Open Letter for Retraction of Statements by Ludington City Manager John Shay

[XLFD]

 

City Manager John Shay,

 

I am offering you the opportunity to retract your comments made at the end of the June 24, 2013 meeting, which were made grossly in error and meant to defame my character.  A script of your words and my commentary on the veracity of those statements are in the thread I include here:  http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/public-lynching-on-a-...

 

Whereas I could care less whether you are self-delusional enough to actually believe I did not prevail in the civil action against yourself and the City of Ludington in the Federal case or the application of your skewed logic in other parts of your speech.  I do, however, take issue with the factual errors and reliance on secondary/hearsay information you proposed as factual and in the public interest to speak on the record at an open public meeting that you knew was recorded on video. 

 

Starting at #5, you stated that I had "taken a family photo of mine without permission, superimposed a slash mark... against it, a family photo that I didn't give you permission to use."  As I told you and Attorney Vander Laan at the deposition, this was not from me.  Believe it or not, you are not universally loved here, and someone else did that using the screen name of "John".  I said in front of you under oath, and I will tell you again, I am not "John", so the theft and desecration of your family photo was not perpetrated by me.  I admit freely that the Darth Maul morph was done by me, and that the picture used for you is from the MML 2011 meeting.  This is protected political speech, not theft or defamation, as you inferred, and it looks good on you.

 

#7 is false.  "You take pictures of the house, you're entitled to go out on the street and take photos of the house, you can do that"  I have never taken a picture of your house.  The closest I have ever gotten to taking a picture of your house was taking a picture of a car across the street and in front of the mayor's house that were blocking pedestrian use of the sidewalk, but just so you know, those two pictures I spoke of were taken from the corner of Seminole and Kenowa, a good distance from your house.   I have plenty of other pictures from around the town where I took pictures of people parking across the sidewalk.  It illustrates how industrious our police force is in respecting pedestrian traffic.

 

#8 is false,"I have had to deal with parents or teachers coming up to my wife and saying that you are staring at my wife and my kid while they're at school" I would dare say the one with the staring problem is you, as noted in the thread.  This is an example of third person hearsay about a vaguely defined concept; your reliance on it to paint me in a bad light at the City Council meeting was sinister in effect.  How come your wife and kid never noticed it?  The times I've went to school for functions, my gal Toni was there with me and can vouch for the truthfulness of my emphatic denial of looking at anyone continuously except for the person I'm talking to at the time.

 

As stated, there was no public interest put forth or resolved in these characterizations of my person, and I expect a categorical retraction minimally on these three points you put forth that have humiliated, harassed, and defamed me without any regard for the truth or for the consequences of them being spoke in a recorded open meeting against me, a private individual who had just prevailed in a lawsuit against you.  I would also hope that the City Council, in particular Kaye Holman, would put their own personal vendettas aside, and recognize that the City Manager they hire each year, has just done one more irresponsible act that will be addressed if it is not quickly and thoroughly remedied. 

 

I would expect such a retraction to take place at the next scheduled City Council meeting, and be sincere in its application, if that is possible from your side at this point.

 

Thank you for your affirmation of providing a retraction notice to me prior to the next scheduled meeting.

 

Tom Rotta

The Ludington Torch

CC:  All City Council Members, Mayor Henderson, CA Dick Wilson, WMOM, WLDN, MCP, COLDNews, plus Torch Readers, Facebook Friends

[Willy]

Good for you X and I agree completely with your decision to request an apology from henchman Shay. The only way to stop him and the other Councilors from spewing lies at an official public meeting is to call them out. If you think about it, he overstepped his boundaries when he slandered you at that meeting. He is an employee of the City, hired by the Council and he takes it upon himself to bad mouth a citizen. Who does he think he is? He's not King of Ludington. It was not his place to speak up. A councilor should have spoken for him. The fact that he can step up to the mic and say what ever he pleases says a lot about the current elected officials. Either they completely agree with Shay or their to timid to put him in his place. Who's running the show anyway?

[XLFD]

It's hard to imagine a city so corrupted that they agree to settle a lawsuit based on a policy meant to defame and neutralize a citizen who calls them on violations of ethics and laws in their public business (that they choose to ignore, rather than deal with), that then allows this libel to be spoken, and not be denounced, but applauded.  

At heart, I am a teacher, dealing with a group of 'students' with a learning disability, so I have to be patient.  But I will not tolerate such behavior in the classroom as this.

[XLFD]

The City gave its own unique twist to the controversy, that unique twist meant stating the wrong or incomplete facts on both sides of the coin:

[Lisa O'Brien]

The paper certainly has a unique way of reporting - I hope I can remember to call on Monday and cancel my e - subscription.

[XLFD]

I meant to put "City of Ludington Daily News" instead of just "City", but sometimes I wonder if there really is a difference.  I am half-surprised, however, that they withheld reporting the City Manager's tirade on Tuesday or since in their usual style.

[Willy]

You have to wonder what the bosses at LDN are thinking. People heard what was said at the meeting so the LDN is not fooling anyone except the truly uninformed. Anything short of direct quoting the comments made is extremely poor journalism. I guess the LDN is relying on those uninformed readers to sell newspaper to. I for one canceled my subscription a long time ago because of the half truths, distortions and lies that they print. Readers cannot be sure that they are getting accurate information.

[masonco]

I have not seen an apology, I quit paper delivery but do get e-edition yet simply to compare there, here and MCP

[XLFD]

If there is a retraction or an apology, it should be given at the next city council meeting, since that's where he delivered the initial slander.  To say something like that at a televised public meeting, and then say "I'm sorry." in a private E-mail, will not address the problem.