Today I Witnessed a Rape...

[XLFD]

I was out riding my bicycle on this nice October day by the residence of a lady I know.  She is beautiful, yet simple; she is the ward of a guardian, whose decisions are made for her.  She was adopted long ago with strict rules given by the parents as to how she was to be taken care of.  Recently, her guardianship has changed and the rules were mostly forgotten.

 

I noticed a truck that belonged to a friend of the new guardian.  Concealed by some nearby foliage, I seen him taking advantage of her.  Before I could do anything, I saw two more of the guardian's friends drive their vehicles up to her place, and they got out and joined in the assault.  I wanted to call 911, but knew the guardian was a co-worker and a very good friend of the local police chief, who would allow this to continue.  I sneaked off, disgusted, and went home to get my camera, so as to chronicle the nasty development to help her in the future.

 

When I got back, the vehicles had left and this poor lady was hurting.  She had multiple cuts all over her body, and they had even spray painted her all over. It looked painful and I took pictures of the hurt they had inflicted on her.  Before I could even think of doing more, they came back and brought some more friends with them.  The anguish I felt with not being to help this lady was great, but I went away while they came back at her.  Once again they assaulted her, cutting her up, damaging her beyond immediate repair.  I took more pictures of the carnage, but they paid little attention to me-- they knew I couldn't help her out, and they had weapons.

 

They continued this for the rest of the afternoon, cleaned up a little bit afterwards, and left.  I consoled her afterwards, but knew there was little I could do to help her before they would come back again and do worse to her.  Tomorrow the raping will continue.

 

Pre:  100_1081.JPG   100_1084.JPG   100_1087.JPG

 

During:  100_1091.JPG   100_1097.JPG   100_1100.JPG

 

Post:  100_1107.JPG   100_1108.JPG   100_1109.JPG

[charlemagnetism]

spot on govnor. i looked at that sloppy joe thread and its solid. there tearing up beutiful cartier park to put in some fences for dogs to run around and socialize. isnt that what ballfields are for. speaking of which why cant they just use some of unused oriole field for this you already got fencing up and its more convenent for most.

is that current dog park you talk of at the end of loomis. if i needed to take my dogs out i would verily go there instead of some ill gotten fencepark. whats next themeparks for cartier.

[XLFD]

The DPW crew did another days work at despoiling Cartier Park. For all the man-hours they put into this project, they really haven't done a whole lot. I'm not complaining, mind you, but I begin to see why the trees by the stop signs never get clipped, and it takes such a long time to clear sand off the beach.

Here's what you might see if you followed these guys: Go to work, figure out what's happening, get in a vehicle, go across town, work a little, get in vehicle go across town, take a break, go back across town, work a little, go across town, take lunch, go back, work a little, go across town, take a break, go back across town, wind things up, talk among themselves, go across town, clean up self and vehicles, wind down, go home.

[Jen]

1. The City of Ludington did approve this park.
2. The only trees being removed are those that are large and already fallen, and any dead brush. Some small trees will be removed to allow the fence to be installed. The committee wants to keep the park as un-touched as possible. This land is not being CLEARED. It is being cleaned up.
3. The DPW crew is being paid by the dog park committee to do this work. Their time spent at the site is not being paid for by your taxes.
4. There were many public meetings regarding this park and I"m assuming you didn't attend any to voice your opinion. Or you did attend... and found yourself in a room full of supporters and too afraid to speak your mind. Either way, this is a project that is supported and paid for by many, MANY Ludington residents.
5. The vandalism of the stakes and paint marks went un-noticed...

[Sweater Cows!]

The point of this thread that X is trying to make is that PER the city charter or whatev you guys have in ludington the general public must vote on all parks items that change the use of the land.

So even if what you write is accurate, which I will assume it is. the point is that it should be a ballot voted change, not something the city commish can do without putting it up for a vote.

[Sweater Cows!]

I HOPE that X's beef is with Shay & the sommish's poor following of written charters and laws and NOT with the actual dog park, its location or dogs. cuz if that is the case I don't like him anymore.

[XLFD]

That's pretty much my point, Sheila. Though I have the same reservations about you as to dog parks like this as far as my personal use, and a desire to keep Cartier Park the way it is.

[Sweater Cows!]

The only thing guaranteed in life is change, taxes and death.

If I were to get technical on you I would have to say that the city violated this LONG AGO.

Because back in the early 90's (boy I am showing my age) The park was different than it is now. The first violation that took place was with the walking and bike trails I see in there. It NEVER was that way way back then. A person could go 'park' up there with a reasonable expectation of privacy other than someone driving the loop. The loop was rather a tiny road that only one car could fit down, not quite a two track for the most part but not a 'road' like it is now either and there was not any bike or walking trails or that parking area on the corner of bryant and Rath to disturb ones privacy. So whoever got those going would be the people who violated the city charter whenever that happened. Considering that I would say that a precedent has been set by the bike and walking paths and if that isn't considered a thing that needs a public vote than neither is the dog park.

[XLFD]

Jen, welcome to the Ludington Torch.

