Contacting the Michigan Treasury Dept. to what Garden City is using as their authority which is Linked. I received this response and it was broken down to its meaning then a final response and pay attention to it.
EDIT: Oct. 18, 2013 the link in blue was http://www.gardencitymi.org/departments/administration/pdfs/streetlightingreport.pdf which indeed has been removed (what are they trying to hide?) but detailed below.
As sited in the report, the city uses their charter as authority to levy the special assessment. In MCL 117.4d cities are given the ability to include in their charter direction for levying a special assessment for lighting as stated below:
THE HOME RULE CITY ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 279 of 1909
117.4d Permissible charter provisions; assessing costs of public improvement and boulevard lighting system; definitions.
(1) Each city may in its charter provide:
(a) For assessing and reassessing the costs, or a portion of the costs, of a public improvement to a special district.
(b) For assessing the cost, or a portion of the costs, of installing a boulevard lighting system on a street upon the lands abutting the street. A city shall not establish a special assessment district for a boulevard lighting system if the district includes the entire city, unless the special assessments against the real property within the district are levied on other than an ad valorem basis.
(2) As used in this section:
(a) “Boulevard lighting system” means any design or method of providing light to a street.
(b) “Cost” includes necessary condemnation cost and necessary expenses incurred for engineering, financial, legal, or administrative services; operation and maintenance of a boulevard lighting system, whether that service is provided directly by the city or is provided by an investor-owned utility; and other services of a similar kind involved in the making and financing of the improvement and in the levying and collecting of the special assessments for the improvement. If the service is rendered by city employees, the city may include the fair and reasonable cost of rendering the service. The inclusion of a cost specified in this subdivision as part of the cost of an improvement for which special assessments have been levied before the effective date of the 1987 amendatory act amending this section is validated.
(c) “Street” means a public avenue, street, highway, road, path, boulevard, or alley or other access used for travel by the public.
Final Statement by Darcy Marusich – MarusichD@michigan.gov
To see exactly what authority and the limit of that authority that the city has, you will need to look to the charter that the residents voted on and approved at the time of the cities creation. According to the city lighting report you sent, that authority would be contained in their Code of Ordinances, section 40.11. You should be able to obtain access to that information from your city offices.
§ 40.11 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR STREET LIGHTING AND SIMILAR SERVICES.
All improvements consisting of the construction, installation, maintenance and operation of systems, facilities and equipment for street lighting or other similar services shall be accomplished pursuant to the improvement procedure provisions provided under §§ 40.03 to 40.08, both inclusive, of this chapter, except and provided, however, that where such construction or installation is performed by the Detroit Edison Company, or some other public utility company, and the cost thereof is not charged to the city or the users of the service, then in such case:
(A) The report and recommendation of the City Manager, which may be required under § 40.03, shall omit all information as to cost of construction and shall include all other information required by said § 40.03, together with such schedules of existing rates and service charges as may be submitted to the city by the Detroit Edison Company or other public utility; and the Council, in acting on such report pursuant to § 40.05, shall consider only such matters as are required by this division;
(B) Neither the whole or any part of such cost of construction shall be assessed against any property within the proposed special assessment district;
(C) The regular, approved rates for such service, as charged to the city, less the amount thereof constituting a general obligation of the city, shall be annually assessed upon the property especially benefitted, as provided in §§ 40.05, 40.06, 40.07, and 40.08;
(D) All other sections of this chapter which are inconsistent with or contrary to the intent of this section, are hereby made and declared to be inapplicable to all assessments made under this section; and
(E) The Department of Public Services is hereby authorized to adopt reasonable rules and regulations governing the administration of this section.
(Ord. 11-012, passed 9-12-11)
Again final statement by the Mi. Treasury Dept employee.
“you will need to look to the charter that the residents voted on and approved at the time of the cities creation”.
That’s the thing people there was no Lighting District upon the city’s creation. Former City Manager Darwin McClary invented 40.11 straight out of his ass in 2011 without a residential vote. The council alone voted and passed this fiasco on 9-12-11.
One councilwoman voting no from the very start and against this assessment I spoke with a few weeks ago in-depth, Jody Dodge.
