Ludington City Council Meeting, October 8, 2018: An Improper Assessment

[XLFD]

A 24 minute meeting of the Ludington City Council had its share of confusion and misinformation often found in longer meetings.  It started the morning of October 8, 2018, with Kaye Holman appearing on WMOM and talking to the morning crew about the meetings happening that day.  She appropriately reminded everyone that a Committee of the Whole meeting would be held at 4:30 PM (rather than some sources that said 6:30 PM) concentrating on sidewalks, but failed to relate what the termination order between the City and the DEQ was for on the agenda, believing it had something to do with water quality.

When it was explained later in the meeting, it was actually on water quantity, according to the city manager, where it effectively allowed the City's water treatment plant to pump at higher levels than before, a need which was necessitated by the high water demand of the cogeneration plant hooking up to the city water system, and additional maintenance due to the age of the facility.  True to form, Mayor Holman would introduce it at the meeting as improving your drinking water.  Unless your on some of the streets in the Fourth and Fifth Ward that were renovated over the last couple of years, your water quality is the same.  Fortunately, new standards by the State should get the City to assess the amount of lead pipes and goosenecks in the city water system shortly.

The only other business at the meeting scheduled was a change in the recycle contract with the waste hauler.  Due to international events, glass will no longer be on the recycle list for the citizens.  If you have been in the habit of recycling your glass containers, consider changing your purchases to get your groceries mostly in plastic or metal containers when that option is available, rather than glass.  Though he admitted an ignorance of the numbers (like the rest of the public), Tom Tyron rose in the first public comment to suggest abandoning recycling altogether if the cost is that prohibitive for glass.  

This item would be passed without input from the councilors, after they approved spending another million dollars during this two week period.  The item that everybody should remember about this meeting is an 'old issue' I brought up in my only public comment of the night.  At 2:30 into the meeting, I revisited unanswered questions about the City Assessor's office:

October 8th, 2018 Ludington City Council meeting from Mason County District Library on Vimeo.

XLFD:  "At the end of the last meeting, I asked several questions regarding the vacancy and the filling of the vacancy of the city assessor's office. Nobody attempted to answer them. Through the city manager's memo and comments, we have been told that the vacancy occurred due to a resignation shortly after a new contract had been approved in April for the old assessor, who was to be paid $2000 per month until his resignation, whenever that happened this summer.

Accordingly a selection committee made up of city officers Steve Brock, Tom Ezdebski, and Carol Foote interviewed 3 candidates for the position and selected one of those based on the interviews. Somebody changed the terms of the prior contract which would guarantee the new city assessor over $3400 per month, 70% more than what we were paying the previous assessor who had been working for the City without any problems noted for six years.

The secretive nature of the process and the colossal increase in wages concerned me, so I sent a FOIA request to the City seeking to understand it better. Our state's Open Meetings Act statute says: "...all interviews by a public body for employment or appointment to a public office shall be held in an open meeting pursuant to this act." The selection committee was created for and performed a governmental function in choosing one candidate for the assessor role. It conducted 3 interviews in that process, chose one, and fixed the terms of his contract outside of the public's eye.

The response to my request showed that they had not issued any public notice for these interviews, that they did not take any minutes at the interviews, and that there were not any notes, recordings, or other records of either of the other two alleged applicants. Not even a worksheet or other justification showing why they raised the monthly wage or why the hired assessor was better than the others. I officially appeal that response at this meeting, for I can't believe that anybody on such a selection committee would not have asked questions or taken notes during those interviews when given the responsibility that has historically been designated to the mayor.

It would be refreshing if the interim city manager could at least tell us the names of the other two assessor candidates so that the public can verify that those two were interviewed and submitted their applications to the City, and the rationale of why we are paying over $43,000 to a part-time position which is only mandated eight office hours per week. Thank you.[END COMMENT]"

In review of the history of appointing assessors in Ludington, the three snippets above show the mayor's appointment before the most recent charter.  The charter section 3.5 says:

"The Mayor shall appoint a City Manager and a City Attorney, with the approval of the majority of the Council elect. The Council may create such additional offices as it may deem necessary... in any manner that it deems to be in the best interest of the City."  

Now certainly, the council created an assessor's office over 100 years ago, and up to fairly recently they were appointed by mayor and approved by the city council, elected officials-- the official minutes show that.  Likewise, section 10.4 of the charter shows the assessor should be totally independent of the city manager:  "The City Assessor shall perform such other duties as may be prescribed by law or the Council."  Even as late as a couple of years after the  current 1984 charter, the mayor was annually appointing the city assessor and other offices:

Shortly after that, the process got more secretive, with new city assessors being approved of by the council, but the appointment agency was unclear.  Frankly, a mayor who appoints an assessor who seems to be overestimating values may have a political price to pay at the next election, so this might have been an intentional passing of duties to the city manager that has since became routine. 

However, although none of my questions were answered at the previous meeting, some were answered here, not a lot, but some, by the city manager:

Steve Brock:  (7:15 in): "The reason I didn't respond at the last meeting was that I think I answered all of the questions asked in my presentation about the process.

To go further, the city charter allows the city manager to make hiring and firing decisions within the City [Editor: up to a point, see section 10.1(d)1], and I take that responsibility seriously, and I did that.

We did interview three candidates, two of the other names I can make available, I don't think it's any secret, that's fine. I selected those two people because they're the two people [Ezdebski and Foote] in our office that are dealing with the assessor's role most frequently.

The city council approved the contract. The pricing for that contract was based on submittals by the three companies, and they all came in-- about two of them came in around the same number, one of them was a little bit higher-- ten dollars per parcel and that was kind of misconstrued in the newspaper, ten dollars per parcel is sort of the going rate for those sorts of services.

