Ludington City Council Meeting, June 24, 2024: Fine Time to Leave

[XLFD]

This reporter would stay at the June 24, 2024 meeting of the Ludington City Council for less than ten minutes into it, but would eventually be able to look at the video of the meeting, and be very glad about that decision.  The Ludington Torch would quickly navigate down to the Scottville Commission meeting, then over to the MCC School Board meeting, rather than stay in Ludington, where the LCC agenda packet showed few items of business and promised a love-fest for the outgoing city manager, Mitch Foster-- which it quickly devolved into.

But this would only happen after my initial comment to the council, which panned the budgeting and appropriating skills of Foster and the city in general in processes that have taken place before he arrived in Ludington back in 2019.  Only lately, through meticulous research involving interviews with other municipality officials, reviews of past practices, and perusal of appropriate laws, we have learned that the City of Ludington has been doing most everything wrong; here's my comment with links to some of the supporting records:

XLFD: (7:45 in) "It's quite revealing when neither the auditor who has served the city for decades nor any other official can explain to the people of Ludington why they are offering 2023 budget amendments in March and even May of 2024 when the law says it cannot do that.  Look at the law, look at Michigan Department of Treasury manuals, ask those officials across Mason County responsible for budgets in our townships, our other city, and our county and inquire whether they ever make budget amendments after the fiscal year it pertains to and you should get the same answer in every resource:  you can't.

Yet, the City of Ludington does this every year, your auditor never catches it-- that auditor should be immediately fired-- and the question any reasoning citizen should ask is why the city is breaking the law, making budget amendments five months into the year for the preceding year.  We see a city manager in flight this year and those very late budget amendments; is that a golden parachute on his back as he takes off after discretely seeing to it that the city installs an insider to be Ludington's next pilot who shows she is not rattled by such turbulence?

Meanwhile, the city is poised to do another of its annual illegal procedures, hiking taxes with truth in taxation hearings, trying to raise over $300,000 extra by unlawful process.  Our city charter is clear enough in section 8.6 in saying that appropriation and revenue ordinances for the next budget year only come after that budget is adopted-- which won't happen until December. 

Statute MCL 141.412 indicates as much by saying the notice for a city's budget hearing must include the language:  ""The property tax millage rate proposed to be levied to support the proposed budget will be a subject of this hearing." 

How can that be, if the rates have already been set in July, months before the city starts its work on the budget?  And guess what, in the 13 years I've been coming to council meetings regularly, millage rates are never part of the discussion at budget hearings.

Without a budget, you have zero rationale to raise our taxes this year, like you had in preceding years, like the last year where you raised our taxes by nearly $300,000.  Unbounded greed is all that I see in your dulled eyes, while lawlessness is in too many of your actions.  Revisit these ordinances in December, take them off of your agenda now.  [END comment]

The first concern was ignored for the second time, perhaps the council thinks they can sing it away in a hootenanny after a meeting, but this issue won't go away because, as I inferred, it's indicative that our city budget leaders (Foster (and prior City Manager John Shay), Jackie Steckel, and Clerk Deb Luskin) has been doing both practices for over a decade even when state law and the city charter prohibit both, of cooking the budget books after the year's end.  This isn''t generally done without some massive unethical plan behind it.  Both Steckel and Foster will be gone by year's end, Steckel's retirement will probably make that December meeting as unbearable as this one to those who expect at least adequate performances from their city officials (not only in their official capacity, but also their singing too).

After one of the county drain commissioner candidates introduced himself, Chuck Sobanski, with a shirt and start of his speech indicating that he was the (honorary) mayor of the Fourth Ward, claimed then and later in the meeting, that he spoke for all Fourth Warders that they would sorely miss Mitch and thought he had done a great job.  That hasn't been the consensus of those people who have signed recall petitions against the Fourth Ward Councilor Cheri Stibitz, and those who would love to sign, except that they fear retaliation if they do sign.   

I just look forward someday to being able to claim in a few years that I am honorary mayor of the 6th or 3rd Ward and go to meetings so I can fawn and supplicate as good as he does.  After a minor change of agenda item 8(B)(b) to say "repeal" rather than "appeal", they passed the consent agenda and went to another preliminary involving receiving a $50,000 check from the estate of Tom Coleman to be used over the course of 20 years by the Tree Advisory Board for their projects.  Coleman was one of the original members of that board after serving on MDOT during his career, and his brother (a Fourth Warder) gave a smart presentation of the check.  