At the Oct. 8th (2012) meeting she once again was adamant about her opinion on the matter stating;
“You can create a district to assess for improvements, but you can’t create a lighting district to pay for maintenance and cost,” said Dodge who voted no to approve the assessment roll. “I’d like the council to look at other alternatives. I’d like the council to look at other items in the budget.”
The only other NO vote was councilman Jim Kerwin. The sitting city manager wasn’t allowed a vote.
My pertinent question to her and the Mi. Treasury was is the extra money Garden City has put onto every single residents Winter Tax bill legal?
Darcy Marusich had said that the state had no jurisdiction over the city’s. But Jody Dodge’s answer was a straight out NO.
Since 2011 Garden City residents have paid this special assessment but it is solely being used for one thing and one thing only. To PAY GARDEN CITY’S DTE BILL.
I asked her can I quote you and stated Yes, nothing she was saying to me hadn’t already been duly noted on record on the subject matter.
Now I don’t know about he rest of the residents in Garden City but is anybody helping you pay your DTE Bill? Hell my thermostat is on 63 at night and never above 67 when up and down to 60 when I’m not home, attempting to lower my utilities bill. Why in the hell should anybody be asked after paying their regular taxes to pay something extra to pay somebody else’s bill.
As I stated at that same meeting if I had wanted to pay special assessments I would have bought a condo where people constantly live under dictatorship.
It is strange to me that Garden City even hired Darwin McClary in the first place since he was fired from Eastpoint in May of 2010 a position he held there for 6 years. Before his contract was terminated he was making $101,000, not counting benefits.
Eastpointe starts the search for full-time city manager.
He lasted a much shorter term with G.C. citing he was fired for being gay.
Excerpts from this Nov. 2012 article:
Most recently, McClary was released from his city manager position in Garden City at the urging of a small group of residents with money, political influence and a conservative agenda. McClary makes it clear that his sexual orientation was not their only complaint, and that the people of Garden City are “incredibly welcoming and accepting” of LGBT people. Yet when those who wanted him removed used homophobia as one of their weapons, it was a reminder of the obstacles that gay people still face in society.
In 2011, Garden City faced the same economic problems that many cities in Michigan struggle with, and city leaders pushed for a millage. A 12 mil increase was voted down by the public and economic consequences were hard for some residents to swallow. “We instituted a street light assessment, a rubbish collection assessment, restructuring of city hall where we laid off 11 city employees. To put it in perspective, we had a staff of 174 full time positions in 2001, down to 99 in 2011. We were operating with half the staffing as before and still maintaining most of the services, but the changes did not sit well,” he explained.
Sounds like a friggin soap opera to me.
Don’t feel to bad Mr., Garden City certainly didn’t terminate the Special Assessments and Ordinaces you created out of your ass.
But this is one new resident that isn’t handing over the extra $36.87 when I pay these taxes before Thursday. And if I were the rest of the residents who paid this for 2011 & 2012 I would be filing a lawsuit to get a refund of that money for those years.
Jody Dodge also did say that the present sitting city manager Robert S. Muery Jr. (who is also the G.C. Chief of Police) was doing his best to make these improvements to the city’s lighting considering that the city is getting this extra money from its residents, sounding like he wasn’t to happy that this special assessment is gaining this just to pay the DTE bill. But in doing so the improvements would have to be in place by June 30th 2013.
I’m sure he is doing this for the reason stated but in some ways its like trying to now justify having gotten this money at all in the first place. But then he had nothing to do with this bull instead doing the city a favor by taking on this job. But also noted in our conversation ( Dodge) was the fact that Garden City is being charged for DTE poles that don’t even exist.
So much for where the residents money is being used for. Why in the world would anybody be just hand over their money to this city. God, if a stranger walked up to you on the street and say hey I need $37.00 would you give it to them?
Then why on earth would you hand over this to a city because they say so? This Mayor and Council have to follow the laws like anybody else and THE HOME RULE CITY ACT; Act 279 of 1909 117.4d in itself is not the sole authority. As Mi. Treasury Darcy Marusich stated: To see exactly what authority and the limit of that authority that the city has, you will need to look to the charter that the residents voted on and approved at the time of the cities creation.
