Introduction:
Links to the video recording and the council packet are at the bottom of this post. Please note any errors or omissions in the comments. Anything noted in brackets was inserted by Clarkston Sunshine.
Agenda Item #1, Call to Order (Video time mark 0:00:00):
Sue Wylie said I’m going to call the meeting to order at 7 o’clock.
Agenda Item #2, Pledge of Allegiance (Video time mark 0:00:03):
Wylie said everybody please rise, and we will say the Pledge of Allegiance.
Pledge said.
Agenda Item #3, Roll Call (Video time mark 0:00:24):
Wylie said turning to Item #3 on the agenda, we have a roll call, and Evelyn [Bihl, deputy clerk], are you doing the roll call? Or Jonathan [Smith, city manager], you’re doing the roll call.
Sue Wylie, Laura Rodgers, Gary Casey, Amanda Forte, Mark Lamphier, Ted Quisenberry, and Peg Roth were present.
Wylie said everybody’s here.
Agenda Item #4, Approval of Agenda (Video time mark 0:00:50):
Wylie said Item #4 is approval of the agenda. I need a motion to approve the agenda as presented.
Motion by Roth; second Casey.
Wylie said any discussion from council.
No discussion.
Wylie said any discussion from the public.
No discussion.
Motion to approve the agenda passed by unanimous voice vote.
Wylie said and the motion is adopted. This carries.
Agenda Item #5, Public Comments (Video time mark 0:01:13):
[Though public comments can sometimes irritate the city council, there is value to both the council and the public in hearing them. While they can’t eliminate public comments entirely without violating the Open Meetings Act, your city council has occasionally decided not to acknowledge public comments during a city council meeting unless the person submitting the comments also appears at the meeting (in-person or electronically) to personally read them. In the past, members of the public have been cut off for exceeding the city council’s arbitrary three-minute time limit (it’s arbitrary because no time limits are required by the Open Meetings Act).
If your public comments were submitted to the council but not read, or if you tried to make public comments but your comments were cut short, please email them to clarkstonsunshine@gmail.com and I will include them in my informal meeting summaries either under public comments or under the specific agenda item that you want to speak to.]
Wylie said Item #5 is public comments.
(Wylie read the rules for public comments.)
Wylie said would anybody like to make a public comment.
Wylie recognized Chet Pardee for a public comment.
Chet Pardee:
Pardee provided his name and address.
Pardee said my comments this evening relate to a FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] request that I submitted in the middle of June. It was answered on the 29th, and I was in agreement with the delay. I requested information on Smith’s performance review, which appears to have been provided to Smith based on an email on the 22nd from Wylie to Smith. The FOIA response material included my 2024 public comments but didn’t include comments that I made in November of 2023. This was a council meeting in which Wylie and Rodgers were absent. Casey presided, acknowledged receiving public comments from Cory [Johnston] and myself, chose not to read either, and indicated if anyone would like a copy, one could request it. I had provided my public comments at 11:30 on the 27th of September. I also provided a copy of my 11-27-23 comments as an attachment to my 12-13 public comments and indicated they were attached for information.
Pardee said my 11-27 public comments were in response to Smith’s reading input on the 27th that showed 25 items that were keeping him busy. My response to Smith’s items focused on 17 items that I felt were important to Clarkston citizens and should have been on Smith’s list. Missing were an escalation policy for code enforcement, a repair plan for progress on the seven Main Street pavers, including input from Bill Bair from MDOT [Michigan Department of Transportation], getting concurrence from businesses on their East Alley repair cost participation, and making the East Washington storm sewer repair.
Pardee said also, what was missing, I felt, was a simple project tool to assist in the completion of capital projects in the budget. Missing were street repair priorities consistent with HRC’s [Hubble, Roth & Clark’s] PASER [Pavement and Surface Evaluation and Rating] study results, nine streets in poor condition from the 2022 update, no mention of a three-year budget process that would provide financial perspective or a financial education process to assist council members’ understanding. Also missing was West Miller Street and sidewalk expenditures consistent with Oakland County assuming responsibility for Upper Miller Pond and updating on the sewer cost charges that had been communicated previously by Independence Township of a $60 million sewer bond coming.
Pardee said and to council, it’s council’s responsibility to provide direction to Smith on his activities. I suggest again that council utilize Julie Meredith’s [Director, Clarkston Independence District Library] willingness to facilitate council’s discussion in determination of the city’s priorities for Smith’s use.
Wylie thanked Pardee. Pardee said you’re welcome.
Wylie said anybody else in the public like to make a comment.
No comments.
Agenda Item #6, FYI (Video time mark 0:05:36):
Wylie said next, I have Item #6, FYI. It says to be determined. I did not receive anything.
[To Smith], Wylie said did you have anything. Smith said no.
Wylie said moving to – (holding up a document), Roth said are we going to discuss this at all, or we don’t need to? Wylie and Quisenberry said what is it. Roth said about the petitions and the— Wylie said we can. Is there a more appropriate time to talk about it? Ryan said if you want to talk about it. Wylie told Roth to talk about it.
Roth said yeah, I just – Wylie said why don’t you tell everybody what? Roth said the majority of the petitions, there was only one group of petitions for the people running for city council that was approved by Oakland County. The rest were denied. So, anyone who was running for city council other than – Wylie said or mayor – Roth said and mayor will all have to do write-ins if they want to run.
Roth said and so I just was curious, looking back, because my petition, I submitted mine on the 17th, and then Wylie submitted hers on the 22nd, and then the last of them came in on the 23rd. So, I guess they were just held onto, and all sent in bulk. Ryan said oh, I don’t know that. I mean – Roth said is that, yeah. I mean, I was checking with Cari Neubeck [Independence Township Clerk]. She said normally you send them off as they’re received, but since nobody was apparently overseeing what the clerk was doing, they were just left to be sent in on the 23rd. Actually, they were sent in on the 24th.
Wylie said she actually did, the clerk did actually call me I think the day I turned it in, and she told me I was missing something, and I don’t recall now what it was. Roth said you had needed more signatures. Wylie said pardon me. Roth said you told me you needed more signatures. Wylie said no. Bihl said you needed to sign and date it at the bottom. Roth said oh, there. Bihl said you needed to sign and date it on the bottom. Wylie said oh, okay. Thank you. Yeah, so she did contact me about something, but there was—I forgot to check a box, and I should have read more carefully, and Ryan pointed out to me what I didn’t do. Roth said on hers too. Wylie said and so I’m going to have to be a write-in.
Wylie said apparently, according to Ryan, maybe you want to say what’s going on with Oakland County. Ryan said well, it’s everywhere. The voting process has, you know, been under attack for many years now, so they’re strictly construing the statutes and making sure that everything is done appropriately, and there were some technical issues with the petitions. Unfortunately. But apparently, everybody, and I don’t know what happened here, but everybody’s, I mean, somebody had to verify, because everybody’s filing for petitions, they had to verify the petition signatures were okay, and then it went to the county. Roth said right.
Ryan said so, what was looked at relative to the affidavits, I don’t know. Roth said affidavits, all of them, five of them. Wylie said six. Roth said six, right. Ryan said six out of seven. Wylie said it was different things on different people. Roth said yeah, but all the signatures were fine. Wylie said each person had enough signatures. Roth said just the affidavits were not filled out totally.
Casey said who’s up for a vote. Wylie said three, Lamphier, Roth, myself. Forte said and who’s on the ballot? Pardee said Lily. Wylie said a lady named – Roth said somebody Jones. Smith said (unintelligible) Jones. Pardee said McLean. Roth said Jones, Lily McLean. Wylie said Al Avery. Roth said Al Avery. Lamphier said no, I wasn’t. (Quisenberry made an unintelligible comment.)
Forte said so, who’s on the ballot.
Wylie said Lisa Paterczack. Roth said oh, that was the other one, right.
Forte said so, who made it on the ballot? Who did it? Wylie said Jones. Ryan said Ms. Erica Jones. Wylie said Erica Jones. She’s the only one who got it filled in correctly. [There has been a challenge to the validity of Jones’ petitions filed. It has not yet been ruled on.]
Wylie said I’m sorry. You know, I’ve been mad about it today. Roth said I know. Wylie said I’m laughing about it today.
Ryan said so if I may, what I’ve done, I called everybody. I haven’t talked to Ms. McLean yet. I put a call in to her so that everybody knew today. And we found out about this Friday, or Smith did, and he contacted me. So, I prepared a packet for everybody. I’ve given one already to the mayor, and I have one for Ms. Roth and for Mr. Lamphier, showing you the correct, what needs to be, what was not done correctly, along with the statute, along with the information for write-in procedure, should you want to do that. And tomorrow I’m going to e-mail to the other three, Al Avery, Ms. McLean, and Ms. Paterczack, the same packet. And if anybody needs to talk about that going forward, I’ll be happy to do that, no problem. But that’s what we’ve done and why, and that’s why I called everybody today when I found out exactly what was going on.
Roth said okay. So, the packets are here? Ryan said yeah, I have yours and Lamphier’s. I’ve already e-mailed. Roth said yeah. Ryan said and I’ll e-mail the other ones to the other three people.
Forte said so, everyone has to be write-ins. Wylie said yes. Forte said this will be a very interesting election. Roth said yeah, even the lady at the clerk’s office said, well, this is very odd.
Pardee said is there still an appeal process? Ryan said no. Pardee said no appeal process.
Casey said so, which ones are out.
Wylie said what process. Ryan said appeal process.
Roth said only one. I don’t know. Somebody (unintelligible).
Wylie said I think an appealing took place with Mr. Ryan previously, over the weekend. Ryan said the deadline is July 23rd, and if it’s not met, then the county will not certify that portion of the ballot, except for Ms. Jones. So, it will be Ms. Jones and two blanks for the council people, and a blank for mayor, but, so, it will be a write-in.