Foster would give a plausible-sounding defense of the city's policy for doing the appropriation ordinances during the summer, similar to the one he gave to me last fall when I brought this first to his attention, but there is authority I have found yet in support of his claim that the City has to do it in summer because of some unnamed rule that says they must get that in before October.  You think that in a year's time and with the city attorney's help, he would have brought something forward to defend actions that seem to go against statute and city charter.   

After he affirmed their unlawful appropriation procedure, they moved on to setting the public hearing at the next meeting on July8th at 6PM at city hall.  They would allow McKenna up to the end of the year to craft the city's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and if you think the existing zoning rules are violating your basic rights as a property owner, wait until you see what this looks like.  Zoning at its best prohibits your neighbors from doing something that negatively impacts your property or your rights, the next line of zoning rules will be mostly zoning at its worst, allowing government more control over everyone's private property.

In recognition of their mistakes at the last meeting in jumping the gun, they passed a resolution that officially recognized the resignation of Foster and Oakes, and recognized her repurposing as the interim city manager.  They would then approve an employment agreement that would grant her $6500 per month, paid on a weekly basis.  They approved a hazard mitigation plan.

In providing a "clean ending" to the lawsuit launched by Terry Grams against the City and its deer cull in Cartier Park, the city council repealed the ordinance that approved the three year contract with the USDA's Wildlife Management division, which would have expired in early 2025.  This was the best action they took this evening, and did uphold the city attorney's insistence in court that the city had no intention to do future deer culls, but still left the possibility of the city contracting with them (or some other such service) at some point in the future for city deer culls. 

The second comment period was unanimous in praise for the outgoing city manager, with former Mayor Steve Miller, Charter Revision Commissioner Jack Stibitz, HM Sobanski, former Councilor David Bourgette, Planning Commissioner Patrick O'Herron, and former Councilor Les Johnson all offering glowing appraisals-- you will note that all are former, honorary, or current city officials.   Even with the inducement of refreshments after the meeting for all, no member of the general public spoke-- other than me at the beginning of the meeting, who wondered whether he was wearing a golden parachute.

Mitch Foster had come in with such promise back in early 2019, and until late 2022, he was still doing an admirable job of keeping clear or in control of the worst of the corruption that had played a large part in the earlier administration.  Bourgette would say in his praise that he wasn't sure at first whether he would be able to fill John Shay's shoes.  In this last year, he finally did.  He furtively snuck away in the middle of the year and without warning took another job.  He did this after making a literal mess of things and being in the pockets of developers and Ludington elites, after showing initiative and problem-solving skills in his first years.  The Shay comparison was very good.

Foster would have his own words to say at the very end of the meeting, where he was careful to thank all of his fellow officials and wife (not any individual citizens again) before ending it with the following:

Foster:  (1:01:00 in)"There's a contingent within our community that, at times, has lowered the quality of discourse and has created unnecessary divisions.  This behavior shows not only challenges for our current leadership, but also our successor, nevertheless, I'm confident that fostering a philosophy of respect, collaboration, and constructive dialog we can overcome these challenges and strengthen our community bonds.  Ludington is a place of resiliency and unity and I believe wholeheartedly in our collective ability to achieve great things together.

Ludington has incredible potential, and I believe in our ability to achieve these great things.  Let us work together, support one another, can ensure that our community can continue to thrive."

A standing ovation followed.  While I was surprised he referred to the city council as a contingent and listed some of their faults, I was happy that he reminded them that they need to respect the people, collaborate with them, and offer constructive dialog.  I doubt whether the city council took the hint, so I will have to continue pestering them to get their act together.

At the end, you can see why he feels that the city council is a bit discordant, when they get together in some straw hats and mangle the Kenny Rogers hit "You Picked a Fine Time to Leave Me Lucille".  I think they doctored the lyrics up, but it's hard to decipher in the video; the song originally was inspired by a father in Tulsa who Rogers overheard him when his cheating wife just upped and left him.  Appropriate in this case in more ways than one it goes:

… You picked a fine time to leave me, Lucille With four hungry children and a crop in the field
I've had some bad times, lived through some sad times
But this time your hurting won't heal
You picked a fine time to leave me, Lucille

I was thrown out of a city council meeting just a couple months ago for having background music for one of my comments, it enhanced the comment immensely, but Mayor Barnett, with the full council watching in approval, had me ushered out of the meeting for background music I had properly metered for my comment, protected under the First Amendment and the MIchigan Open Meetings Act. 

