Here then is the meeting that was held in the backroom of the council chambers, at the council committee meeting, where they can freely discuss issues which come before them. Due to no one pursuing my complaints and concerns regarding code enforcement stepping onto private property without permission or a warrant, I asked Councilperson Leslie LaCorte to take up that fight within council. In the face of so much opposition and dragging of feet in inquiry for the citizens sake, I feel she did so valiantly. I feel this meeting exemplifies well the kind of evasive and obfuscating behavior from them I’d become accustomed to over the years trying to get things paid the attention I feel they merited. It is also a window into how Leslie LaCorte was often treated by them, treating her disrespectfully, unprofessionally and talking down to her like she was a child. I have added my remarks in red as a commentary on the meeting. Again, this is verbatim, so while it reads like they’re all thick-tongued, all the ‘ums’ and stammering and such is just normal speech patterns and must not be construed as anything other. I want to start it by again showing the speech I gave before them to consider a moratorium on code enforcement.

CITY OF WHITEHALL COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING

JUNE 11, 2013

18:45:37

Councilperson Leslie LaCorte: “ I also wanted to talk with, ask Ray, he actually was out last week when Jim (Graham) brought forward this, um, when we were discussing the codes and stuff like that. I don’t know, I just feel that, um, I’d just like to hear an explanation on the ‘right of entry’ to when we feel, what our standards are, what our codes are as far as when we feel its right to enter a property Ray”.

Former Service Director Ray Ogden: “Well, the Property Maintenance Code does give the city the right of entry and, um, unless somebody tells us no. Rarely do we enter a property, we don’t normally have to…the Property Maintenance Code does have that in the code”.

(By his own admission, Mr. Ogden says that they do enter property but never mentions the permission or warrant process as outlined in the 4^th amendment. Also, according to Mr. Ogden’s conveniently incorrect interpretation of strictly worded law, (by he who sends officers out under color of law to serve violations regarding the letter of the law, that which he can’t, by this example, understand himself. As well too, judged by a Magistrate that assumes violations have been brought to him by means of lawful actions on the part of code officials) the IPMC’s #104.3 Right of Entry, the entire Service Departments, Code Divisions, and as such, the City of Whitehall’s positions are, that the entire city is one big YES! for their traipsings unless an arbitrary entity known as “somebody” comes out of their structures and yells “NO!” at them (Very convenient for them being that their operations take place during the weekdays when most people aren’t in their homes to yell “NO” out at them in the first place). Obversely, the law actually states that they can’t just go anywhere they please, that first they must try every reasonable measure to get permission from an occupant or owner. Once that avenue is exhausted, if no one answers or explicitly gives permission, then they must seek entry by means of a warrant signed by a judge. So, in actuality, the entire city is one big “NO!”, unless someone says “YES”, the exact opposite of what his interpretation conveniently misinformed Ms. LaCorte with. That which began the muddying of the core issue; are code officials allowed by law to step onto private property without aid of permission from an owner/occupant and/or a warrant signed by a judge. The Supreme Court decision, Camara v Municipal Court, says no.)

LaCorte: So, as far as when, um, someone has the ‘No Trespassing’ sign, and again, I just want to clear up to why I’m asking this because for, you know, a year now I feel like I’m in the middle of Administration/residents, um, or resident (meaning Gerald Dixon) I should say, and um, I’m getting to feel like it’s unfair. I don’t know where, I mean, we are here for the community and I totally understand that and I’m here to back up the Administration and the job that they do but when I’m getting phone calls and I feel like I can’t give answers and I feel that I can’t help, I feel like I need to come to you guys for help…(bad mistake if you’re going to get any ‘help’ from them)

(Councilperson LaCorte very briefly starts to stick to the topic but quickly veers into self-defense over her motivations in challenging Service Director Ogden and the city’s code enforcement practices. It is difficult to not only buck power but so many people who are opposed to your efforts and not helping)

Mayor Kim Maggard: “Mmmmm-hmmmm”.

LaCorte: “…um, I know you’ve gotten calls, you’ve gotten calls, you’ve gotten calls (indicating various councilpersons) and I feel, um, not that I mind the phone calls, I mean I don’t want to offend anybody at all…”

Maggard: “Mmmm-hmmm”.

LaCorte: “but I just feel like, why is there a continuing problem, why are we struggling to, um, have a clear code as far as the entry of property when there’s a ‘No Trespassing’ sign, I know, there’s been meetings with the Mayor and, I’m still getting phone calls, so I don’t know, I don’t know what the…”

Ogden: “Well, would you address the nature of the phone call with me so I could answer your question?”

(Mr. Ogden’s confusion in understanding what Councilperson LaCorte is driving at is in conflict with what Mayor Maggard claims later in the evening, to “have actually talked to Ray and the city attorney about that (the issue at hand) and we are doing the right* thing per our city attorney.”)

*Note the mayor uses the term “right”, not ‘legal’ or ‘lawful’.

LaCorte: “Okay. Alright, well, and again, Jim was here…”

Councilperson Bob Bailey: (interrupting) I don’t disagree with what you’re saying (has she really gotten out a cogent statement yet?) but, you know, here’s one thing I looked at, cause I kind of researched this, how many code violations are written annually? Several thousand.”

(His interruption has nothing to do with my concern and the topic at hand. It is a nattering nuisance and one of several times Councilperson Bailey veers the conversation off the meat of the matter by interrupting. It has nothing to do with the heart of the concern/complaint/issue (code officers on property without aid of permission or a warrant and a moratorium of code enforcement in light of this charge) and only serves to derail the momentum and thread of Councilperson LaCorte’s investigation and verbal examination from reaching adequate and proper outcomes, that which she, standing up for citizens and the law, deserves professional patience, courtesy, consideration and respect from the council table to achieve.)

Ogden: “Are you talking about notices or violations?”

Bailey: “Well…”

Council President Jim Graham: “Yea, cause there’s probably more notices than actual violations.”
Maggard: “Yes…there is.”

Bailey: “Let’s say notices, that’s what I checked.”

