Nine citizens in a half-hour long public comment period spoke up on various topics affecting them at the Monday August 24, 2015 Ludington City Council meeting, but you would think nobody did if you got Tuesday's City of Ludington Daily News (COLDNEWS).  Their representative at the meeting, Kevin Braciszeski, gave a third of a newspaper page to the discussions the council had over the proposed charter amendments the council has been 'introducing' for the better part of a year at their meetings.  Nothing new revealed here other than Mayor/Police Sergeant Cox thought that the vote on making the clerk and treasurer position would be polarizing, and lead to the failure of the other three proposals.  He's right, but the others would fail on their own merits without the help.

The other COLDNews article titled "City Approves DEQ Deal, Treatment Plant Filters".  This also was old news that just required a rote vote by the council, as the public was informed that due to the increase of water usage in our deal with Michigan Power, we would definitely need to go from two to four filters at the water treatment plant, and spend upwards of over $10 million to upgrade the water treatment plant paid for by bonds funded over time by increased utility rates. 

Also passed along in that article was the uncontroversial renewal of the city's water deal with Scottville, and the council accepting grant money to get six handicap-accessible voting booths for elections.  This is what reporter Brasiczewski took out of this 92 minute meeting.   

But beyond the booth grant, everything he reported on was in the middle half hour; neglected were any coverage of the public comments or other business beyond the propaganda and the routine mentioned in half of a page of COLDNews (the MCP did not even cover it at all).  Here's what happened beyond the public comment, and not mentioned:

1)  A new readiness-to-serve charge was passed unanimously, created by ordinance to handle the larger 8', 10' and 12' piping that Michigan Power will use.  These ranged from $680 to $1535 per month.

2)  Beyond establishing water rationing rules in case certain limits of water use are exceeded while the water treatment plant is upgraded, they made a contract with the Franklin Holwerda Company to respond in an emergency to replace a defective filter during the construction time (up through 2018).  For being on standby, the company receives $1200 per annum.

3)  The rezoning of the old Paulina Stearn's Hospital at 1010 S Washington from Government Service to Waterfront, in order for the new purchaser to develop a technology business, which passed unanimously.

4)  The shelving of the dog beach expansion between Ludington Avenue's terminus and the north breakwall, which was approved by council.

5) Adopting a resolution changing the Michigan Works! system into aligning with Michigan Prosperity Regions.  This is rather complex state reorganizations, which start at p. 114 here

6)  Denied a FOIA appeal regarding a FOIA request for correspondence between city officers and Michigan Power for the 6 month period prior to their agreement.  The city exempted certain records via attorney-client privilege that were not requested and charged for 9 hours of separating exempt from non-exempt material.  Even throughout this appeal, the only entity who claimed the attorney-client privilege for the City of Ludington was the FOIA Coordinator, who is an independent contractor for Ludington, who absolutely has no power to do that. 

More on this later; enjoy the odd justifications by City Attorney Wilson in the video below they will be reprised (beginning at 1:23:00 in).

These six actions were arguably more substantial than the council's torturous reasoning of why clerks and treasurers should be appointed by them, or the other actions.  But that's the COLDNews.  It should also be noted that at 31:00 into the meeting, Councilor Krauch amended the previous minutes to insert that the tile presented by Nancy Mustaikis at the previous regular meeting was never determined to be asbestos, and shouldn't be on the record as being asbestos.  One would hope that when any test results get back, that the minutes would be readjusted.   

The Public Comments in Order

Dale White noted he owned two rental properties in town, and that various codes used in construction have increased sixfold or more since he has dealt with them, and even more since his homes were built, and it'll be hard for them to pass rigorous inspections without serious investments.  As a home inspector himself, he noted that it's always the ones behind in rent that ask for inspections. 

Marcia Bonnville, the President of the Mason County Landlord Association reintroduce the Landlord-Tenant Handbook as a guide to educate all sides, and said the proposed Rental Inspections have created chaos for both landlords and tenants.  She noted that Councilor Krauch attended a meeting recently and said at the end:  "This is going to happen; if you like it or not."  At the meeting's end, Krauch disputed the words and context of that quote. 

Mary Simmon noted that landlords were already responsible for smoke detectors, for sex offender checks, for renter's yards and garbage, and that a new state bill that would make landlords provide voting registration info to tenants.  Declared Ludington needed more rental units not less.

I was next, my full transcript on three issues follows the video.

