Ludington City Council Meeting, December 9 and 16, 2019: A Complete 360

[XLFD]

These two December council meetings were very close together in time and yet very different.  Two aspects of the meeting held on the ninth were discussed in The Statecraft of Floracraft and "Two Illegal Closed Sessions Don't Make Lawful Open Meetings".  The first was where I passive-aggressively wondered why a local company only wanted lower taxes for itself rather than for all, and why the council thought that was fair to all of their constituents.  The second was an analysis of their flawed process in trying to cure an obvious violation of state law by obviously violating the law again.  

I had also made an opening comment in that same meeting regarding the deficiencies in the Brownfield Plan for the Haskellite (Wolverine) Building on Rowe, the very next night I would reiterate those problems at the county commissioner's meeting where they held a public hearing over it.  The commissioner who had the project in his district, Nick Krieger, was forced to vote against the plan due to those insufficiencies, and if the state abides by the law, you will likely see this tax abatement nullified, until they can follow the rules.  I will be writing more on this once I get a reply from the state either way.

Needless to say, those three points of opposition to how the City approached tax abatements, following the rules and open meeting principles, you might think the December 16th meeting would find me contentious at the city hall podium with freshly sharpened rhetorical knives.  But I was like the month of March, coming in (the first meeting) like a lion, and going out (the last meeting of the year) as a lamb.  

Before the latter meetings, I had set aside some time and personalized greetings on over a dozen fancy Christmas cards, giving them to each councilor*, the mayor, the city manager, clerk, treasurer, attorney, both chiefs, and regular attendees, Planning Commissioner John Terzano, COLDNews reporter Noah Hausmann, and the camera lady.  I also had spent a little money on some gifts, about $8, which I gave to the clerk, treasurer and mayor.  

These gifts all were 'birdcage gifts' to a degree.  If you have heard the new term wegifting which you're most likely to have done yourself, you would understand the term.  My father as a kid brought his mom a nice birdcage for Christmas, the problem was, she didn't own a bird, he did.  Think of O. Henry's "Gift of the Magi" with the woman buying him combs for her hair and the man buying her a chain for his pocket watch.  

The clerk got a spindle of 20 recordable data CDs; this was in gratitude for the City providing me with about a half-dozen CDs for FOIA requests over the last couple of years without expecting any money in return for the digital media that costs around a quarter each.  The treasurer got a pocket book of Sudoku puzzles.  The treasurer as a citizen had organized Sudoku tournaments back when they were first trending (2005 or so) and I had won both.  My hope was that he would get reenergized to organize more in the future so that I could earn more plaques.  

The mayor's gift was an easy to read book on Robert's Rules of Order.  Arguably, Mayor Steve Miller has been the most consistent parliamentarian of the three previous mayors, so this manual was not meant to disparage his performance but to supplement his skills in meeting-craft.  I, and others have been encouraging the City to re-adopt Robert's Rules, since there have been times when the City's lack of following formal rules have made them look silly and arbitrary in what they do absent such protocols.  The City is on record voting to implement Robert's Rules at least three times, all in the 20th century, but they don't currently think they are in force.

This token 'influence-peddling' was all done before the camera clicked on at the December 16th meeting, and I have no idea whether the officials were expecting me to rail about the unresolved issues of the last meeting, or bring up other issues due to the lack of much anything on the agenda other than a budget hearing.  So, I just gave them another gift of compliments:

191216lcc from Mason County District Library on Vimeo.

XLFD:  (3:00 in) "First off, I would like to thank the agenda scheduler for making the last meeting of the year contain regular last-meeting-of the-year activities only, like approving the budget, setting meeting dates and approving committee appointments. It gives one a little time to reflect on all that has improved in the City in an otherwise tough year to run it.

Since I made my first FOIA request over 10 years ago, I've seen the City acting with some very bad intent to avoid letting the people view records in the public domain. This year, the City has made commendable advancement in this field. They have not only made documents available, the mayor and city manager has made time to further explain supplemental information not present in the written records.

The City has upgraded its commitment to transparency at meetings this year. Instead of having standing committee meetings held with no public notice with invitees only, these groups now have a regular schedule and regularly report updates to this council at every meeting. Hopefully gone are the days when important topics get discussed at multiple committees, multiple times and the general public only becomes aware of that topic the weekend before the topic becomes law at the council level.

There is still room for improvement in my opinion, as you can probably tell since I've come before this council at over 20 plus meetings this year airing well over 20 grievances of one sort or another. We may have similar objectives, but we often have different perspectives. As a citizen, I appreciate the adaptive and resilient leadership at city hall and the fresh perspectives of recent council additions of ditching some bad habits that city hall had over the previous ten years which led to strife between officials and citizens.

This year has shown us that city leadership can own and correct a mistake, that they can actively communicate with and solicit advice from the public, that they can operate more transparently and even that they can sincerely compliment a historical antagonist. That is progress which I would like to see continue into the new year. Merry Christmas [END]."