And that is Jody Dodge’s argument as well. If the Lighting District had been set at the time of inception that would have been a different story but it wasn’t. There was no ordinance 40.11 where the residents voted upon. This ordinance was created by a single individual at will in 2011 and only the city council voted.
It is not legal.
Now if anybody wants to hand their hard earned money and sit in their homes with things in place to have lower bills only to hand over with what you’ve saved to Garden City. I say you are not only crazy but stupid. And I would be suing to get my money back for 2011 & 2012.
If sitting city manager does come up with what is required by law by June 30, 2013. Those who have also not paid this may or may not owe whatever late fees & penalty on this $36.87 and if they start turning over delinquent taxes to Wayne County. I would see Garden City in a great big building downtown in Detroit called a court because how anybody can just invent something that wasn’t in existence at the start without a residential vote required by law, I’d like to hear the final judgement on.
The Special Lighting Assessment Is Not Legal.
There was an article in the G.C. Observer on Oct. 25, 2012. Knowing that the articles only appear for a certain amount of time I copied it. The link now leads nowhere.
Written by Sue Mason Observer Staff WriterOct. 25, 2012
Some Garden City residents may not like it, but they will continue to pay a special street lighting assessment.
Monday evening the council voted 4-2, with Councilman George Kordie absent, to approve the tax roll for the special assessment which will appear on the December tax bills. The charge will be for 2013.
This is the second time that the city is charging all owners of improved property, including businesses, for citywide street lighting. The charge will be $36.87 per improved parcel and will generate some $470,000 to pay for the street lighting.
“Do I want to pass this on to you? No, but I have to do this for the safety of the children who walk to school in the dark,” said Mayor Randy Walker in response to residents who said they couldn’t afford to pay the assessment. “We’re not going to turn off the lights for the safety of residents. We can vote this down, but we still have to get the $485,000 to pay the bill. We have to pay (Detroit) Edison for the lights. We all benefit from the lights, we have to pass this cost on.”
One resident told the council she bought her house for cash in August after saving her money while employed at the defunct Detroit Race Course. She recently got health insurance and is now facing a triple-digit increase in her monthly premium.
“I think the special assessment is wrong, our regular taxes should cover it,” she said. “If I had wanted a special assessment, I would have bought a condo. I think the city should cover it.”
Buddy Wallace told the council that the state attorney general has said such a special assessment is “illegal” because it “must be assessed on new and improved property.”
“According to the attorney general, it has to be on every parcel, not just improved parcels,” he added. “I would like to see an up or down vote on this issue.”
A Dawson Street resident told the council that she’s a single mother who “can’t afford to pay for everything.”
“No one’s going to want to live here and there will be no need to turn the lights on,” she said.
Elizabeth McGowan also talked about her daughter, a single mother, “who can’t afford all these charges.”
“We take care of our bills and we’d like to keep it that way,” she said. “It might be families can’t afford to pay this assessment. It might not be much, but I think you need to consider other ways.”
Councilwoman Joanne Dodge told her colleagues that she “can’t vote” for the assessment.
“You can create a district to assess for improvements, but you can’t create a lighting district to pay for maintenance and cost,” said Dodge who voted no to approve the assessment roll. “I’d like the council to look at other alternatives. I’d like the council to look at other items in the budget.”
“If we have that many people saying they can’t afford it, we need to find something else,” added Councilman Jim Kerwin who also voted no.
Councilwoman Jaylee Lynch told residents that she doesn’t think there has been enough time to look into the reason for the assessment. The council moved payment of street lights from the general fund to a special assessment to deal with its revenue shortfall.
“I’d like to see us look at using solar lights or something more efficient,” she said. “I think it’s time we looked at buying new bulbs and updating our system to bring down the costs.”
Councilman David Fetter told the audience that the council “can’t find $500,000 to cut.”
“It’s all about money,” he said. “We’re still looking at another 5 percent hit on revenue for the year and that’s based on home prices one and a half years ago. We have to manage the money. We understand you, we hear you. We have to pay as well.”
He added that he doesn’t mind looking into it further in the budget process, but aid that the council had done that for fiscal 2012-13 and couldn’t find the money.