No wonder Foster thinks these people have lowered the quality of discourse and made divisions.  Had I serenaded Foster in similar manner, I would have likely been arrested; maybe their police would have punctured my lung like they did to another area businessman for his background music. Mitch Foster called for that intervention in as well.

[Freedom Seeker]

Excellent speech, X.

[Freedom Seeker]

What I can't figure out is if Foster abandoned ship because he could not stand the corruption or became a part of it? I think Foster is smart enough to see that you are right on just about everything you say, X, and it is back up in law, obviously in court, except when there is a judge that is on the corrupt side or afraid to rule against the city for fear of losing votes.

Then the City  blames all the expense of defending their wrong actions on you making money. Wrong. You don't get paid except for filing fees and mailing costs (Miss recent Parrot perpetuating lies, in latest Alway editorial.)

I feel Foster tried, early in his term, to mediate to the Council that what you point out is right, but maybe could not withstand Barnett's pressure of having to prove his wrongs in a battle that has gone on long before Foster came.  Same as the sin of Cain.  Did Foster no longer want to be a part of it?  And the Clowncilors singing that Foster was a loose wheel is about as applicable as the City vessel headed for a crash.  How stupid.

What's more corrupt is the fixing of the budget now uncovered.

Another thing, how can Oakes, a Councilor, become a paid employee?  I thought that was against Charter? 

[XLFD]

At his core, I believe Mitch Foster is a good person and that he served Winneconne, Wisconsin with honor and a belief in the Strong Towns philosophy that he originally brought with him, and which seems 110% better than what has been our city hall's philosophy.  He gave up on the small bets, he embraced Ponzi Growth schemes, and his actions put a lot of stress on the regular citizens keeping up with the bills.  Hopefully, someday he will be decompressed enough from his service with the city to explain why he changed dramatically in philosophy between 2019 and 2024, and honest enough not to throw the blame on me, I am just the messenger that told him how far he has strayed from the straight and narrow.

The most recent letter to the editor 0f MCP meant to discredit me, without ever mentioning my name, seems to have been orchestrated by Foster (as seen in recent FOIA responses) either on his own or by the designs of another elected official(s).  An inherently good person will have a hard time doing such deviltry in their job and seek an exit.  As far as the two budget fiascoes, they predated his arrival, aren't easily explained away, and those scandals will likely not follow him but stay with the other two officials dealing with this year's yet-to-be-made budget.

As for your last point, you have provided a teaser for my next article based on the City of Ludington.  Stay tuned on this broadcasting station.

[Freedom Seeker]

Staying tuned! Will you include the FOIA on Foster's connection to the Op-Ed?

[XLFD]

That will be under a different article, but yes it will be shared.

[Willy]

X, your remarks about Foster were tongue in cheek, right? You do know he was referring to you  and not the Council. I think he booked because he knows how off the wall these people are and to keep his job he needed to go along with the corruption. One has to ask, what is the matter with these people? They're like the Democrats in the way they run the City they were entrusted to look after. There definitely is a sense that they think they can do what ever they want, whenever they want and to who ever they choose to do it to. Who would have thought that this bunch of geriatric elected officials   would act like a bunch of control freaks. I still say that we need to attract a better class of Councilors by paying a descent salary so that it would be worth while for good representatives other than old retirees who have nothing else to do with their time then to screw up Ludington's City Hall.

[XLFD]

I'm completely aware as to how he meant it to apply to me, but in reviewing his wording, I couldn't help but note that he was projecting his own side's ills like the current federal regime always does with Trump.  Trump will take away all your rights, they say as they put a gag order on him and bring gun control bills to the floor.  Trump will get us into WW 3, they say as their policies appease the war pigs in both parties.  

I'm fighting for the concepts of truth, transparency, justice, ethical conduct, fiscal conservatism, and accountability and at every step I take they put up roadblocks to all of these.  Then claim they're doing it for all of us.  Sad, but not unexpected.