Lakeside Politics

Living up to expectations

2012-01-06T14:00:00.000-05:00

At first, McClanahan presented a total budget that was less than 2010. “There were unusual circumstances and it’s still less than 2010,” he said, asking the board to re-amend the budget. “Errors were made. They’ve been corrected,” said Supervisor White. “The purpose of this meeting is to revise the amended budget … The amendments corrects the budget.” “In all my years in the township and on the board, I’ve never had an emergency meeting on a budget,” Trustee Phil Hart said, adding the Public Safety Committee used to look at the budgets, but White wouldn’t give them a budget until after the board had it.

Facepalm, courtesy of the VBT Clerk.

2012-01-06T13:43:00.000-05:00

OK. In the grand scheme of things, $5,000 isn't a huge chunk of the VBT budget. But do we need someone making important decisions that doesn't seem to grasp the cause and effect of what they do?

During the Board of Trustees meeting, Trustee Phil Hart wondered why Wright would re-open the bidding after the previous discussion in February. Hart asked Wright whether the township had had a performance issue with The View. Wright replied no – there was no issue.
Hart said that, had Wright not re-opened the bidding, the $2.50 quote from The View would have continued to apply, and the township would have avoided an annual cost increase of $5,000

As LaVaute points out, had they waited until the contract was actually due to renew, the township would have continued to enjoy a much lower rate than they will get under the new contract. And given the close relationship between White/Wright and the people that run the independent, they had to have a pretty good idea how much more this would cost.

Another closed door

2010-07-24T14:29:00.001-04:00

Spielman weighed in on the McClanahan hiring decision. He's the only local reporter I've seen include the following, fairly important details. (The current made some mention of it as well, but the second paragraph below is the essential one)

“I truly believe that this process was never intended to secure the best possible candidate for this position, but to ensure that Mr. McClanahan would get the permanent job,” he said in a prepared statement.

Budd agreed. She said EMPCO provided the township with test scores, but did not inform officials of the types of questions they asked. The test scores were all within four points of each other. EMPCO did not look at the candidates’ resumes, Budd said, and they also wouldn’t say whether they gave added weight to the fact that McClanahan was a resident of Van Buren Township and had held the interim position.

Another closed process. More answers that White won't let the public have. Worse, the full board isn't even allowed to know the evaluation criteria? There is no way to know that the criteria was not McClanahan = best score plus two. There is also no way for the board to claim it is making an informed decision. Knowing the process is essential to evaluating the results.

I'm disappointed that Gerry Lavaute at the View didn't make mention of this fact. While I have some personal admiration for him, the quality of the reporting on local matters has been wanting. I think the public would be well served if they didn't have a contract with the township for publishing official information. These details are too important to the public to gloss over. I expect that sort of omission from White's friends at the Independent.

Delaney no longer hearts Paul White

2010-07-08T22:15:00.002-04:00

Some interesting bits in this (my take afterward), from John Delaney: ... Seriously, read it all.

Mr. Supervisor, I’m writing this letter to point out some facts on your past promises that you seem to be breaking with an alarming rate. It’s funny that during the recall process you were hell bent on wanting to right this township and ferret out the wrongs of our local government and some of the township elected officials and VBT employees. Well, now that you’re comfortable sitting back in your office chair, hands folded behind your head, you’re telling yourself, “Whew I dodged a bullet on February 23, 2010.” (the recall) That’s not true! You have broken promises and are now stalling and allowing your Public Safety Director to do the same!

Approximately 9 or so months ago I came to the township board meeting and brought up the subject of violations of our township’s policy that were being broken by an elected official and other employees that were against you in the recall! You jumped on the band wagon and asked me to put extra pressure on said elected official and the Public Safety Department of which I did. The following board meeting I brought it up again to which the elected official finally complied. The problem is, your Public Safety Director, (which was chosen by you) is still in violation of said policy since December 09, and has been making excuse after excuse for not invoking the policy or its punishments for violating it. Time and time again I’ve had meetings with you and your director, during the last 3 meetings, it was stated that the director is writing or rewriting policy which updates the old. Here’s the problem with that, it doesn’t matter what he rewrites, the original or existing policy in question is the only policy which matters at this time. The police department belongs to the township and at NO TIME is it a separate entity, and that it is to follow the guidelines of the township. Not the Public Safety Department’s redundant policy! The confusion here is that this Public Safety Director thinks that his department is separate from the other township employees and that’s been the status quo for too many years already. This goes to show that you, Mr. White, have again lied to us residents when you promised to change things from “Well that’s the way we always did it!” Also, it shows that this Public Safety Director can fall behind a statement that his department is looking at the policy and rewriting the public safety policy. That dog won’t hunt! It’s not up to the Public Safety Director or any public safety officer to write new township policy or circumvent what we already have. It’s time for the community to know that this department might be trying to create its own entity again by just going along with the old views, that the public safety department can just do anything they want and not fall in line with township policy.

We residents should not have to just settle with the explanation of the Public Safety Director that “Well, I’ve rewritten two policies or made new ones and we are waiting to publish them!” Bologna, we already have the policy I’ve been talking about and it’s VBT Resolution 2003-45 and it’s in place! Anything and everything that the Public Safety Department and you Supervisor White try to do to stall or circumvent said policy is unacceptable! Mr. Supervisor it’s time for you to put up or shut up and invoke this resolution to ALL Van Buren Township employees and elected officials!

Respectfully Submitted

John Delaney

VBT Resident

First, I like that he spelled "Bologna"

Second, John is apparently feeling used and dirty. I'm picturing some Crying Game sorta stuff happening in the Delaney shower.

Third, and seriously, 2003-45 is the ethics policy. I know the recall folks made some complaints regarding the ethics policy, mainly in the area of campaign contributions. I'm not sure if those are the same concerns that Delaney is referencing here. If there are others, I hope that he elaborates soon. I expect that the interview would be a good time to bring it up.

Fourth, White asked Delaney to go after Sharry. It wasn't concerned citizens, it was a fellow board member that lacked the courage to do it himself. Van Buren Township Supervisor Paul White is a coward (but we knew that). (edit ... maybe I didn't read that right first time through... White wanted more pressure after it was independently brought up? ... I'm not sure it's significantly different in the end.)

Finally, how bad are White and McClanahan when a convicted felon is offering ethical advice, and he seems like the reasonable one?

This....

2010-06-17T09:53:00.001-04:00

" At the end of 2009, White was begged to keep the marine patrol going. He had to be shamed into even operating it on just the weekends (at the expense of road safety).

Where might that boat have been Wednesday afternoon if the marine patrol hadn't been axed?

Never forget: We traded a boy's life so White could pay back a 100,000 dollar promise to McClanahan. "

Look out for "The Current" this summer

2010-05-18T23:18:00.001-04:00

Were circumstances different, I would have probably found myself involved in this venture.

As it is, I am thrilled to see this launched. Spielman has a good sense of what is right, but he has too many communities to cover, given the attention that VBT requires under Paul White's (non) "leadership".

Ugh-ly

2010-05-17T21:23:00.000-04:00

Holy crap that's ugly. I was waiting for them to add some sort of top. Cone, dome, something. It looks like someone shoved the world's largest flashlight in the ground. I don't think paint will help much.

In the future: Welcome to VBT home of the National Flashlight Museum

Champagne settlement details

2010-04-30T22:47:00.002-04:00

Well, the story goes something like this: The township is totally not admitting any fault, but we're willing to pay you almost a half-million dollars and fix your employment record that we completely screwed up out of spite, if you'll agree to stop suing us, because our lawyers are threatening to kneecap us with .45s if we can't figure out a way out of this mess.

And it only took an actual lawsuit, which is more than Dave Frankling had to bother with.

Discussion question: Does Paul's "Strictly Business" claim this time around completely discredit, mostly discredit or what-are-you-talking-about-it-never-had-credit-to discredit Paul's insistence that paying Frankling 55K was "Strictly Business"?

Another open question to Paul White.

2010-04-29T13:28:00.002-04:00

Given that you excused the exchange of 55,000 dollars from the taxpayers for a political contribution because the contribution was "too small to influence you", and that an ordinance officer was recently dismissed for allegedly receiving cell phones during a site inspection in exchange for site approval:

Is there an official dollar amount/retail value that qualifies as worthy of dismissal, or are the rules different for board members?

Remember, leadership by example is the best kind of leadership. Your answer will be helpful in letting employees know exactly how much graft is officially acceptable in Van Buren Township.

I'm still waiting for answers on those earlier questions.

Police overtime down, but are residents paying the price?

2010-04-28T23:54:00.006-04:00

A couple caveats: 1. One month doesn't necessarily make a trend, but it's a pretty good sample, and it's as much data as I've looked at. 2. These are call outs, not confirmed incidents, but I think they should be representative of the facts on the ground. 3. I think this is an important month to compare since April 2009 largely marks the end of Champagne's time at the helm, and by now White has had time to register his own influence on the department.

So, the chart:

With a couple of exceptions the numbers are up, some of them notably. The chart speaks for itself, so I won't try to dive into the numbers.

One item that I think needs extra comment is the OWI/DWI results. There is a huge year-to-year drop, but I don't think that is a reason for celebration. Instead, it causes me significant concern. That particular crime has a different relationship to the police than the others in that the police generally spot the offense in progress, rather than being called to it by a concerned resident.

While, the drop may be a result of significantly fewer people operating while intoxicated (maybe less money to drink away?); more likely is that offenders are not being spotted due to reduced availability/presence of patrols. If that is the case, current practices are placing more people at risk of fatal collisions. With the summer coming up, Public Safety needs to review how it is protecting those on the roads.

Hopefully Director McClanahan can shed some more light on these numbers in the near future (PSD should also have more complete statistics, including call-out times that may be of further interest).

Minor clarification: The data is for roughly the same 35 day stretch in 2009 and 2010 and primarily covers April with a bit of late March in there as well. Labeling it only April data isn't precise, but fits on the chart better. Still, as a sample it covers about 10 percent of the year, so should yield pretty reliable results.

Freep story on the 55K giveaway

2010-04-28T09:25:00.001-04:00

Minimalist, but hopefully it gets the issue out to a bit wider audience in Van Buren Township. More details down the blog, for those that are new (follow the "frankling" tab below).

A gift of leadership, for those that will listen

2010-04-28T00:35:00.007-04:00

Lost in the shuffle of the Champagne/McClanahan fiasco was one of the appointments made to the Public Safety Committee. CW4 (Ret) Richard Wardwell happened to be in the stack that Van Buren Township Supervisor Paul White pulled his appointments from. And VBT should be thankful for that (I am tempted to give White some credit, but I am convinced that he neither had, nor has, an appreciation for what Chief brings to the table).

For the non-military readers, I wanted to take a moment to try to pass on what it means to be a Chief Warrant Officer 4 (CW4) in the US Army. Chiefs, as they are often called, are technical experts. They have dedicated themselves to mastering a particular profession and to strengthening that profession through developing the people below them. Chiefs are mentors, leaders and trainers; and CW4's are exceptional at all three.

It's those three roles that are such a huge value to the Public Safety Department, or to anyone in a leadership role. If you get Chief talking about leadership, or some similar topic, here is what you do: Stop talking. Take out a pen and paper. Write down everything Chief says. Then learn it. Then implement it. Anything less is a disservice to you and to those you lead.

If it sounds like a bit of hero worship, that's not unintentional (though don't read too much into hero... it's little "h", not big "H"). The rank of CW4 (and those that earned it) is held in that high of a regard among those that know what it means.

Apologies to Chief Wardwell if this runs afoul of humility.

Public Safety Director applications are in

2010-04-27T13:38:00.003-04:00

The view has a brief roundup of what is happening with the permanent Public Safety Director position. 25 applicants will be cut down to 5. 5 will be interviewed in person by an outside agency. According to Gerry Lavaute, the interview includes:

( An interview exercise, in which the candidate would be asked to describe his or her resume', including describing their short- and long-term goals for the township's Public Safety Department.

( An oral presentation by the candidate to interviewers, that may have as its subject a current township public safety issue

( An "in basket" exercise, in which the candidate returns from a week-long vacation and is greeted by a full in basket of assignments and issues, including messages from disgruntled citizens, or a hot assignment from the boss, and so on. The candidate will be asked how he or she would prioritize the assignments, and would go about completing them.

( A role-playing exercise, in which the EMPCO assessor portrays a troubled employee, or a township trustee. The candidate will be asked to respond to the situation.

( A leadership exercise in which the candidates demonstrate leadership by properly portioning out rib-eye steaks.*

Now based on past public performance, I can't see McC surviving the process intact. But, stranger things have happened.

* No, not really. I made that up.

