Quick, look at the top of this
page.
It says OPINION, right? And it
said that last week, and the week
beforewhenmy opinion apparent-
ly garnered a great deal of atten-
tion in the City of Wayne. I wrote
my opinion about the conduct of a
candidate for city council who also
publishes a “newsmagazine” and
actively personally solicits adver-
tising from local businesses. It was
my opinion that this is wrong,
could be construed or interpreted
as the buying or selling of some-
thing other than advertising and is
patently unethical.
It is my opinion that this puts
the business owners or employees
being solicited in an extremely
uncomfortable and often unten-
able position.
I also expressed my opinion
that other conduct of this individ-
ual was less than ethical, using his
taking payment for publishing
legal notices of the city in his
“newsmagazine”whenhe knewhe
was not qualified as a legal news-
paper as one example of his less
than appropriate past conduct.
Many, many people agreed.
Others, like Edward B.
McMurray, did not. I received a let-
ter from Mr. McMurray, printed at
left, detailing his opinion of my
journalistic errors and failures in
addressing this issue. Mr.
McMurray writes a fine letter, his
English and grammar teachers
would be proud. Unfortunately, he
apparently never took journalism,
because he missed the big header
at the top of the page I pointed out
earlier. Remember, the one that
saysOPINION.
Mr. McMurray is also, from
what I hear, a very nice, highly-
respected, community-minded
resident who does an incredible
amount of good for the city with
his PeopleHelpingPeople project.
It is, once again, my opinion,
that his disagreeing with me is a
good thing. His criticisms are less
than accurate, but that he took the
time to readwhat I had to say, then
writeme a response, is admirable.
He claims that I printed unsub-
stantiated allegations or rumors.
No, Mr. McMurray, I didn't. I
wouldn't have printed any of it if I
had any doubts at all about the
accuracy of the situation. I used
phrases like “it was also rumored”
and “allegedly” because I did not
witness some of this man's blatant
misconduct myself, but heard
about it from other eyewitnesses.
That's plural, Mr. McMurray,
because I never, ever depend on
one independent source. My
cranky old editor always demand-
ed at least two verifications. In this
case, I had at least three.
Mr. McMurray also had difficul-
ty, he says in his letter, of determin-
ing who said, when caught taking
payment for city notices he was
unqualified to print, “I wondered
when they were going to catch on.”
Let me make it clear for you, Mr.
McMurray, it was the candidate
youare so strongly defending.
Mr. McMurray also took
umbrage, he says, with my revela-
tion that this candidate and I have
an unpleasant history. I apologize
for that, if you felt it was wrong, Mr.
McMurray, but
it was an
attempt to be as
honest about
the situation as I could. I do have
an unpleasant, and very long, his-
tory with this man, beginning
when he was just a teenager. I
knew him very, very well. I know
his family, who are extremely love-
ly, kind, caring and gentle people.
Writing what I did about him was
not easy for me----and I took weeks
to wade through the personal
moral dilemma this situation
posed.
Now, here comes the big one.
What Mr. McMurray claims has
really tied a knot inhis tailfeathers
is my casting “a dark shadow not
only on the integrity of the candi-
date but also of six departments in
this city.”
What I saidwas that it behooves
all those in government to avoid
the appearance of wrongdoing. I
didn't impugn the character of any-
one other than the man in ques-
tion. I never implied or suggested
that anybody in any city depart-
ment would do anything other
than their job with honesty and
dignity. That seems to be your
interpretation of my words, Mr.
McMurray, and Iwonderwhy
Could it be because one of those
department heads wrote for this
man's “newsmagazine” in just the
last issue or that the city attorney
put a paid advertisement in his
last paper, which can only be inter-
preted as endorsing and validating
his candidacy?
And as for the city clerk being
replaced as a columnist for the
publication which you say you
“knew in July”, I wonder just how
close to the situation you must be
to have had that kind of parochial
A
SSOCIATED
N
EWSPAPERS OF
M
ICHIGAN
P
AGE
6
September 22, 2011
Letters
Once again, the actions of the Plymouth Township Board of
Trustees has us somewhat puzzled.
We fully understand the financial constraints that plague
nearly every municipality in the area----budget cuts and subse-
quent service cuts are becoming more the norm than anyone
would like to admit. In Plymouth Township, where the fire
department budget faces a $1 million loss with the withdrawal
of the City of Plymouth from a joint services agreement, diffi-
cult decisions and choices have to bemade.
But still, some of these decisions are curious, at best.
Take for instance the choice to refuse an $800,000 federal
grant from the Federal Emergency Management Authority.
Township officials reportedly refused to apply for of secure the
grant funding because they did not want to have to guarantee
no layoffs of staffing in the fire department for two years.
Maintaining a specific level of staffing is a requirement of the
grant towhich township officials didnot want to commit.
