April 23, 2004
Towner & Towner, PC
Attorneys and counselors at Law
RE: Letter dated April 14, 2004 FOA request response
Dear Counselors,
My Freedom of Information request was given at the Clinton Township Records office, as was instructed by Skip Anderson. I submitted the complaint number to the clerk. In my request I submitted all the information I was privy too. It included the violation number, my address, and my name...which is a specific as I can get. The clerk did find only one record a copy of which I have in my possession.
The violation and the complaint do not match.
Complaint states, numerous antenna's on roof, there is no ordinance limiting "how many" antenna's I may have. Only one which limits the height. So if the original complaint was how many I have, the complaint should have been "dismissed".
My understanding of this, when the FOA request is given, ALL RECORDS relating to the case should have been provided. It is a record generated by a public body, therefore I should be able to get all of the information. I don't understand why a zoning violation complaint would be exempt or protectected in any way, especially with the possibility of the complainant using the mechanism to cause undue burden to me. There needs to be checks and balances for this, and I don't see any. I believe a "concerned citizen" has been harassing me.
The reason I deduce this is the case, is because we have had numerous visits from inspectors for a new roof and new windows recently, and the issues of antenna height has never been pointed out before this complaint was issued. I paid for those inspections and they should have revealed to me a violation at the time of the roof inspections at the very least, (if there was one).
If there is more information available on this case, I respectfully request compliance with my original FOA request.
My home address is 35618 Rutherford, Clinton Township, MI - 48035.
Violation notice number is 25751, issued February 19, 2004
Very Truly Yours,
David Cunningham