Freedom From Information

[XLFD]

In the recent LDN article describing the Ludington City Council's confirmation of John Shay's deposit for a Freedom of Information Act requests  of Tom Rotta, the article noted that "questions about the issue e-mailed to Rotta were unanswered by today's deadline." 

 

I never got to see these questions, as I did not open my E-mails in the 18 hours he gave me to respond.  My E-mail server let's me know if someone on my contacts list has wrote me, I generally only check out all the rest of the garbage that accumulates there when someone does. 

 

My input probably wouldn't have changed the article's focus, and he hasn't indicated any interest in my side since I have contacted him.  His original questions, followed by what my answers would have been:

 

Why are you requesting information? 

 I run a local website that serves as a public watchdog for issues that the community and its visitors have an interest in.  The City unanimously approved $1.51 million in taxpayer dollars to effectively paint two water towers at least ten years before it needed to be, without mention of any competitive bids.  Ten years ago, this was done (and more) at a cost of less than $200,000-- Scottville did theirs this year for less than $50,000.  This is one of many anomalies the people have a valid interest in.  We attempt to gain information so that our points have some validity, and aren't just rumor.

 

What information are you requesting?

That information should be privileged between myself and the FOIA Coordinator (Shay), and the head of the public body who is handling the appeal (the city council).  If you wish to see the eventual synthesis of these requests, feel free to join the Ludington Torch and offer your opinion.  (Note: the information I requested was mostly brought up by CM Shay at the meeting, with his spin on them, the actual requests are here, and my latest three:   Outstanding FOIA requests.txt

 

What do you think about the proposed deposits?

If FOIA Coordinator Shay had specifically identified these costs in his initial reply to my requests (instead of sending me just one enigmatic form letter for four separate FOIA requests that tells me I owe him a large amount of money, and tells me the records don't exist) then the FOIA process would have been followed and I would have the option to appeal any I thought were unreasonable, or cost more than I wanted to pay.  As that didn't happen, FOIA Shay just went and wasted a lot more of everyone's time in his stonewalling.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

After I read the LDN Tuesday afternoon and noticed I had been contacted via E-Mail, I checked it out.  After a sarcastic 'thank you' reply the following exchange took place, when I thought about it later:

 

On Nov 10, 2010, at 2:00 AM, Tom Rotta wrote:

Who or where did you get my E-mail address from?
_______________________________________________

From: Kevin Braciszeski a href="mailto:[e-mail]">[e-mail]>
Sent: Wed, November 10, 2010 10:13:14 AM
Subject: Re: Quick Question

 

a copy of a letter you sent the city.
_______________________________________________

On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Tom Rotta wrote:

OK... did you request this letter through an FOIA, or did the City Manager or other city official freely give it to you?  If the former, could you present your written request to me?  If the latter, could you explain the circumstances?  Thank you.
________________________________________________

From: Kevin Braciszeski a href="mailto:[e-mail]">[e-mail]>
Sent: Wed, November 10, 2010 2:23:08 PM
Subject: Re: Quick Question

 

The  city provides the newspaper with a copy of the agenda material council members receive before council meetings.
________________________________________________

On Nov 10, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Tom Rotta wrote:

Could you provide me with a copy of those materials or at least a summary of what they included?  I could FOIA the City again, to get this information but I only want to send one request out instead of 3 and see the information this year, LOL.
_________________________________________________

November 10, 2010 4:17:33 PMRe: Quick Question
From: Kevin Braciszeski a href="mailto:[e-mail]">[e-mail]>

I spoke to my editor about your request and he said we don't give our information out, except in stories.
__________________________________________________

Wed, November 10, 2010 10:15:49 PMRe: Quick Question

 

Now do you understand what private citizens have to go through to get information that should be readily available from their own City's government?  They have strict rules to follow, you don't.
 
  You could have wrote a great story about why a government charges $900 to inspect the Building Inspector's annual building permit report for the last few years.  Looks like I had to pay a Building Inspector's pay for over a week, because their records from the 1990s were incomplete.  Something I found out on the third letter in to them.
 
Serve the citizens not the government.  Peace out.

 

_______________________________________________

 

 

The City of Ludington has no problems giving out a citizen's own personal, private information, but does have problems giving out publicly available information any citizen should be able to acquire.  A bit out of whack?  You decide.

