Proposed recall petition language targeting West Bloomfield Township Trustee Larry Brown has been filed with the Oakland County Clerk/Register of Deeds Office.
The petition language was submitted by township resident Betty Hyman on Jan. 5 and a hearing to evaluate the petition has been scheduled with the Oakland County Election Panel on Wednesday, Jan. 26.
Hyman is asking for a recall, citing Brown’s decision in 2009 to have his $125 meeting stipend diverted to a township Water and Sewer Benevolent Fund for needy families, claiming that he has not paid taxes on his 2009 earnings as a trustee.
“As of Jan. 15 every year, I pay taxes in West Bloomfield and Mr. Brown should pay taxes on his income,” Hyman said.
“I’ve also been paying my count of house taxes in February, which also pays for Mr. Brown’s salary. Four board members can’t absolve him of it.”
Township Supervisor Michele Economou Ureste and Trustee Steve Kaplan recently brought the issue forward as part of a declaratory judgment suit filed in Oakland County Circuit Court, which is awaiting a final order.
But, at the Monday, Jan. 10 township board meeting, the board voted 5-2 to allow Brown and Trustees Howard Rosenberg and Gene Farber to continue to have all or part of their meeting stipends allocated to the fund.
Hyman also cited Brown’s vote in November 2009 in favor of a sanitary sewer lining project contract with Liquiforce Services (USA), which has an office located in Romulus but is based in Kingsville, Ontario, Canada, stating in her petition that the contract would have been subsidized with federal stimulus funds.
Hyman also cited Brown’s lawsuit last year against the West Bloomfield Police Department regarding a prior Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking information on an investigation by the Michigan Attorney General’s Office.
The judge dismissed that suit because the police department couldn’t be sued as a legal entity.
Both the West Bloomfield Police and the Oakland County Sheriff’s Departments previously investigated Brown’s business relationship with Dan Garman, an outside contractor for Richfield Equities, after Brown voted for a single-source waste hauling contract with Richfield in December 2010 after he disclosed the relationship with Garman.
The investigation determined there was nothing inappropriate. No warrants or charges were issued and the case was closed on March 16, 2010.
When reached, Brown did not have any comments regarding the new recall drive.
If the recall petition language is approved, Hyman will have 180 days to circulate recall petitions, and that 6,654 registered voters’ signatures, or 25 percent of township votes cast in the last gubernatorial election, would be needed to seek Brown’s recall on a township ballot.
This comes after township resident Ray Jarjis Kasmikhia filed for a recall petition in June 2010, but was turned down by the county election commission because the recall petition language wasn’t clear.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login
Observer
January 21, 2011 at 6:07 pm
Someone needs to ask the hard questions. If Larry Brown is willing to give his stipend away, why would he care about paying his taxes on it? We are probably talking about close to 10k a year, a couple thousand in taxes? Wouldn’t the tax write off be worth it? It’s flat out not logical so, that must mean more might be at stake.
Why hasn’t a comparison of his giveaway vs his takeaway been stated? Isn’t his “stipend contibution” about a 1/50th of what his tantrum lawsuits costs the taxpayers?
At this point, I don’t see how Larry Brown can effectively serve the publc.