City Council Meeting 9-24-2012: Psycho Stares, Crocodile Tears, and the Usual

[XLFD]

It was a rather eventful night at the Ludington City Council on 9-24-2012.  The usual opening occurred followed by the public comment period.  Bob Hannah, whose name is composed of two palindromes, started off (2:30 into the video, below) by venting that I like to spend  the taxpayers money, he then stated I haven't paid off a judgment to John Shay from this last lawsuit, which is pretty difficult when the judgment won by the City (not Mr. Shay) hasn't even been given to me yet from the court.  He then states my current lawsuit will cost the City between $50,000 - $100,000 (apparently, he has a crystal ball to see my victory and my judgment-- yet he does not comment on why I would win what he later calls a frivolous lawsuit). 

He continues defining my lawsuit as part of a vendetta against the City, which again presumes the City has wronged me, as such is the nature of vendettas.  Bob continues with noting that even now I do not stop at stop signs on my bicycle, a fact, and yet I still maintain as long as I follow the rules of the right of way, I am within the laws of Michigan.  He finishes:  "If he has the money to hire a lawyer for a frivolous lawsuit, then he has enough to pay the full amount of FOIA."  

Pretty profound coming from a City of Ludington loyalist.  I found out later, Bob is a current member of the Ludington Fire Department, Mayor Henderson's and Councilor Tykoski's fellow firefighter, who joined two months after I resigned.  He's where he's at from my bicycle riding, ironically enough.

Attorney Jeff Nellis then spoke about his candidacy for Probate Judge.  As most judicial candidates, he had to comment on bland stuff like his experience and family life.  My favorite, C. Dale Bannon, then spoke about how difficult it has been to get the City/MDOT to change the signs referring to Stearn's Park as "City Park".  Then it was my turn at the 7:00 mark:

"At the end of last meeting of this austere body, the City Manager commented on the local circuit

court finding in favor of the City for nearly $700 and dismissing two citizens' FOIA appeal. Until I

see a final judgment from that court, I won't comment on that aspect. But what he didn't bother to

tell you was the particulars of that lawsuit and what happened to get two citizens to that point. Here is a timeline and some facts, and the City has their opportunity at the end of the meeting for their rebuttal, if they deem to do so.

On September 7, 2011 we made a FOIA request asking for business records between the City and

Nick Tykoski's businesses. Six days later, John Shay gave a response that did not comply with

FOIA rules. He did not grant the request, deny the request, partially grant and deny the request, or

postpone the request. As such he violated the act.

After trying to get a lawful response from him again, we appealed to this body. The mayor sent a

certified letter to my ally inviting her to the meeting on September 27, 2011, but a request by me to also attend that meeting was denied by John Shay. You see, in his capacity as City Manager he has that right under the Workplace Safety Policy, a constitutionally illegal policy that will cost the City Manager (and unfortunately, our City's taxpayers) a lot of time and money to revoke and address injuries that it caused.

We sent our appeal rationale to each councilor, but neither of us showed up at the meeting, where

our FOIA appeal was taken off the agenda, never to be considered by this Council. The council

shirked their responsibility to hold a FOIA appeal. This was not surprising from the same City

Council that decided it had the right to bar citizens from public places at a City Manager's whim,

including the only two Ludington public places that citizens could inspect FOIA responses.

After this outrage, we pursued a FOIA in the local court system. Here we were assigned Honorable

Judge Richard Cooper, who effectively blocked us from getting any response until after that

November's election, which was significant because we eventually received some records that were

unfavorable to those concerned with ethics by now-councilor Nick Tykoski. But ethics were far

from any public servants minds as we found out throughout our court process.

The City's law firm, Gockerman, Wilson, Saylor, etc. came forth on November 8th as the City's

counsel. Little did the plaintiffs know that this lawfirm also had Judge Cooper's son as an associate

until four months later when the Judge admitted it as an appearance of impropriety. Judges, court

administrators, and the City's lawfirm had a responsibility to admit such impropriety immediately by

the Canons of Judicial Conduct and the Rules of Professional Conduct, but it took them over four

months. We immediately disqualified the judge, and sent a complaint to the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission.

