To Dis-Spence with Ethical Conduct

[XLFD]

This article continues the research and analysis started in the Lots a' Planning in a Riggsed System, an article looking at the ethical failures of a new Planning Commissioner, and the failure of the Ludington city government to notice and correct the corrupt conduct.  A read or re-read of that article will be a good foundation to fully appreciate and understand the information given below.

The Purchase and the Plan

In an effort to connect more dots and to see what trail the written public records led to, I recently submitted a FOIA request for: 

"All E-mails, applications, or other correspondence sent, received or otherwise referring to 'Spence Riggs' by any officer of the city in the calendar year of 2016 (include Planning Commission members, city council members, or other city hall staff)."

The FOIA Coordinator advised me that there was a voluminous amount of records as there was a bit of correspondence between city officers and Spence Riggs, who also serves as the director of the Mason County Growth Alliance (MCGA).  The MCGA effectively is the county's economic development director, Riggs is effectively their sole hired administrator, while Ludington City Manager John Shay presided over the MCGA Board in 2016.  Other current members of the board include a county commissioner, the county administrator, and the PM Township supervisor.

I narrowed the scope down enough to receive a CD with several records pertaining to Riggs journey to the Ludington Planning Commission (LPC) and his advocacy of small houses.  Chronologically, Riggs had no stated interest in the LPC or changing local zoning law to accommodate small houses until he made a social media post announcing that he made a real estate purchase, as was seen previously:

Take special note that Robert W. Gibson (of locally based Gibson Custom Homes) offered congratulations and Riggs stated "Now let's build more."  This suggests that even at that point Gibson and Riggs had collaborated on other efforts and planned on even more. 

It's unclear what happened between late September and the beginning of December, but one may infer that Riggs looked at pursuing his dream of splitting his 150' wide parcel into 50' wide lots and building a couple of houses to each side of his existing house.  But local zoning law flatly denied him that opportunity, one could only build on lots that were at least 60' wide.  Relying on the old maxim that if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, Riggs heard of three or four vacancies on the LPC coming up and verbally committed through the Assistant City Manager Jackie Steckel, who related it to her boss, John Shay, who also was effectively Riggs boss on the MCGA:

This permission was orally transmitted from Steckel to Riggs, who formally applied for the LPC to Steckel the very next day in this E-mail:

As noted, the first mention of small houses and changing zoning law in the public record was picked up by Heather Tykoski within a week of that 'application' in the Dec. 6, 2016 LPC meeting minutes.  Tykoski and Riggs, both economic development directors, have many collaborative efforts within the city and the county, as found throughout the records I received. 

As noted in Lots a' Planning in a Riggsed System, the next month began a very directed effort by Riggs to get on the subcommittee to rewrite the zoning law, an expedited effort to get it through the LPC and in front of the city council, directly advocating for it on behalf of the full LPC at the 2-27-2017 meeting of the council, and then attending the next meeting to hear it went through.

And even though I had noted Riggs' machinations were improper and unethical at that next meeting on March 6th when I said: 

"While the idea of developing small lots seems to have a lot of merit, I agree with Councilor Rathsack that it needs more research, diligence and public input than it has been given.  This is particularly salient when the Planning Commission's self-proclaimed spokesman and brand new member Spence Riggs helped develop and vote for the text of the ordinance in the PC's Text committee, voted for the recommendation to this council at the February PC meeting, and stamped his and the PC's qualified endorsement of the ordinance at the beginning of the last meeting. 

All without noting for the record that he purchased three small lots, two undeveloped, late last year when he was being groomed for the PC position.  He stands to make these undeveloped lots go from worthless to worthwhile if you vote yes on this ordinance.  If your code of ethical conduct has dulled over your years of public service, that has the appearance of a major conflict of interest...."

As usual, no city official took this glaring impropriety as anything to comment on or act on, and the city council's representative on the LPC, Kathy Winczewski, actually lied to protect him saying the inarguably false words:  "Contrary to what was presented to you tonight, Spence Riggs was not a member of the Planning Commission at the time he served on any capacity into looking into this issue."  The January LPC minutes, along with the video, showed them discussing the issue before being sent to revise the wordings in the Text Committee he was appointed to.

The Split and the Switch

Within a few weeks after the zoning change went into effect on March 21, Riggs worked to split the lot into three and develop the two new lots.  Beginning on p. 88 of the May 22, 2017 council meeting packet, a May 5th letter addressed to the City Assessor Brent Bosley from Riggs sought permission to split his property. 

On a supplementary FOIA request I received the additional May 10 e-mail between Assessors Foote and Boswell where Foote expresses that she "told [Riggs] that the new parcel numbers would not be assigned until 12/31.  They would like to get verbal approval so they can go through with the sale."  Bosley saw no problem with the split 'as long as it meets zoning'.  Having noticed other problems with the packets records involving the undertakings, I spoke these words in the second public comment period:

"At the June 6th Planning Commission meeting, they will consider two special land use constructions taking place at small lots that do not exist.  Looking at p. 90 of your packets, you see that on May 5th, Commissioner Spence Riggs sent an inquiry to Assessor Brent Bosley in order to split his property into three parcels .  By city law, Section 50-191 to 50-196, such a split needs to be formally reviewed by the Planning Commission, recommended to council, and the city council must formally approve of it and record it.  None of that has happened, so 713 and 717 North Lavinia do not exist, nor are the purchase agreements Riggs submitted legal, or the covering up of the purchase price such as you see on p. 97-98.