Wylie said anything else on this topic.
Roth said (unintelligible). Quisenberry said mayor, nobody’s running on the ballot? Roth said that’s right.
Forte said anyone can be written in. Wylie said yep. You have to, I believe, to be elected, you have to file as a write-in candidate. Ryan said you’ve got to follow a procedure. Roth said to be considered.
Forte said so, the people who filed, they are considered write-in candidates. Wylie said yes. Ryan said no. Rodgers said you have to file separately now.
Rodgers said what’s the deadline for that. Ryan said well, it’s like the Friday, it’s like two Fridays or something before the election, but because of early voting and absentee voting, it probably should be done sooner than later so that you can tell people you’re running for write-in, as a write-in, because people can vote earlier now. I mean, they can, there’s early voting and there’s absentee voting, and you know, it’s not just people who are going to show up on November 5th and vote. They don’t have to. Wylie said right. Ryan said but all the information will be provided, and that’s where we are. Wylie thanked Ryan.
Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.
Pardee said will there be any communication to the citizens of Clarkston about what has happened? Wylie said well, I plan to call the newspaper and tell them, because I want my name out there so people will vote for me, and I will be doing private communication. I assume the reporter watches these and will find out what’s happening, so I assume she’ll be asking. But I intend to call her. Other than that, it’s up to each individual. Roth agreed. Pardee said it would seem an ideal item for communication in Smith’s writing to the community. Wylie said perhaps, yeah.
Wylie said anybody else on council have any comments or questions about this SNAFU from us. Lesson to everybody else in the future – Roth said yes, it is – (continuing), Wylie said make sure you get your paperwork done right. Roth said read.
Wylie said any other questions or comments from anybody in the public.
No comments.
Wylie said okay.
Agenda Item #7, City Manager Report for July [sic] 12, 2024 (Video time mark 0:13:06):
-
- City Manager Report, July [sic] 12, 2024 (page 3/63 of the council packet)
Wylie said moving on to Item #7, city manager’s report, and I think you just have one little item on here.
Smith said nothing for right now. Wylie said nothing, okay.
Quisenberry said I have a couple things to ask you about that. Wylie said okay, go ahead. Quisenberry’s got something he wants, I’m sorry.
Quisenberry said three things. One, Independence Township met since the last meeting and made a decision on their board regarding their, our police overpaying that we did. I’m wondering if you wanted to give an update to everybody so that they know what happened. I know you and Wylie were there, and I was there as well, and it was also covered in the news, but if you wanted to explain what happened with that and then if there’s any comments anybody has on that.
Smith said so, as you know, we’ve been overpaying based on their billing us. Independence Township has been overbilling us. We internally overpaid for the last 14 years for police and fire services to the tune of $177,000 over 14 years. We discovered it. Mr. [Richard] Bisio discovered it, brought it to our attention, recommended we investigate this, which we did. We suspected that there was indeed a mistake in their billing amount, and so we contacted Independence Township, and their finance expert looked into it, and he, too, confirmed that they had overbilled us for 14 years.
Smith said so, what the overbilling is, instead of charging police and fire service millage against just real property values, which is the way the contract was set up, they were charging us for both real property and personal property. So, they were combining the two and applying the millage rate to the higher total, which is not the way the contract reads. So, I’m not sure why this wasn’t caught when the first bill came to the city back in 2010. You’d think it would have been scrutinized at that time, but it somehow slipped through, and for the last 14 years, everybody’s been, my predecessors and I, have all been paying bills for this. Independence Township billed to us, and we paid it. We have no way, without knowing their millage rates, we have no way of knowing what, how to calculate it on our own. [Independence Township millage rates for police and fire protection are publically available on the township’s web site.] Their invoice is just a number. Second quarter services, X amount of dollars. It didn’t say the detail behind it. So, we’ve been diligently paying.
Smith said we asked for it. When I first discovered this, I brought this to José’s [Aliaga, Independence Township supervisor] attention, asked for the full amount to be reimbursed. It was $177,000. They immediately cited the statute of limitations, says, no, you’re only entitled to six years’ reimbursement, which would bring the $177,000 down to about $88,000. That’s all you’re entitled to.
We talked about this in [secret, closed session] council meetings, and ultimately agreed that if that’s all we’re going to get is the six years, then that’s all we’re going to get. But they had, as Quisenberry mentioned, they had a meeting two weeks ago, and it was brought up in a public meeting. So, I went to the podium and asked for, once again, the full amount, not just the $90[,000] or the $88[,000], but the full amount of $177,000. They voted on it. One person voted in favor of reimbursing the full amount. The other six voted against it. So, it failed.
Smith said he’s told that there is possible reconsideration of that vote. We’ll see at their next board meeting whether that happens or not. But as of this time, I think all we’re going to get is the six years. We did add interest. We said, well, all we’re going to give us is a six-year statute of limitations, which I think is a little frustrating that they’re hiding behind the statute of limitations, as the full amount, we’re partners, neighbors. But they have chosen to do this. Smith said I said, well, then the least thing you can do is pay us interest. So, the $88[,000] becomes $96[,000]. So, we’ll get approximately $96,000 here, I would expect, in the next couple weeks. And unless their vote is reconsidered, maybe they change their mind.
Wylie said you think, you said reconsidered. Do you think reconsidered with the current board members or maybe reconsidered with a future board, which I think they would take office in November, I assume? Smith said in November. they would not take office until November. Quisenberry said probably December. Wylie said or December.
Quisenberry said but isn’t there only one change? Isn’t it the supervisor that’s the change? Roth said no, there’s a change in the trustee, too. Quisenberry said oh, okay. Smith said but, no, I think they’re talking about reconsidering it now. We’ll see. Wylie said oh, okay.
(To Rodgers), Wylie said you had something.
Rodgers said yeah, after reading about it and watching it, just to reiterate, Smith, what you said is that you got a bill. When did you become city manager? Smith said 2017. Rodgers said 2017. So, for seven years, this bill was let go. And I’m assuming that back in 2010, when the original calculations came out, that’s when it should have been caught. And you got a bill just like we get a water bill or just like we get any other kind of bill that doesn’t show us how we got, arrived to that number, but that that’s a number. And so, for seven years, without having that equation and really no need to, in good faith, that you would never think that another community that’s attached to ours would ever do something like this to you. I just want to reiterate that, that probably 99.9% of the people in your same spot would have done exactly the same thing. And it was only when it was brought to our attention, and as soon as it was brought to your attention, did you fix it.
Rodgers said the second thing is I kind of wanted to give a shout-out to Sam Moraco [Independence Township board trustee and the contractor who did extensive work on Rodgers’ personal home]. From what I hear and what I saw, he stood behind our city, our village, the city of the village, very strongly and, you know, pushed for us. Unfortunately, the other trustees did not have that ethical feeling that he did in supporting their community. So, thank you for going to that meeting, and I just wanted to make that point.
(To Smith), Quisenberry said I thought you did a very good job presenting that. It was very concise and thorough and to the point and left no doubt in anybody that was watching this exactly what happened, how it happened, and how this mistake could have happened. Because like you said, the bill that you get is just a number, and it wasn’t itemized, so you would have not known, and we wouldn’t have thought to look at it. So, I thought that it was very well presented. I also want to commend Trustee Moraco for his stance. Two or three times, he interjected his opposing view with the rest of the board, saying that, yeah, we can hide behind this six-year thing because legally we can get away with it, so let’s do it. And he was saying, no, ethically, that’s not the way you do it. I’m a businessman. That’s not the way I conduct business. And these are our partners. And he even mentioned, this is a lot of money for them, and the township certainly could afford it. They would need this. So, yes, a call-out, good to him, and a thump on the head to all the others.
Wylie said anybody else on council have any comments, questions.
No comments.
Wylie said anybody in the public.
An unidentified man said he answered his own question. Wylie said you got your own question answered.
Wylie said anybody else.
Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.
Pardee said to what account will the $96,000 go. Smith said it will go into the 101 general fund. It will go into our fund balance. Pardee said it will become part of the fund balance calculation then. Smith said right. It will. Not like the ARPA [American Rescue Plan Act] funds, if that’s what you’re referring to. Pardee said I know there are other ones. Smith said when we received ARPA funds, that did not go into the 101. That had to be used for capital improvements, so it did not go into the 101.
Wylie said anybody, (to Quisenberry) you’ve got something else you want to say on the same topic? Quisenberry said well, not on the same topic.
Wylie said before you do, I just want to say one more thing on this topic. Mr. Bisio is sitting here, and I also want to give him a thanks, because he’s the person who caught the error to begin with. I’m sorry if I’m embarrassing you but thank you. Pardee and Roth thanked Bisio.
Wylie recognized Quisenberry.
Quisenberry said I’ve had a couple residents ask me the status of the whole Mill Pond issue and the water level. And there’s been really no discussion or new information put out to any residents along there, but some of them have talked to me and asked me about it, and they wanted to have an update because the last they knew there was some dialogue going on between us and the county, was it, as far as the control of it. And I said, well, I’ll look into it then.
Smith said I have not had any discussions with them recently. The last I left it, and I can request, it would be a fair request, to have them come to a future council meeting to give us a status update on where they stand. The lake level study, which was to be done months ago, I believe it’s completely, finally done, but there are other aspects of the whole engineering and design study that’s just taking a long, long time. It’s not costing, to my understanding, it’s not costing any more money than what we have earmarked as a result of the grant that we received and the city monies that were being donated to the cause. So, I’m not concerned about the cost, it’s just the timing, which is really, really slow now.
