When I was growing up, my Mother repeated lots of sayings that I heard over and over again. Such as:
It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.-- Mark Twain
I am sure you are all familiar with the 'clean underwear' one, though I am not sure who that is attributed to.
Another one I like is: If you keep your mouth shut, you will never put your foot in it. -- Austin O'Malley
My favorite when I was on the Board was: Give someone enough rope and they will hang themselves.
If there was going to be a guidebook for politicians, I would expect to see all of these sayings in it. Unfortunately, a lot of politicians probably would not read it. Furthermore, they become so enchanted with themselves that they think everything they say is wise beyond belief and that the masses will fall at their feet praising their profound wisdom.
How else to explain the comment in today's Oakland Press by the West Bloomfield Supervisor? She states "I have a tough time doing my job when the courts are broken."
Honey, you lost. More than once on more than one issue. And now you want to take on the Circuit Court? You want to waste taxpayer dollars on an appeal? How does that benefit the taxpayers of West Bloomfield?
In an online article for the West Bloomfield Patch she says "I need to know what powers the supervisor has, if any. Right now, it isn't very much, yet I am held accountable and responsible."
Well, former supervisors did not seem to have an issue with this, but I have a few thoughts. How about not hiring a budget director and doing it yourself. THAT is one of your statutory duties. Alas, you are not qualified to be an assessor, another statutory duty. Could you be the Personnel Director? Another statutory duty.
Gee, it seems that your job is to be accountable and responsible for those people actually performing the duties you are not able to perform. Oh, and run the Board meetings. And for that you make a damn good salary. All from taxpayer dollars. Otherwise, what I am hearing you say is that you do nothing.
Showing posts with label west bloomfield. Show all posts
Showing posts with label west bloomfield. Show all posts
Better than Vicodin
Yesterday it was Monica Conyers giving me a good laugh. Today it is Judge Rudy Nichols making me smile. His decision in Ureste vs Township of West Bloomfield is better than vicodin. I feel so good my back pain is inconsequential.
The Oakland County Judge previously ruled against plaintiffs Ureste and Kaplan regarding the appointment of a police chief, administrative tasks of negotiating a collective bargaining agreement, and authority to terminate employees without Board approval. The issue of trustee compensation was to be decided in the future.
Well, the future is today. Judge Nichols ruled that, as stated in MCL 42.6, A trustee may receive ... a sum per meeting of the board actually attended by him, as established by the township board to be paid upon authorization of the township board.
In the ruling: The Court finds this statute discretionary, meaning that a Trustee may accept, or may decline, a sum per meeting at the Trustee's prerogative. That is, it is the Trustee's decision, by a plain reading of the statute, to accept or reject the sums referenced in MCL 42.6.
Hooray for Larry Brown. Is the Court's decision clear enough? Can Ureste and Kaplan understand this without twisting it around? Will the public be subject to another of their 'guest opinions' explaining how they are really correct and the Judge is wrong?
I have seen a lot of decisions in my twenty some years in office. A judge once told our attorney that we needed to come to an agreement with the plaintiff in a case because we might not like what the judge decided. We found common ground.
The last paragraph of today's decision is quite interesting:
At this point, any issues that remain appear to be political in nature, not legal. That is, the litigants (Ureste and Kaplan) have to resolve their differences by majority rule or seek redress by or from the State Legislature. They can, of course, take an appeal, but in all likelihood this Court expects that it would be a waste of time and money.
I do not think I have ever seen anything like that admonishment in a case before, though I will admit my memory is not what it used to be. I do know this: I can still recognize politicians who are more interested in furthering and promoting themselves than doing what is in the best interests of the citizens. We citizens and taxpayers had to pay the bill to fight these lawsuits, just because the egos of these two are so big they can't stand to be on the losing end of any decision. (Who do you think is behind the recall effort stemming from the garbage contract?)
I suggest they start the next Board meeting with an apology to the taxpayers. Then, if these two do not like being in the minority, I have a solution: RESIGN! Either that or be thrown out of office in 2012.
The Oakland County Judge previously ruled against plaintiffs Ureste and Kaplan regarding the appointment of a police chief, administrative tasks of negotiating a collective bargaining agreement, and authority to terminate employees without Board approval. The issue of trustee compensation was to be decided in the future.
Well, the future is today. Judge Nichols ruled that, as stated in MCL 42.6, A trustee may receive ... a sum per meeting of the board actually attended by him, as established by the township board to be paid upon authorization of the township board.
In the ruling: The Court finds this statute discretionary, meaning that a Trustee may accept, or may decline, a sum per meeting at the Trustee's prerogative. That is, it is the Trustee's decision, by a plain reading of the statute, to accept or reject the sums referenced in MCL 42.6.
Hooray for Larry Brown. Is the Court's decision clear enough? Can Ureste and Kaplan understand this without twisting it around? Will the public be subject to another of their 'guest opinions' explaining how they are really correct and the Judge is wrong?
I have seen a lot of decisions in my twenty some years in office. A judge once told our attorney that we needed to come to an agreement with the plaintiff in a case because we might not like what the judge decided. We found common ground.
The last paragraph of today's decision is quite interesting:
At this point, any issues that remain appear to be political in nature, not legal. That is, the litigants (Ureste and Kaplan) have to resolve their differences by majority rule or seek redress by or from the State Legislature. They can, of course, take an appeal, but in all likelihood this Court expects that it would be a waste of time and money.
I do not think I have ever seen anything like that admonishment in a case before, though I will admit my memory is not what it used to be. I do know this: I can still recognize politicians who are more interested in furthering and promoting themselves than doing what is in the best interests of the citizens. We citizens and taxpayers had to pay the bill to fight these lawsuits, just because the egos of these two are so big they can't stand to be on the losing end of any decision. (Who do you think is behind the recall effort stemming from the garbage contract?)
I suggest they start the next Board meeting with an apology to the taxpayers. Then, if these two do not like being in the minority, I have a solution: RESIGN! Either that or be thrown out of office in 2012.
I Love a Good Battle
The gloves are on. Or is it off? I'm never sure.
Anyway, I got blasted in a guest opinion in today's Oakland Press. I got my name mentioned seven times in the article. SEVEN. I love it. Every politician knows it is all about name recognition. Six months after an incident, most folks remember your name but can't remember why.
So some guy in West Bloomfield, who must have been paid to write the opinion, is praising the Supervisor. (Notice that I rarely mention someone's name. Why give them free press?) Unfortunately, he can't read the statute any better than she can. Here is the state statute:
42.12 Township police force; establishment; township marshal, appointment; rules; policemen, powers and duties.
Sec. 12.
The township board in each charter township may provide for and establish a police force and authorize the supervisor, or the township superintendent if one has been appointed, to appoint, subject to the approval of the said board, a township marshal and such other policemen and watchmen as may be required to protect property and preserve the public welfare and safety in that portion of the township not included within the corporate limits of any village or villages located wholly or in part within the township. No police officer of any such village shall be ineligible for appointment as a member of the township police force, except that no village police officer shall serve as township marshal. The township board shall make all necessary rules for the government of the township police force and its members and shall prescribe the powers and duties of policemen and watchmen, and may invest them with such authority as may be necessary for the preservation of quiet and order and the protection of persons and property within that part of the township not located within the corporate limits of any village.
Now, do you see where it 'requires that the supervisor recommend or nominate a candidate for police chief' as the writer states? It is getting ridiculous to keep arguing about something which a judge has already ruled on. And the Supervisor lost!!!
Now, if the point of the opinion was to praise the Supervisor and her accomplishments, the writer could have easily done that. He criticizes me for not acknowledging them. Well, sir, that was not the point of my opinion.
