(I have published this story elsewhere as well.)
Monday, August 17, 2009
Yes, dammit, they are actually pulling the plug on Grandpa.
And it isn't the first time either.
When my father died in 1980 I wasn't prepared to be fatherless,
and I was fortunate to meet Alex Zelchenko who became a truly
remarkable friend as well as something of a surrogate father.
Alex lives on Lincoln Avenue, in Chicago.
When Alex was 90 years old, he had some neurological problems
along with gall bladder difficulties. They discovered that he
had some sort of growth in his lung, and another in his brain.
They took care of the gall bladder with an endoscopic extraction
of some gallstones. Alex refused regular abdominal surgery
because his own father had unexpectedly died during an
identical gall bladder surgery. He was ready to fight to live.
But when it came to the tumors, the medical profession and
Medicare wrote him off. Effectively they pulled the plug. They
refused to do anything, even to follow through and properly
diagnose what those growths were, and sent him home to meet
whatever fate befell him without diagnosis let along any medical
intervention.
Now Alex is 95 years old. He has moments of "normalcy"
and longer periods of old age dementia. Or is it? What would
his quality of life be had they diagnosed that growth in his
brain growth and treated it?
In the meantime he had a brain aneurysm that his wife insisted
must be treated. But his wife is now hospitalized with her own
issues, and a dysfunctional family created such a stink with
infighting among themselves that the court appointed not only
a guardian ad litem but also a medical guardian for Alex and
his wife, Phyllis, who is somewhat younger than Alex.
Alex had a series of neurological symptoms about a week ago.
The medical guardian, appointed by the Illinois courts, said sure,
admit him for diagnosis.
They found a brain tumor again, and a growth in his lung, but they
can't be bothered even to compare the growths to the records of
5 years ago, when they wrote him off the last time.
Who would have thought Alex would survive another 5 years? And
who would have thought he'd actually be able to enjoy those 5 years
in relatively good health for most of that period. Last time it was
the doctors who refused to go further with diagnosis and
treatment, this time, to our collective social shame, it is the state.
Son Gregory, who has an interest (with a degree in) biology and
health asked to look at the films. The court appointed medical
guardian said, "I'm not going to permit you to play doctor."
Why? Are power and control issues more important than doing
the best for Alex? And here I thought a medical guardian is
supposed to stand in the person's shoes, making decisions
for them, without any other considerations! An advocate. Isn't
this medical guardian supposed to be an advocate?
Oh. No. It is because the medical guardian has pulled the plug
on Alex because he's 95 years old and he's supposed to be
dead already. Who the hell is the medical guardian working for
anyway? Perhaps it is inconvenient to the state that Alex is
still alive? Is that the problem? Is that why they are withholding
diagnosis and treatment, now for a second time?
What kind of quality of life can a 95 year old have? Perhaps
the state doesn't consider it worth our time. Alex worked well
past retirement age, and paid into the system much more than
his fair share.
But he's 95 years old, and there's no one, with authority, looking
out for him in his old age.
Folks, this is your future, unless you fix the problem. It doesn't
matter what President Obama says. When the moment of decision
comes, they will pull the plug on Grandma, just like they're doing to
Alex. And some day it will be you.
Bill Vajk
Monday, August 17, 2009
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Talking the Talk Without Walking the Walk
I attended most of the "Americans for Freedom"
meeting at Bates Township Hall this evening.
Unfortunately the arthritis in my neck flared
up (it has been doing that, I have a surgical
consult scheduled in September) and I was forced,
by pain, to leave before the Q&A period at the end.
I look forward to hearing what went on from someone
who stayed to the end.
That being said, I have a few comments to make.
The main speaker ended up being Dan Stafford,
former Iron River Township treasurer, addressing
many of the problems we, the citizens, are
presently experiencing with the political bunch
in Washington. He made a couple of comments that
hit home with anyone who was paying attention
to "how things really work."
Dan addressed his problem of having a really bad
upset stomach before the Township Board meetings
because he knew there was always going to be a
fight.
He went on to discuss how the politicians at the
federal level aren't looking out for citizens'
interests but have their own agenda.
I guess it was not obvious to Dan that the reason
why he was having all those fights at the Iron
River Township Board meetings was because he was
not doing what the electorate wanted him to do!
I stopped attending the meetings (I was attending
them when I first moved to Iron County) because I
considered the fights to be inane, and the board
was, in my opinion, unresponsive. I knew that
all that could and would happen was that I would
lose my temper to no avail.
One of Dan's points during his speech to the
assembled group was that we need a reduction in
the size and scope of the federal government.
Let's take a look at the Township Board's
performance during the period he was the
treasurer.
Here's the unreserved fund balance reported
for the period:
2004 $ 844,729
2005 862.478
2006 918,397
2007 1,015,357
2008 1,157,425
Stafford did not run for re-election in
the November 2008 election. But the fund
continues to grow.
June 30,2009 1,167,622
This is all with an increase in taxes of 2 mils
that the township has tried, in two elections,
to get renewed, with a threat that they would
continue to place this on every ballot till it
gets passed. AND along with this was a
significant increase in the water bill for all
who are being thus served.
And then the current board has the audacity to
refuse to make repairs to a Township owned
building, Beechwood Hall, asking the voters
to approve an additional tax to make needed
repairs. This is the sort of irresponsibility
that will lead to demolition of a perfectly
useful facility after it becomes a blight,
because of personal bias by board members
against the use of this building by west end
Beechwood residents.
In the end, it is apparent that Dan Stafford
preaches a different story from the one that
he himself lives. It is different from the
personal agenda he imposed on Township
residents while he held political office. He
talks the talk, but he does not walk the walk.
As they say in Brooklyn, "So what else is new?"
That's not to say that what Dan said didn't make
good sense, it did. I find it sad that even
while knowing what "should be," he was unable to
deliver it.
This, unfortunately, seems to be the general case
in politics today.
Bill Vajk
meeting at Bates Township Hall this evening.
Unfortunately the arthritis in my neck flared
up (it has been doing that, I have a surgical
consult scheduled in September) and I was forced,
by pain, to leave before the Q&A period at the end.
I look forward to hearing what went on from someone
who stayed to the end.
That being said, I have a few comments to make.
The main speaker ended up being Dan Stafford,
former Iron River Township treasurer, addressing
many of the problems we, the citizens, are
presently experiencing with the political bunch
in Washington. He made a couple of comments that
hit home with anyone who was paying attention
to "how things really work."
Dan addressed his problem of having a really bad
upset stomach before the Township Board meetings
because he knew there was always going to be a
fight.
He went on to discuss how the politicians at the
federal level aren't looking out for citizens'
interests but have their own agenda.
I guess it was not obvious to Dan that the reason
why he was having all those fights at the Iron
River Township Board meetings was because he was
not doing what the electorate wanted him to do!
I stopped attending the meetings (I was attending
them when I first moved to Iron County) because I
considered the fights to be inane, and the board
was, in my opinion, unresponsive. I knew that
all that could and would happen was that I would
lose my temper to no avail.
One of Dan's points during his speech to the
assembled group was that we need a reduction in
the size and scope of the federal government.
Let's take a look at the Township Board's
performance during the period he was the
treasurer.
Here's the unreserved fund balance reported
for the period:
2004 $ 844,729
2005 862.478
2006 918,397
2007 1,015,357
2008 1,157,425
Stafford did not run for re-election in
the November 2008 election. But the fund
continues to grow.
June 30,2009 1,167,622
This is all with an increase in taxes of 2 mils
that the township has tried, in two elections,
to get renewed, with a threat that they would
continue to place this on every ballot till it
gets passed. AND along with this was a
significant increase in the water bill for all
who are being thus served.
And then the current board has the audacity to
refuse to make repairs to a Township owned
building, Beechwood Hall, asking the voters
to approve an additional tax to make needed
repairs. This is the sort of irresponsibility
that will lead to demolition of a perfectly
useful facility after it becomes a blight,
because of personal bias by board members
against the use of this building by west end
Beechwood residents.
In the end, it is apparent that Dan Stafford
preaches a different story from the one that
he himself lives. It is different from the
personal agenda he imposed on Township
residents while he held political office. He
talks the talk, but he does not walk the walk.
As they say in Brooklyn, "So what else is new?"
That's not to say that what Dan said didn't make
good sense, it did. I find it sad that even
while knowing what "should be," he was unable to
deliver it.
This, unfortunately, seems to be the general case
in politics today.
Bill Vajk
Thursday, August 13, 2009
WE Energies - Requested Rate Increases
There's only one word for this.
Wrongheaded.
We live in a capitalistic society. That means
that a firm trying to do business in this society
has shareholders who invest money in the basics
that constitute that business. Goods,
infrastructure, payroll, and whatever else is
necessary in any given instance. And sales are
designed to include profit, yielding the basic
reason for shareholder investment in the first
place.
The decision to invest in a new huge power
generating plant has a number of elements
driving the decision whether to build such a
facility or not.
First, is there either growth in demand for power
that will justify the investment based on increasing
sales? Or, the other justification, has the existing
infrastructure gotten so old that replacement is a
necessary expenditure?
Based on these two, the analysis either justifies
shareholder investment, or it does not.
WE Energies appears to have latched on to some other
criteria as justification to build a new power plant,
but cannot justify it under the only criteria that
makes any economic sense. So they now approach the
Public Service Commission in order to increase
utility rates to pay for a new power plant that is
an investment not available through the shareholders.
As an electrical energy consumer in the region served
by WE Energies I have a couple of very simple questions
to ask.
1) What am I getting in return for increased rates?
The answer is, nothing.
2) If I am paying for this generating power plant, where
is my return on the investment?
The answer is, it doesn't exist. This rate increase is
nothing more than a bottomless pit wanting to be filled.
WE Energies recommends their customers make changes to
power consumption habits in order to reduce our monthly
costs. But, if successfully implemented, what that results
in eventually is an overall reduction in consumption with
an accompanying request from WE Energies for another rate
increase in order to maintain former profit levels.
This request is nonsensical. The management and
shareholders want to increase production capacity
without increasing sales and to reach into customer
pockets to pay for this excess capacity that we
will not be utilizing.
Here's the hook you're looking for.
Once this excess capacity is available, WE Energies
will likely sell that power to other regions of the
country at lower rates than we are paying because
we are subsidizing the excess capacity. It will
likely be resold at retail through unregulated
utility companies where profit is not reportable
to any state regulatory agency, making this a scam
worthy of a Bernie Madoff.
I urge the Wisconsin and Michigan regulatory agencies
to thoroughly investigate interlocking boards of
directors between WE Energies and unregulated
electrical power providing utilities in other
states.
In the meantime, I urge the Michigan Public Service
Commission to deny the rate increases requested for
the addition of this coal fired generating facility
by WE Energies.
Bill Vajk
Wrongheaded.
We live in a capitalistic society. That means
that a firm trying to do business in this society
has shareholders who invest money in the basics
that constitute that business. Goods,
infrastructure, payroll, and whatever else is
necessary in any given instance. And sales are
designed to include profit, yielding the basic
reason for shareholder investment in the first
place.
The decision to invest in a new huge power
generating plant has a number of elements
driving the decision whether to build such a
facility or not.
First, is there either growth in demand for power
that will justify the investment based on increasing
sales? Or, the other justification, has the existing
infrastructure gotten so old that replacement is a
necessary expenditure?
Based on these two, the analysis either justifies
shareholder investment, or it does not.
WE Energies appears to have latched on to some other
criteria as justification to build a new power plant,
but cannot justify it under the only criteria that
makes any economic sense. So they now approach the
Public Service Commission in order to increase
utility rates to pay for a new power plant that is
an investment not available through the shareholders.
As an electrical energy consumer in the region served
by WE Energies I have a couple of very simple questions
to ask.
1) What am I getting in return for increased rates?
The answer is, nothing.
2) If I am paying for this generating power plant, where
is my return on the investment?
The answer is, it doesn't exist. This rate increase is
nothing more than a bottomless pit wanting to be filled.
WE Energies recommends their customers make changes to
power consumption habits in order to reduce our monthly
costs. But, if successfully implemented, what that results
in eventually is an overall reduction in consumption with
an accompanying request from WE Energies for another rate
increase in order to maintain former profit levels.
This request is nonsensical. The management and
shareholders want to increase production capacity
without increasing sales and to reach into customer
pockets to pay for this excess capacity that we
will not be utilizing.
Here's the hook you're looking for.
Once this excess capacity is available, WE Energies
will likely sell that power to other regions of the
country at lower rates than we are paying because
we are subsidizing the excess capacity. It will
likely be resold at retail through unregulated
utility companies where profit is not reportable
to any state regulatory agency, making this a scam
worthy of a Bernie Madoff.
I urge the Wisconsin and Michigan regulatory agencies
to thoroughly investigate interlocking boards of
directors between WE Energies and unregulated
electrical power providing utilities in other
states.
In the meantime, I urge the Michigan Public Service
Commission to deny the rate increases requested for
the addition of this coal fired generating facility
by WE Energies.
Bill Vajk
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Nationalization, don't be fooled by the silence
Despite all the pretty words wrapped around the
so called bailout of General Motors and Chrysler,
the simple fact is that they have become
nationalized. Such a move was unthinkable in any
time period in United States history other than
right now.
Imagine.
Nationalized.
That's a word that is reserved to communism and
communist nations, not democracies.
OK, that's done.
At the present moment, most of the residents of
United States are strongly engaged in the
arguments over nationalizing health care. That's
right, nationalizing.
First they try to sell the idea of a single payer
insurance system, that being the US government.
But in the end, as reimbursement for services is
cut, the only way to have a health care system at
all is to take over the day to day operation of
the whole thing. That means the US government will
end up owing and operating every doctor's office,
every hospital, and every lab. Nationalized with
the US government, that is all of us, their
employers.
The system that has to result from the government
running the insurance end of the medical business
will end up looking like the failed eastern European
health care branches of government.
One has to take pause for a moment and ask, "why
copy a failed system?"
It is a matter of power and control. The USA has
no direct experience with communism and socialism,
so it appears we, as a people, are going to be
forced to taste it.
Eastern Europe had a really difficult time with
democratization, including getting rid of nationalized
health care. Our stupid American communists continue
to believe in the righteousness of that system, and
those who don't recognize the government takeover
of the nation's means of production, and health care,
and shortly energy (using cap and trade) are dupes
and fools.
Republicans have failed the nation. Democrats are on
the verge of doing so.
Political theory holds that there is a predictable
sequence on the types of governance for any given
nation. Beginning with monarchy, that evolves into
democracy. Eventually socialism, then communism
takes root, and if at all possible, anarchy, until
a strong man grabs power as a dictator.
It looks like we're going to skip past socialism
quickly enough and head straight into communism. I
wonder how fast the US will cycle through before
we get back to democracy once again and, most
important of all, will 200+ years of successful
history have any effect at all? This bunch in the
white house and congress are completely ignoring
history.
Those of you depending on veteran's benefits for
health care, how long do you think that's going to
stay in effect once the government takes over health
care? One nation, one people, one health care system.
It has to happen. Don't be fooled by the silence.
Bill Vajk
so called bailout of General Motors and Chrysler,
the simple fact is that they have become
nationalized. Such a move was unthinkable in any
time period in United States history other than
right now.
Imagine.
Nationalized.
That's a word that is reserved to communism and
communist nations, not democracies.
OK, that's done.
At the present moment, most of the residents of
United States are strongly engaged in the
arguments over nationalizing health care. That's
right, nationalizing.
First they try to sell the idea of a single payer
insurance system, that being the US government.
But in the end, as reimbursement for services is
cut, the only way to have a health care system at
all is to take over the day to day operation of
the whole thing. That means the US government will
end up owing and operating every doctor's office,
every hospital, and every lab. Nationalized with
the US government, that is all of us, their
employers.
The system that has to result from the government
running the insurance end of the medical business
will end up looking like the failed eastern European
health care branches of government.
One has to take pause for a moment and ask, "why
copy a failed system?"
It is a matter of power and control. The USA has
no direct experience with communism and socialism,
so it appears we, as a people, are going to be
forced to taste it.