During this time, we (and the court) received from the City, certified by the City Manager with an

affidavit, a set of public records that supposedly fulfilled our FOIA request. This was four months

into the process, and the records included only ones that we received through two previous

requests, the vast majority were not even applicable to our request under appeal, and said our lawsuit was moot. We knew from previous requests, there were many records not included. We made special requests for those records we knew of.

Amazingly, after City Attorney Saylor and City Manager Shay had seen these new FOIA requests,

they found the records we asked for a half year previously and and some more records that they had withheld, what they would say they 'overlooked'. This is why they would later also claim our lawsuit was moot, even after they perjured themselves and would not get us the full records until 6 months after we asked for them. The new judge, also on the 51st Circuit Court, agreed with them. So although we spent $210 on Court costs, received fraudulent records and perjured statements, and wasted countless hours trying to go through the legal hoops to get this 30 pages of non-exempt

public records we should have been given a year ago, our side is told our point is moot and we owe

the City money for other records we have never seen. You can conclude what you might about the

court processes here in Mason County, I know how we feel about it..."

That's where I was cut off, having expended my five minutes plus about a half minute.  Next days City of Ludington Daily News' (COLDNews) Kevin Barnishevowicz had this to say about my assertions:  "Rotta spoke for five minutes about the lawsuit he filed against the City and lost."   The 'news' that the Chief of the LFD said the usual disclaimer about my LFD shirt just after my speech merited more than twice the coverage by the COLDNews.  By the way, a loss in a local seemingly-dysfunctional trial court is just a setback, not a loss.  In my book of justice.

 

Speaking of which, Jeff Nellis, Probate Judge candidate, snuck out shortly after this without comment about my judicial references.  But I did promise you some other things:

 

Psycho Stares 

 

While City Attorney Richard Wilson was droning on about how everyone who attended the closed session was aware of what was going to be discussed at the closed meeting on 8-27-2012, (and neglecting to note that the Open Meetings Act requires that general information to be shared with those not attending from the public, before they move to go into closed session) John Shay began fixing his gaze at me.  It was a bit unsettling, particularly since I think he has done quite a bit to justify me taking out a "Letter of Trespass" on him, notwithstanding the four counts in my lawsuit that apply to him.

 

 

Take a look at John Shay's gaze as Wilson lulls you in the background, starting at 42:45 and extending all the way to 45:15, (two and a half minutes) focussing on the podium area, where I was perched at that time in case a question was asked of me regarding my FOIA appeal.  Off-camera, I myself was generally focused on Wilson, who was the only person talking, but I could not help but notice this fixed gaze, which would make a normal person feel nervous. 

 

Particularly, if that normal person had the MCSO serve the fixed-starer a Federal Court suit earlier that day, and even more particularly when one realizes that this man has ultimate control over the Ludington Police Department, and has utilized them against this normal person before.  They all carry guns; I don't.

 

Crocodile Tears

 

At 49:00 in, Gary Castonia says:  "When I first ran for office I knew I would be scrutinized and I'd be held accountable for any statements I made.  But the only way I can say this now is by quoting Mr. Rotta, I'm absolutely disgusted that you dragged my family, my grandson (breaks down), and my wife, and her business into this.  And I want the whole city to know how you treat people.  And the last comment I want to make is:  People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks." 

 

The rock-lobber strikes again, according to Gary.  He refers to this thread  karma-castonia  which relates court news placed out by the Mason County Press and the COLDNews, and I believe that 'glass house' comment should be reviewed by the senior Castonia.  During his long career as a law officer, I am sure he bagged his share of marijuana-possessors, and thought he was doing society a favor.  Now that his grandson is nabbed, and the irony of the situation is pointed out, he goes into pitied victim-mode. 

But this isn't why he won't get any sympathy from me for his theatrics, because I do think it is a tragedy that his grandson may now find himself with this charge plaguing him through his career.  What he will get is these questions:  Where was your empathy, Gary, when you passed the Workplace Safety Policy and effectively criminalized me in the eyes of my fellow citizens with the COLDNews when I hadn't done anything?  Why don't you have any empathy towards the emotional distress you have helped caused in others by your reluctance to do anything about this unconstitutional legislation?  And why is re-publishing factual information about this event in the Torch any worse than those other news groups doing the same, and why am I being held accountable for raising real concerns regarding kids that may have been exposed to illegal drugs at your wife's daycare facility?