“Where are we going to find it now,” he said. “I don’t know how we can get around this. Show me where we’re going to get $485,000.”
According to Clerk/Treasurer Allyson Bettis, residents will pay the assessment twice in 2012. The initial assessment for 2012 went out as a separate bill in March, but next year’s charge is being placed on the winter tax bills that go out in December to save money.
The special assessment covers only lights on city streets and roads. The city will cover the cost of lighting on county and state roads, about $81,000, and the Downtown Development Authority will pay for the decorative lights in the central business district.
“I can sympathize with every person here, it’s hard on myself, but the money is not there,” said Mayor Pro tem Patricia Squires. “I don’t know where else we can cut. It’s not an easy decision to make.”
firstname.lastname@example.org (313) 222-6751
I say the residents need to have a meeting of their own because the days of You Can’t Fight City Hall has been long gone. But if you have the money to spare then send it my way, you can help me pay my bills along with yours. OK
Because in essence this is what you are doing anyway.
Special Lighting Assessment my ass. That’s what we pay regular taxes for. I pay my DTE without any help, let the city of Garden City pay theirs.
And I will challenge this illegal special lighting assessment in court. I paid in Full the regular amount owed. I refuse to give this city extra money beyond my normal taxes owed so they can pay their DTE bill.
Jody Dodge & Jim Kerwin seem to be the only council people fighting for the residents of Garden City. My question to these residents is: Where is your Fight?
Because if you don’t fight for yourselves it means this city OWNS YOU and I’ll tell you something else it’s only going to get worse.
EDIT Oct. 18, 2013.
On the front page of the Sept. 8, 2013 Garden City Observer this Headline.
Charter Amendments Rescinded.
Attorney General finds problems with wording.
Articles only stayed for so long on the internet, thus I grabbed this off the cached page. I have the paper before me. This cache link Title was changed to Garden City Council pulls charter amendments off ballot but Sept. 8 edition in print stated Charter Amendments Rescinded..
Written by Sue Buck.
Garden City residents who were hoping to cast their votes on several charter amendments will have to wait until at least next August to do so.
The Garden City Council, upon advice of Acting City Manager Robert Muery, rescinded the proposed charter amendments that were expected to be on the Nov. 5 general ballot.
The city had hoped to clean up and update some sections of the city charter which included the procedure for filling vacancies, publication of proceedings, recognizing the current retirement system approved by collective bargaining, eliminating the local board of canvassers, time when taking office and the method of informing residents about special assessments.
Rescinding of the amendments wasn’t listed on the Aug. 26 council agenda. Muery brought up the subject later in the meeting.
The Michigan Attorney General’s office had contacted City Attorney Tim Cronin on Friday, Aug. 23.
“I found out Friday afternoon that there were problems,” Muery said. “They were not problems that could be resolved and corrected by tomorrow’s deadline.”
Problem with all six
Muery said that the Attorney General had problem with all six of them. There were problems with language and clarity. The language could be no longer than 100 words, for example.
“One of the items, the Attorney General said might actually be unconstitutional,” Muery said.
The language needed to be new language and not rephrased old language, he added.
Councilman Michael Jones said that the council members were informed before the meeting about what would transpire. Jones said that he saw nothing in writing from the Attorney General’s office who criticized the fact that the city attorney had approved the language.
Jones added that the criticism was that the amendments were too lengthy – too many words – and that there was criticism on how they were written.
Garden City Clerk/Treasurer Allyson Bettis, who was on vacation at the time, said that she watched the council meeting to find out what happened. She said that the amendments were rescinded because they weren’t “appropriate.”
“I wasn’t expecting this,” Bettis said.
Bettis wrote the amendments with review by Cronin who was at the meeting when they were approved. Cronin, however, wasn’t present the night council voted to rescind them.
Practice of AG
Joy Yearout, director of communications for the Attorney General’s office, said Thursday that it is the practice of that office to review such documents for compliance with the Home Rule Act.
No letter was sent to the city. Instead, Yearout said that her office received a letter from Garden City informing them that the amendments were rescinded. She said that additional information about why they were rejected should be sought from the city attorney’s office.
