Robert Heyl for Salem Twp. Supervisor

I want to thank the residents of Salem who voted for me in 2008 and once again ask for your support.  I was elected by the majority of voters in a record turnout during the last election.  Salem residents recognized changes were needed and I have been working diligently to make these much needed changes. 

A small group of individuals associated with the former administration are disrupting meetings, spreading untruths by letter and websites, and in general are trying to create as much chaos as possible.  They do not want change because the status quo is personally and monetarily advantageous for them.  Up to now, I have not responded because I felt it would drag me down to their level.  I now feel I must address at least some of the issues, especially those with regards to the change of Township attorneys and the truly ironic claim that I have denied first amendment rights at Township meetings.  I also want to address issues regarding the Ryder House and Fire Administration Board.

LEGAL

Recently we changed Township attorneys.  Salem’s former Supervisor claims that our former attorney never lost a case.  However the prior attorney not only cost the Township more than $500,000 last year alone in legal fees, but his advice precipitated a $30 million lawsuit against the Township by Salem Springs (Shostak).  In addition the enormous expense of the Police services lawsuit has yet to be settled.  These expenses could be even more significant than the legal fees already mentioned.  Our former attorney lost this case twice for the three Townships involved.

The ACLU lawsuit cost the Township and its insurance company over $130,000.  Thousands of this was paid to our prior township attorney to observe the insurance lawyer.  Co-counseling if you will.  Why?  This lawsuit could have been avoided with a simple apology to the ejected residents from the ex-Supervisor.  He wanted his day in court so long as the residents of Salem were paying the bill.  He finally agreed to the settlement. 

I felt our previous attorneys were unsatisfactory on many of the legal issues facing our Township.  The people have a right to know the prior legal team cost our township $1,400,000.00 (one million four hundred thousand dollars), in fees and costs over the past nine years.  That doesn’t seem reasonable for a small township like ours.

I guess you could say the current Board has 1.4 Million reasons to lose confidence in our prior Township attorney.  In addition, there are several members of the current and previous Township Board who have admitted that our prior Township attorney is a “close personal friend”.  I doubt they can be objective regarding his performance. 

I have ironically been accused of denying First Amendment rights by the ex-Supervisor whose own denial of First Amendment rights was so egregious that the ACLU brought a lawsuit.  I have often found that people with a weakness in an area like to accuse others of the same thing.  It is not a denial of First Amendment rights when I try to restore order at a Board meeting after people shout rude comments out of turn and generally disrupt the orderly business of Township meetings.  I want everyone to know I have never told anyone Township employee or otherwise they cannot speak at Board meetings.  I did tell Fire Chief Hamilton that all firefighters must follow Fire Department and Township meeting rules when attending Township meetings.  I have concerns with former board members turning our fire department into a personal political organization.  I welcome constructive comments, not empty accusations.  The ex-Supervisor is outraged that the Sheriff’s Deputies were called to keep order when a meeting became unruly.  He forgets he actually had the Sheriff’s Deputies throw two residents out of a meeting (see ACLU Lawsuit).

POLICIES

Many of the Township’s policies are so outdated they could result in serious liability.  Updating and revising them is imperative. 

FORENSIC AUDIT OF PROPERTY TAX ISSUES

I am currently investigating complaints to the Township by concerned residents regarding the assessments of ex-Administrative Board members’ property which appear to be too low.  What I have determined so far is that for years the Assessor has been denied access to their property and that of their relatives which means their property may not be properly assessed for taxing purposes. A forensic audit will get to the bottom of this and sort things out as well as determine why it took nine years for the former supervisor to have his property assessed correctly.  Apparently he did not pull permits to finish the lower level of his home and his taxes did not go up in a timely manner.

RYDER HOUSE UPDATE

The Ryder House has been neglected for many years.  The structural integrity is good but it needs paint and carpet as well as some repairs.  Also, the township activities in the Ryder house are badly overcrowded, and I am considering asking the privately owned post office in the Ryder house to find another location, since this is not a direct township activity.  The residents of the hamlet have asked for help to have their mail delivered to their homes rather than having to go to this facility daily to get their mail. In the past they have twice petitioned the township to let them put up their own post boxes, yet were never given any direction or support.   I think this was an unconscionable oversight by the previous township board. Previous boards never executed a lease for the Contract Post Office.  I am also concerned that there was an obvious conflict of interest between the Township and the former treasurer and the former supervisor.  A conflict of interest is defined by a financial gain.  I find it intriguing that a former board member, had, and still has, a FOR PROFIT business on public property.  By not having a signed lease agreement, the rent was never reviewed or increased.  Thus an obvious financial benefit, and hence the conflict.  I am looking into the legal ramifications of this convoluted arrangement.

Resolving these and other critical issues facing the Township takes time and focus.  It is a shame that I am distracted by the chaos created by a few individuals. 

PENNOIL LAWSUIT

I want to address the lies and inaccuracies made by the ex-Supervisor regarding the lawsuit against my company LubeMart Associates, Inc.

All Pennzoil dealers are independent business owners, not franchises.  In most instances we are not bound by contracts but choose what oil we use in our bulk tanks based on quality and price.  In January of 2008 Pennzoil Corporation filed lawsuits against 22 independent oil change businesses in Michigan and Northern Ohio.  They did this because many of independent Pennzoil dealers were tired of the constant price increases and switched to different bulk oil. 

The wording on all the lawsuits filed was the same but the issues varied from dealer to dealer.  In our case in was about signs.  We had a contract with Tri-Penn Oil (the Pennzoil distributor) which allowed us to display the logos of products we purchased from them.  Pennzoil was one of them.  Our attorney said the contract was valid and we would win the lawsuit.  The problem our attorney pointed out to us was that Pennzoil has a lot more money than we do.  Our attorney said they would drag it out for years and even when we won they would appeal.  We would go bankrupt fighting this in court.  In the end a Consent Agreement was reached and we agreed to take down the signs and Pennzoil agreed to stop the lawsuit.  During this entire time Pennzoil continued to send us promotional materials to display in our shops and sent rebates for their products to our customers.

We have NEVER sold adulterated products, recycled products or any other type of substandard quality items.  Wayne and Flat Rock are close knit communities just as Salem is.  We would not be in business long if we lied to people about the quality of our products and services.

NEPOTISM

I have been accused of Nepotism.  It is my understanding the term “Nepotism” means favoritism shown to relatives especially in appointments to desirable positions for financial benefit.  My wife has volunteered her time with no pay helping in the Township office answering phones during our Christmas lunch and staff meetings.  She along with several other unpaid volunteers also help label the Messenger.  Under the previous Board volunteers were no longer needed when the Board hired the ex-Treasurer’s mother as a paid temporary employee.  The ex-Supervisor’s daughter also worked as the Deputy Clerk for several years.  This is nepotism.