An open question to Supervisor Paul White

2010-04-27T13:13:00.002-04:00

Given that the notice of intent to sue was filed on September 15th, 2009, and that the notice stated that settlement was only open from 30 days from that date, and that no lawsuit was forthcoming in October, November, December or January, and the Franklings attended a fundraiser on January 23rd, 2010, and that the Franklings donated to the POWW PAC at that fundraiser:

What exactly persuaded the board to add that item to the February agenda for settlement just 3 weeks after the fundraiser?

Given the above, and that no lawsuit was forthcoming in February, March or April:

What exactly persuaded the board to add that item to the April agenda for settlement and that the matter was urgent enough to proceed with a vote?

The Frankling story in one wordy post.

2010-04-23T13:32:00.003-04:00

On 20 April 2010, the Van Buren Township Board voted (4-2) to pay 55,000 dollars to David and Linda Frankling. The board justified the action as necessary to avoid the possibility of future lawsuits with the Franklings over an ordinance dispute. But the courts had already ruled, in a contracted legal battle, that the Township was not obligated to pay additional costs, and no lawsuit was pending.

The township attorney and dissenting board members suggested a maximum of 20,000 dollars as a "nuisance fee". Supporting the vote were Township Supervisor Paul White, Clerk Leon Wright, and Trustees Al Ostrowski and Denise Partridge.

Further details cast significant doubt on the candor of the supporting board members and raise the possibility of the payout as a culmination of a campaign promise and political favoritism.

While claiming that the township had been notified of an intent to sue, Township Supervisor Paul White failed to mention that the notice was filed in September 2009. In the the intervening 7 months, no lawsuit materialized.

Further, campaign finance records reveal that the Franklings have ties to the board members. The Franklings contributed to the Supervisor White's run in 2008. In January 2010, after notice to sue had been filed, the Franklings attended a PAC fundraiser at which all 4 supporting board members were also present. The Franklings made an additional donation at that fundraiser. Reports surfaced after the 2008 election that Supervisor White had promised the Franklings a favorable outcome in the matter.

The April 20 vote was the second time that the board sought to vote on the matter (the first occurring in mid-February). Each time the board meeting agenda was written so as to obscure the intent of the vote. The most recent agenda particularly excluded the mention of a payment to the Franklings. Prior to both votes Supervisor White sought to bar the public from discussions. He was rebuffed both times by 3 board members, Treasurer Sharry Budd, and Trustees Phil Hart and Jeff Jahr, because the discussion was not over pending litigation as required by Michigan law.

During the discussion leading up to the vote township residents pressed several concerns. The possibility of encouraging more frivolous claims was raised by resident Allen Babosh, as he suggested that the board may be seen as eager to settle claims. The board members were repeatedly asked about associations with Dave and Linda Frankling, but refused to detail either contributions or contacts they had since the notice of intent was filed. The contradiction of the advice of the township's attorney and the rulings of three separate courts, including the Michigan Supreme Court; the apparent attempt to hide the vote from the residents; and that waiting for a suit to be filed would mean the insurance policy would cover the costs instead of the money coming directly from the taxpayers, were also raised.

Residents seemed sympathetic to the Franklings because of their extensive legal battle, but felt that sympathy was not a reasonable cause for the transfer of so many tax dollars from an already stretched budget.

Also appearing at the meeting was the attorney that represented Dave and Linda Frankling in the earlier lawsuit, John Day. Attorney Day suggested that the Franklings could seek as much as 100,000 dollars from the township and urged the board to avoid the suit by paying 55,000 dollars. Supervisor White and others appeared to greet the advice warmly and exchanged several comments. No legal representation for the township was present to rebut Attorney Day's claims.

The legal strategy also stands in stark contrast to what Supervisor White has advocated for in past and pending lawsuits. In other cases, White has sought to reassure concerned residents by noting that the township has municipal insurance against lawsuits. The township recently arrived at a settlement with former Public Safety Director Gerald Champagne after a very public, and heated, battle over his termination. The lawsuit was frequently derided by Supervisor White as a money grab.

Four lawsuits are also pending that allege discriminatory hiring practice on the part of the township board, Supervisor White and Trustee Ostrowski are also named in those suits.

More Frankling Giveaway Details

2010-04-22T15:49:00.006-04:00

A few quick notes:

Dave and Linda Frankling gave $420 to either Paul White directly or to the Partridge, Ostrowski, White, Wright (POWW) PAC.

$120 dollars was given at the Pancake Fundraiser POWW PAC held 23 January. Paul White and other board members were also in attendance. The fundraiser was held (and the donation given) after Frankling's attorney notified the township it would sue.

Frankling's attorney, John Day is a past contributor to Trustee Partridge's husband's past run for office.

Frankling's attorney notified the township in September 2009 and gave a 30 day deadline before suit would be filed. No suit materialized in the intervening 210 days.

Frankling giveaway

2010-04-20T16:23:00.007-04:00

If resolution 2010-11 passes it will be the second big payday for a POWW campaign donor. The board is attempting to hide the purpose of the agenda item for tonight, but resolution 2010-11 will give Dave Frankling 55,000 dollars from the taxpayers. The exchange is that Frankling will agree to release any and all claims related to the recent lawsuit, but the Judge already declared that he wasn't owed any additional fees.

My contention is that voting on the matter will be a violation of the Open Meetings Act since they did not state what the resolution accomplished (read any other agenda and you will see that the text of the resolution is included, why not now). This is the second time that White and Co. have attempted to put the item for a vote and the second time that they have tried to hide it.

Frankling contributed to the campaign of at least Paul White, and may have contributed to the POWW PAC during the recall attempt in order to help keep the 4 board members that will vote for this resolution in office. He may get a good return on his investment. All of those donations should be declared before a vote is taken.

To avoid the appearance of impropriety, the board should seek a number that will receive unanimous support, if one could be found. A split vote, especially along the exact lines of those that have benefited from contributions should be a huge red flag to the township residents. Filling the pockets of supporters is unacceptable.

Update: Shockingly un-shocking. The board voted to give a campaign supporter 55,000 dollars. Get your campaign donations to Paul White now, and you too can buy a GMC Yukon or nice BMW courtesy of the people of Van Buren Township.

VBT is officially Pay-To-Play

Summing up John Delaney

2010-04-18T18:45:00.010-04:00

I am hoping this is my last post on the subject. Below is a summation (mostly chronological) of Delaney's criminal history, but I'll begin and end with a bit of editorial content.

Allow me first to address why I am spending time on this. Delaney was a central figure to the POWW committee during the recall efforts. He has (or at least had) the confidence of 4 of 7 of the township board members as well as the current Director of Public Safety, Carl McClanahan, and was often involved in their efforts, either as an organizer or spokesperson; even representing them in radio ads prior to the election. During that time and since, Delaney has primarily used his time at the podium to label citizens, certain officials and especially the police department as corrupt, lying, conspiring, racist or some combination thereof. Since it is the character of others that he focuses on, and always in the absence of credible evidence, the quality of the man making the charge ought to be considered.

The information uncovered demonstrates that Delaney has a long history of an adversarial relationship with the legal system and law enforcement. That should be well forward in the minds of Van Buren Township residents when they hear him continue to (unsubstantiatedly) accuse others of wrongdoing. It should also be in the minds of those evaluating our current crop of township officials. You can often tell a man by the company he keeps.

The first post on Delaney's criminal background came after another individual dug up the mug shot and conviction. Delaney's response, however, created more questions than it answered so I decided to poke around some more. The information came from Oklahoma's database of court records, and was easy to search once I located it (more states need to follow suit). Absent additional intrigue, I do not intend to dig further, though some unpublished information indicates that there are more stones that could use turning.

-----------------------

Having sad that, this is what I found (I am omitting traffic/suspended license offenses and their related "failure to appear warrants", but know that there are several from his time in OK):

In 1990
John Delaney first crossed paths with Judge Allen McCall on a bogus check charge. The fraudulent check was in excess of $4000 dollars and earned him a conviction on a 1991 guilty plea, a one year suspended sentence and restitution. The sentence was later revoked, but jail time reduced to 15 days. Delaney had at least one failure to appear warrant issued during this criminal case.

June 1992
Delaney is caught using a forged proof of financial responsibility and public safety documents. Edit: Delaney contacted me and said these were related to his automobile and not his business. Since I'm really trying to not dig further, I'll leave it stand there. Delaney communicated to me that he unknowingly "acquired them from a friend, who offered a very reduced price". The charge resulted in a plea of guilty in Feb 1993 with 30 days jail time, a one year suspended sentence, a 2 year suspended sentence and fines. There may still be fines owed related to this charge, but that is not conclusive.

August 1993
Delaney is accused of using another bogus check. The charge is dismissed by the state in December (reason is not stated, but could have been lack of evidence, or that Delaney paid restitution prior to the charges going forward, but that's purely speculation on my part).

At some point between the last and next charge,
Delaney attends a softball game at which Judge McCall is also attending. According to later court filings on behalf of Delaney, during the game Delaney loudly and publicly called Judge McCall (who had presided over previous criminal appearance by Delaney) a "short, fat, dumpy m*****f****er" a "liar" and a "cheat".

June 1994
Delaney is charged with using another bogus check. May 1996 Delaney fails to appear for a hearing, Delaney does not appear until 45 days later. Delaney sought a continuance to retain his own council. Hearing eventually scheduled for January 1997, but Delaney again fails to appear. He lands back in court nearly three months later and waives a jury trial, electing to appear before the judge (knowing that the hearing is scheduled for Judge McCall's docket. A non-jury trial is held in April 1997 at which Judge McCall finds Delaney guilty and waives a pre-sentence investigation. The original sentence is 10 years plus restitution. August 1997, Judge McCall reduces the sentence to time served (about 4 months) plus a 2 year suspended sentence.

-----------------------

All the above charges are either admitted to by John Delaney, or where he has denied them, are listed by the State of Oklahoma as being committed by John Delaney of 5335 Cherry, Lawton OK. It is unlikely that two different Delaney's were operating bogus check rackets from the same address, but in the case of a relative sharing the address, it is possible I suppose. At most one of the bogus check charges could be mis-attributed to our John Delaney. Further, I expect that Delaney would have raised that defense when the charges were first uncovered.

Presently, Delaney claims to be seeking to have the last conviction overturned due to failure of Judge McCall to recuse himself (since Delaney had previously called him names) and incompetent representation (that he hired himself) failing to properly advise him on the waiver of jury trial. Delaney indicated the appeal is at the federal level, but when asked did not state if it had been accepted by the court or was scheduled for a hearing. To have made it to the federal level, at least one state court should have upheld the conviction (it is also now 13 years after the fact).

The District Attorney for the case is now retired, and could not be reached for comment. Judge McCall is still serving in the same court. I may pursue additional comment from Judge McCall's office, but I haven't yet decided.

-----------------------

One additional curiosity and a small correction to earlier information: John Delaney's charges all list his birthdate 06/02/1956. He is listed in an old Belleville High School yearbook as a member of a class of 1979 (a webisite incorrectly lists him in the class of 1980) and is remembered by his contemporaries as attending BHS at the time, to include trouble with authorities for theft of items from the school. That would put him at nearly 23 at the time of his graduation.

Reflecting on that, he must have really committed to getting his HS diploma, no matter what it took as he was held back 5 times in various grades. I find that scenario unlikely because of the availability of work with the UAW, and similar positions, at the time. By the age of 18 Delaney ought to have been seeking work, instead of facing 5 more years of something that he had significant difficulty with.

The only other possibility is that Delaney obtained a fake ID at some point during his early years and has continued to use it ever since, perhaps trapped into it by early run-ins with law enforcement. Since I am not going to fork out money looking into this, I'll leave it unsolved.

Delaney Responds

2010-04-15T16:17:00.012-04:00

I guess word gets around fast. Delaney responds to the last post here.

International Man of Intrigue John E. Delaney is blaming the affair on a corrupt judge. Conceivable, I suppose. For the record, the Judge in his case appears to be the judge that presided over at least portions of the Oklahoma City Bombing trials back in the '90s (edit: and, amusingly, the trial for the "Penis Pump Judge" a few years back).

He doesn't make clear his claim that the whole thing was made up, or the charges were overblown. It sounds like he wrote at least one bad check, so there is an implicit admission of at least some fraud. Whatever happened, pointing out factual information (I disclosed the fact of a conviction, which remains a fact to this date) is again seen as a smear of some sort.

Character matters when you're close to people with political power, and evidence of past fraud goes to character.

I'll be digging around for more info.

And if it ever gets expunged, I'll be sure to note it here.

I am a bit curious what "obvious" information I omitted, though.

Update: Robert Schulte retired from as DA from Comanche County last year and is reported to be traveling. He's unavailable to respond to Delaney, but having had a 16 year career after this incident casts some doubt on any overt corruption. Comanche County DA has a "Bogus Check" division so fraud may be a particular problem in the area.

Update 2: Delaney waived jury trial and was convicted by the Judge. That is what the legal business calls a slow guilty plea. So you're set up by someone, presumably a politically connected someone since that's the angle Delaney suggests. At the time of the trial you agree to waive the protection of jury (and that's exactly what a jury is for: Protection against a corrupt government prosecuting for political purposes) and put your fate in the hands of one of the members of the local politicians? That part doesn't make sense.

