2018 could be Ludington Mayor Candidate Steve Miller's year as he seems the prohibitive favorite to claim the top spot on November 6 and lead the city for the next 4 or more years. He definitely started off the year on a successful note in his career as WMOM's sale and marketing director, scoring a lucrative deal valued over $5000 for the soon-to-be-declared Michigan radio station of the year.

Problem is, that early deal was brokered by Miller on behalf of WMOM with the Ludington Downtown Development Authority (DDA, aka the Downtown Ludington Board) an agency he serves as a voting city official of.  Quite a few ethical and legal issues arise from that transaction, which may, or may not, come into play if you are concerned that the mayor of the city should be following the high standards we require of public servants.. 

Facts:

At the first meeting of the DDA on January 8, the minutes report that a deal was reached between the City and WMOM:

"A marketing contract with WMOM for yearly ads was presented. $2748.00 for the year. Steve Miller recused himself from discussion and voting on the contract. Brandy made a motion to approve the annual contract with WMOM contingent on fundraising seconded by Lenich. Motion Carried."

The unsigned contract looked like this with the file dated January 3rd: City of Ludington 2018 Exclusive Ad Package 01 03 2018.pdf.  This contract calls for $300 worth of gift certificates to WMOM as part of the deal.  An E-mail sent on January 26th from the DDA Marketing and Communications Director Jen Tooman to the 7 members of two exclusive DDA committees related:  

"I’m emailing the executive and marketing committees to ask for a switch in allocation for marketing funds.
As you recall, WMOM gave us a proposal (attached) which included (40) 30 sec. ad spots each month for $229. The actual cost is $458 but half is in-kind trade for event sponsorships. The total for the year if we start in February will be $2519. The only thing I want to negotiate is the $300 in gift certificates. I’d rather this be prizes in general, because we usually give away cups/entry tickets to events, not gift certificates.
Originally, we allocated $2500 in our 2018 budget to purchase a contract with the LDN. We were planning to make the WMOM contract contingent on my ad sales on the kiosks, website and brochure.
I would like to propose that we switch the $2500 allocation from the LDN to WMOM and make LDN’s contract (which wouldn’t start until March if we accept) contingent on my ad sales. This way we can start rolling with radio ads right away during a time when the businesses would love to see some foot traffic from the locals. It also gives me more time to sell ads before a March start date with the LDN. If everyone agrees, we can start our radio ads February 1.
If you feel it needs more discussion, we can postpone the radio ad start date and bring this up at the Marketing meeting on February 1st and at the DDA meeting on February 6th."

The changes were agreed to by the members of the Executive Committee (whom probably for the most part double as members of the Marketing Committee (the membership of DDA subcommittees is their own little secret).  Seven voting members of the DDA were contacted by Tooman for support, five responded:

 

The revised contract was signed by Jen Tooman signing for the City of Ludington (which the DDA is an agency of) and Steve Miller signing for WMOM on January 29, when only three of the affirmations had been received from the two committees:

The Problems:

Steve Miller has made communication a hallmark of his mayor campaign, but this appears to be his greatest weakness in what happened between his company, the public agency he serves as an official for, and the public.  When Miller swore that he would uphold the state and federal Constitutions as he became a public officer of the City of Ludington serving in the DDA, he was ascribing to the standards that we expect from such officials.  

Considering the contract he negotiated and signed between his private business and the public agency he served on he has to fulfill several requirements set in law to make such transactions legit.  But first, let's note that the law explicitly states these contracts are wrong---

--- unless you abide by the strictures in section 3 which state:

Steve Miller never disclosed his company's pecuniary interest in the minutes of any DDA meeting, including the one he recused himself at, there is no written disclosure to the presiding officer of the DDA at least 7 days before the meeting he recused himself and the DDA voted.  Nor did he recuse himself at the January 8 meeting, and neither did the DDA vote after that meeting on either the original or amended contract.  

Frankly, the two DDA subcommittees in their round-robin closed communications where they were approving the amended contract, violated the Open Meetings Act in doing so.  John Henderson learned nothing from the last OMA lawsuit that caught the City doing this very thing in 2012.  A sub-quorum of the DDA cannot do something that only the full DDA has the power to do.

With this in mind, we find some other violations of law by Steve Miller.  State law, MCL 15.342 Standards of Conduct for Public Officers, says in section 2:

(5) A public officer [Miller] shall not engage in a business transaction [WMOM's contract] in which the public officer may profit from his official position or authority  or benefit financially from confidential information which the public officer has obtained or may obtain by reason of that position or authority.


