Ludington City Council Meeting 3-24-2014: Vigillante Justice Transcripted

[XLFD]

I figured there needed to be a full transcript of what took place at the March 24, 2014 meeting, because it seems to be confusing to a lot of the public, particularly with what they read in the newspaper (which is also included herein) and what they perceive is at issue.  I have a biased viewpoint of the proceedings, so by all means, take that into account.  I include an unbiased video of the meeting to counter any inherent bias, and the newspaper's account which is biased towards the other side to balance such discussion.

 

I gave what I thought was a relatively quiet public comment, and I later commented during the public hearing for the Brill tax abatement in a very positive way-- to Kaines West Michigan.  I am thinking that at least Chief Barnett was ready to fire back before the meeting started with a prepared statement, and that's why he didn't latch on to anything new I proffered, such as the use of 'vigilante', or legitimacy issues.  If Chief Barnett was talking off the cuff, I think he would have.

 

Therefore, the concerted attack by the chiefs may have occurred to give the council a breather and some distance in a way to try and discredit me.  Why would they discredit me now?  A very important result is about to come up in the 79th District Court about whether the Open Meetings Act (OMA) was willfully violated by six city councilors and Mayor Henderson.  Lowering my star would serve to not only help Judge Wadel to give less credibility to my presentation, but also lower my public status so that even if I did win and got the verdict in my favor, the City of Ludington could put out their press release to obscure that very fact. 

 

There has been some interesting results from that OMA litigation that may also necessitate a full frontal attack by the supporting characters of the City to save their bacon from worse transgressions they have performed, more to be disclosed soon.  There is no doubt that Mayor Ryan Cox shown himself to fail as a parliamentarian by failing to admonish either chief for launching personal vitriol on a private citizen, and also shows one very good reason why he should not simultaneously be Chief Barnett's superior at council meetings, and inferior at his police reservist job.  It sure gives him a conflict when things like this occur. 

Here is the video and the transcript starting at about (1:14:20).  Links in blue, my commentary in red.

 

March 24, 2014 Ludington City Council from Mason County District Library on Vimeo.

 

 

Ludington Police Chief Mark Barnett:  "Your honor, if I might.  This is-- I'd like to share a few things if you don't mind.  In 1976, early in 1976 I began as a cadet in the City of Pontiac Police Department.  In 1979, I was fortunate enough to be sworn in as a police officer, and upon taking that oath, one of the primary responsibilities was to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

I've heard a lot about that lately, seen some examples of one view of what that document provides for.  The forefathers when they drafted that document, felt that it was important to provide the freedom of speech, I think that we all could agree that is an important part... 

What I don't think that they envisioned is to create a verbal club, somebody could bring out at will (Bob Seger riff on WMOM's phone goes off)  That's a good song... and bludgeon people indiscriminately [like current LPD Officer Aaron Sailor , also from Pontiac, has allegedly done in two of his three federal police brutality lawsuits].  I've been here for thirteen years, when I came here my wife and I consciously chose to move here, put our family here.  And one of the things that was remarkable about this city, about this county, was the desire of people to come together and volunteer their services, free of charge, to provide help and assistance.

We've heard about some runs that are going to take place, to raise money for someone other than who is putting it on.  We see, we can look anywhere and see opportunities to become involved, we can see examples of people that can go out and expend their efforts to benefit other people.

My concern is, with Mr. Rotta, is the random use of the ability to say whatever he wants [within Ludington's public policies and acts] about whomever he chooses [limited to Ludington public officials] whenever he chooses to do it [within his five minutes][note that Mayor/Reserve Officer Cox allows the Chief to stray from all three].  And to create a forum to routinely bludgeon people [Here was my original mission statement for the Torch, it hasn't changed and has no bludgeoning included].  While he has every right, as provided by the Constitution, it doesn't make it right for you to be able to do that [bludgeoning].  And it's upsetting to me.  You know I'm supposed to protect and serve people, but I look around here on this council, I look around in the audience, I look in the mirror and I see people that have been bludgeoned by this constitutionally-protected speech, and it just doesn't seem right to me [that's why I went against the Constitution back in 2011 in revising the letter of trespass to keep him from entering facilities for public input and information]. 

