Is There an FBI Investigation Under Way In Plymouth Township?

Disclaimer: I do not work for the Patch. I am not paid by anybody to write my blog. I write about MY opinions, and MY opinions only. I have written this blog after going back and forth over the tape of this meeting countless times in order to get the words of everybody involved as accurately as I can, and the opinions I express are only my opinions.

I have come to a major life decision. Having attended just two Plymouth Township Board of Trustees meetings, and one League of Women Voters candidate forum, I have decided that I am going to do my best never to miss a meeting again.

In these tough economic times, one must make sacrifices, as well as search for value in all that we do. In the interest of stretching my entertainment dollars, I will be attending the free meetings of the Plymouth Township Board of Trustees.

Anything to do with the Plymouth Township Board of Trustees has an entertainment value that rivals sports, movies, and my personal favorite, WWE Wrestling. The only thing missing at these gatherings are popcorn and hot dogs.

To be honest, if they were to schedule a Board of Trustees meeting once a week, I would seriously consider canceling my Netflix account.

All kidding aside, these meetings are some of the strangest events I have ever witnessed. It seems that at least one board member has a meltdown of some sort at every gathering, and the anticipation of who it is going to be at any particular meeting is almost half of the fun.

After Robert J. Doroshewitz's (Door-shev-its) candidate forum controversy, I was of the opinion that the Board of Trustees meeting the following night would be pretty anticlimactic. I figured it would be pretty quiet, with nothing controversial on the agenda, considering there is the big election coming up.

None of the incumbents want to have a bad moment in public right before the voters take to the polls to vote. Obviously, Mr. Doroshewitz has been the exception to that rule, but he gets a pass because he is at least swinging the bat. Unfortunately for him, every time he tries to hit the home run, he flies out to the shortstop, or in the case of the candidate forum, he gets the proverbial thumb by the umpire. Enough about Mr. Doroshewitz (Door-shev-its) though. He got smart, and kept pretty much to himself at the last Board of Trustees meeting. Until the end. The man never disappoints.

So with Doroshewitz starting the game on the bench, the smart money was on Ron Edwards stepping to the plate to deliver the goods. After all, he was surprisingly well behaved at the candidate forum, which actually shocked me, but he has seemed to somehow be able to contain his outbursts during this election season.

That all ended during the public comments portion of the agenda though, when Mr. Paul Schulz stepped to the podium and asked Mr. Edwards in particular, and the rest of the board in general if they were a part of, or knew of any ongoing FBI investigation.

In the interest of complete accuracy, I am going to quote Mr. Schulz verbatim because this is a huge deal.

Mr. Schulz: "As a resident and candidate for Plymouth Township Trustee, I am compelled to bring forth some disturbing information that has been shared with me by numerous business owners and private citizens. I've been informed that there is an ongoing federal investigation of Ron Edwards.

"Treasurer Edwards, will you confirm or deny that you are under investigation by the FBI, and have you spoken with the FBI? And are there any other elected officials here that are also under investigation, and has anyone else here on the board been contacted by the FBI?

"Mr. Supervisor, have you been aware of this investigation at all?

"I believe our community has the right to know, there are a lot of taxpayers that want to know what's going on."

This was a pretty big question to be sure, and I have no earthly idea whether there is or isn't any kind of an FBI investigation going on with the Plymouth Township Board of Trustees, or any individual members on the board.

This is a very big deal here, and almost worthy of the infamous Joe Biden quote.

Many probably wouldn't want to mention it without having some sort of proof of an ongoing investigation, but the fact remains, that the question was asked at a public meeting of the Plymouth Township Board of Trustees. It happened. The question was asked, and in my opinion, that makes it a subject for public dissemination.

Again, I have no idea whatsoever whether there is an investigation going on, and if there is, I have no idea what it is about, or whether it is even valid.

I was far more interested in the response from the board, and in particular the response from Mr. Edwards, and here is his incredible response.

Edwards: "Mr Schulz, I have been not notified by anybody, but we do know that you've been arrested for an OWI, that you ran from the scene of the accident.

Schulz: "I did sir? I haven't been convicted of any crime, sir."

Edwards: "No you haven't, but your driver's license was I believe, was suspended about a week ago."

Schulz: "My driver's license was not suspended, sir. That's very far from the truth, sir, you're lying."

At this point, I am thinking that if Mr. Edwards says he has no knowledge of an FBI investigation, I kind of had to believe him, because to lie about that at a public meeting would be opening a huge can of worms if we were to learn differently at some point in the future.

The astonishing thing is the personal attack Mr. Edwards leveled upon Mr. Schulz. If there was nothing to Mr. Schulz's question, why wouldn't you just say so? Why the personal attack? If it was not a valid question, why not just communicate that there was no validity to the question, and even go further to say that you would not dignify the question with a response other than that?

