Ludington Police Pier Review

[XLFD]

Early on the date of July 20th, 2019 the local newspaper related a story about a couple of visiting teenagers being swept off the breakwater. On the paper's Facebook page Ludington City Councilor Angela Serna wondered why people who were ignoring the 'closed' sign weren't getting ticketed by the police or the beach patrol.

Two days later, Serna would be publicly reprimanded by the rest of the city council for making such statements, her undisputed defense that LPD and the chief weren't doing their jobs was never considered in their verdict of guilty. Yet, Serna's words would change policy, as shortly after this meeting the LPD and the beach patrol started taking the closing of the breakwater more seriously and conveying this message to the newspaper and the Mason County Press (MCP) in order to show their work.

The last week of July saw 19 people ticketed for walking on the breakwater when it was closed at least three days, this was reported on in the MCP three different times. A FOIA request to look at the tickets showed that they had not been issued until after the "not doing their job" controversy washed through city hall. In case you are curious, the tickets are issued under the authority of statute MCL 324,80198a which says in its entirety:

(1) When wind conditions on the Great Lakes attain a magnitude whereby 1/3 of the waves resulting from the conditions cause any public dock, pier, wharf, or retaining wall to be awash, it constitutes a state not conducive to the orderly and safe use and occupancy of those structures.
(2) When the conditions described in subsection (1) exist, any harbormaster, peace or police officer, or other authorized official may rope off or barricade entry to these structures or post in a conspicuous manner notices that entry on those structures for the purpose of fishing, swimming, or other recreational activity is prohibited.
(3) A person shall not knowingly enter or remain upon any public dock, pier, wharf, or retaining wall for the purpose of fishing, swimming, or other recreational activity when the structure is roped, cabled, or otherwise barricaded in a manner designed to exclude intruders, when notice against entry is given by posting in a conspicuous manner, or when notice to leave or stay off is personally communicated to that person by a peace or police officer or other authorized official of the local unit of government.

It mentions no punishment for the violation, but in the state law section regarding marine safety, when no punishment is mentioned a violation is considered a misdemeanor (MCL 324.80171), meaning you could face a harsh fine and up to 93 days in jail. What I didn't understand is that if the beach patrol is on duty and the breakwater is closed, are these violators actually ignoring them, coming back from the lighthouse and then giving out all of their personal information voluntarily?

On Thursday August 8th, the breakwater was closed and four people were cited for disregarding the closure of the breakwall, among these were a 20-year-old Manistee man and a 21-year-old Bessemer City, North Carolina woman. I just happened to be down at the beach when it happened, saw them coming back into a waiting phalanx of a LPD officer and a beach patrol guy. I perched myself covertly nearby in a convenient sand dune.

In a rather surprisingly civil manner that lasted about 15 minutes, I saw two tickets given to the couple after they had voluntarily given over their IDs and answered questions posed by the officer. The couple walked away south down the beach, I followed behind looking to ask them some more questions, the first being "Did you just get a ticket for walking on the breakwall?" The two 'criminals' voluntarily related their story and confirmed some questions of mine.

They had parked at the Loomis Street parking lot and had walked along the beach to the pier, neither had seen any indication that the breakwall was closed until they had come back and saw the officials hanging around a sawhorse that had no warning they could have saw from their vantage points. Pictured below is how they went out to the lighthouse, the green being their path, the red mark being a DPW sawhorse that had 'breakwall closed' written on the side facing the east.

They had no indication that the breakwall was closed, there was no wind, only on occasion did the water crest over the pier. They were somewhat disappointed by the tickets, but figured they might dispute them because there was no way they could tell that the breakwall was closed from the route they took.

And the law agreed with them, the breakwall was not 'roped, cabled, or otherwise barricaded in a manner designed to exclude intruders' from where they accessed it, the notice of closure was not posted conspicuously where they could see it, and no official personally communicated that they had to stay off it. This couple was so cooperative that they would have not ventured forth had they known, but they got what amounts to nuisance tickets that could negatively affect their lives depending on the disposition with them. The friendly couple were also told that they were banned from Stearn's Beach for the rest of the day.

What a great way to handle tourism in Ludington! Cite a couple of visitors for misdemeanors because the LPD cannot do their job properly in closing the breakwall and communicating that fact to those not 'knowingly' walking on a closed pier.  I wish our elected officials would address the problem-- oops, they can't because they would be publicly humiliated by their peers.

