Scottville City Clowncil Meeting, Sept 7, 2021: An Existential Crisis for Public Records, Public Hearings, and Ordinances

[XLFD]

In the past, when people ask me about when the Scottville City Commission became what I affectionately call their city clowncil, I've hesitated before giving them an answer that wasn't definite.  After the September 7, 2021 meeting of that body, I am finally able to give a definite answer.  It's when Tracy Thompson retired after decades of being Scottville's City Attorney, and he was replaced by Carlos Alvarado, who doesn't seem to know too much about being a municipal attorney.  He proves it all the time, take the multiple times this meeting.

Carlos arrived at the city hall meeting room after the gavel sounded a little after the starting time of 6:30, so he plopped down in the peanut gallery.  The agenda packet had a couple of items that he messed up, but the agenda itself was juggled around before they got down to any business, after they said the pledge and took roll in the not-so-large meeting room shown below.  Do you recognize any issue in that photo?

Venerable Ludington citizen C. Dale Bannon would notice the problem immediately as he pointed out the issue at a Ludington city council meeting several years ago.  Give up?  The American flag should always be to the left of all other state or municipal flags, there should never be another flag to the flag's right when they are displayed at the same level.

As usual, they avoided hearing the citizens before the city official's reports and the business of the meeting.  Carlos has ruled that the clowncil can avoid having the public comment at the beginning even when the city charter proscribes that rule.  The reports noted the fall celebration coming up on Saturday, not much else of importance.  The 9th item on the agenda happened to be a public hearing on "section 153.045 of chapter 153 "Animals, Livestock and Fowl", which was moved from item 11.  Here is that section that was the topic of the public hearing:

Why would they hold a public hearing on established law?  The hapless clerk, Kelse lester, apparently didn't understand that the clowncil was passing the 'chicken ordinance', though the agenda has no reference to that, nor is or was it mentioned for the public hearing.  The clowncil passed an ordinance not on the agenda, but the law they passed (seen on the last page of the agenda packet) will never go into effect, as it has no 'effective date' put on it.  According to section 7.14:  "The effective date of all ordinances shall be prescribed therein...".  The clowncil actually discussed the omission of an effective date... and then passed it.  Carlos sat quietly.

Unequivocally, the effective date on an ordinance needs to be on that ordinance before it's passed, otherwise, it's not part of the ordinance, and the ordinance never takes effect.  You can wait until after passage to add on when it was passed and how it was passed, but the effective date needs to be part of the ordinance, Carlos, but it's nowhere to be found in the ordinance, but a blank is left at the end:

The city clowncil will have to pass this again properly for it to have any effect, thanks to no official noticing the issue.  Maybe they will actually put on their agenda that they plan on passing an ordinance rather than pass it by stealth.  And why not do it stealthily, it creates a whole new revenue stream for the city every year with an unlawful chicken tax. 

The ordinance once passed will have you pay an as-yet-undisclosed amount each year if you have chickens on your lot, but you get nothing in return from the City for that tribute.  This isn't a fee, it's a tax, and by the Headlee Amendment it needs to be passed by the electorate.  Do you understand that Carlos?

Then came my FOIA appeal seeking a public record that Carlos claims is not a public record.  Here's his line of reasoning as reported by Riley Kelley in the COLDNews:

"Mr. Rotta requested a copy of the prepared speech that Commissioner Alway read at a recent meeting... the denial is based on the fact that the document did not exist in the record." Alvarado said.  "My conclusion is that since this was not part of the record, and simply does not exist; the denial should be sustained."

Neither you nor I can figure out what the heck his line of reasoning is in regards to what a public record is, but if you want to look further into his thinking, his full opinion is in the agenda packet, it links to a precedent that totally debunks his theory.  

I pointed this out later in my public comment, and also noted that Carlos was a big, fat liar when it came to my latest FOIA appeal in Ludington

XLFD:  "Let it be noted that once again, the Scottville City Clowncil has shamefully and shamelessly violated the city charter by procedurally preventing the public from being heard before the business of the city is conducted at their meeting.  You clowncilors do not serve the public you rob from, that's why you brazenly overlook the widespread embezzlement that city officials commit under your negligent watch.

