Fires on the beach at Stearn's Beach have been prohibited since at least 1984 in Ludington.  The Ludington City Code Section 38-72 (b) [No fires in park or beach] expressly prohibits them on the beach and everywhere else except for the established grills in the grassy area beyond the beach.

The city manager has the authority to issue permits for special beach events, as can the Recreation Board and City Council, but the authority to permit gatherings does not give them the express authority to bend the other rules.  

Yet this has happened in the three years of beach bonfires.  Back in 2014, there was no request for the one bonfire held that year, the brainchild of Brandy Henderson.  Never was it brought before the council to allow this bonfire, and it was essentially approved without vote at a spring meeting of the Downtown Development Authority.  Significant city resources from the DPW, police and fire departments were used to make this event happen, as well as marketing and advertising to get the word out. 

By all indications, it was not the roaring inferno of success they wanted, however, there was a marginal attendance noted because some of the crowd that usually inhabit Ludington's Stearn's Beach on a summer night wandered over to take a look at what was happening.   

Next spring (2015), the Ludington Area Convention & Visitor's Bureau (LACVB), with DDA Treasurer, Chamber of Commerce President, and LACVB Executive Director (all-in-one) Kathy Maclean made a request for three more bonfires, the Ludington City Council passed unanimously their approval for the events.  With more marketing, advertising, city personnel and resources the events justified themselves for at least another year, and once again three bonfires were approved w/o debate on March 7, 2016 for this summer.

Now some of this and more have already been related on The Vanity of the Bonfires, especially the points that the city can partner with their own official and break the rules that you and I have to respect at the beach, while using a significant amount of your tax dollars, all in the name of attracting a niche of tourists that have fascination with beach fires. 

And there is something romantic and relaxing about campfires on the beach when shared with family and/or friends, feeling the heat, feeding the fire, making s'mores and roasting weinies. talking about things that matter. etc.

Translate that to the beach bonfires, you have a burning barrel surrounded by fence, with old pine pallets with who-knows-what chemicals and contaminants on them being thrown in by somebody in firefighter turn-out gear, making sure you do not get close enough to enjoy the ambiance. 

The people you see surrounding the conflagration are mostly strangers, some perhaps glaring lustily at your daughters, some looking as if they may regularly stand around a barrel for heat, and some being people around town who you'd rather not share a moment of your free time with otherwise.  I honestly don't see the appeal when you have the alternative to enjoy one of your own making.

So anyway, the LACVB thought the night after the House of Flavor's world record attempt would be another good night for a beach bonfire, and so MacLean sent another request for permission to the city council on April 4 along with the details:    

This application is roughly similar in form to the preseason requests of 2015 and 2016 for the three bonfires, and it was included in the April 11, 2016 Councilor Packet, meaning it was sent to the councilors and available to the public on April 8th.  It was approved 5-1 at the 4-11-16 meeting, the only meaningful dissent coming from Councilor Rathsack who believed they had enough bonfires for the summer.

I actually walked to the beach the afternoon of June 11 and found a bunch of pallets (which weren't oak, more like pine, one looking especially sodden with some foreign substance) next to their new fire pit along with the usual fencing strewn about the beach several hours before darkness.  I did notice the beach was packed and the fire perimeter was one of the few spots without beachgoers.  I noticed later, the beach was a lot more sparser at dusk, but it was densest near the fire.  Like all beach fires, the local paper called it an unqualified success.

Stearn's Beach is within my ward, a well-visited area, and a nice place to gather.  My political committee considered it to be a nice place to hold a September political rally to introduce myself to the voters.  An evening with a mellow fire, some free hot dogs and beverages, and some conversations dealing with what my constituents want to talk about, and for me to voice my opinions on these issues and honestly debate with my opponent if he came.  It sounded like fun, but would the City leaders allow it? 

At the August 8th meeting I asked the full council including the city manager, attorney, and police chief about holding a campaign event at the beach.  My full speech is at the link but the minutes for that meeting summarized the oral request.