Quisenberry said nothing’s really happened since, granted the water levels haven’t been as drastically changing as they were in the last year, but these people were concerned about, what if it starts to change? Where are we at with that then? Smith said well, it’s a fair question that we need answered, and so I’ll make a note to ask Ryan [?] from the Water Resource Commission, who’s my contact on this project, to have him come to a meeting. He came to the meeting, you may remember him, giving us an update on what was going to be done, and when and how and all that stuff. I can ask that he come to a future council meeting and give us an update.
(To Roth), Wylie said you got a question. Roth said no, I just was going to make a comment. Ryan is going to be going on maternity [paternity] leave at the end of this month, and he has been talking to Karen Joliat [Oakland County Commissioner representing the Clarkston area], so she would actually have an update for you, and he’s trying to get everything together so he can put, he can schedule a meeting to give everybody all the updated, put everything together, but again, since he’s going to be on maternity [paternity] leave, that’s sort of on hold right now. He’s hoping to do that by the end of the year. Smith said okay. Roth said but since Joliat talked to him, she would be a good person to have come in. I’m sure she’d be happy to. Smith said all right.
Wylie said anybody else on council have questions or comments for the city manager.
Quisenberry said last thing I have is the last two meetings, three meetings we’ve had, we’ve discussed waste hauling, and it’s not on the meeting this time, but I would just like to, in a future meeting, next meeting, revisit that with an option to look into a single-day service. Smith said okay.
Wylie said council, public, any questions or comments for the city manager.
Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.
Pardee said I’m the only one that I can recall who expressed a concern about the county taking over the responsibility of upper and lower Mill Ponds in conjunction with our wanting to repair West Miller Road. And we had an estimate from HRC that showed an equalization pipe running under the road. I think that was part of keeping the two ponds the same height. And I’ve raised the question several times, and I think Pardee and [Jim] Meloche are the only people that are concerned about how are they going to do that if we’ve just repaired the road. How are they going to put an equalization pipe under the road when we’ve just repaired West Miller as included as a specific item in the current budget? So, I would say this is number four or number five times that I’ve raised the question, and I’ll try to be here when somebody from the county is here. Did Jim Nash [current Oakland County Water Resources Commissioner] get reelected? (Smith made an unintelligible comment.) Ryan said he made it through the primary. Pardee said yeah, okay. Wylie thanked Pardee.
Wylie said anybody else in the public.
No comments.
Agenda Item #8, Sheriff’s Report, July 2024 (Video time mark 0:27:29):
-
- Report from Lieutenant Richard Cummins (page 4/63 of the council packet)
Okay, moving on to Item #8, Sheriff’s Report. We have a chart, and Sergeant Ashley is not here. Anybody on council have questions or comments about the report we have from the Independence Township substation?
Roth said I do, but I don’t think there’s anybody here to answer it. Quisenberry said what is it? Roth said just about what the one that was some damage, a property crime. I just wondered where it was, but I can find out. Wylie said okay.
Wylie said anybody else.
No comments.
Wylie said anybody in the public.
No comments.
Agenda Item #9 – Motion: Acceptance of the Consent Agenda as Presented (Video time mark 0:28:11):
-
- 07-08-2024 – Final Minutes, Regular City Council Meeting (page 5/63 of the council packet)
- 07-22-2024 – Draft Minutes, Regular City Council Meeting (page 7/63 of the council packet)
- 08-01-2024 – Draft Minutes, Special City Council Meeting (page 9/63 of the council packet)
- 08-12-2024 – Treasurer’s Report (page 11/63 of the council packet)
- 08-05-2024 – Check Disbursement Report from 07-01-2024 to 07-31-2024 (page 12/63 of the council packet)
- Carlisle/Wortman, July invoices (page 21/63 of the council packet)
- Thomas J. Ryan, P.C., July invoices (page 23/63 of the council packet)
Wylie said okay. We’ll move on to Item #9, the consent agenda. The consent agenda this time includes final minutes of the July 8th, 2024, regular meeting, the draft minutes of the July 22nd regular meeting, draft minutes of the August 1st special meeting, treasurer’s report from August 12th, 2024. And we’ve got these all together to approve at one time. Does, can anybody make a motion to approve these items?
Motion by Forte; second Rodgers.
Wylie said any discussion on council.
No discussion.
Wylie said any discussion from the public.
No discussion.
Motion to accept the consent agenda as presented passed by unanimous voice vote.
Wylie said and consent agenda is approved. Oh, it was Amanda Forte made the motion and Laura Rogers seconded.
Agenda Item #10, Unfinished Business (Video time mark 0:29:16):
Wylie said Item #10 is unfinished business.
Item #10a – Discussion: Status of City Manager’s 2024 Performance Review (Video time mark 0:29:18):
Wylie said discussion, status of city manager’s 2024 performance review. And it was emailed to the members of council last week. Did everybody get it? I unfortunately did not bring the hard copy with me. I forgot to print it out. Wylie said so, just to remind you, we started talking about it last meeting I think it was at the time. The copy I provided to everybody was incomplete, wrong, older version. This is the, the one I sent you was the last version.
Wylie said and it was, the council put together or appointed a committee to perform the annual Clarkston city manager’s performance evaluation. It was myself and Gary Casey and Derek Werner who’s here tonight. And first thing we started with was looking at possible, different methods to use. We started looking, maybe you guys can remind me, I think our main start was looking at MML, the Michigan Municipal League, the different methods that they saw and we all, two of us came up with the exact same template. I think it was the city of Durand and we decided to use something similar to that. And many communities were using almost the exact same form, which was coming up with kind of a grading system. We modified it a little bit to suit our needs to each area. We graded it as unsatisfactory, satisfactory performance, outstanding performance, does not apply or not enough information. We filled that out, went back and forth on a few things, had some compromises, had some suggestions on a few of the areas. And the areas we looked at were professional development, organizational management, intermediate and long-range planning, fiscal management, intergovernmental relationships, relationship with the public, management of and relationship with employees.
Wylie said anybody on council have any comments, questions, anything.
Quisenberry said I do. Wylie said I know you do. Yes. Quisenberry has, so Quisenberry’s got some comments.
Quisenberry said I’ll start out with the premise that I’m extremely disappointed with this. I think this was done wrong and poorly and not really reflecting a performance review of a city manager. There were only two members of this council that had input into this end result. And let me just first ask, is this the end result? Is this done, is the committee that created this considering this now a done and final issue? Wylie said I did. And if it is – Wylie said Werner’s Derek’s nodding his head. And just to remind you, this is, we were a committee that was appointed by council, and if council chooses to not accept it or to do something different, council always has the right to do that. But we considered it the final product.
Quisenberry said I would have thought that the rest of the city council, the other five members of the city council, would have had a chance to look at it prior to it being submitted to Smith for his review and approval or whatever. So now he, it’s been given to him, and he clearly is under the assumption, here’s my review and it’s now done. But we never had a chance to give any input whatsoever on it. And although Smith is the one that asked for it, we’re the, as a collective body, not anyone more so than the other six, have a responsibility to do it and do it in a fair way and do it in a way that is, I guess, the best product that we could have. He deserves it, that level of a product, as well as us and any of the residents in the city that choose to come over. And I want to look at it. I want to see how my city manager is. And I don’t know how many citizens had an input in this either, but primarily us. City council, five of seven people, had no input whatsoever. And I’m not quite sure that the model that was used is the best model that we could have come up with to reach a far better product than what we have.
Wylie said I agree with you about getting more input from others in council. And actually, we did, Roth did come. Roth said I do have a question, too. Wylie said she did have a request. She requested to come talk to us. She was the only person that I recall who requested to come talk to us. And I do agree we should have had more council people involved with it. And actually, after we finished it, I guess I knew about this beforehand, but many cities, what they do is they give this template to everybody on council and ask everybody to fill it in. And then everybody gives their evaluation to the city manager. It’s not all incorporated into one main report. Everybody gives it to the city manager. So, the city manager, I think they do it anonymously, but I don’t really know for sure. And I do like that better than what we did.
(To Roth), Wylie said you had a comment or question. I just wondered if the one, and do you mind if I look at this? There was a reference to not using your political, was that in answer to what I came and spoke to? It was the only thing that I thought could possibly be. Wylie said it was not in (unintelligible). Roth said I was just, I was looking for any kind of feedback from what I came to talk to you guys about. And the only thing that I thought even could basically – Wylie said it was not incorporated. Roth said it was not incorporated. Wylie said it was not incorporated.
(To Wylie), Rodgers said so, going forward for, if this is the 2024 evaluation, going forward for 2025, we probably should incorporate some of these things that, you know, especially the input. I agree with that. Wylie said I really would. I really like the idea of having everybody do it. And you could have somebody kind of collate it all or everybody just give, a lot of cities, they just, everybody just gives it to the city manager. That’s what they do. Rodgers said maybe they should do some – Wylie said and this is actually, this is used by a lot of cities. It’s not just, there’s a lot of cities that use it. And I actually called some people who I had met at the SEMCOG [Southeast Michigan Council of Governments] meeting, and I called them and asked them what they did and (unintelligible) this.
Rodgers said yeah, I think that is a good point, though. (Wylie made an unintelligible comment.) Rodgers said you know, you were kind of under the gun to get it done, whatever, but I do think that that’s a great idea. Wylie said I agree.
Roth said so, was there some reason that mine was not. Wylie said it was discussed and it was decided not to include it. And there was compromises. Sometimes we all agreed on things. Other times we did not. And that was one that we did not. Roth said it was important enough to. Wylie said I don’t know about that.
Forte said I think it would be great to include feedback from citizens. If we can do like a link or like a survey question just in one of the emails from the city manager. (To Smith), Wylie said actually, you kind of alluded to that at the last meeting, I believe, when you said really people who have a better idea of your performance as a city manager would be the citizens because you have more contact with them. Forte said because there’s been issues that have come up on Buffalo Street that like Smith has resolved very quickly and efficiently for us. And it’s never come to city council. Like they’re minor things, but that would be input from a citizen that, like, I’d like to include in the review. Wylie said okay. I’ll make a note of that.
