Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recreation Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident says lifetime ban from Livonia rec and senior centers is punitive; asks council to investigate
Summary
Resident Steve King told the council his lifetime ban from the city recreation and senior centers followed dismissed trespassing charges and, he said, stems from his criticism of the administration; he asked the council to use its oversight authority to investigate and lift the ban.
Steve King of Coventry Gardens told the Livonia City Council on June 15 that he has been barred for life from the city’s recreation center and senior center after walking through a Senior Center construction site, a restriction he said is punitive and unsupported by the facts.
King said the breaking-and-entering claim against him "disappeared" and the trespassing charge was dismissed, but the lifetime ban remains. "I have no criminal record, yet I am prohibited from accessing taxpayer funded public facilities that I help support through my own tax dollars," he said, adding that other people who walked the site were not reprimanded. He told the council the restriction “serves no legitimate public purpose” and asked it to exercise oversight under the Livonia City Charter, chapter 4, section 13, to investigate and lift the ban.
King said he had previously used the rec and senior centers frequently and that losing access removed daily social connections. He also told council members that the city employees who initiated the matter are no longer employed by the city and that the council should not be left enforcing former staff members’ personal grievances.
Council did not take immediate action at the study session. King asked that his formal request be placed on the committee-of-the-whole agenda; the council moved on to other agenda items and the request will appear on the July 13 regular meeting agenda, where council members can vote on any formal referral or investigation.
The exchange was part of the public comment period; no city staff presented evidence in the session to explain the discipline or to rebut King’s account. The transcript shows King’s description of the criminal charges being dismissed and his request for council oversight, but it does not record a formal staff report or vote resolving the ban.
What happens next: King’s request to have the council review and potentially lift the ban was formally placed on the schedule for consideration at the council’s July 13 regular meeting, per the study-session process the council described, but no decision was made on June 15.
