Charter Revision Question Omissions are Subject of Invalidation Lawsuit

[XLFD]

Last week I was engaged in two legal battles with the two largest cities in Mason County, fortunately as a plaintiff.  On Wednesday, the City of Scottville had a motion of summary disposition hearing before the court in order to extricate themselves from the nine counts facing them and their officials facing them.  51st Circuit Court Judge Susan Sniegowski listened patiently over a period approaching two hours to the facts and arguments presented by both parties before deciding that she would issue a written ruling in a week or so.

I voluntarily vacated one count due to its timeliness-- the relief sought depended on the charge being bought up before a certain time and it wasn't.  Of the other eight counts, five had basically undisputed facts and likely could be decided as a matter of law by the judge and will likely be decided upon in the eventual judgment.  One of those was effectively acceded to by the defense, the other four should be decided in plaintiff's favor, but obviously I am biased. 

The other three involved:  1) the intentional destruction of a FOIA invoice with fraudulent charges by Scottville Police Chief Matt Murphy, 2) the intentional blocking of plaintiff's two public comments on March 15, 2021 at a city commission zoom meeting, and 3) the ejection of plaintiff from the commission's in-person meeting on May 3, 2021 for an alleged breach of the peace due to plaintiff sitting quietly.  These may likely require further findings which would come after a trial of fact, due to disputes of what transpired.

After that hearing, I still had some serious work to do on my other legal project with the City of Ludington.  On May 3rd, 2022 (the anniversary of my ejection from the Scottville meeting) the voters of Ludington fielded two ballot questions, one was fourteen words long without any numbers, the other was 114 words long with 9 numbers.  Believe it or not, the former question was not legally proper when put on the ballot.

I have previously reviewed this topic just before the election in the May 3rd Election Guide, just after in the Stolen Election of May 2022, looked at the secrets in the Hidden Costs of Revision, and lectured the officials created by this vote in The CRC Meets.

One expects to get fully informed by their doctors before consenting to take a medicine or go through surgery, shouldn't electors be at least minimally informed of the repercussions of their votes on the ballot?  Whoever drafted the sinking fund question decided that was proper, but the author(s) of the revision question apparently decided that such information might make the question less likely to pass.  Better for the voters to think the question is revenue neutral rather than costing more than ten times what the costs of the Planning Commission have historically been over a two year period.

An error was made before this got on the ballot, those numbers weren't fixed by the city council as required by law.  It led to material fraud when voters entered their precinct and voted without knowing those values.  Most taxpayers would consider revising the charter if it was a free service, but most wouldn't if they knew beforehand that it would cost a million of their tax dollars that are sorely needed elsewhere.  If the amount is not specified to the voter, they effectively are disenfranchised through the ignorance of the values kept secret by our city officials.

The application for leave to file, the complaint, and the motion to disqualify Judge Sniegowski (due to her City of Ludington connections) are found here:  quo warranto filing

Quo warranto actions are usually taken up against a person who is perceived to have a public office or franchise unlawfully but can be used to disqualify material fraud or error in an election question.  If the court grants leave, assigns a fair judge to the case, looks over the complaint and exhibits, and fields an expedited hearing, we can see what they think of the matter.  I had to file this on Thursday in order to be timely, and just made it.

[Freedom Seeker]

Amazing perseverance and endurance, X! (Some would say enduring pain in the arse). But for you, keeping their feet to the feet to the
Fire, what corruption there might be. I hope you prevail! Thank you for your service and sacrifice!

[XLFD]

I appreciate your support, FS; I hope you prevail over whatever may find itself blocking your life path too.  I will be sure to update folks on the progress and hope the court has fealty to the laws of the state and the integrity of elections.

[Willy]

I agree with FS. The big difference between X, and the average citizen advocate is that X does much of his advocacy process using the legal system, something most ordinary folks have a hard time dealing with and understanding. In my opinion that is a mighty sword to swing because that alone forces most of the incompetent and corrupt politicians and representatives to do an extra bit of thinking about how they approach the way they do their jobs even if they don't care about how they are turning their backs on the citizens who elected them. They know that X will be watching them. 

[XLFD]

I was three years into my issues with Ludington officials and had a Workplace Safety Policy thrown on me before I realized my litigation superpower, perhaps that was the radioactive spider that bit me-- but I believe it was more the fact that John "Shady" Shay was abusing access to public records because he felt he held all the cards.  

Thanks for the compliments and the picture, I need to work a little more on my abs to make it look like an accurate silhouette.