Banned From Coming To City Council…Some on Council are Looking into Doing Just That…

While encouraging the residents to come to council meetings some council members even go so far as to chastise residents for not attending. Well, all of that just might be a bunch of crap.  Why do I say this? The Truth Page has received evidence that the Council Chair and newly elected Council Chair Pro Tem have other ideas. The Council Chair asked the City’s corporation counsel to look into their (the council) rights regarding the public portion of the council meetings. Councilman Berry said that the public comment portion of the meetings has become embarrassing and that as elected officials they shouldn’t have to be embarrassed like that. Apparently, our new council chair Pro Tem (little dictator) did some investigating on the subject and found out that someone can be removed and/or Banned from a council meeting. All of this of course is in response to the last council meeting when the issue of a claim made against the Mayor came up again.

 

Keep in mind that Councilman Berry was just re-elected in November and has one week as of Tuesdaybeing the Council Chair Pro Tem. This should make for a very interesting 2-4 years as they are already looking for ways to keep the public quiet. It’s not like they do a damn thing about any of the endless charter violations already committed. The Council does nothing to investigate any wrong doing by this Administration. They never looked into two people (City employees) negotiating contracts while they were having a personal relationship. They did nothing about the Mayor hiring someone illegally to the City and letting them work for over a year. They do nothing about anything.  But, this is something (he who said he doesn’t have time) is willing to spend time and our tax money on.

 

I’m sorry Mr. Mayor that you were never afforded the opportunity to defend yourself against this claim. That was taken away from you by your assistant when she decided to hide this from you. I’m sorry that the HR director and the City attorney spending endless hours talking to one another and this persons lawyer. I’m sorry they excluded you from those discussions and decided to make a deal with this person. I’m sorry and no, it’s not fair that this should keep being brought up. Then again, is it fair that thousands of tax payer dollars were spent to look into this? Is it fair that tax dollars were used to keep this a big secret? Is it any wonder that residents are mad and want to know why their money was spent on such things. Councilman Berry, it’s not the fault of the taxpayers yet you want to place blame on those residents who decided to investigate this claim.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Banned From Coming To City Council…Some on Council are Looking into Doing Just That…”

  1. How come counsel member Barry become a pro-temp, he received the lowest votes. And why he and the chair want to ban residents from attending and speaking during the public city council meetings? What they are concerned about? Is investigating the allegations against the mayor by his ex-secretary may expose additional information they prefer not to come to light? They just investigated the clerk and censured him, (By the way, for how long?) May be they are protecting the city? May be they are brave and come to this blog and explain why they don’t want to investigate that matter? The mayor told the resident to shut-up.

    Those actions by the officials may perceived as if trying to hid something? They should be calm and cool and answer objectively and professionally with full respect to the residents when addressing them about matters related to their duties in their public offices.

    Like

  2. Kathy, what race calling that blogger want you to publish? If what he/she emailing is hate language, Please inform the FBI hate grimes unit in Detroit and the state police about that. They will identify and locate that person. We have civic duty responsibility to do that so we can avoid possible harm to the public. Let that blogger ask the authority why you can’t publish the……….? Check the following websites:
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/hate_crimes
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/hate_crimes/overview
    http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/
    http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2008/state_ucr_contacts.html

    I hope that person will read and understand and stop sending race/hate language to you.

    Like

  3. You bet I changed your words that kind of talk isn’t allowed here against any race period. Unless you would like to give your full name telephone number address and email so you can stand behind that trash then no it will not get put up here. You don’t like that walk bye bye. I won’t insult my own children by allowing that talk here.

    Like

  4. I think it’s time for us to move on from this. I only say this because it’s not getting us anywhere council can’t or won’t look into this after all this time. Furthermore this was submitted to the Governors office maybe he can do something about it. I think the taxpayers and the council were cheated.