He goes on to say that the Supervisor has been battling me and the former Supervisor. Gee, I was not aware of that. What are we battling about? He says that I am jealous of her? Jealous of what? I had a very successful career for over twenty years and left on my own terms.
I've lived in this community for 39 years and have a lot invested here. And I have a right to state my opinion. If you don't like it, state your own. But there is no need to attack me directly. Unless, of course, you want to keep my name in print for when I run for office in 2012. Be my guest. I'll see you at the polls.
Anyway, I got blasted in a guest opinion in today's Oakland Press. I got my name mentioned seven times in the article. SEVEN. I love it. Every politician knows it is all about name recognition. Six months after an incident, most folks remember your name but can't remember why.
So some guy in West Bloomfield, who must have been paid to write the opinion, is praising the Supervisor. (Notice that I rarely mention someone's name. Why give them free press?) Unfortunately, he can't read the statute any better than she can. Here is the state statute:
42.12 Township police force; establishment; township marshal, appointment; rules; policemen, powers and duties.
Sec. 12.
The township board in each charter township may provide for and establish a police force and authorize the supervisor, or the township superintendent if one has been appointed, to appoint, subject to the approval of the said board, a township marshal and such other policemen and watchmen as may be required to protect property and preserve the public welfare and safety in that portion of the township not included within the corporate limits of any village or villages located wholly or in part within the township. No police officer of any such village shall be ineligible for appointment as a member of the township police force, except that no village police officer shall serve as township marshal. The township board shall make all necessary rules for the government of the township police force and its members and shall prescribe the powers and duties of policemen and watchmen, and may invest them with such authority as may be necessary for the preservation of quiet and order and the protection of persons and property within that part of the township not located within the corporate limits of any village.
Now, do you see where it 'requires that the supervisor recommend or nominate a candidate for police chief' as the writer states? It is getting ridiculous to keep arguing about something which a judge has already ruled on. And the Supervisor lost!!!
Now, if the point of the opinion was to praise the Supervisor and her accomplishments, the writer could have easily done that. He criticizes me for not acknowledging them. Well, sir, that was not the point of my opinion.
He goes on to say that the Supervisor has been battling me and the former Supervisor. Gee, I was not aware of that. What are we battling about? He says that I am jealous of her? Jealous of what? I had a very successful career for over twenty years and left on my own terms.
I've lived in this community for 39 years and have a lot invested here. And I have a right to state my opinion. If you don't like it, state your own. But there is no need to attack me directly. Unless, of course, you want to keep my name in print for when I run for office in 2012. Be my guest. I'll see you at the polls.
What to Say?
I had a phone call yesterday from someone who was looking at the employment postings for West Bloomfield. Currently, they are looking for a full-time Finance Director and a part-time Budget Director. The question I was asked was, 'Why are these two separate positions?' Why Indeed!
Blame it on Township laws to start with. As I stated in an earlier post, the Clerk is responsible for accounting functions, while the Supervisor is in charge of preparing the budget. The person formerly was called just 'budget director' and reported to the Supervisor. Yet, he was still involved to some extent in the accounting functions.
Hiring someone into one position with two masters who do not get along is a recipe for disaster. It was hard enough when I was there. Every time I made a request to the budget director for information, he had to clear it with the Supervisor first. And you are right if you are thinking that the Supervisor and I did not have a 'working relationship'.
Township laws are very out-dated. For that matter, so is township government, IMHO.
As to the question of actually working in West Bloomfield, I suggested they go online and view the recent meetings, read the minutes, or attend a meeting in person. They said they had read some of my blog entries about the township.
Back when I was on the Board, we were interviewing for a department head position. I was embarrassed by the behavior of some trustees when interviewing potential candidates. One candidate left the interview and told an employee in the hall that we could not pay them enough to work for the 'crazy Board'. Yikes.
All I can say is 'candidate beware'. And if you are looking for a finance position, I heard Pontiac is hiring.
Blame it on Township laws to start with. As I stated in an earlier post, the Clerk is responsible for accounting functions, while the Supervisor is in charge of preparing the budget. The person formerly was called just 'budget director' and reported to the Supervisor. Yet, he was still involved to some extent in the accounting functions.
Hiring someone into one position with two masters who do not get along is a recipe for disaster. It was hard enough when I was there. Every time I made a request to the budget director for information, he had to clear it with the Supervisor first. And you are right if you are thinking that the Supervisor and I did not have a 'working relationship'.
Township laws are very out-dated. For that matter, so is township government, IMHO.
As to the question of actually working in West Bloomfield, I suggested they go online and view the recent meetings, read the minutes, or attend a meeting in person. They said they had read some of my blog entries about the township.
Back when I was on the Board, we were interviewing for a department head position. I was embarrassed by the behavior of some trustees when interviewing potential candidates. One candidate left the interview and told an employee in the hall that we could not pay them enough to work for the 'crazy Board'. Yikes.
All I can say is 'candidate beware'. And if you are looking for a finance position, I heard Pontiac is hiring.
Guess No One wants to follow My Suggestion
Yesterday, I blogged about folks writing and saying things without knowing all the facts. Today, I sit down with my coffee to read my local paper and there is a letter from an attorney in West Bloomfield berating the four sensible members of the Township Board.
Among the things he says is that the Clerk may be in violation of the Hatch Act of 1939 for sending out press releases. Really? The Act is a Federal Law whose main provision is to prohibit Federal civil servants from engaging in partisan political activity. The Hatch Act also applies by extension to certain employees of state and local governments whose positions are primarily paid for by federal funds.
The operative word here is 'Federal Funds'. Since when is the Clerk's salary, or her Deputy's, paid for with Federal dollars? The only Federal dollars I am aware of are those grants received for Homeland Security after 9/11.
Anyway, how is sending out a press release telling residents how much a lawsuit is costing us a partisan political activity? They are ALL DEMOCRATS!!!
The writer then goes on to say that the Judge has made a decision in favor of the Supervisor and against trustees, who are sending their money to a Township Benevolent Fund to help township residents in need of assistance, instead of filling the pockets of themselves and the IRS. As of last week, I was still not aware that a decision has been made.
I googled this guy. (Sometimes I wonder how I ever got along without 'google'.) The only attorney I could find with his name is a divorce attorney in Sterling Heights. AHA. Macomb County. Tells me a lot.
Among the things he says is that the Clerk may be in violation of the Hatch Act of 1939 for sending out press releases. Really? The Act is a Federal Law whose main provision is to prohibit Federal civil servants from engaging in partisan political activity. The Hatch Act also applies by extension to certain employees of state and local governments whose positions are primarily paid for by federal funds.
The operative word here is 'Federal Funds'. Since when is the Clerk's salary, or her Deputy's, paid for with Federal dollars? The only Federal dollars I am aware of are those grants received for Homeland Security after 9/11.
Anyway, how is sending out a press release telling residents how much a lawsuit is costing us a partisan political activity? They are ALL DEMOCRATS!!!
The writer then goes on to say that the Judge has made a decision in favor of the Supervisor and against trustees, who are sending their money to a Township Benevolent Fund to help township residents in need of assistance, instead of filling the pockets of themselves and the IRS. As of last week, I was still not aware that a decision has been made.
I googled this guy. (Sometimes I wonder how I ever got along without 'google'.) The only attorney I could find with his name is a divorce attorney in Sterling Heights. AHA. Macomb County. Tells me a lot.
A Suggestion
The West Bloomfield Board made it into the papers again this morning. Above the fold on the front page. Before we have any more letters to the editor, pronouncements at Board meetings, or lawsuits, let's have all citizens of the community, including the Board members and other onlookers, read the following documents and demonstrate that they fully understand what they mean.