True to my word, I submitted my formal request on that Friday afternoon, August 12, to the mayor pro-tem, the city manager, and the police chief, mirroring the format that Kathy MacLean used to garner favor for the three times she asked.  Here's what the correspondence said:

"The "Rotta for Third Ward Councilor Committee" is formally applying to use the Stearn's Park Beach for a campaign event on the evening of September 27, 2016.  We are cognizant that the City may have snow fencing up at this time, and will plan accordingly if that's the case.  Tom Rotta, former Ludington firefighter of eight years, and other volunteer helpers will be present during all times to make sure fire safety is followed for all participants at the event.  As noted at the last city council meeting, no city resources are needed, but we encourage DPW units to check out the beach on the day after and notify Tom Rotta if any further clean up is needed.  If bad weather is forecast on the night of the 27th, we hope to reserve the rights for the following evening.
Other Details:
Location:  the fire will be situated at least 100 ft. north of the breakwall, and at least 100 ft. east of high tide.  Activities will fall within this radius.
Construction and Materials:  The fire will be situated in a 3 or 4 ft. diameter metal fire ring using hardwood firewood from split logs.  An additional metal ring will go one extra foot around the fire ring in order to help keep participants from being too close to the fire.
Clean up & Removal:  The fire pit and safety ring will be removed by the committee, all ashes will be scooped up and repurposed as fertilizer, the immediate area will be swept flat.
Personnel:  No city personnel is needed, although we would be excited if Councilor Les Johnson and the candidates for councilor at-large would attend in order to enjoy the occasion and make their case to the attendants.
Other Details:  We plan on serving hot dogs (using the fire and spits for cooking), along with pop, bottled water, and chips.  A table or two will be set up for this purpose and containers provided for waste disposal.  Our committee will pick up stray trash created.
An acoustic mike or two may be used for talking and/or debating, the range of this noise will not extend much beyond the 100 ft. radius of the event."
                                                                                                                                                              
As noted, MacLean's last request was submitted four days before the agenda was finalized, while mine was submitted seven days prior.  She got her request considered at the meeting after being formally put on the agenda.   The LACVB got their request on the agenda, had the city council mull it over, and vote on it.  The "Tom Rotta for Third Ward Councilor Committee" (TR4TWC) got fully ignored even though they submitted it earlier, during a time when the beach is sparsely used past the tourist season.  There was not even a reply back from either of the three officials.
Would they have told me that fires on the beach are not allowed, nor are amplified sounds?  Would they have told me that my group does not have any connection with the City government or its tourism, so it has less rights as a group than the LACVB?  Would they have told me that rules don't apply for some groups with proper connections and do for those with improper ones.
                                   
I have called them on utilizing the beach and other parks in direct defiance to the city's laws, now they apparently want to use those same rules to keep my soiree from happening-- even worse, it looks like they just want to ignore the whole thing instead of providing an answer that will show their bias against peaceful, purposeful, public gatherings by the locals.

Views: 538

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hmm, sounds like you need a firm legal council answer by Monday, 8/21/16 now? I think with some more formal request, before the actual date, you could get approval. Let's see what happens for now, and if they refuse and decline this, act accordingly under rule of Michigan Law. Also, make sure your request is also sent to them via email or other written means, that way there is another non-verbal record of this kind and cordial request. Written and formal is the key here I assume, lol. Copy for the most part, Kathy McClean's method of approval, then, wth?

It's obvious the City is going to refuse permission and require you to jump thru all the hoops just for show. If this is not allowed then it might be a good idea to use the gazebo type structure located between the PM channel and the boat launch parking lot. If it rains there will be cover for those attending and there is ample parking and an easy walk to the event.

Our city leaders have long used the power of "ignoring things until they go away" for a long time when it comes to being asked by common citizens for a consideration of what they allow for others.  They will likely do that here, knowing that local media will not air the hypocrisy involved while the tourist season is still around (as if they would otherwise) and a couple of days before the last bonfire of the season by the LACVB. 

A city council candidate was once banned without reason from the Ludington City Hall, his polling place, for the 2011 election and couldn't participate in a debate or even vote, but was that a story the media touched at all (other than say the candidate was banned), even when the city settled in federal court later with that citizen for the damages to his civil rights?  Turning down a beach campfire is small potatoes in comparison.

I do have alternate plans if this falls through for whatever reason.

Another city that I know of has burning rings probably 6 foot in diameter along their beach. The beach is a lot longerthough. The city rents them out for a small fee and I believe a deposit to cover any clean up. On your request XLFD, I don't think the city will give the OK as then they will have every TOM,Dick and Harry asking for the same. The city bon fire is a joke anyway, it's so big they my as well bring down a old abandon building and torch it off. The idea of a camp fire is to set around it talk to friends and have a good evening together. Ludingtons idea is to burn a stack of polluted pallets 10 foot high with a fence around it.A good plan on burning the pallets as they don't have to pay for hazardous disposal . They do waist tax paying citizens money on having the fire dept. on hand for your safety along with extra police in case some tourist gets out of control.

