Fred Roperti's Reflections

South Lyon Herald - You Just Never Know, Continued!

Well, I appeared in a story on the front page of the Detroit Free Press on Tuesday, and on the front page of the South Lyon Herald on Thursday - along with a bystander, my daughter Gina.

Apparently some people, that have nothing better to do with their time but create conspiracy theories, decided that Salem Township Clerk David Trent went out in the street and started handing out ballots (which, sadly, is NOT the most absurd thing I've heard in this election). Do I need to say now that that's not true? But please, don't believe me - take a look for yourself...(click to view full size)

I'm wondering, when these people look under the bed do they see dust bunnies, or Russian spies?

In any case, the plot thickens....remember the story of Chicken Little? When Chicken Little gets hit on the head by a "ballot" falling out of the sky, it just ain't news until Chicken Little runs off and tells Henny Penny all about it. In our story, Henny Penny is the editor of a small town newspaper.

Well our little Henny Penny is so excited by this piece of "news" from Chicken Little that he rushes out and publishes a story on the front page reporting this fact: "one of those that received a ballot without submitting an application was Gina Roperti, the supervisor's daughter." Henny Penny forgot to mention that when he spoke to David Trent, that David told him that all the applications were right in his hand and running through the copy machine for Mr. Penny to pick up. Hmmm. But somehow, the story ran as fact anyway.

Do you think there'll be a retraction and apology on the front page next week?

Oddly, there was enough lead time on this story that Henny was able to spread the story to others, and quote their reaction. He contacted Turkey Lurkey with the State, and Goosey Loosey with the County, he was so excited just thinking about these ballots falling from the sky that he completely forgot about the facts... maybe when "Foxy Loxy" reminds Mr. Penny of how far afield he has roamed from his employer's Principles of Ethical Conduct, he'll think twice before printing known and unsubstantiated fantasies.

In light of what I just read reported as "news", I am amazed looking at these Principles of Ethical Conduct. The story was written with complete and utter disregard for his employer and his profession.  Mr. Penny smears me, my daughter, and David Trent, all while knowing what he is writing is not the truth, in an attempt to influence an election. FOR SHAME!

When "feelings" don't reflect what happened...

Below on the right is a letter published in the South Lyon Herald today. I believe most people - not all, but most - sincerely believe what they are saying is accurate. However, desire for something often shades recollection and perception to flatter the speaker - facts often get fuzzy when feelings are primary. In any case, my answer is below....

My Answer... With all due respect to Mr. Burley, this is a perfect example of why those with personal agenda’s should not be making decisions for the rest of us. Firstly, calling this structure a “church” is stretching the bounds of credulity. If he had said former coffeehouse, apartment building, dog kennel, condemned building or unsafe attractive lure to children and magnet for illegal activity, I’d agree. Second, it is impossible to move a building that cannot stand still without falling down – the prior owner had nailed siding onto the building in an attempt to keep the bricks from falling off! By removing this unsafe building, we’ve added value far beyond the $30,000 mentioned, and provided needed space to the township. Third, this building was taken by a previous administration through eminent domain or the process where government takes an individual’s property for a necessary and legitimate governmental need. The one remaining member of the board, Trustee Marcia Van Fossen, voted to take this property from an individual, embroiling the township in a lawsuit that cost over $400,000 to settle, and worst of all, did so knowing that it was her intent was to give this building and the land to this organization. Where is the governmental need in that? Fourth, we did look at options… The lowest estimate was close to $400,000 to repair this structure’s foundation, every mechanical and plumbing system, deal with flooding, roofing and complete gutting. More realistic estimates were closer to $600,000. Further, there was not a purpose that this structure would fulfill for the township. This group wanted the township to fund their desire to move and repair this building. How could elected officials even dream of using public money to fund a private organizations wishes? Fred

"Salem church a loss to community" As a nonresident of Salem Township who has had dealings with the present Salem Township administration, I feel that it is important to express my feelings on what is happening. What a church organization wanted to do was to buy an old church in the hamlet. This property had been sitting empty for six years. The sale would have given a value to the community. Yet the majority of the Salem Township Board hurried the church group to move the building from the Dickerson Street site, and would not give the needed time for the structure to be moved. After two years the Salem Township community has only a parking lot and approximately $30,000 loss. Where was the Salem township government's help in the project? The zoning department knew of places in Salem Township where a building could be moved to. The Salem Township clerk handles records, and the township treasurer handles tax matters. Any of these three township officials would have knowledge of property that a building could be moved to. Yet, there was no information given. Three months and blockage to government funding made things impossible. The current Salem Township administration destroyed rather than serve. Did these Salem Township officials do their civic duty? After two years, 7911 Dickerson is a vacant lot. The money available from the sale is lost. What did the citizens of Salem Township get except the loss of a part of its community? These Salem Township Officials did not go into anything with a prior preparation, no knowledge of the cause and effect, and no long range planning. The Salem Township board was unable or unwilling to look beyond their narrow views and to look for long term value. Please, I urge the voters to evaluate what was not done and ask the question as to what value can be gained by re-electing the current Salem township Supervisor, Treasurer and Clerk. Alden D. Burley