Eastern Europe had a really difficult time with
democratization, including getting rid of nationalized
health care. Our stupid American communists continue
to believe in the righteousness of that system, and
those who don't recognize the government takeover
of the nation's means of production, and health care,
and shortly energy (using cap and trade) are dupes
and fools.
Republicans have failed the nation. Democrats are on
the verge of doing so.
Political theory holds that there is a predictable
sequence on the types of governance for any given
nation. Beginning with monarchy, that evolves into
democracy. Eventually socialism, then communism
takes root, and if at all possible, anarchy, until
a strong man grabs power as a dictator.
It looks like we're going to skip past socialism
quickly enough and head straight into communism. I
wonder how fast the US will cycle through before
we get back to democracy once again and, most
important of all, will 200+ years of successful
history have any effect at all? This bunch in the
white house and congress are completely ignoring
history.
Those of you depending on veteran's benefits for
health care, how long do you think that's going to
stay in effect once the government takes over health
care? One nation, one people, one health care system.
It has to happen. Don't be fooled by the silence.
Bill Vajk
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Michigan Municipal League - Page 2
Please take a look at the Michigan Municipal League (MML)
advocacy page at:
http://capwiz.com/mml/issues/bills/?state=MI
There are all sorts of issues that concern municipalities
as well as plenty that don't. Take, for example, SB 986
SB 986
Bill #: SB986
Year: 2007
Bill Summary:
"Bridges that are properly funded first are the
fractured critical bridges. All other bridges
will be put at the bottom of the list."
The MML opposes this bill, a bill that places
public safety before political and financial
considerations. Here is clear evidence that MML
is placing municipal interests above those of the
public the cities, and ultimately they, are
supposed to be serving.
They also oppose SB 1434:
SB 1434
Bill #: SB1434
Year: 2008
Bill Summary:
** Pending Board Approval
"States there would be no driver's license fee
if a person is at 125% poverty level."
What difference does it make to MML and the cities
if whether the state charges our poorest citizens
for a driver's license or gives it to them free?
Doesn't having a driver's license give a poor person
a better chance of getting a job?
It appears that despite their claim to being a
non-profit organization, the MML has been violating
IRS rules by being highly an active political lobbyist
organization.
Bill Vajk
advocacy page at:
http://capwiz.com/mml/issues/bills/?state=MI
There are all sorts of issues that concern municipalities
as well as plenty that don't. Take, for example, SB 986
SB 986
Bill #: SB986
Year: 2007
Bill Summary:
"Bridges that are properly funded first are the
fractured critical bridges. All other bridges
will be put at the bottom of the list."
The MML opposes this bill, a bill that places
public safety before political and financial
considerations. Here is clear evidence that MML
is placing municipal interests above those of the
public the cities, and ultimately they, are
supposed to be serving.
They also oppose SB 1434:
SB 1434
Bill #: SB1434
Year: 2008
Bill Summary:
** Pending Board Approval
"States there would be no driver's license fee
if a person is at 125% poverty level."
What difference does it make to MML and the cities
if whether the state charges our poorest citizens
for a driver's license or gives it to them free?
Doesn't having a driver's license give a poor person
a better chance of getting a job?
It appears that despite their claim to being a
non-profit organization, the MML has been violating
IRS rules by being highly an active political lobbyist
organization.
Bill Vajk
July 2009 Iron River Documents - Comment
I received an email with ideas regarding the
article on this subject and it is worth some
discussion. The sender asked that their name not
be used, and so it is not. This article is an
opinion piece and offered as opinions offered
by individuals.
Next, email, with my comments following:
=========================================================
Hello Bill,
No surprise with the resolution on the middle school.
Past history bears out how the school district Iron
River, Stambaugh and now maybe West Iron disposed of
its no longer needed property. The Central School
being the latest and the Lincoln School before.
The Lincoln School was sold to a private individual
who stripped it what he wanted and then was left for
years in disrepair until he was told to raze the
structure or the city would. He razed the building
and left the rubble were you see it now if you drive
by.
The Central School was sold to a prominent individual
who with his sons used it for storage and also stripped
it for their needs. He sold to a (descriptive deleted)
in IR who could not keep it in repair and the city
picked it up and you know the story from there.
As for Nelson field, the schools (Stambaugh and Iron
River) and now West Iron never had a field of their
own and relied on Stambaugh and now Iron River to rent
them Nelson. I do believe West Iron is the only school
district not to have their own football field etc. The
city as in the Managers' report has been waiving or
reducing the rent for a number of years. Now that the
city wants to have the full cost of the rent restored,
the school is calling FOUL.. I do believe they should
pay or no play.
Interesting doc on delinquent tax payment and who or
whom might be trying to retain some money because of
their shortfall. The shortfall being speculation on
my part and the county being in the need of cash to
pay bills??
Yours,
(signature withheld by request)
PS I would prefer that my name not be made known.
Thanks
===========================================================
Several of us discussing this as we phone one
another or meet about town have a problem with
the city's resolution as a form of an attempted
restraint imposed by one taxing unit of local
government upon another at the same political
level.
The history above has no bearing on future acts.
We must assume that the West Iron school boards
of the past and their administrations acted in
good faith. No one can ask more than that. The
subsequent history of the former Lincoln and
Central schools is not the responsibility of
the school board, past or present.
The only thing I'm aware of that has liability
reverting to the last known responsible party
is, for some quirky reason, a ladder.
If the City of Iron River is so very concerned
about the Middle School building, then the
hands on responsibly preventive mechanism would
be for the City to procure the property themselves
and see to its disposition as they see fit. I
understand there's an amount of money in the
School District's budget for one year's
maintenance.
If the city takes the building over and cannot,
within some predetermined time frame, find a
suitable owner/tenant then the city will have
some funds available, from the maintenance fund,
towards tearing the building down and holding
the property, a prime commercial site, for future
sale for use once the local economy improves. Or
sell it now at a small price to a land speculator
and start to immediately collect property taxes.
We're talking about an 80 year old building with
all the problems that age entails. I understand
that presently the roof needs repair or replace-
ment. That's not an inexpensive item on a multi-
story building of this size.
There is a sense, repeated to me by others, that
if a reliable purchaser cannot be found promptly,
the building should be demolished.
Bill Vajk
article on this subject and it is worth some
discussion. The sender asked that their name not
be used, and so it is not. This article is an
opinion piece and offered as opinions offered
by individuals.
Next, email, with my comments following:
=========================================================
Hello Bill,
No surprise with the resolution on the middle school.
Past history bears out how the school district Iron
River, Stambaugh and now maybe West Iron disposed of
its no longer needed property. The Central School
being the latest and the Lincoln School before.
The Lincoln School was sold to a private individual
who stripped it what he wanted and then was left for
years in disrepair until he was told to raze the
structure or the city would. He razed the building
and left the rubble were you see it now if you drive
by.
The Central School was sold to a prominent individual
who with his sons used it for storage and also stripped
it for their needs. He sold to a (descriptive deleted)
in IR who could not keep it in repair and the city
picked it up and you know the story from there.
As for Nelson field, the schools (Stambaugh and Iron
River) and now West Iron never had a field of their
own and relied on Stambaugh and now Iron River to rent
them Nelson. I do believe West Iron is the only school
district not to have their own football field etc. The
city as in the Managers' report has been waiving or
reducing the rent for a number of years. Now that the
city wants to have the full cost of the rent restored,
the school is calling FOUL.. I do believe they should
pay or no play.
Interesting doc on delinquent tax payment and who or
whom might be trying to retain some money because of
their shortfall. The shortfall being speculation on
my part and the county being in the need of cash to
pay bills??
Yours,
(signature withheld by request)
PS I would prefer that my name not be made known.
Thanks
===========================================================
Several of us discussing this as we phone one
another or meet about town have a problem with
the city's resolution as a form of an attempted
restraint imposed by one taxing unit of local
government upon another at the same political
level.
The history above has no bearing on future acts.
We must assume that the West Iron school boards
of the past and their administrations acted in
good faith. No one can ask more than that. The
subsequent history of the former Lincoln and
Central schools is not the responsibility of
the school board, past or present.
The only thing I'm aware of that has liability
reverting to the last known responsible party
is, for some quirky reason, a ladder.
If the City of Iron River is so very concerned
about the Middle School building, then the
hands on responsibly preventive mechanism would
be for the City to procure the property themselves
and see to its disposition as they see fit. I
understand there's an amount of money in the
School District's budget for one year's
maintenance.
If the city takes the building over and cannot,
within some predetermined time frame, find a
suitable owner/tenant then the city will have
some funds available, from the maintenance fund,
towards tearing the building down and holding
the property, a prime commercial site, for future
sale for use once the local economy improves. Or
sell it now at a small price to a land speculator
and start to immediately collect property taxes.
We're talking about an 80 year old building with
all the problems that age entails. I understand
that presently the roof needs repair or replace-
ment. That's not an inexpensive item on a multi-
story building of this size.
There is a sense, repeated to me by others, that
if a reliable purchaser cannot be found promptly,
the building should be demolished.
Bill Vajk
What's Wrong with Iron River 090706 - Part 3
email received August 5, 2009
======================================================
Subject: Rodeo banner
From: "John Archocosky"
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:25:16 -0500
To:
Good morning Bill,
After receiving your memo of the posting you published
on July 6th, regarding the rodeo banner, I have been
noticing how other communities mount their banners.
I’ve attached a photo that I took last Saturday evening
as I was passing through Florence. Please excuse the
quality as it was taken with a cell phone camera. This
one particularly caught my attention as you used it as
a good example when you complained about Iron River’s
rodeo banner.
Thanks,
John
John A. Archocosky, Manager
City of Iron River
=======================================================
Reply:
Dear John,
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
You weren't supposed to see that.
best regards
Bill
======================================================
Subject: Rodeo banner
From: "John Archocosky"
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:25:16 -0500
To:
Good morning Bill,
After receiving your memo of the posting you published
on July 6th, regarding the rodeo banner, I have been
noticing how other communities mount their banners.
I’ve attached a photo that I took last Saturday evening
as I was passing through Florence. Please excuse the
quality as it was taken with a cell phone camera. This
one particularly caught my attention as you used it as
a good example when you complained about Iron River’s
rodeo banner.
Thanks,
John
John A. Archocosky, Manager
City of Iron River
=======================================================
Reply:
Dear John,
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
You weren't supposed to see that.
best regards
Bill
Sunday, August 2, 2009
July 2009 Iron River Documents
Associate Editor Ben Smith brought in four
City of Iron documents issued in July of 2009
that are, for various reasons, worthy of
notice by citizens and voters. The first of
them is a resolution for which I visited
City Hall and got a signed copy to publish.
The documents explain themselves however as
a general question that comes to my mind because
I have my own ongoing disputes with the city,
why is it that these days the City of Iron River
seems to have a beef with just about everyone?
Here's the link to the documents:
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river/0907ir-docs.pdf
Bill Vajk
City of Iron documents issued in July of 2009
that are, for various reasons, worthy of
notice by citizens and voters. The first of
them is a resolution for which I visited
City Hall and got a signed copy to publish.
The documents explain themselves however as
a general question that comes to my mind because
I have my own ongoing disputes with the city,
why is it that these days the City of Iron River
seems to have a beef with just about everyone?
Here's the link to the documents:
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river/0907ir-docs.pdf
Bill Vajk
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
About Michigan Taxes - Do Your Part!
Addendum note: There are a few people reported
to have gotten stuck in this article. To read
more of this blog, please click:
ironcountydoings
"Local Option Taxes" is the name given to a
new movement overrunning the USA like an
unstoppable tsunami. In Michigan, promoted
in a activist fashion by the Michigan Municipal
League (MML), it threatens to undo the will of
the voters as expressed in Proposition A and
the Headlee Amendment.
Looking closely at the MML agendas and conduct,
it becomes apparent that the organization has,
for some time, been pitting municipal interests
against the people that municipalities are
supposed to be serving. The "American Way"
holds all government subservient to the will
and needs of the people. MML has lost sight of
the essential mission of government, elevating
municipal interests above yours.
Even worse, the Michigan Municipal League is
supported by membership fees paid by our cities.
That's tax dollars funding an organization that
has absolutely no oversight. That's tax dollars
funding an organization that has been working
against the interests of the taxpayers who are,
without any say in what is being done in their
name, supporting an MML that's working against
all of us.
It is time to completely reorganize the MML, or
to dissolve it as an un-American organization.
Please insist that your local government withdraw
from membership, and don't take no for an answer.
Make your voice heard before further damage is
done. Please tell your state and local
legislators that you won't stand for gutting the
only laws standing between you and runaway
property taxes. Michigan residents fought this
tax war before and won. Why should we have to
fight the same war all over again? Take a firm
stand and don't let anyone change your mind, or
change the laws about taxation in Michigan. Just
remember, it is your pocket they're reaching
into, and they'll spend your money with nothing
to show. Don't weaken!
Bill Vajk, Iron River, MI
to have gotten stuck in this article. To read
more of this blog, please click:
ironcountydoings
"Local Option Taxes" is the name given to a
new movement overrunning the USA like an
unstoppable tsunami. In Michigan, promoted
in a activist fashion by the Michigan Municipal
League (MML), it threatens to undo the will of
the voters as expressed in Proposition A and
the Headlee Amendment.
Looking closely at the MML agendas and conduct,
it becomes apparent that the organization has,
for some time, been pitting municipal interests
against the people that municipalities are
supposed to be serving. The "American Way"
holds all government subservient to the will
and needs of the people. MML has lost sight of
the essential mission of government, elevating
municipal interests above yours.
Even worse, the Michigan Municipal League is
supported by membership fees paid by our cities.
That's tax dollars funding an organization that
has absolutely no oversight. That's tax dollars
funding an organization that has been working
against the interests of the taxpayers who are,
without any say in what is being done in their
name, supporting an MML that's working against
all of us.
It is time to completely reorganize the MML, or
to dissolve it as an un-American organization.
Please insist that your local government withdraw
from membership, and don't take no for an answer.
Make your voice heard before further damage is
done. Please tell your state and local
legislators that you won't stand for gutting the
only laws standing between you and runaway
property taxes. Michigan residents fought this
tax war before and won. Why should we have to
fight the same war all over again? Take a firm
stand and don't let anyone change your mind, or
change the laws about taxation in Michigan. Just
remember, it is your pocket they're reaching
into, and they'll spend your money with nothing
to show. Don't weaken!
Bill Vajk, Iron River, MI
Monday, July 27, 2009
Michigan Municipal League
I became aware of the Michigan Municipal League
some time back and read a few things about them
on their web page without doing any real analysis
about their mission or what they are really about.
In the current news is an issue about taxes and
the basic paradigms relating to how local
governments are funded and operated. A different
approach called Local Option Taxes
is rearing its head in most of our 50 states
at the moment. Michigan Municipal League is right
there with the suggestion that the legislature
should restructure both the Headlee Amendment
and Proposition A in order to eliminate the caps
placed on taxes.
In short Michigan Municipal League is working
against the interests of the citizens of this state
in an attempt to grow larger government at every
level in the state of Michigan!
Here's the worse part of this. Municipalities join
the MML and pay their membership out of funds
provided by taxpayers, the very same taxpayers that
the Michigan Municipal League is working against.
The Michigan Municipal League provides support in
favor of municipalities that find themselves in any
sort of difficulty.
Ask yourself, what sort of difficulties can a
municipality encounter? The Only difficulty
is when the municipality enforces its own interests
instead of those of a taxpayer, or a group of
taxpayers.
Gee whiz! Isn't government supposed to be for and
by the people? Where did this against the people
stuff come from? Who allowed this, the MML, to
happen? Who was asleep at the switch?
Wake up, people!
Please read the entire web site:
http://www.mml.org/home.html
and especially:
http://www.mml.org/thenews/2009_07_22-gongwer.pdf
The people of this state won the tax war once. Why
do we have to fight the same war again?
Bill Vajk
some time back and read a few things about them
on their web page without doing any real analysis
about their mission or what they are really about.