Wylie said anybody else on council have a comment, criticism, question.
Forte said I’m glad we started. Rodgers agreed. Wylie said well, yeah, it’s been a long, you’ve been on, you’ve been a manager you said since 2017. Rodgers agreed. Wylie said and I think you said you’ve been asking for – Rodgers said you have to start somewhere. Wylie said it was a start. We got, you know, and it wasn’t perfect by a long, by a long shot. There are a lot of things we could have done to improve. And I understand, Quisenberry’s not happy at all with it. And that’s okay. I think you bring up some good points that we needed more council people involved at a minimum. And perhaps I think finding ways to have citizens be involved might be difficult, but certainly something could be looked at.
Forte said it could be one survey question, like a Google form. Like, is there any notes you have for the city manager to be included into the review? People could just type it in. Wylie agreed.
Quisenberry said but I think moving forward from this point on, you can’t put the toothpaste pack in the toothpaste holder. You can’t do that. So absent tossing this out and starting all over, it’s 2024. We’re in the second half of 2024 already. Maybe the best recourse based on what’s happened is to make notes of all these comments that we’ve had, and I think we probably should do a 2025 evaluation, tweak the way that it was done.
Wylie said yeah, it says annual. So that means to me it’s a yearly, and I would imagine you would probably prefer an annual. Maybe not.
Quisenberry said so, I think – Wylie said it definitely needs tweaking. Quisenberry said yeah. Move forward with this by, I don’t know if we need a motion just to accept and file, or just leave it as it is. Wylie said I think we have to have, do we have to have an agenda change to put it on? Ryan said if you want to put it on the next agenda, you know, because it’s just for discussion tonight. Although you could have it on the agenda if you wanted to – Wylie said OK – (continuing), Ryan said but everybody would have to agree. Or put it on the next agenda now that you’ve discussed it. Accept and file.
(To Quisenberry), Wylie said you want to have it on this agenda or you want to wait until next meeting? No, it would be the same thing. Next one’s fine. Wylie said do it the next meeting. Okay. So, we’ll put it on the agenda to, a motion to accept the annual Clarkston City Manager Performance Evaluation 2024.
Wylie said anybody in the public have comments or questions.
Wylie recognized Werner.
Werner said just a comment that if you’re going to make changes, the sooner the better. Because we’re kind of backwards in the process. We’re reviewing him on performance before he knew what he was getting reviewed on. Rodgers said that’s true. Wylie said and that was something Mr. Pardee especially brought that up a lot, and I think Quisenberry did too. Werner said (unintelligible) Smith to be judged on something he didn’t know he was going to be judged on. Wylie said right. Werner said as long as you’re going to make changes to that form, start from scratch, whatever. I would suggest you get in front of Smith before you start. Wylie said okay.
Quisenberry said you could probably just start with his job description and then go to it, expound on it from there. Wylie said we actually, when we were working on it, we went through the city charter to make sure that the duties described in the city charter were included in here. And things that were obviously way out of the, not at all in our city charter were not included in here. So that’s really his own, that’s as far as I know, that’s your only job description. Quisenberry said yep. So, this is an evaluation, not a description. Wylie said right.
Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment. You had your hand up.
Pardee said yes. So, I had made a FOIA request for communications and processes related to giving Smith his review on the 16th of July. I was provided the responses to my request on the 29th of July. And so, I’m wondering, do I have the latest version of the conclusion that was given to Smith? Wylie said I’ll send it to you. Pardee said okay. Wylie said I’ll send it to you. Pardee said okay. My second point is I’ve been involved with performance reviews as part of the automotive industry for 44 years. And I’ve made this point before, points before. Two is there needs to be objectives established on an annual basis for the person that’s being reviewed and by council agreement. So, it isn’t you’re laying these are the things that we want you to do. We want Smith to agree to, yes, these are the things that I want to do. And I’ve made the point before about objectives and there aren’t any. I’ve made the point to Smith directly that I think his objectives need to include the capital projects that he proposed to council and were approved by council as part of his review process. And I asked some questions that were inappropriate. I was asking, trying to find out, Smith, had you been through that kind of performance review in your prior life? Smith said absolutely. Pardee said okay.
Rodgers said hey, I think what you’re saying is I know any reviews that I’ve ever gotten, we kind of do our own, like, self-evaluation. And then our manager does their evaluation of that person. And we come up with our objectives that we’d like to accomplish in the year. And so does the person that we report to. (To Pardee), Rodgers said and so, I don’t think that’s a bad idea that Smith comes up with what he thinks is important. He’s the one sitting in the job day after day after day, putting up with everything. And we can come up with what we think is important based on what you all say and what we hear on the streets and together come up with those objectives. But, yeah, you’re absolutely right. There should be something there that he kind of goes after. Pardee said and in reality, the agreement of objectives is really the beginning of the process for the follow-on review. Rodgers agreed.
Wylie said okay. Anybody else in the public have questions or comments? I’m just making some notes.
No comments.
Agenda Item #11, New Business (Video time mark 0:44:11):
Wylie said okay. Moving on. We are on Item #11, new business.
Item #11a – Motion – Reconsideration of August 1st Motion to NOT Accept Catherine Ashley’s Resignation (page 28/63 of the council packet) (Video time mark 0:44:14):
-
- Motion – Reconsideration of August 1st Motion to NOT Accept Catherine Ashley’s Resignation (page 28/63 of the council packet)
- Resignation Letter (page 29/63 of the council packet)
- Motion – Acceptance of Catherine Ashley’s Resignation (if first motion passed) (page 30/63 of the council packet)
Wylie said we’ve got a motion, reconsideration of August 1st motion to not accept Catherine Ashley’s resignation. And it says a note, if passed, motion to accept Catherine – oh, I’m sorry, that’s the next one. If accepted, motion to accept Catherine Ashley’s resignation. Give me a moment. Let me turn to this page. Oh, I have it. Okay.
(Wylie read the motion.)
Wylie said so, we have a motion, Casey you know this, by Gary Casey, and I need to be seconded by somebody else. Does it have to be somebody who was at that meeting? Ryan said no. Wylie said no, it could be anybody on council.
Forte said I’m so confused. So, what’s happening? Casey said we’re reconsidering accepting the clerk’s resignation. Forte said okay, so we’re accepting her resigning. Wylie said well right now, we’re just going to reconsider – Ryan said not accepting it. Wylie said not accepting it. Because at that meeting – Forte said isn’t that what we did in the last meeting? Wylie said we did not accept it, so now we’re kind of saying we’re going back on that. Quisenberry said undo that. Wylie said yeah, undoing that.
Roth said I’ll second. Wylie said I’ve already got a second. [The second was not audible.] Wylie said that’s okay, I think a lot of people don’t understand what’s, because it’s been so confusing, what’s going on. Forte said I was in that meeting, but I’m just trying to catch up. Go ahead.
Wylie said okay, so I have a second from Quisenberry.
Wylie said any discussion on council, from members of council. Everybody clear on what we’re doing?
Lamphier said this is allowing us to reconsider her resignation. Wylie said yes, yes.
Rodgers said so, and please stop me if this is not the place to bring this up, because I am super frustrated with the revolving door of the city clerk. Wylie said tell you what, let’s do this. I mean, I think that’s a good discussion. Rodgers said yeah. Wylie said let’s do this, and then let’s just do this vote on her – Rodgers said okay – (continuing), Wylie said and then talk about that. Rodgers said okay, so if we vote yes on this, what are we saying, we accept it? Wylie said no, we’re saying we are – (interrupting Wylie), Quisenberry said rescinding the motion from the special meeting. Rodgers said if we say yes. Ryan said which opens up the possibility of a way to accept the resignation.
Wylie said okay, any questions or discussion from anybody in the public about this reconsideration. We’re going to have to do a, it’s a motion, okay.
Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.
Pardee said yes, in one of the communications that Ashley made, she talked about the need for a person to be added to city staff who would be specifically FOIA. Wylie said yes. Pardee said is that in play? Wylie said I think it’s being discussed and thought about. Rodgers said that was part of what her talk was about. I, well, yeah.
Wylie said Rodgers has something else she wants to discuss, and I just asked and said let’s put it off until we do that. You can talk about it, but you can ask about it. I think it may be under discussion. Certainly, we’re all thinking, or some of us are thinking about that possibility, but nothing’s happened yet as far as I know. I’m not in administration. I’m just a council member.
Smith said researching it. I’m researching it. There’s no progress to report at this time. I’m just researching it.
Pardee said but we have issued to somebody today at noon a request for somebody applying to the clerk position. Wylie said that’s different. Smith said that’s the clerk position. Pardee said I understand, but that’s going on in parallel. Smith said correct. Pardee said okay.
Wylie said anybody else on the public. Questions or comments on this motion?
No comments.
Wylie said do we need to do a roll call? I see we’ve got a roll call here. Ryan said why don’t you do a roll call? Wylie said okay, we’ll do a roll call. (To Smith), so, if you would take a roll call on this motion, which was motion by Casey, seconded by Quisenberry.
Rodgers, Quisenberry, Forte, Casey, Roth, Wylie, and Lamphier voted yes.
Wylie said okay, so the motion is adopted.
Wylie said next, we have a motion, and this is Item 11a(1). Since we passed that motion, we’ve got a motion to, acceptance of Catherine Ashley’s resignation.
(Wylie read the motion.)
Wylie said so, I need a motion and a second to accept Catherine Ashley’s letter resignation. Anybody want to make that motion.
Motion by Lamphier; second Casey.
Wylie said any discussion on council.