Accounting Procedures Manual
Uniform Budget Act
Charter Township Act
It seems that everyone is an expert. Charter Townships do not get to make their own rules and neither do their citizens. That's what all these laws and established procedures are for.
I was on the committee that wrote this latest Accounting Manual and I would hate to think we wrote it only for the benefit of our committee and to fulfill a requirement in the law.
Accounting Procedures Manual
Uniform Budget Act
Charter Township Act
It seems that everyone is an expert. Charter Townships do not get to make their own rules and neither do their citizens. That's what all these laws and established procedures are for.
I was on the committee that wrote this latest Accounting Manual and I would hate to think we wrote it only for the benefit of our committee and to fulfill a requirement in the law.
Where's My Pen?
This morning's Oakland Press has a story about missing equipment in Independence Township. Seems that a tractor and an aerator have gone missing. The story reminded me of 'things that went missing' when I was at West Bloomfield.
I had a practice of leaving my very nice Cross pen on my desktop each night when I left for home. It was always right there when I came in the next morning so I could write up all of my bank transfers and investments.
One morning I sat at my desk, went to grab the pen, and it was GONE. I looked everywhere. I even asked my counter staff up in the front of the office to look and see if I had left it on someone else's desk. No luck.
Being more than a little upset (read loud), other co-workers heard me. They then informed me that they too had items missing. One was missing a pair of ladies slacks that were on a coat rack in the hall. The other was missing her sports bra which was in her gym bag in her office.
I put a call in to the person in charge of the outside cleaning crew (my suspicious nature arises) at Town Hall. We did a little investigating (too many crime shows) and found out that other departments also had problems. A digital camera, a stepladder, and some make-up were also missing.
At this point we involved the Police Department. And we fired the cleaning company.
We came up with some interesting scenarios for someone who steals a ladder, camera, ladies clothes and make-up, and a pen. You are free to come up with your own stories.
As for Independence, you have to admit that a tractor is a little big to stuff in your pocket or make a quick getaway in.
I had a practice of leaving my very nice Cross pen on my desktop each night when I left for home. It was always right there when I came in the next morning so I could write up all of my bank transfers and investments.
One morning I sat at my desk, went to grab the pen, and it was GONE. I looked everywhere. I even asked my counter staff up in the front of the office to look and see if I had left it on someone else's desk. No luck.
Being more than a little upset (read loud), other co-workers heard me. They then informed me that they too had items missing. One was missing a pair of ladies slacks that were on a coat rack in the hall. The other was missing her sports bra which was in her gym bag in her office.
I put a call in to the person in charge of the outside cleaning crew (my suspicious nature arises) at Town Hall. We did a little investigating (too many crime shows) and found out that other departments also had problems. A digital camera, a stepladder, and some make-up were also missing.
At this point we involved the Police Department. And we fired the cleaning company.
We came up with some interesting scenarios for someone who steals a ladder, camera, ladies clothes and make-up, and a pen. You are free to come up with your own stories.
As for Independence, you have to admit that a tractor is a little big to stuff in your pocket or make a quick getaway in.
Talk about Unnecessary
It's been a long morning. Up at six am, I couldn't get my newspaper because of the ice in my driveway. So, I spent the time working on my power point slide presentation on fiscal stress that is due by Monday. (I'll be giving this talk in Lansing on March 25.)
It was almost noon by the time I got the Oakland Press out of my box. I should have left it there. Or at least not read the Opinion Page.
There in black and white is another guest opinion from two West Bloomfield officials. Guess who. The caption is 'Attacks from township clerk unnecessary'. Attacks? What attacks? I haven't seen anything in the newspaper. Wait. Didn't I see something similar awhile back? Why, yes I did.
The opinion starts out with the statement 'We are not conflict-oriented..' Really? Could have fooled me. Why write a letter for something I have heard nothing about?
The two are complaining about a recent press release from the Township Clerk. Well, I wonder how many residents have seen it. Not me. When I was Treasurer, I also sent letters to the editor and press releases, when necessary. They were not always printed or acted upon. So, the public knew nothing about them.
The article goes on to say that the Circuit Court Judge has 'seemingly...agreed with us...' The issue referred to is the compensation of a trustee and the Judge has not made any decision. If I were the Judge, I'd be more than a little peeved that they had the nerve to put words in my mouth.
They then rehash the three issues they lost on in the Court already and assert their opinion that they are still right and the Court is wrong, so to speak.
As to the position of a new Finance Director, if the position existed, the person would, under Township State law, report to the Clerk. MCL Section 41.65 states:
My opinion? This entire 'guest opinion' was unnecessary. It only serves to cause more dissension and get their pictures in the newspaper, yet again.
It was almost noon by the time I got the Oakland Press out of my box. I should have left it there. Or at least not read the Opinion Page.
There in black and white is another guest opinion from two West Bloomfield officials. Guess who. The caption is 'Attacks from township clerk unnecessary'. Attacks? What attacks? I haven't seen anything in the newspaper. Wait. Didn't I see something similar awhile back? Why, yes I did.
The opinion starts out with the statement 'We are not conflict-oriented..' Really? Could have fooled me. Why write a letter for something I have heard nothing about?
The two are complaining about a recent press release from the Township Clerk. Well, I wonder how many residents have seen it. Not me. When I was Treasurer, I also sent letters to the editor and press releases, when necessary. They were not always printed or acted upon. So, the public knew nothing about them.
The article goes on to say that the Circuit Court Judge has 'seemingly...agreed with us...' The issue referred to is the compensation of a trustee and the Judge has not made any decision. If I were the Judge, I'd be more than a little peeved that they had the nerve to put words in my mouth.
They then rehash the three issues they lost on in the Court already and assert their opinion that they are still right and the Court is wrong, so to speak.
As to the position of a new Finance Director, if the position existed, the person would, under Township State law, report to the Clerk. MCL Section 41.65 states:
The township clerk shall be responsible for the detailed accounting records of the township utilizing the uniform chart of accounts prescribed by the state treasurer. The township clerk shall prepare and maintain the journals and ledgers necessary to reflect the assets, liabilities, fund equities, revenues, and expenditures for each fund of the township.The job of the Supervisor is to prepare the budget, not run the finance department. They are two separate things. West Bloomfield never had a Finance Director, per se, in all the twenty years I was there (he was on sick leave and never came back). That was one of the reasons we later changed a job title of Assistant Finance Director to Budget Director.
My opinion? This entire 'guest opinion' was unnecessary. It only serves to cause more dissension and get their pictures in the newspaper, yet again.
My Hat's Off - or On
I have a lot of hats. I don't work or go to fancy lunches, so most of them, well all of them, sit in their boxes in my closet. I used to wear them to the symphony, but... Some I have had for a very long time, as evidenced by the boxes.
Crowley's closed its downtown store in 1977 and that was the only one I ever shopped in. Others bear the names J.L. Hudson and Hudson's. The fanciest boxes have the letter J imprinted in continuous scroll work for Jacobsen's.
I no longer buy hats other than to garden or ones that flatten for travel. But next Sunday the library is having a celebration of its National Medal and I thought it might be fun to dust one off and put it on. Problem is, I can't decide which one to wear. Some are definitely off the list because of the winter season. But there are three I am considering.
Here are my choices:
I'll take all suggestions. Hopefully, the hat will look better on me than on the lamp shade.
Crowley's closed its downtown store in 1977 and that was the only one I ever shopped in. Others bear the names J.L. Hudson and Hudson's. The fanciest boxes have the letter J imprinted in continuous scroll work for Jacobsen's.
