"Why did we allow expansion of the current system beyond its capabilities?" asked Commissioner Frank Cummings. "We created our own problem. I think we kind of shot ourselves in the foot."

So ya, 'ol Frank Cummings should prolly face the consequences of a Ezekiel 33 styled amended Charter too.

Cummings said someone should have predicted this problem long ago.

"We've met and exceeded what we can handle and nobody has screamed 'fire' along the way," he said.

That would've been your job, Frank... had you been doing it.

Bottom line.  I do not agree with this proposed amendment as much as I don't agree with muslimama Tlaib from the Congo of Detroit pushing her "Ban the Box" legislation to be upon 'certain' employers in this state.

From what I've read, Mr. VerWys was up front with disclosing his record to voters and they chose to hire him.  That's not any different from a private sector employer having the freedom to choose who they hire based on disclosed knowledge.

Both the Constitution of the United States and the Michigan Constitution have crystal-clear prohibitions against ex post facto laws:

No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.  (U. S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 9)

No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contract shall be enacted.  (Michigan Constitution, Article 1, Section 10)

This charter amendment, as it is currently written and according to the Kentwood City Counsel, amounts to an ex post facto law that is intended for enshrinement in the city's charter.

I intend on raising that point tonight at the commission meeting.  For a change, probably because there's already some public backlash developing against this amendment, the commission is going to forego the "executive session" portion of the scheduled meeting and handle the entire matter in the form of the committee of the whole.

I showed up at City Hall earlier than strictly necessary, but that gave me time to sit in on the committee work sessions in advance of the 7:00 p.m. meeting.  What I noticed as I took the cup of coffee offered by Mayor Root was that someone had hardcopied this article (through comment # 2) and passed out copies to all of the commissioners.  At the time, only Commissioner VerWys knew me face-to-face, so it wasn't like I was actually expecting trouble.

At the regular commission meeting (at which the public seating seemed filled to about half-capacity), the question on the resolution was set as item # 17 on the agenda (Resolutions).  Item # 11 (Public Hearings) included two applications for Industrial Facilities Exemptions (read, "tax abatements") for Hearthside Food Solutions LLC.  After the standard dog-and-pony discussion regarding how this will help a locally-owned company create jobs locally, the commission approved the applications by a 6 - 1 vote.  (Commissioner VerWys was the only "no" vote.)

And before we get to what happened with item # 18 on the agenda, let me pause for a moment to point out that I am very sure that the City Commission knew that Commissioner VerWys and Mayor Root had provided interviews to WOOD-TV8's Joe LaFurgey, and that they had aired right about at the time the committee work sessions were breaking up.

Once the commission reached the proposed resolution, two things happened:  The first was that Commissioner VerWys recused himself from the dais, stating that this resolution had the potential to affect him personally and so his comments should come from the floor.  The second was that Mayor Root opened up the floor for public comment.

Including Ray VerWys and myself, five people approached the lectern to speak regarding the resolution.  Not one spoke in favor of the proposed charter amendment as it was presented.  Those who did speak cited:

• that the city commission is perceived as attempting to overturn the ballot box result from November 2009

• that the city is opening itself up to a big lawsuit, with attendant negative publicity, and which the city cannot afford, for violating the constitutional prohibitions against ex post facto laws

• that approving this resolution for the ballot is essentially the same as putting Ray VerWys back in prison

• that not providing a sunset clause is a very bad idea, because it fosters a "one strike and out" culture, where no one is ever permitted redemption

Once the public commentary was closed, the commission discussed the resolution.  Without going into all the details of who said exactly what and in which order, this was the position of each of the members of the commission on the resolution:

• Commissioner Frank Cummings - who introduced the resolution as written - said that this resolution was not targeted at any one particular commissioner, but that elected officials in general should be held to a higher standard than the rest of the public.

• Commissioner Robert Coughlin supported the proposed amendment as written and introduced.

• Commissioner Richard Clanton, citing the language of the Lansing city charter, recommended that the resolution be amended to include a 20 year sunset clause.

• Mayor Richard Root supported the proposed amendment as written and introduced, questioned what the voters knew and when they knew it with regard to the November 2009 elections, and said that the retroactive implications of the resolution should be left in the hands of the commission if the amendment is approved this November.

• Commissioner Sharon Brinks supported the proposed amendment as written and introduced, but did not oppose some sort of sunset clause. She also cited legal precedent that an expunged felony removes that conviction from consideration with regard to the proposed amendment.