Mark Warka, Mayor of Big Rapids, appealed to Ludington leaders to get their help in keeping Spectrum's Aeromed based in Grand Rapids rather than Traverse City, offering a service map, but noting that Ludington was outside the quick response of either place.

Linda Kurncz, complained of the recent shutting down of the swings at Stearn's Park as a bad example of government overreach, noting they were declared unsafe because of possible snagging, whereas, right across at the Skate Plaza, kids shoot up in the air unsafely all day.

Deb Mannikko, who owns a lot of rental properties came out like a tiger, asking the council what would happen to those unidentified tenants the council mention who would likely lose their unit, that those renters would become homeless.  Why isn't the city doing anything about the citizens living in the tents, she queried.  She finished with:  "Every single homeless person will be on your heads, and I won't have a problem telling them where to go." 

Sending the displaced tenants over to the homes of the councilors who vote for this?!  Priceless thought, Deb.

Ron Martin informed us he was the new kid in town, and told the council how he appreciated having the traveling wall in town the previous year.  He bloviated a bit about things and was nixed like me at the five minute mark.

C. Dale Bannon, known for his observations about flags and signs, told the council that two maps put up in two different places in Ludington were oriented wrongly with the ground.  What he said about it being confusing had the mayor put it on the Parks and Recreation Committee's agenda at the end of the meeting.

Thus ended the public comments.  One of the acknowledgments by the council was at the 1:28:40 mark, where Councilor Winczewski noted: 

"I would like to thank Mr. Whte and Mrs. Bonnville for coming tonight and talking reasonably and intelligently and really expressing your views on the rental inspection-- that gives us a lot of things to think about.  Sometimes when people get very, very emotional, you tend to shut off some of your, umm, thinking, and both of you I think opened the doors to think of some other things..."

Apparently Simmon, Kurntz, Manikko, and myself have shut off our thinking, according to the sophomore councilor who has yet to turn her thinking on during that time, in my honest opinion.  But I had enough smarts to combine the rental inspection program and the absence of Ludington's NPDES permit into just one issue, as illustrated in the following transcript.

August 24, 2015 Ludington City Council Meeting from Mason County District Library on Vimeo.

"Three issues I would like to discuss. 

First issue:  our city leaders seem to lack any empathy with our landlords and tenants who are facing an extremely burdensome rental inspection program manufactured by the city, so I shall endeavor to help with that understanding.  Consider the similarity of the city's four year quest to get a NPDES permit from the DEQ and the issues that may arise when a landlord wishes to get an occupancy permit for a rental unit from the city.

The city thinks a toxicity limit for ammonia is onerous since there was none when the treatment plant was made, the people think a limit for bedroom size and ceiling height is onerous because there has never been such limits before when their rental unit was built.  But permits must be got. 

The city objects to spending many millions of dollars having to move its discharge pipe from a lagoon to the river to get a permit to get them to state standards, the people object to landlords having to spend many thousands of dollars on units to get them to arbitrary standards the city leaders have set.  But permits must be got.

The analogies could continue, but here's the rub.  The DEQ standards are there so that our whole area does not have its health and safety compromised by having toxic levels of ammonia and heavy metals in our drinking and recreational water, yet our city has dragged its feet for four years since their last valid permit expired, spending tens of thousands of our dollars on attorneys, engineers, consultants, etc. to avoid having to spend a lot of money on upgrades to meet minimal standards, while the DEQ does the same spending trying to show why the public's health would be jeopardized if the status quo is maintained. 

The City's rental inspection program differs because it has no public purpose stated other than to "improve the rental housing market", which it arguably doesn't.  No segment of the population wants this program, other than city officials whose purses and powers will grow as they violate the right of the people to be secure in their homes against mandatory and unreasonable searches.  While those very people who they say they want to help, drink and swim in the water that our same city leaders have dumped their poisons in while fighting a state agency truly looking out for our health and safety.

And if you still think the city is altruistically doing these inspections on behalf of the tenants, please ask them why then are they allowing many downtown businesses to do rental rehabs, effectively establishing second floor apartments in the downtown mostly financed by the state, and then allowing those rental units to remain vacant even when they are lawfully supposed to be rented out or marketed to lower-income tenants. 

Perhaps its because our greedy city is reimbursed 25% of the cash flow for administering the grants, and doesn't want to be burdened by making sure the recipients follow the rules, as city officer Kathy Maclean hasn't at 102 West Ludington.  If the city does not follow state rules for these rental units, why do they believe they have the moral authority to inspect and license our other rental units?

