Has The City Improperly Commingled?

Provided by Councilwoman Hicks-Clayton you will see legal opinions given to the City back in 2011 regarding inter-fund borrowing. Here is what the City received regarding this,

Often local governments will loan resources from one fund to another fund experiencing
a temporary cash shortage. This is allowed under Michigan State Constitution. Interfund loans are addressed in GASB 34, ¶112(a).1: Interfund loans—amounts provided with a requirement for repayment. Interfund loans should be reported asinterfund receivables in lender funds and interfund payables in borrower funds. This activity should not be reported as other
financing sources or uses in the fund financial statements. If repayment is not expected within a reasonable time, the interfund balances should be reduced and the amount that is not expected
to be repaid should be reported as a transfer from the fund that made the loan to the fund that received the loan.

In addition, in 2011, a opinion letter was received from the Michigan Department of Treasury, to the City of Dearborn Heights, Corporate Council, City Treasurer and Council members:

Below is the opinion from Corporation Counsel asked for by the Council regarding inter-fund loans

Gary T. Miotke
Corporation Counsel
Daniel S. Paletko
March 29,2011

Honorable City Council
c/o City Clerk Judy Dudzinski
City of Dearborn Heights
6045 Fenton
Dearborn Heights, MI 48127
Re: Interfund Loans
Dear City Council Members:
Per Motion 11-071, your Honorable Body directed that I research interfund loans
and make a recommendation on my findings. More precisely, I was to research the
propriety of interfund loans and how to properly effectuate them. Subject to what is
otherwise stated in this letter, it is my opinion that the types of interfund loans that are
specifically contemplated by the City are proper provided they are approved by your
Honorable Body. – —
– —-
Treasurer Riley raised the issue in a letter to your Honorable Body. In his letter,
Treasurer Riley referred to an email from Michael P. McGee, a public finance attorney
associated with the law firm of Miller Canfield. In his emailv Mr. McGee concluded that
a municipal interfund loan is “permitted provided it is properly documented and approved
as a loan by city council so as to distinguish it from an inappropriate transfer.” Based on
this communication, Treasurer Riley requested and your Honorable Body approved
Motion 11-071.
I agree with the opinions expressed by Mr. McGee and Miller Canfield.
However, my opinion is also subject to the following.
First, any such interfund loan must truly be treated as a loan in all relevant
respects. Per Treasurer Riley, the four (4) funds from which interfund loans are likely to
be made are water, major streets, local streets, and library. These funds are special or
dedicated funds based on State law, dedicated millages, and/or user fees. Based on
general law and Michigan case law from the 1800’s, “the well-settled rule is that special
funds cannot be used for another and different purpose.” See McQuillin Municipal
Corporations, Section 39.50, Volume 15, p. 186 and see Chaffee v. Granger, 6 Mich 51,
57 (1858). Yet, there is authority that has been recognized in general and in Michigan
City of Dearborn Heights·
that a truly temporary interfund loan from a special fund is not inappropriate provided the
fund receiving the loan has sufficient revenue to repay the loan and provided further that
that the borrowed funds are idle, are loaned with the express intent that they are to be
repaid, are available if needed to pay persons entitled to be paid from such fund, and are
repaid to the fund from which they have been borrowed. See McQuillin Municipal
Corporations, Section 39.50, footnote 5 (and authorities cited therein) and see Michigan
Op. Atty. Gen. 1951, No. 1451 (August 1,1951), p. 327 (citing the McQuillin section just
cited and an Illinois court opinion). Hence, interfund loans from special funds can be
appropriate if they meet the requirements in the preceding sentence and otherwise are
truly temporary loans.
Second, any such inter fund loan must be approved by your Honorable Body. This
is required by the Uniform Budgeting and Accounting Act. See MCL 141.437 and MCL
Third, this opinion is limited to the propriety of interfund loans from the City
funds for water, major streets, local streets, and library. Since I have not researched this
issue in relation to any other City special funds, I am unable at this time to offer an
opinion about the propriety of interfund loans from other City special funds.
Fourth, I must caution that this opinion is based on rather meager authority. More
specifically, there is very limited authority either supporting or opposing the conclusion
that interfund loans from special funds can be appropriate. Yet, in my opinion, the
limited weight of that authority tends to support this conclusion particularly where it is
also supported by an opinion of the Michigan Attorney General.
In conclusion, the contemplated interfund loans from the City’s special funds for
water, major streets, local streets, and library are not inappropriate provided they are truly
temporary loans meeting the requirements noted in this letter. To be effectuated, any
such interfund loans must be approved by your Honorable Body as required by the
Uniform Budgeting and Accounting Act.
If you should require my further assistance regarding this matter, or any other
matter, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Very truly yours,