Instead, Mr. Edwards decided to turn it into a game of one upsmanship and gave us a public "tell-all" of Mr. Schulz's alleged driving record.

This was a classic Pee-Wee Herman response. "I know you are, but what am I?" Or maybe, "bounces off me, and sticks to you like glue!" I didn't know what to think about the bizarre response from Mr. Edwards.

If the circumstances weren't so serious, Mr. Edward's response would have been hilarious, but this situation is serious, if true. An FBI investigation is serious business. Ask Kwame Kilpatrick, or Monica Conyers, or ask Bobby Ficano if an FBI investigation is a serious matter.

The last part of Mr. Edwards' comments to Mr. Schulz were the most disturbing, and disgusting. Disgusting is the only word I can think of for Mr. Edwards' comments toward Mr. Schulz. They were absolutely disgusting, and they validate every single reason I first decided to publicly question whether Mr. Ron Edwards is fit for public office.

Here is the rest of Plymouth Township Treasurer Mr. Ron Edwards' response to Mr. Paul Schulz's question:

Edwards: "Just so you know, you have gone to numerous businesses with that Mr. Schulz, from Pilgrim Party Store, to Al Jonna, all the way down, anybody you could get an ear, on Ann Arbor Road to. So once again Mr. Schulz, we know you, you're not all there, have a good day."

Schulz: "Thank you Mr. Edwards."

Un Biden Believable! You're not all there? Our sitting Plymouth Township Treasurer, in a public meeting tells the man "you're not all there?"

Hold Everything! Mr. Ron Edwards, who is not only Plymouth Township's Treasurer, but also Plymouth Township's resident loose cannon, has the nerve to tell someone, anyone, that they are not all there?

The same Mr. Edwards who had an epic, news-making meltdown directed at a 911 emergency dispatcher because he wasn't able to get out of HIS fireworks show quick enough?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgLVlADpM4M

He had to wait in line like all of us little people? "You're not all there?"

The same Ron Edwards who in another newsworthy meltdown, was accused of ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnB_ph8T7aE

All because he followed the rules, and passed a letter along from the City of Warren to the rest of the board members, telling Ron that they were not going to offer him the job he applied for? Oh yes, Ron tried to defect from his job in Plymouth Township, that the folks elected him to do. He sought greener pastures, in the city of Warren. "You're not all there?"

So, Mr. Ron Edwards, when confronted with a simple question about whether he was or was not involved in an FBI investigation, responds by telling us all, that Mr. Paul Schulz, who is a taxpayer, and a candidate for the Plymouth Township Board of Trustees, that he is "not all there."

I can only assume, because I have never spoken to the man, that Mr. Edwards meant that Mr. Schulz was mentally unbalanced. There are not too many ways to take that comment. OK, let's be honest, there is only one way to take that comment. Whack Job, cuckoo, a quart low, whatever, you get the point. Not all there.

I saw Mr. Schulz at the candidate forum, and I listened to his answers, and listened to his one-minute comments. Whether you agree with his vision for Plymouth Township or not, I would find it absurd if you were to try and convince me that they were anything but reasoned and thoughtful. They were most certainly not the words of an unbalanced man. They were not the words of someone who is "not all there."

FBI investigation aside, I was left wondering how Mr. Edwards obtained his information about Mr Schulz's driving record. Maybe he happened to be driving by when the OWI incident happened. I doubt it, but you never know.

I have been told that you can get information about convictions on a person's record on the Internet, but that still leaves me wondering. If Mr. Schulz was not lying, he has not yet been convicted of OWI, and more intriguing, how did Mr. Edwards know that only a week prior, Mr. Schulz's drivers license was supposedly suspended?

I don't believe for one minute that any publicly available reporting agency keeps their records updated, especially on the internet, that quickly. It doesn't even come close to passing the smell test, Mr. Edwards.

How did Mr. Ron Edwards, on July 17, have information on Mr. Paul Schulz's driving priviledges that were only a week old? The bigger question would be why he had such information?

Why did Mr. Ron Edwards come to a meeting of the Board of Trustees with updated information on whether or not Mr. Schulz was legally able to drive a vehicle in the state of Michigan? How did Mr. Edwards get this information?

Mr. Edwards does sit on the Plymouth Township Board of Trustees, and he has a history of bullying the police to get what he wants, as his infamous 911 call clearly illustrates. Could he have pulled a string, or bullied someone in order to get some information about a political opponent? I don't know the answer to that question, but I know the man's history.

To be honest, the very thought of a person such as Mr. Edwards having this information at his fingertips is very disturbing. If the Plymouth Township Board of Trustees have access to the driving records of political opponents, they also have access to everyone's driving record, and who knows what other information they have and control?