Second issue: please inform Joe Moloney, Wallace Cain, and other city officials who get up during the public comment period who caper, preen, and pat other officials on the back to divulge to the actual public that they are either representing themselves, the City, or their respective board in their comments.  It becomes confusing when Mr. Moloney gets up to the podium and says the people that are working on this ordinance are good people, when he is one of those people. 

Joe indicated at a July 7th Planning Commission meeting that in order to qualify for a Neighborhood Enterprise Zone grant from the state the city would need a housing inspection program.  That is incorrect, such a requirement is only for cities of over 20,000 people.  If Joe and this council is looking to get special grant money from the state by passing this ordinance, they need only to look at the existing laws a bit closer, and find that they don't need an ordinance. 

Third issue:  my FOIA appeal for this meeting is a moot point.  The records I requested should not have any issues with the claimed exemption the FOIA Coordinator wants to extort hundreds of taxpayer's dollars in blacking out E-mails between city officers and city attorneys which I haven't requested.  There are three main problems which I noted in my E-mail to the six legitimate councilors on this panel earlier today. 

First, a letter sent from city officials or attorneys [Here's where I was stopped, the discussion continues here] to the Michigan Power officials, has no AC privilege because they're not between an attorney and their client.  If subsequent forwardings of that E-mail occur between city officials and attorneys, as in Exhibit four of your packets, those are not part of the request.

Second, you will note in Exhibit Four information has been blocked out using the AC privilege, when that privilege does not exist because Mark Beauchamp is also included in the mix.  Beauchamp is not a city official or city attorney, he was hired illegally by City Attorney Wilson in a funneled-money scheme to do cost-of-service consulting for the city.  He is not the client or the attorney, ergo, the AC privilege can not exist for that redaction.

Third, and most important, is that only the client can claim AC privilege; the attorney's client is the City of Ludington, and this public entity can only claim the power of AC privilege through its city council.  You have declared no such privilege, unless it was done in violation of the Open Meetings Act.  Neither our FOIA Coordinator or our 56 other attorneys can claim the privilege without your approval.  Thanks."

Views: 236

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Concerning that FOIA appeal request, I think the CC isn't using it's thinking cap again, or are they? They say they are transparent, and every chance they get Shay and Wilson invoke the AC privilege as an excuse for not revealing information that belongs to the public. As X was cut off at the time limit, the exclusions above that never got said are an integral and important part of exposing this scenario. An obvious question that continues to linger in my head is why Shay has to have Wilson hold his hand to do his job every minute of almost any day? Why? How many times do you need to contact the City Attorney each day or week to perform the job we pay Shay over $100K/yr. to do? Doesn't that in itself bespeak of a weak and incompetent City Manager? I sure think so. Of course the female sasquatch had to put in her two cents of 285 FOIA's and how much the Attorney Alvarez charges for these services. Yes, and it doesn't need or have to be that way Kaye. Per Michigan FOIA laws, it's NOT supposed to be that way either. If you people on the council applied the resources of a typical clerk in the city offices to do FOIA coordinating, you wouldn't be paying $125/hr. to start with. But you seek another shyster attorney to help hide public records for your jollies and secrecy. And, that was your decision, not the voters, and not any reasonable private sector manager that pays attention to details on their own. Does that woman ever, EVER, wash that hunk of greasy hair on her head? The grease is sooo thick now it's reflection on the rooms light blinds me. And this City Mgr. also wants to be in charge of appointing our Clerk and Treasurer? He can't even do half the duties he has on his desk now without a babysitting attorney, plus several assistants. I'm again surprised they brought that proposed change to the charter up yet again. I haven't heard ANY public comment favorable of that amendment yet. Have you? I mean, hey, how many people and times do they have to be told NO? While the City Mgr. struggles at his present responsibilities, he yet continues to ask for even more POWER! He can't handle the power he has now, let alone more. I like the involvement we are now starting to see more and more like Marcia Bonnville, and all the rest that made public comments about city charter or ordinances that are important issues to be addressed. I think the minor swings at Stearns Park was also another common sense issue that the city overstepped it's bounds on again. However petty it may be, it's still another issue of the COL taking over our lives as much as we continue to not speak out and let them. 