Cronin didn’t respond to the Garden City Observer’s request for information nor did he return a phone call and an e-mail message.
Since Cronin would bill for his time working on that language, Councilwoman Joanne Dodge said that the city should not pay him for that time spent because the amendment language was rejected. She added that the Attorney General had problems with every amendment.
Councilman David Fetter was critical of Cronin’s work and pointed out that he didn’t vote to renew Cronin’s contract.
“We have a history of not having the best legal advice available,” Fetter said. “This is ridiculous, this is absolutely ridiculous. This is unbelievable. None of us are attorneys. We have to rely on our attorney. To have this number of mistakes.”
Muery said that Cronin was on vacation when the council rescinded the amendments but he planned to speak to him further.
I am wondering which “One of the items, the Attorney General said might actually be unconstitutional”.
Sounds like everybody needs to call the State Attorney General Bill Schuette and ask him.
Michigan Department of Attorney General.
G. Mennen Williams Building, 7th Floor
525 W. Ottawa St.
P.O. Box 30212
Lansing, MI 48909
Main Number (517) 373-1110
Facsimile (517) 373-3042
Cadillac Place, 10th Floor
3030 W. Grand Blvd., Suite 10-200
Detroit, MI 48202
Facsimile (313) 456-0241
There is a NOTICE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PUBLIC HEARING at City Hall on Oct. 21, 2013 at 7:00PM
I have to laugh because according to Allyson Bettis to whom I spoke with on Oct. 9 when I paid my water bill and expressed anger over this new Water Rate Model that Mayor Randy Walker and council put into place (I’ll get to that) then I spoke about the lighting assessment and she stated these exact words.
“The very person who said it was illegal and voted No on it last year (referring to Jody Dodge) just voted YES on it Monday Oct. 7, 2013”. So the council has already voted on this subject? So what is the purpose of the Public Meeting Oct. 21, 2013?
It will be interesting to find out and ask Mrs. Dodge if that is in fact true that the vote on this special lighting assessment matter has already taken place.
Now on the new Water Rate Model.
Excerpt (page 3): out of the Sept. 22, 2013 G.C. Observer.
“With a recently approved new water rate model, Walker said that the city has decreased the cost for more than half of the high water users. The lower water users, especially seniors who are on fixed incomes and tend to watch their water usage to save money, will see an increase of less than $12”.
“This is an ongoing issue,” Walker said.
So in other words a family of 4,5,6,10 will have their water bills lowered and single people like me who will be the lower water users will have to pay for the higher water users.
Well just Fantastic.
Council shelves idea of 2nd water meter
Written by Sue Buck
The opportunity to have a second water meter to save money on sewage costs appears to be dead in the water for now.
The majority of Garden City Council members, by consensus, has opted not to pursue further discussion. However, Garden City Councilman David Fetter vowed to continue to research ways to help high water users.
Council recently adopted a water rate model that will reduce costs for high water users while increasing it across the board for lower water users.
“The models we run are based on the way we run our water department,” Fetter said.
He noted that consumers who want second meters would still be responsible for all of their costs, like permits, installation, etc.
“If you use it, you will pay for it,” he said. “If you don’t use it, you won’t pay for it.”
Prompted by Fetter, the council approved an independent $14,000 water audit by Plante and Moran. He wasn’t happy to learn that the water fund isn’t used just to pay bills but also to pay some percentage of employee salaries, pensions and health care costs.
“It spells it all out for us – $1.8 million in wages,” Fetter said.
The audit showed a table that 29 city employees or retirees, about a third of the total employees, have had health insurance charges billed to the water and sewer fund between 2010 and 2012. There are also employees who have a percentage of their salaries billed to the water and sewer fund.
Retirement costs will increase because employees get a 2 percent increase in the pensions annually, he said.
Fetter wants to reorganize the water fund to better prepare for the future.
“Our fund is going to bankrupt the city eventually,” he said. “It can’t keep growing at this rate.”
Other council members are concerned that resulting costs not be spread among all the water users. Councilwoman Jaylee Lynch pointed out that the owners of second water meters reside in other counties.
“What difference does the county make?” Fetter asked.