I seriously would like to know how Mr. Edwards obtained this information about Mr. Schulz, and if "we all know" why didn't I know? It simply does not pass the smell test for me.

Going beyond the fact that Mr. Edwards seems to be pretty good at digging up dirt on his opponents, is the question of why he even bothered to attack Mr. Schulz? In my humble opinion, a man with over a decade of experience on a public board should not lose his composure like this. It was a simple yes or no question.

It would seem that the proper response would be something like "I am not currently, or have I ever been under an FBI investigation, nor have I ever met Efrem Zimbalist Jr."

This is the response of a reasonable thinking, seasoned board member, albeit one with a sense of humor. Maybe Mr. Edwards considered it a vicious political attack. If he did, the way to end it is by being professional about it. His response was anything but professional in my opinion.

Moving on, Township Supervisor Richard Reaume stepped in and made a direct statement, on the matter.

Mr. Reaume: "To answer the question, we've not been notified by any federal agency, about any investigation at the Township hall."

Very direct statement to be sure. The Plymouth Township Supervisor, Richard Reaume stepped up and answered Mr. Schulz's question. He did it succinctly, and without personally attacking the man who asked the question.

That is how an elected official is supposed to act. You act with dignity, and you show respect to the person asking the question, whether you like the question or not, always mindful that the person you are responding to is the one you were elected to serve.

For those keeping score: Rich/Ron 2 - Paul Schulz 1 1/2 ( I am giving Schulz a half point credit because those in attendance became visibly upset by Mr. Edwards' personal attack)

If there was such a thing as "intermission" at a Board of Trustees meeting, this would be the time. This is the time where if I had my way, we could all hit the concession stand and grab a hot dog and an ice cold soft drink, and get ready for the second act, because in Plymouth Township, with this Board of Trustees, there is ALWAYS a second act.

We now fast forward to the Trustee Comments section of our agenda. I am going to concentrate on Mr. Edwards, Mr. Bridgman, and Mr. Doroshewitz (Door-shev-its) who just can't seem to contain himself from "holding" when he should be "folding." Note to Bobby D : Listen to The Gambler, by Kenny Rodgers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azZr1cSu9-4

There were comments about a multitude of things that were quite interesting, and those will be dissected another day, but the elephant in the room on this night was the dreaded FBI investigation. If Mr. Edwards' responses earlier were noteworthy and disgusting, his comments at the end of the meeting were downright curious. Mr. Edwards turned his eyes toward his colleagues, and seemed to confront Mr. Bridgman.

Edwards: "As far as Mr. Schulz went tonight, I've been hearing this from different, different sources, different business owners, that he keeps going into business after business after business stating that I'm under investigation by the FBI. I'm not aware of any investigation in regards to myself right now, or the Township."

Edwards: " I don't know that anyone on this board is aware of anything. Are you, Joe?"

It is at this point that Edwards, Reaume, and Doroshewitz cast their eyes upon Clerk Joe Bridgman. It is an accusatory stare they use to be sure, and I am left wondering what these men know that the rest of us don't. Bridgman's response was the huge part of this night, and it brings back the old adage, don't ask the question if you're afraid of the answer.

Bridgman: "I've been approached, yes."

Edwards: "Because I have not been known about anything, and I don't know what it's about."

At this point, Mr. Doroshewitz seemed to find the situation pretty funny, and slipped in a snide comment through his chuckles. And this man calls himself a "seasoned" board member.

Doroshewitz: You've probably been approached by Mr. Schulz. *chuckling*

Bridgeman: "No, I have not been approached by Mr. Schulz."

Edwards: "So I don't know of anything that's going on, nor has it been shared with me, and I don't know where it would be coming from. I have done nothing wrong, books have been audited, they've been gone through, so, um once again, it hasn't been shared with me, and I don't know what it's about. So, if Mr. Bridgman's been approached, (laughing) so be it. Um, so."

Reaume: "Usually the FBI doesn't make it public."

Mann: "That's correct." (it should be noted that Mr. Mann was seen laughing about all of this as well, but that is probably because he is the lame duck, and won't have to deal with the fallout of whatever happens.)

Reaume: "So someone else must have told Mr. Schulz about this thing."

Bridgman: "I have no idea how he found out. About anything. That's a question you need to ask of him."

Next, it was Mr. Doroshewitz turn to speak, and after his comments on the Good Old Fashioned Picnic, he couldn't resist taking one more swing of the bat. It was a comment either directed at Mr. Bridgman, or just a comment making it clear that he is innocent of any wrongdoing if there is indeed an FBI investigation in progress. His final comment:

Doroshewitz: "I am NOT under investigation." (smirk)

After Mr. Doroshewitz said this, he and his two pals, Rich/Ron shared a quick chuckle. (A nervous chuckle?)