I no longer buy hats other than to garden or ones that flatten for travel. But next Sunday the library is having a celebration of its National Medal and I thought it might be fun to dust one off and put it on. Problem is, I can't decide which one to wear. Some are definitely off the list because of the winter season. But there are three I am considering.
Here are my choices:
Designed by Diahann Carroll
Ruth Alan Designs
Designed by Kokin
I'll take all suggestions. Hopefully, the hat will look better on me than on the lamp shade.
Making one Think
Four years ago today, I was here at home with all of my family and friends. We were eating take-out food, something that doesn't happen too often at my house. The reason was simply that I was out of commission and out of the kitchen.
The day before, February 22, 2007, I slipped on the floor at Town Hall and suffered a tri-maleolar fracture of my left leg. In simple English, I fractured the tibia, fibula and ankle bones. A steel plate and nine screws were used to repair my leg. While in the cast, I broke a bone in my other foot. I was out of work until June. I was in physical therapy for several months and then in April 2008 I had another surgery to remove all the hardware and then another round of physical therapy.
It was during that time at home that I fully realized how much stress I was under at work. While I was connected to the Town Hall computers from home and did my daily work, I totally ignored what transpired at the Board level. Never watched a meeting, never read my packet, never asked questions. I was cool. I also decided that I no longer wanted that level of stress in my life and made a decision not to run for election in 2008.
I thought of all of that again this past week after I learned that another of my former co-workers at Town Hall had passed away. It was the third person to die within less than two years and all were in their mid-50's.
The obituary written in the Oakland Press for the Budget Director, Steve Brideau, quotes his wife as saying he was under stress. I do not doubt that at all. He had a stressful job in a very stressful time.
I have often referred to Town Hall as being 'toxic'. Those who are there or are familiar with the situation know exactly what I am talking about and I feel sad knowing that it exists. My thoughts are often with them.
The day before, February 22, 2007, I slipped on the floor at Town Hall and suffered a tri-maleolar fracture of my left leg. In simple English, I fractured the tibia, fibula and ankle bones. A steel plate and nine screws were used to repair my leg. While in the cast, I broke a bone in my other foot. I was out of work until June. I was in physical therapy for several months and then in April 2008 I had another surgery to remove all the hardware and then another round of physical therapy.
It was during that time at home that I fully realized how much stress I was under at work. While I was connected to the Town Hall computers from home and did my daily work, I totally ignored what transpired at the Board level. Never watched a meeting, never read my packet, never asked questions. I was cool. I also decided that I no longer wanted that level of stress in my life and made a decision not to run for election in 2008.
I thought of all of that again this past week after I learned that another of my former co-workers at Town Hall had passed away. It was the third person to die within less than two years and all were in their mid-50's.
The obituary written in the Oakland Press for the Budget Director, Steve Brideau, quotes his wife as saying he was under stress. I do not doubt that at all. He had a stressful job in a very stressful time.
I have often referred to Town Hall as being 'toxic'. Those who are there or are familiar with the situation know exactly what I am talking about and I feel sad knowing that it exists. My thoughts are often with them.
Upscale-itis
It seems like the folks in Oakland Township have contracted the disease that has infected West Bloomfield Township for many years. It is called 'upscale-itis'. This disease affects politicians and the NIMBYs. Anything that even suggests we are not 'above the rest' of the populace causes fits of rhetoric at Township Board meetings with a subsequent rush to the attorneys. SUE the b--t--ds!
In Oakland Township the issue is the Rochester Cider Mill. The headline in today's Detroit Free Press reads: Cider Mill owner could be fined for selling Christmas trees. OMG.
As a former Township official, I know how all this occurs. The cider mill just does not fit the image of how we want our township to look. Cider Mills? How old-fashioned and totally low-end. It's like having big box stores in the local strip mall. No, no, no. C'mon. Franklin has a cider mill and they call themselves 'the town that time forgot'. None of that for us trendsetters.
For example, in West Bloomfield we do not allow drive-through restaurants. Of course not. All of our residents are dining at The Lark. No need to grab a coke on the go, let alone a burger. We only sit-down at cloth napkin restaurants. Give me a freakin' break.
Another thing we do not allow is multi-level parking structures. We carp about the coverage a homeowner is allowed for a patio on his property, then we tell hospitals and shopping centers to pave over everything to provide parking for their patrons. How does this help the environment? It doesn't, but it provides beautiful vistas when we drive by (that is how it was explained to me years ago by a planner). It also does not allow penetration of the water into the soil, but hey, it's more 'upscale', right?
As for the NIMBYs, many of these people move in 'after the fact' and then complain, much like the folks who move near an airport and then complain about the noise. Or buy a house near vacant property and then complain when the owner of said property wants to use it. Or behind a shopping center and complain about the trash pick-ups from dumpsters. Or the view of same. I could go on. I've seen and heard it all.
And people ask me why I retired from government. Huh!
In Oakland Township the issue is the Rochester Cider Mill. The headline in today's Detroit Free Press reads: Cider Mill owner could be fined for selling Christmas trees. OMG.
As a former Township official, I know how all this occurs. The cider mill just does not fit the image of how we want our township to look. Cider Mills? How old-fashioned and totally low-end. It's like having big box stores in the local strip mall. No, no, no. C'mon. Franklin has a cider mill and they call themselves 'the town that time forgot'. None of that for us trendsetters.
For example, in West Bloomfield we do not allow drive-through restaurants. Of course not. All of our residents are dining at The Lark. No need to grab a coke on the go, let alone a burger. We only sit-down at cloth napkin restaurants. Give me a freakin' break.
Another thing we do not allow is multi-level parking structures. We carp about the coverage a homeowner is allowed for a patio on his property, then we tell hospitals and shopping centers to pave over everything to provide parking for their patrons. How does this help the environment? It doesn't, but it provides beautiful vistas when we drive by (that is how it was explained to me years ago by a planner). It also does not allow penetration of the water into the soil, but hey, it's more 'upscale', right?
As for the NIMBYs, many of these people move in 'after the fact' and then complain, much like the folks who move near an airport and then complain about the noise. Or buy a house near vacant property and then complain when the owner of said property wants to use it. Or behind a shopping center and complain about the trash pick-ups from dumpsters. Or the view of same. I could go on. I've seen and heard it all.
And people ask me why I retired from government. Huh!
Get a Life, Lady
While meaning no disrespect to the elderly, the 83-year old woman initiating the recall drive against Trustee Larry Brown should get a life. Talk about being confused. My guess is that someone found the woman and put her up to this recall. Is she someone's aunt?
She is quoted in one paper as saying she wouldn't know Larry Brown "from a hole in the wall" prior to 2009. Now, maybe the lady moved into West Bloomfield in 2008, but Larry was up for election that year and he has been active in West Bloomfield for many years before that. I've known Larry all the way back to the early 1990s. Am I supposed to believe she is 'sleeping beauty' just waking up from a long nap?
Give me a break. The lady says that she got upset about the new waste hauler contract. Well, so did I, but it passed on a 5-2 vote. Done. Not Larry's fault.
Besides, she does not even mention that in her recall petition. She is complaining about a sewer contract that also passed on a 5-2 vote. I was at that meeting and heard the attorney tell the Board that they would lose a grant if they did not choose the low bidder and it did not matter if it was not an American company. If the lady is upset, maybe she should direct her anger at Washington DC.
As for the failed lawsuit, I think Larry should have continued and refiled against the Township. FOIA exists for a reason and denying access to public records is just plain wrong. And especially in light of the $1.8 million dollar settlement against our Police Department in another case.
She has also sent a letter to another paper complaining about the Clerk's choice of a Deputy. Well, he would not have been my choice, but that is strictly the Clerk's decision. The Deputy is there to carry out her statutory duties in her absence and is to be loyal to her. She can appoint and dismiss whomever she wants as many times as she wants. Why don't some of these griping people sit down and read the state statutes???
