Signs of Hypocrisy 2014

[XLFD]

Back in 2011, I ran for the Ludington City Council against the then two-term councilor Kaye Holman.  If you recall, I was banned from being on the property of city hall or the police department on March 1 of that year, due to some policy created by a coordinated effort of the City Manager, Community Development Director Heather Venzke (Tykoski), City Attorney Dick Wilson, and Police Chief Mark Barnett to try and discredit some of the revelations of corruption I was bringing forth at the time regarding cronyism and misuse of government funds by the Ludington City Hall.

 

The city council without fanfare or discussion passed a new policy which could effectively keep any citizen off of public property by the whim of the Ludington city manager.  The next day, I was summarily banned from stepping foot on the two properties mentioned.  This would later cost the city many tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees and settlement costs when I took the issue to federal court on grounds that it violated several rights of individuals that it would be used against.  It motivated me to run for city council, a position I really had no desire to seek before this not-so-subtle public attack on me, published in the local newspaper complete with character aspersions.

 

The campaign itself was difficult to wage, since I was not permitted to enter the place where I had to submit and pick up most of the paperwork for running.  Later on, I had to miss a 'debate' scheduled by the local paper because City Manager John Shay would not give me written permission to enter the city hall, even though I petitioned him three times to do so.   I was even prohibited to vote under the threat of arrest for the misdemeanor of trespassing if I were to go to my legitimate polling place (the city hall) to vote in the election I was running in.  A right which I was also denied at the presidential primary the next February.

 

But perhaps the most repugnant bit of nostalgia was the City of Ludington's blatant attack on my campaign signs.  I had purchased 100 one-sided signs for my city wide campaign, and had gotten about half of them distributed throughout the city when I and my helpers noticed that my signs were disappearing almost as fast as they were being put up. 

 

I caught the code enforcement officer Jerry Welton stealing signs from people's front lawns, here's a look into his back seat in October of that year:

 

 

He had no problem stepping onto my parent's property and taking my signs up, saying that there was some sign ordinance in the zoning law which states that signs could not go in the street right-of-way.  This was totally untrue, and in the next few days I pointed out a large variety of other campaign signs and many other signs that had been in the right-of-way which Code Enforcement Officer Welton didn't mess with. 

 

 

 

Every "Join the Revolution" sign near the streets was nabbed with gusto by this city operative.   But even before I noted this hypocrisy in his application of the 'law', I pointed out that the law was on my side.  City zoning law is often open to interpretation, but it seemed fairly clear in the rules; here election signs are defined as temporary signs (not requiring a permit): 

Here, it says that those permissible temporary signs are an exception to the rule that no sign could be in the public right-of-way.  This, of course, is also dependent on whether the signs conform to the rest of the chapter's provisions (as to size, color, non-impediment to corner sight lines, etc.), which my signs did. 

 

 

Of course, the city impounded the signs at the city hall as an added message, since I had to have others go on my behalf to pick them up.  But as I stated back then, my signs should have been left where they were, and if they just had to be picked up because of some crazy interpretation of the zoning law on signage, then that law needed to be equally applied to all signs.  Several Holman signs spent the rest of the election out on the public right-of-way, some on street corners violating sight lines.

 

The election of 2012 saw the city go back to a regular interpretation of sign placement, as did 2013, both of which were chronicled here at the Ludington Torch.  Signs for candidates were allowed in the right-of-way without a peep from the code enforcers or even Councilor Holman who fancies herself an opponent against signs in the ROW, even if it's allowed.

 

What about 2014?  I have waited a month since the first election signs started coming out, waiting to see if the City of Ludington Code Enforcement team, recently tongue-lashed for fostering blight in the city, would steal the signs (or just move them out of the ROW) I took pictures of on June 22, 2014.  These include the following pictures mostly for the circuit court judge race.  Craig Cooper was most active in getting his signs out at the time, and had a few out in the ROW like this one:

And this one right I front of that parked car.  These are still here they were one month ago:

The next Cooper sign is well within the city's ROW.  If Jerry Welton got out his wheelie measuring device on this one and several others at areas where there is no sidewalk, and measured 35 ft. from the center of the street out (like he was doing for my signs), a whole lot more signs would be moved away from the street, like he forced me to do for all my signs, or else.

But Cooper wasn't alone back in June, Susan Sniegowski, the City of Ludington criminal attorney who wants to be judge, had her sign put not only in the ROW, but also in an area where it could be said to be blocking sight lines looking up the street.

Susan Boes had her sign clearly visible near the street, which the law allows if the City code enforcement team doesn't dislike you:

Another one from Sue Sniegowski near the corner of this street:

Along South Washington, a residence has put out eight Spaniola for judge signs.  They have put those signs beyond the city ROW, but they have violated the law by exceeding the amount of signage that can be placed out for a candidate (see the limitation provided by the zoning law provided above for election signs).  Why hasn't the city invaded this property and stole their signs like they did back in 2011?

Lest I leave out judicial candidate David Glancy, here are a few of his signs practically hanging out in the street, but they are still hanging around:

Two more from Glancy for the same residence where the ROW is used on both streets:

Since that time, the four judge candidates and the county commission candidates with signs in the city have put up a lot more signs in the street right-of-way.  I could post dozens more that violate the 2011 rules that the city applied to my signs, which weren't really rules at all.  They were not codified, and the restrictions that were forced on me, have not been applied since.  Nor will they ever again unless I, or some other agitator to the corrupt status quo, run again.

[Willy]

I'm sure the inspector was under orders to remove your signs so the decision to remove them still falls on the heads of City officials. The removal of your signs and not others was so blatently wrong and offensive that it's hard to understand how these people can remain in power. The citizens of Ludington are asleep in front of their TV's and have no desire to elect responsible, honest bureaucrats. I'm glad you won your lawsuit but it doesn't seem to have jolted the citizens to act on electing better people to reperesent them.

[XLFD]

Ludington is a lot like Washington DC, in that there exists a majority in power that will accomplish their ends by ignoring the law, satisfying their crony friends plus themselves in the process, raising taxes, restricting freedoms and forsaking their oath of office.  The few Paul's, Amash's, Lee's that exist can only rail against the tyranny when they are so vastly outnumbered by the forces of tyranny.

Unfortunately in Ludington, I cannot point to anybody on the inside coming out against anything illegal or unethical that's happening, which shows that our city is in big trouble.

[Johnny]

GREAT investigation Tommy! Thats crazy that 3 years later signs are not being taken down!  What an investigation to do on your day off of work.............

[XLFD]

I think you missed the point, Johnny, but I'm beginning to expect that from you. 

[AQUAMAN]

Expect no less from Johnny boy X, his head is buried in narcissism. Hypocrisy mixed with political correctness is what makes the liberals effective and to be watched carefully at all times. 

[Nikki Forbes]

Go door-to-door.   Ludington is only a mile and a half in diameter.   Get a team of supporters.  I'll join.

[XLFD]

The main problem with that is that putting election signs in the right-of-way in Ludington is perfectly legal as long as the sign is conforming and not obstructing intersection sight lines.  My election signs were fine where they were, but the City of Ludington felt that they could not only prevent me from entering City Hall or Police Department property, prevent me from participating in a forum held at the City Hall, and prevent me from voting in an election where I was a candidate, they also figured it was fair game to use a separate set of rules for my campaign signs and use city officials to effectively steal my legally-placed signs.  The three election cycles since shows that they have no problem with election signs in the right-of-way, unless they belong to candidates they fear.  Tyrannical.

[Nikki Forbes]

And who do they all answer to?   Or, just by-pass the games and go to the top.  Do you not think this is appellate-to-supreme-court-worthy?