Wayland Police Chief Dan Miller is Fired

[XLFD]

WAYLAND -- Police Chief Dan Miller, suspended since early January from his long-time job, was told Thursday that he violated city policy 32 times in the past.

The notice of the violations, presented to Miller by interim Wayland City Manager Terry Hofmeyer, came as Miller is to learn today whether he keeps his 26-year job as Wayland police chief.

Miller said the alleged policy violations are minor and most are related to earlier allegations involving a state police probe over possible mismanagement of confiscated evidence.

The state Attorney General's office recently cleared Miller of any criminal wrongdoing of the allegations. In one instance, he was accused of keeping a seized GPS unit for his own use.

Miller was cleared more than a month ago, but he remained on paid suspension by the interim city manager pending an internal investigation of other possible wrongdoing.

Many community members have come to his aid, packing City Council meetings to urge the board to reinstate Miller to his full duties.

Miller said Thursday that he had a "predetermination" meeting with Hofmeyer that lasted less than five minutes. During that meeting, he was handed a list of 32 alleged policy violations that happened in the past and asked for any comment.

Miller said he did not know what would happen today with the city manager's decision, expected to be released to the media mid-morning.

He considers all of the alleged violations to be minor. Some involved his service of a personal protection order notice and others involved investigative document he had taken home to study.

Miller has a 40-year career in law enforcement, including 26 years as chief of Wayland police.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2012/04/suspended_...

 

WOOD TV confirms that Dan Miller has confirmed his firing this morning.  The Ludington Torch has been following this story since the beginning of the year, and this looks to be just the start of a brewing controvery.  Will this turn out like the brouhaha about a decade ago where the Chief prevailed over a corrupt City Manager?  Or have the tables turned on the Chief? 

Read more here at: 

 http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/wayward-and-waylaid-i...
http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/the-tail-wayland-the-dog

 

In case you missed it the first time.

 

[Phil Convissor]

I’d like to say at this point that I meant no disrespect to law or law enforcement. I even once had Respect for Dan Miller the “...Chief” & the man.

2nd at this time I’d like to say by Dan Miller calling this investigation “small town politics”, is his way of being disrespectful to the ones he’s accusing of, what I believe he’s trying to say is “propaganda”. It’s only political or propaganda by him saying so and by him bringing his personal life into this he has taken this, on his own, to a different aspect entirely. Even tho he was cleared of any and all wrong doing criminally as far as the “investigation“ is concerned, one now has to question the ethical side of this story.

His bringing politics/his personal side into it makes one wonder if it may be time to access his true feelings on this and its effect on him being the most productive/best influential individual for the position of Police Chief, or now, the possibility of interim Fire Chief.

One may be inclined to ask, when are public officials going to be held accountable for there own narcissistic behaviors.
Are they not the ones we are supposed to look up to, to do what’s right, especially when they are responsible for things that go wrong, criminally or ethically. “With Power comes Great Responsibility”.

I read about Dan Millers achievements, although impressive to say the least, I fail to see how public safety would be effected at all by his dismissal, (2003 fire station “Meeting” revisited ), on the contrary, his dismissal could bring back a much needed trust from this community, and show that especially if and when a public official does something wrong and if they can stand up and admit it and bow out gracefully,… I believe it could once again bring back the trust, in this small community,to many (especially the quiet ones) who now believe this one town official to be nothing but a clown.

[XLFD]

Phil,

I believe the citizens of Wayland, the citizens of Ludington, and the citizens of any Michigan city would be well served by having the chief of police ELECTED by the citizens of the City.  The status quo of most cities is to have the chief of police answering only to the City Manager who has himself only to answer to the City Council.  Having the chief of police so far removed from the people's directives does have a very real effect on removing accountability for their actions off the table.

But, unless Dan Miller has a very vocal minority of followers, it sounds as if he and his history have the general support of the majority of the common people of the area.  City Hallers/City Managers don't seem to like him, most people do.  Look at what's alleged and read between the lines.

[Phil Convissor]

XLFD, do you call going to extracurricaular activities, and being vidieotaped by the plolice chief  or ex police chief a threat? He was threatening me and my rights. But then again I'm non-custodial,... what rights are mine? I have written analienable rights as written in the divorce, such as "being able to go to extracuricular activties" It does not say while your parenting time or not when its' hers. And there is where the root of the problem lies.

 

Should I fax you the police report where she litarally backed into my car at a school, with kids in her van back in 2004, her reason " he's always showing up at extracurricular activities when its not his parenting time"

 

And you know the short end of that stick? It's inadmissable now because there was an adjustment to the divorce after the fact, and you can only go back with evidence to the last "judgement of divorce" Go figure . At least in Circuit ct.,

Now when it comes to district and that "Money Cow"  "windfall"or whatever you called it, maybe I will be able to bring that stuff in for proof.