In the current news is an issue about taxes and
the basic paradigms relating to how local
governments are funded and operated. A different
approach called Local Option Taxes
is rearing its head in most of our 50 states
at the moment. Michigan Municipal League is right
there with the suggestion that the legislature
should restructure both the Headlee Amendment
and Proposition A in order to eliminate the caps
placed on taxes.
In short Michigan Municipal League is working
against the interests of the citizens of this state
in an attempt to grow larger government at every
level in the state of Michigan!
Here's the worse part of this. Municipalities join
the MML and pay their membership out of funds
provided by taxpayers, the very same taxpayers that
the Michigan Municipal League is working against.
The Michigan Municipal League provides support in
favor of municipalities that find themselves in any
sort of difficulty.
Ask yourself, what sort of difficulties can a
municipality encounter? The Only difficulty
is when the municipality enforces its own interests
instead of those of a taxpayer, or a group of
taxpayers.
Gee whiz! Isn't government supposed to be for and
by the people? Where did this against the people
stuff come from? Who allowed this, the MML, to
happen? Who was asleep at the switch?
Wake up, people!
Please read the entire web site:
http://www.mml.org/home.html
and especially:
http://www.mml.org/thenews/2009_07_22-gongwer.pdf
The people of this state won the tax war once. Why
do we have to fight the same war again?
Bill Vajk
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Truthful Reporting
I've grown weary of the perky (all chime in now)
"everything is wonderful" op-ed pieces in the
Iron County Reporter mixed in with the occasional
"wicked citizens challenge government employees
by submitting FOIA requests" diatribes from Ms.
Volek, the publisher.
In this week's episode, the op-ed reports that
despite the economy collapsing in the rest of
the country, things are progressing in Iron
County, a probable exception to the rule.
She closes out her piece with, "By moving
proactively, Iron County has a good chance of
coming out of this economic slump, downturn,
recession--whatever it's being called--strong
and future oriented. With the support of the
community, we'll keep on kicking, despite."
The last pep rally I attended was in high
school. By college they weren't mandatory. I
hate being subjected to them again.
Ms Volek, I hasten to point out that the
Titanic sank despite the orchestra playing
till the final moments. Berlin fell to the
allies despite high society attending the
Berlin Opera in the final days of the
European war. And Iron County? Will baseless
positive stories make a real difference?
The answer is no.
The Reporter's income seems to me to be
shrinking. If The Reporter wants to improve
its financial situation by increasing paid
circulation it needs only a small paradigm
shift in the stories that are published. If
The Reporter actually reported all the news
in the county, most especially printing (as I
first heard a complaint about this rag) "the
dirt," then I think that circulation would
increase three to four fold over the present
sales and it would afford a real service to
the community. It isn't as though the region
wouldn't be well served by honesty for a
change.
This blog, with limited resources, is
attempting to fill that gap.
Bill Vajk
P.S. I started out wanting to write this piece
in a humorous mode. Unfortunately there's nothing
funny about the situation. I'll do humor soon.
"everything is wonderful" op-ed pieces in the
Iron County Reporter mixed in with the occasional
"wicked citizens challenge government employees
by submitting FOIA requests" diatribes from Ms.
Volek, the publisher.
In this week's episode, the op-ed reports that
despite the economy collapsing in the rest of
the country, things are progressing in Iron
County, a probable exception to the rule.
She closes out her piece with, "By moving
proactively, Iron County has a good chance of
coming out of this economic slump, downturn,
recession--whatever it's being called--strong
and future oriented. With the support of the
community, we'll keep on kicking, despite."
The last pep rally I attended was in high
school. By college they weren't mandatory. I
hate being subjected to them again.
Ms Volek, I hasten to point out that the
Titanic sank despite the orchestra playing
till the final moments. Berlin fell to the
allies despite high society attending the
Berlin Opera in the final days of the
European war. And Iron County? Will baseless
positive stories make a real difference?
The answer is no.
The Reporter's income seems to me to be
shrinking. If The Reporter wants to improve
its financial situation by increasing paid
circulation it needs only a small paradigm
shift in the stories that are published. If
The Reporter actually reported all the news
in the county, most especially printing (as I
first heard a complaint about this rag) "the
dirt," then I think that circulation would
increase three to four fold over the present
sales and it would afford a real service to
the community. It isn't as though the region
wouldn't be well served by honesty for a
change.
This blog, with limited resources, is
attempting to fill that gap.
Bill Vajk
P.S. I started out wanting to write this piece
in a humorous mode. Unfortunately there's nothing
funny about the situation. I'll do humor soon.
Friday, July 17, 2009
A Job Well Done - By All Involved
Today was a sort of anniversary for me, because it
was this date, in 1969, the mission was launched
during which man first set foot on the moon.
In 1968 I worked, as a consultant (contractor) at
ILC Industries in Dover, Delaware. ILC was then a
division of Playtex Park, the same folks who made
women's girdles but were probably best known for
the "cross your heart bra." ILC designed and custom
manufactured the Apollo space suits.
Model A6L was their entry level suit that was
completely redesigned after the fire that took 3
astronauts lives during an earthbound practice
session. By the time I arrived to ILC we were
manufacturing the A7L model that had many features
to improve the fireproofing of the space suit
system. Almost nothing is 100% fireproof in the
pure oxygen atmosphere used during the Apollo
missions.
I had, at the end of my stay at ILC, two projects
that were given to me that were my crowning
achievements at that time. The lesser one was to
find all the misplaced/forgotten change orders that
NASA had issued for helmet R&D, especially the
optically correct gold splatter coating on the pull
down visors. Having those change orders was absolutely
necessary in order that ILC be awarded the profit that
was due them for the work that was done. The NASA
contract was what is called "cost plus." That meant
that the government trusted ILC to spend their money
frugally, and all costs would be reimbursed. But in
order to receive the profit portion of the contract,
the monies already paid out had to be justified and
all work performed under the authority of change
orders issues by NASA.
ILC suspected that some $10 million in reimbursed
costs had not been submitted for profit payout,
partly because the man in charge of that R&D, named
Tomasetti, had experienced a couple of heart attacks
and though he had managed to pull himself together
well enough to get the necessary job done, he had
lost track of the documentation. On days that Mr.
Tomasetti was well enough to come to work, I sat
with him over a two week period and very patiently
documented the entire process, including all the
change orders that had been scattered through his
desk and office. In the end I managed to document
about $18 million in approved work that resulted in
recovery of approximately $1,080,000 in profit for
the corporation, and I prepared the documents needed
by ILC's professional negotiator.
As pleased as I was with that success, even more
important to me was the other final project. I was
given the task of writing the proposal for all the
alterations to the A7L space suit needed for the
lunar missions. In house we called it the Omega
Configuration. I still have my draft copy of what is,
to the ordinary reader, a boring and dreary document.
The only difference between the draft and the final
version was the title and a reduction, across the
board, of 15% on all projected costs.
I was, considering that the year was 1968, well paid
for my efforts. I never received any other compliments
(with reference to John Archocosky's call for compliments
for "job well done" by city crews.) In fact, the proposal
took 95 hours of my active work, start to finish, for
the draft copy. And a week was all the time I was given.
Two secretaries stayed most nights well past midnight
in order to get the typing done.
Along with everyone else involved with Apollo 11 took
pride in our work, and more especially in the achievement
of a successful mission. By then time Apollo 11 launched
I had been working for some time at Fairchild-Hiller on
the F-15 fighter design in R&D, and coordinating that
aircraft design with the airborne phased array radar
system that I had worked on in the R&D phase at Raytheon
several years earler.
Ever since July 16, 1969, every time I look at the moon
for one reason or another, I am internally pleased with
myself while realizing that, "I helped to put men there."
The feeling never gets old. For me there is no reward
greater than knowing a job was well done.
Happy anniversary Bill. Happy anniversary America.
Bill Vajk
was this date, in 1969, the mission was launched
during which man first set foot on the moon.
In 1968 I worked, as a consultant (contractor) at
ILC Industries in Dover, Delaware. ILC was then a
division of Playtex Park, the same folks who made
women's girdles but were probably best known for
the "cross your heart bra." ILC designed and custom
manufactured the Apollo space suits.
Model A6L was their entry level suit that was
completely redesigned after the fire that took 3
astronauts lives during an earthbound practice
session. By the time I arrived to ILC we were
manufacturing the A7L model that had many features
to improve the fireproofing of the space suit
system. Almost nothing is 100% fireproof in the
pure oxygen atmosphere used during the Apollo
missions.
I had, at the end of my stay at ILC, two projects
that were given to me that were my crowning
achievements at that time. The lesser one was to
find all the misplaced/forgotten change orders that
NASA had issued for helmet R&D, especially the
optically correct gold splatter coating on the pull
down visors. Having those change orders was absolutely
necessary in order that ILC be awarded the profit that
was due them for the work that was done. The NASA
contract was what is called "cost plus." That meant
that the government trusted ILC to spend their money
frugally, and all costs would be reimbursed. But in
order to receive the profit portion of the contract,
the monies already paid out had to be justified and
all work performed under the authority of change
orders issues by NASA.
ILC suspected that some $10 million in reimbursed
costs had not been submitted for profit payout,
partly because the man in charge of that R&D, named
Tomasetti, had experienced a couple of heart attacks
and though he had managed to pull himself together
well enough to get the necessary job done, he had
lost track of the documentation. On days that Mr.
Tomasetti was well enough to come to work, I sat
with him over a two week period and very patiently
documented the entire process, including all the
change orders that had been scattered through his
desk and office. In the end I managed to document
about $18 million in approved work that resulted in
recovery of approximately $1,080,000 in profit for
the corporation, and I prepared the documents needed
by ILC's professional negotiator.
As pleased as I was with that success, even more
important to me was the other final project. I was
given the task of writing the proposal for all the
alterations to the A7L space suit needed for the
lunar missions. In house we called it the Omega
Configuration. I still have my draft copy of what is,
to the ordinary reader, a boring and dreary document.
The only difference between the draft and the final
version was the title and a reduction, across the
board, of 15% on all projected costs.
I was, considering that the year was 1968, well paid
for my efforts. I never received any other compliments
(with reference to John Archocosky's call for compliments
for "job well done" by city crews.) In fact, the proposal
took 95 hours of my active work, start to finish, for
the draft copy. And a week was all the time I was given.
Two secretaries stayed most nights well past midnight
in order to get the typing done.
Along with everyone else involved with Apollo 11 took
pride in our work, and more especially in the achievement
of a successful mission. By then time Apollo 11 launched
I had been working for some time at Fairchild-Hiller on
the F-15 fighter design in R&D, and coordinating that
aircraft design with the airborne phased array radar
system that I had worked on in the R&D phase at Raytheon
several years earler.
Ever since July 16, 1969, every time I look at the moon
for one reason or another, I am internally pleased with
myself while realizing that, "I helped to put men there."
The feeling never gets old. For me there is no reward
greater than knowing a job was well done.
Happy anniversary Bill. Happy anniversary America.
Bill Vajk
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
What's Wrong with Iron River 090706 - Part 2
I received the following email from Iron River
City Manager John Archocosky which I publish
intact in order to answer it in public:
=======================================
From: "John Archocosky"
To:
Subject: What's Wrong with Iron River 00706
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:01:33 -0500
Good morning Bill,
I received the hard copy of your article.
You’re right; the Rodeo banner crossing US2
after the wind caught it certainly did not
look good. The problem actually stemmed from
the fact that the banner was not designed to
fit between the supporting cables that have
been in place for years.
The city did not order the banner nor were
we asked what size it should be to fit the
cable arrangement. When the banner arrived,
the city crew did the best they could to
secure it with the ties that were provided
and it appeared to work fine for the first
few days that it was displayed.
Unfortunately, when the stronger wind started
to blow over the weekend, the ties provided
were not sufficient to hold the banner in place.
As soon as the DPW schedule permitted, the city
crew went back and had to reinstall the cable
system so it could accommodate the nonconforming
banner that was provided.
As I’m sure you know, it is not a simple task
to install anything over a US highway. Special
permits are required which must be processed
through MDOT. Permits require minimum ground
clearance as well as other safety related
conditions that needed to be met. As the crew
would have to be working in the middle of the
US2 traffic lanes to reinstall the cables, it
required coordinating the crew’s time with that
of the police department for traffic control
and our employees’ safety. Considering what
had to be done I feel the City of Iron River,
who was donating its time and effort, responded
to a non-emergency situation in a reasonable
timeframe.
When I received the copy of your article I
wasn’t sure if you wanted an explanation or
simply wanted to use it as an opportunity to
complain about the City of Iron River. In
either case "you now have the rest of the
story".
Criticism will always be accepted here and
even appreciated when it is offered in a
constructive manner for the betterment of
the City. It would be nice however, to
receive some positive reinforcement from
time to time for all the things done well
by the city staff and employees.
Thanks for your observation on the banner.
Sorry we never seem to meet your expectations.
John
======================================
I noticed that the initial repair was made to
the Rodeo Banner within a few days after John
Archocosky received the hard copy of my
previous article about this banner. This
is a busy season for me, so it took a few
days for me to have a camera along when I
drove through once again. From what I could
see, the city crew shortened the lower cable
somewhat and installed two spreaders to make
the cables, spreaders, and banner operate as
a single system as this photo shows:
It now works.
For comparison, here is one of my archive photos of a
Florence County Fair banner for 2007 hanging over
US2 with approximately the same length of cables.
I provide this as a model of what can be achieved. They
have exactly the same difficulties in Florence County
as we have in Iron River when it comes to this matter.
But on to other issues John raises.
If anyone cares to go back and look, every criticism I
have made concerning any Iron County governmental
unit always had a problem with an available solution.
Yet mostly my comments have fallen on deaf ears (meaning
solutions were not undertaken) with responsive complaints
at what appears to be an unending stream of criticism from
Bill Vajk co-mingled with the whispered rumor that "Bill
Vajk is out to destroy Iron River." That gives rise to a good
chuckle on my part.
I hasten to point out that my upbringing, including a
parochial school (St. Paul's at Princeton, NJ, see their
web page on the internet, still a fine school!) sent home
a report card every semester that had a comment at the
bottom in the beautiful script of the "Sisters of Mercy"
that said, "There's always room for improvement."
And so there is. The routine praise we received at the
hands of the nuns was the grades we earned. The same
thing is true of all employees, everywhere. They earn
a paycheck in exchange for which they are expected
to perform a "job well done." It is expected. In fact,
it is demanded, even more from government employees
than in any other setting.
Praise and positive reinforcement were, in the sane
society that existed before the "baby boomer culture"
came of age, reserved for extraordinary performance.
I identify this expectation of praise for doing what's
expected and what people are paid to do as a cultural
phenomena belonging to your generation, John. Are
prison guards expected to clap every prisoner on the
back every day and praise them for not having shanked
anyone in the past 24 hours? Where does all this
constant praise requirement come from?
Along with the classic report card footnote, there was
one other unremitting message that we were hammered
with that apparently fell by the wayside for your
generation. It is a brief statement that, "Anything worth
doing is worth doing well." A later version that I started
hearing in the 1970's went, "If you don't have time to
do it right now, when will you have time to do it over?"
As far as never meeting my expectations, I am alone
in these only insofar as voicing them goes. This
community is an old mining culture that was well
taught to shut up, do your job, and be grateful for
what the company provides. That paradigm continues
intact today with government replacing "the company,"
for the most part. There is a lot of seething undercurrent
in the region that remains silent for the most part rather
than risk getting labeled a troublemaker.
Look at the voter rejection of the Iron River Township
millage request in the last election. This is, for the most
part, the only protest the general population will mount,
and even then with great difficulty. And look at the
township's response, a move to create a new "fee" for
"sewer availability." Good grief, what's this community
coming to.