The sentence compared to the time served is, as Delaney points out, odd. I hope to get more information on that soon.

Update 3 (Slow day): A dismissed charge for bogus check in '93. (looks like restitution was paid and the charge was dropped, which would put the lie to Delaney's "One Time" claim). Also, a failure to appear for a "driving on a suspended license" charge from '93.

Oh, And the entire sordid affair as recorded by the Oklahoma court records. Delaney, failed to appear several times (which will usually earn you a few books tossed your way). The original sentence was reduced to time served (4 months) and fines and restitution of about 3600 dollars (paid in full) with a 2 year suspended sentence, by the same judge that Delaney is saying he exposed as corrupt. .... John Delaney's connection with reality again appears tenuous.

Update 4 (Yes Really): Just one time John? How about the 1991 guilty plea for a bogus check? Or the pair of guilty pleas to forgery in 1992?

We've gone from one charge to now seeing that Delaney is a habitual criminal. In his defense, I should apologize for scoffing at his claims of being a handwriting expert. The forgery raps prove that he has practical experience in the field. This repeat criminal is a trusted acquaintance of 4 of the 7 board members of Van Buren Township.

Birds. Of. A. Feather.

One last odd bit before I close up this post: Delaney graduated from BHS in 1980. His documents all list him as born in 1956.... So he graduated high school at the age of 24?

Hey, Don't we know this guy?

2010-04-09T14:45:00.007-04:00

Den of Thieves. Birds of a feather. etc. etc.

So Van Buren Township, has a thief (Denise Partridge) and a police impersonator (Albert Ostrowski) sitting on the board. That we knew. One of their closest associates (John Delaney), though we long knew he was odd, seems to be a fraud as well.

JOHN E DELANEY 06/02/1956
Belleville, MI; Van Buren Township, MI

94-208

Obt Merchandise & Money By Means Of A False & Bogus Check

04/17/1997

How do they find the room in that closet for all those skeletons? And what else don't we know about the people leading the township, or standing beside them?

2010-03-09T19:51:00.002-05:00

I expect most of the readers here keep up with Spielman's thoughts as well, but if you haven't seen it, he has some brief thoughts on the sure-to-be-a-fiasco-because-white-will-not-listen-to-reason hiring process for a permanent PS director. I think the college degree angle might miss the conspiracy mark a bit. If memory serves, McClanahan has a Masters in Public Administration. Still, I agree that a masters would be preferred, but significant time in SENIOR leadership positions ought to be a workable substitute if sufficient experience at the necessary tasks can be demonstrated.

Public Safety

2010-03-04T17:48:00.006-05:00

Well, I may disagree more with Delaney than I indicated earlier. The bit I missed due to bad audio may have had some important details, though I am still uncertain. It seems Delaney may have been arguing for dropping the fire duties from the position McClanahan is currently filling, and divorcing the Police and Fire components of the department. That change would be accompanied by a retitling of the job to Police Chief.

That plan has some pretty serious flaws, in my mind. Foremost, there is no reduction in staff inherent in that move. Presumably, the salary for the Police Chief would be less than what is currently proposed for the Public Safety Director, but that would be a considerably smaller savings than would be realized from actually eliminating a layer of administration. Secondly, that change carries less weight in establishing a bargaining position for the township as it negotiates contracts to help meet coming budget problems. As a matter of conjecture, it also seems targeted at removing the preference for fire experience that McClanahan lacks, and therefor clearing the way for dropping him into the permanent position.

As I see it, the best plan going into next year, would be to drop the position entirely. There would be some requirement for an adjustment to the upper command structure of the Police Department. Those changes could also be leveraged to reduce costs overall. A more detailed look at the issue may very well reveal a different strategy, but I envision at least an offer of early retirement buyouts for the most senior of the department, with the hope that one of the two current captains would find the offer attractive (this is complicated by the current job market, but that ought not be insurmountable). A retitling/mini-promotion to police chief for the remaining captain would establish the top of the command, with the remaining staff filling in a modestly revised structure below.

Supervisor Paul White (enemy of the constitution) expressed some concern about needing to study the effects of the sort of realignment I am proposing, but we have a built in solution. Interim Director McClanahan has a bit over 6 months on his contract. To facilitate this change, White can simply charge him with accomplishing those changes. By the end of his contract, McClanahan ought to be able to prepare the department for operations under this revised command structure. That McClanahan has no permanent contract, and therefore no direct interest in preserving the position, is a boon to the community.

The issue of the Fire Department is a significantly different matter. They have a workable command structure, but the issue of how to fill the duty crews would conceivably become more complicated in the absence of a combined department (for some [madigan, ostrowski, et al.] that seems to be the goal), but again ought to be at least manageable if the departments are working well together. Of course, the budget may force a rethinking of the duty crew concept. Moving to a full time (and even more expensive) system seems a financial impossibility, but increased response times from reduced duty crews may be a political one.

It's a tangled mess no matter how you look at it, but especially so in light of budget-pocalypse. Had White appointed some people (former CW4's excepted) to the public safety committee that showed a serious interest in the departments, beyond belittling and berating them, he may have gotten some useful insight out of their time. He didn't, so he likely won't.

A slightly different window on the board room

2010-03-02T19:24:00.019-05:00

My observation of VBT politics is relegated to TV watching tonight. The babysitter called in sick. Ah well. It's easier for the board to ignore good advice if they don't have to listen to it first.

... the audio is mostly useless (AT&T).

Hmmm..... except for everything he said, and the fact that he made a horrible argument for it, I totally agree with Delaney about the Public Safety director position..... I think anyway. The audio was pretty garbled in the middle. ... And suddenly White wants a consensus?

Pretty surreal start to the meeting... Delaney and White arguing over direction... And more (Pam Ruff) arguing for dropping the director. ... Either this is coordinated cover, or White wasn't against US the whole time, he's just dedicated to not doing anything anyone suggests.

Ahhhhh..... that's the backdoor route to a (expensive) full time FD?

Nice job chasing away any potential candidates though.... "We could hire someone and then maybe cut him or force him into another job later", says White.

Hah .... now he's concerned about getting the best from the PS department.

I look forward to all the POWW supporters wondering why he's ignoring them, but it seems too pat. ... I suspect we'll see this evolve more in the future.

... Swallow having to explain things to Partridge like she's 7....

Ahh .... roundabouts... sounds like not many fans in the room, but I am totally in favor. I love roundabouts. Especially in a sports car.

Non-agenda items ...

Concern about actually posting for jobs from a POWW flunky ... great idea, now.

(edit: by flunky, I really mean it on this one. The commenter was Diane Madigan, who POWW appointed to the Public Safety committee. She has repeatedly shown that she has absolutely nothing useful to offer, except derision for the police. I expect this single appointee will greatly trouble White's attempts to appear as a supporter of the boys in blue. And it ought to. Every time he tries it, I hope someone asks if he still stands behind this appointment.)

Walmart ... the quirk pathway... this looks to be the recall replacement as frequent topic for discussion. (well past 3 minutes, btw, not that I mind. It's a stupid rule) Boycott walmart? That's easy, I don't shop there, anyway.

Hah! ... CJ Marshall jokes that a roundabout would spur another recall! Good laugh from the audience too.

A good make-up moment. Great to see.

The future of the public safety director position

2010-03-02T13:54:00.003-05:00

The board will consider the approval of the job description for Public Safety Director and possibly move to advertise for a permanent director. I have something else in mind.

Since the township might very well be facing a budget apocalypse next year, I believe that the best policy for the remainder of this year is to have the interim director use the remainder to focus on one task: Establishing policies on how the police and fire department will operate without a Director for the combined departments.

The departments have already established that they can do it. Having the position open for the latter half of last year did not reveal any major structural flaws. Tidying up any of the smaller problems that might have occurred and clarifying roles and responsibilities should put both services on a trajectory for success.

For those that will surely point back to the 2004 report that led to the creation of the position, I have to point out that the economic situation was markedly different. Budgets were growing like gangbusters and, generally, everyone saw no end in sight to the windfall tax revenue that came from skyrocketing property assessments. This situation demands a different outlook: Survival.

The path that the township takes on this position will also lay the groundwork for coming contract negotiations. Filling the position, and raising the salary (as much as 30% based on the earlier release of the job description) will give cause for the unions to demand similar treatment and prevent the township from finding a workable solution for the future. The inevitable contract arbitration will likely turn largely on this one decision.

2011 budget problems

2010-03-01T20:30:00.005-05:00

How bad is it looking for Van Buren Township next year? Based on my tax assessment that recently arrived, I'm guessing the township will be looking at another 2 million dollar wallop to the wallet. That's without taking into consideration the commercial properties that are starting to plummet in value.

Visteon alone pays a few million in property taxes. With one parcel accounting for about 2.5 million, the 60% devaluation of that property translates into another million-and-a-half dollar sucker punch.

This is just skimming across a couple of numbers, but it's conceivable that next year's budget could be squeezed well over 4 million dollars (around 30%).

Someone you know probably needs to read this, but you don't know it.

2010-02-26T22:56:00.004-05:00

Not a VBT issue specifically, but something that has touched most everyone I have ever known in some way, at some time.

A Prayer From The Living World

DocZero is a semi-frequent post-er over at hotair.com and is consistently one of my favorite reads.

On why the recall defeat wasn't a total loss:

2010-02-26T20:13:00.003-05:00

Having reflected a bit on the outcome of the Feb. 23 recall vote, I've come to some largely unfounded, but hopeful conclusions about the results.

The low turnout is largely the story, but looking at the numbers ought to give White and company pause. Of the 8000+ votes he collected in November '08, only 2100 people were compelled to come out and follow up their vote. A good chunk of that is just due to the turnout vagaries of seasonal elections, but an unknown portion (and the not knowing is the key) is likely due to waning enthusiasm or frustration with his leadership (it happens to every politician at varying rates). Carrying on as they were is unlikely to improve those numbers for the four officials.

The margin is of course what decides it, but there is more to look at then just who got more. White was expecting a 70-30 win. A 2-1 or better margin would have been a clear message to charge on. The much closer than expected 56-44 result sends a different message. As noted yesterday, the officials seem to each be reading it their own way.

Downriver Utility Authority

2010-02-25T17:46:00.005-05:00

Those unfamiliar with this project would do well to skim through the July 2009 report drafted by Malcom-Pirnie. At a minimum, the first few and last couple pages identify some of the key issues. The conclusion contains some salient questions that I hope have been answered.

Bottom line, estimates are a 1.7% savings, but offset by some other costs. Since it was intended as a way to cut costs, that doesn't seem like a glowing endorsement. There may be other benefits that the report does not address, like better local control. Hopefully those will be addressed at the 1 March board meeting.

How's that unity working out?

2010-02-25T15:18:00.006-05:00

Within a couple hours of winning and issuing new calls for working together, VBT was treated to this:

What residents say is one thing, but when it gets a "like" from Trustee Albert Ostrowski, one has to wonder just how serious they are about moving forward for everyone. One also has to wonder where Ostrowski's head is in trying to "heal the community." Or does unity mean "shut-up let us do whatever we want"?

Tanner, by the way, is a particularly disgusting denizen that likes to harass other people's kids.

Edit: In case any one gets different ideas, the attitude displayed by Ostrowski here does not appear to be universally held among all 4 officials. Third hand reports put the unity efforts at varying levels. On a scale of 1-10 (1 being pitchforks for the recallers and 10 being group hugs and kumbaya) I'll rank them as a very rough:

White - 5
Wright - 7
Partridge - 3
Ostrowski - 1.5

Now what?

2010-02-24T17:02:00.004-05:00

The question I've been hearing most is: What now?

My answer: Wait and watch. Stay engaged; vigilant against bad behavior.

It's possible that for the next couple years, the board will work to get along and find paths forward that the community can get behind. Paul White may finally understand the difference between "can" and "should".

Only time will tell But ironically, the only way to know if we were right in our estimation of the situation was to lose the recall. As I told the Freep: I hope we were wrong, but I don't think we were.

Going forward, Paul White has a couple big issues looming:

1. The Frankling "file" nearly got an action before the recall vote. That's still pending, and it's believed to be a move to cover court costs that the judge said the township didn't have to pay. Frankling is a donor to White's campaign and very likely a donor to POWW recall efforts too. That ought to trigger an ethical consideration. We'll see if it does.

2. The Public Safety Directorship needs resolution. White has promised a full on search for a candidate, but has so far really dragged his feet. Beyond just getting the position permanently filled, White proposed a 30% pay increase for the position. The direction the board takes with that salary range will directly impact contract negotiations.

early vote reports

2010-02-23T14:19:00.001-05:00

ugh.... no blackberry blogging for me today. Most I could get done was a title.

