About an hour ago the Grand Rapids City FOIA appeals committee rubberstamped "Shredder" Ophoff's denial of our requests for public records related to the valuation and subsequent tax assessment of the Boardwalk property located north of downtown on Monroe Avenue. So those records, for now, remain under lock and key (assuming the Shredder hasn't come up with a pretext for destroying them yet).
From our readers we learned of the existence of a letter from the Boardwalk developers to the City stating that they had invested only $20 million in the property. Apparently this figure was used to justify a low tax assessment of the Boardwalk. However, that figure contradicts the $30-35 million the Boardwalk developers had told its lenders they had invested in order to support a $26.5 million in loans against the property. On the one hand the Boardwalk developers gave the City a low-ball figure to get a cheap assessment and on the other they gave the banks a big figure to maximize the amount they could borrow.
If the Boardwalk developers lied to the City, then they cheated to get a 50% reduction in their tax assessment. If they lied to the banks, then that would appear to be bank fraud. If, if, if ... we needed the facts. So we made requests of the City to get the relevant public records. On behalf of the City, "Shredder" Ophoff refused. We made appeals to the City Commission. Today the City Commission subcommittee in charge of FOIA appeals met and told us to take a hike.
General George, a.k.a. Mayor Heartwell, took command of the situation even though Commissioner Jendrasiak was nominally the committee chairman. The General gave voice only to the Shredder's arguments for denial and invited him to speak to that end. Of course, the Shredder made all the necessary noises, and I, as one of the appellants, was not permitted to address the committee to counter his nonsense. The General then struck a deliberative pose and declared, by gosh, we need to deny the release of these documents. Jendrasiak and Commissioner Dean, the third member of the committee, fell into line and agreed. In short, the City's FOIA appeals process is a joke.
It never ceases to amaze me how quickly and completely our elected officials forget that they do not represent the City, they represent us. Even if Heartwell, Jendrasiak, and Dean sincerely thought Ophoff had the legal basis to deny disclosure of the requested documents, they had the authority to release in the name of the public good. But no. They closed ranks to protect the City staff and the stink emanating from the conflicting values placed upon the Boardwalk property by its owners.
So the herd instinct of the Grand Rapids City Commission is alive and well, which explains the mooing you thought you heard at City Hall.
Hello Dear L.A.W. Readers...
As Editor of your Local Area Watch Web Site I thought it would be important to add a little footnote to Bill's feedback on the FOIA hearing at City Hall yesterday morning.
You see...I am a transplant from the east side of the state. I grew up north of Detroit and spent my whole life as a native Detroiter (Coleman Young, Kwame Kilpatrick, etc...)I know full well how city and state governments works (both the good and bad of it).
I decided to attend the FOIA hearing/meeting with Bill in person to get a feel for the actions of the Mayor, the City Attorney and The City Commission. I went to the meeting expecting the usual proceedings a City Hall and City Commission would allow - input from both parties being represented on an issue that was on the table in a public forum.
Much to my surprise the contrary occurred!
1) The committee as Bill noted was lead by Mayor Heartwell and NOT the committee's chair person Mr. Jendrasiak. Interesting... Does Mayor Heartwell allow Mr. Jendrasiak to do his job sometimes? I doubt it. Clearly the Mayor wanted to direct this forum his way and not allow others to control things. He clearly wanted this issue in and out as quickly as possible.
Shame on you, Mr. Mayor...your citizens do count - remember that in the next election. I certainly remember it everytime I pay tax dollars that pay your salary.
2) I am surprised that not one old or new city commissioner has ever stepped out publicy on this very serious hazardous waste issue dealing with the city and private companies. Regardless of the amount of video footage, detailed chemical analysis of the land and false statements and affidavits under oath it never seems to be enough to even give a rise of consciousness to these commissioners. After all - all those workers at the site had been exposed to harmless levels of chemicals, people who live and work in the area were exposed and who knows who else after all the dumping was done. Clearly the health and lives of these citizens don't matter or action would have been taken long ago. All I can do is shake my head at the lack of courage to do the right thing.
3) Reverend Dean asked twice why a city clerk was not at the meeting taking notes. Mr. Ophoff and Mayor Heartwell both confirmed that the only thing required in hearings such this one were the documents needed to give the committee members the necessary information about the issue at hand. A clerk taking notes for the record isn't done or needed. On the other hand, issues like license fee disputes and similar clerks do take notes. Sure seems to me like any hearing SHOULD be recorded for both public and private auditing. I guess the city does what it likes, not what is right. (Although in hindsight, taking notes might not matter if Mr. Ophoff is involved - he is famous for shredding city documents after all. Same thing could happen if any had been taken...)
4) No one on the FOIA appeals committee or Mr. Ophoff were willing to make eye contact with anyone in the gallery - that being Bill, myself and one reporter from the G. R. Press. They say lack of eye contact from someone is disrespectful and possibly covering up something less than honest...I sure felt that way.
5) Only Mr. Ophoff, the city's attorney was allowed to make comments about why the FOIA request should be not allowed.
6) Only Mayor Hearthwell was allowed to ask questions and make judgments. No one else on the committee even spoke up and asked any questions. (That tells me either they know the result or they were told to keep quiet!).
7) Bill's right to ask questions, make remarks and be involved in this public hearing was denied. They acted as if neither he or I or the reporter was even in the room. It was interesting that Bill's request for the FOIA paperwork and his request for the hearing were the reasons for this meeting YET he was ignored, slighted and denied any right to speak. I felt embarrassed at their conduct and disappointed for Bill as once again his (and Mary's and Brian's) rights were over-looked.
I sure hope citizens will stand up in the future and do the right thing even when their publicly elected officials cannot or won't.
Regards,
Editor of The L.A.W. Website
Bridget Dupont-Tingley
Posted by: The Editor | June 22, 2005 at 02:56 PM