I cannot remember ever making a more complimentary comment, and yet I think that some of the councilors may have only heard the criticisms of past practices included therein of which I spoke of to show the contrast of the old with the new.  Either that or they figured that something was amiss-- what with me giving out cards, gifts and praise.  My presents came with no strings attached other than my presence.

The public hearing had nobody approach the podium, and little of substance discussed by councilors before it passed.  They approved the low bid submitted by Hardman Construction of $185K for the seawall between the Loomis boat launch area and the stub pier just west of the coast guard station.  Other than that they filled the standing committees which stayed with the same personnel; the budget and committee particulars can be found here. 

Next year's meeting dates were set, same as this year (6:30 PM, 2nd and 4th Monday of each month except for March, May and December where meetings are on the 1st and 3rd Monday).  I can understand the conflicts of Memorial Day and Christmas in May and December, but can't figure out why March has it different.   

Nevertheless, officials seemed to be wanting to get through and call it a year, with no reports from councilors and a small report from the city manager.  A small bit of mirth crept out in the beginning, when I discovered I had lost Councilor Johnson's Christmas card somewhere, and he was the only regular attendee that didn't get a card, I apologized profusely for the oversight.  That's why it's extra funny that Clerk Luskin skipped over Johnson's name when going down the roll, it was like an episode of the Twilight Zone or something.

The three areas of friction noted between the City and myself at the December 9th meeting and the passage of the opt-out of state reforms (with Councilor Angela Serna making a principled 'no' vote) which I had criticized at the prior meeting, was in high contrast to the gifts and goodwill at this meeting, so much that someone remarked to me afterwards it as being a 'complete 360'. 

I didn't want to spoil the night by reminding them that the correct phrase was a 'complete 180'.  Three-sixty rotations get you back to the same vantage you started with.  

[Du Wright]

Nice comments, X. And Merry Christmas to all!

[shinblind]

Old Council members,

Often wrong. Never in doubt.

Voters be wary.

[AQUAMAN]

First off, X's comment was very pleasant and cordial at the end of the year with Christmas only a few days away. I think the availability of FOIA info. being offered more promptly and with some extra info. thrown in says a lot for improved openness and transparency this year, and hopefully into the future. Secondly, I liked the fact that a local contractor, Hardman Constr. got the low bid for the new seawall at Maritime Park. My concern though is the following: 1) the wall alone does not address the sidewalk replacement nor the armor rock in front of the seawall costs, nor the asphalt parking lot collapse, which could be substantially more $$$$. 2) building the replacement new seawall is only taking into effect the current water levels, instead of researching the future levels. The NWS and others have already predicted and forecast the Lk. Mi. levels to increase some 11-14" in  2020. That would definitely not be good for this new work, nor planning for the future in a more intelligent and engineered way imho. If the COL is going to do this expensive project, I think they should investigate just what I outlined here, before final construction goes forward now and this coming spring. Thirdly, both State and Fed. laws used to disallow recording of the public without their advance knowledge and permission, whether by phone, or in person. I see where CM Foster is now incorporating this for every public commentator, and I just wonder why, and how this improves public participation into the future.

[XLFD]

First of all, I express great gratitude in the contributions of Aquaman and Willy over the last ten years of the Torch, as we have just reached year ten and am now starting on year 11.  They have been frequent contributors and offer great insights on many topics, and have done so for a decade.  I do not wish to disparage our more recent members, but these guys are XLFD-approved for their endurance for that period.

Aquaman, you misunderstand what Mitch Foster is doing at the beginning of each public comment.  He actually has a timer that you can see that counts down the two or three minutes you have to speak.  He is not recording, and even if it was, the fact that the library is recording the meeting should tell you that there's nothing wrong with recording commenters, it's an open meeting and you have no expectation of not being recorded.  That's why Danny V. taking pictures from behind me at a recent meeting didn't elicit much shock from me, what he does with those pictures in the privacy of his bedroom probably would, however.

I think the City at this point is smart enough to not place a cost on what it will take to replace the sidewalk and turf behind the seawall, there undoubtedly will be damage during the winter and so such an amount would be only a tentative estimate on what the cost is now and speculation as to whether we can get a good bid for sidewalk replacement.

[Willy]

Don't forget Dave. He and I joined the Torch at the same time. It's hard to believe that ten years have gone by so fast. You have done the Ludington community a great service X and deserve to be honored for all that you have accomplished for the people who really matter, despite the "couch potatoism" that inflicts most of Mason County. 

[XLFD]

I didn't forget Dave, I just left him out to elicit a response from him since I frequently see him lurking in the background of online members keeping an eye on things, but rarely see him post anymore.  He used to post articles of interest on the national and state level almost as prolifically as I would post those of local interest.  Wouldn't mind seeing him doing that again, he can often walk the tightrope between partisan issues.

Thanks for the medal, I will cherish it always, or at least until the 20th anniversary, when I'll require a more showy decoration.

[Willy]

Is it possible that Councilor Serna has had a positive influence on the Council. In your opinion how does this Council compare to previous Councils in cooperation and openness? 