It just doesn't seem right-- if you ask Mr. Rotta if someone were to do that [speech bludgeoning] to him, would he consider that to be right [I don't even know what you are talking about, LOL, but if it's whatever you're doing right now, I've never done that]?  I don't consider he would, but then he randomly and arbitrarily does that [speech-bludgeoning]to other folks.  I myself have been called, my physical self appearance has been called into question [not by me], I've been called a pervert or some other type of terms [I've never done that, but if your department has been observing rest room cameras trained inside stalls and urinals, a reasonable person could come to that conclusion].  I'm not, and I don't appreciate that, and my family don't appreciate reading that or hearing that [my family don't appreciate the LPD looking into our bathroom stalls with covert recording cameras; a perverted agency is one that hides them in vents and doesn't warn the public of them for years.  Your hypocritical department throws people in jail for this.]

And it's because of your exercising your free right to say those things, or your view of your right to say such things, not fully recognizing that it hurts me, it hurts my family, it hurts the family and the members that are seated up here, that are seated in the audience [then quit, we'll replace you and others with ones that follow the rules and aren't so thin-skinned about being held accountable].

You should be ashamed of yourself... and I want to say, I want to say to those people that have volunteered their time to actives, reserve police officers [aka my vigilantes].  Those folks are here to provide a service, free of charge, to the citizens of this city, because they want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.  I would suggest for you, Mr. Rotta, if you want to be part of the solution you better act appropriately [if I was trying to play the victim like you currently are, I would perceive that in the threatening way it was intended], and you treat people with the simple respect that you demand that you are treated with [I have never demanded that I be treated with respect-- good thing too, cause I haven't got a lot of it at city hall].  You should be ashamed of yourself [I heard you the first time].  I would like to apologize, apologize on Mr. Rotta's behalf [What arrogance and conceit!  Why don't you apologize to the citizens, on my behalf if you must,for not having these officers legitimized] to those men and women who have served as volunteer police officers and reserve police officers, as volunteer firefighters [that's me for eight years], as people that have set up events, people that volunteer their time with churches and other organizations to help this community [that's me again], and I would say to you that I reject your notion that you just indiscriminately bash these people, and beat out of them the volunteer spirit [that's not my notion, and you well know that, Chief].  Shame on you Mr. Rotta; Shame on you [yes, yes, more ego-flagellation, please].  That's all I have to say [over four minutes without a word on public policy, just a biography, an appeal to the masses, and a prolonged personal attack]

 

Councilor Kay Holman:  Well put, Chief, very well put [nothing that belongs in a council meeting, but very well put].

Fire Chief Jerry Funk:  (1:18:45] (Walking up) seeing that we are going after Mr. Rotta [an honest enough admission, come join in on the feeding frenzy].  I was a member of the police reserve for just about thirty years [...back when it was legitimate], actually a little over thirty years.  I gave up holidays weekends, to go and help the community.  I know that that don't mean nothing to him [of course not, as a volunteer firefighter under your direction, Chief, for eight years who fought fires, was on the rescue team, entered Ludington's fire reports for the state, went to schools throughout the year for fire safety programs, etc.], but I resent what he said about us.  We are here to help the community.  I wish we could get more police reserves to do that.  With his type of attitude, and the way he cuts people down, I don't know why anybody would volunteer for it, but... I did it for over thirty years and I never felt I was a vigilante [neither do most vigilantes], I thought I was helping people, and I commend you Mark for what you said.  I just wish he would figure out something to get out there and help the community [already have-- I started a website back in 2009 to bring a forum and awareness to the community of the problems of our corrupt, elitist, public figures] instead of bashing everything that we try to do, but I really resent that for the thirty years that I gave the city up, the weekends the holidays [deja vu], for every year I gave up the Fourth of July, never gave one up for my family [damn oppressive city-- give him an Independence Day off for once].  I worked.  And that's all I got to say; I don't know what else he is going to do (glares at Rotta as he heads back to seat).

 

Mayor/Reserve Officer Ryan Cox:  Any more miscellaneous business?

Councilor Kaye Holman:  Oh, I pretty much think that pretty well covers it, don't you?