LaCorte: “Yea, that’s a good way to start it.”

Bailey: “That would be compact.”

LaCorte: “Where do we start…?”

Bailey: “Notices. Several thousand.”

Maggard: “Yea.”

Bailey: “And you really only have issues with a small number of those, and not to diminish the importance of those concerns…”

LaCorte: “Right.”

Bailey: “…those people have but, I don’t think the things broke so much as, um, you know, like, when a policeman comes to your house, if he feels there’s a safety issue he may enter your house, I looked at it, as code, with code enforcement, cause we had this in our neighborhood, a broken fish tank and a broken down truck in the backyard, kids playing on it, bad safety situation, it was Wynn Stafford’s (sp?) property, anyhow, uh, code enforcement had to get back there to see it, so they had to enter the property and it was rectified rather quickly, now he was upset, this was before I was a councilman and he was in here. Maybe his (Wynn Stafford) concerns are legit that he’s entering, the code enforcement entered a rental property of his but its still a safety situation. Now granted, if its grass, that’s not a real particular safety issue.”

(In the 4^th Amendment to the United States Constitution it says; The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, (which includes the cutilage** as found in United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294 (1987)) against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

In Camara v. Municipal Court- 387 U.S. 523 (1967) it states:

“With certain carefully defined exceptions, an unconsented warrantless search of private property is “unreasonable.”

Search warrants which are required in non-emergency situations should normally be sought only after entry is refused.”

“A search of private property without proper consent is “unreasonable” unless it has been authorized by a valid search warrant.”

“When the right of privacy must reasonably yield to the right of search is, as a rule, to be decided by a judicial officer, not by a policeman or government enforcement agent.”

“…the possibility of criminal entry under the guise of official sanction is a serious threat to personal and family security.”

“The warrant procedure is designed to guarantee that a decision to search private property is justified by a reasonable government interest. …If a valid public interest justifies the intrusion contemplated, then there is probable cause to issue a suitably restricted search warrant.”

Councilperson Bailey’s assertion then that mere non-emergency safety issues require the immediate attention and unlawful intrusion of government agents onto citizen’s private property is utterly incorrect and misinformed anyone at that table who may have been ignorant of law and simply wholeheartedly accepted Mr. Bailey’s assertions. No one, including the chief law enforcement officer at the table, Mayor Kim Maggard, corrected Councilperson Bailey. Given then the information proffered by Mr. Bailey, this had the power to skew the forward movement of the proceedings as initiated by Ms. LaCorte. His assertions are, at best, a heinous ignorance. At worst, they’re a scary and telling peek into the mindset of those who are governing the city of Whitehall.)

LaCorte: “No.”

Graham: “It could pose a, um, varmint problem.”

Bailey: “It could…”

Councilperson Van Gregg: “If its too much…”

Bailey: “…but, you know, I just don’t think it’s a, I don’t think a big alarm should be going out that people are being mistreated, I think that each individual case needs to be handled…”

LaCorte: “Right.”

Bailey: “,,,worked out…”

LaCorte: Right.”

Bailey: “…and resolved.”

LaCorte: “I think that’s another thing, are we working them out, are we, you know, instead of, um, getting the constant phone calls, are we trying to address things to the point that we’re solving a situation instead of being contacted, I mean its like a merry-go-round, I think if it goes around the table…”(Councilperson LaCorte continues to try and stay on point…)
(Excellent counterpoint to Mr. Bailey. Are we working out all these individual complaints against code enforcement or are we just sweeping them under the rug until everyone forgets and they start getting more calls again?)

Maggard: (interrupting LaCorte’s thread…) “Well, I…I think people, people feel that’s their property and its very personal to them when somebody says, hey you need to fix up the property. To them I think some people take that as an insult, so of course, their feelings are hurt, they are upset. Uh, if anything on a property is visible to the naked eye we can write a citation or a violation, we don’t even have to come onto the property, we can see it from there. However, please remember that many, most of our phone calls are from neighbors…” (two utterly different trains of thought she added, one was people’s feelings being hurt by code enforcement, the other letting everyone know their power when it comes to enforcement.)

( The mayor interrupting Councilperson LaCorte with the utterly unrelated ‘feeling’ as to why people get upset with code enforcement has the same effect that Councilperson Bailey’s interruption did just a moment ago. Councilperson LaCorte isn’t given the professional courtesy of patience and time to fully articulate what she wants to say about this important topic before others unprofessionally, disrespectfully and consistently interrupt her train. It is also telling that they, as citizen’s representatives and elected officials, don’t extend to her the professional courtesy, equal interest and willingness to help her find the best and most just conclusion they can for the citizen’s sake. By not actively participating in the understanding of the issue brought forth and addressing the matter at hand in the clearest and most concise manner possible, they do a great disservice to the citizen’s concerns and welfare, those they chose to represent and ostensibly fight for.)

Graham: “Mmmmm-hmmm.”

Bailey: “Exactly, and they want to remain, they wanna remain anonymous.”

(Here Councilperson Bailey is asserting that neighbors want to snitch on their neighbors without those neighbors ever knowing who called the city code enforcement on them. Sort of like a secret police. If the citizens can’t stand with courage when it comes to their actions, they should remain silent, as well, the city should never entertain the odious practice of citizens secretly informing on neighbors. Haven’t we seen the scary results of secret informants working with government agents? Have we learned nothing from this? The fact that the city is all in for this anonymous, secretive code enforcement policing says volumes about the character of those running things at City Hall. Its gross and telling and frightening.)

Maggard: “…and they are looking at that across the street or right next door and they call and complain. And so, we need to check that out. We go, they say you can come on our property and look at the next door neighbors. (gross) We don’t look over a solid fence but if we can see through it or our employees can see through it, they can take pictures. (Gov’t. agents taking photos of your property through spaces in your fences. When did this become normal, or okay?) If its visible to the naked eye and there is no, um…”

LaCorte: (train of thought now derailed)“So we just serve them a citation first and give them a…”

Maggard: “…a warning.”

Graham: “No, they get a warning first.”

Maggard: “They absolutely get a warning first.”