(7) A public officer [Miller] shall not participate in the negotiation or execution of contracts relating to a business entity in which the public officer or employee has a financial interest [WMOM].

The record shows that Miller executed the latter contract for WMOM by his signature, it's almost certain that he negotiated the initial contract's terms orally.   The marketing contract definitely created a profit for Miller's company.  These state standards are almost duplicated by some standards in the city charter (sec. 2-72):

"No officer [Miller] shall make an unauthorized use of his public position [creating a contract with his private business] to obtain financial gain, other than de minimis [less than $100]financial gain for himself, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which such individual is associated."

"No officer shall make unauthorized use of any confidential information received through holding such public position to obtain financial gain, other than de minimis financial gain, for himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which such individuals associated."

Conclusion:

Transparency hasn't been a cornerstone of Miller's candidacy, nor has he acknowledged any of the ethical lapses of the DDA during his time serving as an officer of that agency.  There has been more than there should, and he has had the soapbox.  The episodes brought to light here should offer some insight into how he may serve once he becomes mayor. 

It should also be noted that Miller resigned from WMOM in July, allegedly from an incident in which he felt a job applicant was treated unfairly, saying in a post which has since been deleted:

"In reference to Tuesday’s post by [name withheld] addressing her disturbing interview at WMOM, I’d like to make it clear, the opinions and inferences do NOT reflect those of any of the station’s staff.
Since my name has been directly associated with this post and subsequent thread, I feel it necessary to respond.
Firstly, I’d like to thank those who were willing to post comments vouching for my character.
And, to make clear any concerns of my personal beliefs, after seeing [her] post and a pursuant conversation with the station’s owner, I’ve tendered my resignation and am no longer an employee of WMOM/Bayview Broadcasting, effective as of 11:30 this morning."

I find it highly likely that the empathetic resignation due to a perceived injustice was further facilitated by the realization by Miller and/or the station manager that he was rather useless until election day to the radio station as a marketing and sales representative due to the 'equal time' restrictions he was being forced to observe when his opponent, William Dustman, would not sign a waiver.  

If he had resigned seven months earlier, he would at least not be associated with the scandal of his own making.

Views: 800

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

WOW!  Unbelievable!  Mant thoughts come to mind.  First, thanks for the excellent research, X.  Secondly, I pray for the future of the city if Miller is elected Mayor with this example of lack of ethics.  And former mayor knowing better on OMA.  A group of DDA totally void in ethics.  And I was hoping that the new mayor will revive the ethics board!

Mr. Dustman, you are our only hope.  I hope your campaign takes off with rocket fuel soon.

Dustman isn't running like a real candidate, he's running in the DARK, no signage, no nothing. If he is really serious, he needs to do his homework, now, or never!

The choice is clear between both candidates for mayor. 

One is unapologetically conservative, the other is evasive about his core beliefs (which are decidedly progressive if you review his posts over the years)

One has no problem talking about the ethical problems the city has had and faces even now, the other believes his fellow officials are without fault.

One has the analytical skills to improve how the City is being ran, one has the marketing and sales skills to say city hall needs no improvement.  

One can say a lot of substantive material in a short time, the other can string together a lot of words and phrases and literally say nothing meaningful.

One wants to get a running start in order to stop the corruption at city hall, the other gets a running start into the mud pit by mixing his public and private interests to his advantage.

Yet, it is the latter man's election to lose, because of that marketing disparity and his attempts to massage the clique in power, rather than topple it. 

Very well thought out and said X, you hit the nail again and thanks for the heads up on the Mayoral candidates. The only problem is, will the voters see all this before voting?

Yet, I think Bill Dustman doesn't have the best skill set for being mayor, if that makes sense.  I think he would be more effective as a councilor.  Mayor Holman declared she wouldn't seek another term as mayor after candidates for other seats were committed, otherwise I think Cheri Stibitz Rozelle would have tried for the mayor spot again and likely would be successful against the two men seeking it now.   In my estimation, she has a better skill set for being mayor rather than a city councilor.  

I was politely arguing an extreme lefty the other day on recent national events and they came to a conclusion I was misogynistic because of my take on Justice Kavanaugh.  It seemed to me a rather ridiculous conclusion at the time, but it strikes me as rather odd that I want Cheri as mayor, Kandi Fugere as 4th Ward Councilor, and Angela Serna as Fifth Ward Councilor, rather than their male counterparts running for the positions (noting that I favored Kandi slightly over Jeff Casperson in the primaries). 

This dude was so out of it that he called me racist for supporting John James for senator, when his support is fully behind a person paler than Anderson Cooper.  The extreme left has lost any sense of reality.

RSS

© 2024   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service