A label of "troublemaker" doesn't bother me because
my background includes not only a good educational
background, but also a personal history of successful
risk taking in military/industrial research and development
world. I found out at a young age that when you go for
the gold all the time, you make friends and enemies, and
the individuals in those positions are apt to shift back and
forth with as much volatility as the weather. I keep my eye
on the goal. The chips can fall as they will. In my opinion
if one worries about everyone's feelings, nothing is ever
achieved. There is some evidence in the history of our
personal interactions that you understand, and practice,
this same philosophy yourself, albeit sometimes mistakenly
(that's probably the consequence of your personal
experience being limited to typical midwestern cultures.)
In wrapping up this exchange it probably makes good sense
to tell the reader a bit more about the world outside Iron
County. I grew up at Princeton, New Jersey, and off and
on resided there till 1974 when I moved out of the region
permanently. Starting sometime in the 1960's, major
corporations that had midwestern and west coast operations
began promoting executives from Chicago, Detroit, St.
Louis, and the like, to their corporate offices in New York.
These folks settled mostly in New Jersey as daily rail
commuters into the city. By rail, a Princeton area resident
could find himself in most midtown Manhattan offices in
about an hour. Even in Chicago that's not considered a
bad commute.
Most of those promoted to New York corporate offices
lasted about a year, and then they packed up their homes
and returned to whence they had come. The New York
business models are a whole lot more demanding than those
of the midwest, and the midwesterners simply couldn't
acclimate themselves to the demands and the pace.
Anyone who grew up here in Iron County, let alone has
lived here better part of a lifetime, experiences pretty
much the same culture shock if they move to Chicago.
What I'm trying to say, John, is that I am two major
cultural paradigms away from living here contentedly
and quietly, because where I come from, and where I
live (internally) my expectations are those of a
mainstream progressive America that demands a
number of things that the folks who live here all their
lives all too often seem willing to give up. These are
> constitutions limit government powers
> the rule of law is necessary
> unless handicapped, earn your keep honestly and honorably
You'd think these are simple rules to live by, but
in Iron County it appears to be very difficult for
some.
Unfortunately, it seems I will soon be in litigation with
the City of Iron River as well as perhaps some officers
of the City and Iron County, and potentially with Iron
River Township as well if the currently envisioned
sewer ordinance revisions become a reality. These could
be settled at a much smaller cost to the taxpayers by
negotiations, but there's a generalized arrogance in Iron
County governments that seems to prevent such solutions.
best regards,
Bill Vajk
City Manager John Archocosky which I publish
intact in order to answer it in public:
=======================================
From: "John Archocosky"
To:
Subject: What's Wrong with Iron River 00706
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:01:33 -0500
Good morning Bill,
I received the hard copy of your article.
You’re right; the Rodeo banner crossing US2
after the wind caught it certainly did not
look good. The problem actually stemmed from
the fact that the banner was not designed to
fit between the supporting cables that have
been in place for years.
The city did not order the banner nor were
we asked what size it should be to fit the
cable arrangement. When the banner arrived,
the city crew did the best they could to
secure it with the ties that were provided
and it appeared to work fine for the first
few days that it was displayed.
Unfortunately, when the stronger wind started
to blow over the weekend, the ties provided
were not sufficient to hold the banner in place.
As soon as the DPW schedule permitted, the city
crew went back and had to reinstall the cable
system so it could accommodate the nonconforming
banner that was provided.
As I’m sure you know, it is not a simple task
to install anything over a US highway. Special
permits are required which must be processed
through MDOT. Permits require minimum ground
clearance as well as other safety related
conditions that needed to be met. As the crew
would have to be working in the middle of the
US2 traffic lanes to reinstall the cables, it
required coordinating the crew’s time with that
of the police department for traffic control
and our employees’ safety. Considering what
had to be done I feel the City of Iron River,
who was donating its time and effort, responded
to a non-emergency situation in a reasonable
timeframe.
When I received the copy of your article I
wasn’t sure if you wanted an explanation or
simply wanted to use it as an opportunity to
complain about the City of Iron River. In
either case "you now have the rest of the
story".
Criticism will always be accepted here and
even appreciated when it is offered in a
constructive manner for the betterment of
the City. It would be nice however, to
receive some positive reinforcement from
time to time for all the things done well
by the city staff and employees.
Thanks for your observation on the banner.
Sorry we never seem to meet your expectations.
John
======================================
I noticed that the initial repair was made to
the Rodeo Banner within a few days after John
Archocosky received the hard copy of my
previous article about this banner. This
is a busy season for me, so it took a few
days for me to have a camera along when I
drove through once again. From what I could
see, the city crew shortened the lower cable
somewhat and installed two spreaders to make
the cables, spreaders, and banner operate as
a single system as this photo shows:
It now works.
For comparison, here is one of my archive photos of a
Florence County Fair banner for 2007 hanging over
US2 with approximately the same length of cables.
I provide this as a model of what can be achieved. They
have exactly the same difficulties in Florence County
as we have in Iron River when it comes to this matter.
But on to other issues John raises.
If anyone cares to go back and look, every criticism I
have made concerning any Iron County governmental
unit always had a problem with an available solution.
Yet mostly my comments have fallen on deaf ears (meaning
solutions were not undertaken) with responsive complaints
at what appears to be an unending stream of criticism from
Bill Vajk co-mingled with the whispered rumor that "Bill
Vajk is out to destroy Iron River." That gives rise to a good
chuckle on my part.
I hasten to point out that my upbringing, including a
parochial school (St. Paul's at Princeton, NJ, see their
web page on the internet, still a fine school!) sent home
a report card every semester that had a comment at the
bottom in the beautiful script of the "Sisters of Mercy"
that said, "There's always room for improvement."
And so there is. The routine praise we received at the
hands of the nuns was the grades we earned. The same
thing is true of all employees, everywhere. They earn
a paycheck in exchange for which they are expected
to perform a "job well done." It is expected. In fact,
it is demanded, even more from government employees
than in any other setting.
Praise and positive reinforcement were, in the sane
society that existed before the "baby boomer culture"
came of age, reserved for extraordinary performance.
I identify this expectation of praise for doing what's
expected and what people are paid to do as a cultural
phenomena belonging to your generation, John. Are
prison guards expected to clap every prisoner on the
back every day and praise them for not having shanked
anyone in the past 24 hours? Where does all this
constant praise requirement come from?
Along with the classic report card footnote, there was
one other unremitting message that we were hammered
with that apparently fell by the wayside for your
generation. It is a brief statement that, "Anything worth
doing is worth doing well." A later version that I started
hearing in the 1970's went, "If you don't have time to
do it right now, when will you have time to do it over?"
As far as never meeting my expectations, I am alone
in these only insofar as voicing them goes. This
community is an old mining culture that was well
taught to shut up, do your job, and be grateful for
what the company provides. That paradigm continues
intact today with government replacing "the company,"
for the most part. There is a lot of seething undercurrent
in the region that remains silent for the most part rather
than risk getting labeled a troublemaker.
Look at the voter rejection of the Iron River Township
millage request in the last election. This is, for the most
part, the only protest the general population will mount,
and even then with great difficulty. And look at the
township's response, a move to create a new "fee" for
"sewer availability." Good grief, what's this community
coming to.
A label of "troublemaker" doesn't bother me because
my background includes not only a good educational
background, but also a personal history of successful
risk taking in military/industrial research and development
world. I found out at a young age that when you go for
the gold all the time, you make friends and enemies, and
the individuals in those positions are apt to shift back and
forth with as much volatility as the weather. I keep my eye
on the goal. The chips can fall as they will. In my opinion
if one worries about everyone's feelings, nothing is ever
achieved. There is some evidence in the history of our
personal interactions that you understand, and practice,
this same philosophy yourself, albeit sometimes mistakenly
(that's probably the consequence of your personal
experience being limited to typical midwestern cultures.)
In wrapping up this exchange it probably makes good sense
to tell the reader a bit more about the world outside Iron
County. I grew up at Princeton, New Jersey, and off and
on resided there till 1974 when I moved out of the region
permanently. Starting sometime in the 1960's, major
corporations that had midwestern and west coast operations
began promoting executives from Chicago, Detroit, St.
Louis, and the like, to their corporate offices in New York.
These folks settled mostly in New Jersey as daily rail
commuters into the city. By rail, a Princeton area resident
could find himself in most midtown Manhattan offices in
about an hour. Even in Chicago that's not considered a
bad commute.
Most of those promoted to New York corporate offices
lasted about a year, and then they packed up their homes
and returned to whence they had come. The New York
business models are a whole lot more demanding than those
of the midwest, and the midwesterners simply couldn't
acclimate themselves to the demands and the pace.
Anyone who grew up here in Iron County, let alone has
lived here better part of a lifetime, experiences pretty
much the same culture shock if they move to Chicago.
What I'm trying to say, John, is that I am two major
cultural paradigms away from living here contentedly
and quietly, because where I come from, and where I
live (internally) my expectations are those of a
mainstream progressive America that demands a
number of things that the folks who live here all their
lives all too often seem willing to give up. These are
> constitutions limit government powers
> the rule of law is necessary
> unless handicapped, earn your keep honestly and honorably
You'd think these are simple rules to live by, but
in Iron County it appears to be very difficult for
some.
Unfortunately, it seems I will soon be in litigation with
the City of Iron River as well as perhaps some officers
of the City and Iron County, and potentially with Iron
River Township as well if the currently envisioned
sewer ordinance revisions become a reality. These could
be settled at a much smaller cost to the taxpayers by
negotiations, but there's a generalized arrogance in Iron
County governments that seems to prevent such solutions.
best regards,
Bill Vajk
Friday, July 10, 2009
Buy Local
I tried.
I needed a replacement mirror for the passenger side
of my pickup truck. While backing up with a trailer
in the forest on my farm, I got the mirror up against
a tree and made a bunch of little mirrors out of the
large one. I got a price of about $225 for a
replacement mirror from Kevin's Auto Body.
So I went to the Auto Value parts store on US2 in
Iron River. They ordered a replacement mirror for
me, but when it arrived a couple of days later it
was the wrong one. So the clerk called in to his
supplier and came up with a price in the high $68
range but I also saw him write down his cost of
$ 31.89.
I haggled. In my opinion, the ordinary markups
(typically doubling the cost to the customer)
are not realistic for an item that a retailer
has not had to inventory. Here's how it works
for special order items.
The retailer orders the item that arrives a
couple of days later. The day the supplier ships
the item, the supplier puts the cost on the
retailer's account that the retailer receives,
on average, 15 days later, and then has about
20 more days to pay. So the wholesaler carries
the cost of the special order item on the books
for, on average, about 35 days. The retailer
generally has his money from the sale on the
second day. This means that any special ordered
item will, on average, result in the sale amount
of money in the retailer's account for 32 to 33
days, at interest. Given no outlay till well
after the retailer gets payment, a 100% plus
markup is, in my opinion, severely unreasonable.
The retailer experiences no risk whatever,
and that's one of the elements that goes into
retail markup!
Inventory costs (the cost of money and warehousing)
are built into the wholesale price for the item.
Anyway, I walked away from the Auto Value store
without ordering this item. As I told them I would,
I came home and got on the internet and found I
could buy the replacement mirror for $18 and
change with something under $13 for shipping
and handling, so the total price for ordering
off the internet came out to be a few cents
over $31.
The cost difference to the consumer, between
$31, and $68 is plenty big, but even larger yet
is the difference to the highest price of $225.
Is it any wonder so many people have abandoned
"main street" merchants in rural area like Iron
County? I don't mind paying a small premium, with
a limit of perhaps $45 tops for this mirror. That
would mean a 45% premium over what the internet
cost is, and a 15% markup based on what I know
the local merchant was going to pay for it. By
increasing his sales while charging reasonable
rates for special orders, any merchant could
make a nice living out of that.
The $68 cost to me would be a 119% premium over
what the internet wants to charge me and $225
would represent a 625% premium.
I'd like to help the local merchants, but they
won't let me, not when they do their customers
like this. I've had Kevin's do some work for me
in the past. They really do very nice work, and
as things happen, I'll continue to use them for
body work and painting. But as a parts supplier,
sorry!
Bill Vajk
I needed a replacement mirror for the passenger side
of my pickup truck. While backing up with a trailer
in the forest on my farm, I got the mirror up against
a tree and made a bunch of little mirrors out of the
large one. I got a price of about $225 for a
replacement mirror from Kevin's Auto Body.
So I went to the Auto Value parts store on US2 in
Iron River. They ordered a replacement mirror for
me, but when it arrived a couple of days later it
was the wrong one. So the clerk called in to his
supplier and came up with a price in the high $68
range but I also saw him write down his cost of
$ 31.89.
I haggled. In my opinion, the ordinary markups
(typically doubling the cost to the customer)
are not realistic for an item that a retailer
has not had to inventory. Here's how it works
for special order items.
The retailer orders the item that arrives a
couple of days later. The day the supplier ships
the item, the supplier puts the cost on the
retailer's account that the retailer receives,
on average, 15 days later, and then has about
20 more days to pay. So the wholesaler carries
the cost of the special order item on the books
for, on average, about 35 days. The retailer
generally has his money from the sale on the
second day. This means that any special ordered
item will, on average, result in the sale amount
of money in the retailer's account for 32 to 33
days, at interest. Given no outlay till well
after the retailer gets payment, a 100% plus
markup is, in my opinion, severely unreasonable.
The retailer experiences no risk whatever,
and that's one of the elements that goes into
retail markup!
Inventory costs (the cost of money and warehousing)
are built into the wholesale price for the item.
Anyway, I walked away from the Auto Value store
without ordering this item. As I told them I would,
I came home and got on the internet and found I
could buy the replacement mirror for $18 and
change with something under $13 for shipping
and handling, so the total price for ordering
off the internet came out to be a few cents
over $31.
The cost difference to the consumer, between
$31, and $68 is plenty big, but even larger yet
is the difference to the highest price of $225.
Is it any wonder so many people have abandoned
"main street" merchants in rural area like Iron
County? I don't mind paying a small premium, with
a limit of perhaps $45 tops for this mirror. That
would mean a 45% premium over what the internet
cost is, and a 15% markup based on what I know
the local merchant was going to pay for it. By
increasing his sales while charging reasonable
rates for special orders, any merchant could
make a nice living out of that.
The $68 cost to me would be a 119% premium over
what the internet wants to charge me and $225
would represent a 625% premium.
I'd like to help the local merchants, but they
won't let me, not when they do their customers
like this. I've had Kevin's do some work for me
in the past. They really do very nice work, and
as things happen, I'll continue to use them for
body work and painting. But as a parts supplier,
sorry!
Bill Vajk
Iron River Township money woes
Iron River Township is being financially squeezed
by the prison closure. However that does not afford
license to impose a new tax on the residents in
violation of the Headlee Amendment to the Michigan
Constitution. Here are some guidelines:
"There are three factors to consider when deciding
if a charge is a fee or a tax. Id. To be considered
a fee, a charge must: (1) serve a regulatory purpose
rather than a revenue-raising purpose, (2) be
proportionate to the necessary costs of the service,
and (3) be voluntary, in the sense that the payor may
choose not to avail himself of the benefit and thereby
avoid the charge.
MAPLEVIEW ESTATES, INC. v. CITY OF BROWN CITY, 2003.
It is clear to me that Iron River Township's proposed
revisions to the sewer ordinance, as reported, runs afoul
of case law as does Iron River's and the township's
"readiness to serve" charge in their water ordinance.
Bill Vajk
by the prison closure. However that does not afford
license to impose a new tax on the residents in
violation of the Headlee Amendment to the Michigan
Constitution. Here are some guidelines:
"There are three factors to consider when deciding
if a charge is a fee or a tax. Id. To be considered
a fee, a charge must: (1) serve a regulatory purpose
rather than a revenue-raising purpose, (2) be
proportionate to the necessary costs of the service,
and (3) be voluntary, in the sense that the payor may
choose not to avail himself of the benefit and thereby
avoid the charge.
MAPLEVIEW ESTATES, INC. v. CITY OF BROWN CITY, 2003.
It is clear to me that Iron River Township's proposed
revisions to the sewer ordinance, as reported, runs afoul
of case law as does Iron River's and the township's
"readiness to serve" charge in their water ordinance.