LaCorte: “…and from there we go to a further action.”

Maggard: “…and, um, if council would like to change the code on that, you wanna make it less restrictive then of course that’s your prerogative. But please…”
(She actually told them what they can do and no one heard her or paid attention.)

Bailey: “I would also like to add since I started, and one of the reasons I ran, um, one of the things I heard campaigning a lot and then engaging with residents to hear their voice, I hear, more compliments about how their neighborhoods are more looking better since the code enforcement is educating…”

Maggard: “Right.”

Bailey: “…these homeowners, or residents that, hey, you need to mow your grass, cut your bushes, whatever. I hear more positive things, really about code enforcement than I actually hear negative things, so, and not to diminish anybody that has an issue,”

(Councilperson Bailey, with Mayor Maggard’s affirmation, uses his interruptions of Councilperson LaCorte’s defense of my charges and concerns to illogically add misplaced positive praise for code enforcement and the job they’re doing. It is employed as a tactic to throw concern and attention off the ugliness of the true issue in order to diminish and de-fang its power, and with it, the awful attention and any responsibility put onto the code division and Mayor Maggard’s administration. (This tack will continue later on in the meeting.)

Serious concerns should be dealt with in a serious manner by able people with an unbiased professional ethic. This is not the time for cheerleading, it is a time for serious examination. The issue at hand is not about ‘positives’ and ‘negatives’; it is about the law and the citizen’s rights, plain and simply. I feel Councilperson Bailey does this with intent due to his personal ill will towards me and because he wants what is happening within code enforcement to continue without the nosy (and noisy) intrusion of outspoken citizens like myself.)

LaCorte: “No, that’s not it…”

Bailey: “That’s not the point.” (So then why did you confuse the issue by making it Mr. Bailey?)

LaCorte: “…because I’m here, I feel like I’m the middle person and I feel like, what can I do to help both parties resolve, what can we do as leaders and as, cause I believe in code enforcement one hundred percent, I mean look at the house next door to me that I see just falling apart, um, that, I just know they’re not,… they’re not educated on keeping their property up, I mean their gutters are full of…”
(Trying to find a middle ground with them is not keeping and stabilizing the one that should be found, the right one.)

Graham: “Trees.”

LaCorte: “…trees coming out of them and its heartbreaking. I go over there and I’d gladly, you know, wacky-weed his yard, you know, just because its either I do it or its gonna look like that, so…”

Bailey: “That’s actually how ‘Neighbors helping Neighbors’ was born.”

LaCorte: “Right”.

Maggard: “Yea”.

LaCorte: “…so, I know…”

Bailey: “…but it was overwhelming to be honest with you”.

LaCorte: “…and I’m one hundred percent Code but that’s just it…”

Maggard: (listening to Bailey, not LaCorte) “Mmmmm-hmm”.

LaCorte: “I just wanna make sure that, you know, if there is a situation and I think, because I feel like I’m in the middle and I don’t have the answers, I don’t have the solutions, um, and I’m not educated on that, I’m sorry, I’m not a Code guru, I can’t, you know, I can’t answer the questions…”

Maggard: (now listening to Councilperson LaCorte) “Mmmmmmmm…”

LaCorte: “so thats just where I feel like I’m coming here to the table tonight to say, you know, I mean…”

Maggard: “Mmmmm-hmmm”.

LaCorte: “I wanna respect all of my, um…”

Maggard: “Mmmm-hmmm”.

LaCorte: “…citizens and when they come to me and just to make…”

Maggard: “Mmmm-hmmm”.

LaCorte: “…them feel that, you know, I wanna listen, I wanna try and make a difference, you know, if it stops here, it stops here, there’s nothing more…”

Maggard: “Mmmmmmm…”

LaCorte: “…I can say or do, um, but I just wanted to see, what is our code as far as, you know, like you said, if the neighbor next door doesn’t say ‘you can come on my property to look at this situation’, do we just enter, do we, um, have to get a warrant or anything like that to justify…”

(Councilperson LaCorte tries in vain to explain her position and peppers it with a lot of her ‘feelings’ but she seems intimidated by the lot of them (Mayor Maggard with her numerous condescending ‘mmmm-hmmm’s) and is certainly outnumbered in her efforts. Despite this, she is still trying to pursue the matter at hand.)

Maggard: “No”. (‘No’ to just entering or ‘no’ to getting a warrant?)

Ogden: “I would first of all need to know specific situations. Now, you went out with T.J. (Code Enforcement Officer Walt ‘TJ’ Sural) and I several years ago”. (Again communicating with Councilperson LaCorte from the standpoint of being out-of-the-loop.)

LaCorte: “Yes, I did”.

Ogden: “Basically we’re doing the same thing we did then…”

LaCorte: “Mmmm-hmmm”.

Ogden: “…now”.

LaCorte: “No.”

Ogden: “…nothing has changed and I don’t know, so I don’t know what your concern is because at that time you weren’t especially concerned.”

(Service Director Ogden’s nonsensical argument here is; because Councilperson LaCorte went out on rounds with a Code Officer a few years ago (which was, no doubt, a very by-the-book tour) and she had no issues with what was being done then, that means she couldn’t possibly have any problems with code enforcement now because its all exactly the same. This tack from Ogden effectively intimidates Councilperson LaCorte and eviscerates the weak structure of her ill-understood, ill-prepared argument taken up to defend a citizen’s position. That which no other councilperson did.

Regardless, his argument is not the issue at hand and is given in that same manner of oblivion towards Councilperson LaCorte’s inquiries, despite his meeting with the mayor and city attorney. Her experiences on her ride with a code officer several years ago have nothing to do with current concerns with them stepping onto private property without permission or a warrant now.)

Councilperson Wesley Kantor: “We had a gentleman come to town, I think his name was Mr. Matthews, two weeks ago, three weeks ago tonight, lives on St. Rita Lane, over a landscaping fence, um, and that’s where the, we should actually, we need to look at the code on that. I mean, that needs to be changed. (He then talks, again, about the landscape fence issue.)

