Melissa Powell Weston

William J. Vajk
US2 Highway
Iron River MI 49935
22 July 2008

Melissa Powell Weston
Iron County Prosecutor
2 South 6th Street
Crystal Falls MI 49920

Dear Ms. Powell Weston:

I had previously asked Joseph Sartorelli to forward my request to the
Michigan Attorney General for some Iron River Township ordinances. I
present a new similar request relating to two specific Iron River
Michigan ordinances, attached, with an eye to preventing the necessity
of a massive class action lawsuit which most of the probable targeted
upper peninsula municipalities will not be able to afford to defend
against within their current budgets.

I ask that your office forward the context of this request to the
Michigan Attorney General for his opinion. The Attorney General
declines to respond to requests made by ordinary citizens while
reserving comment to questions posed by state officials.

City of Iron River Ordinance 52.64 has to do with charging property
owners whose premises are connected to the water mains in Iron River
but who are consuming no water because the service is shut off at the
curb stop.

This section fails to comply with the fundamental fairness demanded by
the US Constitution and imposed on the states through the 14th
amendment thereto. In addition, since there is no actual service being
provided to the customer in exchange for this charge it constitutes an
illegal and discriminatory tax. Please see National Cable Television
Ass'n v. United States, 415 U.S. 336, 94 S.Ct. 1146, 39 L.Ed.2d 370 in
which the Supreme Court has effectively stipulated a method of
determining the fairness of charges by a federal agency not authorized
to create and impose taxes related to the service provided, in this
instance, none. While that decision is not imposed on state and
municipal agencies, the legal concept is identical in all respects. A
property owner only receives that benefit from being connected to the
water system which he already paid as fees at the time the original
connection was made. This ordinance is outrageous yet it is duplicated
by other municipalities in the region pending legal challenge.
Further, municipal governments are prohibited by state law from
establishing taxes not authorized by statute. If a municipal
government is imposing charges without providing service in exchange
it cannot be anything other than a tax regardless of whatever the
municipality decides to label the charges.

The undersigned has paid this so called fee to the city of Iron River
under protest for several years.

City of Iron River Ordinance 91.31 et seq. is at first blush
constitutionally vague. Despite the fact that grass was mowed at 413
Plum Street, Iron River, on or about April 29th, the City of Iron
River mowed the grass again on or about 16 June without giving notice
or opportunity to object that the requirements of the ordinance had
been met. The city is unable to determine whether the ordinance
requirements have been met by a property owner. The determination by
the Public Works Foreman when the grass becomes "unsightly" without
further guidance is constitutionally vague. If the ordinance provided
a fixed length of grass that is unacceptable then the determination
could be made in a reasonable manner.

Furthermore the ordinance requires that "it shall be the duty of every
person who owns any lands within the corporate limits of the city
to....." A person is defined under section 91.30 as "One or more
persons of either sex, firms, corporations, partnerships,
associations, unincorporated voluntary clubs, and associations."

The city enforces section 91.31 et seq. on a capricious and arbitrary
basis all the while failing, as a corporate entity itself, to mow
grass on public properties directly under its control. The second
question regarding this ordinance is whether the city can legally
enforce an ordinance which it itself ignores, and clearly ignores
where it comes to friends of the city administration.

Ms. Powell Weston, I am taking you at your word that you wish to
continue to work with state and local officials to better Iron County
(please see Iron County Reporter 23 July 2008 pg. 5.) Sending this
request for an opinion to the Michigan Attorney General would
demonstrate that you are a person who keeps their promises. The total
cost to you is the few minutes it will take to compose and submit your
version of the legal questions. I look forward to hearing your
decision for this request in the next few days.

Sincerely,