Slow voting early, but the after 5 crowd seems steady. I know we have enough supporters to pull this thing out. The question is: Did we convince them to get to the polls.

Unofficial tallies should come in after 8, but I probably won't be able to post them here.

Check back just in case, unless you're at the party. Then you'll know when I do anyway.

Memory failing me.

2010-02-22T19:24:00.002-05:00

Something big is going down tomorrow .... can't remember what though ... hmm... boating? toting? noting? doting? floating? Help me out ...

Smile or Vile?

2010-02-19T08:19:00.005-05:00

Rosemary Otzman's response to Ordinance Officer David Schuler being injured on the job by an idiot with chemicals and a POWW sign?

"You had to smile"

No, Rose, we didn't. And you didn't have to smile either. If you did, it's because you're an absolutely horrible human being.

Housing and government

2010-02-19T08:17:00.002-05:00

Why the loan modification program isn't working:

(Not VBT specific, but loosely related on account of the condition of the real estate market. )

The 100th Post Post

2010-02-19T08:16:00.001-05:00

Recursively self-referential

Belleville View

2010-02-17T22:06:00.003-05:00

Austen Smith, Editor of the Belleville View, weighs in on some of the recent recall news.

A "middle of the road" piece, so everyone will find something to be outraged about.

Blog Fight

2010-02-17T22:00:00.002-05:00

Want to let the Det News know how you feel about their completely uninformed recommendation on the recall (whether you like their decision or not, they did no research at all to come up with it)?

Comments thread is here (registration required)

Failure of Leadership, compassion, decency

2010-02-17T13:08:00.001-05:00

Spielman's letter of the day is from injured officer David Schuler's wife.

I'll have to tidy up the link later. For now, this will have to do.

link

As I started to say last night:

When we were harassed last summer, POWW said nothing.

When vehicles were vandalized, POWW said nothing.

When tires were slashed,POWW said nothing.

When hate filled comments were posted by their supporters, POWW said nothing.

When an officer was injured by chemicals on one of their campaign signs, POWW tried to say nothing, but reluctantly expressed as little concern about it as they possibly could.

But when a free ad was placed in a free publication that didn't agree with them, POWW was ready with a prepared statement to condemn it.

Real leadership would show far more concern over the issues that POWW ignores than they would over a couple square inches of newsprint.

Proper leadership can go a long way towards preventing this sort of escalation, but POWW prefers politics and intimidation over their respionsibilities to the public.

POWW actually injuring people now?

2010-02-16T14:53:00.008-05:00

Update: Treated and released with irritation to hands and eyes from the substance.

The press release is here. Blogging from a blackberry has drawbacks, like linking to other sites.

The sign was across the street from an elementary school.

A sign

across the street from an elementary school

was booby trapped

with a caustic substance

Stupid does not begin to describe this.

Mostly random (and apparently highly suspicious) guess about the substance: NaOH (sodium hydroxide), just 'cause I want to say I was right, on the very small chance that I am right.

Oh, and the house this was behind (though the owner denies involvement) has a POWW sign in front too. Funny coincidence.

The video is here (no direct link, click "officer injured by sign")

What Dr. Houttaker, and POWW, aren't telling you

2010-02-15T21:52:00.004-05:00

(Edited Edit: I caught up with Dr. Houtakker at the board meeting but he refused to discuss any of his "analysis" at all. I'm not sure if that means he stands behind it or not.... He sure doesn't seem interested in defending it)

Once again, local resident Dr. Houttaker has published a detailed look at the cost of Van Buren Township's Police services. The analysis is based on a comparison with Pittsfield Township, and concludes that the Police Department for VBT is far too expensive. The comparison is far too shallow in its analysis though to support the conclusions Dr. Houttaker is reaching. Instead, both the timing of its release and the factors it ignores indicates that the study was designed around a desired result, and intended to arouse anger in the run up to the recall. Some of those factors are far too glaring to have been a simple oversight to someone standing on their PhD.

First, Dr. Houttaker conveniently leaves off 2009's figures, though they were available to him before he published his study. Including those numbers would destroy one of core arguments, that the costs are the result of previous mismanagement, and that the current leadership is bringing things under control. Indeed, the costs for 2009 are higher still than 2008. Were it a lack of proper leadership, Dr. Houttaker should be condemning the current administration as well.

In fact Supervisor White has set the stage for further increases in police wages, in spite of a fairly widely held view that the economy demands cuts. White, while freezing his own pay, granted salaried employees a two percent pay raise. Should contract negotiations again go to arbitration, that pay raise, and White's own pay freeze, will be taken into account by the arbitrator. It will be hard for the arbitrator to grant the township relief in police wages in the face of pay raises by other staff. Had White taken the 10 percent pay cut he promised during his campaign, the township would be in a far better position to reduce costs.

Second, in trying to lay the blame for costs on past supervisors, or the police themselves, Dr. Houttaker ignores the history of contract negotiations involving the department. In recent years, the contract negotiations have gone to binding arbitration. That alone disproves the allegation, or implication, of favoritism throughout Dr. Houttaker's analysis. The arbitration would rely, in part, on a comparison with Pittsfield Township, and would not result in a disparity as deep as Dr. Houttaker is claiming.

Third, the police in VBT are pulling double duty as emergency responders in the Fire Department, an arrangement not shared with Pittsfield. That duty is usually overtime for the officers and results in a sizable boost to their pay. The cost of that fire service was included by Dr. Houttaker in his some of his statistics on police pay, but removing the police from that duty would only require someone else to cover it and would not result in savings to the township. Belleville View reporter Gerry LaVaute spent considerable time looking in to the issue and reached a similar conclusion.

Fourth, and finally, though I could go on, Pittsfield Township is partially patrolled by Washtenaw County Sheriffs. The exact impact of that shared policing isn't clear, but if one were doing a truly fact based study it would have to be considered. The presence of a second police agency would directly affect the needed staff levels and costs to the township for it's own policing. The full costs for Pittsfield Township residents are likely to be partially hidden by the costs covered at the county level. Absent the inclusion of at least a guess at those costs, the numbers Dr. Houttaker indicates for VBT are artificially inflated.

Making the Police a political target for the purpose of preserving the jobs of four elected officials is deeply disturbing. The police are, far more than those officials, often the public face of the township. Asking them to respond to dangerous situations after pointing unfounded blame at them is inexcusable. It is the ultimate low, in a long history of lows for Supervisor White, the officials that support him and the members of POWW PAC that continue to fan the flames.

Transparency?

2010-02-15T21:16:00.005-05:00

The final agenda item, for what ought to be the last meeting presided over by Supervisor White, is adopting the "recommendation for attorney file #88395". So what is that exactly, and why is the board hiding behind a number that means nothing to the public?

The item was actually scheduled for a closed session meeting, but 3 board members (guess who) objected and prevented the board from closing the doors to the public. Good for them. The item does not relate to any ongoing lawsuit.

Attorney file 88395 is some internal number assigned to Paul White's request that the township attorney look into how the board could reimburse Franklin's attorney fees. Franklin incurred those fees suing the township over ordinance enforcement issues relating to his neighbors garage. The court sided with Franklin, but refused to grant his request for attorney fees.

Franklin is a contributor to Paul White's campaign, and probably POWW PAC as well. It can be assumed that his donations came with the hope, if not the promise, of having the current board reimburse him. My own feelings are mixed really, since he won the suit.

My main concern is that White is trying to make all this happen under the radar. For a man that promised transparency, and still insists that he is a paragon of it, the listed agenda item shows a real lack of commitment. It is likely that White feels trapped between a promise to a supporter and the political necessity of not being seen to shell out tens of thousands just a week before a recall vote.

But if he is going to stand on his comments about transparency and courage to do what is right, this is a great opportunity to do it. If White, and his supporting cast believe that it is the right thing to do, the residents should get a full discussion, explanation and defense of the decision.

It would be the first act of real courage I've seen from them. And yes, I might even say something nice about them, if they keep everything above board.

Coming to Post Offices Near You

2010-02-15T10:35:00.003-05:00

news link

2010-02-15T00:15:00.002-05:00

fox 2 video

Serial Absentee Ostrowski

2010-02-12T15:46:00.003-05:00

Ostrowski's horrible attendance record was highlighted here a couple weeks ago (he never attended an assigned committee meeting in 14 months). Another instance of Ostrowski not taking the job seriously has surfaced as well. Details are still being pulled together, but Ostrowski was supposed to attend some diversity/sensitivity-type training last year, after a racially charged "joke" was sent to township employees from his official account.

Ostrowski missed (skipped?) the training. It also doesn't appear that White felt the need to hold him accountable.

Spielman's recall editorial

2010-02-12T14:31:00.003-05:00

Which I am pointing to, not for the editorial (worthy read though it may be), but for the comment from one of Leon's neighbors.

POWW's Unconstitutional Actions Are Getting Noticed

2010-02-11T20:00:00.003-05:00

CBC Press release went out today:

Township Officials Attempt to Squash Pro-Recall Speech?

Recall-Targeted Van Buren Township Officials Attempt to Block Distribution of Local Newspaper

Residents of Van Buren Township are outraged over attempts by some elected Van Buren Township officials to block the distribution of a local newspaper containing articles that are critical of those Township officials. Recall-targets Paul White, Leon Wright, and Al Ostrowski have been spotted around Van Buren Township demanding that local businesses, including gas stations and party stores, throw out or refuse to display copies of the Van Buren Voice newspaper (www.vanburenvoice.com) in their businesses. In one incident, Supervisor Paul White removed all copies of the Voice from a local business when the store clerk refused to remove the papers, and then drove off in his township (taxpayer paid) vehicle.

The Van Buren Voice is a locally-published, resident-created newspaper published by Citizens for A Better Community. The Van Buren Voice has been critical of four members of the Van Buren Township government, specifically, Supervisor Paul White, Clerk Leon Wright, Trustee Denise Partridge, and Trustee Albert Ostrowski. Those four officials have been the target of a recall campaign. Van Buren Township residents will decide whether to recall the four officials on Tuesday, February 23, 2010 (www.vbtrecall.com).

Eric Feldkamp, a member of Citizens for A Better Community, expressed shock Thursday morning that elected officials would attempt to violate the First Amendment Constitutional Rights of its Van Buren Township citizens to free speech. “We've faced some pretty juvenile antics in the last year, but every time I think their behavior has hit rock bottom these officials have gone out of their way to prove me wrong.”

The week of February 8, 2010, Van Buren Township Supervisor Paul White entered a local Meijer gas station on Belleville Road , where he verbally harassed employees about the presence of the paper. Supervisor White removed a stack of the papers when the Meijer employee refused to discard them (this incident was caught on Meijer’s surveillance tape at approx 7:00am). Later that week, Supervisor White, this time accompanied by Township Clerk Leon Wright, entered the same store and again harassed the employees about the distribution of the Van Buren Voice.

Then, on Thursday, February 11, Van Buren Township Trustee Al Ostrowski was observed in another business, a local party store on Haggerty Road , instructing the employee present at the time to discard the Van Buren Voice when it was delivered.

Citizens for A Better Community has attempted to resolve this situation informally by notifying Van Buren Township’s attorney of the anti-speech behavior. Unfortunately, such attempts have not resulted in the cessation of the Van Buren officials anti-speech activities. Rebecca Kesler, attorney for Citizens for a Better Community, remarked, “Obviously, I’m disappointed that our attempts to deter Trustee Ostrowski and his fellow elected officials from continuing to violate the First Amendment Rights of the citizens of Van Buren Township have not been successful. I think it’s unfortunate whenever any elected official behaves in a manner that is inconsistent with the Constitutional Rights of anyone. Citizens For A Better Community is currently evaluating its options to protect its Constitutional Rights.”

News alert

2010-02-11T19:58:00.003-05:00

Fox 2 news might be worth watching tonight. Jus' Sayin'

Update: No, the video hasn't been posted to myfoxdetroit.com. I'm keeping an eye out for it, though. At this point, I'm hoping someone works the weekend.

1st amendment? What 1st amenmdent?

2010-02-11T09:40:00.003-05:00

Al Ostrowski is now confirmed to also be interfering with the distribution of the Voice. He was in the Huron Party store on Haggerty and told the store owner to throw them out when they cam in. 3 of the 4 elected officials facing recall are now known to be actively engaged in violating citizen's rights.

That's government suppression of first amendment rights to free speech and press. Noted first amendment advocate and POWW supporter Ken Landstrom has yet to comment.

Blogging from the road.

2010-02-09T19:13:00.003-05:00

Not much time, but I thought some of you might like to get your heart rate up a bit from the comfort of your own home. If so, check out Partridge's latest cry for sympathy. Funny how her principles bubble to the surface only after she finds herself offended.

Serious Crash on I-94 over the weekend

2010-02-08T18:28:00.006-05:00

The View is reporting a serious crash on I-94 in the early hours of Saturday morning. Engine 1 from the South Station was struck by a truck while idling in the right lane of the highway. The driver of the truck is reported to have been airlifted and in serious condition. No Fire Fighters were injured. Prayers for the driver and his family, if you are so disposed.