    Like

  5. bitsy08, The mayor ex-secretary lawyer filed the claim with the city and put his name on that claim and threaten the mayor to file it in the court if no resolution reached. That lawyer must beveled what his client claimed to put his name on that claim! Do you think for a moment that the lawyer did’t believe that the ex-mayor secretary was truthful? In any way, what is the status of that claim? Any cost associated with it been paid? Who authorize the payments? And if so, did the city council approved those payments without asking what they are for? Is this claim received by the Human Resources office? Is the complaint is a city public record? The council recently investigated similar claims, why not this one?

    Like

  6. Didn’t I just say that the lawyer didn’t say the charges were false; he just said they were never investigated and no lawsuit was ever filed so there is no judicial determination. I believe that would mean that so far they are UNSUBSTANTIATED charges and as such, for someone to send a letter to the citizens detailing these charges was in effect a smear campaign against the mayor. Hmm. Seems to me the mayor does a good job of smearing his “good” name all by himself. So what we have hear are unsubstantiated charges against the mayor and the council has been asked to investigate. Never going to happen. This council is a do-nothing group of old people who are just here to collect their money and do as little as possible. Now, before you all get all over me, when I say old, I’m referring to their state of mind.

    Like

  7. Noisy

    Yes it was sent to the Mayor he however said he never saw the claim. His assistant is the person who saw this claim and took care of everything surrounding this claim. The Mayor from what he said in his deposition in the Hassan Jamal lawsuit never saw the claim he went on to say that his assistant never discussed it with him. His assistant in her deposition backs up what the Mayor say’s and she stated she never showed it to him nor told him about it. Going with what the Mayor and his assistant state he never knew.

    Like

  8. bitsy08: According to what you said, that employee lawyer field a claim with the city against the mayor, The mayor saying that the her lawyer give him a letter stating that the charges he field are false? are you sure about that? And the claim against the mayor was filed with whom in the city? Was addressed to what department? And received by witch city official?

    Like

  9. One upon a time there was a woman who worked in the office of the “former” Mayor, She had very good performance reviews. Then along came Paletko, the new mayor. This woman complained to the mayor’s assistant about pornography being left around the office. All of a sudden and lo and behold, her performance reviews got worse. She was eventually moved out of the mayor’s office, into another position, at the same salary. Now the letter the mayor read at the council meeting in January (?) was from this person’s lawyer. Her lawyer didn’t say the charges were false, he just said they were never investigated and no lawsuit was ever filed so there is no judicial determination. We’ve asked the council to investigate. How far do you think we’re going to get with that request? We also asked the council to investigate putting GPS on city-owned cars. No one knows where the city employees are going with these cars and if indeed they are on city business. In the meantime, in this economy, we, the residents, pay for the gas. The mayor racked up 79,000 miles on his car in 2 years. When you do the math, that’s approximately 800+ miles each week. Where do you think he went to incur that kind of mileage? How do you do your job and yet rack up 800+ miles on your car – unless you’re working out of your car. As to Tom and Ken and their request to either remove or ban residents from council meetings and saying exactly what they want, this from Lisa Hicks-Clayton:
    This would not be allowed as defined and would be a violation to the U.S. Constitution First Amendment and the Open Meetings Act. I would not support such a position. In addition, I sponsored the public comment section at Study Sessions and feel if the resident wishes to address the Council body on the subject at hand, the resident should be allowed to do so, as we represent the residents (course she doesn’t say what the outcome was on her proposal). Another point – she seems to be the only council person who realizes she works for us:

    Restricting public comments to agenda items is likely to be upheld under the Open Meetings Act and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. However, it is of doubtful validity under Section 6.7 of the City Charter because Section 6.7 requires the rules to provide citizens a reasonable opportunity to be heard “on matters within the jurisdiction of the Council.” Matters within the Council’s jurisdiction are likely to be viewed far more expansively than just the matters on a particular Council meeting agenda. Plus, to put such a rule into effect, the Council would have to depart from its practice of hearing from residents about various matters that are not on the Council’s agenda.