(Now it’s Councilperson Kantor’s turn to further deflect and derail the conversation away from the truth with a matter thoroughly unrelated to the issue at hand.)

“My question is (regarding the landscape fence issue) why in the world are we going out there with two Whitehall Police Officers?”

Maggard: “I believe it was because they tried to contact him numerous times, and, it wasn’t just one time and it was numerous times and they didn’t want to move the property themselves so they thought if they could get an officer out there and knock on the door then perhaps that they would then come to the door then. They had tried numerous times to knock on the door and nobody came to the door so, I think that was the issue.”

Kantor: (over the landscape fence) That should’ve never happened, we should be able to work with the citizens.”

(They all continue to go on and on about the topic of fences, variances, landscape fences, etc. but when the topic is code officers on private property without permission or a warrant, none can seemingly keep it on topic.)

Maggard: (Finishing out the endless fence conversation) “You probably don’t want someone with chicken wire in their front yard.”

(At this point the mayor mentions a “manual” of commonly-asked questions on the City of Whitehall’s website.)

Graham: “The people who are griping, I guarantee ya, no one who has, I gotta say this right, has not received a code violation has called to complain about a code violation unless its a neighbors. (?!) So remember, the people who are doing the complaining probably got a notice, just like the mayor said, people take things personally, there’s nothing personal about it (but what about lawful or unlawful?) its what the code is, its the same as driving laws, its the same as everything else.”

(The President of Council opines that people who just “gripe” just do so because they got served notice. The issue, whom the President of Council, being the one overseeing the movement of the proceedings decides that this is the real issue and does nothing to steer the conversation back to the meat of the matter.)

LaCorte: “I just think they need to be more cut and dry in places I guess, I mean, you know, because if I can’t understand it and I don’t know right from wrong, you know, what our, how our city goes about, um, trespassing, not trespassing, I don’t know that, that’s something I don’t know, I can’t answer that, and if…”

(Again, doing the Council President’s job, Councilperson LaCorte tries to steer it back to the original issue from all their unprofessional, unrelated, pointless-to-the-meat-of-the-issue tangents.)

Bailey: “Now we’re back to the original issue…”

LaCorte: “Right. Well, and again, I’m just sayin’, you know, that maybe as Kim is sayin’ this is something we need to start, you know, looking at and um, changing some things to making them more in a direct direction as its stated so that…”

(She heard the mayor, she knows they can change legislation to make code enforcement fairer if there are problems, with more direct, understandable language…yes, good for her.)

Graham: “Well, they have to have a reasonable cause.”

Maggard: “Yea, they can’t just come on property without any cause.”

( Both the mayor and president of council offer something which has nothing to do with what Leslie just offered and only serves to muddle and disarm the point she is trying to make. That which furthers their own aims and doesn’t respect the liberty and freedom and rights of the citizens.)

Graham: “So, an example…right, so, what you’re talking about is in very broad terms. If you get it down to specifics…” (What?!)

LaCorte: “Well, all I’m talkin’ about is, I’m getting phone calls, and, I can’t help, and I can’t fix, and, I’m not the only one, I know all of my council members are getting phone the phone calls…”

Maggard: “I’ve only received one phone, er, um, one complaint about that particular issue.”

(The mayor minimizes my concern and complaints because the concern over or notion that city officials could possibly be violating laws really has merit and only deserves attention when a majority show concern over it.)

LaCorte: “But I’m just saying that, I’m in the middle.”

Maggard: “Mmmmm-hmmm. Well…”

LaCorte: “…and sometimes after…”

Bailey: “Its kind of the nature of the beast.”

(Councilperson Bailey offers a platitude to placate Councilperson LaCorte. In essence saying, ‘There’s nothing wrong here Leslie, these things happen and it just comes with the territory of being an elected representative. Let’s move on.‘)

Maggard: “Yea, it is, its part of…”

Graham: (seeing my hand raise for an opportunity to speak.) (Quietly…) “There’s no audience participation.”

LaCorte: “But we’re not, we’re not resolving the issue to…”

Maggard: “Yes we are.”

(Disrespectfully interrupting Councilperson LaCorte at the council table and rebutting the very thought she won’t even allow her to finish. They really won’t allow her the time to adequately define her position due to the unprofessional bullying of their constant interruptions of her train of thought and allowing her to get out exactly what she wants to say.)

Ogden: “Well, why don’t you go to the source because I have not heard from you about anything that relates to my department concerning code enforcement, so I don’t know how to respond to an issue I don’t know exists.”
(The gall of him to say this given what the mayor says 6 lines down from here)

LaCorte: “Well, the mayor knows it exists, she had a meeting with the situation, so I don’t know why you wouldn’t know about it, but I would think you two would communicate.”
(Good for her!)

Maggard: “Are we talking about Mr. Dixon?”

LaCorte: “Yea.”

Maggard: “Alright, just say it.”
LaCorte: “Well, I know he’s sitting back there.”

Maggard: “…and I have actually talked to Ray and the city attorney about that and we are doing the right thing per our city attorney.”

(Here, the mayor drops the city attorney’s ‘feelings’ on the matter (no legal opinion) which usually sends a chilling effect to a group of people who are sorely under-educated on various matters. This also reveals the artifice of Mr. Ogden’s confusion earlier regarding Leslie’s inquiries.)

LaCorte: “And I’m not saying you’re not doing the right thing.”

Maggard: “But, per our city attorney.”

(Dropping it again.)

LaCorte: “This isn’t about what you guys are doing, its just about getting it resolved and moving forward, and past it.”
(Perhaps this is Leslie’s take on it but in actuality, it is about what they’re doing.)

Maggard: “As long as, uh, the city attorney says we’re on good, legal standing, I’m willing to keep on doing what we’re doing.”
(Dropping it yet again but also, she says “good legal standing”, not, ‘we’re following the law’ or, “we’re lawful”. This sounds like verbal play.)

LaCorte: “Okay.”

(Sufficiently cowed by the mayor repeatedly dropping the spectre of the ‘law’, the ‘city attorney’, into the mix.)