 

 

 

 

[Edie Lindsey]

X,
Shouldn't they have closed the meeting before getting personal with you and Xed out your name on the materials they gave out? Your requests and your past outlaw bicycling behavior should not have been aired, and it makes me bite at my bit at how they actually let this moron at the helm of our city roll over the rights of the people.

On the bright side, I am glad they published your requests, in that it shows just how petty and miserable a City Government we have here. Few, if any, are for records that are 'vague' or should be hard to find, that is, if we had a well-organized city government.

[XLFD]

The article shows I had 10 requests where I only had nine, but the FOIAC/CM Shay decided to group them together into two requests and charge me $367.25. I didn't have any of my requests fulfilled because of his unlawful rearranging, whereas, by City policy, I should have got at least six fulfilled. He was able to present my requests to the council differently than how I requested them. Apparently he did this to prove some point of his, but he effectively made a false representation at a public meeting. That is just one more serious breach of ethical conduct by the CM.

It may boost his ego to say I was cited for failing to stop at a stop sign (without mentioning I was on a bicycle or that the stop sign was illegally placed, and not backed by a traffic control order-- both problems of city/police administration and much more serious than my 'offense') and insinuate my requests are not worth wasting time over. But once again, he neglects to consider what I was actually appealing, and the Council got his edited defense of his actions and the point of the appeal. The records of the city, if you believe this man, are in terrible disorder.

[AQUAMAN]

The Disorder here is with the CM Shay, not the citizens that want and ask for FOIA information, imho. His ducking/misinformation/out-right lying about issues has long since been noted, and duly recorded! It's a typical and usual response that is nothing short of hypocritical and condescending of the voters and public at large. Cause he is a POWER and BIG SHOT to be dealt with. Something that definitely needs to get changed, when the public wakes up, and finally atones it's own actions to force big city peeps like this out, not just out of office, out of town, forever! JMO and I would hope of anyone caring about the progress and positive future of Ludville!

[XLFD]

I have created a new form letter for my FOIA requests from the city. As they like to ignore certain parts of the law, I have stressed these parts to be followed forthwith. I have also put each request on its own separate sheet of paper, so they are less likely to group them together illegally again, particularly when it stresses that it is one and only one request. I'll deliver another batch to them on Monday, which includes the nine I just got dismissed as if it were one request.

[Edie Lindsey]

If you don't mind, could you post that form letter and take your personal stuff out? After all, as your on-line wife I should already know that and whether you do boxers or briefs. ROFL. I've wanted to find out something through an FOIA request but don't know how to do it.

[AQUAMAN]

Hmmm, what did I miss? You say now the City dismissed your 9 FOIA requests? I thought they approved them for a fee of $184 as partial cost to do. I'm getting confused now.

[XLFD]

They lumped my nine (ten, if you read the LDN) separate FOIA requests into two mostly unrelated requests. Each request should have been dealt with separately, and I believe each would have been under $100 each to look up laborwise, most well under. Under the terms of the FOIA, this is illegal to do, and each should have been determined separately, if they went over that $100 of labor benchmark.

Here's the minutes as posted by the City Clerk. Once again my position is being mis interpretted, and note the City Attorney, the City Manager, and the councilors once again made no reference to the policies of the city or the FOIA law in reaching a determination. There is a reason for this. The FOIA law was not followed.

I also am somewhat disturbed by what they call my basis for the appeal. The City A&M simplify it to saying that I "do not want to pay for these documents and he does not like the fact that the city did not specify in the city's response the unusual nature of the costs to the city". A reading of my appeal to the councilors and the CM, never uses this language, or inference, just states what the law says, and how they did not even come close to following it.

[charlemagnetism]

thats your problem guvner you expect these crooks to follow the law. these guys just dont want to be bothered with that. you should be able to look at all the stuff you asked for or told they do not have that record. dont they have to tell you what they charge before you by the free info. come on.

[AQUAMAN]

Guvner? You're a character Charlie! I like what Pete had to say in defense of the FOI process and our freedoms to it. He would be a good one to get council and advice from in advance before diving into shallow waters perhaps, if he agrees. Question? Should we start a FOIAX fund with donations for the $180 now? Rolls Eyes .....................ahhh..... for freedoms gone awry these days.