The clerk and her assistants are the one who archive most of the city records anyway, so it only makes sense that these assistant clerks who are paid over $100/per hour less would be the logical choice for coordinating requests, but herein lies the problem as was pointed out at this meeting if you caught it:  the elected clerk is not under direct city manager or council control, and the councilors and especially Shay do not like that fact.

That's why Shay would not allow the clerk to take over his job as FOIA Coordinator, because she would have been allowing most non-exempt records to be given over to me and others at a reasonable rate of her choosing.  Instead, make the taxpayers pay for a superfluous contracted attorney (first Sue Sniegowski, now Carlos Alvarado) at $125/hour instead of a salaried employee working at a tenth of that.  The FOIA attorney, however, is completely at the bidding of the city manager and knows they are supposed to obstruct the flow of information whenever possible even if the law does not allow for it, especially when Shay doesn't want it out there. 

Holman is just an ignorant pawn which Shay loves to have at the helm of the Finance Committee, whose slickness of hair is outdone by the lack of slickness in her comments and math skills.  If she could make wise comments and public policy, and expect her city manager to follow the rules, I doubt anybody would care whether her hair was as greasy as a plank of fish from Long John Silver's

Thanks for the information X. Some still want to appoint the Clerk and Treasurer and remove the decision from the voters as to who holds those offices. Where is this movement to appoint them coming from? I think X hits the reason right on the money and that being a power grab by Shay who has  convinced the foolish Stepford Councilors that this is a good idea.
Again Shay numbers the FOIA request Mr. Rotta has requested. What he should number is the amount of times they have refused information to Mr. Rotta and other citizens. How is it conceivable that any City officials who consults with the City Attorney regarding City business thinks that their discussions are considered privileged. Anything discussed regarding the public's interest or the City's business is public information and must be provided to any citizen  who requests it and should not have to be obtained with a FOIA request. This entire FOIA business is way out of control and because self serving politicians will always have something to hide, I'm afraid it will never get better.
What can be said about Holman. She can't seem to keep her mouth shut. What a numbskull.   She can't equate that the City is refusing information to citizens which causes them to file FOIA and that hiring a $200 per hour FOIA attorney to handle them makes sense.
The other female numbskull Council member thanked the only 2 people she agreed with because they weren't presenting information she deemed negative. She must have forgotten that she represents all of the citizens not just 2.

It was not rocket science to see that all of the original seven proposed amendments to the charter all benefitted one city position, the city manager.  This was his wish list which was danced through a committee consisting of the two female councilors and mellow Dick Rathsack, who all seem to be enamored of the Shayster. 

The general citizen should ask themselves: the bargaining and discussions are past, the contract with Michigan Power and PM Township has been reached, the ink is dry, so even if you think the city has to send me records I did not request and further assume the city did actually  invoke the attorney client privilege in a legitimate way (which they didn't) of those extra records, then reason to yourself why was it claimed at this point?  Anybody?  Anybody?

Wishy-washy Winkie at least showed us at this meeting that she has some passive-aggressiveness in her, unfortunately it was geared at the citizens who were most passionate about the harm they see coming if this program is passed, and the potential for dumb electoral choices we might make.  Perhaps the best case in point occurred in the Second Ward in 2013. 

I've said this before and will again. Holman as Finance Committee Chair is a joke. She knows nothing about finance and has no education to back it up. Only what Linda Rogers prepares for her, and reads it verbatim at every CC mtg.. Long John Silvers indeed, lol. As for an appointed attorney for FOIA coordinator, X hits the nail on that head too. It's all about POWER and CONTROL for Shyster Shay, that's the entire key. And all the better that he also appoint the Clerk and Treasurer for increasing that power and control to the maximum. I think the Mayor is finally seeing the light there now. With that issue being a pretty sure bet to go down with the voters, if they link the other amendments to the charter with it, it's a sure loss in all respects. Looks like they are going to get wise to that now, before the future election next year. Too bad, I'd like to see it all go down the toilet. Meanwhile, the DEQ permit stays expired, dirty water prevails. The sewers are also out of date by 50 years, being 100+ years old in many downtown areas. The roads continue to deteriorate and fall apart. Hell, the entire infrastructure is outdated and flimsy at best. And all these Stepford CC Clowns can do is try to ignore it, and distract the public from serious issues, with all this nonsense that they bring on the agenda every two weeks. A very sad and ignorant state of the city affair. Just wish it wasn't Ludington that this fraud is being perpetrated on. 

RSS

© 2024   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service