The Fire Engine is a casualty though. According to Lavaute it is now an ex-fire-engine. The cost of replacing a truck seems to be around 500-750,000. That's as much as half of the township's current MMRMA coverage limit for vehicles, but the policy appears to require the township to cover about 16,000 of the expense.

Update: Spielman has more. Early reports that the truck is a write off may not be true.

Brown Shirts in VBT

2010-02-06T21:44:00.009-05:00

For those that think the comparison to be hyperbole consider a few facts before I get into what brought this up. When you get to the end, look back and you'll see that each point is well supported:

1. The Sturmabteilung's maxim was "All opposition must be stamped into the ground"

2. The SA opposed, jealously the German Army (A stand-in in this analogy for the VBT police and POWW's absolute spite for them)

3. The SA was a pseudo-military arm of a political organization.

4. The SA enforced boycotts against disfavored and opposing businesses and organizations

So this week saw some interesting developments that cemented for me the aptness of this comparison. It is not one that I take lightly, but the increasingly opppositional tactics resorted to by POWW make it necessary.

First, the board meeting was an interesting experience for those in attendence and familiar with the speech control tactics of fascist (or similar leftist) groups, both historically and in current American politics. POWW clearly made a concerted effort to stack the crowd. Alone, that's not a big deal, but watching their reaction to events indicated that they had all received some instruction.

The primary evidence of this was the oddly extended applause, cheering or other noise that went beyond a natural length into a forced, extended period. The effect was to prevent the speaker (at least once for me and Bob Thorne) from responding. White of course showed no concern for the disruptive outbursts, or surprise. They were expected and welcome.

The tactic is commonly deployed by activist groups on college campuses and other politically active gathering areas. It's intent is both to prevent fair discourse and intimidate the opposition and observers to prevent further speaking out. It is an essentially uncivil, civil method of suppressing speech.

Second, POWW supporters were waiting in key areas around town this week looking for papers to be delivered. Even White, in his taxpayer provided car, was prepared to swoop in on the papers before residents could get their hands on them. Just as drowning out speech with shouts, cheers and applause prevents opposing views from airing, the effort to remove the papers is aimed at controlling the message reaching the potential voters. Lacking papers to remove, some of the POWW supporters turned to following us recallers around town, a clearly intimidating action given the current climate.

Third, POWW supporters have begun sending "messages" to businesses: If you allow pro-recall speech (the Van Buren Voice) in your stores, it will hurt your business. Todd Elwart is even proud of it:

The Voice is placed in many of the same businesses as the Independent. The Independent refuses to run anything pro-recall and shares some close ties with POWW. The Independent, and it's widespread distribution is central to their effort to influence the residents and swing the final vote. The Voice, by providing the residents the chance to hear the other side threatens that effort.

Fourth, back in the fall POWW supporters took to actual violence and verbal abuse to try and prevent the recall from getting this far. Tires were slashed, cars vandalized, petition collectors were followed and supporters were treated to repeated name calling.

Finally (though I could list more intimidation tactics), Paul White himself went into at least one local business and removed every copy of tthe Voice from the store. Before he did that, he reportedly tried to intimidate the clerk into preventing us from leaving the paper there at all. When she didn't cave (and how horrible is it that a store clerk shows more constitutional respect than a sitting government official and some former-military POWW supporters) Paul White just stormed out with the stack of papers.

POWW and their supporters are hoping to rely on silencing the truth about the actions of the board since they cannot argue the facts. The only way to do that is through a concerted, organized effort to suppress free speech. I'm not sure POWW think about any of this deep enough to understand the absolute disrespect that they show for the freedoms we have in this country. Several of their supporters are even former military servicemen, and I am greatly troubled at how they square their service to the constitution with the tactics that they support.

For our own part, the pro-recall regulars have always responded to speech we didn't like by looking for ways to deliver our own message along side the other. The Voice itself is a great example of that. When Rosemary Otzman banned us from her paper, we didn't threaten boycotts, we haven't set out each Thursday morning to scoop up all of her papers and we haven't threatened business or advertisers.

Why? Because we know that the public, given the chance to compare messages, is capable of distinguishing between the side that speaks from facts and the side that speaks through bullying and intimidation. We can look at our efforts and be proud of them. POWW, like everything else they have done, will have to deny them.

In the end, I hope that both residents and businesses see through all this for what it is. Further, they ought to realize that responding to the threats and intimidation will only make it worse. Standing up to it now, and removing the offenders is the only way to make it go away.

Edit: A nice example of the college campus tactics I described is in this video.

Bad Photoshop .... but you get the idea

2010-02-05T17:17:00.004-05:00

Quit laughing. Let's see you do better.

Why thanks for pointing that out

2010-02-04T22:21:00.003-05:00

According to the Independent, Van Buren Township Supervisor Paul White has completely failed at the one thing he really, really promised to do: Reign in police overtime. Of course, the Independent didn't point that out. They want you to see how greedy those 60-70-80 hour working Public Safety employees are.

I guess she forgot that there was a new sheriff in town to take the heat. Cindy King left before the year got started and Champagne was gone half way through. So who is to blame for the costs? Paul White.

Not only did Paul White completely fail to reduce police compensation, it's actually gone up since he took office. Paul White also fired former director Champagne for failing to do what White himself failed to do.

This brings up two interesting questions:

1. If, as Paul White describes them, the greedy police and extra-double-greedy police wives are really just upset about Paul White's super-awesome fiscal management skills cutting into their Ferrari savings funds, shouldn't we expect the police to throw their support behind compensation increasing Paul White?

2. Since world-class manager and fiscal guru Paul White couldn't accomplish the one task that he insisted should cost Champagne his job (how hard can it be really?), isn't it reasonable to conclude that the problem wasn't Champagne, and that the firing was from a complete lack of ability on the part of Supervisor Paul White to comprehend a puddle deep issue of resource and personnel management, and that Paul White should take his own medicine and let a grown-up take a look at things?

Spielman nips Babosh in Weekly Comment Contest

2010-02-04T22:10:00.002-05:00

They have no idea that there is a weekly comment contest, but I thought it might add some anticipation.... I'm cheating at my own unannounced and entirely ad hoc rules, since Spielman's comment isn't in a Letter to the Editor (Dear Me, I am writing me to ...), but I have the statutory right to do that.

Spielman is starting some running editorials on the officials and the reasons for recall. He starts with Van Buren Township Supervisor Paul White. It's about as good a summation as anything the recall has put together. That might be why he gets paid for all that newspaper business.

POWW clean-up crew thwarted by printing delays

2010-02-04T18:42:00.002-05:00

Alright, we're new at this weekly publication stuff. There are bound to be hiccups in the first few weeks.

Papers didn't arrive in time to get out for the morning crowd. That crowd is reported to include a handful of POWW personalities and maybe even Supervisor White. Several people reported seeing POWW supporters' vehicles at some prime Van Buren Township newspaper-delivering spots this morning. As you are now aware, they rolled themselves out of bed for nought.

The paper didn't make it's way around town until afternoon. Most of the delivery crew reports it to be well received, but not everyone was friendly. One area resident had a few choice words, including the "F" one and insisted that our the "Voice" ought to be illegal.

I am starting to develop a small inkling that reverence for the first amendment is not at the core of the POWW supporters' values.

Union denounces former ally

2010-02-03T08:36:00.001-05:00

January 27, 2010 - Van Buren Township, Michigan – “The American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 236 DENOUNCES its endorsement of Democratic Trustee for Van Buren Township, Denise Partridge from September 2008.

Denise has proven NOT to be a fighter on issues that affect our community. Ms. Partridge had dedicated herself to serving her union, involving herself for her entire career of 31 years at Van Buren Township. However, has now demonstrated a lack of respect for her former Union Brothers and Sisters through the recall election process.

Van Buren Township, AFSCME Local 236 DENOUNCES the previous support for Democratic Trustee for Van Buren Township, Denise Partridge.”

Property Values: Plummet; Supervisor: Glib

2010-02-03T08:20:00.002-05:00

Wayne county properties took a roughly 12% hit in preliminary assessments, but VBT was nearly double the average at 21%. Paul White commented:

"It looks like I'm not going to get paid next week," said Van Buren Township supervisor Paul White. "This is going to have a huge impact in 2011."

He will, of course, get paid next week (3 weeks from now remains up in the air). His recognition of the impact on 2011 though doesn't square with his recent budget actions. In approving the budget, White stated they were bringing forward about 100,000 from the 2011 budget. There was an additional 35,000 that had to be made up due to an error in the approved budget, and 70,000 worth of salary and benefits for the Public Safety Director position has yet to be funded.

The acknowledged spending puts us at around 200,000 in the hole already for next year. Both Paul White and director McClanahan have made statements indicating they were seeking additional spending of around 230,000 for public safety. That puts the township north of 400,000 for spending that will ahve to be made up in 2011.

Paul White's glib response should concern everyone. He jokes about not getting a paycheck, when the real impact will be on the employees of the township that will actually be impacted by those cuts. If history is any predictor though, his friends' paychecks are safe.

To the Supervisor:

2010-02-03T00:56:00.003-05:00

In response to rumors that an effort was made last week to remove copies of the Van Buren Voice from the township hall, and that staff were instructed to prevent its distribution in the future, I felt it important to communicate the importance of recognizing the right to speech in our society.

Actions taken to restrict the content of speech allowed within the township hall is a violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. It is government directed censorship. It is not acceptable. While you may not like the editorial content of certain publications, you may not solely evaluate those publications for agreeable content in deciding if it should be allowed.

The Independent is a print publication of similar size, form and function as that of the Van Buren Voice. The free distribution of speech in the form of the Independent has not been contested by township officials and it's longstanding placement within the senior center and other areas of the township hall establishes the right of other citizens and citizens' organizations to carry out similar forms of speech in the same areas. (It would be reasonable, for example, to object to speech in the form of shouting in the halls. However, if you allow one person, or those representing one view to shout in the halls, you cannot restrict the right of others to similarly do so)

The fact that the publisher of the paper is a different type of legal entity than the Independent is immaterial. Speech is speech. The case is bolstered by the recent decision of the Supreme Court (Citizens United v FEC ) which in part recognized that all speech, regardless if the status of it's originator as citizen, corporation or other organization, is equally protected under the law. From the decision:

Because speech is an essential mechanism of democracy—it is the means to hold officials accountable to the people—political speech must prevail against laws that would suppress it by design or inadvertence. Laws burdening such speech are subject to strict scrutiny, which requires the Government to prove that the restriction “furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. ... Premised on mistrust of governmental power, the First Amendment stands against attempts to disfavor certain subjects or viewpoints or to distinguish among different speakers, which may be a means to control content. The Government may also commit a constitutional wrong when by law it identifies certain preferred speakers. There is no basis for the proposition that, in the political speech context, the Government may impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers.

Further, it is not a matter of government prerogative to decide which speech constitutes "news" for the purpose of recognizing speakers. The speech distributed in the form of the Independent is considered news by some and editorial content by others. That view is, of course, held by other residents about the Voice, but its classification as such is a matter for individual citizens to make. Those that do not find redeeming virtue in either publication are welcome to avoid it, or speak out against it in the many ways afforded to us. The government must trust the citizens to make the choice for themselves. (The effort of bloggers to be recognized as legitimate journalists has resolved in their favor, in spite of dissimilar characteristics, including often declared support for candidates or initiatives, when compared to "traditional" media organizations.)

In the mean time you are welcome to a copy. They are free (the best price). Your employees, similarly are welcome to one. Should they wish to use their personal time to browse the paper, that is their right as citizens of the United States.

The Voice will likely arrive at the township Thursday morning to take it's place alongside other speech from other organizations distributed in similar form. In recognition of the cherished freedoms afforded to us by those that have given their lives to preserve it, I hope to see you there to welcome it. Not because you like the paper, but because you love our freedoms.

P.S. The decision also highlights nicely the first amendment conflict inherent in your inconsistent use of your gavel to declare speakers out-of-order when they present uncomfortable topics for discussion.

Next week: POWW Book Burning

2010-02-01T19:55:00.002-05:00

OK, not quite.

POWW personalities and Van Buren Township Supervisor Paul White have taken a step that way in the last few days though.

One move is by scooping up copies of the "Voice" around town. Supervisor white himself stalked the township hall looking for the paper. Supposedly he demanded that directors not allow the paper in the building. I guess Supervisor White has decided that the government is now in the business of deciding what messages are acceptable for residents to hear. Dissenting opinions receive the full tyrant treatment.