xc via hand-delivery only:
Mayor Daniel S. Paletko
Treasurer John J. Riley II

Now I get that I’ve seen it before when this was all happening and as you can see one of the funds being used to borrow money from is the water fund. At the same time if I’m understanding everything the CSO bond money collected from residents goes to the water fund. While the legal opinion above is good did they look at all the information before giving it? I ask this question based on what I’ve seen come on the blog and what has happened at the most recent City Council meeting when Troy Brown asked some interesting questions. From what I’m reading on Troy 4 The Truth Facebook Page he’s found this,


That the CSO Bond Tax is considered a “Debt Service Fund” and is governed by the Revised Municipal Finance Act.

Below are some possible violations, of the MCL, that may have occurred during the years in which Dearborn Heights residents and property owners were over TAXED by millions for the CSO Bond:

Improper commingling of debt service funds;

Inter-fund borrowing of debt service money;

Use of debt service money for other than debt service payments;

Excess tax levies for debt service purposes;

Inappropriate transfer of excess debt funds to the local unit’s operating funds

Now reading some of the possible violations I would like to ask any Council member, the Mayor, the Comptroller, or Treasurer a couple of questions.

  1. Are the CSO money’s deposited in a separate bank account or are they put in the same account as the water fund money’s?
  2. If CSO money collected is put into the same fund as the water fund and there is no separation and money was borrowed from the water fund with CSO money in that fund… How could the lawyers give an opinion that would let the City use this money in clear violation of the rules.

I’m hoping someone can answer these questions I think it’s very important to find out where the CSO money went. If the money was put in a separate account and that account wasn’t touched to barrow money to the City then there is only the issue of over charging. If however the money’s are Commingling and being used in the operating funds there is as I can see and I’m not a lawyer a problem.

Who Knew What And When? The Over Collecting Of The CSO Bond.

It’s come to light because a resident wanted answers on the money collected by the City to pay for the CSO bond. That the City over collected money from the taxpayers. The City will have over three million dollars after the bonds are paid off.  Troy Brown insisted that the Mayor give him an answer and the Mayor got an opinion from a lawyer on the subject. Read that opinion in full. From what I’ve been told a law was violated in the over collection of money from the residents. Now comes the question who knew what and when? Is there a state agency that follows how much money is going into this account? Was there ever anything sent by the state instructing the administration to lower the rate that the City was collecting from us?

When five years ago council members brought this to the Mayors attention did he being a CPA crunch the numbers? If he didn’t at least take a look at them why not? Was this opinion the first communication that Mayor has had with any lawyer about this subject? Is this bond looked at every year? If it is where are the reports for the bond? Who gets the report if there is a report? Did the council have access to the numbers? I would think so if some of them questioned the amount being collected as too much? Where are those reports? If there isn’t a state agency overseeing these accounts (our city isn’t the only one collecting for bonds.) Why not? If a law was violated what’s the punishment for the violation? Who gets punished? If the Mayor knew and kept collecting anyway what happens to him if anything?

What CSO bond reports do council members get? Have they ever asked for a legal opinion about the CSO bond? Have they approved charges for any opinion from a lawyer in the past about this bond? I think it’s time that our City Council take a very hard look at this. They have unlimited access to all documentation in the City according to our City Charter. If the reports/emails and or opinions from lawyers are not forthcoming from the administration. Take the administration to court on behalf of the residents that were overcharged.

Folks, there is a problem here and I think there are some very important questions we as residents should be asking. All the information I’m talking about is public information and should be willing given to whoever want’s to ask for it. No, I do not think that any resident should have to pay a dime for the information. We’ve already paid way to much if this was an honest mistake then information, should be willing given to whoever might ask for it. Full access Full transparency by this administration is required.

FOIA Changes.