As for the stipend being deposited into the Water Benevolent Fund, that issue is still at the Circuit Court. Will she recall the Judge if she doesn't like his decision? Let's just hope that she is never in need of money to pay her water bill. She could be out on a corner collecting pennies instead of signatures.
She is quoted in one paper as saying she wouldn't know Larry Brown "from a hole in the wall" prior to 2009. Now, maybe the lady moved into West Bloomfield in 2008, but Larry was up for election that year and he has been active in West Bloomfield for many years before that. I've known Larry all the way back to the early 1990s. Am I supposed to believe she is 'sleeping beauty' just waking up from a long nap?
Give me a break. The lady says that she got upset about the new waste hauler contract. Well, so did I, but it passed on a 5-2 vote. Done. Not Larry's fault.
Besides, she does not even mention that in her recall petition. She is complaining about a sewer contract that also passed on a 5-2 vote. I was at that meeting and heard the attorney tell the Board that they would lose a grant if they did not choose the low bidder and it did not matter if it was not an American company. If the lady is upset, maybe she should direct her anger at Washington DC.
As for the failed lawsuit, I think Larry should have continued and refiled against the Township. FOIA exists for a reason and denying access to public records is just plain wrong. And especially in light of the $1.8 million dollar settlement against our Police Department in another case.
She has also sent a letter to another paper complaining about the Clerk's choice of a Deputy. Well, he would not have been my choice, but that is strictly the Clerk's decision. The Deputy is there to carry out her statutory duties in her absence and is to be loyal to her. She can appoint and dismiss whomever she wants as many times as she wants. Why don't some of these griping people sit down and read the state statutes???
As for the stipend being deposited into the Water Benevolent Fund, that issue is still at the Circuit Court. Will she recall the Judge if she doesn't like his decision? Let's just hope that she is never in need of money to pay her water bill. She could be out on a corner collecting pennies instead of signatures.
Public Employee Safety
Unless you've been living under a rock the last few weeks, you must be aware of the attacks on public employees and officials in the news. No, I am not referring to stories on their pay and benefits, but rather the physical attacks on their safety. First, the shootings in Arizona and now a brazen gunman in the City of Detroit.
Granted, these attacks are not new. One can name many public officials shot down by crazed assassins. And, when I worked at the old Detroit General Hospital, a disgruntled employee came into the building with a shotgun and killed an administrator. The end result of that incident was the issuance of employee IDs and the stationing of armed guards at the entrances.
When we were designing the new TownHall in West Bloomfield, my clerical staff asked that we not have bullet-proof glass installed at the counter. I agreed. The only change I asked for was that my vault be built of concrete blocks and not the dry-wall that was in the plans. (Go figure. Dry-wall and a steel door. You have to be a pretty stupid crook to fall for that ruse.)
Several years later, after threats were made to officials, a security system was implemented. IDs were issued to allow access to employee areas. No ID, no access. My deputy pointed out that if anyone really wanted to get to me, all they had to do was walk up to my corner office, which was all windows, and shoot. Well, thanks for that. Another employee pointed out that without the bullet-proof glass in place, one could hop over the counter. Well, that's what the panic buttons were for.
The underlying fact remains that no matter how safe we try to be, if the crazies want to get us they will. It doesn't matter if we are at work, at home, or out on the streets. There is no guaranteed safety. Even if the anti-gun lobby banned all personal guns, the bad guys will find a way to devise their own weapons.
It is a sad but true fact that we can never be completely safe, no matter what precautions we take. Let's just remember that we have public employees out there who live with that risk every day of their lives.
Granted, these attacks are not new. One can name many public officials shot down by crazed assassins. And, when I worked at the old Detroit General Hospital, a disgruntled employee came into the building with a shotgun and killed an administrator. The end result of that incident was the issuance of employee IDs and the stationing of armed guards at the entrances.
When we were designing the new TownHall in West Bloomfield, my clerical staff asked that we not have bullet-proof glass installed at the counter. I agreed. The only change I asked for was that my vault be built of concrete blocks and not the dry-wall that was in the plans. (Go figure. Dry-wall and a steel door. You have to be a pretty stupid crook to fall for that ruse.)
Several years later, after threats were made to officials, a security system was implemented. IDs were issued to allow access to employee areas. No ID, no access. My deputy pointed out that if anyone really wanted to get to me, all they had to do was walk up to my corner office, which was all windows, and shoot. Well, thanks for that. Another employee pointed out that without the bullet-proof glass in place, one could hop over the counter. Well, that's what the panic buttons were for.
The underlying fact remains that no matter how safe we try to be, if the crazies want to get us they will. It doesn't matter if we are at work, at home, or out on the streets. There is no guaranteed safety. Even if the anti-gun lobby banned all personal guns, the bad guys will find a way to devise their own weapons.
It is a sad but true fact that we can never be completely safe, no matter what precautions we take. Let's just remember that we have public employees out there who live with that risk every day of their lives.
Finally, A Report
For a very long time I have had the practice of not sitting on committees that do not get something done. I do not need to go to meetings to just sit around and talk about what someone else is doing. I have left committee positions when that has occurred.
This past May I had a meeting to talk about the possible default on debt payments by local communities with a member of the Senate Fiscal Agency (SFA) and the Executive Director of the Michigan Government Finance Officers Association (MGFOA). The end result was the creation of a committee by the MGFOA to work with the SFA and look at the debt situation.
We made our presentation in October to the SFA and will present it to the MGFOA at their March meeting. And finally, the written report itself will be issued today.
There have been many premature articles in Bloomberg and the WSJ since the project started. Here is the one from the Bond Buyer on the final report.
Our committee will continue to meet to look at some legislative issues and come up with suggestions to alleviate future occurrences of the problem. We need changes in Michigan and I am sure some of them will be unwelcome. But what is obvious to me is that we cannot continue to conduct local 'business as usual' anymore. Local government units cannot borrow their way to prosperity, anymore than local residents can.
This past May I had a meeting to talk about the possible default on debt payments by local communities with a member of the Senate Fiscal Agency (SFA) and the Executive Director of the Michigan Government Finance Officers Association (MGFOA). The end result was the creation of a committee by the MGFOA to work with the SFA and look at the debt situation.
We made our presentation in October to the SFA and will present it to the MGFOA at their March meeting. And finally, the written report itself will be issued today.
There have been many premature articles in Bloomberg and the WSJ since the project started. Here is the one from the Bond Buyer on the final report.
Our committee will continue to meet to look at some legislative issues and come up with suggestions to alleviate future occurrences of the problem. We need changes in Michigan and I am sure some of them will be unwelcome. But what is obvious to me is that we cannot continue to conduct local 'business as usual' anymore. Local government units cannot borrow their way to prosperity, anymore than local residents can.
No, She Cannot
Just one week ago, on Friday the 7th, I asked if the Township Supervisor in West Bloomfield could 'stop the nonsense'. I got my answer on Monday night when I made the mistake of tuning into the Township Board meeting.
I stopped on the government access channel at 7:00 PM to see if the meeting had started after their scheduled 6:45 Executive Session. I discovered that they were discussing Item #12 regarding the minutes of closed sessions. I blogged about this particular issue back on December 11. Closed sessions are CLOSED. The fact that they occurred show up in the regular minutes of the board meeting showing the vote to enter and the items discussed and the documentation from those sessions are sealed in an envelope by the Township Clerk after the meeting.