(To Quisenberry), Wylie said I can see your mouth going, you’re next. Quisenberry said no. Wylie said I’m sorry. Quisenberry said I’m saying I think this is a good time for Rodgers to have some comments.
(To Smith), Rodgers said yeah, I guess, from what I understand from the letter that Ashley wrote in her resignation and from what Karen [DeLorge], our previous city clerk, has divulged, that it’s really hard for them to do their $20 an hour job with the magnitude of FOIA requests that are coming in. I don’t know what that number is on a monthly basis and how that compares to other places. Do you know what that number is? Smith said well, officially we only know what was July. So, in July, there were 31 FOIA requests that came in. Some of them are five-minute requests. Some of them are multifaceted steps in there that take much more time, hours, potentially days. The one big one had 13 steps in it and took about three or four days of the staff’s time to pull all the information together.
Rodgers said it just is really bothersome that this particular facet of their job is what is making them quit. And so, something has to be happening that isn’t the norm for FOIA requests. I don’t know if it’s the number. I don’t know if it’s the expectations. I know that from the letter, she was named in a lawsuit within two weeks of being in her job. That just seems a little bit unkind. I know legalese doesn’t care about that, but it seems majorly unkind. And so, we can’t do anything about the laws with FOIA. And they are, as we’ve talked about long before, they are written for those people that want that information. They are entitled to it. I would want it if I wanted it. If I had a need for it, if there was something that I wanted to do with it, I would expect it to come to me in the same manner that these 30 requests in July were handled. But I’m wondering how many of those 30 requests just ever come, anything’s ever found out about it. Is it something that people need for a cause? Is it, you know, Ashley refers to it as a fishing expedition. I mean, you can always find something if you really look hard enough.
Rodgers said but I’m wondering, like, is there something that, like, should we start charging for our FOIAs then? If there’s so much, why should we not make, at least recoup some of our expenses? We’re giving all these requests, $20 an hour of time, plus, plus paper, plus staples, plus whatever else is required to get this done. And I know that it’s not always the clerk. We haven’t had a clerk in good standing for a while. DeLorge went to all those meetings, and they just couldn’t take it anymore. Something’s happening. Somebody is pushing that button to the length that it is unkind and not fair to that person making $20 an hour. No one’s going to do that job for $20 an hour. No one’s going to take it and then get written up about it, about how terrible they are, get letters put in our mailboxes about how terrible they are. That’s, I mean, to me, the border on slanderous. I don’t know if I know the legal definition of it, but it doesn’t seem right, and it’s unfair and unkind to these people. It’s a lot of money that we need to recoup. I talked to Independence Township, their clerk. They charge. Other surrounding areas, from what she says, I haven’t talked to them yet, they charge.
Quisenberry said we can charge. Rodgers said we do not charge. We do not charge for our FOIAs. Smith said we can. We can, but we do not. It was a practice that was stopped a few years ago over harassment over, the dispute over the charges. Rodgers said right. Smith said what should the charges be? How many hours did it really take you? So, we can absolutely start that now. We have met with our FOIA expert, Mr. Carlito Young, I did meet with him, and we’ve talked to him, and he will support us on charging for FOIA.
Rodgers said I mean, this is costing our taxpayers a lot of money, a lot of money. Smith said it’s not just the time spent, but it’s what we’re not getting done. Rodgers said right, exactly. Smith said I mean, Pardee can talk about my performance review, and I should be working on capital improvement projects. The sidewalk replacement, okay, the first phase of sidewalk replacement, you know, the second phase is to replace those that were not candidates for cutting. I should have done that. I should have been out marking those slabs four or five weeks ago. I haven’t gotten it done. It’s not because I don’t want to do it or just because I’m kicking back watching TV on my computer. That’s just a joke. I’m just buried in work because right now I’m a clerk, too. I am the official clerk for the city right now. And it’s just this turmoil, this revolving door of clerk positions just cannot continue. I agree with you on that. It’s something that we need to find a solution for because the revolving door will start sweeping in the rest of the staff and potentially more of the staff leaves. So, it’s something we have to be cautious of and be mindful of.
Smith said but what I started to say is these other things that we’re not getting done. You say, well, why haven’t you worked on Miller Road? That is, to be honest, that’s so far down the priority list I can’t even see it anymore because I’m just buried in with the elections. It’s just overwhelming, just overwhelming. And I’m concerned at this point. I’ve got resume requests and job postings out on three different sites, MML, Indeed, and our city website. And I’m getting resumes, but they’re not, there, I got one from a bartender that works at the chicken finger wings place where, buffalo wings – an unidentified person said Buffalo Wild Wings – he’s a bartender there.
Rodgers said and the expectation is that day one from the residents, day one they know exactly what to do and get everything in on time and no room, no room for error. You’ve got to be right on it. So, you can’t take a person like that. You don’t have time to train a person like that. Smith said well, yeah, it’s extraordinarily difficult to train somebody from a bartender to a foreman. And that’s an extreme example, obviously. But the vast majority of the ones I’m getting are service technicians. They’re former receptionists at a car dealership. I’m getting these kinds of applicants. Rodgers said because that’s who makes $20 an hour. Smith said that’s comparable, right. To get a clerk from, say, another city to walk in, and maybe not on day one, but day ten would be pretty much up to speed. To get one of them, I would have to be paying six figures. There’s no question. Our $35,000 salary offer just doesn’t even begin to cut it. So, it’s a challenge finding that person. We say often that let’s get a retiree that doesn’t need to make those kinds of salary requirements. But a retiree is, you know, that’s (unintelligible). I’m a retiree. They are not going to be strong on computer skills. And I need somebody very strong in this job. Where the elections are going, I need somebody very strong on computer skills. So, it’s a challenge finding somebody at this pay. And when I do get them, I want to retain them. And the revolving door aspect of this is an issue.
Smith said what can we do about it? We can start charging for it. Absolutely. We can start utilizing the 10-day extension when that’s appropriate, because some of these are very time-consuming. Can we look into it? I am looking into it. I haven’t any luck so far with the possibility of a contractual FOIA coordinator that maybe doesn’t even need to be here in the city office. They could be totally remote. They could be the FOIA coordinator for the city of Traverse City. And I utilize them when needed. And it can all be sent to them electronically. They pull it all together. They respond officially to the FOIA request.
(To Smith), Rodgers said but my understanding is that we would, of course, we would need to pay them. But the price for a FOIA has to come from the lowest salary paid person in your office. Smith said that’s how the worksheet calculates it, yes. Rodgers said that’s right. Smith said so, it’s a challenge to make it work financially. I think there would be no question that it’s not just taking this portion of the budget and shifting it over here and it offsets nicely. It’s going to be taken from something else. It’s going to overall reduce some other activity elsewhere on the budget that I’m sure all of you would not want to do. I have to take something out of DPW [Department of Publics Works] services just to throw an example out. I don’t think anybody would say we’re not going to not plow streets anymore. We’re not going to not mow the grass anymore. What are the things that we could look at? Those are tough choices. We’ll cross that bridge when we get there, but it’s all things that I’m looking at.
(To Rodgers), Wylie said okay. Rodgers said yeah.
Wylie recognized Quisenberry for a question or comment. Quisenberry said two.
(To Smith), Quisenberry said first, thanks for stepping up and handling this, especially this last week with the voting. It was very good, and I’m sure it was a very difficult week, and kudos to you for doing that. Second, I think that if you hire the bartender, you’re just going to increase the amount of service, the walk-ins that you’re going to get coming to the counter here. The main reason I wanted to comment after Rodgers did is, (to Rodgers), I agree with everything you said, and a lot of this is, it’s in the law. We can’t ask a citizen, why do you want this? We’re not allowed to do that. They can pick whatever they want to FOIA if it’s within the FOIA guidelines, and they can FOIA it, and we can’t say, what do you need to know this for before we decide to. I was a FOIA coordinator for many, many years at the two places I used to work, and it is painful. Yeah, no. I’m retired three times. And there’s, the law is very, very specific on a lot of these requirements that we as a municipality, as a government unit, have to – Rodgers said adhere to – Quisenberry said adhere to. The pay, the fact that we have to take it, the extension that we are allowed, the one-day, 10-day or 14, 10-day extension that we’re allowed, and we have to act on them all within those time constraints. We don’t have to act on the Miller Road project, all right, like we do constitutionally and legally with the others. So, we have to move on these things in a way that the state’s told us that we have to. And I would ask Smith to administratively, today, make a decision that we’re going to start charging for FOIAs the full amount that the state allows us to charge for FOIAs. And that’s something we don’t have to do as a body of the council. We can just say we want to charge from now on like everybody else. So, I was floored just to find out five minutes ago we didn’t. We didn’t charge.
Smith said that’s something that’s already been decided, we’re going to start doing that. Quisenberry said and exercising, if it’s an election week and we’re just floored, then right away, as soon as it’s feasible, file the 10-day extension, saying we’ll get to you in 10 days or something like that. Make it a lot easier for us and not more cumbersome for the citizen. That’s not the intent, but just there’s procedures within that law that require us to do certain things, but also guidelines to allow us to help do it so that we cannot be so burdensome with them.
Quisenberry said and the last point I had is to what extent is this FOIA, I don’t want to say coordinator, but assistant that we voted on last fall to help us when the clerk needs it, they can shuffle some information or work or just help from that other entity, to what assistance are we utilizing those people? Smith said we really only utilized them once. Carlito Young is a FOIA expert, a FOIA attorney, and we will call him in on the really big cases, but it is hourly billing rate. It would not make financial sense to bring them in on the smaller ones. Smith said so, we really haven’t pulled that trigger just because we’re trying to be financially responsible. But we did have a meeting with them. Ryan was there, Wylie was there. We had a meeting with Carlito to talk to him about what things can we do. He was very clear. The FOIA law is extremely strong. You cannot claim harassment. You cannot claim too many FOIAs, even if it’s disproportionate to your population. When he looked at the month of July, 31 FOIAs for a population of 800, he said that is high on a proportionate basis. So, he thought that was high, but he says that still, no judge in the land is going to rule in your favor. So, be aware of that. You need to do your best.