Maggard: “So…and that’s what’s gonna happen.”

(But what is the truth of the matter? This isn’t sought or asked. As well, when I later asked Mike Shannon for the law which overrode or overturned ‘Camara v Municipal Court’, he offered nothing.)

Kantor: “I also contacted Mike (City Attorney Shannon) and he told me the same thing.”
(Confirmed by Councilperson Kantor, no need to check further. Unless the city attorney can’t be trusted…)

LaCorte: “Mmmm-hmmm.”

Kantor: “I also contacted Whitehall police and gave ’em a ‘what if’…”

LaCorte: “Mmmm-hmm.”

Kantor: “…and what our code officers did, they did the right thing.”

(In agreement and siding with the mayor. Did Councilperson Kantor do any research on his own or did he only rely on the sacrosanct word of City Attorney Michael T. Shannon (whose relationship to ethics is questionable) and the police department, the head of which is Mayor Maggard herself, who also heads up the Service department and thus, the code enforcement division whose practices are in question? Did he, as the people’s representative and for their ultimate benefit, do any searching on his own to see what the truth is, or did he just lazily and perhaps, self-servingly, only rely on their words to end the matter regarding the people’s concerns?)

Graham: (Once again spotting me showing interest in sharing information) (Quietly…) “…can’t, can’t participate.”

(I believe one of the reasons they did away with citizens speaking up at council committee meetings was because their thoughts and opinions may have gotten in the way, contradicted what the elected officials wanted to do or wanted to communicate, right or wrong. Council President Graham has the ability to make an exception to allow me to speak but I feel he didn’t, not because he didn’t want to be a ‘rule-breaker’, as I have seen him be in the past, (and since in these very committee meetings) but because my adding to the conversation would have utterly centered it on the meat of the matter and where Councilperson LaCorte may have made weak, assailable arguments, mine would not have been. This shows that what Council President Graham wants is not to do the right thing or ensure justice and citizen’s rights but, to do, in a self-serving way, what he and his fellow Whitehall Democratic Club member Kim Maggard want, regardless of the way its administered. That is wrong.)

LaCorte: “Maybe this meeting tonight at this table will help answer some questions so that we can (Inaudible). That’s all I have.”
(Bailey, Graham, Maggard and Kantor have won, she can’t stand against them any longer. Her fight is not completely dead, but almost.)

Gregg: I think most of the time when people call, and they call me they usually complain about a neighbor or they get a violation and they want, you know, like a, the car and the sticker, like I’m gonna get ’em out of it, you know, like I’m, that’s really what they want when they call you. Most of the time. Now I do have neighbors that walk and say what about this or what about that.”
(Again…this is not the issue.)

Maggard: “Mmmm-hmmm. Right.”

Gregg: “And what I’ve always done is check with Ray and they’ll take a look at it and then I’ll explain it to, whatever the situation is, if they don’t, if it is in violation or if it idn’t. But most of the time the phone calls are…they’ve got a violation and they wanna say, what can you do about it?

LaCorte: (inaudible crosstalk) “I don’t know if they’re in violation and that’s what I’m saying, I’m not educated (on codes) so I don’t know if they were in violation. I don’t know.”

(Still trying to make some point.)

Graham: “…and no one…I can’t believe that anyone would expect people on city council or the mayor or anyone else to know what every rule and regulation is.”
(Then look it up!)

Maggard: “Oh, but they do.”

(General laughter)

Graham: “Well, I know that they do, but its not realistic.” (I agree)

(If a citizen has a complaint that suggests laws may be being broken or there is a pathology of behavior by city officials reported which harm the citizen’s rights or justice served them, I would think that would be sufficient cause to start doing some homework and know exactly what is going on. Otherwise, there is no excuse and little reason for a convivial outbreak of mirth over such a serious subject.)

Kantor: “You’re pretty close.”
Gregg: “Check with Ray.”

Graham: “Yea, if its a code problem, that’s what I do, I call Ray or T.J. And I say, you know what, I had a complaint about this, let me know what you find so that I can tell the person, you know, um, give that person an answer and that’s usually the way I handle because I’m not the code.”

LaCorte: “I’m not either.”

Graham: “I don’t do code enforcement.”

(The issue is not about code enforcement, it is about the law and citizen’s rights. If the problem lies in a particular department, you don’t call that department for an answer, you find out the answer on your own. If there is troublesome behavior in a specific department, what makes them gullible enough to think that calling the department in question will garner them the most honest and forthcoming answers. Particularly if citizens are calling into question their behavior? If they are guilty, they’re not going to give the answers to those seeking justice. Self-investigation and Council’s ability to launch an official investigation, per the City Charter and for the citizen’s sake, is the only avenue.)

Ogden: “Well, that’s just it, everybody around the table has contacted our department from time to time about issues. We respond to them the same way that we respond to any other residents that are calling us, asking us questions, or complaining or just giving us notification, whatever. So, that’s the same response you get, the same response you get but if there’s any concern among council members about the process you’re welcome to meet with ray Hamby or Walt Sural or even our building inspector and travel around, I mean Bob’s done it, Leslie’s done it, um…”

Gregg: “I’ve done it…”

Ogden: “Leo…” (Councilperson Leo Knoblauch)

Kantor: “I did learn somethin’, I didn’t even know our chief inspector could do that. I didn’t know he did that.”

(General chatter)

(Riding around with those who run a department doesn’t give you the insight a citizen has that is in the sights of the code enforcement division itself. Proof is in the pudding, not in what perfectly arrayed presentation they give those who could affect their jobs and make trouble for them. Its the difference in how an employee acts when the boss is around and when he’s not.)

Bailey: You know Ray, I wouldn’t last a week doing your job. There’s some ruuuuuude people out there.”

(Instead of fighting and inquiring exhaustively for the citizen’s rights and the law, Mr. Bailey instead opts to heap praise on those who are at the center of these charges.)

Ogden: “We want you to see what’s out there so you can tell us how, how you, what kind of codes you think we need (or should abolish!) because otherwise, you know, there is a disconnect. So, I would welcome each of you to take a half a day and go around and see what’s goin’ on, whether its with Walt or Ray.”