For the twenty plus years I was on the Board, that is how it was done. Now, this Township Supervisor has accused past boards of throwing out the laws and doing things wrong. In addition, she insulted the township attorneys and told them they were wrong in their opinion that we had always been in compliance because her own legal experts, whom she conveniently refused to identify, told her she was right and the rest of the world is wrong. She complained about a website that is critical of her, but refused to identify it even when asked by both the attorney and Trustee Brown.
Township Clerk Shaughnessy read the State law out loud and the Supervisor reinterpreted it to mean something completely different. What is her problem?
The meeting went downhill from there, even though it already seemed to be in the gutter. The Supervisor managed to misstate the decision of the Circuit Court on the lawsuit she filed against four of the Board members. On the issues she lost, she is appealing to the Court of Appeals and stated that she would have a quick decision in her favor. She said that there had been a ruling on the tax issue, even though the Judge has not made a decision. I sat here watching this take place and questioning the mental process of the person who is supposed to be running several of our Township departments.
Oh, well, then there is that problem she identified about department heads 'crying in her office'. Really? Crying? (The fact that all but two department heads are men, makes the mental picture rather interesting.) I'd fire their a--es. As a taxpayer, I want you doing your job, not crying about it. If you can't perform in what I know is a very stressful situation over there, then you need to go, or come forward with the issues.
All the public sees is what happens at the Board table and some folks think that the majority is the problem because they Supervisor is telling them so. And they don't know what the law says any more than she does. She and they believe she has unlimited authority. (She does not.)
In fact, MCL 42.9 states: No creation of any additional administrative office or combination thereof shall abolish the offices of township clerk or township treasurer nor diminish any of the duties or responsibilities of those offices which are prescribed by state law.
Do you see anything in the language that protects the Township Supervisor? NO. And the Board can, by majority vote, remove her duties and hire a Township Superintendent. MCL 42.10 states, in part: The township board in each charter township shall have power to appoint a township superintendent and may delegate to him any or all of the following functions and duties which functions and duties, unless so delegated, shall be exercised by the supervisor:...
Criticizing the attorney in public, arguing with Board members, misstatements of Court decisions, monopolizing 'Public Comment' to give speeches on ones own merits, implying that prior boards did not follow the law... Need I go on?
If you are a resident and are reading this, please send it to your friends. I have received emails and phone calls this week about this, but the same group of people talking about it is not enough. We need lots of voices to 'Stop the Nonsense'.
I stopped on the government access channel at 7:00 PM to see if the meeting had started after their scheduled 6:45 Executive Session. I discovered that they were discussing Item #12 regarding the minutes of closed sessions. I blogged about this particular issue back on December 11. Closed sessions are CLOSED. The fact that they occurred show up in the regular minutes of the board meeting showing the vote to enter and the items discussed and the documentation from those sessions are sealed in an envelope by the Township Clerk after the meeting.
For the twenty plus years I was on the Board, that is how it was done. Now, this Township Supervisor has accused past boards of throwing out the laws and doing things wrong. In addition, she insulted the township attorneys and told them they were wrong in their opinion that we had always been in compliance because her own legal experts, whom she conveniently refused to identify, told her she was right and the rest of the world is wrong. She complained about a website that is critical of her, but refused to identify it even when asked by both the attorney and Trustee Brown.
Township Clerk Shaughnessy read the State law out loud and the Supervisor reinterpreted it to mean something completely different. What is her problem?
The meeting went downhill from there, even though it already seemed to be in the gutter. The Supervisor managed to misstate the decision of the Circuit Court on the lawsuit she filed against four of the Board members. On the issues she lost, she is appealing to the Court of Appeals and stated that she would have a quick decision in her favor. She said that there had been a ruling on the tax issue, even though the Judge has not made a decision. I sat here watching this take place and questioning the mental process of the person who is supposed to be running several of our Township departments.
Oh, well, then there is that problem she identified about department heads 'crying in her office'. Really? Crying? (The fact that all but two department heads are men, makes the mental picture rather interesting.) I'd fire their a--es. As a taxpayer, I want you doing your job, not crying about it. If you can't perform in what I know is a very stressful situation over there, then you need to go, or come forward with the issues.
All the public sees is what happens at the Board table and some folks think that the majority is the problem because they Supervisor is telling them so. And they don't know what the law says any more than she does. She and they believe she has unlimited authority. (She does not.)
In fact, MCL 42.9 states: No creation of any additional administrative office or combination thereof shall abolish the offices of township clerk or township treasurer nor diminish any of the duties or responsibilities of those offices which are prescribed by state law.
Do you see anything in the language that protects the Township Supervisor? NO. And the Board can, by majority vote, remove her duties and hire a Township Superintendent. MCL 42.10 states, in part: The township board in each charter township shall have power to appoint a township superintendent and may delegate to him any or all of the following functions and duties which functions and duties, unless so delegated, shall be exercised by the supervisor:...
Criticizing the attorney in public, arguing with Board members, misstatements of Court decisions, monopolizing 'Public Comment' to give speeches on ones own merits, implying that prior boards did not follow the law... Need I go on?
If you are a resident and are reading this, please send it to your friends. I have received emails and phone calls this week about this, but the same group of people talking about it is not enough. We need lots of voices to 'Stop the Nonsense'.
Can You Stop the Nonsense?
I have been thinking about this particular blog entry for some time. I knew the day would come when I would have something to say, but now that the day is here, my mind is still befuddled with what has been going on. Of course, that can only mean that this is another entry about West Bloomfield politics.
This morning's Oakland Press has a story below the fold on the front page titled 'Judge dismisses township's officials vs. officials lawsuit.' (Reminds me of 'Spy vs. Spy')
Now, if you are someone who does not routinely follow what goes on over at that particular institution, you may think that the headline is written incorrectly, since it makes no sense. But, alas, in the rather disfunctional minds of a couple of our officials, if we cannot bully our way to the top, we sue.
All of this is costing the taxpayers thousands of dollars and all because two people can't read and have serious delusions about being some kind of super-supreme rulers. The state law clearly says that the Board MAY authorize the supervisor to appoint a police chief, NOT that the supervisor shall appoint. And now an Oakland County judge has agreed that trustees did not violate any statutes in nominating and appointing a Police Chief, which, by the way, is in accord with our own Township ordinances.
But even worse than the lawsuit is their (Economu and Kaplan) behavior. It is nothing more than bullying. Let us do what we want and run West Bloomfield like a dictatorship or we will sue or, at the very least, run to the papers and TV stations to make you look bad.
We hear reports in our papers about students bullying each other at school. Schools are having classes to teach them that this is inappropriate and unacceptable.
Well, in light of the behavior of these two officials, I think our broadcasts of Township Board meetings should carry a warning to parents that 'some content may not be suitable for children'. Hey, it's not suitable for adults.
I find the comments in the newspaper particularly disturbing since they (E & K) are indicating they may appeal the decision. I've heard that an email was sent to township employees regarding this and someone may want to FOIA it and read it, maybe publish it. This can only cost more taxpayer dollars, unless these two individuals are planning to reimburse the township.
This has gone on for far too long. My hope is that both of these people will resign in shame, but in the interim STOP the bullying now.
This morning's Oakland Press has a story below the fold on the front page titled 'Judge dismisses township's officials vs. officials lawsuit.' (Reminds me of 'Spy vs. Spy')
Now, if you are someone who does not routinely follow what goes on over at that particular institution, you may think that the headline is written incorrectly, since it makes no sense. But, alas, in the rather disfunctional minds of a couple of our officials, if we cannot bully our way to the top, we sue.
All of this is costing the taxpayers thousands of dollars and all because two people can't read and have serious delusions about being some kind of super-supreme rulers. The state law clearly says that the Board MAY authorize the supervisor to appoint a police chief, NOT that the supervisor shall appoint. And now an Oakland County judge has agreed that trustees did not violate any statutes in nominating and appointing a Police Chief, which, by the way, is in accord with our own Township ordinances.