Garden City Clerk/Treasurer Allyson Bettis, at council’s request, looked at variety of communities with second water meters but didn’t support allowing a second meter. Second water meter users would be helped because they wouldn’t be assessed for sewerage charges when watering lawns or filling pools.
She compiled information from several communities that allow the installation of residential second meters for residential properties. These communities include: the City of Northville, Farmington Hills, Bloomfield Township, Auburn Hills, New Baltimore, Mount Clemens, Waterford Township and Chesterfield Township.
In a memo to Garden City Acting City Manager Robert Muery, she said that it is important to note that New Baltimore and Mount Clemens obtain their water directly from Lake St.Clair and do not purchase water from Detroit Water and Sewerage Department. Waterford Township obtains its water from a series of wells, but is part of the Clinton-Oakland sewer system that relies on DWSD for waste water treatment and disposal.
Macomb Township does not allow second meters, but instead gives high-use customers a break on sewer charges by charging water only on usage over 40 units, she said.
“It was difficult to find communities in Wayne County that allow irrigation meters, perhaps because the Wayne County Division of Public Works does not allow exemptions from wastewater sewage disposal charges to municipalities for lawn sprinkling,” Bettis said. “The Wayne County DPW has denied requests for such exemptions on the basis that to permit them, would in effect, ‘cause a shift of costs from one user in the group to other similar situated users, and, thus, unfairly benefit a user at the expense of others.’ ”
However, Bettis said that individual municipalities make their own policies on how they wish to charge their customers. Rates are based on an assumed consumption.
“If that assumed consumption is reduced, then the model used to calculate the rates would need to be re-calculated,” she said. “Any significant consumption reduction would not have a positive effect on the water/sewer fund because revenue assumed based on a certain consumption level, would be reduced and expenses would not be reduced.”
Councilman Jim Kerwin said that he didn’t favor second water meters for commercial users.
“If it is residential, I will be somewhat for it,” Kerwin said.
Businesses would pay for their costs, Fetter said.
“We are not giving anything away,” Fetter said.
Mayor Randy Walker said that he is done talking about second water meters.
“Five of us don’t want it, it’s closed,” Walker said.
With a recently approved new water rate model, Walker said that the city has decreased the cost for more than half of the high water users. The lower water users, especially seniors who are on fixed incomes and tend to watch their water usage to save money, will see an increase of less than $12.
“This is an ongoing issue,” Walker said.
Councilman Michael Jones said that he spent more than $1,400 to replace his sod last year but he’s not sold on second water meters. He would need to be convinced that his potential lower water rates for keeping the sod green and filling his pool would not result in higher water rates for others.
The water fund covers the wholesale cost of water and sewage and the costs to pay employees in whole or in part who do jobs that are related to water, Jones said.
“If those salaries are not paid from the water fund, then it will have to come out of the general fund,” Jones said.
That can result in cuts in other area of the general fund and possibly an increase in taxes, he added.
Fetter wants employee costs to be drawn from the departments in which they specifically work in order to reduce water and sewage costs. Fetter has been researching the second water meter issue for weeks and has talked to Farmington Hills about how they handle second water meters.
“Our citizens deserve the choice and the chance for a second meter,” Fetter said. “I will keep up the fight.”
I picked one hell of a city in-which to buy a home and live. Special lighting assessments for which there was no lighting district upon the city’s creation (like the State Treasurer office stated to look for ordinance 40.11) for its citizens to vote upon. They invented one in 2011 that only the council got to vote on.
Now I have to pay for large families water usage while watching my own. Allyson Bettis tried to sugar coat ( called lying) this stating I am paying just for my own usage. Guess I can’t read or comprehend.
Again: With a recently approved new water rate model, Walker said that the city has decreased the cost for more than half of the high water users. The lower water users, especially seniors who are on fixed incomes and tend to watch their water usage to save money, will see an increase of less than $12.
No I comprehend all to well.
Face it Garden City is as corrupt as Detroit only the faces aren’t all black so local media doesn’t jump and report on it. But it did at least get the State Attorney’s attention.
Stay Tuned…and show up at that meting this coming Monday, Oct. 21, 2013 at 7:00pm if you give a damn about being ripped off. If not send me a donation, stupid me I thought paying my regular taxes covered what I was supposed to be paying. Not giving a little extra to pay the city’s DTE bill. Now I have to pay for other people’s water as well.