Councilor Wanda Marrison:  Your honor.  In light of transparency at the end of the meeting:  does Mr. Rotta have anything to say?

Holman:   [Tourette's kicking in] Oh, cool!  C'mon Tom.

Marrison:  You asked for it earlier.  Here's your opportunity [I get up, walk to podium].

Cox:  I gave Jerry 60 seconds that's what I am giving you [Liar, Jerry took 1 min 26 sec from where he started talking to where he finished, and for the record Barnett took 4 min 17 sec].

Citizen Tom Rotta:  60 seconds?  I think Chief Barnett had more than that.

Holman:  That's not your business.

Marrison:  That's not your call [She who invited me now restricts me to arbitrary, unfair rules].

Rotta:  OK, (councilor chatter) well if you put restrictions on there, why should I even bother.  Thank you very much. 

Holman:  You're more than welcome!

Marrison:  You were given the opportunity [... for me to get in a couple sentences, and the council and other officials to reply in any which way they want.  I have learned recently they appear to have no codified rules for these meetings.  A FOIA request sent three weeks ago still hasn't been answered, though it was extended].

(Adjournment followed)

 

That was the exchange that took place.  And whereas, I make an effort to add meaningful or at least entertaining commentary and separate it from the actual words that were spoke, the City of Ludington Daily News (COLDNews) integrated their reporter's impressions within her story, complete with her own fabrications without factual bases:

 

 

COLDNews p. 8

 

Paragraph 2:  I have not called anyone names that did not have application under legal definition.  John Shay submitted an affidavit to the 51st Circuit Court that he knew was false, hence he perjured himself, and consequently is a liar, as he was about the slanderous claims he has made against me repeatedly.  Likewise, in my comment, I used the textbook definition of 'vigilante' to show it applied to what passes for the current reserve officers of Ludington, I even provided them a way to cure that deficiency. 

P3:  Attorney Richard Wilson stands unrefuted at the end of these meetings with his 'clarifications and corrections' just because no citizens are allowed to speak at the end.  I have, as of yet, seen no corrections made by him, and the clarifications look more like obfuscations.  I'm sure our reporter can tell the difference between legal arguments (rolls eyes).

P5:  Reporter Klevorn doesn't make it clear that I am not literally "bludgeoning people indiscriminately".  Isn't there laws against that?

P6:  No telling us why he apologized on my behalf.  It must have been for something real bad, that I didn't apologize for.  But Patti never divulges the contents of my speech other than the out-of-context vigilante reference. 

P7:  Disjoint from his full statement, those words look pretty schoolyard.

At the end of the article on page one, she still refuses like the rest of the COLDNews, that the Workplace Safety Policy did not keep me from entering the property of Ludington City Hall or the Police Department without being arrested on misdemeanor charges.

 

 

Since I did get taken by surprise for these two very public and very uncalled-for personal attacks at the end of the meeting, I probably should have called for a point of order once the true intentions of Chief Barnett's diatribe was known, so as to get the business of the meeting back to the public's business, not the belittling of the public.  But then I and the rest of the public that's paying more attention, might not have gotten the full scope of their animosity towards an individual and his rights, along with the scorn they have with most of  the rest of the general public that doesn't come up there and agree with them.

[Willy]

Dealing with the folks in the video is like talking to slab of concrete. Nothing sinks. X explained what the problems are and it's like their ears are stuffed with mud. After X talks, they take out the mud and continue the same despicable behavior. It is so blatantly obvious that they feel they are above the law even when it's explained to them that what they are doing is illegal. What a bunch of child like egos Ludington has running the Government. This group is a "click" which needs to be dissolved and reinfused with new blood. That's the only way things are going to change. I have taken the liberty to post a photo that bares a resemblance to Holman which was taken with one of the bathroom cams. She was quoted as saying "Why doesn't X love me"?

[XLFD]

All this time... I didn't know her true inner feelings... every time she said the word 'indigent', she really meant to say 'I love you', but couldn't. 

I'm touched and nauseated at the same time.  So moved.

