Question

The following letter was submitted to a number
of newspapers around the state for publication in
their "letters to the editor."

I am facing a decision whether to pursue an
appeal in the federal courts. It is a costly and
time consuming exercise to undertake. Or
should I permit very bad case law to
permanently do the following.

First: Decide the entire issue of “fee for service”
as opposed to penalty or tax in favor of
municipalities any time they write “This is a fee
for service” into any ridiculous ordinance they
decide to pass. The effect of this is to strip most
of the protections against fund raising initiatives
presently forbidden by Michigan’s Headlee
Amendment and the Bolt vs. Lansing case.

Second: Strip some significant protections of
the 14th Amendment. Municipalities and states
would to longer have to take you before a judge
in order to demand payment for a parking or
speeding ticket or ordinance violation. There’s
a speed limit sign posted, you were speeding,
pay the penalty, no court is necessary! Under
the new federal court judgment, they can simply
write an ordinance requiring payment in 30 days.
If not paid, they would be allowed to charge that
penalty against your water bill. Then, if that’s
not paid, it will go against your property taxes,
and the county treasurer will collect. You’ll
eventually pay the penalty, even when you
weren’t responsible in the first place. Maybe
the police officer wrote down a wrong license
plate number. You’ll have no option other than
to pay, but wouldn’t that streamline the courts
and make things easy for the cities?

The case is #2:10-cv-114 in the Western District
of Michigan. Google “Vajk v. Iron River” to access
the judgment in question. I’d appreciate your
opinion mailed to me at 413 Plum Street, Iron
River MI 49935. Thanks. Bill and Gloria Vajk


Bill Vajk