Thus, Commissioner Riggs cannot sell the non-existent lots at an outrageous profit as I mentioned explicitly and prophetically at the March 6th meeting, I quote from that meeting:   "the Planning Commission's self-proclaimed spokesman and brand new member Spence Riggs helped develop and vote for the text of the 'small lots' ordinance in the PC's Text committee, voted for the recommendation to this council at the February PC meeting, and stamped his and the PC's qualified endorsement of the ordinance at the beginning of the February 20th meeting. 

All without noting for the record that he purchased a three small lot parcel, two undeveloped, late last year when he was being groomed for the PC position.  He stands to make these undeveloped lots go from worthless to worthwhile if you vote yes on this ordinance.  If your code of ethical conduct has dulled over your years of public service, that has the appearance of a major conflict of interest as he has never stated for the record how his lot in life would be upgraded, by writing, voting on, and endorsing this proposal without coming clean."

If you opened the link to the city ordinance in the comment, you would note that any lot split has to go through the process.  Yet no official commented to the contrary of my assertion at the end of the meeting or since.  One would think that these officials never dealt with a property split before, and covered the requisite process.

But that isn't the case.  On August 8, 2016, the city council acknowledged that the full process was used for splitting the old lumber yard on Tinkham, including review and passage by the LPC and approval by the city council:

Thus, it appears that the process was avoided due to expedience rather than ignorance of the proper process to follow by mostly the same officials.  One would think that the LPC's meeting on June 6 would have them looking not over the sale of two non-existing lots, rather look at whether the split is kosher.  They were warned, and had experience with lot splits less than a year ago, so surely they didn't skip this step.

Guess again.  The minutes of the June 6 LPC meeting shows that their initial plans went ahead to effectively okay the approval of the building of small houses on small lots at 713 and 717 N. Lavinia, addresses that do not exist.  They only have 'verbal approval' by the City Assessor to split the lots if it passes zoning issues, but Brett Bosley has no such power to do the split, the LPC and city council does.

Rather late in the game Spence Riggs does recuse himself from the discussions and votes due to a conflict of interest, which he never publicly admits as to what exactly that conflict was.  He had a public duty to do that at all the other public hearings where his new land investment was improved because of what appears to be his own self-interest, rather than the public's , as was noted in the prior article.  Fortunately, fellow MCGA Board member John Shay covers him at the end of the discussion and shows how complex the building arrangement with Robert Gibson actually was since Riggs' September 16 social media reply to Gibson of "Let's build more."

And even though the Planning Commission's deliberations and decisions totally avoided the proper process for splitting the 715 N Lavinia into the three lots and the fact that they needed to split the parcel before deciding the fates of non-existing lots, it becomes incredible when you realize that not only are nine trained Planning Commissioners sitting at this meeting, but also John Shay and City Assessor Carol Ann Foote, who all should know better.  Take a look at the circus concerning these actions beginning at 2:30 into the meeting, with Riggs' recusal.

June 6th, 2017 Ludington Planning Committee meeting from Mason County District Library on Vimeo.

City Code Section 1200:2:8 states :  "The City Council may remove a member of the Planning Commission for misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance in office upon written charges and after a pubic [sic] hearing. Failure of a member to disclose a potential conflict of interest constitutes a malfeasance in office."

Commissioner Spence Riggs repeatedly failed to disclose a potential conflict of interest, failed to disclose how much money he would be profiting from selling 2/3 of his property after he amped up their value with the zoning law he wrote, and failed to put the public's interest in front of his own throughout the whole process.  He needs to resign or be removed from his office in disgrace for doing so.

[John Doe Jr]

Same old tactics. Lie and deny and when you are caught then recuse yourself. John Shay knew from the start this was a conflict of interest and, allowed it, then also gave instructions of how to get out of it. This is absolute collusion.

[XLFD]

Speaking of collusion and conflicts:  Another concerned local brought to my attention that at the June 6th meeting, after Riggs recused himself due to a conflict of interest without specifying what that conflict was, and Shay later specified that Riggs had recused himself because Riggs was 'a party to (the 713 and 717 N Lavinia transactions)', Riggs did not recuse himself from the 209 S Rath deliberation and vote, even though his business partner for the two previous public hearings was Robert Gibson, and this project involved Gibson as the developer. 

It is unseemly that Riggs would partner with Gibson in corrupted land transactions that profited himself as an individual, and then represent himself as acting in the public's interest in voting on Gibson's other development deal.  Consider, do you believe Riggs could argue or vote against Gibson for the Rath property development without possibly upsetting his own shady deals with him?  One more major appearance of impropriety not absolved by the meeting minutes or video.

[John Doe Jr]

They are so corrupt they can't even keep up with their lies.

[AQUAMAN]

Just another "in your face Ludington hillbillies" actions that no one will care nor do anything about is their attitude imho. Hey, they've been getting away with this stuff over and over again since even before The Torch has been established, and no charges have been filed yet, so why not now again? Shay will just keep colluding and lieing to the public, and council, to continue these unethical and illegal ways, and tell everyone that objects that you are not credible, only he as King here is.

[XLFD]

A very odd defense for Spence was raised by the city manager and city attorney tonight after Councilor Les Johnson raised whether my allegations had merit.  I expect the local media to do the usual and take their word for it, even though it's as outrageous as a James Comey interview.  Will spotlight the crazy-talk in coming days after the video becomes available.

[AQUAMAN]

Please spotlight anytime, we're very interested. Thanks.

[Willy]

Excellent work X. If it weren't for you this City would be totally under the influence of the swamp creatures.