[XLFD]

Looks like Councilor Johnson definitely needs a good shave.  

No doubt in my mind that Councilor Angela Serna has been an invaluable source for transparency from within city hall, as she always strives to ask the right questions and address things openly at meetings rather than as the secret squirrel society we're used to where almost everything is asked and answered outside of public meetings.  She is not afraid to wade into battle with the old way of thinking, and that's a good thing for us all.

This has been the best year for transparency and accountability I can remember regarding city hall and it's due in large part to three people (my incredible modesty won't allow myself on that short list) each are fairly new on the scene:  Mitch Foster, Angela Serna, and Dianne Seelhoff.  I would love to add to that list in 2020.

[Du Wright]

Thanks X for the thanks that maybe our struggle was successful (which took two years in court to get the subcommittee meetings to comply with OMA law (we settled 11/25/19). It definitely is an exhausting endeavor, being pushed to the end on every issue by the City using high-priced, high-powered CMDA (Grand Rapids) lawyers to refute, twist, deny and find loopholes in the law. When they figure they can't win an issue, they force settlement, probably so they won't get a violation on court record and cost the taxpayer more with a trial. In city council meeting of 11/25/19 they seem to imply that we cost the city $53,000 in their attorney fees. Though it is a sweet win that the city now properly posts subcommittee meeting dates and minutes, the cost is bitter, for we are taxpayers, too. (I wonder if the lawyers keep pushing the cost until the city gets wise and finally "cries uncle.")

The bulk of appreciation for the win on transparency goes to Tom Rotta for having the fortitude, accumen and endurance to see it through and continue to bring transparency to the city.

It is disgusting how the City uses the shield of lawyers with initially seemingly no concern of taxpayer money (when they could have settled two years ago at very little cost).

Then when the city settles, they seem to blame the cost on us. Something should be illegal about the city indiscriminatly wasting tax payer money hiding behind lawyers. Partly to blame, imo, is the Michigan OMA law, which basically says if a city violates the law, they have the right to "reenact" a wrong but that, imo, should be done BEFORE they are forced to court. It is hard and intimidating arguing against a highly experienced lawyer from Grand Rapids who becomes a Judge. We'd have to employ a lawyer skilled in OMA to fight that, and if we won, then the city would have to pay our attorney fees. That is something we do not want to have to cost the city, so we go as "pro se" (without legal representation). Had we employed an attorney, the costs the city would have had to pay would have probably been doubled by the city having to paying our attorney fees at their loss.

Fortunately, we've seen a few "re-enactments" lately. That I credit to Mitch Foster listening to XLFD memos and cutting the cost before it has to be taken to court. I hope he keeps it up because there is a memo in the hopper due to a perceived violation of a 12/5/19 Strategic Planning meeting which took place at the Ludington Bay Brewery (with dinner) which potentially violated the OMA on four counts (not providing electronic notice on the official website, not providing electronic minutes on the official website, not providing an (agenda), and not providing the public an opportunity to speak).

The meeting at the Ludington Bay Brewery happened about a week after the ink dried from the former settlement of OMA violation, and amidst a consideration to "reenact" for violating the 2/3 roll call requirement necessary to go into closed session to negotiate settlement! Doesnt it just make you wonder Who is advising the City in legal matters?

At least Mitch Foster has been listening to Tom Rotta's memos of late and that is a great change from the last administration that would not only blatently disparage him at public meetings but went so far as to put an illegal Letter of Tresspass on him to hinder him while running for a seat on the Council, and to prevent him from interacting in city meetings and other FOIAs that expose wrongdoings.

I pray for a Miracle on Harrison St. This Christmas!

[Freedom Seeker]

So was the public invited to dinner and a drink at the Ludington Bay Brewery?  Was this a City Council meeting?

[Du Wright]

Besides one reporter from LDN, I was the only "public" and it seems like I was an unwanted intruder.  Being very interested in Strategic Planning for a community, I endured the meeting.  Mitch Foster, during a break, came over to talk to me as well as Councilor Winczewski, which sort of broke the very frigid ice block of earlier passing the Mayor at the entrance on his bar stool.  Even though he seemed to do his best to avoid seeing me, it was hard not to when I had to squeeze sideways through the congested walk path of bar stools and tables moved out of the way to make a u-table seating formation for the 10 participants.  As I squeezed by I asked whether the meeting was public to sort of break the ice, and was told "If you want to be here you can"--a direct quote as I remember it.  That reply added to the environment of the uninviting, cold, hard, high uncomfortable bar stools. 

It was not clear as to whether one should eat dinner, I wasn't invited by the city to eat, however the wait staff of the Brewery offered and brought me water.  Overall it was very awkward, congested and imo not conducive to a public meeting, especially when we have a much l larger conference room downstairs in the new city hall, more set up for public meetings and more inviting.  Fortunately I had brought a cooler of tea and nuts, anticipating a long, awkward meeting.

[Du Wright]

The meeting was at the Jamesport Brewery, Reds room.