The Legislature made many significant changes to FOIA at the end of 2014. These changes go into effect on July 1, 2015. Under the new law, municipalities must adopt “Procedures and Guidelines” describing fees associated with FOIA requests. In fact, municipalities cannot charge fees unless they have “Procedures and Guidelines” in place. The following areas will be significiantly changed under the new law:

  • Requests
  • Responses
  • Deposits
  • Fee calculations (including detailed itemization); and
  • Avenues for challenging and appearling the public body’s denial of a request

The Michigan Freedom of Information Act entitles all persons, except those incarcerated in state or local correctional facilities, to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of those who represent them as public officials and public employees. Public records include writings (which include e-mail) prepared, owned, used, in the possession of, or retained by a public body or its divisions and employees in the performance of an official function, from the time they are created. There are certain public records that are exempt from disclosure, and these are defined in the Act.  Further, the Act requires that public bodies designate a FOIA coordinator to receive and take action on FOIA requests. If there is doubt as to whether a certain course of action might violate the FOIA, the public body’s attorney should be consulted for advice and guidance. Go To Site

Troy Brown Email Exchanges with City Officials.

In the comment section here Straightforward made a comment about councilwoman Hicks-Clayton. I responded with questions of my own to straightforward. I posted the comment and my reply on Facebook where that started a conversation. Where Troy Brown answered what I was asking straightforward here. I asked Mr. Brown to please if he could share the emails and who answered them from the City with us on the blog. He did so and here are all the back and forth emails between his self the Mayor Council members and others working for the City.

From: Mayor Dan Paletko <Dpaletko@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>
Date: Mon, May 4, 2015 at 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: Response to April 15 Questions
To: Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com>

No, I received an oral preliminary report, but I want his reply in writing with the logic/law supporting his opinon.

—– Original Message —–

From: Troy Brown

To: Mayor Dan Paletko

Cc: Ken Baron ; Tom Berry ; Robert Constan ; Lisa Hicks-clayton ; Margaret Horvath ; Ned Apigian ; Joseph V. Kosinski

Sent: Monday, May 04, 2015 10:19 AM

Subject: Re: Response to April 15 Questions

Mayor Paletko:

Have you revived feed back from your inquiry from last month? (see below)

“We just need clarification from bond counsel (Law Firm of Miller Canfield) on whether we can spend any of these dollars on items outside of the ballot issue.”

How long typically does the city have to wait to hear back from the bond counsel?  Are the guidelines written in an objective document or is this a subjective observation?

As always your help is very much appreciated.


Troy Brown – Dearborn Heights Resident


On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Mayor Dan Paletko <Dpaletko@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us> wrote:

The loan is not a balloon note, but rather works like a mortgage payment. Every year a portion of the principal is paid along with the accrued interest. According to the audited financial statements, approximately $1 million of principal is due in the next year. These bonds were issued by Wayne County but both Wayne County and the City of Dearborn Heights jointly owe the amount. The tax proposal passed by the citizens are paying off the Dearborn Heights portion of the amount owed.


These bonds were issued to the financial community and are regulated by both the Internal Revenue Service, the Security and Exchange Commission as well as the bond covenants included in the bond agreement, and State law. Only a legal opinion from bond counsel saying what we can or cannot do is going to influence any of us as elected officials.


I gave you a copy of the ballot language so you could see for yourself the restrictions included in what the residents voted upon. I also shared with you that these improvements were done in the Rouge System and to spend these dollars in another drainage district is an additional hurdle.


We just need clarification from bond counsel (Law Firm of Miller Canfield) on whether we can spend any of these dollars on items outside of the ballot issue.


—– Original Message —–

From: Troy Brown

To: Mayor Dan Paletko

Cc: Ken Baron ; Tom Berry ; Robert Constan ; Lisa Hicks-clayton ; Margaret Horvath ; Ned Apigian ; Joseph V. Kosinski

Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 6:09 PM

Subject: Re: Fwd: My questions of the Invoices that they want to just rubber stamp tomorrow.

Great historical information.  Thanks.

Now to the bigger questions,

why is there only 6.8 million in the fund – it says that there will be 27,000,000 by July of 2015?

why is in the “cash available” if it is ear marked for CSO improvements only? This should be down at the bottom of the page by the 500,000 flood reserve, correct?  Why is it in this section?

If indeed there are restrictions, then what will be the penalty of using them on a real need in the city? ( I know for a fact that you can file with the IRS to change ear marked funds we have done it it church before). There a real need and you all have been aware of this since you were old enough to know that water backed up into the streets and into some houses is “not good”.