[AQUAMAN]

The chiefs played an old liberal card of trying to compare apples to oranges, and the result is the public & media is just gullible enough to swallow it. Trying to compare the volunteer LPD reserve, vs. volunteer work in general. The COL charter still has no ordinance/policy for the LPD reserve unit. As X pointed out it has no foundations to exist legally: no training manual, no prerequisites for hiring, no accounting for use of equipment, no standards of conduct and morale, and much more I presume. The FOIA request that X made came back as a blank of information, because none apparently exists. Since X pointed this technicality out, it's a moot issue. Had some legal eagle pointed it out, it probably would be acted on, after all, it's their duty to correct this, even in hindsight. Take the planting of petunias, red cross drives, good will drives, Turkey day dinner deliveries, optimist, elks, & eagles drives and donations to worthy causes, all of which I have volunteered for at one time or another over the years. This reserve thing doesn't deter me from other volunteering now and into the future, so why would it anyone else? I also think Gerry went over the top in declaring he's lost every July 4th with family for 30 years to volunteer work. He made that decision, now he acts like he's been cheated somehow, and appears somewhat bitter and disgruntled about it. Grow up Ger, someone else can volunteer in your place if just asked nicely. Lastly, I think Barnett's interpretation of the first amendment is his and his alone. If it suits his own purpose, I'm sure he will invoke it anytime anyway he wants. But let someone else invoke it, and it's not in line with his personal standards. I think what he suggests and wants is for X to be ejected from the CC meetings asap, because he disagrees with his mannerisms and invocation of FOS. By doing so, it will only cause another suit against the COL for so doing. My gosh, how these people love to twist and warp the laws, just for Ego's sake.

[XLFD]

Thanks for your perceptive recap, Aquaman.  If I had said what Chief Barnett said about a private citizen, I would have been warned by a staccato of councilors and the mayor after the first use of the word 'bludgeon', and would have been escorted by Chief Barnett out of the meeting before the second "you should be ashamed of yourself" was uttered.  Chief Barnett, it shall be noted, was applauded roundly by the councilors; if Mayor Cox wasn't applauding he probably had his hands occupied doing something else in celebration of his boss' fine words on 'public policy'. 

I've got Attorney Nick Bostic still on the quick-dial if they want to invoke the new Constitutionally-awkward and amended Workplace Safety Policy 2 on me for Chief Barnett's perceptions of my words' jackhammer qualities.  It sounds like he and the council feel threatened and intimidated enough by my speaking what needs to be spoken to waste a lot more tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer's money to quiet my voice in their chambers and keep me from using public facilities. 

About the moot issue, not even the City Attorney tried to bluster about why the reserve officers were legit this time around, deferring instead to allow the Chief to ply his homilies about what good people he and the squad of vigilantes were, and how evil was the person who dared not to respect his authority.

[AQUAMAN]

Authoritarian attitudes and speech over the top is a major part of the problem, I agree X. Some are acting and talking like this simple local forum is a huge conspiracy of folks out to defame and mock everyone at city hall. If some are interpreting that after all that has been put on the table for thought & debate, and proven over and over again with written records and documentation, then they are the ones to watch. And that should be scary to John Q. Public, not us. If someone, either on the payroll, or not, is constantly monitoring and spying on us, how do they justify that to the taxpayers paying for their spying time on the citizens coin? And what's worse is that the spy/spies, don't seem to acknowledge facts and figures in any logical manner. They report back to superiors, or coworkers, much ado about misinterpretations and falsehoods that don't exist mostly. That in itself is more dangerous than what the spy thinks is the problem to begin with. It seems to be designed to attempt to shut down any form of knowing and getting to the truth on sensitive matters of contracts, ordinances, projects, and the like which the city council seems determined to block at every corner. A totally secret local government, accountable to no locals, determined to rule by force, inuendo, threats, and even crying in public for sympathy. A juggernaut of authoritarians bent on ruling by iron fist, and letting the local media carry that false message like it's truth in reporting. Is it any wonder then that now since the outlanders have taken full control and power, that any locals want to try to fix a problem by running for local office when all this fiasco exists?

[Willy]

Well stated Aquaman and X.

[AQUAMAN]

That woman is as sickening a human being? as you get. I  make a motion to nick-name the out of order female at large councilwoman the same as Trump named Rosie: a "Female Sasquatch"......lol...rofl...pmpf!