As I said in Feb. when this blog was put up: Because if you don’t fight for yourselves it means this city OWNS YOU and I’ll tell you something else it’s only going to get worse.
And as you can see with the Water, it has.
EDIT: Oct. 23, 2013.
Well I knew the meeting in itself would be a waste of time of course the council Votes Yes and again passes this Illegal Special Assessment. But what made many sick is when the departing councilwoman Jody Dodge who had previously voted No on it did an about-face and voted Yes.
After all it was she more than anybody who pounded the very truth that since there was no Lighting District created at the time of the Garden City’s inception that what the former city manager did by creating the ordinance 40.11 out of his ass in 2011 without giving the city’s residents a chance to vote on it was blatantly illegal.
Amazing yet sad.
Even sadder because others on the council especially the treasurer who smiled and gloated weeks prior having known to what your vote was going to be. But just because you did decide this time to vote for it still doesn’t make it legal regardless of your reasons, it just makes you a hypocrite.
And if some find that’s something to smile and be proud of, I say it’s too bad they will still be seated at the table in any position instead of joining you.
Jim Kerwin stood his ground and voted NO for a third time.
David Fetter who previously voted twice a YES decided he was up for re-election and voted this time a No. Wonder if that will go back to a Yes if voted back in. I mean he stated he originally voted for this thinking it would only be for a short time not 3 years. Maybe he was telling the truth who knows. Little hard to believe anybody running for anything in today’s politics. But I do remember his smart ass statement in 2012 after the vote was taken to a member of the audience when moving on to another subject, Hey look what we had to go through to get $36.87.
Yes, people do take notes councilman.
The only one I will be voting for is Jim Kerwin, he doesn’t sway from what he believes in whether you agree with him on all or not.
The Mayor on my questions about water bills only would answer to one and it was stomping in shit, he alluded to the other.
If I leave town for the winter and not one drop of water comes out of my faucet or down my drain will my house still get a bill of less than $12.00?
According to his general answer it would only be fair if I pay my fair share of the water usage? Even if none is used.
Buddy Wallace will get my vote for Mayor whether I know enough about or like him. Walker is for taking people’s money for whatever reason he thinks up.
As far as Jody Dodge. Have a nice life, I did lead the applause after Mr. Fetter’s heartfelt homage to you.
That is my character. I don’t take stances then turn around and stab people in the back on my way out the door.
And to the people in Garden City or any city as far as that goes on DTE Smart/Advanced Meters aka AMI Meters:
DTE OPT OUT IS NOT A REAL OPT OUT. Better do your homework. They still will take your analog meters out and still put in these toxic ones on your house. And whether Radio ON or OFF, your home will become a running 24/7 microwave.
Consumers Energy Opt Out is literally a real opt out. You get to keep your analog meters and NOT have these new devices placed on your home.
Smart (electric) & Advanced (gas) already have sickened the healthiest of people by the thousands across this country. If already sick with multiple medical problems like me God help both you and I.
People with Pacemaker’s the ICU is waiting for you and my Mom has one.
If you call or say OK to DTE I want to Opt Out, you will still have these new meters placed. Only way to keep your Analogs, Chain and lock the old ones and Lock the Electric ones (must fill whole gap and loop) and tell DTE I Will Not agree to this opt out as it is written. I will pay the opt out cost but I will not allow the installations of these new meters Radio On or Off.
American Academy of Environmental
How to prevent Smart Meter Installation.
But that is the thing, they came up with a so-called OPT OUT that isn’t an OPT Out because they are still installing them claiming they can turn off radio, the links from the medical community I already posted state that whether off or on the meters in them-self are medically damaging.
That is why this Bill was Introduced.
Heart and Pacemaker Disruption from Electric Meter.
Radio On or Off, Pay Attention: You Still Get Dirty Electricity flying and contained throughout home.
Bills will also soar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IK2oeBoxVg (Same as DTE, but at the very end specific information pertains to where they live)
If you value your Health. Chain and Lock up your analog meters, no matter what DTE threatens. The Opt Out is anything but.