Siwik wants to bump Thomas out so that she can be #14 on the ballot this November. I don’t like Thomas, but Siwik would be bad too … she claims to be so loyal to her Crowley Park neighborhood, but isn’t even involved in their new neighborhood association … can we say that she’d be any more loyal to the citizens of Dearborn than she is to the citizens of her own neighborhood? Siwik is all about protecting her business interests … that’s fine, business is important to creating a thriving city, but Siwik is so focused on business that she’s forgotten that there are people who live in Dearborn?

Let’s be sure that Thomas leaves council … even if he is not in violation of the Charter, he’s not invested in our community. But let’s be sure that Siwik doesn’t replace him … she’s invested in our businesses, but not in our citizens … we want people on city council that are invested in both!

Nancy Siwik came in 16th place,, so I cant see her gain.

You are right, Siwik did come in 16th place and it wouldn’t benefit her in this election … but this isn’t her first attempt to get onto council and I’m sure it won’t be her last. She’s trying to use Thomas’s faults to make a name for herself. She wouldn’t have to use the faults of others to make a name for herself if her own assets were more appealing to the voters of Dearborn.

Whenever anyone speaks out about something so publicly, one must ask, what is their true motive … what’s in it for them? Thomas will go on his merry way soon enough … with or without Siwik’s attempts to sabotage his election efforts. Siwik sees an easy target … she’s trying to make herself a household name before the next election. I just want to be sure that people know the whole story about Siwik.

YoungGibraltar – your name seems to indicate your residence is outside of Dearborn … what’s your interest here?

@ Dearborn Mom.. Maybe Siwik was put up by someone else…

I do not in fact live in Dearborn, it was my hometown but I enjoy Bloggin & reading the articles.

@Donna Hay, great point bout JBO.. makes you think…

The only initiative that will cause change on the city council, is to get the people who think voting is a hardship on their precious schedules, OUT TO VOTE! A person who chooses not to cast a vote in the upcoming election will have confirmed that they want ‘business as usual’.

So, which beautiful, ambiguous Dearborn legislation will be quoted to solve Siwik v. Thomas? ‘City Charter’? ‘Council Rules’? ‘Master Plan’? Wind direction? And city legal is going to interpret this mess without bias? Please.

Siwik v. Thomas = Conyers v. Cockrel.
Only thing missing was a “Shrek” moment.
Useless, mindless distraction, all of it.

The time is right for all of these parasites to be removed, the problem is that their are not enough people to seat a “Honest ” council. This town was raped clean by Michael A. Guido and staff. Most all of his Directors and staff still remain, so how can you expect change? Detroit/Dearborn, Kwame/Michael, potato/patato,………..

At our neighborhood block party, I asked a fellow member of our neighborhood association why Councilman Thomas hadn’t joined. He replied that Thomas told him he really wasn’t in town enough to join. Apparently Thomas thinks he is in town enough to be involved with the council.

it isnt the legal dept issue, only city council members can take action and remove Doug Thomas. correct me if I am off.. Good news Doug is on the 8 spot, right above Abraham..lets hope these two dont make top 7

They did turn it over to Legal last night but by the time they do anything the election will be over. Just what makes a person a ‘resident’?

I believe that the Council would “instruct” the Legal department to investigate the issue and report back to them. Only the Council as a body may take action to remove another member. I also believe that what the Mayor was saying to the council president was that Ms. Siwik “has a right to speak”. I’m betting that if she were saying wonderful things about the council Mr. Tafelski wouldn’t have been so eager to shut her up! Any citizen has a right to speak at a council meeting, and is allowed two minutes to ask questions or make comments.

1. This issue is not a secret … it’s been publicized and I’m certain that the city council was aware of it before Siwik’s statements. True, they should’ve acted on it without anyone having to speak at the meeting. I’m not trying to kill the messenger, just saying that her motives were likely not as pure as she would like us to believe.
2. If Siwik is part of the mayor’s campaign, it would certainly explain why the mayor wanted to hear more … maybe the mayor has a personal interest in seeing Thomas go away … rumors were that Thomas considered a run against him for mayor. If Thomas made it on the city council again, maybe he’d run for mayor next time around.
3. I may not be Siwik’s fan, but she is not a stupid woman … she would not allow herself to be “put up” by someone else … unless there was something in it for herself … once again, back to people’s ulterior motives. Unless you know something we don’t know YoungGilbraltar.

Ms. Siwik should not be one to throw stones, for she lives in a glass house.
Dearborn ordinance section 12-795 requires that a bed and breakfast shall be the principal residence of the owner who shall live on the premises.
The City of Dearborn Tax information Search shows that Nancy Siwik is the owner of 22331 Morley, which is a bed and breakfast located on Morley in Dearborn. It is listed as the Dearborn Bed & Breakfast under dearbornbb.com.
When Ms Siwik stepped to the podium to present her evidence against Doug Thomas she stated that she lived on Baily Street.
Therefore she is in direct violation of the City of Dearborn ordinance which requires her to live at the bed and breakfast address, which she does not.
Does she get a free pass from the city because she is the treasurer for the mayors re-election campaign? And, why did she not point this out to the counsel when she raised the Doug Thomas issue. Is this the way the mayor retaliates against Doug Thomas for his opposition to paid parking?
Diogines

Mbwp – Siwik lives on Banner Street.