I don't know what terms were available to the previous assessor, if he gave a better deal than that, obviously he probably did, and that's fine. The reasons for our mutual departure will remain, as I have stated, between him and us, if you will. He wrote a letter of resignation and I accepted it, and that's the end of that (he offers the new assessor's office hours and allows the city attorney to add to it).  

City Attorney Richard Wilson:  "A city manager is not a public body, he is not subject to the Open Meetings Act, and their is strong case law in the court of appeals that supports that. He's entitled to hire and fire employees of the city..." (He finished off by agreeing with the rest of the city manager's statement.)

City Attorney Wilson is once again wrong.  Booth News Inc. v Uof M Board of Regents a Michigan Supreme Court case noted:  "we hold that the selection of a public university president constitutes the exercise of governmental authority, regardless of whether such authority was exercised by Regent Brown, the nominating committee, the full board, or even subcommittees. Accordingly, this individual or these entities must be deemed "public bodies" within the scope of the OMA."

I believe Wilson looks at another case Herald Newspapers v City of Bay City where the superior court found in that case that the city manager was not a public body.  If the city manager forms a committee to do something that is normally his duty, he would not be a public body, said the court. 

Here, it's unclear the city manager had the power to appoint the city assessor, if that were the case, Attorney Wilson would be right on this point.  A city manager, however, can be a "public body" if he goes beyond his executive capacity and be liable under the OMA.  As the duty of appointing the assessor has unlawfully switched from the mayor to the city manager in Ludington over time, it's likely this aspect is not actionable for redress.  

But there is no explanation for the gigantic raise of salary for the new assessor.  The interim city manager offered a contract with this large increase of 70% a month admittedly without a rationale other than some new and seemingly arbitrary way of calculating a wage for a contracted assessor.  

For comparison consider the City of Wyandotte back in 2013, who changed full-time assessors, going from one with level 3 experience and a $36,000 salary to a contracted firm.  New hire Jared Litwiller is MCAO 2, he would have been hired at $28,000 for four years for this city that is three times the population of Ludington for a full time position with approximately three times as many parcels. 

If Wyandotte used Ludington's metrics of $10 per parcel, Jared would have received around $130,000 plus Ludington's out-of-control fringe benefits equaling 80% of that.  Over $200,000 in remuneration each year.  Seriously, does an 8 hour a week part time job as a Ludington LVL 2 assessor merit a rate of over $100 per hour? 

I am making additional FOIA requests to find out why out city manager is giving away money so easily, why Brent Bosley resigned, and who else applied for the position-- since Steve Brock wants to keep that part of the record to himself after being asked twice at a public meeting.

[Freedom Seeker]

Interesting analysis, XLFD, of whether a city manager is responsible to the OMA and again disappointing that there seems to be a breach of transparency with the interim city manager, especially in view of a pay raise and a new way to appoint an assessor.  An assessor, of all employees should be most publicly vetted, it would seem.  I am disappointed in Brock's and Wilson's explanations.

[Willy]

And yet another reason to have Ludington give up a City Manager rules system. Very well explained X. Something [a reasonable explanation by city officials] I believe will never happen with the current way Ludington' government is ran. It's almost like Shay never left.

[XLFD]

Willy, it's good to see you contributing again, I was worried that the City took away your internet privileges.

I was hopeful about Steve Brock bringing in some transparency and truthfulness to city hall, but I have received several indications that he is no better than Shay.  A FOIA request I received today was very illustrative of this.

[Willy]

I've been away with no computer access. Watch out. Rumor has it that after the trees are regulated, computers will be next. After all those stupid politicians know what's best for everyone else.

[stump]

Brocks Quote:  We did interview 3 candidates , two of the other names I can make available.  I don't think it's any secret , and thats fine.I selected those two people as they're the two people { Ezdebski and Foote } In our office that are dealing with the assessors role most frequently.            So, were the other 2 candidates interviewed  Ezdebski and Foote??????  sounds like it to me as Brock never did mention any other names. If that is true, it sounds like one of Brocks buddies got a pretty nice paying job on the backs of the tax payers . Furthermore , if we find that that is true , can we impeach Brock??

[XLFD]

I am sure Brock was referring to the selection committee when he referenced 'those two people', who were named at the previous committee as the other two people helping him select the City Assessor.  Those two people already have well-paying jobs and benefits and could not also serve as City Assessor.

Brock later says, possibly to clarify, that the 'contract was based on submittals by the three [assessing] companies'.  And this is where Brock's house of cards begins to collapse, according to the records showing his prevarications, as will be explained in a future article.  

[shinblind]

Unless city residents are paying the same price for water that the cogeneration plant is paying this amounts to the water users of the city subsidizing the cogeneration facility for the difference. 

There is no doubt that the water treatment plant needed upgrading. It has been 40 years since the last upgrade.

But 40 years ago the population of the city was 16% higher than it is currently. 

The extra capacity of the water treatment plant isn't for the benefit of the locals.

But we get nailed for the cost

Just another bad deal that Shay made for city residents.

On another note I would not recommend eschewing glass food containers for metal or plastic just because glass is no longer recyclable.  To the contrary we should be demanding more glass containers.

Glass is inert. Plastic and plastic lined metal containers are not.

If anything we should be demanding more glass containers.

[stump]

Lets see, If I had a job that required me to spend 40 hours a week at and was knowledgable and qualified for a job that would require only to spend working 8 hours week  for about triple the pay Foote would be crazy for not throwing her hair band in the ring.,