Hiding Behind Signs 3: FOIA Discovery!

[XLFD]

A FOIA request dealing with inspecting the contracts and receipts between the City of Ludington and the then City Official/City Councilor Candidate Nick Tykoski's company  between 2008 and 2011 which the City would not divulge or assign a fee cost for was related in the thread Hiding Behind Signs.  Read, or skim that if you remember it,to get a background. 

 

We at the Torch then appealed to the City Council, and was promptly denied any sort of administrative appeal process as illustrated in Hiding Behind Signs 2.  Again take a quick glance at that, for even more background.

 

We then began the second appeal process, in the Circuit Court to find out why we were not getting any documents or any sort of acceptable FOIA response from the City Manager in Going to Court.  Because we thought the FOIA law was clear, our complaint points were strong, and the City was in arrears by not following the FOIA, we decided to go without a lawyer and save the City (i.e the taxpayers) the costs of any  attorney fees on our part.  An original court date of November 2 was made, but due to a misunderstanding between us and the court where the defendant was never given a court date, this date had to be rescheduled for November 17.

 

But starting election day, the lead City Attorney of Ludington, Manistee's Richard Merlin Wilson, drafted a document that started the City's counter-offense.  This 11-8-11 letter had in it the following:

First off, I see nothing in the FOIA appeal process that claims it is a "civil action", but it does say in Section 10: "The court shall determine the matter de novo [afresh] and the burden is on the public body to sustain its denial." and "An action commenced under this section and an appeal from an action commenced under this section shall be assigned for hearing and trial or for argument at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way."

  

Allowing pre-trial answers to the complaint, discovery and counterclaims is not expedient, nor does the FOIA claim the FOIA appeal process is a civil action.  Besides with plaintiff discovery, should I not get to see what I originally requested-- the Tye Sign's FOIA?  And what would be up with a counterclaim?  Is the City now wanting to sue me and/or Toni for making FOIA requests? 

 

I hang my head in shame for the City I live in to announce it, but the answer to that is "Yes".  Here is their list of Affirmative Defenses:

 

I expect a line of defense from the City of Ludington, but this defense is ridiculous and fraudulent.  Here is a quick refutation of every one of the five defenses.

 

1) As in the original request Toni has asked to inspect certain records.  The City has not made available those records either by granting her those records or establishing any fee for those records.  The records differ from a request she made in January, which we paid for in full.  And even different than I, a totally different person, made last year.  That is a clear denial of allowing us to see these records.  The City Council then passed on their duty to judge it in the administrative appeal.  Which led us to this impasse.

 

2)  As stated the only FOIA request prior to this made by Toni that overlapped this request was on January 24, 2011, which she paid for.  This was a totally different request that involved competitive bidding on the DDA signage contract with no mention of Tye's Inc.  This assertion is slanderous as she has paid that charge.  Barrister Wilson, I am a different person, but this was not my request of last year and the charge then was illegally based.

 

3)  FOIA requests about a City Official's company and his possible benefitting from unfair contract awards is excessively and unreasonably interfering with the discharge of the City's functions... oh, please.  Take a minute to look in the file folder or computer file dealing with "Tye's Signs" and allow us to inspect it.  How's this appeal after appeal working for you?  It sure is a waste on my time, and trampling on the public's right to know about their new councilor-elect.

 

4)  The City Attorney boldly lies here: the records have yet to be offered for any price, and Toni has asked for them only on this FOIA and its appeal.  The chain of replies is in the "Hiding behind Signs" thread where FOIAC John Shay never offered these records nor stated any price.  By Section 5, FOIA, (2) and (3):  Failure to respond to a request pursuant to subsection (2) constitutes a public body's final determination to deny the request. In a circuit court action to compel a public body's disclosure of a public record under section 10, the circuit court shall assess damages against the public body. 

 

5)  More slander.  Toni does receive some public assistance and has a notorized affidavit of indigency filed at the Ludington City Hall.  John Shay arbitrarily allows her to have the $20 off it affords at times.  At other times, like for the January 24 request, he disallows it capriciously. 

 

Five out of five times, they make assertions without proof, just a tax-dodging lawyers word for it who hasn't even filed an Oath of Office with the City.  "Scheme to defraud" ?  Those are strong words, Dick.  Since Toni has got her affidavit approved, there has been absolutely no duplication of her requests to mine. 

 

At the bottom Richard prays that the honorable court dismiss plaintiff's complaint with prejudice [barring the plaintiff from filing another case on the same claim], grant to defendant its costs and expenses in defending this action, including a reasonable amount for attorney fees and other just and reasonable awards.

 

Here is how open, honest, and thrifty our City Hall is.  We will likely now have to get an attorney to handle all the extra bother the City has put in our way, and when we win, guess who's going to pay the court and the attorneys for the City's reluctance to show these documents?  We all are, and yet why doesn't the City Manager freely let Toni come in to inspect these documents?  Is he just hiding something, or is he just being an obstructionist who is upset for having an occasional extra duty of hunting down documents?  Someday we may find out.

 

But Saturday's LDN dutifully reported that the City Council is going to go into a closed session on November 14, Monday night, to discuss the City Attorney's letter in full.  If any of you in the Council have a soul, please help Toni and the public at large to get this information which the City Manager has claimed privileged. 

[Sohn Jhay]

Maybe the question at this point is Who refused to pay those prior fees?

Because if he said the prior requests were similar then the only way to know for sure would be to pay the prior fees and see the prior information.

[XLFD]

As I have reiterated, the requestor of this FOIA paid for the prior fees of her similar request, and no fees were assigned for this unique request.  A reading of both of her requests shows they are for different records-- or do you dispute that, Sohn? 