Bill Vajk
Monday, July 6, 2009
Iron County Road Commission Problems (1)
Recently I had complimented the Iron County
Road Commission for having done a good job
of maintenance grading Kallio Road. They
did the job right for the first time in
years by putting the proper crown back in
the road, and not building berms that keep
rainwater in the road, making it muddy even
after a light summer rain, and keeping spring
snowmelt runoff on the road that's a real mess
far too long into the season.
Unfortunately my congratulations on getting it
right was premature. They've regraded the road
and got it wrong again. The photo below, 4 July
2009, shows the brand new berms created by the
most recent maintenance work.
This isn't a difficult thing, grading a gravel
road. You get the results shown in the photo
below by turning the grader blade the wrong way,
as though the operator were plowing snow. To
grade a gravel road properly the blade must be
turned the other way, to move sand and gravel
away from the edges of the road towards the
middle, in order to create a proper crown that
assures water runoff instead of water retention.
Could we please, please, get the appropriate
training for the people sent out to do this work?
There's just no excuse for what's been going on
with Iron County's gravel roads for the past
several years.
Bill Vajk
Road Commission for having done a good job
of maintenance grading Kallio Road. They
did the job right for the first time in
years by putting the proper crown back in
the road, and not building berms that keep
rainwater in the road, making it muddy even
after a light summer rain, and keeping spring
snowmelt runoff on the road that's a real mess
far too long into the season.
Unfortunately my congratulations on getting it
right was premature. They've regraded the road
and got it wrong again. The photo below, 4 July
2009, shows the brand new berms created by the
most recent maintenance work.
This isn't a difficult thing, grading a gravel
road. You get the results shown in the photo
below by turning the grader blade the wrong way,
as though the operator were plowing snow. To
grade a gravel road properly the blade must be
turned the other way, to move sand and gravel
away from the edges of the road towards the
middle, in order to create a proper crown that
assures water runoff instead of water retention.
Could we please, please, get the appropriate
training for the people sent out to do this work?
There's just no excuse for what's been going on
with Iron County's gravel roads for the past
several years.
Bill Vajk
What's Wrong with Iron River 090706
What's wrong with Iron River, I ask, with tongue
in cheek and a nudge-nudge-wink-wink-say-no-more.
I moved to Iron County in late 2003. I discovered
that there was a place on US2 to mount a banner
advertising local events near where the river
crosses the highway in town when the first postage
stamp banner for the "Christmas in Lights" parade
was put up.
The wind wrapped that around the support cables,
rendering the banner useless.
I've noted that nearby communities never have this
problem. Crandon's banners always look good as
do the ones in Florence. But Iron River, feh, it
always gets messed up because apparently those
in charge of maintaining the facility, as well
as those who install and take down the banner
don't seem to take the care necessary to do a
good job.
This article is also being mailed, in hard copy,
to the city manager, John Archocosky. The lack
of care and concern by the city for simple things
gives a really bad impression to those passing
through, folks who might otherwise decide to stay
and to spend some money here.
Bill Vajk
in cheek and a nudge-nudge-wink-wink-say-no-more.
I moved to Iron County in late 2003. I discovered
that there was a place on US2 to mount a banner
advertising local events near where the river
crosses the highway in town when the first postage
stamp banner for the "Christmas in Lights" parade
was put up.
The wind wrapped that around the support cables,
rendering the banner useless.
I've noted that nearby communities never have this
problem. Crandon's banners always look good as
do the ones in Florence. But Iron River, feh, it
always gets messed up because apparently those
in charge of maintaining the facility, as well
as those who install and take down the banner
don't seem to take the care necessary to do a
good job.
This article is also being mailed, in hard copy,
to the city manager, John Archocosky. The lack
of care and concern by the city for simple things
gives a really bad impression to those passing
through, folks who might otherwise decide to stay
and to spend some money here.
Bill Vajk
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Rule of Men v Rule of Law - July 4
In terms of Rule of Men v. Rule of Law, today,
the 4th of July, is one of several important
dates as it is the birthdate of the American
Declaration of Independence. As important as
the event of the framing and signing of that
document was in American history, the ideas
in our Declaration had firm footing in earlier
struggles involving the English Crown.
The earliest codification of universal human
liberty was offered up by Henry I of England
at the time of his coronation. Henry was a
usurper. His brother Robert had been away,
involved in the First Crusade, at the moment
it became his turn to succeed to the Crown
of the combined England and Normandy. Henry,
next in line, took advantage of the absence
of his brother Robert, seized the treasury
and was crowned king on August 5, 1100.
Henry signed the Charter of Liberties, a
document that reads somewhat like the Magna
Carta (executed a little over 2 centuries
later) in order to assure the support of the
earls and barons of England, or perhaps better
states, to prevent the opposition of the barons.
He negotiated the other problems, with the people
within arm's, reach his ascendancy to the throne
by settling a long standing problem with the
Pope, and by marrying a woman of mixed Scottish
(her father had been Scotland's Malcolm III)
Anglo parentage. In those days signing the Charter
of Liberties was, for a king, giving up a
significant amount of power.
Unfortunately for England, the promises did not
descend through successive kings.
By 1215, the barons had had enough of the King's
antics. They went to London in an armed group on
June 10, 1215, and forced King John to agree to
their demands on June 15. The document took another
month to prepare, and that was completed on July
19, 1215, becoming the official and original
Magna Carta.
Even so, it became a requirement that a new copy
be agreed to at the coronation of new kings, and
the specific requirements in those successive
documents changed over time. The version that
remains the law in England and Wales is the
1297 edition with many individual clauses repealed
over the years. The critical parts, habeas corpus
and due process, remain intact.
Much as the Magna Carta had been based on the
Charter of Liberties in an earlier time, the
American Declaration of Independence found its
principles rooted in Magna Carta.
We celebrate the 4th of July as the beginning of
the United States of America. It led to the first
war in which Americans, as a people, fought so
that the Rule of Law replaced the Rule of Men. It
is just as important to recognize that every
single war we, as a people, have engaged in ever
since the signing of the Declaration of Independence
some 233 years ago today has been the very same
war. Each war has been to enforce the supremacy
of the Rule of Law where others have replaced it
with the Rule of Men. There will be more on this
topic in subsequent articles in this series.
I had mentioned earlier that my family came to the
USA after WWII precisely over this issue. The
document displayed below was one that my father
had to carry in Hungary after the war. On the
left is the Russian language version, stamped and
signed off by the Soviet official in charge of the
occupation forces. On the right is the Hungarian
language version, signed by the minister of natural
resources and a corporate official of the
Hungarian-American Oil Company. What the document
says is that my father is employed in a job that
is important to the state and must not be taken to
do other work.
TAKE NOTICE: Personal rights are not the
focal point! All that matters is the needs of the
state.
There was a real need for my father to carry this
with him at all times. In those days, when some
workers were needed to perform some task or another,
whoever was charged with getting the work done was
authorized to send armed men out on the streets to
round up anyone they saw and bring them back to do
whatever job that needed doing.
While today we understand that this is one of the
more extreme cases of Rule of Men prevailing over
the Rule of Law, the simple fact is that people
lived and died because of such conduct by the
state. And it also pays to understand that we,
the United States of America, condoned such
conduct by our allies, so long as it wasn't in
our face. Consider also the political perspecive
of President Obama who put political expediency
over the principles we have bled and died for
since 1776 when he remained quiet while Iran was
killing citizens involved in peaceful protests
in the streets of their capital.
Looking the other way.........a problem prevalent
in Iron County today, and our White House as well.
Bill Vajk
the 4th of July, is one of several important
dates as it is the birthdate of the American
Declaration of Independence. As important as
the event of the framing and signing of that
document was in American history, the ideas
in our Declaration had firm footing in earlier
struggles involving the English Crown.
The earliest codification of universal human
liberty was offered up by Henry I of England
at the time of his coronation. Henry was a
usurper. His brother Robert had been away,
involved in the First Crusade, at the moment
it became his turn to succeed to the Crown
of the combined England and Normandy. Henry,
next in line, took advantage of the absence
of his brother Robert, seized the treasury
and was crowned king on August 5, 1100.
Henry signed the Charter of Liberties, a
document that reads somewhat like the Magna
Carta (executed a little over 2 centuries
later) in order to assure the support of the
earls and barons of England, or perhaps better
states, to prevent the opposition of the barons.
He negotiated the other problems, with the people
within arm's, reach his ascendancy to the throne
by settling a long standing problem with the
Pope, and by marrying a woman of mixed Scottish
(her father had been Scotland's Malcolm III)
Anglo parentage. In those days signing the Charter
of Liberties was, for a king, giving up a
significant amount of power.
Unfortunately for England, the promises did not
descend through successive kings.
By 1215, the barons had had enough of the King's
antics. They went to London in an armed group on
June 10, 1215, and forced King John to agree to
their demands on June 15. The document took another
month to prepare, and that was completed on July
19, 1215, becoming the official and original
Magna Carta.
Even so, it became a requirement that a new copy
be agreed to at the coronation of new kings, and
the specific requirements in those successive
documents changed over time. The version that
remains the law in England and Wales is the
1297 edition with many individual clauses repealed
over the years. The critical parts, habeas corpus
and due process, remain intact.
Much as the Magna Carta had been based on the
Charter of Liberties in an earlier time, the
American Declaration of Independence found its
principles rooted in Magna Carta.
We celebrate the 4th of July as the beginning of
the United States of America. It led to the first
war in which Americans, as a people, fought so
that the Rule of Law replaced the Rule of Men. It
is just as important to recognize that every
single war we, as a people, have engaged in ever
since the signing of the Declaration of Independence
some 233 years ago today has been the very same
war. Each war has been to enforce the supremacy
of the Rule of Law where others have replaced it
with the Rule of Men. There will be more on this
topic in subsequent articles in this series.
I had mentioned earlier that my family came to the
USA after WWII precisely over this issue. The
document displayed below was one that my father
had to carry in Hungary after the war. On the
left is the Russian language version, stamped and
signed off by the Soviet official in charge of the
occupation forces. On the right is the Hungarian
language version, signed by the minister of natural
resources and a corporate official of the
Hungarian-American Oil Company. What the document
says is that my father is employed in a job that
is important to the state and must not be taken to
do other work.
TAKE NOTICE: Personal rights are not the
focal point! All that matters is the needs of the
state.
There was a real need for my father to carry this
with him at all times. In those days, when some
workers were needed to perform some task or another,
whoever was charged with getting the work done was
authorized to send armed men out on the streets to
round up anyone they saw and bring them back to do
whatever job that needed doing.
While today we understand that this is one of the
more extreme cases of Rule of Men prevailing over
the Rule of Law, the simple fact is that people
lived and died because of such conduct by the
state. And it also pays to understand that we,
the United States of America, condoned such
conduct by our allies, so long as it wasn't in
our face. Consider also the political perspecive
of President Obama who put political expediency
over the principles we have bled and died for
since 1776 when he remained quiet while Iran was
killing citizens involved in peaceful protests
in the streets of their capital.
Looking the other way.........a problem prevalent
in Iron County today, and our White House as well.
Bill Vajk
Monday, June 29, 2009
A Crane for Iron River?
Does the City of Iron River have a project using this
large crane? One would think it would have been
mentioned in City Council meetings.
large crane? One would think it would have been
mentioned in City Council meetings.
For additional topics and discussions about Iron County
please click here
Bill Vajk
Saturday, June 27, 2009
local critic isn't interested in doing what's best for Iron County's residents
>From: shadow_man4243
>Subject: [ironcountyindependent]
>Re: Fw: Ironcountydoings: Building Iron County Michigan
>To: ironcountyindependent@yahoogroups.com
>Date: Saturday, June 27, 2009, 2:30 PM
>I read this article in The Daily News' Speak Out
>section. What is the writer trying to say in this
>article?
>We know the county is going to appoint a committee
>to do a feasability study of building a new airport.
>We know the county is not at the point of building
>a new airport and looking for a builder/developer to
>build it. We know that the county had in the past
>had a study done as to where to locate a new airport
>if one was to be built and plans to build when it was
>dropped because of various obstacles.
>The writer mostly focuses on getting the EDC involved
>in the process by sitting down with a builder/developer
>to ascertain the staffing and manning of the project?
>Also the crafts and job skills needed to complete the
>project and if need be provide training for these skills
>at county expense. The writer seems to be advocating
>that the airport be built using all local (Iron County)
>builders and labor and if all local resources can't be
>used, that perhaps the workers would have to live
>within 100 miles of the project for a year after
>completion.
>If this project was to come to fruition and be built,
>the majority of the monies would be federal and state
>and having the requirement that the contractor(s) and
>labor be residents of Iron County or be within 100 miles
>of Iron County will not fly.
>The largest obstacle is acquiring the land and getting
>approval from all the entities that have jurisdiction
>on this project. If were not the objection of the
>military that the proposed airport northwest of Iron
>Lake was located in a MOA, the airport may or may have
>not have been built.
>Shadow
Bill Vajk's answers:
1) Where a feasibility study is concerned, we know in
advance that the outcome of such a feasibility study
will find justification for building a new, better,
Iron County Michigan airport. To entertain even the
remote possibility of any other outcome is absurd. The
County Board is 100% predictable in such matters.
2) I suggest that the selection of a developer/builder,
or a small pool of candidates, has already been done.
It is in the best interest of the County Board to
do such a selection early because there's a lot of free
lobbying work available (in Lansing, Washington, and
even in Iron County) from those people if they have
a reason to believe that they could benefit by being
the builder/developer selected to do the project.
Shadowman, if he or she is knowledgeable about such
matters (and I have reason to believe that's true)
is being disingenuous in making a statement that is
designed to mislead the local population into
believing otherwise.
3) Who better than an experienced reputable builder/
developer to smooth the way through obstacles like
getting the military relocate their practice areas.
4) Iron County, including our EDC, has a recent
history of ignoring the needs of the local population
where it comes to significant projects. The operative
word in EDC is, ta-da, DEVELOPMENT. Why
was an out-of-state contractor hired to dismantle
the Cloverland Hotel by hand? Was there some special
secret technique used to do that job? No, of course
there wasn't.
4a) There is nothing significantly high tech about
building an airport that places such construction
out of reach of ordinary tradesmen. Radar equipment
and the like is generally installed by the manufacturer,
with the infrastructure (structures, conduit, wiring,
and so forth) provided by regular trades contractors
5) The US Government can and does write grants and
RFQ's (request for quotation) and RFB's (request for
Bids) carefully crafted to designate a targeted set
of contractors/bidders. To state out of hand that
because federal monies are probably going to be
used prevents targeting where the workers live is,
at best, incorrect. Such things are done with
great regularity.
6) I believe, therefore, that "shadowman," whoever
he/she is, does not have the interests of the local
population at heart, but has self-interest as his/her
primary motivation. Otherwise why not support "the
home team"? You fight for them without first throwing
in the towel and misleading people by saying what we
need to get done cannot be, without even trying! That's
not what shadowman is doing. That's not what shadowman
ever does!
Shadowman, whoever you are, come out-come out!
If you have legitimate issues to discuss, then stand
up and be counted, without hiding behind that stupid
pseudonym. Plug the name into google images and see
what nonsense that brings to your screen. But then,
who would expect legitimate discussion from someone
who calls themselves shadowman?
Bill Vajk
>Subject: [ironcountyindependent]
>Re: Fw: Ironcountydoings: Building Iron County Michigan
>To: ironcountyindependent@yahoogroups.com
>Date: Saturday, June 27, 2009, 2:30 PM
>I read this article in The Daily News' Speak Out
>section. What is the writer trying to say in this
>article?
>We know the county is going to appoint a committee
>to do a feasability study of building a new airport.
>We know the county is not at the point of building
>a new airport and looking for a builder/developer to
>build it. We know that the county had in the past
>had a study done as to where to locate a new airport
>if one was to be built and plans to build when it was
>dropped because of various obstacles.
>The writer mostly focuses on getting the EDC involved
>in the process by sitting down with a builder/developer
>to ascertain the staffing and manning of the project?