Why has this not been suggested before since there is a real need and we can no longer wait for the federal or county funds to help us?

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Mayor Dan Paletko <Dpaletko@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us> wrote:

In the mid 1990’s, the city was ordered by the Michigan DEQ (on behalf of the Federal government) to correct certain combined Sewer overflows (CSO) in Dearborn Heights. This was and still is an obligation of the City of Dearborn Heights water and sewer fund.


Historically, projects are simply added to the sewer rates included in the water and sewer billings to customers.  A $27 million project would have had a large impact on rates.  The City put a ballot question asking the voters if they would prefer to pay for these improvements via property taxes rather than via water & sewer bills.  The advantage being, taxes are deductible for income tax purposes.  This was put on the September 9, 1997 ballot and it passed.


Attached is a copy of the original proposal, which shows up on the summer tax bills.


This money is restricted, and is only to be used as specified in the proposal given to the public.  Most if not all of these improvements were in the Rouge Valley System in the north-end of the City.  It paid for the CSO Basin constructed on Edward Hines Parkway near Telegraph road, and various improvements to separate sanitary from storm water disposal.


The money collected is to be used to pay the bonds.  I have asked bond counsel Miller Canfield to give us an opinion on if any money can be used for other purposes.  If it can, then the City could ask voters to renew the millage.  I asked the question in late February, early March and have not received a response as of today.

—– Original Message —–

From: Troy Brown

To: Mayor Dan Paletko

Cc: Lisa Hicks-Clayton ; Heidi ; Suzanne Todd

Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:29 PM

Subject: Fwd: Fwd: My questions of the Invoices that they want to just rubber stamp tomorrow.

Mayor Paleko:


Please direct me to the location of the complete details and information concerning the CSO Reserve Fund that I brought up last night.  I would assume that all of the info is on the website or elsewhere, electronically, concerning this “cash on hand” fund .


You indicated you were not sure what the criteria for use was, so hopefully the complied information on this fund will explain it to me. Any historical information, as Lisa suggested below, would be great.


Also, if indeed there is a restriction of use, perhaps it belongs in a different section of the Water Budget since it is not readily available to any and all Water Budget Expenditures.


Thank you Mayor for the info and help.




Troy Brown – Dearborn Heights Resident

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Lisa Hicks-clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: Fwd: My questions of the Invoices that they want to just rubber stamp tomorrow.
To: Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com>

The Mayor or DPW Director William Zimmer.  Also, Dan Brooks is very knowledgeable.  When I was elected in 2012, I spent time with him reviewing and hearing the history and the details.


From: Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com>
To: Lisa Hicks-clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com>
Cc: Heidi <hmbsweetjeep@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: Fwd: My questions of the Invoices



Thanks for the information.


Can you direct me to where I can find all and complete info on this CSO fund?



Thanks for you help.





Next Set of Emails

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Troy Brown<tbrown8036@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: Special Levy monies to help the flood situation on the NBECD – RESPONSE
To: Lisa Hicks-clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com>

Furthermore MCL 141.424 describes ONE fiscal year as the report of ONE unit of Government.  If one is to use this MCL item for a means of justifying a Water Budget separate from the General Budget, then they will have to make the assertion that the Water Fund and the General Fund are derived from 2 different UNITS, which is, as you know, not the case. Also note that the description of a fiscal year does not lend itself to separation of the budgets when read within the context of the Law.
What is your take on this?
Respectfully and Regards,
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com> wrote:
The Charter DOES NOT disconnect the 2 budgets. All of the other information in your e-mail is fine and you have answered many of my questions however I still cannot find in the Charter where this notion that the General Budget and the Water Budget are different.  The exact wording is this:
“Section 8.2. – Budget: Preparation of.

to me, Heidi

On or before the first day of April of each year, the Mayor shall prepare and submit to the Council a complete itemized proposed budget for the next fiscal year. It shall include at least the following information: ”

I am asking how you read out of this statement that says that there are 2 budgets: one water and one general?

It is with all respect that I ask you this because I cannot seem to see this dichotomy?  Is there a state law or something else that supersedes?

Certainly you are not suggesting that preference or methodology of the administration, past or present, supersedes the Charter, are you?


Troy Brown.