(Riding around will only reveal what they’re doing while having this elected representative with them, not what they’ve been doing. You really wanna see what they do, follow them around secretly and spy on them)

LaCorte: “Well, I’ve been cited, you know, I’ve gotten, I’ve gotten tickets from code enforcement.”

Graham: “Well, everybody makes a mistake once in awhile, ain’t no big deal.”

(How is living your life in the way you wish to with no malice or violence but which goes against these human-constructed codes, ‘a mistake’? To live your life outside the restrictions of their codes is ‘a mistake’? *sigh)

Bailey: “I had to tear down a fence once, between my house and garage and then put it back up.”

Graham: “You had it in the wrong place?”

Bailey: “No, I just didn’t get a permit. It was twenty foot long.”

LaCorte: “Mine was more the brush out in front of my yard that the neighbors put out there that they didn’t know what couldn’t go out after November,…”

Maggard: “Oh, yeah.”

LaCorte: “…so I got cited for it…”

Bailey: “At the end of the day I was ignorant of code its not the city’s fault…”
Maggard: “Right.”

Bailey: “I couldn’t help it if Lehman (sp?) could see my fence as I was buildin’ it from his house…”

Maggard: “Oh, oh…man (laughter) yeah.”

Bailey: “…you know, but, he made me take it down…”

Maggard: “Yeah.”

Bailey: “…go get a permit and put it back up.”

Graham: “Woulda been nice if he’d told you before you got it built though.” (laughter)

Maggard: “Yeah, yeah, that would’ve really been nice. Darn.”

Bailey: “But, it happens to everybody.”

(Take your lumps citizens! Being cited for code infractions is not the same as due process not being served or city officers skirting the law, which is the actual topic of the table)

LaCorte: “It does, it happens to me, it happens to everybody, and I believe in code, I really do. I, want to be proud of our community, you know, I have a lot of concerns with, you know…”

Bailey: (overtalking) “I have found that these guys typically bend over backwards to correct issues and help people…”
(Again, choosing praise over thorough investigation, asking hard questions or getting to the nitty-gritty bottom line of the issue.)

Kantor: “We do. Yes we do.”

LaCorte: “…some of these houses that we’re looking at right now…”

Bailey: “…even out-of-state owners that get in a bind, you know, this has helped corrected the issue but, there’s always gonna be that small percentage that no matter what you do, ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’.”

Kantor: “You know, Ray, Its like I said (inaudible) first started talking, when he came in her, I realized there’s two sides to every story, and I seen T.J. Out there, you know, and I call him and everything and…” (there is cross-talking patter, inaudible) “I’ve seen TJ working, he does a good job.”

(Councilperson Bailey apparently didn’t sprinkle enough sugar over code enforcement, code officer Walt Sural or the Service Department, so their other enabler, Councilperson Kantor, pours it on.)

LaCorte: “Well, no ones doubtin’ that TJ doesn’t work, that’s not it.” (correct)

Kantor: “No, no, he does a good job!”

Bailey: (referring to Wes Kantor) “I think he’s speaking in terms of ethics.”

(The issue is not about code enforcement’s ethics, its about whether or not they’re violating law to enforce it on citizens. If anyone’s ethics are in question they’re Mayor Maggard’s for allowing any impropriety or lawbreaking in the first place, and I quote, “So…and that’s what’s gonna happen.”)

LaCorte: “Oh, I’m sayin’, you…”

Graham: “Some people probably think he does too good of a job and those are usually the people that call you and say, fix this.”

Ogden: “I hear him on the phone or talking with somebody in person and he’s outstanding.”

Bailey: “He’s great.”

(Disgraceful)

Ogden: “He was in customer service before, down at Dick Masheter, he knows how to deal with people.”

Kantor: “Right.”

Ogden: “He can deal with people as well as anybody I’ve ever seen in my life in terms of, you’ve got a situation that isn’t comfortable for people and they don’t necessarily (stammering) like the fact that they’ve got to do something differently…”

LaCorte: “Mmmm-hmmm.”

Ogden: “,,,but then again, he has a way of communicating with them to where, my gosh, they leave out of there or they hang up the phone and all is well. I couldn’t have found a better code officer and I’ve told him that, he, there wouldn’t be anybody in the State of Ohio I would find that would be any better than him to do that job. So, uh…”

(This entire exchange between Kantor, Bailey and Ogden practically deifying Code Officer Walt Sural and the Code Enforcement division exemplifies one of Whitehall governance’s major pitfalls; concerns over behavior and actions by officers of a division of the city that may involve violation of law that have been shared with city council by a concerned citizen and instead of treating such a weighty charge with the full attention its seriousness demands, they instead spend valuable time building up the men and department at the very center of the charge. That which seems to benefit each other and their jobs within city hall brought on by their inappropriate personal relationships with each other (See: conflicts of interest and why they matter) When concerned citizens can’t get a proper hearing for their charges, complaints and concerns because of this practice, then that practice is obstructive and harmful to the citizens and the processes in place to adequately and properly serve their interests, as they’re supposed to. In this, they have traded their commitments to the citizens they swore to serve to commitments for their friends, donors and buddies. It is an appalling lack of principled restraint on their part. This orgy of praise over serious inquiry for a citizen’s passionate concerns made me so upset and frustrated that at this point in the meeting, I walked out. It is the only one in the four years I’d been going, at that point, that I ever walked out on.)

Kantor: “Right, I think Ray (Animal Control and Code Officer Ray Hamby) does a good job too. I’ve seen him talking to people and neighbors and, you know, he’s…”

(Might as well throw Ray Hamby into this pile of  glorification too.)

Maggard: (getting philosophical)“Well, its difficult, I mean, like there’s always personal feelings involved with Ray Hamby, you know, you love your animals, so, you don’t want anybody tell you anything bad about your animals or handle your animals and, the same with your home and property, its so personal, I think its its even more personal than a police officer stopping you for speeding.”

