Thursday, July 9, 2015

ILLEGAL "ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT"

 I am a 70-year old retiree with a small home and minimal social security as my only retirement income.  The municipality where I live has carried on Nazi-style ordinance enforcement for some time.  In 2007 they prosecuted me criminally for "too tall grass" after I had cut the grass in question within their time limit. Moreover, state law doesn't allow criminal prosecution for this type of "private nuisance."  The City lost in court to me, a layman.  The judge said that, if he were treated similarly, he would have "declared war" on the City, just as I had (by defending myself aggressively in court).  
     As retaliation three years later, the City suddenly cut down the large, verdant shade tree in my front yard (shown in pic), claiming falsely that it was dead; and they towed away my old (1989) but currently-licensed and serviceable mini-van while I was out of town, claiming falsely that it was a junk vehicle. The City ignored state and federal Constitutional law requirements for reasonable notice and hearing when they did these things. 
     The $1,200.00 special assessment the City placed against my home, for the cost of cutting down my main shade tree and effectively stealing my van, threatened my ability to make mortgage payments and remain in my home.  I have been able to do so only because I have been able to obtain small loans.
     I am suing the City and the city officials responsible in federal court.  The Complaint gives full details. (The case number is 5:13-CV-0543-JLV.  You can read the Complaint and all the documents for free at any South Dakota federal courthouse or online through the federal PACER online document system, though there is a $.10/page charge for what you download.)  The City has failed so far in their motions to have the case thrown out and discovery is going forward, though it has been delayed.  Apparently part of the reason for the delay is because the outgoing Mayor in 2011, Allen Hanks, destroyed large numbers of City documents. (See story on Kooiker in Rapid City Journal online of July 3, 2015). By 2011, I had served the City with multiple notices of intention to sue and several notices to preserve evidence.  Some officials really seem to believe that they ARE the law.
      I used to be a paralegal and, because I have no financial resources except my home, I am handling the lawsuit myself so far.  I would prefer to have an attorney, but that is not economically realistic. Also, I think larger contributions such as those necessary to pay attorney's fees should go to cases where someone's liberty is at stake. 
     I have kept very good documentation, including, for example, audio recording of a City official saying that, in "my case," no ordinance violation was necessary to order me to replace the roof on my house.  Since I have powerful evidence, I believe I have everything under control except the cost of necessary depositions, at about $300 per hour including transcript.  I will need to take these depositions in September or October this year.  I hope to raise $1800.00 here for this purpose.  It is risky to go to trial without taking depositions of the main, hostile witnesses: Otherwise they may present some surprise, perjured testimony.  It is important to elicit any perjury early on and be prepared to disprove it at trial.
    I am confident I will win at trial if I can prepare well, or else settle satisfactorily when the City understands that I am well-prepared for trial.  I have sued partly because I believe that the City must be forced to stop treating citizens as if we are the least-significant serfs they own, and as if our homes are their property to do with as they please. City officials should have to obey the law, too. 
For More Information Please Click Here
OR

No comments:

Post a Comment