In another display of political thuggery, someone or a few of the members of the school board have decided that demanding public humiliation is the best way to handle recall supporters. One school employee made the mistake of accepting 7000 free ads for the school in the Voice's first edition. At least one member of the school board responded by demanding that the superintendent force the employee to issue some public apologies. For what, it's unclear. For that matter, to those demanding the apologies, it's unimportant what they are. The important point is that it lets everyone else know that anything but strict adherence to the government approved agenda will be met with punishment. No word yet on the board pushing for the Marching Band to adopt the goose-step for upcoming performances.

I'm not sure how the board stacks up politically, but Brenda McClanahan, wife of controversial POWW appointment Carl McClanahan is on the board. She should be remembered for recommending the firing of Gerry Champagne while knowing that her husband was in-line for the job. She did so in spite of the remainder of the board pointing out that it was a clear violation of the ethics policy. It's reasonable to guess that she is involved, if not the ring leader, in this exercise of brass knuckle politics.

This of course does not lend itself to kind comparisons with historical political movements. Exit question: Can POWW get the trains to run on time?

A reminder from last summer

2010-01-30T09:30:00.005-05:00

The below video is from last summer, shortly after Champagne was terminated. The two minutes of this video are a big piece of how the recall got kicked off. In it, Al Ostrowski is questioned by the Police Captains about his vote and POWW's motivations for hiring Carl McClanahan. The revelations are not only an embarrassment to POWW, but also Carl McClanahan and the township. What amazes me is that, after this all came out, the board went ahead with approving McClanahan as the Interim Public Safety Director for Van Buren Township. Ostrowski was the deciding vote in the 4-3 decision. After his statements, it's absolutely shameful that he did not see a reason to vote no. His "yes" vote was a vote to accept the pressure and racist motives that he admitted led up to the decision. Board members have a responsibility to stand up to discrimination, but POWW have repeatedly shown that it is not inclined to do so when standing on principle goes against their personal political objectives

Prize Purse

2010-01-29T22:27:00.002-05:00

Bowling : Rollercoaster ride, but not bad since I haven't bowled in a while.

Bowling Fundraiser: Fantastic! Somewhere around $3000 raised in one highly social night.

Raffle : I won a purse! There was a scuffle in the car when my wife thought she should have it. For now, I managed to keep hold. I think she is planning to stay up later than me and swipe it. I may have to sleep with the thing. But, it is PRAAAAADA, so I don't mind.

Tomorrow: Shoe Shopping!

New news

2010-01-28T23:19:00.004-05:00

Some of you may have spotted it around town, or spotted it in your car as you were driving stacks of them around town, this morning. The Van Buren Voice has arrived.

Run one: 7000 copies.

The paper was largely put together because the staff of the Independent told us directly that they would not run any letters supportive of the recall. Those regular Independent readers may have noticed that a great deal of column space has been given to the officials subject to recall, while the citizens that are for the recall seemed to have disappeared.

That's an odd stance for something titled "the Independent, but it's an odd staff. Once upon a time, journalism prided itself on its independence (no accident there) from the government message, and it's questioning of those in power was seen as a responsibility of the profession. Rosemary Otzman has pitched all that aside and decided that being part of the system is better than challenging it.

When was the last time Rosemary asked a tough or critical question of Supervisor White? When, last, did the Independent cast a critical eye on the board majority? Regardless of whether or not they feel it warranted, they owe it to her readers to at least look into what is causing them concern.

The Independent has decided that selling their own opinions to the public is more important than giving the public a chance to draw it's own conclusions. The Independent staff have traded their responsibilities for the favors of POWW and in doing so sold out their readers.

The Recurring "Allen Babosh writes an awesome letter" post

2010-01-28T22:29:00.002-05:00

At Spielman's

The best part:

6. Mr. White states, “The ultimate question is: are the recallers the people you want to run Van Buren Township.”

a. We want the community to choose and run Van Buren Township. ... Mr. White the ULTIMATE QUESTION IS do we want POWW to run our township anymore?

Mike Tyson type upper cut, with a bit of ear nibble for good measure.... That is the real question. No one in the recall inherits the position when the recall is finished. The voters get another shot at electing the responsible leadership the thought they were getting in November 2008. But before we get to the question of who comes next, we have to ask ourselves if the lawsuits, disrespect, campaign promises, personal attacks and dishonesty are the way we want Van Buren Township to be represented.

Chamber of Commerce keeps a seat ready....

2010-01-28T18:09:00.004-05:00

but Van Buren Township Trustee Al Ostrowski doesn't seem to want to fill it. It's a shame, in such a tough economy, that our officials would ignore the portion of the community most likely to help us through.

The Chamber meetings are not the only ones skipped, but they sure seem like the most important. Ostrowski, is of course responsible for his own attendance, but Supervisor White ought to answer for why he has allowed this to go on for so long. If Ostrowski won't attend the meetings he is assigned to go to, he should be replaced by someone who will.

The question this raises is: Is Paul White unaware of Ostrowski's abysmal record, or does he not view the meetings as worth attendance? In any case, White should have been asking for updates, ideas or some information on how the meetings were going. It's another lapse in management that could cost the township's residents, albeit indirectly through missed job opportunities.

Edit: Resident Shannon Ostby on the subject over at the Eagle

Dirty politics for thee, but not for me.

2010-01-27T17:25:00.003-05:00

Van Buren Township Trustee Denise Partridge turned to the political martyr card in her latest display of selfish high-mindedness. The letter is in response to the mention in a recall mailout of her run in with the law 20 years ago (from what I have heard, she was picked up for shoplifting a carton of cigarettes at a local gas station). Trustee Partridge is, of course, appalled at the idea of someone mentioning an incident from her past. There are two angles to consider on this, but it sure seems relevant either way.

First, voters have the right to know about the past decisions of the people they are electing to office. In the same way that an employer asks if you're ever been convicted of various crimes and other questions relating to your background, they ought to know about a candidate before the election. The campaign is, after all, a very public interview process for a job. But this incident does not appear to have been brought forward during the 2008 election. Voters never had the opportunity to evaluate then-candidate Partridge for a position that is primarily one charged with maintenance of trust.

Second, Trustee Partridge has hypocritically shown no concern for the character attacks on Champagne, either during his dismissal hearings, or the many statements that have come from the POWW camp since. Trustee Partridge remained silent over the unfounded statements about the motives of the recallers coming from the POWW camp. Trustee Partridge has ignored the shameful, and baseless comments targeted at my own personal life coming from the POWW camp. But Trustee Partridge wants to claim the high ground on this issue. It should be pointed out that the incident pointed out by the recall flyer actually occurred, whereas those coming from both officials and supporters are at best unsupported opinions, and at worst intentional slanders of character. Which one smacks more of dirty politics?

The decision by Trustee Partridge to speak out now shows that despite her statements otherwise, she has not moved far from that decision 20 years ago. Theft is a crime of selfishness; It ignores the impact on the business owners and manufacturers and other members of the community that must pay for the product that the thief took for free. In choosing to speak out now, only in defense of her own character rather than when the character of others was attacked, Trustee Partridge has shown that 20 years later it is still, at times, only selfish interest that motivates her.

Suits cost money

2010-01-26T19:21:00.002-05:00

Non-vbt local officials seem to be coming around to the "administration is expensive" mindset. Will ours?

Debate?

2010-01-26T19:01:00.003-05:00

POWW are putting a good amount of effort into convincing the public that they are the ones running on the issues. That should make the opportunity to debate a no-brainer (heh). So of course POWW responded to our request with enthusiasm for the opportunity to put us in our place, right?

If you answered "Yes" you have not been paying attention. They did reply with enthusiasm, of a sort. Van Buren Township Supervisor Paul White's response was:

NO!!

Now, I didn't bold it for emphasis, or add the exclamation points for effect, or theatrically make the text real big. That is exactly how White's response looked when Bob Thorne received it today.

It just drips scowl, doesn't it? POWW know they have no single issue that they can play in their favor and have been reduced to hiding from the public while calling the opposition (us) greedy, liars, immoral, gender-confused and a host of other things. P, O and W have collectively showed a lack of courage in standing up to White and his headlong rush towards political revenge. It should be no surprise that they continue that tradition here.

How much is this recall going to cost?

2010-01-24T22:55:00.003-05:00

POWW have often stated that the recall will cost the township $25,000 per election (A second election will be necessary if the recall is successful. The four board members that comprise POWW have had access to elections data for a full year, so one would expect that the expenses for elections would support that number. One would, only if you haven't grown to expect that POWW don't do facts too well.

The school board election in November cost the township about $10,000. Not insignificant, but far less than the numbers our own elected officials have been claiming. The average cost to each resident is about $0.40 for each election. Clerk Wright specifically is responsible for these elections and ought to know the costs, and Supervisor White's repeated claims of "extreme fiscal responsibility" would seem to include the effort to know what the costs of the townships various responsibilities are.

The conclusion one is left with is that either the officials have failed to research their claims, or are making up figures simply to drive voters to the "no" box come time to vote. Neither is an acceptable course for public officials.

(For comparison's sake: One insurance deductible for a lost lawsuit is $75,000 or about 7.5 recall elections)

On the advice of the attorney?

2010-01-24T22:46:00.002-05:00

The ballot language authored by Supervisor Paul White, Clerk Wright and Trustee Partridge (Ostrowski did not respond) is a lie, or at least intentionally omits all the attorney's various communications. The following transcript (hopefully it will be replaced by video soon) includes Paul Whites own comments proving it:

December 1^st, 2009 Van Buren Township Board Meeting Time Stamp 28:53

Phil Hart: “Supervisor White”

Paul White: “Trustee Hart”

PH: “Yesterday, in the Budget Meeting I advised the board I would be calling the Attorney, to speak to him on why, if there was a reason we have not, that you have not brought on Mr. McClanahan and he said “Yes there was”. It is his recommendation to you not to do it. So, without getting into specifics, that is a very um tall order from our attorney and I think you been complying with him and now your thinking you just want to do it.

PW: No sir

PH: So

PW: You are making an incorrect statement, sir.

PH: Bottom line I talked to the attorney and the attorney is not recommending bringing on, his recommendation is to go for a full search for the best candidate the search to serve this community the best way possible. Find the best candidate that can do that job. Now if you think it is anything different and you haven’t been recommended that Paul, then tell me. But, that is exactly what the attorney said.

PW: The attorney made the specific statement to me that I can bring the appointed interim Public Safety Director on at any time, his recommendation was that I strongly consider not doing that."

The importance of a manager having the ability to distinguish between "can" and "should" cannot be overstated. "Can" I shout "fire" in a crowded theater? Yes. "Should" I? No. It will land me in a pile of legal trouble. Can Supervisor Paul White bring McClanahan on board? Yes. "Should" he? No, but apparently his thought process never made it that far. Too often, White follows through on what he can do, as if legal authority is the only criteria for decision making. Impact on lawsuits, trust in leaders, employee morale are not factors that White weighs.

Critique, dissent and democracy

2010-01-22T21:33:00.004-05:00

A combination of issues got me doing some philosophical thinking today. I intend to burden you with some heavy reading as a result. If you cam here looking for gossip and a bit of sarcasm, tonight is not the night.

The oft repeated response from Supervisor Paul White, et al. that the recall is anti-democratic and that the constant questioning of the officials has prevented them from doing their job has always rankled me more than most of their other arguments (even the ones that suggest my opposition is based in greed, stupidity, gender confusion something else). On reflection, I think my disposition towards ire for this position is based in my passion for the foundations of for the American brand of liberty and democracy, and the implications that those foundations have for responsibilities of citizenship and the necessity of informed and civil debate.

My thoughts on the issue coalesced today around a back-of-the-book blurb on my newly acquired copy of Michel Foucault's "The Politics of Truth" (My concern that I might be getting ahead of myself by blogging about this before I read the book is outweighed by my urge to get some thoughts down in readable form). The quote from Foucault reads "Critique will be the art of voluntary insubordination and reflected intractability," and in it I found much to consider; specifically the concept of "critique" and the importance of "involuntary insubordination" as it relates to the American idea of the sovereign citizen. Both of those may remind the reader of the frequent refrain during the W presidency that "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." It is, in a sense that refrain which I am addressing here, though I think it deserves significant refining.

First then, the central nature of debate is the inclusion of a "critique" of opposing arguments. The term critique ought not be confused with the more pedestrian meaning of criticism, in that it is not simply the highlighting of flaws. Critique, it may be worth considering, shares an etymological root with criteria, or the application of a defined set of rules for evaluating or testing an object, idea, performance, etc. Effective and reasoned debate, and the act of giving a critique must then include some standard against which the opposing sides are judged.

Absent that standard, no evaluation can be made of which side is the superior argument. Critique, absent the standards of evaluation, devolves into that pedestrian form of criticism as an act of opposition by identifying and amplifying flaws. They may or may not be legitimate concerns, but will not receive proper evaluation by the observer of debate or those undertaking it. The end result is an argument that is never resolved despite the growing exasperation of the debaters.