• Commissioner Michael Brown opposed the proposed amendment as written, and also opposed a sunset clause of 20 years.  A sunset clause should be included, but he didn't believe that 20 years is the right waiting period.

At about quarter before nine, Mayor Root recessed the commission until 9:00 p.m. so that they could take a break before wrapping up deliberations and putting the matter to a vote.

When the commission reconvened, and after some additional discussion, Commissioner Brown verified from the City Clerk that it was too late for any approved resolution to appear on the August primary ballot, but that the deadline for an approved resolution to appear on the November general ballot was about July 11th; then he put forward a motion to table the resolution until the June 21st regular meeting so that the commissioners might have time to research and consider options for amending the proposed resolution . . . the motion died for lack of support.

Commissioner Clanton then put forward a motion that the proposed resolution be amended to include a twenty-year sunset provision . . . the motion died for lack of support.

After some additional discussion, the question of the proposed resolution, which remained unchanged from the original wording, was called to a roll-call vote (Commissioner VerWys abstained):

• Brinks "yes"
  
• Brown "no"
  
• Clanton "yes"
  
• Coughlin "yes"
  
• Cummings "yes"
  
• Root "yes"

But as annoyed as I am about that, I am most thoroughly disgusted with Mayor Root, Commissioner Cummings, Commissioner Coughlin, and Commissioner Brinks.  In spite of unanimous public commentary opposed to the resolution, evidence that the proposed resolution is inconsistent with all other Michigan municipalities having similar charter amendments, and in the face of clear testimony that this resolution violates the federal and state constitutions, these four ninnyhammers went ahead and did it anyway.  (And that, boys and girls, fits the Merriam-Webster definition of "stupid.")

(As a total sidebar, though still relevant, major kudos should go to WOOD-TV8, WZZM-TV13, and the Grand Rapids Press for providing very fair and balanced coverage of this whole story.)

To Commissioner VerWys' enduring credit, he did a marvelous job of maintaining his composure throughout the entire debate.  (I think that everyone in the room knew that this resolution was specifically targeted at him, despite the gang-of-four's pretensions otherwise.)  However, once the vote was done, he declined Mayor Root's offer to return to his chair for the remaining agenda items, instead opting to retire out to the hallway to process as privately as possible what just happened.  (Crystal Hilliard, with WOOD-TV8, stepped into the hallway via another door in order to interview him for the eleven-o'clock news.)

Commissioner Brinks was having none of that.

I'm not sure what exactly motivated it, but Brinks cut off the closing comments of one of the commissioners and promptly pitched a hissy fit to the effect that a city commissioner who had not been properly excused had absented himself from the meeting, and he ought to be ordered back into his chair.  Police Chief Richard Mattice, on Mayor Root's order, stepped out into the hallway and asked Commissioner VerWys to return to the meeting.  (My take on the Chief's reaction was that he wasn't too thrilled with the order.)

So now the only person standing between the City of Kentwood and a disastrously unconstitutional miscarriage of justice is Michigan's Attorney General, Bill Schuette.  He can put the kibosh on this entire debacle by simply saying "no" in writing and signing his name to it.  (Jason, would you mind getting him on the phone for me?)

In the meantime, I'm going to be having a chat with the leadership of the Independent Coalition of Kent County tonight.  A key element of that discussion will be whether or not the gang-of-four's conduct warrants a recall attempt.

Any shot I may have had at leveraging the ouster of Commissioner Coughlin via either the August primary ballot or the November general ballot vaporized when Coughlin pulled down 62.22% of the vote in the Ward 1 Primary.  Because that's a clear majority of the votes cast, he's in with no need to run in November.  (That Scott Bailey never actually got off his duff and ran any campaign whatsoever, let alone an effective one, didn't help matters any.)

And as soon as my family returned from the hospital after my daughter's birth, I made a point of checking the Kent County website, Elections Department, to see as to whether or not the proposed charter amendment was actually placed on the ballot.  Imagine my surprise when I found (on page 4) this:

Shall Section 14.1, Chapter XIV, of the Charter of the City of Kentwood be amended to prohibit persons who have been convicted of a felony from being qualified to serve in elective office in the City?

And this was apparently done with no fanfare or press release whatsoever.  In fact, I went by Commissioner VerWys' place of work last week and discussed it with him, and it was the first that he'd heard of it; ditto for key players in my citywide political ground crew.  Evidently, the AG approved it, the Governor signed off on it, and the City Clerk just notified the County Clerk that this was to be placed on the November ballot (all without so much as a "by your leave").