After this, I was willing to call it a day after I went back to the south concession stand to retrieve my bicycle. But what should I see than a couple of men and a young boy getting ready to go forth on the pier when I looked back. They had also went along the beach and had not seen the warning on the sawhorse. By this time, the LPD officer had drove away and the beach patrol guy was nowhere to be seen, so I ran back down to the beach and tried to save them.

David Hasselhoff, I'm not, but I was able to get to the sawhorse before they hit the first turn, yelled and gesticulated to get their attention, and then waved for them to come back. At this point, I noticed the beach patrol coming down the pier a couple hundred yards away.

As the trio started back, I went towards the beach patrol guy and asked him why the 'closed' sign was where it was, when it should be further out. He explained that his superiors insisted the sign be where it was and that it had a tendency to blow over when it was put further out. I expressed my concern that putting the sign where it was makes those coming from the south ignorant of the closure and that as such, the whole setup was just a revenue generator for the LPD that could lead to people dying after unknowingly going out on a hazardous pier.  And that it would be due to the negligence of the city to convey that danger properly.

The two and a half men got back and were informed of the closure, the patrolman wisely did not ticket them and let them go. I can only hope that the beach patrol adopts a new policy of posting a patrolman near the breakwall entrance since they have failed to properly cordon off and post warnings regarding closures of the pier, and that he warns all of the hazards and the penalties of going out on the breakwall when its closed. I doubt anybody will ignore them and truly earn a misdemeanor for venturing forth.

EPILOGUE: While noticing the couple out on the breakwall in the Loomis Street parking lot, I also noticed a group of about a dozen playing around on the collapsed walkway north of the boat launch piers. This was past not only a saw horse, but some police tape too. The weight of several people were on the collapsed, sharply-angled-down portion, and I was worried that the instability that caused the original collapse and undermining that happened since may present a very real hazard to this group.

An LPD sergeant was writing reports in his vehicle within sight of what was going on. I pointed out what was happening and whether he might want to step in. He declined, saying that the LPD policy was just to enforce the law prohibiting use of the breakwall when it was closed. About ten minutes later, I saw that policy enforced against an unwitting duo.

It turns out in the end that Councilor Serna was wrong.  The LPD along with their arm called the beach patrol were not doing their jobs because they had not been writing tickets for people walking out on the breakwall; no, they were not doing their jobs because they failed to stop people from going out on the breakwall during hazardous conditions or set up a meaningful blockade.

[woodsman]

Do you know who owns the Breakwater? Corp of Engineers should unless given to the COL I think awhile back the Lighthouse ownership was transferred to COL but never really heard about the Breakwater. I think the COL would be very foolish to take ownership of the Breakwater with repair bills that could be into and beyond millions. So if the Corps of Engineers still own the breakwater does the local Law enforcement have the right stop anyone or ticket anyone using Federal Property?  When at the Grand Canyon recently I ask the people with the uniforms about people falling off the edges and getting killed the answer was it is Federal Property and people can walk where they want to.

[XLFD]

In 2006, the Coast Guard transferred ownership of the breakwater lighthouse to the City of Ludington under the terms of the National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Act.  The Sable Points Lighthouse Keepers Association, a volunteer group, maintains, restores and operates it.  The breakwater itself isn't, but the law cited in the article in boldfaced allows 'any harbormaster, peace or police officer, or other authorized official' to rope off and restrict access to such structures in Michigan when conditions are bad.  

Frankly, I doubt whether these citations would hold up in court if challenged, primarily because the sawhorse sign saying simply that it's closed for people coming from the east would not be sufficient deterrent.  These tickets would only succeed under challenge if the police/patrol gave a full warning not to use the breakwater and were ignored.

[Willy]

In my opinion if adults want to risk their lives that’s up to them, however the pier should be posted at a place where the public could be informed prior to walking to the lighthouse. Minors are a different situation. Minors need to be restricted from using the pier when wind and wave condition create an unsafe condition. The Chief has completely dropped the ball when it comes to keeping kids off the break wall. Also the mayor and council need to publicly recant their shameful mistreatment of Serna and remove the reprimand from the public record. Shame on the Chief for not doing his job and shame on the mayor and council for being mindless fools.