>Also the crafts and job skills needed to complete the
>project and if need be provide training for these skills
>at county expense. The writer seems to be advocating
>that the airport be built using all local (Iron County)
>builders and labor and if all local resources can't be
>used, that perhaps the workers would have to live
>within 100 miles of the project for a year after
>completion.
>If this project was to come to fruition and be built,
>the majority of the monies would be federal and state
>and having the requirement that the contractor(s) and
>labor be residents of Iron County or be within 100 miles
>of Iron County will not fly.
>The largest obstacle is acquiring the land and getting
>approval from all the entities that have jurisdiction
>on this project. If were not the objection of the
>military that the proposed airport northwest of Iron
>Lake was located in a MOA, the airport may or may have
>not have been built.
>Shadow
Bill Vajk's answers:
1) Where a feasibility study is concerned, we know in
advance that the outcome of such a feasibility study
will find justification for building a new, better,
Iron County Michigan airport. To entertain even the
remote possibility of any other outcome is absurd. The
County Board is 100% predictable in such matters.
2) I suggest that the selection of a developer/builder,
or a small pool of candidates, has already been done.
It is in the best interest of the County Board to
do such a selection early because there's a lot of free
lobbying work available (in Lansing, Washington, and
even in Iron County) from those people if they have
a reason to believe that they could benefit by being
the builder/developer selected to do the project.
Shadowman, if he or she is knowledgeable about such
matters (and I have reason to believe that's true)
is being disingenuous in making a statement that is
designed to mislead the local population into
believing otherwise.
3) Who better than an experienced reputable builder/
developer to smooth the way through obstacles like
getting the military relocate their practice areas.
4) Iron County, including our EDC, has a recent
history of ignoring the needs of the local population
where it comes to significant projects. The operative
word in EDC is, ta-da, DEVELOPMENT. Why
was an out-of-state contractor hired to dismantle
the Cloverland Hotel by hand? Was there some special
secret technique used to do that job? No, of course
there wasn't.
4a) There is nothing significantly high tech about
building an airport that places such construction
out of reach of ordinary tradesmen. Radar equipment
and the like is generally installed by the manufacturer,
with the infrastructure (structures, conduit, wiring,
and so forth) provided by regular trades contractors
5) The US Government can and does write grants and
RFQ's (request for quotation) and RFB's (request for
Bids) carefully crafted to designate a targeted set
of contractors/bidders. To state out of hand that
because federal monies are probably going to be
used prevents targeting where the workers live is,
at best, incorrect. Such things are done with
great regularity.
6) I believe, therefore, that "shadowman," whoever
he/she is, does not have the interests of the local
population at heart, but has self-interest as his/her
primary motivation. Otherwise why not support "the
home team"? You fight for them without first throwing
in the towel and misleading people by saying what we
need to get done cannot be, without even trying! That's
not what shadowman is doing. That's not what shadowman
ever does!
Shadowman, whoever you are, come out-come out!
If you have legitimate issues to discuss, then stand
up and be counted, without hiding behind that stupid
pseudonym. Plug the name into google images and see
what nonsense that brings to your screen. But then,
who would expect legitimate discussion from someone
who calls themselves shadowman?
Bill Vajk
Building Iron County Michigan
It is apparent that despite the earlier failed attempt
to build a new county airport, Iron County has
never given up on the idea. In the long term picture,
I think the County Board has this one right. It is
my guess that a builder/developer, or at least a pool
of them, has already been chosen. This is the moment,
perhaps the last possible moment, to get the rest of
the project right.
This is the time for our EDC to sit down with a
builder/developer or few to figure out the manning
and staffing for the airport project from this point
forward. We need to know as soon as possible
precisely the type, caliber, and number of skills
and crafts necessary to complete the project, and
we need to immediately provide, at county expense,
such training as is necessary to complete the skill
sets required for the project so that from the
moment that ground is broken, we can assure
that local people are building their own airport.
Ideally this would also be true for all major con-
struction projects in Iron County's future. There's
no reason why it can't be.
As a practical matter, they will doubtless not all be
Iron County residents. We, as a community, need to
set some distance limit on how far away the workers
live as a permanent feature in their lives, meaning
where they live from today to a year after completion
of the new airport building project. I suggest a 100
mile distance limit. Perhaps less is better?
And finally, even more important, I think the public
needs assurance that this is not some "cargo cult"
(use your favorite internet search engine on the
words) project where a means is provided for
commerce that has no hope of success. The need for
any new airport for Iron County needs to be justi-
fied in advance. I'm in favor of it, but I too want
proof.
Bill Vajk
to build a new county airport, Iron County has
never given up on the idea. In the long term picture,
I think the County Board has this one right. It is
my guess that a builder/developer, or at least a pool
of them, has already been chosen. This is the moment,
perhaps the last possible moment, to get the rest of
the project right.
This is the time for our EDC to sit down with a
builder/developer or few to figure out the manning
and staffing for the airport project from this point
forward. We need to know as soon as possible
precisely the type, caliber, and number of skills
and crafts necessary to complete the project, and
we need to immediately provide, at county expense,
such training as is necessary to complete the skill
sets required for the project so that from the
moment that ground is broken, we can assure
that local people are building their own airport.
Ideally this would also be true for all major con-
struction projects in Iron County's future. There's
no reason why it can't be.
As a practical matter, they will doubtless not all be
Iron County residents. We, as a community, need to
set some distance limit on how far away the workers
live as a permanent feature in their lives, meaning
where they live from today to a year after completion
of the new airport building project. I suggest a 100
mile distance limit. Perhaps less is better?
And finally, even more important, I think the public
needs assurance that this is not some "cargo cult"
(use your favorite internet search engine on the
words) project where a means is provided for
commerce that has no hope of success. The need for
any new airport for Iron County needs to be justi-
fied in advance. I'm in favor of it, but I too want
proof.
Bill Vajk
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
New Iron County Airport - Chapter 2
Dateline June 23, 2009. Iron River, Michigan
The Iron County Commission met today. In a fairly
routine meeting they agreed to allow the Township
Association to use Pentoga Park for their annual
picnic and meeting free of charge by a vote of
three to one. Commissioners Black, Brunswick, and
Wills voted to allow the free use of the park.
Commissioner King voted no and Commissioner Lind
was absent.
The same issue was discussed approximately one year
ago and the Township Association was denied free
use of the park. This time after a somewhat lengthy
discussion, they decided to allow its use at no
charge.
Other items discussed were:
The Western Upper Peninsula Planning and Development
Region will be holding their annual convention in
Iron County on Sept.21, 2009 at a still undecided
location.
Some discussion was held concerning the fact that
Houghton County has at least three incubator projects
underway and Iron County has none.
The commissioners voted to take no action on a
resolution forwarded to them by the Director of
the County Medical Facility supporting health care
reform. The implication was that the subject was
too complicated.
The new tenant of the Cooks Run Trout Hatchery did
send in his check per the agreement , but they have
not received the insurance policy which was part of
the agreement. On advice of civil attorney Tinti
they decided to set a deadline for its receipt.
They appointed commissioner Brunswick to the U.P.
State Fair Board.
Also, on the advice of civil counsel Tintil and EDC
Director Melchori they decided to draw up a contract
with the governmental units of the county outlining
their agreement to cooperate with the funding of the
EDC program and its director.
This reporter was told that he misreported the total
number of people attending the special meeting held
at Iron River Township Hall to gather support to
oppose the state's plan to close the prison camp in
the township. This reporter reported approx. 40
people in attendance, EDC director Melchori claimed
the figure was 60 +.
And finally on a suggestion by EDC director Melchori
and the county Chair King a motion was passed to
appoint a committee to study an airport feasibility
for Iron County.
Ben Smith publicly reported the existence of this
news organization to the Iron County Board.
Ben Smith
=========================================
Editor's comment:
We gladly report corrections to errors, or even possible
errors, that we publish.
I have previously commented on the need to simplify
the Economic Development Corporation's Mission Statement
to stick to creating jobs for county residents. The
fact that the Iron County Board commented, with a
negativity (in MY opinion) on the Houghton
incubator projects is unfair to the EDC given the broad
discretion the board itself has granted to the EDC. I
recommend that our earlier published Mission Statement
be formally adopted.
"If the mission statement stuck to "increasing job
opportunities for our residents" I'd be a whole
lot happier." (April 18, 2009) and apparently so
would the County Board.
Projects like Disk Golf need to be undertaken by Parks
and Recreation instead of the tourism negative projects
like a fee charging boat wash complete with enforcement
patrols by police officials.
Bill Vajk
The Iron County Commission met today. In a fairly
routine meeting they agreed to allow the Township
Association to use Pentoga Park for their annual
picnic and meeting free of charge by a vote of
three to one. Commissioners Black, Brunswick, and
Wills voted to allow the free use of the park.
Commissioner King voted no and Commissioner Lind
was absent.
The same issue was discussed approximately one year
ago and the Township Association was denied free
use of the park. This time after a somewhat lengthy
discussion, they decided to allow its use at no
charge.
Other items discussed were:
The Western Upper Peninsula Planning and Development
Region will be holding their annual convention in
Iron County on Sept.21, 2009 at a still undecided
location.
Some discussion was held concerning the fact that
Houghton County has at least three incubator projects
underway and Iron County has none.
The commissioners voted to take no action on a
resolution forwarded to them by the Director of
the County Medical Facility supporting health care
reform. The implication was that the subject was
too complicated.
The new tenant of the Cooks Run Trout Hatchery did
send in his check per the agreement , but they have
not received the insurance policy which was part of
the agreement. On advice of civil attorney Tinti
they decided to set a deadline for its receipt.
They appointed commissioner Brunswick to the U.P.
State Fair Board.
Also, on the advice of civil counsel Tintil and EDC
Director Melchori they decided to draw up a contract
with the governmental units of the county outlining
their agreement to cooperate with the funding of the
EDC program and its director.
This reporter was told that he misreported the total
number of people attending the special meeting held
at Iron River Township Hall to gather support to
oppose the state's plan to close the prison camp in
the township. This reporter reported approx. 40
people in attendance, EDC director Melchori claimed
the figure was 60 +.
And finally on a suggestion by EDC director Melchori
and the county Chair King a motion was passed to
appoint a committee to study an airport feasibility
for Iron County.
Ben Smith publicly reported the existence of this
news organization to the Iron County Board.
Ben Smith
=========================================
Editor's comment:
We gladly report corrections to errors, or even possible
errors, that we publish.
I have previously commented on the need to simplify
the Economic Development Corporation's Mission Statement
to stick to creating jobs for county residents. The
fact that the Iron County Board commented, with a
negativity (in MY opinion) on the Houghton
incubator projects is unfair to the EDC given the broad
discretion the board itself has granted to the EDC. I
recommend that our earlier published Mission Statement
be formally adopted.
"If the mission statement stuck to "increasing job
opportunities for our residents" I'd be a whole
lot happier." (April 18, 2009) and apparently so
would the County Board.
Projects like Disk Golf need to be undertaken by Parks
and Recreation instead of the tourism negative projects
like a fee charging boat wash complete with enforcement
patrols by police officials.
Bill Vajk
Monday, June 22, 2009
Rule of Man v. Rule of Law, Page 3
Rule of Man v. Rule of Law, Page 3
Ludwig von Mises wote:
"The only certain fact about Russian affairs under
the Soviet regime with regard to which all people
agree is: that the standard of living of the Russian
masses is much lower than that of the masses in
the country which is universally considered as the
paragon of capitalism, the United States of America.
If we were to regard the Soviet regime as an experiment,
we would have to say that the experiment has clearly
demonstrated the superiority of capitalism and the
inferiority of socialism."
Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis by
Ludwig von Mises.
Found at: http://www.econlib/org/library/Mises/MsSApp.html
This was originally published in German in 1922 and
through several reprints in German as well as English
the last edition appeared as late as 1951. The impetus
of the book was socialism whereas this discussion is
about the Rule of Law. There is an overlap that occurs
naturally enough where, as in socialism, social, political,
and economic power are all focussed in a relatively few
individuals or at best a small group instead of being
spread across all of society as is normal for a capitalistic
democracy.
Von Mises work approached socioeconomic-political
problems from the viewpoint of discussing socialism
opposing capitalism. For our purposes the reader can
legitimately substitute "rule of man" in place of
socialism, because in the end that's how it works out.
For our discussion we also substitute Iron County compared
to the rest of the USA (or if one prefers, Iron County
compared to nearby economically successful counties) for
those used by von Mises.
The ONLY difference between Iron County and Dickinson,
or Vilas or Onida Counties is the effective operation of the
ruling political structure. While today's population in Iron
County is very low, that was brought about by how the
oligarchy operates and is kept that way by that same
oligarchy continues to operate.
Let's take a look at two proposed projects that are
supposed to help progress in Iron County, one favored
by the oligarchy, and one opposed by them.
Several years ago I proposed a trolley project
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river
for Iron River that upon initial presentation was
favored by John Archocosky, City Manager, with the
following comments: 1: I like it, it will be good
for the city and the county. 2: Your timing is
perfect, streets and alleyways are going to be
redone and we'll include this project in that
planning and, 3: I'll help in any way I can.
Armed with this, I promoted the project for several
months until it became apparent that the project was
disapproved by the oligarchy because success would
mean they stood a chance of losing control of the
county, of their political power, when competitive
individuals became part of the political landscape
as a result of the money coming into the county and
an increase in the management caliber population
In the end, Archocosky used two mechanisms to defeat
that which he had initially promoted. He determined
that the trolley project would not be self-sustaining
out of generated revenue. Nothing in Iron County has
been able to achieve that status for the last 50 years.
Even such routine purchases as replacement police
cars depend on federal government grants. Armed with
that bit of information, Archocosky had the raw
information published by the local press (before this
organ was established) and he fed it through the well
established rumor mill as though a successful project
bringing prosperity into the city and county were an
unspeakable evil.
Compare this to the airport project that the population
spoke harshly against the last time the proposal was
made public. Despite the fact that the population was
generally opposed, the project has been ongoing all
the while. Even when a discussion about the new airport
ensued in a public meeting of the Iron County Board, it
was not reported in the newspaper or on the air of our
local radio station, WIKB.
Now the reason for not discussing it in the broad
distribution media was based on "not getting the
local gentry riled," but the disservice to the local
population is huge and is one aspect of "rule of
man v. rule of law."
A couple of years back I got myself in trouble with
the editor of the Iron County Reporter for calling
her function in the county that of a puppet controlled
by the puppet master. Well the best of all possible
forms of control happens when the person being
controlled has no sense of that reality. But here,
in the case of the airport project, you can see it
plainly enough. What was that about, "the wife is
always the last one to know"?
Here's the crux of the matter. It is the "rule of
men" intent on maintaining their own petty political
and economic power that holds Iron County in such a
grip of controlled poverty that also keeps our
population low and forces your children to leave the
community where they grew up in order to find work.
I keep showing you how it works. When will you, the
public, do something about it? Even those third world
Iranians aren't sitting still for precisely the same
sort of control that's being exercised over you, you
who allegedly live in a democratic society.
No, I'm not recommending insurrection in the streets,
but an active participation in government by more of
the population would easily wrest control of your
lives and economy from those who currently use it to
bolster their own egos and line their pockets at your
expense.
Drive by 766 Penetoga Trail to see how John Archocosky
lives on the income you provide him. And while you're
at it, ask him why he doesn't live in the City of Iron
River as the City Charter requires a City Manager to
do. The idea was that he should have to live under the
same ordinances and rules as the people he represents
in City Hall every day. Why have you permitted him to
skate on this?
Bill Vajk
Ludwig von Mises wote:
"The only certain fact about Russian affairs under
the Soviet regime with regard to which all people
agree is: that the standard of living of the Russian
masses is much lower than that of the masses in
the country which is universally considered as the
paragon of capitalism, the United States of America.
If we were to regard the Soviet regime as an experiment,
we would have to say that the experiment has clearly
demonstrated the superiority of capitalism and the
inferiority of socialism."
Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis by
Ludwig von Mises.
