So... Why Again are You Being Paid 72 Times What You are Legally Supposed to be Paid?

[XLFD]

From: Tom Rotta <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sent: Mon, May 23, 2011 12:12:47 AM
Subject: Salary question for City Councilors

Hello, Kaye, this is Tom Rotta, the other candidate on the ballot for the at-large City Councilor position this fall.  I am hopeful we can carry on a dialogue so that I can further understand a few things that confuse or trouble me, and you can learn a little more about me and the rationale behind my confusions and positions.

 

To this end, I would like to address a point of which I made in my letter of interest for the 3rd ward councilor job, namely that the City Charter adopted August 4, 1992 says:

  

"Section 17.10. - Continuance of salary of Mayor and Council Members:

The Mayor shall continue to receive an annual salary in the amount of Three Hundred Dollars ($300), and each Council Member shall continue to receive an annual salary of Fifty Dollars ($50), until such amounts are changed by the Council in accordance with the provisions of this Charter."

 

The provisions of the Charter is stated thusly:    

"Section 5.4. - Compensation and expenses [of Mayor, Council Members, City Clerk and City Treasurer]:

The City Council may determine the annual salary of the Mayor, Council Members, City Clerk, and City Treasurer by ordinance. The salaries of the Mayor and Council Members shall not be increased during their terms of office. The Mayor, Council Members, City Clerk, and City Treasurer shall be reimbursed for their actual necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their duties of office."

 

Therefore, the City Council must create an ordinance in order to increase the salary of all elected officials of the city, including themselves.  Perusal of the revised city charter/code and an FOIA directed to the FOIAC on the topic of any city ordinance passed since the charter was adopted that increased the pay rate, have determined that there has been no city ordinance passed since 1992 that has raised the rate of pay for city councilors (and the mayor).  This would mean, that by the City Charter, each City Councilor should be paid $50 per year, would it not? 

 

Yet the W-2 Forms for the city reports that each Councilor has received $3600 for the last three years, at least.  The mayor was paid $4800 (for mayor duties) during the same time. 

 

Could you please explain, in writing, why this is so, making sure to explain why it isn't illegal for the elected officials to accept the unlawful rate of pay?  Thank you very much.         Tom Rotta 

----------------------------------------

 

I sent the above E-mail to Kaye Holman, waited a week with no response, then figured I would broaden the investigation into this troubling question by asking other City Councilors with E-mails, along with other City Officials this same question, forwarding the above and adding an additional preface:

 

	Add to Contacts
	[e-mail]
	John Shay <[e-mail]>; Paul S Peterson <[e-mail]>; Richard Wilson <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]

---

 

Hello again, Kaye.  I have waited, but not received a reply from my first inquiry, which I have forwarded once again to you and a few other parties.  As a public official, it not only looks bad to the public when you are receiving 72 times the amount of money you are legally supposed to be receiving, it is also a crime that can have severe penalties. 

Please, either admit that you are, and have been, unlawfully overpaid at least the last four years, or show public records (i.e. passed ordinance(s)) that prove you are being paid the right amount.  Your friends may help and respond, as well.  Thank you for your expedient reply(s).

Tom Rotta

------------------------------------------------ 

The above was sent Sunday 6-5-11, and has been ignored all week, by everyone.  If there is, in fact, no such ordinance(s), can anyone explain to me why this isn't a blatant misdemeanor violation of the following law by all City Councilors and the Mayor:

    

Public Extortion

 

Standing mute should not be an acceptable defense.

[AQUAMAN]

I'm sure Shay, as usual, will be checking for the exact legal position with the City Attorney for an answer, as he himself and others emailed don't want to touch this hot potato without using up some legal retainer monies, lol. Surely there is an out or legal excuse for such audacity and overpayment, or is there?

[Sweater Cows!]

could the addtional money paid be the reimbursements for expenses all lumped into the W-2? I figure you probably already went over that and figured it is not,because if it was it would not be figured into the W-2 as income anyway as it is a reimbursement for money spent. Hypothesizing that that will be the excuse used IF you ever get one. 

 

It's not like you can actually FORCE them to answer questions about there own screw ups and illegal behavior.

[XLFD]

You are correct, reimbursements for expenses are figured into other slots of the budget, and not figured as payroll.  I can't force them to answer questions, I can only make pleas to state and federal agencies to do their regulatory jobs over such misdeeds. 

[Christopher R. Keough]

After reading this post Mr.Rotta, you running for office to the city council of ludington, seems not in the best interest or working cohesively with other members for the final positive resolutions of our towns problems.  It seems your interest are more personal to the effect of digging holes where there is truly no bones, in the effect of a search of our communities suggested conspiracies.  Also, it seems that your directive is placed in a format of Robin Hood Theory. Which stipulates the agenda of the poor against those of influence.  Suggested influence of city officials by you.  Truly, as adults, we all know that running a town and keeping policy, is more difficult then on paper. The realities and struggles of a community takes many side turns and sacrifices to keep commerce alive. This political arena has never been a safe bubble, or equality of individual rights.  The survival of any community is essentially the fact that money must be generated. Spent; transfered.  I have watched the forums for some time. Listened to opinions.  I believe most of this fact laying ground work is based on sessions of individuals such as yourself in the alliance of members here, to suggest that the town, and those who have money and involvement in the decisions for our financial survival are in a conspiracy, deception, and abuse of citizens rights here.  This to me, is the act of revenge against the machine philosophy.  With all said, and rightful opinion given, I can not see, or imagine that your approach, with your theory on the town and those who are running it, are a positive influence for the community, if you are elected.