Let me address your concerns as you voiced them. A deeper analysis is in the thread Hot Dogs, Sloppy Joes, and One Sweet Pickle, found in our archives.

1) The City Charter clearly says that: " ...The Council shall not vacate, discontinue, sell, lease, trade, nor divert to other public use any public park grounds without first securing the approval of a majority of the electors of the City voting thereon in any election.” Therefore, the city of Ludington did not approve this park, as approval could only come from the majority of electors. The City Council's approval really means nothing. And why didn't the dog park committee put this on the ballot last year?

2) If anyone should go down to the Cartier Park location, they will find several mid-sized trees have been removed from various places. Unless the fencing is all over, a bunch of live trees have been removed contrary to your claim. I am reassured by you that it won't be cleared, but technically, it should not even be touched at this point.

3. I am presuming that you are paying salaried DPW workers to help clear. The citizens are still paying for the time these fellows are working, and the DPC is just paying them extra. Gee, if we need them for public projects elsewhere, the DPC is tying up their time by having them do their bidding for this illegal project.

4. Jen, I really don't care whether we have a dog park as long as it can be decided within the law. If the DPC decides to put it in a city park, you have to contend with a vote by the city's electors. Joe Moloney, the DPC's spokesman, went against his public oath as a member of the City Planning Committee (and Zoning Board of Appeals) when he represented your so-called private group in front of the council, and I, and every other elector in Ludington, was cheated out of our ability to vote on this issue by the City Council overstepping its' authority.

5. ?? The only thing being vandalized at this point is Cartier Park, by the DPC and their willing accomplices in the DPW, until public approval is granted.

As it is, the City of Ludington has opened itself up for a lawsuit by those citizens of Ludington who wish to have some say as to what their public parkland is used for, as stated in the laws of our city.

[Jen]

i understand your concern... but it was a public park... and it still is a public park. and no change of hands has been made. i'm not sure what we've done requires a public vote? all we are doing is putting up a fence in an area folks already used to walk and run their dogs. now they can do it legally! :)

why was this not brought up in the past 2 years while we've been working with the public and the city to build this park? if you were concerned, why did you not voice it at one of our many public meetings? i'll bring this to the attention of our committee. i assure you, our intent was not to upset the public - but to add to the quality of life here in mason county. we've had nothing but good intentions.

the park will actually be divided into 2 parts, one large area for large dogs and one for small dogs... so there will be a fence that runs somewhat in the middle (actually more to the west), so that might be what you're seeing in the middle.

someone removed the stakes and destroyed the paint marks and we had to start all over, wasting our time and money. it has been very frustrating.

the committee is set up as a non-profit with a board. the board will continue to operate into the future. if for any reason the board disperses, the fence can be taken down (or left up...) and the park resumes as it did before. it's all written in a pledge to the city. i'll have to dig that up to get the exact wording.

the committee has plans for annual fundraisers in the future. we have a fund set aside for major maintenance that may be needed in the future.

i appreciate you voicing your concerns, i just wish that the concerns would have been brought to the attention of the committee and the city so that we could come to a public resolution. we really do want everyone to be happy! i will notify you of any future meetings. we, as a board, would love to address these issues in person.

enjoy the rest of your weekend!

[Sweater Cows!]

"understand your concern... but it was a public park... and it still is a public park. and no change of hands has been made. i'm not sure what we've done requires a public vote? all we are doing is putting up a fence in an area folks already used " by Jen.

This has been bothering me when I read the original thread X started. I feel the same way.

But what I think the real issue here is is that the City o' Lud (COL or CoL hereafter) has done so many things against the Laws of the city charter. Making up laws; putting up stop signs that don't follow the State of MI guidelines, firing ppl for not fitting into their clique--because he actually followed the rules I assume; he did win the lawsuit- If you follow back on some of X's threads you will see that (at least it seems to me) his problems aren't so much with any of the things he appears to bithc about, but with the way the CITY goes about breaking their own laws.


I do feel that when it comes right down to it the Dog Park is not a change of use as requires a public vote. But the CoL charter needs to DEFINE what constitutes things that need a public vote. Otherwise every little thing can be perceived by one person or another(as with X in this case) to not fit the rules. We Those of you who deal with the CoL have to find the intent of this rule(and many others) and then make sure that the charter is clear on these things so that there is no doubt in anyones mind how things SHALL be handled.

I do hope all works out well with the dog park.

[Mary A.]

Jen,

Thanks for clarifying some of the issues. Is there someplace online where I could go to learn more about the dog park, now that it is under way? Is there a charter I could read? Thanks.

[Jen]

@Sheila - that if there are laws they should be followed. And if this committee has inadvertently not followed the correct path, I assure you we will do everything we can to correct that! I'll definitely bring it to their attention. This is the first time I've heard about this Charter. It was never brought to our attention... both our fault, the cities fault and those who knew about it and didn't raise a voice. I'm all about working this out and doing it the right way! :)

@ Mary - I don't think we have the charter online. I will get a copy of it at our next meeting and add it to the site. www.ludingtondogpark.com