Found at: http://www.econlib/org/library/Mises/MsSApp.html
This was originally published in German in 1922 and
through several reprints in German as well as English
the last edition appeared as late as 1951. The impetus
of the book was socialism whereas this discussion is
about the Rule of Law. There is an overlap that occurs
naturally enough where, as in socialism, social, political,
and economic power are all focussed in a relatively few
individuals or at best a small group instead of being
spread across all of society as is normal for a capitalistic
democracy.
Von Mises work approached socioeconomic-political
problems from the viewpoint of discussing socialism
opposing capitalism. For our purposes the reader can
legitimately substitute "rule of man" in place of
socialism, because in the end that's how it works out.
For our discussion we also substitute Iron County compared
to the rest of the USA (or if one prefers, Iron County
compared to nearby economically successful counties) for
those used by von Mises.
The ONLY difference between Iron County and Dickinson,
or Vilas or Onida Counties is the effective operation of the
ruling political structure. While today's population in Iron
County is very low, that was brought about by how the
oligarchy operates and is kept that way by that same
oligarchy continues to operate.
Let's take a look at two proposed projects that are
supposed to help progress in Iron County, one favored
by the oligarchy, and one opposed by them.
Several years ago I proposed a trolley project
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river
for Iron River that upon initial presentation was
favored by John Archocosky, City Manager, with the
following comments: 1: I like it, it will be good
for the city and the county. 2: Your timing is
perfect, streets and alleyways are going to be
redone and we'll include this project in that
planning and, 3: I'll help in any way I can.
Armed with this, I promoted the project for several
months until it became apparent that the project was
disapproved by the oligarchy because success would
mean they stood a chance of losing control of the
county, of their political power, when competitive
individuals became part of the political landscape
as a result of the money coming into the county and
an increase in the management caliber population
In the end, Archocosky used two mechanisms to defeat
that which he had initially promoted. He determined
that the trolley project would not be self-sustaining
out of generated revenue. Nothing in Iron County has
been able to achieve that status for the last 50 years.
Even such routine purchases as replacement police
cars depend on federal government grants. Armed with
that bit of information, Archocosky had the raw
information published by the local press (before this
organ was established) and he fed it through the well
established rumor mill as though a successful project
bringing prosperity into the city and county were an
unspeakable evil.
Compare this to the airport project that the population
spoke harshly against the last time the proposal was
made public. Despite the fact that the population was
generally opposed, the project has been ongoing all
the while. Even when a discussion about the new airport
ensued in a public meeting of the Iron County Board, it
was not reported in the newspaper or on the air of our
local radio station, WIKB.
Now the reason for not discussing it in the broad
distribution media was based on "not getting the
local gentry riled," but the disservice to the local
population is huge and is one aspect of "rule of
man v. rule of law."
A couple of years back I got myself in trouble with
the editor of the Iron County Reporter for calling
her function in the county that of a puppet controlled
by the puppet master. Well the best of all possible
forms of control happens when the person being
controlled has no sense of that reality. But here,
in the case of the airport project, you can see it
plainly enough. What was that about, "the wife is
always the last one to know"?
Here's the crux of the matter. It is the "rule of
men" intent on maintaining their own petty political
and economic power that holds Iron County in such a
grip of controlled poverty that also keeps our
population low and forces your children to leave the
community where they grew up in order to find work.
I keep showing you how it works. When will you, the
public, do something about it? Even those third world
Iranians aren't sitting still for precisely the same
sort of control that's being exercised over you, you
who allegedly live in a democratic society.
No, I'm not recommending insurrection in the streets,
but an active participation in government by more of
the population would easily wrest control of your
lives and economy from those who currently use it to
bolster their own egos and line their pockets at your
expense.
Drive by 766 Penetoga Trail to see how John Archocosky
lives on the income you provide him. And while you're
at it, ask him why he doesn't live in the City of Iron
River as the City Charter requires a City Manager to
do. The idea was that he should have to live under the
same ordinances and rules as the people he represents
in City Hall every day. Why have you permitted him to
skate on this?
Bill Vajk
Monday, June 15, 2009
County Commission Meeting & New Airport Discussion
This reporter attended the Iron County Commissioners
first monthly meeting.
Among other things discussed was the evaluation of
the veteran county administrator Jan Huizing, which
will be done as a committee of the whole. Mr. Huizing
told the board the he had asked them many times to set
some goals and targets for him, but as yet no metric
has been established.
County Planning Commission Chairman John Faccin reported
that the members his commission have refused to discuss
a plan for a new County Airport as requested by County
Commission Chair Rosalie King. Ms. King, the chair,
told Faccin that HE, not the members of the committee,
sets the agenda and directs which tasks are to be
undertaken by the Planning Commission.
In other matters, the chair informed other members of
the commission that she was authorized to make an
appointment to the County Housing Authority and it wasn't
necessary for her to advertise for applicants. Therefore
Ms. King appointed former associate and county
commissioner Lawrence Harrington to the post. Also
mentioned was the re-appointment of Michael Henschel to
the soldiers relief fund by Probate Judge C. Joseph
Schwedler .
Director of the Iron County Economic Development
Corporation (EDC), Julie Melchiori, gave the
commissioners copies of the new rules set by the
State of Michigan for the revolving fund managed
by the local EDCs.
Ben Smith
=======================================================
Commentary by Bill Vajk:
Neither WIKB news nor the Iron County Reporter has
discussed the re-emergence of planning for a new
airport.
The new airport issue, shouted down by some of the
Iron County population a few years ago, is back for
review and possibly implementation. I moved to Iron
County after the last big dispute over a new airport.
If you'll look at your Iron County plat book at
T.45N-R.33W you will find in Section 20, 4 quarter
sections marked "State of Michigan Airport." There
had been some discussion a while back about
attempting to bring this area into functional use
as a real airport. Older plat books do not show this
land as an airport.
It seems to me that there is a significant anti-
progress faction in this county, a faction that is
afraid of change of any sort. They do not represent
a significant voting block, but they are very vocal.
They need to appreciate that stopping progress is
much like trying to stop time itself. Things are
already very different in Iron County than they were
the day you were born, and change marches on, hand
in hand with time. The only one able to stop it is
the all powerful. In the history of mankind that
hasn't seemed to have ever happened.
Let's take another look at the basics. Building a
new airport isn't going to use money belonging to
anyone living in Iron County. It isn't going to be
on land belonging to anyone who lives in Iron County.
It will provide services to all living in Iron County,
either directly or indirectly. It is bound to bring
several new jobs to Iron County. And it will support
economic growth here.
You can't often get such a good deal.
Look in the back of a recent plat book. See how much
land is owned by the State of Michigan in Iron County.
Compare this list to any plat book from the 1970's or
1980's. Given the growth instate ownership of land in
the county, what is it you would have the state do with
the land in section 20 mentioned above? Leave it unused?
Or since it is possible to get a modern airport in Iron
County, and that isn't going to deplete even once cent
of your disposable income or alter your lifestyle in any
way, why not let that land become an airport that could
someday save your life with an emergency flight out of
our wonderful backwoods to Marshfield or perhaps to the
Mayo Clinic at Rochester, Minnesota? How about your child
or grandchild who could be saved if only we could get
them to one of those places in time?
I moved to Iron County because generally speaking the
people are friendly and the scenery is beautiful. I
certainly didn't come here to deal with people who have
issues locked into the 1880's. Perhaps the state would
lend us a nice piece of land and those who are afraid of
progress could live, for a month or two, in tents without
TV, radio, computer, electricity, automobile, prepared
ready-to-cook foods, to see how they like no progress
from the time the community was settled.
A new, up to date airport, with better runways, would be
of great benefit to Iron County. It is possible that
there is a conflict between the proposed airport site
and a military exercise zone.
Bill Vajk
first monthly meeting.
Among other things discussed was the evaluation of
the veteran county administrator Jan Huizing, which
will be done as a committee of the whole. Mr. Huizing
told the board the he had asked them many times to set
some goals and targets for him, but as yet no metric
has been established.
County Planning Commission Chairman John Faccin reported
that the members his commission have refused to discuss
a plan for a new County Airport as requested by County
Commission Chair Rosalie King. Ms. King, the chair,
told Faccin that HE, not the members of the committee,
sets the agenda and directs which tasks are to be
undertaken by the Planning Commission.
In other matters, the chair informed other members of
the commission that she was authorized to make an
appointment to the County Housing Authority and it wasn't
necessary for her to advertise for applicants. Therefore
Ms. King appointed former associate and county
commissioner Lawrence Harrington to the post. Also
mentioned was the re-appointment of Michael Henschel to
the soldiers relief fund by Probate Judge C. Joseph
Schwedler .
Director of the Iron County Economic Development
Corporation (EDC), Julie Melchiori, gave the
commissioners copies of the new rules set by the
State of Michigan for the revolving fund managed
by the local EDCs.
Ben Smith
=======================================================
Commentary by Bill Vajk:
Neither WIKB news nor the Iron County Reporter has
discussed the re-emergence of planning for a new
airport.
The new airport issue, shouted down by some of the
Iron County population a few years ago, is back for
review and possibly implementation. I moved to Iron
County after the last big dispute over a new airport.
If you'll look at your Iron County plat book at
T.45N-R.33W you will find in Section 20, 4 quarter
sections marked "State of Michigan Airport." There
had been some discussion a while back about
attempting to bring this area into functional use
as a real airport. Older plat books do not show this
land as an airport.
It seems to me that there is a significant anti-
progress faction in this county, a faction that is
afraid of change of any sort. They do not represent
a significant voting block, but they are very vocal.
They need to appreciate that stopping progress is
much like trying to stop time itself. Things are
already very different in Iron County than they were
the day you were born, and change marches on, hand
in hand with time. The only one able to stop it is
the all powerful. In the history of mankind that
hasn't seemed to have ever happened.
Let's take another look at the basics. Building a
new airport isn't going to use money belonging to
anyone living in Iron County. It isn't going to be
on land belonging to anyone who lives in Iron County.
It will provide services to all living in Iron County,
either directly or indirectly. It is bound to bring
several new jobs to Iron County. And it will support
economic growth here.
You can't often get such a good deal.
Look in the back of a recent plat book. See how much
land is owned by the State of Michigan in Iron County.
Compare this list to any plat book from the 1970's or
1980's. Given the growth instate ownership of land in
the county, what is it you would have the state do with
the land in section 20 mentioned above? Leave it unused?
Or since it is possible to get a modern airport in Iron
County, and that isn't going to deplete even once cent
of your disposable income or alter your lifestyle in any
way, why not let that land become an airport that could
someday save your life with an emergency flight out of
our wonderful backwoods to Marshfield or perhaps to the
Mayo Clinic at Rochester, Minnesota? How about your child
or grandchild who could be saved if only we could get
them to one of those places in time?
I moved to Iron County because generally speaking the
people are friendly and the scenery is beautiful. I
certainly didn't come here to deal with people who have
issues locked into the 1880's. Perhaps the state would
lend us a nice piece of land and those who are afraid of
progress could live, for a month or two, in tents without
TV, radio, computer, electricity, automobile, prepared
ready-to-cook foods, to see how they like no progress
from the time the community was settled.
A new, up to date airport, with better runways, would be
of great benefit to Iron County. It is possible that
there is a conflict between the proposed airport site
and a military exercise zone.
Bill Vajk
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Rule of Men v. Rule of Law: Enabling Rule of Men
It looks like this "Rule of Men v. Rule of Law"
discussion must naturally grow into a series of
articles because it deserves further discussion.
This article is not the last in the series, but
the second of many.
Subtitle: Enabling Rule of Men: groupthink as a mechanism
It begins with groupthink replacing individuality
and the healthy self-interest necessary for the
diversity that leads to economic success for a
community. The identified (and often published)
8 characteristics common to all groupthink
societies have been identified as:
1. Illusion of invulnerability
Creates excessive optimism that encourages taking
extreme risks.
2. Collective rationalization
Members discount warnings and do not reconsider
their assumptions.
3. Belief in inherent morality
Members believe in the rightness of their cause and
therefore ignore the ethical or moral consequences
of their decisions.
4. Stereotyped views of out-groups
Negative views of “enemy” make effective responses
to conflict seem unnecessary.
5. Direct pressure on dissenters
Members are under pressure not to express arguments
against any of the group’s views.
6. Self-censorship
Doubts and deviations from the perceived group
consensus are not expressed.
7. Illusion of unanimity
The majority view and judgments are assumed to be
unanimous.
8. Self-appointed ‘mindguards’
Members protect the group and the leader from
information that is problematic or contradictory
to the group’s cohesiveness, view, and/or decisions.
Here's the current specific example.
Ben Smith posted my first article about "Rule of Men
v. Rule of Law" to the local discussion group known
as Yahoo's IronCountyIndependent. That brought a
person identifying themselves as "Shadowman" out
of a very long period of silent lurking to make
the following posting:
"You know I do believe Bill is fighting a losing
battle here. His FOIA case has been dismissed along
with having the judge removed. By the way here's
the document that is missing from the SC web site."
He posted the wrong file, later corrected by Ben
Smith who posted my copy at:
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river/ADM_file_no_2007-01.pdf
To this "Shadowman" replied:
"Sorry for the wrong file. Thanks for posting the
correct one for it kind of blows Bill's argument
that Schwedler is not the judge of record and
should not be hearing his case. Shadow"
And as if it weren't enough, John Faccin was unable
to pass up the opportunity by piping in:
"Hi Shadow,
It’s been a long time, I knew you were reading the
site, we may be of different persuasion, but your
opinion or facts are always welcome here. Good to
hear from you."
(John's posting begs the question, whose opinions
and facts are NOT welcome at the IronCountyIndependent?
That's answered by items 4 and 5 in the list above.)
John is the little pest best ignored. I've included
him in this article to demonstrate how it is that
even the bottom feeders like him fit into the
groupthink/rule-of-men scheme.
But back to the main topic, what we see is "Shadowman"
distracting the readers on IronCountyIndependent by
misleading them to think that the main issue is
Judge Schwedler and the FOIA lawsuit against
John Archocosky. Actually, very few of them have
any idea what that aspect of the discussion is about.
It hasn't been in the news.
This pair of "Shadowman's" short little "humble"
postings are active propaganda demonstrating how items
1 and 2 in the list above work . And when you get right
down to it, this sort of activity is the only reason
for "Shadowman" participating in any way in
IronCountyIndependent, to catch such political items
and to misguide the readers there to believe in the
viewpoints most beneficial to the political crooks in
charge of Iron County politics.
The referenced web page is actually evidence of
wrongdoing by the Michigan Supreme Court. If
you, the reader, is interested in how that could
be, please read Article VI of the Michigan
Constitution. If you're still having a problem
with it, wait a few weeks since the details will
be posted on the newly promised web page.
It is obvious from John Faccin's comments (he can
sometimes be useful despite himself, kind of like
Iron County's own Joe Biden) that "Shadowman" has
not been participating in the discussions for
a long time period. It is thus obvious that
"Shadowman" only comes out of hiding to guide
people's thinking back to what is in his, and
his political cronies interests. That's what
groupthink is all about.
In this community, the original political power
was in the hands of the agents of the mining
interests. And since they held the purse strings,
control of the population was really easy. The
mines did what they always did, control everything
to best maintain the peace, high production, and
maximize profits. Once the resources are all
used up, or the economy changes, they move on.
Once the mines left, those who didn't flee the
region when the mines closed were already accustomed
to being told what to think and what to do. It took
very little for their successors to step in and take
over. It continues through today. "Shadowman" is
enabling the Rule of Men by convincing the readers
to believe that his position is what is best for
them. Needless to say, it isn't.
Here's by far the best part. "Shadowman" and his
political cronies (including John Faccin) are
lining their pockets with your money and working
to promote their personal wealth, while I have
only the politics expressed by the Founding
Fathers as a weapon, and have no personal political
or financial advantage available from expressing my
beliefs.
I do have to wonder why anyone would give any
attention to a ;ocal politician who hides behind
a name like "Shadowman." If he had honest and
honorable intentions, shouldn't he or she be
posting under their own name. Shouldn't that
person be taking credit, in his or her own name,
for all ideas they claim are righteous?