Yeah, according to the article, his home in Dearborn is for sale … maybe he’d appreciate a bed there. But then again … I’ve read that the breakfast isn’t exactly in line with the price of the room … and in this market, Thomas isn’t going to get his asking price for the house!

I do wonder though … what are his plans if he does sell his Dearborn home?

Nancy Siwik owns many property’s in Dearborn. 2 homes in fact on Bailey st. So that is true to statement.

I just think she was the messenger , of course she will use this to her advantage maybe not a political move right now but could pan out in the future. JBO holds his favorites, Thomas isnt one of them as well as Thomas Tafelski. I wld assume more when come to light but since I no longer reside like Thomas in the D, I can only wonder….

Young Gib. – you can find all the ordiances on the cities website – just click on clerks office and under the heading Divisions click on Ordinances and City Charter and search for Bed & Breakfasts.

If Siwik has a partner at her B&B, then why wouldn’t that person be on the B&B’s website if that’s the person who is actually onsite?

Furthermore, several of the reviews for her B&B mention that they (the guests) were there completely alone without any owner or staff there at all.

Dearborn has a big problem with enforcement of their ordinances … they create ordinances quite easily and rarely enforce them. I’m not just talking about alleged political favors … just a general laziness about enforcement.

Siwik is JBO campaign treasurer. The BIG O wants Doug Thomas out because he was right about paid parking from day one. He allowed Nancy to go on and on because of THEIR agenda. The current Administration (minus Doug) won’t admit to their mistake about paid parking.

I would take a part time Doug Thomas over full time anyone else on the current council.

Vote for ONE person that you can trust for City Council. Your one vote will allow that person to go farther than to fill up your ballot with dead weight. Pick 2, 3 or 4 good candidates (preferable NEW blood) but don’t fill it up with 7 useless people. That is how the same people continue to get re-elected even though they have done nothing for the City except send condolences at meetings.

Milwood – well, she can’t have it both ways … before the primary in the summer, she held a “meet the canidate” event at Crowley Park … inviting the residents of the Crowley Park neighborhood to meet their canidate … the flyer described herself as a resident of the Crowley Park neighborhood.

I am sure that the intent of the ordinance was for her to actually LIVE at the Morley home, not just on paper!

Nancy Siwik made this all about Nancy Siwik, because she desires a council seat. Had this Thomas buisness been uncovered before the primaries, she might have made it this time. She has been trying to make a name for herself by attacking Thomas for a couple of elections now. But again with the glass houses…(obviously, just a metaphor, because no one can really be sure what house anyone lives in…)

Just a few things I felt compelled to riff on:

*Aren’t we kind of missing the point if we’re admonishing Nancy Siwik here? Granted, Siwik’s claim that her actions weren’t politically motivated is ludicrous. And I suppose if you’re one of the more indignant types you could say it’s insulting that she implies otherwise. But who cares? Are your feelings really that hurt?
And the whole thing about B & B ordinances? Honestly, I shudder think of what some of you people must have been like as hall monitors.

*To “Anthony” above, I have to say I laughed out loud with “So, which beautiful, ambiguous Dearborn legislation will be quoted to solve Siwik v. Thomas? ‘City Charter’? ‘Council Rules’? ‘Master Plan’? Wind direction? And city legal is going to interpret this mess without bias? Please.”
Ain’t it the truth.

*Here’s something everyone should ask themselves: Are you happy with your city government? If not you probably shouldn’t be so eager to get rid of Thomas, at least strategically speaking.
While the residency thing might be irksome and sometimes his act can get old, Thomas has the cajones to voice his disagreement when he doesn’t like something — a relative rarity when you consider how slanted the council votes on administrative initiative-type issues(7-0, 6-1, 5-2, etc.).
If Thomas is gone, who will be there to rock the boat? If there is no voice of dissent it seems likely the Mayor will be the only one doing any rocking — of the council, like a sweet infant child slumbering in a cradle. (This is no indictment on O’Reilly. Of course it’s in his own interest to try and get the whole council’s support on his initiatives, right?)

Council Watcher – great comments!!!!!!

Johnny Cakes –

one more thought. I agree, Doug Thomas is the main concern here. However, Siwik made herself subject to the same standards of honesty and integrity when she put herself up twice for a seat on city council.

As for some of us being hall monitors … the rules are the rules and when we start picking which rules to follow and deciding that some rules don’t apply to all people, that’s when a society gets itself into trouble.

I want everyone in Dearborn to follow the rules … the rules are there to set a standard for what kind of city Dearborn is going to be … I want a city where the rules are equitable and enforced. It’s a slipperly slope that Dearborn is on and when we stop holding people to standards, then we’re going to go down the slope pretty quickly.

@ Council Watcher,

noone wants a rubber stamper… yur right

Westside, now they can only sit back and hope Doug does not get reelected and their problem will just disappear. What in the world will they do when he gets reelected? Certainly they knew all about his situation. But never fear, they have turned the whole mess over to Debra W.- after all, isn’t that what she gets the big $$$$$ for.