    Like

  10. What was the public issue the mayor and the council don’t want residents to talk about? Is the issue related to elected officials duties of offices? And if the issue is in litigation, the residents should be able to discuss if related to city business and officials duties, and the officials may choose not to respond as part of their obligations to protect city interest in civil cases. Issues involving criminal matters are different and involves public prosecutions if there are evidence of that nature. Please explain what this “hoopla” is about!

    Like

  11. Hello, read, educate, and enhance your understanding of the Michigan “OMA”

    Click on:

    http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/OMA_handbook_287134_7.pdf

    and clic on the micros in blue color for more explanation.

    Council members should read the city charter and understand its contents and of course follow the rules!

    City charter provisions can only be changed by a ballet vote of an election.

    Elected officials are subject to penalty if they violate the charter and passing time will not eliminate a committed violation (The charter don’t have time limits language on elected officials violations)

    Elected officials must deal with residents comments or allegations about an act related to their duties, or utilization of public assets, or violations of city charter, or using office power for personal gain, Ext.

    Council Pro-Temp Berry can ask council-member Constant who by the way a registered and listened lawyer in good standing, who practicing law in the state of Michigan and spent 6 years as a state legislator, If introducing a council resolution to ban residents from addressing issues related to elected officials conducts in their public offices will be permitted under the Michigan (OMA)?

    Like

  12. Maybe they should tell the Residents in the water bill that if it snows to move there cars off the street. I have a family more then one on my street that has six cars in the street nothing in the driveway or garage they all belong to this family. Loved it when the police came and gave out tickets its about time. People need to know the garage and driveway are were the cars and trucks go. Keep the streets clear so the streets can get plowed. Maybe the council clowns can do something about this problem. WELCOME TO DETROIT HEIGHTS……….

    Like

  13. “Junk yard dog” this coming from a man three years on the council and still can’t follow the agenda, keep up with the meeting, or understand when there’s a vote. A man that interrupts others while talking without getting permission from council chair. In clear violation of the councils own rules.

    Further more I’m sick and tired of this council and this Mayor not doing anything about the lack of technology and communicating with the residents because they are not computer literate, or techies. If they haven’t kept up with the advancement in technology social media or something as simple as havering a newsletter sent by email. This isn’t the problem of the residents move aside or put in place a Commision of people who are interested and more than capable to do it. Stop punishing the rest of us for your weaknesses shame on you. You show contempt for residents who are interested in these things. You show contempt for residents who ask questions about how their money is spent.

    What some of you are even doing on the council is mind boggling. If you have such contempt for us please leave. We would be so much better without such weight around all our necks. You keep dragging us down and then insult us when we ask for the simplest of things.
    City Government working at its finest.

    Like

  14. Don’t you find it puzzling that Tom Berry “had the time” to do some investigating and that which he investigated is how to ban people from coming to the council meetings? Two meeting in a row he said from the council table – I don’t have the time. If you don’t have the time, Tom, I suggest you resign. We hired you to do a job and we hired you to give us INFORMED decisions and votes. If you didn’t study the agenda items, how can you do either? You should have excused yourself from voting because your vote wasn’t an INFORMED vote. Now, you want to remove or go so far as to ban a resident from the council meetings because what we have to say “embarasses” you? Oh, BOO HOO, TOM AND KEN. Pull up your big boy pants and deal with it. If you just once did what we asked it would be something that might make us take another look and HOPE. Right now, most of us have no hope. I ran into Councilman Apigian the other day and he made the remark about one citizen who comes to the meetings all the time – “he’s like a junk yard dog that never goes away.” Isn’t that a nice remark to hear from a councilman about a citizen? Then I told him I wanted to see an e-mail Newsletter that went out to everyone that could tell us of snow days, recreational vehicles parked in the yards, etc. He said – well, not all of us are computer people. Unbelievable! I told him that Dearborn’s IT people are now taking care of our IT Department and if they can send out a newsletter for Dearborn, there is absolutely NO REASON we can’t do it in DH. I’m not going to stop with these ideas. Maybe if we keep battering them, we’ll wear them down. Martin Luther King said: Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s