OK, perhaps they had their reasons. Maybe they are so
unsure of their budget projections they did not want to be in
the position of promising to maintain a specific level of fire-
fighter staffing per population for two years. Except that the
funding might have filled nearly half the budget gap created
with the departure of the city fromthe joint agreement.
We had questions recently when the board members
refused to acknowledge the will of the public, about 3,500 of
them, who wanted a special assessment to pay for fire protec-
tion on the ballot. Board members were unsupportive of the
effort and the township clerk denied the validity of many signa-
tures even those of condominium owners who, officials claim,
do not actually own the land on which their homes are con-
structed, or so the audience at the board meeting was
informed, so were not actual “landowners” and could not sign
the petition.
Frankly, we're still shaking our heads about that one, but we
aren't attorneys and are all too familiarwith the vagaries of var-
ious lawswhichwe findpretty confusing occasionally.
But while the letter of the law is often confusing, the intent
is usually, if not always, clear. People should be given a chance
to choose their own path in a democratic society. Residents in
PlymouthTownship are being denied that opportunity.
Now the board members have agreed to increase the dis-
tance a part-time, on call firefighter can live from the township
borders from 10 to 15 miles. That seems like a big deal to us,
especially since the board also reduced the qualifications for
these part-time firemen to a Firefighter I rather than
Firefighter II classification. To sweeten the pot even a bit more
to entice prospective part-time on-call firefighters to work with
the township, they then increased the pay rate for them.
Township officials are determined, it would appear, to rid
the community of a professional, full-time fire department with
AdvancedLife Support service. Theywould rather have a com-
paratively untrained, part-time, out of the area on call depart-
ment whichwill, we can only presume, costmuch less.
It appears the board members intend to depend on police
officers as first-responders to provide initial medical aid to vic-
tims of disasters or on a private ambulance company to
respond tomedical emergency calls.
And each of the board members seems adamant that this is
the best course of action for the community, despite the stated
wish of many residents to put the issue of an assessment to pay
for the professional service available in the past on the ballot.
They will remain, adamant, we suspect, until one of themor
their family needs AdvancedLife Support, or their home, heav-
en forbid, falls prey to a raging blaze.
Then, we predict, their attitude about the necessity and
value of a professional, full-time fire department will change
very quickly.
We knowours did.
But while the letter of the law
is often confusing,
the intent is usually, if not always, clear.
”
What I said was that it behooves
all those in government to avoid
the appearance of wrongdoing.
”
Actions of Plymouth board remain puzzling
Candidates meeting set
To the editor:
The Belleville Area Women's
Club is sponsoring a “Meet the
Candidates” forum scheduled for
6 p.m. Monday, Oct. 3 in the cafete-
ria at South Middle School, 45201
Owen, Belleville, 48111. This is
your opportunity to meet the can-
didates for mayor, Belleville City
Council and the Van Buren Board
of Education.
Dinner will be served promptly
at 6 p.m. at a cost of $10. Please
send your check payable to
Belleville Area Women's Club
(BAWC) by Monday, Sept. 26 to
Janet Millard, 1016 Zephyr,
Ypsilanti, MI 48198. If you have
questions, call (734) 485-2968 or e-
mail jfayemillard@att.net. Please
include names of attendees with
your reservation.
The public is also welcome to
arrive after dinner to attend just
the program which should begin
at approximately 6:30 p.m. No
reservation is necessary to attend
just the program.
J
anetMillard, secretary
Belleville AreaWomen's Club
Governor's plan blasted
To the editor;
I am fed up with Big Brother
peeking inmywindow.
This latest attack by Gov. (Rick)
Snyder on the privacy of individu-
als by requiring doctors to report
on the Body Mass Index (BMI) of
our children is again prying into
the private lives of families.
Government has no business
snooping around gathering info on
how we live, what we eat and
wherewe go.
Snyder needs to pay attention
the things that cause the economy
to grow in Michigan, not the waist-
lines of our children
Phil Solarz,
Westland
Column is criticized
To the editor;
For the second week in a row, I
have taken objection to your op-
ed. Last week I let it go. This week
I cannot.
You prefaced your editorial on
Sept. 8, 2011 by recalling some-
thing your “cranky editor” told you
about journalism which was in
part to “avoid the appearance of
wrongdoing” then you proceeded
to do it.
You made statements like “he
allegedly” and “it was also
rumored.” Your op-ed contains at
least three unsubstantiated allega-
tions or rumors. I could tell your
intuition was telling you “don't
write that,” as you wrote, “When I
first heard about it, I thought the
best course of action was to shut
up.”Youwrote it anyway.
As a reporter, are you not obli-
Everyone’s entitled to a personal ‘opinion’
See
Opinion
, page 7
See
Letters
, page 7