I have had Eve Alone working on getting this policy and the public records available that led to the making of it.  Due to this policy, I was served a Letter of Trespass for the City Hall/Police Department which disallows me from stepping foot on that property without any reason other than some unknown City worker feeling threatened and intimidated by me.  About a month after that, I am still in the dark about the whys, but the document also says I would be arrested and charged with a misdemeanor if I do so, and is available on the "XLFD:  Banned from City Hall" thread.

Although Eve got nowhere with her request, being charged (in a manner against the City of Ludington's own FOIA policy) nearly $40 to be able to view the records. I was able to weasel a copy of just the policy as it was submitted to the City Council from an unexpected ally.   I would think the City Manager and Attorney would be proud of their creation, being that they devised this policy to nullify my ability to inspect public records at the City Hall, but apparently they would rather keep the details of this policy a secret among certain City Employees.  I swear I have done nothing threatening other than reveal some questionable practices by local politicos on this watchblog, but please comment on this policy if you would, and whether it has a place in a free society when it could be misused so easily.

Workplace Safety Policy

Views: 122

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Boy, looks like Shay and Wilson went to an awful lot of trouble and time consumption on the taxpayers monies to put this extravagant and needless policy and provisions for enforcement into being............WOW. All for one person that FOIA's them, very silly and immature. Well, here's what I would do: 1) make a written appeal to the city attorney, seems there is no time limit mentioned, so, wth. 2) request a copy of the police report on same lot issued, 3) request copy of the written complaint by the employee claiming harassment. All should be available to you, no charge, or minimum charge. Reason, you need the information for your appeal to determine whom your accusers are, that's the law, they can't argue with that, or can they? Do #2 & 3 first, then proceed to #1 last with your documents. 4) I would also include a few sworn statements to include with the other documents. Make sure the witnesses with you sign and notarize the documents before submission to city attorney for appeal, homework......lol.

Thanks for the hints, I may follow any or all of them.  Spring breaks and stinky weather will sideline me for the most part from this forum up through the end of next week.  I was a bit distressed to find no recourse for someone who could arbitrarily be given a LOT provided in the LOT, and the only person I can appeal to is a non-governmental independent contractor from Manistee (Ludington's City Attorney Richard Wilson), who penned this document.  How self-serving can you get? 

My letter to the IRS about his employment status being incorrect probably doesn't give me much pull with him in the future, LOL.

In my opinion this is unconstitutional. It is not an ordinance, law or statute. It is a "City Policy". I'm suprised you haven't challenged it by going down to City Hall and hanging out. The City cannot take away your rights without due process and from what I've seen there has been none. Every citizen of Ludington should be outraged at the audacity of a non elected official who is riding rough shod over them by taking away their rights. By using this "City Policy" and the new "FOIA Policy" the powers to be can litterly cancel the peoples rights to know what is going on in the halls of Ludingtons Government. This is giving Ludington a bad name.
Right RJE, but, since when have the authorities in recent Ludington power been afraid of lawsuits???, (past CM's and BI's), a bad name, (past CM's and Marina Mgrs.),  wrongful deaths, (MCSD, Lifeguards), and the list is endless. When you can get away with running roughshod over any and all citizens, and the LDN backs it up with more rhetoric and propaganda, how is any well-meaning citizen supposed to come forward for justice? The object is to keep the public scared like baby rabbits, and that, is just the scenario of recent, and for too long already. JMO
Another reason this situation is so fishy is that XLFD is banned from being anywhere in City Hall. You would think that he would only be banned from being in the office of  the person claiming to have been threatened and then only if that person was in that office on any particular day. But to be banned from the entire City Hall and police dept. all the time.  And why does XLFD have to prove he's innocent. Doesn't the Government have to prove he is guilty before he is judged and condemned to banishment. Come on Shay your, commie tail is showing. I pity the next town that gets his services.

More good points, RJE.  If Ms. Venzke and/or Mr. Tykoski were the "intimidated" parties, as one might assess through their own LOT of their house (where I haven't been), I have never seen the former in person at LCH or elsewhere, and have not seen the latter since my LFD days.  I have not corresponded directly with any of them, with the exception of 'CC'ing an FOIA request to Ms. Venzke (sent to FOIAC Shay) that had requested DDA public records.  No indirect contact or threats either.

Though these LOT's are issued to certain people each year for causing problems at various residences and businesses, how many others have you seen in the paper, with FOIA requests and 3-year old bicycle traffic infractions to back it up, LOL. 

Innocent until proven guilty only works for you if you work for the government around here.   And even then... 


I say appeal the darn thing, but put your ducks in order as exampled above properly. You are entitled by law to know whom your accusers are. Wonder whom is the arbitrator/final judge on such matters?, not CA Wilson I would presume, he's got an obvious conflict of interest when he drew up this new policy to start with on you in particular. It should be an outside third party/agency with no ties to government to be fair, but will it? Doubtfully, and regrettably. Bottom line is to deter and distract you with more legal expenses and wasted time away from investigating the local corruption details that may or may not be FOIA proven, sad. The best way to protect themselves from outsiders stepping on their toes is to ban you, and anyone else alike, entirely from the scene of evidence.

The way I see it there are 2 scenarios that could be taking place. First. If Shay is acting on his own and the Mayor and Councillors are not keeping up with what he is doing then shame on them for being negligent in performing one of thier major duties, oversight. They must receive a failing grade for not monitoring an unelected officials dealings and responses to the public. Secondly. If the Councillors and Mayor are aware of what he is doing then Ludingtons citizens are in real trouble because Shay is operating with full knowledge of the Council and Mayor in such a way as to deny citizens rights of access to information, due process in implementing policies and procedures, failing to communicate and disseminate public information and shamelessly ignoring the Consitutional rights of every citizen of Ludington. Finally, where the hell is the public and LDN regarding these matters? What Shay is doing is not a silly or minor unintentional infringement of citizens rights but a grossely and purposely thought out plan to stifle the publics basic freedoms which all the people of Ludington should be fighting to preserve


© 2023   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service