[AQUAMAN]

Sohn, I suggest you actually read the letter of trespass and what it says and why. The explanations given by Venzke are flaky and lack any merit at best. At worst, it's flimsy and whimsical. Anyone whom complains about their personal safety due to a website giving rise to a riot, or mob mentality against her, is simply feeling strong guilt and remorse, and is running scared to have it covered up any which way possible. Any true law officer hearing this would and should have dismissed it as total paranoia, as nothing illegal happened, and no true physical factual threat ever happened. But, again, Shay played it up and brought it to his comrade in arms, Chief Barnett. Playing up the poor girl game was a Shay-Sham, through and through, which he has perfected in the years since we employed him. And just who is Shay's boss that would approve and also gain favors with the hotty Heather? JH

[Sohn Jhay]

You have a point, but my understanding is that the impact upon a supposed victim is often weighed more heavily than the actual intent of the alleged perpetrator.  What this means is that the judge's ruling will likely weigh more heavily upon the impact upon the supposed victim than it will upon the intent of the alleged perpetrator's unproven accusation's regarding the purchase of that particular house.

Does that concern you at all?

[AQUAMAN]

We are getting way off track here, the FOIA denials about DDA contracts to Tye's Signs is what the judge is going to hear, not Hotty Heathers' paranoia. LOT's are not issued in normal circumstances when someone simply cries wolf to the authorities, you have to have a physical act on that makes specific threats to that person, persons property, or another workplace property. That simply never happened. It was this website alone, and the days of questions from posters that has her running scared, nothing more, nothing less. The local judges and city hallers feed from the same public trough of funds, thus complicating, and certainly conflicting this issue if heard in Mason County, or more accurately, by a local judge. It should be heard by a neutral outside judge to get the most fair treatment imho. Those threads on the daily posts are located in Signs of Love, buried some months ago, and should be read thoroughly before commenting further. Can you link Sohn to that now X? It may help his disposition and give information that shows categorically that no physical threat was ever made, mentioned in passing, nor eluded to in any way.

[Willy]

Good points Aquaman.

 

Sohn. It would be beneficial for you to read all of X.s posts regarding his situation so  you can get a better understanding of what is going on. Even if you are a doubter as to the validity of X's claims, it would be hard not to see a long history of abuse, lies and  deceit emanating from local officials from the court system to city hall.

[AQUAMAN]

Sohn, does it in any way concern you that someone in an important legal position with city government doling out city DDA contracts to individuals for large amounts of moneys, gives those very signage contracts to her fiance? The same fiance that will profit and gain substantially from such contracts? And that same fiance had inside knowledge in advance of the bidding process to obtain such contracts? And that the fiance bid the contracts with 18 kt. gold, and had no other competitive bidders to bid against him? And why all of a sudden, does Ludington's signage NOW REQUIRE 18kt. gold as a requirement for such work? And that when found out thru the FOIA system, that the DDA Venzke did seek a LOT against X for fraudulent claims of threats against her? So no further investigations thru FOIA at city hall could continue to expose this conflict of interest, and possible criminal activity, all approved and known by SHAY? What say ye NOW?

[Sohn Jhay]

I say any and all potentially illegal activity that becomes exposed deserves to be investigated by the proper law agencies to the fullest extent.  Both sides of the issues should be able to present their own sides in a legal setting.  A few public opinions is not considered a legal setting.  I believe the law should protect the people who live under it from any and all illegal activity.  If there is illegal activity occuring in the City Hall then it needs to be resolved legally.

Employees everywhere have a right to feel safe from harassment within their work environment.  A Letter of Trespass does not presume guilt.  It is to let the supposed victim know when the alleged perpetrator is at the building.  The person named can still visit the buildings with permission.  It would be easy to add the following words to a FOIA request:  "Please schedule an appointment for me to come view the records".

Where is the proof of actual 18K gold lettering?  Or is that only a rumor?

[XLFD]

The actual lettering is 22K gold  p.2 Fax

The actual basis for the letter of trespass is contained herein Creating a monster pt 1.  Sohn, you may decide whether it was placed fairly, and was made with any basis for employee safety.

The reference to Mr. Tykoski's and Ms. Venzke's residence which they brought together in 2010, was added as a link in this thread Signs of Love, to show the close relationship that both had with each other, so as to further prove an unethical, illegal no-bid contract between two members of the DDA with $15,000 of public money going to Nick from the coffers Heather is responsible for.  No mention of this is made in the DDA minutes at all.  Do you give a free pass for such stuff, Sohn?

[Sohn Jhay]

XLFD

Thank you for the link about the 22k gold.  I think it is ridiculous to put real gold on signage for street use.  I wonder what they were thinking?

I do not give a free pass to anyone for anything illegal.

[XLFD]

As Marty says, taxpayers are paying around $200 per hour to have an attorney deny an indigent citizen of Ludington public records that should be available arguably free-of-charge to anyone that requests to inspect them.  City contracts with any public entity, and competive bids for contracts that have been finalized, should be available to the public to make sure that proper, ethical procedures have been followed. 

Section 1 of the FOIA states:  "It is the public policy of this state that all persons, except those persons incarcerated in state or local correctional facilities, are entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of those who represent them as public officials and public employees, consistent with this act. The people shall be informed so that they may fully participate in the democratic process." 

Yet, Toni requested information that would help many Ludington citizens be able to decide whether the City's contracts and invoices with a City Council candidate, Nick Tykoski and his company, were proper and ethical, and  after the City decided not to grant the request, and then decided not to hold an appeal of that denial, the City is now counter-attacking this indigent woman with threats of counterclaims and paying the defendant's legal costs in a ridiculous affirmative defense. 

Is this what a healthy City Hall would do?

[Sohn Jhay]

I thought the city was going to defend against a lawsuit.  I did not know they were going after Toni for legal costs.  Is Toni a plaintiff?