Tonight, city attorney Carlos Alvarado advised you to ignore a public records request by saying that the speech drafted by Clowncilor Alway that he read at the end of the first August meeting was not a 'public record', but it most assuredly is, the Walloon Lake precedent he uses for his own support refutes that claim.  Did Clowncilor Alway prepare the drafted speech?  Yes.  Did Clowncilor Alway share that speech with the clowncil  and assembled public?  Yes.  Did Clowncilor Graham assert that he agreed with that statement at the meeting?  Yes.  Did the clerk summarize the content of that drafted speech in her minutes?  Yes.  

It's indisputably a public record to anybody familiar with the law and honest enough to admit that Mr. Alvarado's reasoning is worthless, and this will be noted in another count of a FOIA violation in my amended complaint of my lawsuit with the city. 

In Ludington, Alvarado advised their city council to uphold his denial of 13 seconds of audio in body cam footage of an unlawful arrest.  Alvarado asserted in his memo and in person before the council, that the audio was redacted because the victim of police brutality was calling out the name of his girlfriend just before the police knocked him into unconsciousness.  

I attended the court hearing for this victim of police violence who had been charged with three counts of resisting arrest where the judge reviewed the arrest numerous times in an unedited video; Judge Middlebrook was disturbed at what he saw, and dismissed the charges.  I found out the extent of what was said during those 13 seconds it was the victim saying:

"Let me breathe"  "Let, me breathe", "Please... let... me ... breathe." 

He then passed out without saying anybody's name.  Carlos Alvarado in his official capacity lied without remorse in his prepared memo and in his testimony before the Ludington city council.  Shame on you, Mr. Alvarado, shame on you." [END comment]

The ridiculous memoranda he prepared for the two cities likely cost the taxpayers about $500 each, since it only takes 2.5 hours of preparation to charge that much.  When the courts finally figure out that Carlos' logic is faulty, the cost can be tens of thousands to the city, for they hire the best lawyers.

In other business, they hired a company to redesign their web services, Envigor, it will come at a cost of $6500 plus $700 per every year.  They also agreed to a Charter Communication franchise agreement, charging them the same rate for the expiring contract.  They also passed an agreement to replace street lights with LED lighting, a switch that should pay off in the near future.

A new person joined the team; Randy Wyman became a planning commissioner after being approved.  But the big news was that Sally Cole resigned as a commissioner, moving outside the city limits in her retirement after she and her husband sold their antique store in the downtown, where they have resided.

Two commissioners have resigned from the clowncil this summer in order to move away from Scottville, it makes one wonder whether all of the Pollyanna banter between officials at these meetings is mere bravado as they escape from the City that they have self-allegedly made so great through their actions.  But their actions betray their usefulness and portray their uselessness, as in just this meeting they unlawfully passed a chicken tax ordinance with no effective date and denied sharing a public record by declaring it as being non-existent.  

[Willy]

I had no idea how the flag is required to be positioned in relation to other flags. That link about the flag is very interesting. It appears that Scottville needs to hire another attorney to make sure Alvarado is giving them the correct advice. Is it possible he is in fact giving the correct advice but the Commission has gone rogue and is ignoring him? I can't understand how these things are happening if the people on the Commission are truly concerned with the reputation and health of the town they represent. Of course the real losers in all of this are the citizens of Scottville.

[XLFD]

Many of the mistakes the commission are making would be internally corrected by a competent city attorney, just like Tracy Thompson who served Scottville in that role for decades did regularly.  I never had to butt heads with Scottville before Alvarado because Thompson was knowledgeable about municipal law and wise when it came to FOIA, advising former managers to provide the records unless they are clearly exempt.

That FOIA policy was thrown out by Alvarado who has actively lied three times in denying and delaying FOIA responses.  The clowncil regularly violates the OMA-- they never used to do that back when they were the commission.  The clowncil disregards the city charter at will, somehow believing they can change the charter by passing some ridiculous motion in a consent agenda.  Any good attorney would tell commissioners that they can't do that, Alvarado has them do it and might draft a memorandum (working at $200/hour) to defend the insanity. 

As long as Carlos is able to validate and justify the bad places this clowncil wants to go, they will support him.  Thompson wouldn't allow this crap to continue. 