Rodgers said so, our problem is a processing problem. It’s not, our problem is a processing problem, how to process all of this, versus getting the legal expertise from the gentleman that you just said. It’s how to just get through that. Smith said just get the work done, yeah. Quisenberry said but if we had that resource, and the reason why we lost clerks so quickly is because of this component of her job, and we had that resource available, we didn’t use it, I don’t know that that was a smart thing. We should have used it more, knowing it’s totally bogging them down. Smith said well, let me clarify this one. The most recent lawsuit was not really FOIA-related. It was related to the HDC [Historic District Commission] petition that’s in the process, and how that was handled by the clerk. So that’s what that lawsuit is about. It’s not FOIA, so we couldn’t have used it earlier on in this case. But we will use Carlito. I’m not saying I won’t pull that trigger. I’m just trying to be sensible about when to do it.
Smith said now, the other thing I want to comment, I think, Rodgers’s point about the numbers. I have worked with our last clerk, and DeLorge before her, about putting together a log, and I think this is important for counsel to understand because we were just talking about my performance review, and we don’t really know what I do here in the office day in and day out. This is one thing that I think we should be sharing with you on a more regular basis, is how much time the clerk and myself, it’s a very small office, I get drawn into everything, whether it’s a financial issue that Coté is running into or something that the clerk is running into or the DPW is running into. I have been pulled in to consult on those, and it’s part of the job. I think, back to FOIAs, I think it’s important that I share with you on some regular basis, be it monthly or quarterly, some activity reports so you can see the number of FOIAs that have come in, gone out, and the amount of work involved. Because otherwise you don’t hear about it, and so you don’t know that it’s going on. So, I think that is something that I would like to start sharing with you.
Quisenberry said the last point regarding this topic is – Wylie said I just want to spread the wealth a little bit. Forte’s been waiting, and maybe let’s give somebody else a chance, and then come back to you.
Wylie recognized Forte for a comment.
Forte said well, I just feel like stakeholder engagement would be great for this, and obviously, Mr. Bisio, you’re here. Do you want to say anything we can do to help you, like we want this to be something that works for our citizens. We want people to be able to ask the city questions. How can we help?
Bisio said do you want me to speak now? Forte said yeah, if you’re willing. (To Wylie), Bisio said do you want me to speak now? Quisenberry said it’s still at the table. Forte said I mean, Pardee already spoke. Wylie said can you just give me a minute? Let us finish here with anybody in council. We do council first, and then the public can speak. And then I think we could go further.
(To Forte), Wylie said that’s what you wanted to say? Forte said yeah. Wylie said OK.
(To Quisenberry), Wylie said did you want to say something else?
Quisenberry said on the same topic, but a little different, and it has to do with the sticky situation you found yourself in last week when the clerk resigned, and the state stepped in and said, this is it now, you got it, and whatever. The action that was taken where we then created a deputy clerk, and now we have a deputy clerk, that would have prevented this, the situation that we experienced where it fell on your shoulders. (To Ryan), Quisenberry said if I’m correct, then the deputy clerk would be able to step in and handle any of the clerk’s responsibilities? Ryan said yes, theoretically and legally, but the point is election law is very difficult and the new deputy clerk, in fairness, she’s not in any of the training. Quisenberry said I’m talking about procedurally. Maybe it might not have worked out the best based upon the situation, but procedurally, having a deputy clerk now makes it a lot easier for us to continue doing business. Ryan said except that when Smith was faced with that issue on that Saturday morning that he didn’t know about, he was it. I mean, he had to sign up and agree to do it.
Wylie said I think what Quisenberry’s saying is that in the future, have a deputy clerk in place, so if we lose a clerk, we have somebody else who has been trained – Quisenberry said exactly – (continuing) Wylie said but of course, that’s going to cost money. Smith said and it would have to, in fairness to the deputy clerk, would have to be in their interest to stepping up to the clerk. Quisenberry said yes. Smith said I know everyone and I have talked about this and that, but it’s not in her interest. Will she fill in on a day, on a daily basis? Sure. But on a six-month basis? Handle the next three elections? No. And I understand why. So, yes, on a day-to-day basis, everyone will step up if there are papers that need to be signed and submitted. With my guidance, she would do that. I’m not concerned about that. Ryan said it provides a redundancy, is what you’re looking at. Quisenberry said that’s exactly it. That we didn’t have before. Ryan said correct.
Wylie said anybody else on council on this topic. And what we’re still doing is dealing with the motion of acceptance of Catherine Ashley’s resignation.
No comments.
Wylie said anybody in the public.
Quisenberry said what about Mr. Bisio. Wylie said yeah, I know Mr. Bisio. Would you like to speak now.
Richard Bisio:
Yeah, I want to tell you the other side of the story.
What you’ve all portrayed is that the city is being deluged with dozens and dozens of FOIA requests that are all ridiculous and not useful. The 32 in the list of your former clerk, there weren’t 32. She split several requests into several different parts and called them separate requests. My wife in her blog has gone through that in great detail, and I’m not going to repeat that. But the responses to these various requests are not to give us the documents. What you want to do is to try to conceal information and do things in secret.
Let me give you two examples. Susan [Bisio] made a simple request for the clerk’s resume, the one that you just hired and just quit. Why is that secret? What she got was two pages, absolutely almost everything in there was whited out. And the excuse for doing that was that it was going to endanger her life if you publicly disclosed her resume. And this is a resume that you each had in your hands when you hired her that you publicly discussed, but you wanted to keep it secret. So, in response to your concealing the resume, Susan did a follow-up FOIA request for several things regarding your process of hiring this clerk. If you hadn’t tried to keep that secret, that wouldn’t have been necessary.
Second thing, the fire and police overpayment. You wanted to do that all in secret. Nobody knew on the public side what you were talking about, what you approved, what you were negotiating with Independence Township. You had a secret meeting and then you came into public session and said, we’re going to approve what the lawyer recommended without any detail as to what you were actually doing. I think that’s a violation of the Open Meetings Act.
But, in any case, that promoted, that secrecy promoted another FOIA request asking for all of the documents regarding the negotiations with Independence Township. And what did we get? We got bupkis. You claimed that Mr. Ryan’s communications with the lawyer for Independence Township were all privileged and you weren’t going to give us a single piece of paper about what they were talking about. We had to go back and forth to actually get that.
So, if you want to do things in secret, if you want to conceal documents, you’re going to get more FOIA requests.
And you’re lucky that my wife at least rejects my advice to immediately sue when you give her a FOIA response that conceals records and that claims exemptions that don’t even exist.
Wylie said Mr. Bisio, you have 30 seconds left.
Bisio said you said the lawsuit was unfair? The lawsuit about the canvass of the HDC petition? I asked three different times what the status was. You didn’t want to tell me. Nobody wanted to tell me. I had to sue to get an answer to the question of what the status of that was.
So, if you’re going to do things in secret, if you’re going to conceal documents, you’re going to get FOIA requests and you’re going to get lawsuits.
Wylie said thank you, Mr. Bisio.
Wylie said anybody else in the public have comments.
Wylie recognized Thomas Swayne for a comment.
Swayne said I just heard Smith talk about the clerk. I was actually here when you guys brought her in that night. I thought it was great. I thought her resume sounded awesome. I thought it was a very open forum when you spoke about it. My question is, and I’m not one that thinks you should always just throw money to fix a problem, but hearing Smith, we need a very professional person to do something. High computer skills, all these things, we got $20 an hour. It’s very, very tough to get. So, I don’t know if there’s any way, and I know we’re a small village, but if we need someone to do a high professional job, we need to pay a little bit more. I don’t think we need to pay what Orion or Rochester Hills is paying or some of these other communities. They’re paying high dollars. I don’t even know what Independence pays. But $20 an hour is very tough. So, I think it would be something for Council to talk about, to just look at. Some way, and I don’t know how to do that, but if I’m looking for someone in my work and I’m wanting a top person, you’re not going to be able to go in at the lowest price. Some people will come for certain things to do the right job, but not when they’re going to be berated and have a hard time at doing something that they think they’re doing the right thing at. Wylie thanked Swayne.
Wylie said anybody else in the public.
Wylie recognized Bihl for a comment.
[At the same time as the following exchange between Bisio and Bihl, Quisenberry begin instructing Wylie on meeting management, saying that this isn’t good (unintelligible), the public should address council, not engage in argument. Roth and Forte shushed Quisenberry. Roth said she wanted to hear what they were saying.]
Bihl said yes, I have one for you, Mr. Bisio, why didn’t you just call Ashley? You knew she was only here ten days. If you didn’t get a response from her, why didn’t you kindly call her and say – Bisio said I didn’t call her. I didn’t call her because I sent her a letter, I sent her two emails – and the response to my third email was, not to tell me what was going on, but to say, it’s in process. Bihl said that’s right, exactly (unintelligible). Bisio said why should I call her? Bihl said common courtesy and showing kindness to people. Bisio said why should I call her.
Wylie said Mrs. Bihl and Mr. Bisio, excuse me, if you would like to address council, you may, your public comments period – Bisio said she’s asking me questions. Wylie said I understand. Bisio said do you want me to answer her questions? Wylie said she prefers Bihl address her comments to council.
Bihl said I just wish that person would have called Ashley – Wylie said she understands – (continuing), Bihl said being brand new. Just like Rodgers said, she was only here a few days. Somebody could have just called and said, I know you’re busy, I know you’re learning. Where are we? Sometimes an email doesn’t work. A phone call works a little bit better. That’s all I’m saying.
