Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE 19TH CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF BENZIE

ERIC L. VANDUSSEN Case No. 13Plaintiff Hon. James M. Batzer vs. BENZIE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Defendants. g1

-CZ

ERIC L. VANDUSSEN Plaintiff in pro per P.O. Box 692 Beulah, Michigan 49617 (231) 651-9189 erielvandussen@gmail.com

A TRUE COPY
Ep 1 1 201

COMPLAINT FOR INJUCTIVE RELIEF NOW COMES Plaintiff, ERIC L. VANDUSSEN, in pro per, and for his Compliant against the above named Defendant, states that the acts giving rise to this action occurred in whole, or in part, within the County of Benzie, State of Michigan, and there is no other pending or resolved civil action between these parties arising out of the same transactions or occurrences as alleged in this complaint. Further, Plaintiff states that: JURISDICTION 1. Plaintiff, ERIC L. VANDUSSEN, is an individual residing within the County

of Benzie and the State of Michigan. 1

2.

Defendant, BENZIE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, (hereinafter: "BTA"

or "Defendant") is a governmental entity established and existing under the laws of the State of Michigan and Defendant is required to fully comply with MICHIGAN'S OPEN MEETINGS ACT 276 of 1976, (hereinafter: OMA). 3. The OMA, at MCL 15.271(4), authorizes Plaintiff to pursue this civil action, in

this Honorable Court's jurisdiction, seeking to compel Defendant's compliance with the OMA or to enjoin Defendant's noncompliance with the OMA.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 4. 5. Defendant is "public body" as defined in the OMA at MCL 15.262(a). The OMA, at MCL 15.269(1), requires in pertinent part that: ... The public body shall make any corrections in the minutes at the next meeting after the meeting to which the minutes refer. The public body shall make corrected minutes available at or before the next subsequent meeting after correction. The corrected minutes shall show both the original entry and the correction. 6. Further, the OMA mandates, at MCL 15.269(3), that: A public body shall make proposed minutes available for public inspection within 8 business days after the meeting to which the minutes refer. 7. The OMA additionally prescribes, at MCL 15.263, that: (2) All decisions of a public body shall be made at a meeting open to the public. (3) All deliberations of a public body constituting a quorum of its members shall take place at a meeting open to the public ... 2

COUNT I - VIOLATION OF MICHIGAN'S OMA 8. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference, paragraphs I through 7 and

further alleges: 9. Defendant has a custom of purposefully and deliberately failing to comply with

the DMA's minute taking requirements. 10. Defendant has been secretly and illegally making additions, deletions and

corrections to Defendant's board meeting minutes before conducting Defendant's next meetings after the meetings to which the minutes refer. 11. Defendant also knowingly and regularly fails to comply with the OMA's dictate

that Defendant's "corrected minutes shall show both the original entry and the correction." WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue an order permanently enjoining Defendant from violating MCL 15.269(1) in the manner described above.

COUNT II - VIOLATION OF MICHIGAN'S OMA 12. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference, paragraphs 1 through 11 and

further alleges: 13. Upon information and belief, Defendant regularly fails to make their proposed

draft minutes available for public inspection within 8 business days after the meeting to which the minutes refer. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue an order permanently enjoining Defendant from violating MCL 15.269(3) in the manner described above. 3

COUNT III - VIOLATION OF MICHIGAN'S OMA 14. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference, paragraphs 1 through 13 and

further alleges: 15. Certain members of Defendant's governing board have been regularly making

decisions to compel BTA employees to make corrections to Defendant's draft minutes, without Defendant first conducting a meeting open to the public pertaining to their corrections. 16. A quorum of certain members of Defendant's governing board and Defendant's

executive committee have been regularly conducting secret deliberations regarding their efforts to compel BTA employees to make corrections to Defendant's draft minutes, without Defendant first conducting a meeting open to the public pertaining to their corrections. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue an order permanently enjoining Defendant from violating MCL 15.263(2)&(3) in the manner described above.

COUNT IV - VIOLATION OF MICHIGAN'S OMA 17. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference, paragraphs 1 through 16 and

further alleges: 18. On and around September 9, 2013, a quorum of Defendant's governing board

deliberated and made the decision to ask attorney Chris Cooke to draft and send a threatening letter to Defendant's executive director in an attempt to coerce Defendant's executive director into immediately resigning her position with Defendant. 19. Defendant's deliberations and decision to instruct attorney Chris Cooke to draft a

threating letter to Defendant's executive director did not occur at a meeting open to the public. 20. Defendant's executive director refused agree to the ridiculous terms contained in

attorney Chris Cooke's threating letter, which was written in an attempt to force her resignation. 21. Certain members of Defendant's governing board became very agitated when

their executive director refused to agree to forced resignation and gag order requirement. 22. On and around September 9, 2013, a quorum of Defendant's governing board

deliberated and made the decision to terminate Defendant's executive director without their deliberations and termination decision being conducted at a meeting open to the public. 23. On September 10, 2013, during an open meeting, a quorum of Defendant's

governing board rubberstamped their previous decision to terminate their executive director. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue an order permanently enjoining Defendant from violating MCL 15.263(2)&(3) in the manner described above.

Respectfully submitted,

Eric L. VanDussen - Plaintiff in pro per

S-ar putea să vă placă și