Kantor: “There’s times where a neighbor or somebody contacts us…”

Graham: “Yes, cause its your property and its an invasion.”

Maggard: “Mmmmm-hmm, yeah.”

Kantor: “Well, they contact us and they’re afraid to contact, for fear of, somebody would say…”

Bailey: (interrupting) “…and I admire how they’ll protect anonymity…”

Kantor: “…and I’ve called them and I’ll tell them that.”

Bailey: “…they will not say your neighbors here, here and there…”

Maggard: “They, they will not do that.”

Bailey: “…are complaining, they won’t do it. It’s (somewhat inaudible, sounds like ‘hostile’.)

Kantor: “I (inaudible) a deputy (inaudible) in my yard and looked back of my yard and looked three doors down and I said, ‘Thank-you. Thank-you so much….so.”

(Here Bob Bailey is trumpeting the anonymous aspect of code enforcement, making of it City Hall’s Secret Police. Where neighbor can snitch on neighbor and no one will ever be the wiser. Is code enforcement acting as an equalizer in neighborhood squabbles? Are they acting in the interest of one neighbors petty jealousies or vindictiveness or flat out revenge because the neighbor has been watching their drug activities or slept with the accusers husband or any one of hundred’s of scenarios where code gladly acts as ‘the punisher’ for a multitude of personal picayune citizen biases, those which act against Americans and their constitutionally-guaranteed liberty? Where authoritarian busy bodies can make other citizens life in Whitehall a living hell. What an awful community that is.)

Councilperson Karen Conison: “I love the idea of us coming up with some questions and with some answers…”
(Not helping, not doing her duty as the people’s representative.)

Graham: “Yea, that’s a good idea.”

Conison: “…because, just recently, I mean, this kind of hit close to home, is, my parents were, code enforcement came to their house, their grass was, terrifically high, Mark will attest to that, because I mowed it, um, and he received a citation (her elderly father) but didn’t quite understand what the citation really meant or what it did, and you know,…”

Ogden: “let’s clear up, it was a notice, not a cita…”

Conison: Right, it was a notice, it was a notice, but, right away he said to me, I was cited and I have to pay two hundred dollars or whatever it was and I said to him, I go, that doesn’t sound quite right, and…”

Maggard: “Mmmm-hmmm.”

Conison: “So, I went over and I was, basically read it for him but, maybe a little simpler than what was on there, so I think a question/answer would be good for our citizens, I think a lot of times, you know, I think you put more into things anyhow because it is so personal for you…”
(A story that added nothing to the core issue nor ensured the citizen’s rights are being maintained.)

Maggard: “Right.”

Conison: “If you’ve received something and you’re so upset about it because its your property…”

Maggard: “Yeah.”

Conison: “So, I think something like that would be a great idea…(inaudible)”

Ogden: “I’d be perfectly willing to draft something up, you know, if its just a matter, how do you, how do you communicate? We have the, we put a lot of things on the website…”

Conison: “Right.”

Ogden: “We do have the guides that go out annually, and so, we’re a age of technology where we have the ability to get information out there, so, you know, whatever we can do because our goal is education. Nothing makes us happier than if we do see a violation, whether we’ve seen it or whether its been reported to us or whatever, and we’ve given that person notice, explained what the violation is, given pictures to make sure they know what the violation is and, started that communication and then we go out there, we see that issue has been resolved, that’s a feather in our cap, not writin’ a frickin’ ticket…”

(I’m so glad herding the citizens like sheep to comply with a litany of man-made rules makes him so happy. Apparently, people don’t have rights to live their organic lives, they only have as many rights as the city affords them. The rest is bundled up and served to them like a text book to “educate’ them on precisely how to live their own lives.)

Kantor: “Right.”

Ogden: “…because that’s the worst case scenario.”

Bailey: (inaudible)

LaCorte: “(inaudible) trespassing.”

Bailey: “Well, with the grass alone, that’s a three to four week cycle before anybody gets cited. Once they’re warned, they got seven days to cut it anyway. And he’s not writing people up for eight inches, its closer to ten, sometimes a foot.”

(Defending the code division again and discussing something which has nothing to do with the core issue.)

Kantor: (laughs)

Bailey: “All those folks on that grass cutting list, (makes a ‘chhhhh’ sound) go cry somewhere else.”

(Councilperson Bailey has shown himself for the authoritarian he is and his obvious preference for Whitehall city government over its citizens.)

LaCorte: “Maybe we can work on something on the trespassing (inaudible)”

(Still trying valiantly to do something about the issue she brought to the table in the face of people who obviously don’t want it to be dealt with, as shown through the dominance of their interrupted, unrelated tangents and fountains of praise and/or with their silence on this important matter.)

Gregg: (inaudible)

(inaudible chatter)

Graham: (in a quieter, more hushed tone towards Councilperson LaCorte) “Leslie…it’s not trespassing.”

(Here is how Mr. Graham is wrong;

Trespassing is defined as; ‘An unlawful intrusion that interferes with one’s person or property.’

Again, taking the 4^th amendment and Camara v Municipal Court into account, re; 4^th amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized. Camara v Municipal Court: With certain carefully defined exceptions, an unconsented warrantless search of private property is “unreasonable”.”

“one governing principal, justified by history and by current experience, has consistently been followed: except in certain carefully defined classes of cases, a search of private property without proper consent is “unreasonable” unless it has been authorized by a valid search warrant.”

“…the possibility of criminal entry under the guise of official sanction is a serious threat to personal and family security.”

“…broad statutory safeguards are no substitute for individualized review.” (meaning that not all grass can be “inspected” across the board. That that alone is not sufficient reason to consider each case individually)

Therefore, if trespassing is an unlawful intrusion that interferes with one’s person or property and the 4^th amendment guarantees people to be secure in their persons and effects against unreasonable searches and ‘Camara’ states that unconsented warrantless searches are unreasonable, then… any foot stepped onto private property in Whitehall by code officers, unconsented and warrantless, would be trespass, per the law.

One wonders then what criteria it was that Council President Jim Graham used to conclude for Councilperson LaCorte that it wasn’t trespass?)