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Lisa Hicks-clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com> wrote:

As we discussed, per our phone conversation, the Charter defines the date for General Fund. Current Administration determines and prepares the Water Budget for presentation to the City Council.  The question would be better answered by the Administration, as I explained in our previous phone conversation.  Please remember, the Water  Budget is a self balancing budget.  All monies allocated and disbursed must be used for that purpose, in relation to, operation of the said budget.   In addition, the Water Budget is prepared after the completion of the Plante Moran audit for the General Fund Budget, Library Budget, Courts, Roads Budget.  Plante Moran prepares the annual audit June/ July.  When formulating and preparing the Water Budget, items taken into  consideration include Detroit Water and Sewage rate proposal, current liabilities, water claims, infrastructure and maintenance, repairs, must be taken into consideration. These points are important when determining the water rates, which is presented with the Water Budget.  Have you ever attended the Water Budget discussions?  By attending, I believe your questions would be answered and present a better understanding.

In closing, I have answered your questions, via e-mail and phone conversation.   I have forwarded the budgets and previous year’s audit.


Lisa Hicks-Clayton

Dearborn Heights City Council Member

From: Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com>
To: Lisa Hicks-clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com>; Heidi <hmbsweetjeep@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 7, 2015 3:50 AM
Subject: Re: Special Levy monies to help the flood situation on the NBECD – RESPONSE


In our conversations we discussed the budgets and I indicated that the charter stated that the budget will be submitted for approval by April 1st and Approved by June 1st.  I questioned why the water budget was separate and you indicated that the Charter says the General budget.  However as I studied this week that is not the case.  There is no distinction between the budgets and furthermore the Fiscal Year, according to 8.1, clearly begins on July 1st with again no distinction between “budgets”.  My question is by what authority does the Council operate 2 different budgets and 2 different fiscal years?




On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com> wrote:


Thank you for your response, however with all due respect, my specific question was not answered.

Note I did not ask if we can re-finance it nor did I ask who pays the bill and who accepts the filling.

I asked specifically  for:

Who is the designated city official responsible for the financial reporting and record keeping for the Special Levy (CSO Reserve) Bond?

Thanks for the help. Note keyword – RESPONSIBLE.




On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Lisa Hicks-clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com> wrote:

The CSO Basin Bond, as established by the millage question, has set guidelines and terms.  Similar to a home mortgage is defined. The City can refinance the bond, if it proves to be a benefit to the City and use of the taxpayers’ dollars. The City of Dearborn Heights Treasurer John Riley pays the bond payment. As the Mayor indicated, questions may be directed to Treasurer Riley, 313-791-3410.  Documents are filed with the City Clerk’s Office, (313) 791 -3430.


Lisa Hicks-Clayton

Dearborn Heights City Councilwoman


From: Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com>
To: Dan Paletko <dpaletko@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>
Cc: Ken Baron <kenbaronsflorist@sbcglobal.net>; Margaret Horvath <nonna1936@att.net>; Joseph V. Kosinski <Kzggy@aol.com>; Tom Berry <cctomberry@yahoo.com>; Robert Constan <rkconstan@comcast.net>; Ned Apigian <ned.council@me.com>; Lisa Hicks-Clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com>; John Riley <jriley@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>; clerk@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us
Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 3:11 AM
Subject: Re: Special Levy monies to help the flood situation on the NBECD – RESPONSE

Mayor Paletko and Dearborn Heights City Council Members:


Who is the designated city official responsible for the financial reporting and record keeping for the Special Levy (CSO Reserve) Bond?




Troy Brown – Dearborn Heights Resident


On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com> wrote:

Mayor Paletko, Treasurer Riley, Mr. Macari:



I thank you in advance Mr. Macari and Treasurer Riley for answering my questions, as the Mayor has indicated you would.  Can I get these answers by mid-July or sooner?

Thanks for the response Mr. Mayor.

Hopefully I will hear from the Council Members on this issue as well,  since they may be able to help me with some or all of the info on these items.



Troy Brown – Dearborn Heights Resident.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Dan Paletko <dpaletko@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us> wrote:

I believe our Treasurer John Riley, the City Comptroller Vince Macari and I have attempted on numerous occasions to try and respond to your many requests for the same information.


I would refer you to my e-mail of April 16, 2015. These monies related to the Special Levy are restricted and once bond counsel provides a written “opinion” governing their use and restrictions, I will be happy to disseminate to everyone.


Your question number 3 will be covered in the legal opinion mentioned above.