Bill Vajk
discussion must naturally grow into a series of
articles because it deserves further discussion.
This article is not the last in the series, but
the second of many.
Subtitle: Enabling Rule of Men: groupthink as a mechanism
It begins with groupthink replacing individuality
and the healthy self-interest necessary for the
diversity that leads to economic success for a
community. The identified (and often published)
8 characteristics common to all groupthink
societies have been identified as:
1. Illusion of invulnerability
Creates excessive optimism that encourages taking
extreme risks.
2. Collective rationalization
Members discount warnings and do not reconsider
their assumptions.
3. Belief in inherent morality
Members believe in the rightness of their cause and
therefore ignore the ethical or moral consequences
of their decisions.
4. Stereotyped views of out-groups
Negative views of “enemy” make effective responses
to conflict seem unnecessary.
5. Direct pressure on dissenters
Members are under pressure not to express arguments
against any of the group’s views.
6. Self-censorship
Doubts and deviations from the perceived group
consensus are not expressed.
7. Illusion of unanimity
The majority view and judgments are assumed to be
unanimous.
8. Self-appointed ‘mindguards’
Members protect the group and the leader from
information that is problematic or contradictory
to the group’s cohesiveness, view, and/or decisions.
Here's the current specific example.
Ben Smith posted my first article about "Rule of Men
v. Rule of Law" to the local discussion group known
as Yahoo's IronCountyIndependent. That brought a
person identifying themselves as "Shadowman" out
of a very long period of silent lurking to make
the following posting:
"You know I do believe Bill is fighting a losing
battle here. His FOIA case has been dismissed along
with having the judge removed. By the way here's
the document that is missing from the SC web site."
He posted the wrong file, later corrected by Ben
Smith who posted my copy at:
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river/ADM_file_no_2007-01.pdf
To this "Shadowman" replied:
"Sorry for the wrong file. Thanks for posting the
correct one for it kind of blows Bill's argument
that Schwedler is not the judge of record and
should not be hearing his case. Shadow"
And as if it weren't enough, John Faccin was unable
to pass up the opportunity by piping in:
"Hi Shadow,
It’s been a long time, I knew you were reading the
site, we may be of different persuasion, but your
opinion or facts are always welcome here. Good to
hear from you."
(John's posting begs the question, whose opinions
and facts are NOT welcome at the IronCountyIndependent?
That's answered by items 4 and 5 in the list above.)
John is the little pest best ignored. I've included
him in this article to demonstrate how it is that
even the bottom feeders like him fit into the
groupthink/rule-of-men scheme.
But back to the main topic, what we see is "Shadowman"
distracting the readers on IronCountyIndependent by
misleading them to think that the main issue is
Judge Schwedler and the FOIA lawsuit against
John Archocosky. Actually, very few of them have
any idea what that aspect of the discussion is about.
It hasn't been in the news.
This pair of "Shadowman's" short little "humble"
postings are active propaganda demonstrating how items
1 and 2 in the list above work . And when you get right
down to it, this sort of activity is the only reason
for "Shadowman" participating in any way in
IronCountyIndependent, to catch such political items
and to misguide the readers there to believe in the
viewpoints most beneficial to the political crooks in
charge of Iron County politics.
The referenced web page is actually evidence of
wrongdoing by the Michigan Supreme Court. If
you, the reader, is interested in how that could
be, please read Article VI of the Michigan
Constitution. If you're still having a problem
with it, wait a few weeks since the details will
be posted on the newly promised web page.
It is obvious from John Faccin's comments (he can
sometimes be useful despite himself, kind of like
Iron County's own Joe Biden) that "Shadowman" has
not been participating in the discussions for
a long time period. It is thus obvious that
"Shadowman" only comes out of hiding to guide
people's thinking back to what is in his, and
his political cronies interests. That's what
groupthink is all about.
In this community, the original political power
was in the hands of the agents of the mining
interests. And since they held the purse strings,
control of the population was really easy. The
mines did what they always did, control everything
to best maintain the peace, high production, and
maximize profits. Once the resources are all
used up, or the economy changes, they move on.
Once the mines left, those who didn't flee the
region when the mines closed were already accustomed
to being told what to think and what to do. It took
very little for their successors to step in and take
over. It continues through today. "Shadowman" is
enabling the Rule of Men by convincing the readers
to believe that his position is what is best for
them. Needless to say, it isn't.
Here's by far the best part. "Shadowman" and his
political cronies (including John Faccin) are
lining their pockets with your money and working
to promote their personal wealth, while I have
only the politics expressed by the Founding
Fathers as a weapon, and have no personal political
or financial advantage available from expressing my
beliefs.
I do have to wonder why anyone would give any
attention to a ;ocal politician who hides behind
a name like "Shadowman." If he had honest and
honorable intentions, shouldn't he or she be
posting under their own name. Shouldn't that
person be taking credit, in his or her own name,
for all ideas they claim are righteous?
Bill Vajk
Monday, June 8, 2009
What Does Jim Dellies Know that we do not?
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river/dellies.pdf
click here
displays a copy of the latest warranty deed for
the Travelur's Motel on US2 just west of the
City of Iron River.
The motel has 18 shabby units (I last stayed there
as a visitor to Iron County in December of 2000)
and an old trailer/family unit in the back along
with a regular owner/manager home at the front of
the motel.
The place has been unused for several years. All
the through-the-wall air conditioners are over
sized which leaves the rooms cold but muggy in
the summer. The bathrooms are dated to the 1950's
and the tile work and plumbing fixtures are in
poor condition throughout. The beds vary from
unit to unit, with room #1 having the worse of
everything, as though the worse was gathered into
one place an let only as a last resort when the
place was full. Maintenance was the lowest
priority with the Panero couple who last owned
and opwerated the place.
After their deaths, the "gallery" that had at one
time in the distant past been the original Alice's
Restaurant was torn down as it had rotted to such
an extent from the leaking roof that it was not
repairable.
It is clear that Dellies paid only $60,000 for the
motel and the property. In better economic times
that would have been a bargain if the new owner
could make repairs and upgrades over a longer
time period while some reasonable number of
rooms could be let to tourists. The outdoor in the
ground pool has not been used in some years, thus
its condition is unknown.
But today the tourism that could support the motel
is almost non-existent. One has only to routinely
pay attention to the number of vehicles at the
AmericInn in town to discover that we have very
few guests staying in Iron River. Most of the
year the Ice Lake Motel has many vacancies.
And look at the number of shuttered motels in
Iron County. All of this points to a dismal
future for tourism in Iron County. But Mr.
Dellies bought the motel anyway.
So what does Jim Dellies know that we do not?
And is that knowledge "insider", being
unavailable to the general public? I cannot
imagine that Mr. Stupak's congressional aid
is a fool, so he must have some sort of an angle
for buying the place, some reason that he believes
the investment will make him a profit where the
opposite is conventional wisdom.
I don't begrudge anyone being clever enough to
legitimately see an opportunity that others
miss, and I sincerely hope that's what's
happening.
Bill Vajk
click here
displays a copy of the latest warranty deed for
the Travelur's Motel on US2 just west of the
City of Iron River.
The motel has 18 shabby units (I last stayed there
as a visitor to Iron County in December of 2000)
and an old trailer/family unit in the back along
with a regular owner/manager home at the front of
the motel.
The place has been unused for several years. All
the through-the-wall air conditioners are over
sized which leaves the rooms cold but muggy in
the summer. The bathrooms are dated to the 1950's
and the tile work and plumbing fixtures are in
poor condition throughout. The beds vary from
unit to unit, with room #1 having the worse of
everything, as though the worse was gathered into
one place an let only as a last resort when the
place was full. Maintenance was the lowest
priority with the Panero couple who last owned
and opwerated the place.
After their deaths, the "gallery" that had at one
time in the distant past been the original Alice's
Restaurant was torn down as it had rotted to such
an extent from the leaking roof that it was not
repairable.
It is clear that Dellies paid only $60,000 for the
motel and the property. In better economic times
that would have been a bargain if the new owner
could make repairs and upgrades over a longer
time period while some reasonable number of
rooms could be let to tourists. The outdoor in the
ground pool has not been used in some years, thus
its condition is unknown.
But today the tourism that could support the motel
is almost non-existent. One has only to routinely
pay attention to the number of vehicles at the
AmericInn in town to discover that we have very
few guests staying in Iron River. Most of the
year the Ice Lake Motel has many vacancies.
And look at the number of shuttered motels in
Iron County. All of this points to a dismal
future for tourism in Iron County. But Mr.
Dellies bought the motel anyway.
So what does Jim Dellies know that we do not?
And is that knowledge "insider", being
unavailable to the general public? I cannot
imagine that Mr. Stupak's congressional aid
is a fool, so he must have some sort of an angle
for buying the place, some reason that he believes
the investment will make him a profit where the
opposite is conventional wisdom.
I don't begrudge anyone being clever enough to
legitimately see an opportunity that others
miss, and I sincerely hope that's what's
happening.
Bill Vajk
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Senator Carl Levin Ignores the Voters
I sent Michigan's Senator Carl Levin a letter discussing
the Michigan court system. In response I received a very
patronizing letter that can be found at:
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river/levin.pdf
It is clear to me that Senator Levin did not have any
concern for the problems in his home state. This is
NOT what we want from our elected representatives.
If he can't get something this simple right, what can
we expect of him when it comes to the bigger issues?
Bill Vajk
the Michigan court system. In response I received a very
patronizing letter that can be found at:
www.angelfire.com/planet/iron-river/levin.pdf
It is clear to me that Senator Levin did not have any
concern for the problems in his home state. This is
NOT what we want from our elected representatives.
If he can't get something this simple right, what can
we expect of him when it comes to the bigger issues?
Bill Vajk
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Rule of Men v. Rule of Law
Today is the anniversary of D Day, of 1944 when the
Allies stormed on to the Normandy beaches starting
the major offensive that ended World War II.
I was a child of 4 at the time. We didn't hear about
it because the Germans had forced the surrender of
all radio equipment capable of picking up allied
broadcasts. The Germans maintained complete control
over what news the people living under their rule
could receive. But the events of that day reshaped
the future, all our futures.
When the World War II ended, my mother did the
paperwork and got us, her three children, transported
to the USA by military transport. First to Paris
aboard a military version of the DC3 airplane, and
subsequently to New York abord the M.S. Gripsholm on
her final journey as a confiscated (from the Swedish-
American lines) troop carrier and a war bride transport
after the war.
With the outbreak of war in Europe in September of 1939,
a mere 3 months before I was born, such rule of law as
existed instantly converted to the rule of men for the
duration of the war, and for much of Europe, for a
period totaling 50 years under various regimes controlling
the different regions.
It was this rule of men that my mother escaped fairly
quickly, though my father, who was not yet an American
citizen, followed as soon as he was able to acquire
sufficient funds to bribe the Russian officer charged
with determining who could leave the country, and who
could not.
If the rule of men had not existed, he never could have
escaped what ensued. But then, if it hadn't been a rule
of men, none of us would have needed to escape in the
first place.
When my dad arrived many months after we did, he was
fortunate enough to be well educated and have saleable
skills that resulted in him picking up right where he
left off, in the petroleum business as an exploration
geophysicist for EXXON (in those days, ESSO.)
So we escaped the rule of men by coming to the USA where
the rule of law guides our lives.
Or does it?
It seems to me that the rule of law is in control of most
of the United States of America.
However I have become aware that once I moved into Iron
County Michigan, the rule of men that I had escaped in
1945 by moving to the USA, has found me again. And just
as my parents found it intolerable in 1945, I now find
it intolerable inside the USA, specifically in Iron County,
in 2009.
Beginning some time next week I will have a new web page
dedicated to discussing how the rule of men stands in
opposition to the rule of law here in Iron County, Michigan,
as a prelude to building the legal complaints that will
be brought against various government entities in Iron
County before the federal courts since it is impossible
to achieve rule of law court verdicts in the present
circumstances in Iron County, Michigan.
Before I undertook my FOIA lawsuit against John Archocosky
in Michigan's 41st Judicial Circuit I provided ample warning to
Archocosky and the city mayor Zanon. They ignored my
warnings just as Judge C. Joseph Schwedler in Iron County
has chosen to do. I also advised Mike Cox, the Michigan
Attorney General, Judge Celello of Iron Mountain, Governor
Jennifer Grandholm (Michigan) as well as the Michigan
Supreme Court. Nobody is paying attention.
For their part, the Supreme Court has removed some of the
evidence against them from the internet, a document called
"ADM File No. 2007-01" but no matter, others besides
myself have seen it before it was removed and copies are
extant.
So this is a combined disclosure about my past as well
as a promise of some of what the future holds for
those personally invested in imposing the rule of
men on this community, and on me.
Bill Vajk
Allies stormed on to the Normandy beaches starting
the major offensive that ended World War II.
I was a child of 4 at the time. We didn't hear about
it because the Germans had forced the surrender of
all radio equipment capable of picking up allied
broadcasts. The Germans maintained complete control
over what news the people living under their rule
could receive. But the events of that day reshaped
the future, all our futures.
When the World War II ended, my mother did the
paperwork and got us, her three children, transported
to the USA by military transport. First to Paris
aboard a military version of the DC3 airplane, and
subsequently to New York abord the M.S. Gripsholm on
her final journey as a confiscated (from the Swedish-
American lines) troop carrier and a war bride transport
after the war.
With the outbreak of war in Europe in September of 1939,
a mere 3 months before I was born, such rule of law as
existed instantly converted to the rule of men for the
duration of the war, and for much of Europe, for a
period totaling 50 years under various regimes controlling
the different regions.
It was this rule of men that my mother escaped fairly
quickly, though my father, who was not yet an American
citizen, followed as soon as he was able to acquire
sufficient funds to bribe the Russian officer charged
with determining who could leave the country, and who
could not.
If the rule of men had not existed, he never could have
escaped what ensued. But then, if it hadn't been a rule
of men, none of us would have needed to escape in the
first place.
When my dad arrived many months after we did, he was
fortunate enough to be well educated and have saleable
skills that resulted in him picking up right where he
left off, in the petroleum business as an exploration
geophysicist for EXXON (in those days, ESSO.)
So we escaped the rule of men by coming to the USA where
the rule of law guides our lives.
Or does it?
It seems to me that the rule of law is in control of most
of the United States of America.
However I have become aware that once I moved into Iron
County Michigan, the rule of men that I had escaped in
1945 by moving to the USA, has found me again. And just
as my parents found it intolerable in 1945, I now find
it intolerable inside the USA, specifically in Iron County,
in 2009.
Beginning some time next week I will have a new web page
dedicated to discussing how the rule of men stands in
opposition to the rule of law here in Iron County, Michigan,
as a prelude to building the legal complaints that will
be brought against various government entities in Iron
County before the federal courts since it is impossible
to achieve rule of law court verdicts in the present
circumstances in Iron County, Michigan.
Before I undertook my FOIA lawsuit against John Archocosky
in Michigan's 41st Judicial Circuit I provided ample warning to
Archocosky and the city mayor Zanon. They ignored my
warnings just as Judge C. Joseph Schwedler in Iron County
has chosen to do. I also advised Mike Cox, the Michigan
Attorney General, Judge Celello of Iron Mountain, Governor
Jennifer Grandholm (Michigan) as well as the Michigan
Supreme Court. Nobody is paying attention.
For their part, the Supreme Court has removed some of the
evidence against them from the internet, a document called
"ADM File No. 2007-01" but no matter, others besides
myself have seen it before it was removed and copies are
extant.
So this is a combined disclosure about my past as well
as a promise of some of what the future holds for
those personally invested in imposing the rule of
men on this community, and on me.
Bill Vajk
Local Prison to Close.
6 June 2009:
The State of Michigan has decided to close all their
minimum security prisons, including the one in Iron
River Township.
Bill Vajk
The State of Michigan has decided to close all their
minimum security prisons, including the one in Iron
River Township.
Bill Vajk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