Well, as noted, the request for fire wasn't on the agenda, and wasn't a late add this evening.  But after bemoaning the city's decision to ignore my request, John Shay said at the end that he sent me an E-mail this afternoon (he did, around 3:00 PM) that pushed me to a Thursday September 1, meeting of the cemetery, parks and waterfront committee stacked with my buddies Councilors Holman, Krauch and Tykoski, along with the three officials I contacted.

At the meeting they introduced a narrative where the LACVB never submitted their requests to the council any later than me, even though the last one as noted, was sent to the city on April 4, and put on the agenda drafted April 8 for the April 11th meeting.  It looks as if they will at least need a $25 application fee even if they decide against my campaign committee, and a $200 deposit.

The most surprising thing this evening was I found that Les Johnson actually has a pulse, and apparently has a penchant for spreading misinformation about me, and speaking too early on court outcomes still unsettled. When he said all that he had to say, I have to admit I didn't see City Attorney Wilson's (or John Shay's) lips move at all.  Impressive and quite amusing.

Is the application fee refunded if not accepted? probably not. I would think that the deposit would only be required if the application was accepted. It just shows that the city wants money , Anything can be bough, just how much will it cost you is the question.

The next opportunity for the city council to vote on this would be September 12, their next meeting.  That would give us 16 days to get the logistics of the operation down even if they do accept, which I doubt they will.  John Shay, as noted by Attorney Wilson, has veto power even if that miracle happens.  He actually has been granted the power to do this without anything being done by the council.  Yet, this is the same guy who wouldn't grant me written permission to enter city hall to debate Kaye Holman in 2011 or vote. 

I will ask John Shay via E-Mail whether I can use the facilities or not; why give the city council the mistaken belief that they have any power to make this decision?  They drafted these idiot regulations over the last few years to transfer more power to Shay.  If Shay refuses, we will decide on an alternate event where we don't have to depend on city leaders granting their tin god approval or not.

X, are you still planning on having a campaign rally on the 27th of September? I haven't heard any word on this since the beach fire was cancelled.

We were planning on an alternative event for that day, and I would have announced it at the meeting of the 12th, but then my father's death on the tenth kind of threw a wrench in the works, since me and several of my helpers would have a rough time of it and giving him a proper send-off.  Yesterday's service went well, and I hope to get back into campaigning mode again this week, and we're hoping to have some event(s) towards the end of October to make a push.

I am open to suggestions on ways to economically get the word out, and welcome anybody who wants to help out in any way, even if they want to do so anonymously.

The best advise I can give you is to make certain you knock on every door in your Ward to introduce yourself and to leave a flyer if no one answers. Explain what your positions are in the flyer and why. And make certain you leave various ways people can contact you.

Your weakest position is the constant attack from certain Council members and the LDN especially on suing the city.  Counter those by reminding people of the money saved such as when you disclosed the City was over paying the City Attorney and the money that was pissed away by not using the lowest bidder and funds spent unnecessarily such as painting the water tower. Hammer on the fact that taxes and fees are increasing while incomes  and population are dropping.

Challenge your opponent to debate you. Not once, not twice but weekly.  Debate is your friend.  

Too much of Ludington is being run for the enrichment of too few. Ask not what your City can do to benefit a few. Ask instead what the City can do to enhance everyone.

Very good points shinblind. I would add 1 more. Let People know that the lawsuits you filed were necessary in order for you to obtain information that the City refused to reveal and that you only recovered your cost for time, material and legal fees. Let them know that if the information had been granted there would have been no need for lawsuits, so any cost to the City was the fault of City officials.  Shinblind's right, an informative flyer and personal contacts with voters to explain what is going on will get you votes.

Good points all, but it all takes a bit of time and effort to accomplish, and I can't force Les into any debates, nor can I make the local media shame him into a meaningful forum where we will both be on an equal forum.  The COLDNews/Chamber of Commies will likely have a debate with a lot of meaningless and skewed questions specially selected to help him out as long as he doesn't pass out.  WMOM sounds like they may provide a forum where we both field some questions with a little bit of time to answer them.  This may be my best chance to actually run a comparison/contrast of our views, with the possible exception of the COLDNews allowing us the same courtesy in print.  It's too bad, because we are likely diametrically opposite on most of our views.

RSS

© 2024   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service