Question number 2 is better handled by the Comptroller and Treasurer. In fairness to them, the year ends fiscally on June 30, 2015. I believe they would be in a better position to answer these questions after the accounting books are closed. You need to allow some time after June 30th for them to collect data from journal entries, cash statements, etc. before a response can be provided.


Mayor Paletko


From: Troy Brown [mailto:tbrown8036@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 6:34 AM
To: Mayor Dan Paletko; Ken Baron; Margaret Horvath; Joseph V. Kosinski; Tom Berry; Robert Constan; Ned Apigian; Lisa Hicks-Clayton; John Riley
Cc: Vince Macari
Subject: Special Levy monies to help the flood situation on the NBECD


Mayor Paletko and City Elected Officials:


As you know I have been questioning why the Special Levy monies (AKA CSO Reserve fund) cannot be used to purchase the 14 properties on Hanover Street along the North Branch of the Ecorse Creek, as defined by the Dearborn Heights FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Application.


Mr. Mayor, you most recently indicated that your current stance is that these monies cannot be used for anything other than paying off the bond debt of the Special Levy.


With that said, I have a few questions for all of you:

  1. In the approved water budget, of as of July 17, 2014, the Special Levy (CSO Reserve) is incorporated into the Water Fund on the sheet labeled “Cash” Available.


  1. To help me understand the financial status of the fund, can you please provide updated information for the following items:
  2. CSO Reserve – Cash on hand?
  3. CSO Bond Fund – Accounts Receivable?
  4. Dues from other funds?
  5. CSO Bond Fund – Accounts Payable?
  6. What is the payoff of the CSO Revenue Bond as of today?
  7. CSO Reserve balance?


  1. If there is money available after paying off this bond, can the city use the remaining balance for purchasing the 14 homes on Hanover?


In the end I would like to see the city use all of it’s resources, including any monies left after paying off the Special Levy, to expedite the solution for the whole flooding situation and immediate mitigation for the 14 homes along Hanover.

Thank you in advance for your detailed answers and to my questions and the help that you will provide.



Troy Brown – Dearborn Heights Resident.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.6037 / Virus Database: 4365/10095 – Release Date: 06/25/15

Troy Brown

5:13 PM (19 hours ago)

Another example of no response

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:18 AM
Subject: Fwd: Special Levy monies to help the flood situation on the NBECD – RESPONSE
To: Mayor Dan Paletko <dpaletko@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>, John Riley <jriley@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>, clerk@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us, Margaret Horvath <nonna1936@att.net>, “Joseph V. Kosinski” <Kzggy@aol.com>, Tom Berry <cctomberry@yahoo.com>, Ken Baron <kenbaronsflorist@sbcglobal.net>, Robert Constan <rkconstan@comcast.net>, Ned Apigian <ned.council@me.com>, Lisa Hicks-Clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com>

Elected Officials:
As you can see from the latest response, the administration is not answering some basic questions reading this CSO Revenue fund which I think should be used by the city to help us residents short term, in the flooding situation.
Can one of you please get this basic information to me today?
I mean this information I am asking for should have been available to you all along, maybe even in your notes since there was some inner fund borrowing against the Water Fund in early May.
I don’t understand this, there is no opinion necessary.
Just as I keep my check book balanced, so to should this fund be balanced.
If I need to FOIA this information then just let me know, I will take that route but to just say “wait until October” for stale data, in my opinion, is not acceptable to me.
I am trying to understand this fund and why it cannot be used for the benefit of us residents who need it, in the time of need.  Since April I still do not have a answer that I am confident in.
It sounds like the Mayor, the administration and the council have never considered using these funds for helping us, is that possible?.  If that is the case I understand the delay’s and the caution being taken but I cannot accept not having the current information that I am requesting.
Thanks for your help.
Troy Brown – Dearborn Heights Resident.