Roth said I think it can go both ways.
Bisio said let me just tell you, when I sent her an email, and her response is, it’s in process, without telling me that she had already finished the canvass – Wylie said I understand – (continuing), Bisio said and already done her work, what am I supposed to think? Wylie said I understand. I understand. Thank you.
Wylie said anybody else in the public have comments or questions.
Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.
Pardee said did the public see a resume. I can recall the meeting in which she was hired, and I can recall being told verbally that she had FOIA experience at the Sheriff’s Department. That’s the only thing that sticks in my mind from her Sheriff’s Department experience. Wylie said I don’t recall. I don’t recall. You may not have, but I don’t recall. Pardee said was the resume provided to council. Wylie said yes. Yes, we did see it.
Wylie said anybody else in the public have a comment or question.
Roth said I don’t know if you guys heard, but what you and I were just saying is, while you were asking why he didn’t call you, you agreed to the fact that that could have gone both ways. Bihl said no, not to call Ashley. Roth said no, I know. I meant in general terms. Bihl said I understand that, and we do call everybody that calls us, and we call back very kindly all the time. Sometimes we can’t get to it because, like Smith was just saying, we’re trying to get through right now so we can do the next election. We don’t have the people here, Peg. We don’t have the skilled people right now. We are missing a skilled person. We’re all scrambling and trying to do the best we can. And the council here is not recognizing us as doing that. We don’t get support. We need your support, and we need the support from the community. We don’t need the community to harass us and belittle us and just hurt us. Why don’t you come in and work with us?
Roth said I’ve actually offered. Bihl said you’re more than welcome to come in with us. Roth said I have offered more than two times to come in. Bihl said come on in. Roth said and I was turned down.
(A noise sounded.) Wylie said that’s my three-minute timer.
Wylie said anybody else. Questions or comments.
(Bihl made an unintelligible comment.) Wylie said your time’s up.
No additional comments.
Wylie said okay, we have a motion, a motion by Lamphier, second Casey, to accept Catherine Ashley’s letter of resignation. And let’s do a roll call, even though it’s a motion.
Pardee said to accept it. Wylie said to accept it, yes.
Lamphier, Forte, Rodgers, Roth, Wylie, Quisenberry, and Casey voted yes.
Wylie said and the motion is adopted.
Item #11b – Resolution: City Office Copy Machine Lease Renewal (Video time mark 1:21:20):
-
- Resolution – City Office Copy Machine Lease Renewal (page 31/63 of the council packet)
- Bid Comparison (page 32/63 of the council packet)
- Ricoh Documents (page 33/63 of the council packet)
- Toshiba Proposal (page 51/63 of the council packet)
- Applied Innovation Proposal (page 53/63 of the council packet)
Wylie said and we have Item #11b, resolution. City office copy machine lease renewal, and we have information and several, three quotes in our packet.
(Wylie read the resolution.)
Wylie said this is a resolution, so I need somebody to resolve and somebody to second that resolution.
Motion by Forte; second Rodgers.
Wylie said any discussion from council.
No discussion.
Wylie said discussion from our public.
Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.
Pardee said am I the only one who saw the Ricoh annual increase in the contract. Wylie said I saw it. I saw it. I don’t remember what it was. Pardee said it’s not like there’s a number there. I understand that they’re the low guy now, but when they put in their contract, it’s going to be five years, we’re going to have an annual increase. Wylie said oh, you said annual increase. Pardee said annual increase. Wylie said I’m sorry, I missed that. Pardee said annual increase. So that was the one thing that jumped out. Wylie said okay.
Wylie said anybody else.
Pardee said I’d be interested in having that (unintelligible). Yeah, I was going to say, did they speak to that? Smith said I don’t know at the end of the five-year lease what the monthly price will be. Rodgers said we probably should know that, though. We should know that, but it’s significantly, right now we’re paying $202.65 a month. It goes down to $86.97. So that’s a significant reduction. I think even with the annual increases, which I think are inflation-driven, there will still be a significant savings over what we’re paying now. And the black and white and color of per-page charts are also significant.
Wylie said anybody else on the council want to comment on this.
Wylie asked Pardee if he had another comment. Pardee said no. Wylie said oh, I’m sorry.
(To Smith), Pardee said (unintelligible) I agree, that all the numbers intended for (unintelligible) are really great, but I just get concerned when somebody throws, there will be an annual increase every year. Smith said I’ll get those. Pardee said thank you.
Wylie said so we can table. Rodgers said yes. (To Ryan), Wylie said so, since we already have a motion and a second, can we table it at this point? Ryan said oh, sure. Wylie said okay, so we need a vote to table. Roth said make a motion to table. Wylie said I think it has to be somebody who made the motion. Ryan said no. Wylie said so, it could be anybody. So, we need a motion to table. Ryan said yeah, and it takes precedence.
Wylie said okay, and (to Roth) so, do you want to make it? Motion by Roth.
(To Smith), Wylie said when do you need to renew this lease? Smith said it’s month-to-month right now. Wylie said we’re month-to-month, okay. Smith said we’re having some problems with the current machines, so the sooner the better.
Wylie said okay, so Roth makes a motion to table. Second Rodgers.
Wylie said any discussion from council.
No discussion.
Wylie said all in favor. We can do it all in favor. Ryan said it’s a motion.
Motion to table the motion to renew the copier lease passed by majority voice vote with Casey voting no.
Wylie said okay, we’ve got one no, but we’re on a table. We can do that six to one. Ryan said oh yeah (unintelligible). Wylie said okay, so Casey was no. Is that correct? Okay. (To Smith), did you get that?
Casey said I just think we should go forward with it because we’re saving a lot of money on the rent. Wylie said okay.
Wylie said all right, so we did table it. So, get it on the next agenda, as I know you want it on the next agenda.
Item #11c – Discussion: Sanitary Sewer Pipe Repairs in the West Alley (Video time mark 1:26:33):
-
- Pipeline Management Co., Inc. Quotation (page 57/63 of the council packet)
- Cash Summary from 07-01-2023 – 08-07-2024 (page 61/63 of the council packet)
- 07-29-2024 Letter from Chase Bank, $50,736.01 (page 63/63 of the council packet)
Wylie said next item on this agenda is discussion, sanitary sewer pipe repairs in the West Alley. And I think Smith’s got some things to say.
Smith said so, as you know, we’ve been over the last month and a half, two months, we’ve been cleaning and inspecting the sanitary pipelines, sanitary sewer pipelines. This is something that Independence Township does for us at no cost, but you could argue that it’s part of our maintenance costs that we’ve been paying for a couple of years. So, they are doing this, and the understanding was that the township would pay for all the hammering and cleaning and all of that related work. But if there is a break found, that is the cost of repairing that break would be on us. The hope would be that it’s a fairly minor break, and they can do this robotic sealing from inside the pipe. They do a liner inside the pipe, and you don’t have to do any digging. It’s all done robotically from the nearest manhole before they go down there. They put a robot down the pipe. Unfortunately, and then they have found some of those, and they are in the process of doing that lining.
Smith said but there are two breaks, and they’re both on the East Alley, behind KH Homes and behind Rudy’s, are where the two breaks have been found, and they’re significant. They’re, if you pitch a pipe, and then the next pipe is down about a half a (unintelligible). So, it’s a significant break, and this is sanitary, so obviously you don’t want this getting into the groundwater. So, it’s important that this be fixed, and this will require digging up to the East Alley [West Alley?], not the West Alley [East Alley?]. So, unlike the East Alley, which is privately owned, the West Alley is owned by the city, so it’s our responsibility to fix this. So, what they’re going to have to do is dig down 12 feet to get to this sanitary pipe. There is an algorithm, I’m not familiar with it, but there is an algorithm that says how wide they have to go to go down 12 feet to protect the workers from a cave-in. They’ll have to do structures and whatnot to prevent that. So, it’s a pretty significant job, and the soil condition is of concern as well. If this alley has soil structure issues, that could be what’s contributing to both of the repairs, being in our city happened to be in that same general vicinity. So, there could be some substructure issues with the ground there. But we need to go in with a plan to repair those.
Smith said they have put together an estimate, and this is still very much an estimate. They won’t stand behind this, it’s not going to be any more or less. But they’ve put this repair estimate together, it’s in the packet, of course I can’t show it to you on the screen because my computer died. The battery was surprisingly, died quicker than I thought. Wylie said is this one of the new computers. Smith said this is my new laptop, yes. (Laughter.) I’m not sure why it didn’t even last a two-hour meeting (unintelligible).
Smith said the repair cost for those two is $121,000. We have about $50,000 in some of the attachments Coté pulled together for me, some options that we could pull out of. We do have a sewer, rainy day fund if you will, that we’ve put some monies aside for future sewer repairs. That has about $50,000 to $55,000 in it. But the total bill right now, estimate, is $121,000. So, this is a very significant repair that’s on the horizon that needs to be addressed.
Smith said I don’t have all the costs yet, so I’m not putting this on tonight’s meeting as a resolution. I’m just bringing it to you for awareness. It would be my hope in the next meeting that I can actually present a proposal on how we’re going to pay for this. And it may or may not include some cost recovery from the residents. Quisenberry said from who? Wylie said residents. Smith said from the residents.
Smith you recall going back about a year and a half, two years ago, we had the big Oakland-Macomb interceptor drain repair, not even close to us, down at 8 Mile and Warren, that had to be repaired. But we used that, and our share of that was about $97,000, $98,000. And we had, we didn’t have enough money in our quote-unquote rainy day fund, so we had to recover that from the residents. And we did that through four quarterly sewer billings of, I think it was $44, something in that range, with four quarterly payments. So, whatever your sewer bill, it just got bumped by $44, and potentially we would have to do that again. The one difference in that case is we had some monies available to pay the bill, and the township was being understanding, because we paid that one through the township, that (unintelligible) charge.
