You would think that after five years, nothing that the city does would shock me very much. But you would be wrong.
I’m referring to this quote from City Manager Jonathan Smith, taken from the April 7, 2021 issue of the Clarkston News and linked here (https://clarkstonnews.com/after-more-than-five-years-bisio-foia-suit-settled-for-160k/):
“The total settlement amount is $160,000, and the city’s portion of that is $35,000,” said Clarkston City Manager Jonathan Smith. “The difference is being paid by the two other defendant parties in the case, the Michigan Municipal League and City Attorney Tom Ryan’s insurance provider. Those parties requested the city to not disclose the amounts of their payments. A budget amendment was passed by city council on February 12 reallocating $35,000 from the fund balance to pay the city’s portion.”
There weren’t “two other defendant parties in the case.” I sued only one defendant – the City of the Village of Clarkston. Clarkston obtained a contribution toward the $160,000 that Clarkston owed my attorneys from two other parties – its insurer (the Michigan Municipal League Liability and Property Pool [MMLLPP]) and City Attorney Tom Ryan’s malpractice insurer. That’s helpful to the city, but it’s false to say that the MMLLPP and/or Ryan were defendants in the lawsuit – because they certainly were not.
With regard to the MMLLPP and Ryan, as my dear-departed mother would say, who gives a tinker’s damn what “those parties” requested? Clarkston taxpayers pay for the insurance coverage from the MMLLPP. They are entitled to know how much coverage they actually received when the lawsuit was settled.
The public is also entitled to know that City Attorney Tom Ryan was involved in the settlement and to what extent he was involved. Ryan is an officer appointed under our Clarkston charter. He’s paid with taxpayer dollars every month. He billed the taxpayers for “work” on my FOIA lawsuit, something that was completely improper because Ryan’s legal advice caused the lawsuit, and he had an interest in the lawsuit continuing so that his legal advice could be vindicated. Ryan’s “work” on the lawsuit was also entirely unnecessary because the MMLLPP assigned an attorney to represent the city in the lawsuit at no additional charge to the city. The extent of Ryan’s involvement should have been limited to providing background information to the attorney assigned by the MMLLPP when requested and to make himself available for deposition if required. That’s it.
I find it hard to believe that the MMLLPP cared very much about keeping the amount of their contribution a secret. They pay claims all the time. While I can’t prove it because I wasn’t there during the closed sessions, I think that the main reason Ryan and the city council wanted to keep the MMLLPP contribution a secret was because you can all do math. If you knew that Clarkston contributed $35,000, and you knew that the MMLLPP contributed $90,000, then you can determine that Ryan’s insurance carrier contributed $35,000, bringing the total to $160,000. That Ryan had to contribute anything at all to the settlement is a disgrace, but the taxpayers are absolutely entitled to know how much that contribution was so that they can decide whether or not they want to make their voices heard about Ryan’s continued employment with the city.
There were two closed sessions to discuss resolving the lawsuit, and the city council gave you zero information about what they were agreeing to beyond the city’s $35,000 contribution (something they had to tell you about because they were spending your money). The city council voted unanimously after both closed sessions on some undisclosed settlement agreement that they discussed and agreed on in closed session and failed to disclose and agree on in open session, in violation of the Open Meetings Act.
It’s entirely possible that the city also did this to misrepresent the total amount of the settlement to the public. The settlement states “Plaintiff contends she is the prevailing party in the Lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act. The City contests that.” Yes, it’s true – the city still refuses to admit that I won the lawsuit – even though I actually won the lawsuit. I would not be surprised to learn that not only would the city like the public to believe that I didn’t really win the lawsuit, but also that the settlement of a several hundred thousand dollar claim was only $35,000. Maybe there will be a further explanation, after the city has more time to discuss this in secret and contrive another story since, as Smith has now said twice, a formal statement on the matter will be released soon.
Do I blame Mr. Smith for this? Not at all. He’s an officer appointed under our Charter, just like Ryan. Both of them serve at the pleasure of the city council, and both of them take direction from the city council. If we accept that Smith’s stated reason that the subterfuge was because the MMLLPP and Ryan asked the city to keep their contributions a secret from you, then you have to know that couldn’t have happened without the approval of your mayor and city council:
Mayor:
Eric Haven – HavenE@Villageofclarkston.org
Councilmembers:
Sue Wylie (Mayor ProTem) – WylieS@VillageofClarkston.org
Al Avery – AveryA@VillageofClarkston.org
Ed Bonser BonserE@VillageofClarkston.org
Gary Casey CaseyG@VillageofClarkston.org
Jason Kneisc KneiscJ@VillageofClarkston.org
Joe Luginski LuginskiJ@VillageofClarkston.org
Shameful. Absolutely shameful. A lawsuit that began because of Ryan and his desire to keep documents secret from the public ended with Ryan’s desire to keep his contribution to the settlement a secret from the public. And the city council still protects him.
Wouldn’t you like your elected officials to explain why Ryan is still working for us? I know I would.