Sac City Council, Planning and Zoning Board apparently to start punishing poor people: Part I

SAC CITY, IOWA – AUGUST 23, 2010

The following is an excerpt of a document given to all the Sac City Council people that bothered to show up for the August 23, 2010 Sac City Council meeting. It is Sac City Administrator Adam Ledford’s instructions to the council.



As you can see for yourself, in both cases, it seems to be the opinion of the city attorney that a strong case against abandonment can be made for both properties to the fact that they are being maintained.

Following is a video of Mr. Stone making his case.


This video is City Administrator Ledford reiterating the city attorney’s position.


Sac City Councilperson Nick Frohardt claimed that according to city code Mr. Stone’s properties fall under a different ordinance that has nothing to do with what the Planning and Zoning Board was talking about. He went on to further state the order to serve notice on Mr. Stone was an error.


Here’s Councilperson Jim Johnston giving his opinion about Mr. Stone’s case. He seems to think that he was charged under the wrong chapter, meaning not the chapter that pertains to abandonment, but the chapter that pertains to maintenance.


…here’s the resolution of Mr. Stone’s hearing.


As you saw for yourself, the council absolved Mr. Stone of the charge of abandonment. Following is a copy of the resolution.



Ok, now we’re moving on to Ms Hoffard. Here she is making her case.


In the ensuing conversation Ms. Hoffard freely admits that there is a broken window, a hole in the porch roof and a pile of brush in the back. Though she has reasons for the existence of these conditions, those reasons aren’t something the city council can verify during the meeting. She also admits that utilities have been shut off to the property, but that services still run to the property and could be turned back on if needed.

During Mr. Stone's hearing, Mr. Frohardt read from the maintenance ordinance, (not the abandonment ordinance in question,) that Mr. Stone could be charged under. Pay particular attention to the list of items that are chargeable under abandonment.


Every single thing Mr. Frohardt read in the maintenance ordinance are items that Ms. Hoffard agrees are not in question.

Here is City Administrator Adam Ledford again stating the city attorney’s opinion that Ms. Hoffard’s property is not abandoned. It’s kind of hard to make out because of crosstalk.


We’re are going to go back in time again to Mr. Stone’s hearing, Mr. Frohardt said the following:


As you can see, at that point it seemed to be important to Mr. Frohardt that everybody be treated the same and that nobody should get picked on or singled out.

…yet he decides to single out Ms. Hoffard with the following statement:


...so what he’s saying is that everybody should be treated the same, unless they don’t have enough money to fix up their properties. Gotta hand it to the guy. When he decides to be inconsistent, he really goes for it.

Sac City Council, Planning and Zoning Board apparently to start punishing poor people: Part I
Sac City Council, Planning and Zoning Board apparently to start punishing poor people: Part II



Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes All Rights Reserved