[AQUAMAN]

Hmmm, good points Phil, I like. I do think the Michigan laws/courts are way too hard on too many dads for no reason other than what has been accepted in the past. I like the way you stand your ground. And I don't think the crowd at city hall had a right to boo you so much either, you're entitled to your opinion too. And the plot thickens.

[Willy]

I'm coming down on Phil's side of this. One thing I hate, really hate, is when a live in boy friend or girl friend sticks their nose into parenting of other peoples children and I really hate the fact that all of these idiot parents shack up with their children watching this disgusting behavior.  I don't care if the custodial parent ask for their involvement, they should stay out of it, completely out of it. The Chief's hands should never have touched that PPO. He should have asked the court to involve the Sheriff or State Police. I don't blame Phil for his contempt for the Chief. I am totally disgusted with these parents who bring their love life home and get the children mixed up with the emotional baggage it comes with. I can't tell you how pissed off these people make me. I have seen to many kids messed up from these indecent liaisons. 

[XLFD]

Phil,

I will cede you any benefit of the doubt as to what you are relating in this last post, but I have given you the opportunity to refute a valid point made by Mick Lane, and asked you a question you chose to ignore, which I think is pertinent to further understanding the situation, which is what I'd like to do. 

I have found in dealing with people that those who often evade the topic or pointed questions by changing the subject or focus of the conversation are not being direct or honest with me.  Please, level with us.

[Phil Convissor]

A wise man once told me, in fact it was just today. 

"Never argue with any idiot, they will only bring you down to their level, and then they will beat you with their experience"

Now that could be directed towards one person or many.

Like you said XLFD, "unless" when you were talking about how many supporters he has or should i say had at one time.

That's neither here nor there, Ethically I have shown you upon your request to much for you to argue.

He is ethically spent. He's become nothing less than a washed up wanna-be wish he could turn the clock back Ex-Police chief.

Wishing you and yours the best.

[XLFD]

I can without reservations admit that I'm an idiot; but I am idiot enough to see that you continue to dodge what my idiotic self sees as Mick Lane's clear rebuttal of your position. 

And whereas I or any other fool should not expect you to be a bad person just because you have had multiple PPOs put out on you, apparently some moron judges have decided they were needed.  You have the forum open to prove why these judges were wrong, why other agencies were wrong about you, but you want to pick and choose what you want to discuss, and claim that you have shown your case.  You have really shown nothing other than you have an axe to grind against the Chief and against your ex-wife of 13 years, and a mantra of "parental alienation" that you have not clearly shown.  But that's just my idiot opinion, I'm sure it means little to you.

[Lisa O'Brien]

XLFD,

I'm confused as to what rebuttal you are looking for - the only thing I've seen is Mik Lane stating it was delivered to the chief to deliver from the courts - so he gave it to an officer to deliver. The city at this point had already told the Chief they did not want the city/police to be involved in anything regarding the girlfriend and ex husband. He should have been smart enough to send it to the MSP to deliver at that point.

[XLFD]

If you check out the five 'violations' in yesterday's post caused by the PPO service by one of Miller's subordinates (found in toto on the Hoffmeyer's April Fool's joke thread), I'm looking for some sort of knockdown legal or logical argument that equates that service as an abuse of power (by Miller, not the prvious CM), insubordination (by Miller, not by his deputy), or any other ethical dilemma or conflict of interest (by Miller, not CM Hoffmeyer). 

I'm so dense that I just can't see the infractions even when I try real hard.

[Phil Convissor]

XLFD, 2 PPOs One that got renewed 13years ago, every year until the divorce was final, and the then presiding judge knew it was all about me wanting more parenting time back then.

And now this one, which started again with them keeping my daughter from me, and me trying to stay in contact with her at every extra-curricualar i could with miller stalking me and video taping me being there, then after they recieved in the mail a notice for my request for a trial on Custody of my daughter and son. She/they turned it against me writing out thier PPO and getting it signed, before the change of custody request landed on the now judges desk.

How many times and how many blogs will it take for you to understand?

[XLFD]

Phil,

I've only been responding to you in this blog, The Ludington Torch, and primarily this thread. 

I am a self-admitted idiot, so my level of understanding the obvious is low.  I do know that "stalking" is a loaded legal term that is frequently abused by the users of it.  Stalking involves repeated or continuing harassment of another individual likely to cause a reasonable person to be terrorized, frightened, et. al. 

It does not seem unreasonable for your ex-wife to want to record her children's events by bringing a camera to the event and having her friend tape it.  If it does point in your direction, maybe it is because she/they think you may be the "stalker" in this complex relationship you have.  Is that possible, Phil?

If I was in your shoes, Phil, and came there to enjoy the event and my daughter's participation in it, I would actually prefer for them to take a videotape of me, to show that I was there, enjoying my daughter's performance, and behaving myself.  And I'm camera shy.