But even worse than the lawsuit is their (Economu and Kaplan) behavior. It is nothing more than bullying. Let us do what we want and run West Bloomfield like a dictatorship or we will sue or, at the very least, run to the papers and TV stations to make you look bad.
We hear reports in our papers about students bullying each other at school. Schools are having classes to teach them that this is inappropriate and unacceptable.
Well, in light of the behavior of these two officials, I think our broadcasts of Township Board meetings should carry a warning to parents that 'some content may not be suitable for children'. Hey, it's not suitable for adults.
I find the comments in the newspaper particularly disturbing since they (E & K) are indicating they may appeal the decision. I've heard that an email was sent to township employees regarding this and someone may want to FOIA it and read it, maybe publish it. This can only cost more taxpayer dollars, unless these two individuals are planning to reimburse the township.
This has gone on for far too long. My hope is that both of these people will resign in shame, but in the interim STOP the bullying now.
Getting to the Bottom Line
A lot has been said and continues to be said about the adoption of a State Budget by July 1. This is a good idea. It means that when the State's new fiscal year begins on October 1, departments and legislators know exactly what the numbers are. It virtually eliminates the chance for a government shut down. Would that the same scenario could be said in Townships.
For fifteen of the twenty-one budgets I was involved with at West Bloomfield Township, the budget was required to be done sixty days prior to the start of the fiscal year. In 2003, the law was changed to require a budget be prepared and adopted by December 31.
For West Bloomfield, which starts its fiscal year on January 1, this cuts the adoption really close. For the majority of townships in Michigan, the fiscal year begins on April 1 (such is the case with Bloomfield Township). Adopting a budget by December 1 means that they have to adopt a budget earlier than before.
I have tried to make sense of how and why this passed, but have never been able to do so. Some of the sponsoring legislators had townships with January 1 dates and others with April 1. It meant that all would have a longer time to prepare their budgets, but that those communities with January 1 years would be cutting it pretty close. And since tax rates are set in October, communities already have pretty solid tax revenue numbers to work with. The State budget has been set so that revenue sharing numbers, while estimated, are still pretty solid.
The law requires that Township Department Heads submit their budget requests 150 days prior to the start of the fiscal year and that the Supervisor submit a budget to the Township Board no later than 120 days prior to the fiscal year. That gave Township Boards prior to the law change at least two months to approve budgets and adopt them.
No matter the change in the law, there is nothing stopping Townships from adopting their budgets in a timely manner, well in advance of the start of the fiscal year. Let's hope that our Legislators in Lansing do the same.
For fifteen of the twenty-one budgets I was involved with at West Bloomfield Township, the budget was required to be done sixty days prior to the start of the fiscal year. In 2003, the law was changed to require a budget be prepared and adopted by December 31.
For West Bloomfield, which starts its fiscal year on January 1, this cuts the adoption really close. For the majority of townships in Michigan, the fiscal year begins on April 1 (such is the case with Bloomfield Township). Adopting a budget by December 1 means that they have to adopt a budget earlier than before.
I have tried to make sense of how and why this passed, but have never been able to do so. Some of the sponsoring legislators had townships with January 1 dates and others with April 1. It meant that all would have a longer time to prepare their budgets, but that those communities with January 1 years would be cutting it pretty close. And since tax rates are set in October, communities already have pretty solid tax revenue numbers to work with. The State budget has been set so that revenue sharing numbers, while estimated, are still pretty solid.
The law requires that Township Department Heads submit their budget requests 150 days prior to the start of the fiscal year and that the Supervisor submit a budget to the Township Board no later than 120 days prior to the fiscal year. That gave Township Boards prior to the law change at least two months to approve budgets and adopt them.
No matter the change in the law, there is nothing stopping Townships from adopting their budgets in a timely manner, well in advance of the start of the fiscal year. Let's hope that our Legislators in Lansing do the same.
Our Library
For those of you have do not know (how could that be?), West Bloomfield has a terrific library.
First Lady Michelle Obama presented the 2010 National Medal for Museum and Library Service to the Library at a White House ceremony December 17. The National Medal is the nation's highest award for museums and libraries.
I want to share the latest pictures of their National Honor with you in case you have not seen them on their website.
Just click here
A big CONGRATULATIONS to all of them.
First Lady Michelle Obama presented the 2010 National Medal for Museum and Library Service to the Library at a White House ceremony December 17. The National Medal is the nation's highest award for museums and libraries.
I want to share the latest pictures of their National Honor with you in case you have not seen them on their website.
Just click here
A big CONGRATULATIONS to all of them.
Of Troy and Building Permits and West Bloomfield
I woke up this morning thinking I will now write about my experience with my bathroom 'repair'. I wrote about this previously, but then removed the blogs. Now, I finally have my 'Certificate of Occupancy' in hand, and decided I would tell the tale.
But first, I go to my mailbox and get my morning Oakland Press to read while I have my coffee (and at the same time shoo three deer out of the yard).
Headline: Builders sue Troy; allege fee gouging
Oh, really? Does anyone think they are the only ones?
During the various building boom eras in the suburbs, building permit revenue was a huge source of cash for communities. Why do you think the State Construction Code was changed to require that the money received only be used for the costs of running the department issuing the permits and doing the inspections?
Anyway, that is not what I am interested in discussing. Rather, it is the cost associated with the process and the fact that tax-paying residents trying to maintain their homes are 'ripped-off' by outrageous fees.
Several years ago I needed to replace my hot water heater. I shopped around and everytime I told the salesman I lived in West Bloomfield, they said that was too bad because West Bloomfield had the highest permit fees.
This summer, when I hired a handyman to fix up my 38-year old, 34 square foot bathroom (not a misprint, only 34 sf of usable space), he never ever mentioned the need for any permits. According to the State Construction Code, cabinet replacement, tiling, light fixture replacement and toilet replacement (which we didn't do), do not require permits.
Imagine my surprise when a township employee called to say that he was told I was 'remodeling' my bathroom and needed to send an inspector over. I asked why I would need inspections and permits and he said that I would need permits for everything I mentioned above and even threw in the replacement of a shower door. I told him I would have my handyman speak with him.
Imagine my complete surprise when I was told I would have to pay $590 for permits and inspections. Apparently, there is a clause that if the repairs exceed $600, you still have to get permits. Folks, I saw a medicine cabinet that was $1200. If this is the case, then the communities should just install kiosks in the local Home Depots and collect the money when you walk out the door.
As it was, my handyman had no idea what I was spending, since I purchased all the materials myself. He only knew what his fee was, which increased considerably as a result of the township holding things up. We lost the whole day of the call, while I was paying him to stand around. And his costs far exceeded material costs. I had all sorts of free time to shop around for deals on supplies.
My handyman had to submit a drawing of the plan of the room. Let's see, EVERYTHING is going back where it was!!! While waiting for approval, my handyman went off to another job and then I had to wait to get him back.
Let me put this in the context of what I pay in taxes to the township general fund this year: $265.77. The voted public safety millage I pay is $252.27. Together, that is less than permits for a 34 square foot bathroom, in a home I have owned and paid taxes on for 38 years. And the $590 doesn't include the money I had to pay to a separate mechanical contractor.
And what did I get for my money? A blessing by West Bloomfield that my handyman properly performed the work. The plumbing permit covered making sure the water wasn't too hot. The electrical permit - well I am still not sure why we even needed that except to be told that we 'should probably upgrade all the electrical in the house'. Will do as soon as the township gives me the money to do it. Oh, they also checked for smoke detectors. And the mechanical? Well, I had the handyman vent my bathroom exhaust fan to the outside. Yes, the township in 1972 allowed the builder to vent fans into the attic. Luckily, I had no attic damage, probably thanks to the roof vents I had to add myself several years ago (none provided by the builder) and the attic fans that were installed. It makes me wonder what was being inspected back in 1972.