LaCorte: (also whispering)”Well, I know, but, you know what…”

(Does she know?)

Bailey: (joining in on their hushed conversation) “Hey, he’s (meaning me) gone through every one of us.”

(Very disrespectful of Councilperson Bailey to diminish my efforts to right wrongs for the citizen’s sake. As said before, if you are not immersed in the shower of kisses and rose petals they give each other then you’re persona non grata. If I’ve had to go through so many councilpersons to be heard or find resolution for that which I’ve found so troubling and meritorious to address, what does it say about them that nothing has changed or been properly addressed? It is absurd to think that I would be so dogged, as a singular citizen, to fight an entire city over several years, along with the toll such a confrontation would take on me, if the merit of my focus was empty and worthless.)

Maggard: (having heard Graham, chimes in) “Yeah, its not.”

(See above movement of laws and reasoned conclusion)

LaCorte: “Yea, I know, but, you know what…”

Bailey: “At some point you just say (inaudible)”

(No, Councilman Bailey, at some point you stop defending your friends and start defending the citizen’s rights.)

LaCorte: “When you can’t say “I’m right or wrong” or “we’re right or wrong”, I don’t like that.”

Maggard: “If we go into a home, then, and if we don’t have a warrant to go into that home, that’s trespassing. However, if it’s on the property and we’ve sent notice and nothing’s being done and it’s a health issue then we are allowed to go onto their property and even high grass and brush, especially around those creeks, and the rats can go in and out, un…”

(She is trying to convince LaCorte why she is wrong in her position. However, it is incorrect, as per Camara v Municipal Court. It specifically mentions ‘private property’ ‘searching private property’. There was no warrant issued to search that property with or without rats, none of which I or my family has seen in the 50 years living next to Turkey Run.)

Kantor: “Coyotes.”

(Not helping… hindering.)

Maggard: “We need to get in there and mow that stuff down. So, that’s actually a health hazard and we can get on.” (Has anybody specifically spotted and anonymously alerted code enforcement or is this vermin problem an assumption on their part?)

Kantor: “Thank-you Ray.”

(Shameless. ‘Mr. Dixon is terrible for having challenged their behavior with reason and logic. The real heroes here are the unsung workers toiling for pennies at City Hall like Ray Ogden and his code officers. Sorry for this affront to your jobs boys. No thanks from any councilpersons for this citizen though. Those are reserved only for each other)

Councilman Leo Knoblauch: “I’d also encourage people to go to our website and look at the ordinances. That’s what I always do when…”

(Councilman Knoblauch finally enters the conversation, not to steer the topic back to a relevant place but only to offer up advice unrelated to the topic at hand.)

Bailey: “Its all right there. Its all there.”
(Get to studying citizens! They should retitle the codes, ‘How To Live Your Life; The Whitehall Way!’)

Knoblauch: “Yea. Now sometimes its kind of hard to find (inaudible, with laughter) …cause some of, the search is not always the best in the world.”

(not on point)

Conison: “But, I know what you mean because you were saying, you know, how do you communicate it, you know, I mean, not everybody does go out to the website, not everybody does go to the city guide so it is, you know, it is…”

(Not advocating for the citizen’s rights)

Maggard: “Yeah.”

Conison: “…very hard to communicate out to all of our citizens, it is something that we will need to think about and work on and…”

(Not supporting the Constitution)

Maggard: “We definitely are gonna work on that Karen. I’ve been doing some research and just some other, how other cities do it and there’s different ways and I’m, Ray is willing to work with us, we’re going to make our information more assessable and hopefully more easy to understand. We can put it out there, but we can’t understand it for them, they have to take that effort to do that themselves. We can say it but we can’t understand it for them, however there’s different avenues in which we can get that message out there.

(Not changing policy which is immoral, harmful or detrimental to citizen’s and their rights. That she doesn’t care about!)

Graham: “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. So you can put all the information on the internet or in the guides or anyplace but if people don’t take the time to look at it, that’s where the problem come in.”

(This adds nothing to a serious dialogue nor accomplishes anything.)

LaCorte: “I have no desire to read it. (laughs) I’m sorry…”

(general laughter and cross talk)

(This is very sad. Councilperson LaCorte delivers the death blow to the topic herself with this utterance. Her defeat is so complete at this point she jumps on their bandwagon for the purpose of amiable relations and no longer feeling ‘in the middle’. She alone doesn’t have the strength to fight the lot of them. They have bullied her into coming over to ‘their’ side. A shame.)

Maggard: “Well, people are so busy. It takes time to do that. People are busy.”

Graham: “Right, right.”

(They convivially welcome her to their side with this pleasant, welcoming chatter)

LaCorte: “That’s not luxury reading, I’m sorry.”

(To agree with them, I don’t think anyone has read all of them. Their volume alone makes them daunting)

@ 19:29:35 Council President Jim Graham calls on the Infrastructure, Maintenance Services Chairperson Gregg but says, “Infrastructure, Maintenance, Service and Code Enforcement Chairperson Gregg.” There is then stifled laughter among several at the table.

@19:31:23 Councilperson Wes Kantor finishes speaking regarding youth soccer as part of the Parks and Recreation Committee.

Graham: “Is that like code enforcement?”

Kantor: “Yea, code enforcement.”

Maggard: (laughs)

(The meeting finishes out with the awful Gerald Dixon gone from their presence, only friendly faces now, with Council President Jim Graham making attempts at humor with mocking allusions to code enforcement in otherwise misplaced areas of the meeting, to stifled delight and laughter. The laughter of Kim Maggard is clearly audible)

** Four of the factors used to determine whether to classify the area as curtilage include:

1. The distance from the home to the place claimed to be curtilage (the closer the home is, the more likely to be curtilage);
2. Whether the area claimed to be curtilage is included within an enclosure surrounding the home;
3. The natire of use to which the area is put (if it is the site of domestic activities, it is more likely to be a part of the curtilage); and
4. The steps taken by the resident to protect the area from observation by people passing by (shielding from public view will favor finding the portion is curtilage).