Smith said this one would be all on us, we’d pay the contractor directly. So, he’s going to be paid all up front. So, I can’t wait for those cost recoveries to come in from the residents. I have to find the money up front. And then we can go back and reimburse ourselves over the next four quarters, or however, whatever timeframe we choose. But it’s a little bit more involved. So, Coté and I are working on this, trying to put the program together. I just want to let you know that this is in the works. We are working on this, and we have to get this fixed this year. It’s not something we can put off.
Smith said so, that’s really all I have. If you have any questions, I’m happy to – Wylie said so, this Chase CD, that was all about what’s in the sewer fund? Smith said yes. Wylie said okay. Smith said Coté has put some monies in a CD that had no limitations on getting the funds back. We’ve got $55,000 in the Chase CD, or $50,000, I guess it is. And we can get that back real quickly. But we don’t have enough to pay the whole $121,000. Wylie said and there’s nothing else in the sewer fund? Smith said no. Wylie said okay. Smith said we have monies in the sewer fund, but they’re always coming and going, right? There’s bill payments coming in from residents, and bills going out to the Great Lakes Water Authority. It’s always a fluid situation. No pun intended. Quisenberry said pass through. Smith said yeah.
Wylie said council, anybody have questions or comments.
No comments.
Wylie said public, questions or comments.
Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.
Pardee said yes, I’d invite Smith and/or Coté at the next meeting to talk to us about the several accounts that we have that have spendable dollars in them that are somewhat, I would call it somewhat obscured. And the number that sticks in my head from our finance discussion was that we had $171,000 from two different places that could be accessed. And there had been discussion with the auditor. Smith said so, for road work, was that for road work? Quisenberry said I think it was. The $171,000 was for local roads and state roads. Smith said major roads. Quisenberry said major roads, yeah.
Pardee said so, roads that aren’t available to us? Smith said that’s for road, repaving roads. It cannot be used for – Quisenberry said there’s a restriction.
Pardee said and then we have the Bisio contribution. Wylie said what’s that. Lamphier said from overpayments. Smith said oh, yeah. When you said earlier in the meeting, you said, well, where is that money going to be spent? Well, we might have to – (interrupting Smith), Cara Catallo said I don’t think it should be called that. Sorry. (To Catallo), Wylie said please don’t make comments unless you’re asked to talk. Catallo said okay. Smith said we may have to use that police and fire overbilling refund for sewer.
Pardee said and for those of us that were on the finance committee would be helped by Coté refreshing at least my memory of what those dollar amounts were that we talked about at the end of the budget preparation that could be available but as I recall, weren’t part of any fund balance calculation. Smith said that’s correct. The local and major roads, that’s actually too soon.
Wylie said okay. So, this is just for discussion right now. And any timetable? Smith said this really should be done, this repair should be done no later than the beginning of November. Wylie said November. Smith said so, I would say the next two months, three months tops. And they want to do it, like, this week. They’ve got crews available, and they said we can get it done this week. I said, well, I think it’s moving fast. So, they’re anxious to get it done. They’re almost done with all the hammering and sewer inspections throughout the rest of the city. So that part of the job is 95% done. It’s just a couple of things like this that have to be done.
Quisenberry said you know what’s interesting about this amount? It’s very close to the amount that the township owes us. Roth said yeah, it is. I was thinking the same thing. Smith said I know. It’s just a coincidence.
Wylie said anybody else on council?
No comments.
Wylie said or public.
Wylie said I’m sorry. Forte said did Catallo have to say something. (To Catallo), Wylie said did you have a comment to make.
Catallo said well, I just think that it shouldn’t be so playfully thrown around. And I think that Mr. Bisio was on council at the time when that formula was decided so that, you know, maybe it would have been caught sooner. So, I just don’t. Wylie said okay. Catallo said so, I just resent sort of the playful nature of it because I love my community. I love my city. I’m disappointed in the council right now because this has been a really difficult time. And for somebody who works the election, like, it’s just a really serious, difficult time. And I, for one, don’t believe that there, I am not a conspiracy theorist. So, I just feel like it’s time to sort of take care of our community. And maybe those of you who are friends with the people who don’t like our community, maybe we can find a way to come together. I don’t know if it’s in a town hall meeting. But I think it’s time to sort of start addressing situations like this to try to find some kindness in our community. I agree with what Rodgers said. Like, it’s just, there’s just such cruelty that it’s a shame. We lost somebody who could have been a great clerk in just a matter of minutes because it’s intimidating to be sued almost immediately. So, I wish that there were a way that we could have different deliveries in our systems. And maybe that would be something worth talking about. Thank you.
Wylie said anybody have anything to say before we adjourn for the evening.
No comments.
Agenda Item #12, Adjourn (Video time mark 1:39:24):
Wylie said I need, Item #12, I need a motion to adjourn.
Motion by Roth; second Rodgers.
Wylie said any discussion.
No discussion.
Motion to adjourn passed by unanimous voice vote.
Wylie said and then we are adjourned at 8:40. Thank you.
Resources:
-
- Link to video recording here
- 08-12-2024 City Council packet
Good grief. It’s hard to know where to begin, so I’ll address two topics in comments and reserve what I have to say about what I know about the backstory surrounding the clerk’s resignation for a separate post on the Clarkston Secrets website. There are things I haven’t shared but apparently need to so I can refute our lying city employees who are trying to avoid any responsibility for the clerk’s resignation – even though they gaslighted her the whole time she worked for the city and were in large part responsible for what happened.
POLICE/FIRE OVERPAYMENTS:
Smith’s claim that there was no way of knowing what Independence Township’s millage rates to double-check the invoices was a straight up lie. If he didn’t feel like asking for the information from the Township, he could have looked it up on the Independence Township website or the Oakland County Assessor’s website. Smith finds the perfect foil in the council – he can lie with impunity, and they never catch him at it because they don’t pay attention to what happens at their own city council meetings. And let’s be honest – they don’t really want to hold Smith accountable or his performance appraisal would have contained at least some “needs improvement” areas. To look at his appraisal, he is the perfect city manager: everything is good and some things are really good.
In a similar vein, no one called Smith on the carpet for not knowing what the annual increase in payments would amount to for the five-year copier lease he asked council to approve. Same negligent conduct, smaller amount. Just as it was with the police and fire overpayments, it was left to a resident to point out the problem. My husband read the police services contract; Chet Pardee read the copier contract. Weird how much you can learn when you do that.
Laura Rodgers claims double-checking invoices isn’t something anyone needs to do – therefore, no city employee was under any obligation to double check bills for police and fire services that amount to 1/3 of city expenses. Kind of a weird thing to hear from someone who works in a double-checking profession (as a nurse). Ted Quisenberry also agrees that our city employes should not be held accountable for $172,000 in overpayments for 14 years.
Note to the city council – you aren’t going to get the balance of the money from Independence Township that our employees negligently overpaid. If the Board ever tries to reimburse us for money they aren’t obligated to pay, they should expect a lawsuit from a township resident to stop it. Did you hear this rumor of reconsidering the decision not to stand on the statute of limitations from Sam Moraco? You should consider the source and not get your hopes up.
And, in our latest twice monthly installment of Crazy Comments by Cara Catallo, Catallo blamed my husband for the police and fire overpayments. Yes, you heard that correctly – she blamed the guy responsible for recovering the money for the problem. (That’s why I call them “crazy comments.”) Catallo’s whacked-out thinking on this subject goes as follows – because my husband was on the council in 2010 when the city attorney negotiated the contract with Independence Township, my husband was therefore responsible for proofing later invoices the city manager and treasurer reviewed and approved before they were paid.
But let’s not let the facts get in the way of a personal smear. Richard wasn’t on the council in September 2010, when the police services contract was negotiated and signed. He wasn’t first elected until more than two months later, in November 2010. Apparently, Catallo’s theory is that a newly elected council member should review all existing city contracts and then closely monitor city staff’s compliance with the terms of those contracts. In Catallo’s weird mind, if my husband had only done that, we could have avoided 14 years of overpayments. In trying to protect Smith at all costs, Catallo attempts to shift the responsibility away from Smith to a council member who wasn’t even there when the contract was negotiated and signed and ignores the charter prohibition on noninterference that would be triggered if he’d tried to do that. (And what about all the other council members who approved this contract? I guess they get a free pass, because it’s only Richard Bisio who is the target of Catallo’s ire.) But we all know facts can’t convince crazy. Catallo has a response for everything. That it’s usually a stupid response hasn’t ever stopped her. And since she objects to calling the money the city recovered thanks to my husband the “Bisio money,” I’ll be calling it the “Bisio money” forever and ever and ever. I think you should too.
CITY MANAGER PERFORMANCE REVIEW:
Ted Quisenberry didn’t go to the city council meeting when the council voted to establish the performance review committee. That didn’t stop him at the next meeting from trying to force the performance review committee to report to the Michigan Municipal League and have the League write the review, something the taxpayers would be forced to pay for because in his mind, the city council is apparently incompetent to evaluate the city manager. Quisenberry could have provided input any time he wanted, didn’t, and then was miffed that his input wasn’t considered. Peg Roth tried to give input, and it was rejected.
Earlier in the meeting, Wylie talked about the rejection of six of the seven candidates’ paperwork (meaning they will have to run as write-ins) as a SNAFU, an acronym that stands for “Situation Normal All F*cked Up.” I think this is an apt description of what happened with the election, the city manager’s performance appraisal, and pretty much everything else that happens at city hall.
But don’t try to hold anyone accountable.
That’s not a thing in Clarkston.