The State Construction Code is supposed to protect the homeowner from unscrupulous contractors. It is supposed to insure that work is done properly and 'up to code'. But who protects the property owner from the local communities who enforce the code and charge ridiculous fees? It is not hard to see how departments can be padded with employees to justify the higher fee required to pay their salaries and benefits.
I was on a committee at the State when the Construction Code was changed requiring the use of fees for related expenses only. I remember another member asking if he only had one building permit would he have to charge the full cost of the department to that permit. I wondered why you would have a full-time department if you had no building being done.
With the current economy, many communities should look at privatizing this area. But, if they are not doing the work, I see no reason to get any money from the process, other than a nominal fee for updating records. When it is a percentage, that starts to sound more like a 'kick-back' than a fee. And yes, I feel that this is an unjustified tax. I felt that way even before I saw the article. Any fee paid to a community is supposed to fairly represent the value of the service. $590? I think not.
But first, I go to my mailbox and get my morning Oakland Press to read while I have my coffee (and at the same time shoo three deer out of the yard).
Headline: Builders sue Troy; allege fee gouging
Oh, really? Does anyone think they are the only ones?
During the various building boom eras in the suburbs, building permit revenue was a huge source of cash for communities. Why do you think the State Construction Code was changed to require that the money received only be used for the costs of running the department issuing the permits and doing the inspections?
Anyway, that is not what I am interested in discussing. Rather, it is the cost associated with the process and the fact that tax-paying residents trying to maintain their homes are 'ripped-off' by outrageous fees.
Several years ago I needed to replace my hot water heater. I shopped around and everytime I told the salesman I lived in West Bloomfield, they said that was too bad because West Bloomfield had the highest permit fees.
This summer, when I hired a handyman to fix up my 38-year old, 34 square foot bathroom (not a misprint, only 34 sf of usable space), he never ever mentioned the need for any permits. According to the State Construction Code, cabinet replacement, tiling, light fixture replacement and toilet replacement (which we didn't do), do not require permits.
Imagine my surprise when a township employee called to say that he was told I was 'remodeling' my bathroom and needed to send an inspector over. I asked why I would need inspections and permits and he said that I would need permits for everything I mentioned above and even threw in the replacement of a shower door. I told him I would have my handyman speak with him.
Imagine my complete surprise when I was told I would have to pay $590 for permits and inspections. Apparently, there is a clause that if the repairs exceed $600, you still have to get permits. Folks, I saw a medicine cabinet that was $1200. If this is the case, then the communities should just install kiosks in the local Home Depots and collect the money when you walk out the door.
As it was, my handyman had no idea what I was spending, since I purchased all the materials myself. He only knew what his fee was, which increased considerably as a result of the township holding things up. We lost the whole day of the call, while I was paying him to stand around. And his costs far exceeded material costs. I had all sorts of free time to shop around for deals on supplies.
My handyman had to submit a drawing of the plan of the room. Let's see, EVERYTHING is going back where it was!!! While waiting for approval, my handyman went off to another job and then I had to wait to get him back.
Let me put this in the context of what I pay in taxes to the township general fund this year: $265.77. The voted public safety millage I pay is $252.27. Together, that is less than permits for a 34 square foot bathroom, in a home I have owned and paid taxes on for 38 years. And the $590 doesn't include the money I had to pay to a separate mechanical contractor.
And what did I get for my money? A blessing by West Bloomfield that my handyman properly performed the work. The plumbing permit covered making sure the water wasn't too hot. The electrical permit - well I am still not sure why we even needed that except to be told that we 'should probably upgrade all the electrical in the house'. Will do as soon as the township gives me the money to do it. Oh, they also checked for smoke detectors. And the mechanical? Well, I had the handyman vent my bathroom exhaust fan to the outside. Yes, the township in 1972 allowed the builder to vent fans into the attic. Luckily, I had no attic damage, probably thanks to the roof vents I had to add myself several years ago (none provided by the builder) and the attic fans that were installed. It makes me wonder what was being inspected back in 1972.
The State Construction Code is supposed to protect the homeowner from unscrupulous contractors. It is supposed to insure that work is done properly and 'up to code'. But who protects the property owner from the local communities who enforce the code and charge ridiculous fees? It is not hard to see how departments can be padded with employees to justify the higher fee required to pay their salaries and benefits.
I was on a committee at the State when the Construction Code was changed requiring the use of fees for related expenses only. I remember another member asking if he only had one building permit would he have to charge the full cost of the department to that permit. I wondered why you would have a full-time department if you had no building being done.
With the current economy, many communities should look at privatizing this area. But, if they are not doing the work, I see no reason to get any money from the process, other than a nominal fee for updating records. When it is a percentage, that starts to sound more like a 'kick-back' than a fee. And yes, I feel that this is an unjustified tax. I felt that way even before I saw the article. Any fee paid to a community is supposed to fairly represent the value of the service. $590? I think not.
A controversy in search of an issue
A while back I stopped watching Township Board meetings. I do not read the minutes. I assume not much is happening since no one has sent an email or called to tell me I need to pay attention. My life is bliss - up until I read the newspaper.
So, last week when I read the story of a 'controversy' about closed session minutes, I figured I must have skimmed it too fast and missed what the issue was and why there was a problem. I supposed that something had happened at a Board meeting.
I went on with my business for the week remembering my own twenty-year experience on the Board. Simply put, you vote to go into closed session, you discuss and leave. You can take no votes and make no motions in the session. What is discussed is protected information, either because it involves negotiations or a lawsuit. There would be nothing to approve in the way of minutes, other than who was in the room and what the issue was. And that information already appears in the general session minutes.
After reading today's newspaper, including the letter to the editor, I had an 'AHA' moment. I figure that someone (or some two) has an issue with the clerk and likely called the paper to stir things up. The very call would be evidence of her incompetence. (Rumor has it that they have already lined up a new candidate for clerk in 2012.)
A recent serviceman to my home, not realizing who I was in my previous life, informed me that 'this new Board is worse than the last bunch.' Amen to that.
So, pray tell, just what is the problem here?
So, last week when I read the story of a 'controversy' about closed session minutes, I figured I must have skimmed it too fast and missed what the issue was and why there was a problem. I supposed that something had happened at a Board meeting.
I went on with my business for the week remembering my own twenty-year experience on the Board. Simply put, you vote to go into closed session, you discuss and leave. You can take no votes and make no motions in the session. What is discussed is protected information, either because it involves negotiations or a lawsuit. There would be nothing to approve in the way of minutes, other than who was in the room and what the issue was. And that information already appears in the general session minutes.
After reading today's newspaper, including the letter to the editor, I had an 'AHA' moment. I figure that someone (or some two) has an issue with the clerk and likely called the paper to stir things up. The very call would be evidence of her incompetence. (Rumor has it that they have already lined up a new candidate for clerk in 2012.)
A recent serviceman to my home, not realizing who I was in my previous life, informed me that 'this new Board is worse than the last bunch.' Amen to that.
So, pray tell, just what is the problem here?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
My absentee ballot is still sitting on the kitchen counter top where I first opened it. I am pretty sure I will not be voting for all the o...
-
The growth of China Importing across the globe has rendered China the greatest exporter in the world. China has overtaken the United State...
-
Attorney Gregory Yates attorney , who are customers and employees to defraud consistently dishonest. Avoid his next victim. In this case, l...