[stump]

  The city attorney is hired to do basic legal work for an agreed fee per year. Other items that come up are additional cost. Lets say Mr. Rotta files a law suit against the city, that's  extra cost to be paid to the attorney for representing the city.  The city doesn't realize that the attorney is padding his pocket by misrepresenting the true facts. Thats when the FOIA'S start rolling in and the city just keeps paying. The city should hire an attorney that can read and understand the city charter and give proper advice.  Why have a charter , bylaws or ordinances if no-one pays attention to them. As for the council, they must not be able read either. Documentation has been shown that embezzlement has been proven in black and white from city records and no one cares. Sad bunch of representatives Scottville has in charge.

[XLFD]

Three of the nine counts I have in my lawsuit against the City of Scottville and certain officials individually (including Carlos Alvarado), have to deal with Carlos delaying FOIA requests by claiming a totally bogus exemption.  His modus operandi has been to have the commission uphold his denial (effectively saying it was proper) then eventually release it once I have appealed his decision.  Never does the exemptions claimed explain why the complete record was denied in the first place.

That willful and intentional delaying/denying of the records is an individual violation of the law if it can be proved in court, and could cost the municipality up to $1000 per charge.  Once I get my official response from the City of Ludington that shows Carlos lied about the audio on the body cams, I will strongly consider legal action against the COL because the FOIA does not allow one to sue individuals who actively lie about an exemption in order to deny or delay its production.

I realize, however, that neither city government will fire the liar out of their own fear of not looking diverse in doing so.  Councilors and clowncilors aren't known for having much spine or for doing what's sensible.

[Willy]

I understand that Alvarado is the one giving the commission legal advise but the commissioners are all adults so it seems odd that not a single one of them can get a second opinion from another attorney just to make sure Alvarado is not misleading them. Sounds like the ball is and always has been in the commissions side of the court. Alvarado is just the hired help. So, I have to ask, who is persuading the commission to take Alvarado's word as gospel? This just doesn't make sense. Even if there is a small chance that any of the commissioner's think that you have a legitimate complaint then why hasn't any of them sought out a second opinion if only to put the issues to rest. It's hard to believe that they are taking Alvarado's word that everything is on the up and up without conducting a thorough investigation.

[XLFD]

You have pretty much put the second piece together.  It's not Carlos that's necessarily leading these guys down the bad paths, but he's finding 'legal' ways for them to avoid accountability.  Rob Alway doesn't want his hate-filled diatribe to get out to the general public, so he tells Carlos to block it, even though there's no exemption allowed by FOIA.  When the DNR guy did a hit-and-run on a Scottville senior citizen, Chief Murphy likely told Carlos to keep it hidden, and Carlos once again did it without a valid exemption.  The investigating committee they formed didn't follow the OMA in any way, so they had Carlos try to claim it wasn't a 'public body' and the record and Alvarado's own words shows otherwise.  Chief Murphy's attempt at public extortion, a one page list of unallowable FOIA fees amounting to $16, is claimed to not exist even though Murph and me both had it in our hands that Friday afternoon I visited Scottville.

The best case scenario is that Carlos is being ordered to do a host of unethical things to cover up the malfeasance and corruption of his employers.  This is not allowed under the bar's professional codes.  In Ludington, he perhaps did a worse sin, he lied on his memo and his in person testimony before the city council's tribunal that he edited out audio to supposedly protect someone's privacy.  He received hundreds of dollars from the taxpayers to draft a memorandum filled with deliberately concocted lies.  I'm one of those taxpayers and I say he needs to go, we have a very competent city attorney in Ross Hammersley already.

[Freedom Seeker]

You are the one, X, who should be getting paid the big bucks for trying to keep these city workers honest but I know you or I or any other citizen pro se do not make any money off from FOIA or OMA lawsuits (only mailing costs and court filing fees are returned). in fact, for those who think you are getting rich off this...to them I say, "you fools ... research the FOIA law and you will see that an individual cannot claim legal fees." X does a service for the public taxpayer by not hiring an attorney to fight this corruption in city government. It would cost the taxpayers (municipalities who lose the lawsuit) many thousands in double or triple digits because these lawsuits take months and years to fight. Thank you again X. I don't know how you have the endurance to do it. I hope that your rewards in heaven will be huge because I know you are dedicating many hours of time over many years for which you are unpaid monetarily with greenbacks.