Because, remember, the reason you said you voted against the Ludington MM ordinance was because you thought the Federal government drug policy was dominant, which made such possession illegal, no exceptions.  Do you honestly feel the same way now that it's your own flesh and blood, possessing it for non-medicinal purposes, getting the rap?  

 

Yes, there were other things that happened this night, including some weird accusations made by LFD personnel off-camera, but if time permits I will cover those later.  The quest for justice, freedom, and information goes on... 

[Willy]

CLFD

I must have missed something. Where are you getting the idea that X or anyone implied that the police would shoot X? You've mentioned this several times.

[AQUAMAN]

While CLFD continues to create dodges and confusion, I again ask this simple question: could you please name one (1) complaint or critique of the current regime/administration of the COL either in the past, or present? Unless of course you actually believe these elected officials wear halo's! No one is perfect, and I am not asking for names of elected nor hired officials, just a policy, ordinance, contract, procedure, law, rule, or anything of germane nature to operating the COL. Once again, I patiently await your answer CLFD. Thanks.

[CLFD]

Aquaman

I have many issues. I attempt to resolve my issues in my own way. I have not found any rule of this webblog that requires a member to automatically fall in line with anybody else's purpose here.

Why do you insist upon knowing what my issues are? What purpose would it serve? My hunch is that if I named one of my issues that it still would not satisfy you.

How about the issue of requiring North Side residents to abandon their private wells and forcing them to tap into the city's water line and then making it possible for city workers to trespass without warrant onto private property to inspect the homeowners water source? And then raising the water fees?

Now what? Will you expect me to elaborate ad nauseum about that issue here on this website when obviously it will do no good toward resolving the actual issue?

 

Thank you for your interest in my posts.

[XLFD]

I would guess CLFD is using the old intimidation tactic of trying to throw a scare in the person who is trying to spoil the corrupt good ol' boy network here in Ludington that he benefits from-- presumably. 

[CLFD]

XLFD

Since when did asking a person a serious question about his own comment become an "old intimidation tactic"?

What really do you expect of your members here?

[CLFD]

Willy

“Particularly, if that normal person had the MCSO serve the fixed-starer a Federal Court suit earlier that day, and even more particularly when one realizes that this man has ultimate control over the Ludington Police Department, and has utilized them against this normal person before.  They all carry guns; I don't.”

 

I asked XLFD what he meant by that. What would you suppose the general public might read into it?

[XLFD]

I did explain what I meant by it, and then you stated your own interpretation of it.  Do you get the concept of intimidation, or are you generally on the intimidating side?   

[CLFD]

XLFD

I did not explain what MY interpretation was. I stated that the citizens of Ludington have faith that the men and women of the Ludington Police Department will not turn their guns against them. I believe that wholeheartedly.

[XLFD]

You interpreted my statements into me saying that I was worried about them shooting me, and that statement above. 

As for that statement, you may wish to go into a local restaurant/bar establishment and ask a man and his mother whether they have such faith in their local police:  McAdam Documents.  

[CLFD]

XLFD

Nice spin. But totally false. I did not offer my own interpretation. I asked "IF" because it clearly could have been interpreted as such.

But even if I were to offer my own interpretation, what difference would it make? You are the person who knows what you intended when you made the comments that you made. A simple explanation will usually help clear up many misconceptions.

[XLFD]

The McAdam's lawsuit is based on falsities?  Why do the depositions of the deputies and Warmuskerken tell the same story then. 

Do you have some inside info on what actually happened that night, or is your purpose here only to spread misinformation and waste everyone's time?

[Eye On Ludington]

I cannot believe the blind obedience to XLFD on this site. I think XLFD is smart enough to know how to say exactly what he means, and it sounds to me like he deliberately inferred that the man who has ultimate control over the LPD might utilize their guns for his own purposes.