Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Pixie Dust

For those of you who are receiving this by mail,
please be advised at the outset of several things.
1) This is a different take from the discussion I
sent to you earlier. Some parts are, of necessity,
repetitious, but the principles underlying this
essay are new and different. 2)  THIS IS NOT 
reason for writing this essay is to get people
thinking about Michigan’s political and economic
problems in a way that can lead to change resulting
in prosperity and economic success that has been
unavailable in this state for quite some time while
other regions are progressing very nicely. The
broader the base of this discussion the better the
outcome is likely to be. 4) This essay is concurrently
being published on the internet at Iron County Doings.
5) This is one of many discussions on this topic.

In the case of Vajk v. City of Iron River, Michigan
Supreme Court Docket No. 150015, the Court of
Appeals had rendered in its opinion that:

“Plaintiff provides no authority from which it may be
inferred that, by turning off the water at the curbstop,
the City is released from its continuing obligation to
maintain capacity to provide water and sewer services
to the Plum Street property should plaintiff or a
successor owner request resumption of the water
supply. Under such circumstances, plaintiff receives
the benefit of the use of the municipal water distribution
and sanitary systems, albeit to a lesser degree than
other users of these systems, and the City’s allocation
of maintenance costs to those like plaintiff who are
connected to those systems constitute a fee for
service for the purposes of the Headlee Amendment.”

What then Court of Appeals stated, albeit indirectly,
is that my current activities are permissibly regulated,
under the guise of police powers of the City of Iron
River, based on my prophesied future activity, or
that of some unknown future owner of my property
on Plum Street. Regulation, in this instance, is charging
me the same as any consumer of water in Iron River
although I am shut off, by the city, at the curbstop.

It doesn’t seem to matter to Michigan Courts that
the US Supreme Court disagrees, Michigan hasn’t
been carrying through with its promises for some
time. So why start now despite the fact that this
failure helps drive the economic failure of the State?

“The proposition that Congress may dictate the
conduct of an individual today because of prophesied
future activity finds no support in our precedent.”
Nat. Fedn. of Indep. Business v. Sebelius, 
132 S. Ct. 2566, 2590, 2012.

No sane person who grew up in the western world
needs to have this explained to them. Would you bring
a new business to Michigan if the state can regulate your
activities today based on what they think you might do
in the future? No one but a fool would consider such
a possibility. The Court of Appeals appears to be using
pixie dust in order to try to save, and validate Iron River’s
ordinances that collect money for providing no services
whatsoever as a police regulation. United States Courts
have instilled in them to try to validate laws passed by
governing bodies. The principle is sound, but the practice
isn’t when the governing body is not working on behalf
of the public it is sworn to serve, but corruptly relies
instead on parlor games to sidestep constitutions.

We’re not going to be able to legitimately succeed or fail
as a state until the Headlee Amendment is enforced as it
was intended and written. It isn’t so much Headlee itself,
but the behavior of Michigan governments that comes into
play. Right now, the kludge that’s holding it all together is
a system of lies and corruption extending from the lowest
municipal levels of government through every level of all
three branches of state government.

When government promises certain things, then delivers
only what they feel like doing, investment flees. So talk
with your peers about this simple problem that Michigan
does not deliver what the state promises, and lets all
work together to change how this state does business
so we can progress together. Are we part of the United
States or not? When a state court system defies the US
Supreme Court, it sure doesn’t seem like we are.

Bill Vajk    July 15, 2015

Blog Archive