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Vince Macari<vmacari@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>
Date: Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: Special Levy monies to help the flood situation on the NBECD – RESPONSE
To: Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com>

This information will be available when the Audit is complete usually by mid October.  Attached is last year’s audit  for the year end June 30, 2014.  Page 16 and 17 will give you a lot of the answers you are looking for. Vince Macari  From: Troy Brown [mailto:tbrown8036@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 2:57 PM
To: Dan Paletko
Cc: Ken Baron; Margaret Horvath; Joseph V. Kosinski; Tom Berry; Robert Constan; Ned Apigian; Lisa Hicks-Clayton; John Riley; Vince Macari
Subject: Re: Special Levy monies to help the flood situation on the NBECD – RESPONSE Mayor Paletko, Treasurer Riley, Mr. Macari:Attachments areaPreview attachment 17784 City of Dearborn Heights 0614 Final.pdf

More Emails

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Yahoo Mail <cctomberry@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: Dearborn Heights CSO Millage
To: Troy <tbrown8036@gmail.com>
Cc: Margaret Horvath <nonna1936@att.net>, “Joseph V. Kosinski” <Kzggy@aol.com>, Ken Baron <kenbaronsflorist@sbcglobal.net>, Robert Constan <rkconstan@comcast.net>, Lisa Hicks-Clayton <hicksclayton4dhcitycouncil@yahoo.com>, Ned Apigian <ned.council@me.com>, Mayor Dan Paletko <dpaletko@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>, “clerk@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us” <clerk@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>, John Riley <jriley@ci.dearborn-heights.mi.us>, Suzanne Todd <grandmasuzanne610@yahoo.com>, Heidi <hmbsweetjeep@gmail.com>, Ray Muscat <rmuscat5@gmail.com>, Jerry Nosal <jhnsr33@aol.com>, “deblynn11@yahoo.com” <deblynn11@yahoo.com>

No, I’d rather discuss it on tv so all can see and hear…

Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2015, at 12:27 PM, Troy <tbrown8036@gmail.com> wrote:

That’s fine. Just send the requested info in written form and that will be sufficient.

Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2015, at 7:27 AM, Yahoo Mail <cctomberry@yahoo.com> wrote:

Mr Brown,

You’re correct, I did not respond because you were not in attendance.

I’ll be happy to reply at the next televised session.

Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2015, at 10:11 PM, Troy Brown <tbrown8036@gmail.com> wrote:

Councilman Berry:

I have watched the “last meeting” 2 times now, trying to find your response, as you said you would have for me. I looked in the Back Up and Agenda documentation and I could not find the requested information there either. Is it possible that you forgot or is this just another case of a promise not kept? Hopefully it is the former and not the later.

Anyway can you please forward me the information that I requested and you agreed to supply?

Thank you Councilman Berry.


Troy Brown – Dearborn Heights Resident

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Troy <tbrown8036@gmail.com> wrote:

Councilman Berry:

I look forward to your response at the next meeting. However in the best interest of time, completing my most recent spreadsheet in advance will ensure I get the info I have requested.  This will also allow for some dialogue on the data provided.

Thanks Mr. Berry.

Have a great weekend.


Troy Brown – DeArborn Heights Resident.

Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 24, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Yahoo Mail <cctomberry@yahoo.com> wrote:

Mr Brown ,

I will respond at the next meeting.

Hope to see you there.

Sent from my iPhone

I feel it’s important for all of us to understand who’s answering, who’s asking the questions and most of all who isn’t responding. It’s an election year we need residents to know just what has happened in this City. How the money is being spent or not.

Dear City Of Dearborn Heights I Wish Our City Had

This is the question I put up over on Facebook and residents added their wish for our City in the comment section. For those of you who don’t have Facebook here is what some of the residents said. I ask those of you who don’t have Facebook what do you wish the City had? If you answered this over on Facebook then no need to here. If you want to see the rest of the comments just click on the photo you will be taken to the Truth Page on Facebook.

Dearborn Heights

No Parking Except For The Mayor Of Dearborn Heights.

At the City Wide garage sale this past weekend the Mayor of Dearborn Heights decided he didn’t have to pay attention to the sign that clearly showed NO Parking.

Mayor Parks in no parking zone

I can’t see a sign anywhere in this photo that say’s ‘park here Mayor’ this is the first time I’ve seen the car that us taxpayers pay for that’s a nice looking car. Just wondering what would have happened to anyone who may have parked behind the Mayors car? Mr. Mayor these signs are put up for a reason I can’t find anywhere in the charter that say’s the Mayor doesn’t have to follow the law. Did I miss something? I know some on here are going to say what’s the big deal and to those who are asking or thinking this I might say maybe that way of thinking is part of the problem. I would like you to start parking where ever you want and when you get a ticket ask them why? Tell the police who will be giving you a ticket “the Mayor did it” see how far that gets you.