Critique also, in terms of democracy, is an essential function of the citizen / voter. The act of voting is more than choosing to support a party, or choosing sides. Voting is an act that influences the future of government and in doing so necessitates, through obligation to those that will share in the outcome of that decision, that those participating in the process critique the options. Again, that critiquing means more than selecting among several arguments, but establishing the criteria by which those arguments will be evaluated.

In our own Van Buren Township microcosm the absence of a forum for political discourse, a result of 3 minute rules, quick gavels and once weekly papers being the only outlets for discussion, forces those participating in the debate to set aside the establishment of criteria so that each my fully use their short window with an audience to "make their point." We ultimately arrive at a point where arguments are nominally truthful or accurate against a particular set of criteria, but fail to appear so to those with a different set of rules. This does leave us in a feedback loop where even the criteria must be critiqued before being settled on, but democracy isn't easy.

The second portion of the quote (several paragraphs ago) also sparked some thought about the nature of our concepts of liberty and the proper place, within those concepts, of the citizen and the government. It is a matter of elementary education that the constitutional concept of government is "of and for the people" and bit later the awake student will learn that "governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed." Foucault's observation about critique and it's act of voluntary insubordination, in part highlights the ever present struggle between the governed and the government for supremacy in our society (or any other).

This returns us to the idea that "dissent is the highest form of patriotism," although I hope I have convinced the reader that the dissent ought to take the form of "critique" rather than "criticism," in as much as that patriotism is founded on the idea that it is the governor that must forever earn the consent of the governed. For my own part I would go beyond the argument that dissent or critique is mere patriotism and suggest that dissent is the exercise of sovereignty of the individual.

Again, in our few square miles of the world, we find ourselves engaged in the struggle between the governed and the governor(s). While in most cases the consent of the citizens is given at set intervals, state law allows for the governed to reconsider that consent. The process is the recall that we are nearing a close to. It is a process that is, at it's core, both patriotic and democratic. It is an opportunity for citizens to remind the elected officials that, in a nation of sovereign individuals, it is the government that is subordinate to the people. The process and the people would be better served if the criticism had a chance to become a critique and the associated debate were allowed to flourish.

I doubt however that Supervisor White will see the benefit in doing so. His opposition to critique is, for the reasons I have listed above, the greatest source of my passion for his removal. For all of POWW's bluster about the recall being undemocratic, the fact is that criticising it as such displays a lack of insight about the place of government and the nature of liberty.

The act of critique is an essential function of the citizen establishing that it is the government that must forever earn the consent of it's citizens.

Before I close, the final portion of the quote ought not be overlooked. Intractability is a trait that one might fairly apply to both myself and Supervisor White. It is the "reflected" part that deserves the consideration. Proper critique will place the evaluator in a position where they have arrived at a position only after considerable weighing of both the criteria and the arguments. I propose that it is the habit of White, et al. to arrive at a position, then identify the criteria that ought to be evaluated. This is not "reflected intractibility" it is intellectual bunkering or the defense of a position for the sake of maintaining the position.

Allen Babosh vies for VBT Laureate

2010-01-21T20:06:00.004-05:00

Another solid letter-to-the-editor performance from Allen. This has the potential to be a weekly series.

Slow news day otherwise, unless you want to know that the township requested a 10 business day extension for a FOIA. That does of course mean that there is something to review, and there is a good chance that the something that has to be reviewed is a "reservation of rights" letter from the MMRMA telling the township we might have to eat the whole million from the lawsuit that Van Buren Township Supervisor Paul White landed us in. But, slow news day.

Elections Clerk stirs up 1st amendment controversy

2010-01-20T21:24:00.007-05:00

Van Buren Township Elections Clerk Joanne Montgomery jumped into the recall mix by filing a complaint against fellow employee David Schuler for having a recall magnet on his personal vehicle (David Schuler is one of the employees that Trustee Partridge shunned at an employee recognition ceremony, and is known to support the recall). Ms. Montgomery is apparently not bothered by others doing the same:

Aside from the hypocrisy of the complaint, there is no grounds for the township to insist that an employee remove something from their personally owned vehicle, that they use only for personal transportation, and park on public property. Ostrowski has a right to do it and so does Schuler. This does however highlight the oft discussed complaints about harassment of recall supporters. Supervisor Paul White proved his disposition for political revenge during the summer months, and has apparently not backed away, in spite of the position it has put him in. It is unfortunate that Ms. Montgomery has decided to join their game. That her position is the elections clerk is worth considering as we approach the day of the vote.

Van Buren Township Firefighter, and avid First Amendment quoter, Ken Landstrom should be springing to Schuler's defense any moment now....

Firefighters Don't Usually Add Fuel to Fires

2010-01-20T20:39:00.008-05:00

Of course, usually in Van Buren Township is lately a sure sign of a following "but not this time."

So, here goes. I know. You're shocked

Firefighters don't usually add fuel to fires, but not this time. Still not wanting to let a hateful comment go to waste (the original comment has been covered here and at Spielman's blog), Van Buren Township Firefighter Ken Landstrom decided to poke his head out of his POWW safe zone and spread some stupid over the recall's way. Landstrom, in a fit of what passes for wit over on the POWW site, confirmed his approval of "hateful and spiteful" comments. No, really. That's a quote.

This latest low point comes after Landstrom and Trustee Ostrowski dismissed the concerns of a local civil rights group's executive director as "embarrassing" and insisted that she "get a life." No, really. That's a quote.

edit: I want to note that I am only including "Van Buren Township Firefighter" before Ken Landstrom since he uses a picture of himself in his gear alongside his noteworthy comments that have appeared on Facebook. Absent that self-identification (and my disdain for using any uniform as a prop for political views) I don't think what he does for a living is terribly relevant.

A POWW comments follow-up

2010-01-19T21:45:00.004-05:00

The POWW comments directed at me got the attention last week, but there is one other bit that I think is of interest. As I mentioned earlier, POWW's comments earned them a courtesy visit by the executive director of the Triangle Foundation, Alicia Skillman. The director left a fairly friendly comment on their page that stated why she was contacting them, who the Triangle Foundation was and what sort of work they did.

The comment stayed up for about a day and got a response from both Trustee Ostrowski and Firefighter Ken Landstrom. Those two responses were not what the Triangle Foundation was hoping for, or in any way reflective of how a reasonable person would respond when a fairly prominent civil rights group comes knocking. The comment then disappeared, but I did not comment because I thought that Ms. Skillman might have been responsible for removing it.

I found out today that my feeling on that was wrong. Clearly, my expectation that most people behave mostly intelligently was not met by those commenting over at the POWW page. Instead of a positive discussion with Ms. Skillman, POWW deleted the comment and gave her the boot.

POWW booted the director of a local civil rights group for inquiring about their comments. This is one of those rare moments of consistency from the POWW camp, since White gave both Lori Werner and I the same treatment. It is probably not, however, the type of consistency that Van Buren Township is looking for in their elected officials.

White blames women for township tension

2010-01-18T16:35:00.002-05:00

White, in a conversation this summer, blamed women for the tension in the township hall. That's probably unsurprising for most readers here, but below is video of one resident discussing the conversation he had with White, Wright and Partridge. Wright and Partridge helpfully defend White by confirming the comment.

In the interest of transparency:

2010-01-18T16:29:00.004-05:00

A request for a debate, in a township that is completely without a forum for discussing issues as a result of Paul White refusing to allow comments, is met with White.... refusing to allow the comment.

White trying to hide from comments

2010-01-16T17:07:00.004-05:00

Here are two clips of White refusing to acknowledge the comments his supporters made:

The board, collectively, has a responsibility to it's citizens to speak out against offensive behavior, not insist on the residents' silence. Unfortunately for VBT, whatever the behavior of POWW or it's supporters, White will do everything he can to make sure it is allowed to go on.

Spielman on POWWgate

2010-01-15T23:34:00.002-05:00

Worth a read.

This is not the labrador you are looking for

2010-01-15T12:32:00.007-05:00

Paul White welcomed concern troll Marie Charles to the team, then asked about her cute little puppy:

I like dogs too. I like them so much, I thought I spotted something odd. On the left is a Lab:

On the right: Not a lab. For the sake of comparison, I put together another side-by-side. On the left is a pit bull:

On the Right is... a pit bull(?). It's odd that someone comes from nowhere, causes trouble on the recall site, runs to the POWW site and happens to share Al Ostrowski's love for the breed. It's a sham so transparent it ought to be embarrassing. It's POWW though, so it won't be.

edit: I added a (?) after ther last pit bull, since I cannot claim conclusively from that picture alone that the dog is a pit. There are some breeds with similar enough heads to be one of those. It is still definitely not a lab.

POWW Management Philosophy Revealed:

2010-01-15T09:46:00.002-05:00

Most Ironic Use of the First Ammendment Award

2010-01-14T23:05:00.005-05:00

In what's shaping up to be a serious issue over intolerance, Van Buren Township Firefighter Ken Landstrom decided that the first amendment was a great place to circle POWW's intolerance wagons. I won't delve into the constitutional issues here, other than to say that amendment one definitely protects POWW's right to be intolerant bullies. But it also protects my right to speak out about it when they do. Ironically, that's a right that Supervisor Paul White didn't feel was necessary to acknowledge at the Jan 13th board meeting.

That's not the end of the irony. Landstrom tossed in the last bit of the amendment too. We've suffered through countless POWW claims of the recall being anti-democratic. But Landstrom has helpfully, and ironically, pointed out what the recall has been replying all along. The recall is the essence of democracy, as the 1st amendment expressly protects:

the right of the people ... to petition the government for a redress of grievances

Petitions, eh? We got about 3000 signatures on ours. On Feb 23, our grievances will be addressed.

Ostrowski steps in it

2010-01-14T20:56:00.006-05:00

POWW, or at least O, seem to be operating under the impression that I or another "recaller" are Lance and possibly their recently added "fan" as well. The new fan, according to her profile and her comment, is the executive director of the Triangle Foundation in Detroit. Word must be out about the shot they took at me a few days ago. In characteristic POWW fashion, Ostrowski shows no recognition that their own actions got them to this point.

For those that didn't see the meeting, I attempted to give White and the others a chance to step back from the comments (it was already established that they were aware of them), but he kept gaveling me down, insisting that he wasn't going to allow politics to be discussed. Another resident followed to speak out about the comments, but White gave her the same treatment. None of the other board members spoke up to voice any concern either. This is all in the same night that both Partridge and Wright confirmed that White is a chauvinist, so at least we have consistency for once (I'll see about getting video of that when it becomes available).

Since they not only took a shot at me, but doubled down on it when they were pushed to remove the comment, then began posting about how important acceptance was while never apologizing, I'll be keeping an eye on how this develops.

Overtime Plans

2010-01-14T17:20:00.005-05:00

Is Jerry Champagne back in the Van Buren Public Safety Department? Referencing overtime costs the public safety director stated:

“We’ll attempt to minimize it. It’s not a given that we can do that. We may have to backfill certain patrols, but we’ll attempt to limit overtime as much as possible.”

Well, that sounds like Champagne. That's essentially what Champagne kept telling White last year when White, looking to fire Champagne, kept insisting was not an acceptable answer to his requests for overtime plans. That's essentially the statement that White insisted was an insubordinate answer to his insistence on an over-time reduction plan when Champagne was fighting to keep his job.

So why am I digging up old quotes? I am not. That quote is from Interim Director McClanahan at the January 13th public safety meeting. I wonder how Director McClanahan will take to his new boss disciplining him over that statement, you know, for consistency.

There are other interesting bits at the link. After all the fuss White put up about needing to squeeze the budget, and sending out flyers to voters congratulating himself for doing so, White is apparently spending time putting money back into the Public Safety budget, $230,000 so far, based on his own accounts. The budget meetings certainly contained plenty of his insistence that none of this was necessary, and an excess of opposition directed at those opposed to the cuts. So what changed?

Now, as far as I can tell, none of this money has been authorized by the board, so I am unsure of how White is claiming to be adding the funds. I'll be checking into it though.

Allow me to introduce "the concern troll"

2010-01-13T16:08:00.005-05:00

The "concern troll" is a particularly dishonest breed of internet denizen that attempts to gain credibility by pretending to agree with one side, just before they trash it. The intended effect is to seem like a "reasonable" person that has "had enough" and pull those that want to seem reasonable over to the other side. The recall had a visit today from a concern troll, who was unceremoniously ejected. Let's have a look at what showed up shortly after over at the POWW facebook page:

Marie Charles: I thought you might find this interesting. I have been a member of the Van Buren recall since it started because I wanted to find out more information.

Really? You never signed a petition, are not a registered voter and no one has heard of you. The facebook account had no activity except for joining "Van Buren Recall" and the POWW fan page. But having established her bonafides as the "reasonable person" the author continues right down the concern troll script.

This morning I posted on their page that I was unhappy with the fighting between Mr. Feldkamp and your new group. I didn’t think that it was appropriate that they were doing this if they expected support.

