their trust fund money.  The private marina owners have to stay vigilant and energized to actually keep these agencies on the straight and narrow, and live up to their agreements for once.  The Michigan DNR should be apprised of how John Shay characterized their position, particularly Ron Olson who said quite the opposite in public and in his June memo.

John Shay didn't abdicate the FOIA Coordinator position for the stated reason, he could easily designate another FOIAC himself via section 6(3) of the FOIA at any time, which he has done when he was under the knife or on vacation.  He abdicated because the City is scared of the possible result of the MI Appeals Court finding a lot of irregularities in his actions as FOIA Coordinator when they rule on our appeal in that court. 

That ruling will come about 10 days before the next meeting (Oct. 3), and if he is not officially the FOIAC, people cannot call for his resignation from that post because of all the iniquity that may be officially heaped on him.  It's another reason why the position is not Sniegowski's until October 1, he wants to be FOIAC for as long as possible.

[Johnny]

Maybe if certain people wouldn't file absurd FOIA request, then Ludington wouldn't have to hire Susan.  If you look at the requests, there has to be a reason.  Is the person that bored they need something to do?  Does this person need money so he is just filing it to try and build a lawsuit?  Is it a jealousy thing?  There are so many thoughts that go through my head about why so many pointless FOIA request would be made?  The final one is, if he is so upset, angry, and frustrated with the city and how things are run, then why live here?  Can you answer this XLFD??  Why not move?  You dislike the Mayor, City Council, the Local Police, the County Police, the Sheriff, The Chief, City events, City ideas.  One of the things id suggest is running for Mayor, but wait, you were going to do that and then pulled out. The reason the city has to hire someone is because of your circus acts of requests. 

[Dave]

Your comment E Murph is obviously spoken by someone that has no clue what is going on. Its clear that you have yet to actually read through any of the threads here or else you'd know exactly why the FOIA request are made. And did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason XLFD hasn't moved is that maybe he loves his city and he wants it to be the best place possible?

Maybe you actually start making comments that are something more then babble. You say a lot without actually saying anything at all.

[AQUAMAN]

I've got a better idea. Why don't we kick out the down-staters mucking up our hometown with their big city ways and crony tactics, and see how they fare back where they came from? Especially the Oakland County mob!

[XLFD]

Dave, that was a perfect reply and pretty much summed things up nicely.  E Murph, the City says I have made 200 FOIA requests which is a slight exaggeration, but you can FOIA the list of requests I have made from the City of Ludington go through it, and pick out one or two of the requests that you feel are pointless, and I will tell you precisely what point there was to it.  I don't create busy-work for the City just for the fun of it.  But maybe you're too busy going after citizens who want more information, to actually make a FOIA request-- and become an enemy of the city.

I believe there is no oversight and little transparency within the Ludington City Hall currently, with this trend starting back around 2006.  That problem needs to be broadcasted and addressed or our City will be ransacked by a bunch of self-serving individuals masquerading as public servants. 

[Johnny]

So, keep going after them to waste our tax payers money? Makes sense...S Todd must not live in the city.

[XLFD]

If these were public officials that were actually concerned with getting information out to the public, they would be more concerned with the illegal denials or unlawful charges that have been assigned to approximately half of these FOIA replies by the City Manager.  When the City Manager says that it takes around $100 to look for documents that likely may not even exist (and he says that too), like he recently did for documents that may have shown the City violating DNR agreements, you have to wonder why the whole City Council allows it.   

If you see enough of these City Council videos, you will learn quickly that the council and the mayor are complicit in the cover-ups of public information and the unethical and illegal acts that continue to be pursued overtly and covertly by the City

[AQUAMAN]

"" Plus, this aint Cuba guys, or are we now? Democracy being Destroyed, everyday, anyday! Just ignore this people, your Liberties are being dissolved and eliminated every day the Shysters stay in office! And continue to infringe ALL our Liberties!

[AQUAMAN]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder someone once said. I'd like to know what some here consider a real waste of taxpayers' monies: 1) painting water towers 10 years prior to it's needed, and for extremely high prices, like $1/2Million; 2) building a bridge to nowhere on S. Washington Ave. for $3Million; 3) building a pier on W. Loomis St. for over $350K that fisherman can't use to land fish, because the rip-rap extends outward over 12' on each side of the water, and no one hardly ever walks on it either; 4) building a steel seawall on the north end of the City Marina for over $950K that is hardly ever used; 5) updating a pair of restrooms at the North Stearns Park concession area for about $75K, when the entire structure isn't worth that much to begin with; 6) proposing over $350K to tear down a sand dune and destroy a local portion of the beach at the West end of Ludington Ave., and replace it with some sidewalk and other apparatus for city functions in the summer; 7) paying out about $75K to clean out the jail's ventilation systems; 8) paying a city attorney more than double what the previous one earned for years, and hire an out of town firm, instead of being true to your own local attorneys; 9) put spy cameras in public restrooms for about $50K, then pretend it's legal and not distorted perversion. So, if that extravagance and poor judgements isn't a waste of taxpayers' dollars, I guess a single man that asks a few too many questions, most of which aren't satisfactorily being answered by a smart-alec punk occupying an appointed city manager position, is? I could add, the infrastructure of most of the downtown, is in utter despicable decay. Streets have potholes all over the place, the sewer system is in collapse, the water system in many places, also in collapse. How do the above 9 issues cited have higher priority to the general public for all the taxpayers' monies being spent?

[XLFD]

Some of the numbers are a little off, Aquaman, (mostly understated) but anyone not shilling for the City of Ludington that comes on here never seem to indicate the amount of money that has been wasted on useless projects during the last few years, and instead they focus on someone making FOIA requests who has paid all lawful charges the City has sent his way, and many unlawful charges as well. 

The officials and apologists love to call my requests 'fishing expeditions' but most of them seem to have a little trouble making the claim with hooks in their mouths.

[AQUAMAN]

I know I've underestimated many of the projects, but, they still add up to over $5Million in mostly unwanted, unneeded projects, that most if not all, local taxpayers can see no direct return to them in badly neglected infrastructure work long overdue. I could also add X, that where FOIA fees are concerned, some of your own acquaintances, have offered the COL a check or cash to help your cause, in the form of "prepayment for fees". The CM Shay firmly denied those donations, and refunded them in kind. So, wth are some here talking about FOIA fees, when the COL declines to take the monies! We already had a thread on that subject matter, and showed a check stub for a refund sent that one day the donation had been accepted earlier. It's in the archives, should anyone want to peruse that matter too.