Okay, let's start with my final score: Schulz 2 1/2 -- The 3 Amigos 1 1/2 (I deducted a half point for the smug way they acted, and the fact that Mr. Doroshewitz thinks that a possible FBI investigation is such a laughing matter.)

So let's walk through this. First, Mr. Schulz asks if there is an FBI investigation concerning Treasurer Ron Edwards. Mr. Edwards does what he always does, and uses his seat on the board to intimidate, and smear Mr. Schulz by leaking information about his private life in an attempt to discredit him.

This is hypocrisy at its best, because 30 minutes or so after Ron Edwards was smearing Mr. Schulz's personal life, he sat on his soapbox and condemned the negative campaigning going on in this community. Really? Really, Mr. Edwards? Do we look like we just fell off the banana boat? I was born at night, Mr. Edwards, but not last night!

So after the first blow-up, some actual business was done while Mr. Edwards fumed. When he got his next chance to speak, he asked the fatal question: "Has anyone approached you Mr. Bridgman?" The answer was yes! Mr. Bridgman did not hesitate, and he didn't waffle.

In my opinion, he spoke like a man telling the truth, but that is only MY opinion. I have this opinion based on the past behaviors of the main players in this debate amongst the board.

Mr. Reaume didn't like hearing about this, and it would almost seem that he could have been insinuating that Mr. Bridgman leaked the information to Mr. Schulz, or vice versa, which would be a breach of professional etiquette. The problem with believing Mr. Reaume, though, is the infamous attack ad he wrote about Mr. Bridgman with information that turned out to be patently false. That was a huge breach of etiquette and trust, so I have absolutely no faith in the validity or truth in anything Mr. Reaume says anymore.

Mr. Edwards simply attacked anybody who had a negative opinion or a negative thought about him. He attacked Mr. Schulz unmercifully, and seemed to indicate that Mr. Bridgman was somehow at fault for having been unfortunate enough to have been approached by somebody about an investigation. Basically, Mr. Edwards attacked everybody in Plymouth Township other than Al Jonna, and anyone who made a donation to his precious fireworks show.

To be honest, Mr. Edwards reminded me of President Richard Nixon while making his comments. It was like Mr. Edwards had his own personal "I am not a crook" moment. Again, if this wasn't such a serious matter, it would be hilarious. It is a serious matter, though. FBI investigations are always serious matters.

Then there is Mr. Doroshewitz (Door-shev-its). The man just can't resist opening his mouth when he should be doing his best imitation of a church mouse. Mr. Doroshewitz took a shot at Mr. Bridgman, and tried to tie him together with Mr. Schulz by insinuating that maybe it was Mr. Schulz that approached Mr. Bridgman about an FBI investigation. He thought this was quite clever and funny when he said it, too. The smug look on his face was, and still is, priceless.

Mr. Bridgman shot him down immediately, though, claiming that Mr. Schulz did not approach him, and further telling the Three Amigos that they should ask Mr. Schulz how he found out about the possible investigation. So who actually approached Mr. Bridgman? More importantly, why did they not ask Mr. Schulz who approached him with this information? One would think that they would want that information.

I guess in the end, we will find out about all of this at the snail's pace that government usually proceeds. Maybe there is an FBI investigation, and maybe there isn't. As I keep saying, though, sometimes reactions to questions are more telling than the answer given.

Mr. Edwards' reaction was to attack everybody. Mr. Reaume's reaction was a thinly veiled attack on the Clerk's ethics, and Mr. Doroshewitz just found the whole thing a joke. In my opinion, the only man who stayed professional was Mr. Bridgman. He was the only board member who seemed to grasp the seriousness of the matter.

Mr. Bridgman did not bring this matter up. He did not speak to it until confronted with a question. I do not think he would have commented at all, but for being challenged by a direct question by Mr. Ron Edwards. To be honest, I think many would have just thought that this was a campaign ploy by Mr. Schulz, aimed at discrediting Mr. Edwards until he asked the fateful question of Mr. Bridgman.

Edwards: "I don't know if anybody on this board is aware of anything. Are you, Joe?"

Bridgeman: " I've been approached, yes."

In my opinion, the whole thing comes down to those two statements. Look at the men involved in this discussion. Look at their past actions. Think about who has a reputation of being honest, and who have questionable reputations. Look at how they react to questions, and situations. Take a true measure of each man sitting at that table, and draw your own conclusion.

The final question I had going through my mind as I left this meeting was how much will a special election will cost the taxpayers of Plymouth Township if this thing goes bad...

Viewpoints expressed by community bloggers on Patch do not represent Patch or its employees. Patch's Local Voices blogs are open to anyone local with something to share. Blogs must be posted under the user's actual name. If you'd like to blog on Patch, click here to get started.