This is the "I have concerns" part, and is where the concern troll gets its name. The poster does not, of course, believe any of this. On other scams this is called "the turn". That leads us to the sell, the point of the whole exercise, to seem like "reasonable people" have only one choice in the matter.

Well at little while ago they deleted my post and removed me as a member. I guess that showed me that they could not take constructive criticism and that they are just mean people. Please know that you have my full support and will fight for you to stay.

With bonafides in place, and sufficiently registered "reasonable concerns" the concern troll points out how vile her now abandoned "friends" have been. Of course, their newly adopted home had this person's support all along, but what would be the fun in someone saying I'm a big supporter and always have been, and will be from here on out!

Dishonest? Yep, but that's POWW.

Update: There is a Marie Charles in the area, but over in Romulus. That at least rules out the sockpuppet, but why is POWW importing help?

Not content to completely embarrass themselves

2010-01-12T23:14:00.006-05:00

Yep, there's more.... what else to say.... I bet the 4 officials happily attend fundraisers for this group that they "have no control over."

And now the Fire Department is weighing in.

Doubling Down

2010-01-12T13:47:00.005-05:00

It is apparently my fault that the POWW PAC has tried to get my goat a bit with a remarkable flair of insensitivity. After thinking it over for a full day POWW have decided that, even though they pulled the comment, the sentiment still stands. Charming. Yet again, POWW acts, someone else is to blame. I invite someone to quote (with links) the comments they feel insult their intelligence, education or profession).

Click the image for their considered response.

Images relevant to the below post

2010-01-11T22:35:00.009-05:00

The "macaca moment"

2010-01-11T21:57:00.008-05:00

Update: The comment has been modified to remove the worst bits. I guess they didn't feel that they had embarrassed themselves enough to remove the whole comment. It's more proof that they really do stand behind the sentiment.

Original:

Those of us that have been astute observers of POWW for the last few months are no doubt aware of their vindictiveness, intolerance and vulgarity (not strictly in the linguistic sense). To the casual observer, the distinction has probably been less obvious.

Well, no more. In a brilliant display of their absolute lack of moral or ethical compass, and in reaction my ability to meet them at every turn with competent (though not perfect) and calm counterargument, POWW have made it easy for everyone to see just what sort of group they are.

Jumping right past the usual personal attacks, POWW decided to suggest that my passion for recalling them comes from, among other slightly less offensive reasons, my "relationship, manhood and gender identity issues"

While they were typing that, it probably didn't occur to them that I might be working so hard to oust them because they are the type that would sink to commenting on imagined "relationship, manhood and gender identity issues,"but that's the sort of deep thinkers we're dealing with.

As I'm writing this the comment has been up for 10 hours, and received 3 "likes," so it's no rogue commenter. The comment seems to reflect the contempt that POWW has for the people that are not POWW. It's insensitive and offensive to those that struggle with just those issues that they attribute to me, and far beyond the sort of personal attack that can be overlooked by any thought of momentary lapse in judgment.

I do of course have all the comments saved, should POWW decide to flush them down the ol' memory hole. I'm nefarious like that.

Can anything else make the choice clearer on Feb 23.

Faking It.

2010-01-10T16:20:00.004-05:00

Bits from the "faking it" episode I referenced earlier. The specific scene I mentioned isn't in there, but it's entertaining if you've not seen the show before. Slight language warning for those with sensitive ears.

Bragging rights?

2010-01-09T21:48:00.004-05:00

Usually when you brag about something, it's an accomplishment. With POWW, they've decided to brag about a colossal screw up. Here's the link, straight off the POWW website:

Water Improvement Project Creates Savings in Water Rates, Water Pressure, and Insurance Rates

That's the same project that got featured in the independent and got a mention from me just yesterday. Just a reminder that project could very well generate some more costs in lawsuits, not to mention the possibility of cost overruns on the project itself (something someone will have to check into). Take a look at the link again.... POWW are bragging about "creating savings". Some of you are probably used to this by now, but I still don't quite get how "cost savings" and "lawsuit" go together.

The only thing I can figure that explains this inclusion on their list of reasons to keep them around is they have completely lost track of which projects they have horribly botched.

And now: Inspiring facebook comments by POWW

2010-01-08T18:57:00.002-05:00

Leon Wright Hello everyone

Fin.

Water Lines and Flower Beds and Touching Stories

2010-01-08T16:21:00.004-05:00

This relates to my moments-earlier post

So the Water Line project has stumbled and dragged from mishap to misstep and is now somewhere approaching mayhem. DPW Director Knepper has been involved, but doesn't seem able to bring this under control. The solution to all the problems is to now dig a huge hole and build a road on a resident's property. Likely the same resident that has had to put up with so much of the mismanagement already.

White's management of the situation has been non-existent. Sure, there is a director of the Water and Sewer Department that has direct control, but Supervisor White also has a responsibility to ensure that work is done and crises are handled. I'm going relate a story here, and just don't want to think up a good transition statement:

There was a British TV show called faking it (I think there was an equivalent that aired in the US for some time too) in which some young person was given a month to learn how to perform a skill that they had never done before. After a month they were expected to be able to fool a panel of experts into believing that they had years of experience, by competing against other people with actual years of experience (a task that they were largely successful at).

One episode was training a 19 year old kid to conduct an orchestra. At one point in the show, when his student was feeiling crushed with pressure, the pro conductor simply told the orchestra to start on their own and play a piece. Without the guidance of the conductor, the orchestra played beautifully. The conductor used that moment to tell his student that the conductor's role is not to make the orchestra play, they are quite capable of doing that themselves. The conductor, the professional related, is there to inspire the orchestra to perform, and to manage the occasions when mistakes are made.

The Supervisor's role, like any manager, is no different than that conductor. Largely, the township staff will go about their business getting the job done. Occasionally, mistakes are made, or a crisis occurs that requires a managers hand. The water line situation (yes we're back to that) is exactly the sort of situation that requires the Supervisor's involvement. That should have come shortly after the project ran long. The Township needs a Supervisor that is capable of managing these issues. Paul White is not that person. A vote Yes on February 23rd will give the township a chance at real leadership.

Water lines and flower beds

2010-01-08T15:50:00.004-05:00

The township has been engaged in a project to improve water service for some time now. The project was originally scheduled for three weeks but is pushing three months, with more to come. (the story is over at the Independent, but I can't link it since Rosemary's website is horrible)

Several important issue arise from this story.

First, the township may well be on the hook for another lawsuit (or several depending on how the area residents file them) due to the excessive disruption to their lives the work has caused.

Second, one of the affected residents is a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals. She was nearly dropped from the board last month in an all too typical unceremonious fashion but White reconsidered just short of the meeting and withheld going forward on that move (then didn't tell his supporter that would have been granted an alternate position about the move leading to an also all to typical awkward few moments at the same meeting). White has apparently reconsidered his reconsidering and decided to go ahead with pushing the disgruntled resident off the board. I am tempted to imply some malicious motives, but I suspect this is simply rank incompetence and a ham handed attempt to fulfill some more promises.

The third bit is long, so it'll receive it's own post, which will be posted above this one, so you've probably read it already.

Kung Fu Fighting, Facebook Style

2010-01-08T15:47:00.002-05:00

There's another solid resource for information over at facebook that counters POWW arguments, that (attempted to) counter the recall arguments. Make sure to become a fan.

In which POWW demonstrates their uncategorical acceptance of new residents

2010-01-07T20:06:00.004-05:00

From the POWW facebook page, in response to me trying to enlighten them about election rules.

Doug Doty: "wow you just dont get it you fool. ... what you should do is move back where you came from."

Bobbi Hnot: "doug you are so right on..........."

A seven part series for the seven remaining weeks

2010-01-07T19:59:00.002-05:00

Gerry Lavaute at the View ran the first of a series running up to the recall. The first installment details some of the circumstances leading up to the recall, including the genesis of White's interest in Van Buren Politics. Most of you are probably aware of this much, but as a newcomer it's educational for me.

Interestingly, the guy who campaigned on change got his start because some change was about to happen in his neighborhood and he sure as heck wasn't going to let that proceed quietly. Yes, to POWW, moving VBT forward means keeping it the same.

Some clarifications needed on the previous post

2010-01-06T23:28:00.005-05:00

Up top update: both the original and this more detailed clarification are also available at the Eagle

In exchanging accuracy for brevity to be sure that my last post wasn't rejected for length, I may have misjudged an acceptable level of exchange.

The problem lies in the matter of my statement that the deputy assumes the official's duties. The township does not have a deputy supervisor as a matter of title, and this has caused some concern about the accuracy of my analysis about Michigan election law. I still believe I am accurate, after checking a couple of sources, but as a non-lawyer trying to figure out laws that even the lawyers don't seem to fully grasp, there may be need for some "adjustment."

Here's the not-brief part of what I tried to say briefly before:

The office of the Supervisor has other staff. Those staff are, as far as I understand, both authorized to and capable of, carrying out the duties of the Supervisor in his absence. This is important as the law states that:

"the officer empowered by law to perform the duties of such recalled official, in the event of such officer's absence, death, illness or inability to act, shall perform and discharge the duties of the office so vacated until the successor to fill such vacancy is duly elected and qualified (MCL 168.970)"

The law doesn't specify that the duties fall on a position titled "deputy" as I did for the sake of brevity; simply that they fall on the person designated to perform those duties in the officials absence as may arise from illness or other circumstances.

That there are personnel authorized to act in the officials absence is the important part, not the title. So long as the township is able to function, there ought not be cause for the appointment specifically of a supervisor by the office of the governor or other outside body.

Further, I invite Supervisor White to assert that there are no such legally authorized employees. If that is the case, it would be prudent to ask why that situation has been allowed for over one year. Designating such personnel is a matter of necessity, not because of recall, but the possibility of illness or injury interfering, temporarily or permanently, with his fulfillment of his duties. Failure to plan for an event that could bring business to a halt would be a serious breach of his responsibility to the township.

Now, having that out of the way: The same law further states that:

"Where power to fill a vacancy by appointment exists, then in such case such office shall be filled in the same manner by temporary appointment"

But with three officials remaining the board has no ability to act since it cannot obtain a quorum necessitating the operation of a third clause in this same law that states:

"otherwise, the governor of the state may fill such vacancy until said recalled officer's successor is elected"

The lack of quorum is remedied by the appointment of a single individual to the board. Since there is no titular or effective deputy for the trustee position, I will assert here that the first portion of the law I am citing necessitates that it be one of those positions that are filled, not the supervisor's. Having now obtained a quorum, the board may seek to temporarily remedy any further vacancy, per the second clause, until the position is filled by a very open and democratic election in early May.

The recall process. Now with actual information

2010-01-05T23:12:00.001-05:00

One bit of misinformation POWW has rolled out to fend off the recall is that the voters will have no choice in selecting candidates to fill any vacancies after the recall.

Here is what the township should expect after the recall is successful:

If all four members are recalled one vacancy will be filled by appointment. The purpose of the appointment is to bring the board up to 4 members, the minimum required under law for the board to conduct business. The role of both Supervisor and Clerk are carried on by the deputies until a replacement is elected (see MCL 168.970 for the full text of that section of law). The state only appoints a successor if there is no deputy to fill the role. Fortunately, Van Buren Township is served well by two very capable deputies in both positions. Residents should feel confident that the responsibilities of those offices will be in capable hands between the recall and the follow on election.

The post recall election is also not conducted as POWW represents it. According to Michigan election law (MCL 168.972) candidates can add their name to the ballot by "filing a nominating petition or paying a $100.00 nonrefundable fee not later than 4 p.m. on the fifteenth day after the clerk ...announces the official result of the recall election." Simply put, the May election to fill the vacancy will be open to anyone collecting a few signatures or paying a small fee. Even more democratic, the ballot will likely be short, allowing the voters to focus on these four offices and select a candidate they believe will act with the integrity and professionalism that Van Buren Township deserves.

The law is clear. Democracy will not be trampled. Are our four officials then unaware of the law and continuing their pattern of just making it up as they go along? Or do they believe their paycheck is more important than their integrity? Whichever the answer, this provides one more reason for VBT to vote YES on Feb 23.

This was also posted to their facebook page. I doubt it will stay up long.

Why a Recall? Bob Thorne lays it out

2010-01-01T20:50:00.003-05:00

Most of these reasons are cause enough on their own to ask someone to politely move on. Thanks to the work of some dedicated, and highly motivated (read ticked off) recall volunteers we have a chance to do just that.

Read the lists. If one of the items doesn't grab you, I'm sure another will (or two, or three). If you see something you like, show up on Feb 23 and vote Yes.

Conspiracy theory getting an early start on 2010

2009-12-31T13:34:00.003-05:00

Outside of my usual township hall fare by just a bit, but still local enough that I'll take some liberties and mention this here.

The subject is the account of NW 253 going around by one of the passengers and an ever evolving story from the TSA about just what happened on and after the flight. Have a read.