[XLFD]

If you are seeking cohesiveness and cooperation amongst units of government, perhaps you feel comfortable with them taking public money that isn't due to them, giving out jobs and contracts to their family and friends against the interest of the public good, and violating the rules and laws that they create and apply to the rest of us. 

You may enjoy such a system, Christopher, but I find it distasteful and decidedly un-American, and pledge myself to fight it and any other tyranny.

[Willy]

That is a well thought out and well written opinion Chris, however I have to disagree with you. XLFD is doing what all citizens should be doing. What has happened to him is exactly why it is necessary to keep a sharp eye and perked ear out for what is going on in government. I have to wonder what is cohesive about a governmental body that abuses the trust of the people who elected them. A body that uses laws and ordinances to intimidate and silence critics. XLFD is the only one I know of that is trying to find the truth and we've seen the results of that quest. Banishment and slander have been his reward. If this current governmental body was in fact an open and truthful group then XLFD would not have a sungle  thing to complain about because all his questions would have been answered.

[XLFD]

And getting truthful information through lawful processes has been the problem since 2008.   My upcoming campaign will focus not only on the problems I frequently throw out here, but with proposed remedies and ways to make City Hall accountable once more.  As well as ways to reduce the liberty-encroaching powers that it has been flexing during the Shay years, for the benefits of business and all individuals that live or visit Ludington.  More to come soon.

I don't completely follow Christopher's line of generalized thinking, but to feel that there is no bone found in the hole when a city legislative and executive branch are paying themselves a lot more than they are legally supposed to be paid (we must remember CM Shay was said to be getting paid about $80,000 in 2008 when his actual wages (before benefits) were over $102,000), is bury-your-head-in-the-sand Ostrich theory to me.  But maybe he can address this specific topic on his next post.

[XLFD]

This is my primary concern on this topic, as well.  I would not argue against their current rate of pay ($3600), as that rate could be justified.  However, a back door raise of incredible magnitude has happened contrary to the law, and it needs to be addressed.  The City Code is a contract the City Councilors, Manager, Attorney, etc. are bound by after they take that Oath of Office, and they should be outraged at the fact that they are not getting paid the right amount (though it is highly in their favor, LOL). 

Since they aren't , it may just have you rethink why CM John Shay's salary was around $18,000 more than it was reported to be (at a LCC meeting) in 2008, and why our "City Attorney" Richard Wilson's firm was given a 70% raise ($20,000) last year, with no new duties incurred. 

But all I hear is crickets in the background the last year and a half when I write any City Councilor.  Not even a patronizing reply.

[Willy]

The reason no City official is responding to XLFD is because they think he is an army of 1. Nonone else has come forward and questioned the City so they assume that if they ignore X that he will eventually go away. If every concerned citizen would take the time and start ringing the phones off the hook and swamping the email system the people in charge would stand at attention. They would then have to respond. As it stands they feel a no response is perfectly acceptable to X's concerns. That fact is very telling because it shows how truly uninvolved and unconcerned they are regarding citizen participation and they  resent someone questioning their authority. As for the citizenry, most everyone is completely satisfied to go home and warm the couch and watch "Dancing with the Idiots" and leave the decisions on how to run the City to the good old boys.

[XLFD]

A revolution in thought cannot be successfully accomplished by just one oft-addled malcontent.  Nor can policy be successfully shaped by one maverick City Councilor going against a wall of modern political orthodoxy.

But one person can make a helluva statement by standing in front of a proverbial tank and by not backing down when tyranny in any form raises its ugly head.  That one person can become many, whose objective is to take over-- and make things right again.  This country was created on that concept.  Join the revolution.  

[AQUAMAN]

I like the sound thinking of Willie and John in this thread. I see no vengeance nor poor judgement in asking simple questions of salary and payrolls, afterall, who's money do you think this is Christopher? It's all the Ludington Citizens money here we simply ask for accountability for. That, as others point out, is clearly all our duties, as concerned and active taxpayers wanting the truth. To simply dodge the questions via no answer, stand mute, just amplifies the question of honesty and justifications of expenditures. This just hasn't happened with Ms. Holman here thus far, now that other CC and the CM have also dodged it, perhaps a true conspiratorial episode is happening. Either way, I truly think an answer is in order, looks like they have none of value and legalness, or it would have been a moot issue by now.

[XLFD]

And now its my other merry man (fish) Frier Tuck.  I still have no answer, but if you are brave enough to give these rogues your inquiry into this or any other topics via the mail, E-mail or by phone (be sure to let them know you are recording the exchange) , they may either answer for you or give you a hand-delivered Letter from the LPD like they did for me.  Or give you dead air.