Harbor Country Politics

Obama radio critic finds talk show time slashed

2009-01-02T12:10:00.001-05:00

Program host: 'I'm just trying to bring to light what he's said'

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Politically active Barack Obama supporters in Michigan have tried to silence criticism of the president-elect on a talk program at a community radio station by cutting its air time, the program host says.
Officials with radio station WRHC told WND the dispute involved talk show host Martin Dzuris' coverage of local issues as well as national issues.
But Dzuris explained in a lengthy interview with WND he attended at least one meeting where radio station officials discussed specifically how to reduce Dzuris' criticism of Obama, which has linked Obama's statements taken directly from his speeches to Marxism.
Dzuris said one issue raised was Obama's call in a Colorado Springs speech for a Civilian National Security Force, an issue on which WND has reported.
In that speech, Obama insisted the U.S. "cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set" and needs a "civilian national security force."
Dzuris, who spent the first half of his life under communist rule in Czechoslovakia, told WND, that concept isn't new at all.
"We called them the 'peoples' militia' (in Czechoslovakia)," he told WND.
He said he's reviewed Obama's speeches in light of his upbringing under a Marxist-type government and discussed those issues on his program.
"I'm just trying to bring to light what he's said," Dzuris told WND. "I'm just taking what he says, his influences, background," he said. "I lived all those things."
He said he was born in Czechslovakia and defected in 1989.

Read the rest of the article here.

Appeal yields 90-minute 'Martin Dzuris Live!' show

2009-01-02T12:06:00.002-05:00

By John Gunner Gooch
For The South County Gazette

THREE OAKS - The "Martin Dzuris Live!" show began airing on Radio Harbor Country (106.7 FM) in its new 90-minute format on Monday, Dec. 29.Dzuris and the WRHC Board of Directors were able to reach a compromise on the talk-show host's appeal of a Dec. 8 Programming Committee decision to reduce the air time of his weekly program from two hours to one.Dzuris made the appeal to get his full air time restored during a Dec. 13 Radio Harbor Country general membership meeting, stating that he felt the decision was based on his conservative political views and political associations, and not because of the technical quality of his broadcasts, as had been claimed by the Programming Committee.During a special meeting of the Board of Directors on Dec. 27, a majority of those voting on the issue decided to give Dzuris back a half-hour of air time, which means his show can now be heard on Mondays from 6 to 7:30 p.m. Rebroadcasts are scheduled for Saturdays from 7:30 to 9 a.m.Peg Kohring, co-chair of the Board of Directors, said that members of the board who also serve on the Programming Committee abstained from taking part in the vote.She also said that board members felt it was not a political decision on the part of the Programming Committee to cut Dzuris's air time in half."Overall, I think the feeling of the board members was that the decision to reduce the time Martin was given for his show was done because of the quality of the show's production, and not because of its political content," Kohring said. "Since we felt his more recent programs had shown a significant improvement in quality, we were now willing to give him 90 minutes on the air instead of 60 minutes."While Dzuris held firm to his belief that the Programming Committee's decision was based more on his political views than anything else, the show host said he and his engineer/producer, Nathan Lumsford, could live with the compromise."I was told that the original decision to reduce the time of my show wasn't politically motivated, but I still don't agree with that," Dzuris said. "I think the petition I presented with my appeal that was signed by so many people asking the board to reverse the Programming Committee's decision was very helpful to me in this process, and I'm very thankful to everyone who took the time to support me by signing it."While I still feel this was politically motivated, for the good of the radio station, and so we can all keep moving forward with it, I'm not going to fight it any more," Dzuris continued. "A compromise decision has been made that both sides can live with, and in a compromise both sides give a little and get a little, and that's what happened here."Kohring said a voice like Dzuris's helped add to the eclectic mix of programming that WRHC had become known for."I think we realize that as a community radio station we need a good balance of liberal and conservative views to be freely aired," she said. "Those who lean toward being right wing or left wing should be allowed to be heard on our broadcasts, and, in my opinion, what Martin does on the air helps give us some of that balance."

Don't Touch That Dial

2008-12-29T20:22:00.001-05:00

By John Gunner Gooch

Controversy isn’t something usually associated with the community’s radio station, WRHC 106.7 FM, but that was the case during a recent Radio Harbor Country membership meeting when program host Martin Dzuris filed an appeal and made his case to reclaim the second hour of his “Martin Dzuris Live!” show that the Programming Committee had voted to take away.Dzuris feels the decision to reduce his air time was based more on his conservative political leanings than his performance behind the microphone, and that has led the more liberal members of the Programming Committee to try to hold him to a more professional standard than his colleagues at the all-volunteer operation. Members of the Programming Committee have denied that discrimination charge, saying that Dzuris didn’t heed advice to tighten up the content of his show, and that taking it back to its original hour format would help do that.If you’ve never met Dzuris, I’d describe him as a character, and I mean that in the best way. He’s an interesting guy with an interesting background; an immigrant from the Czech Republic who truly appreciates our freedom of speech and other opportunities that were not so readily available in the country of his birth. He’s also not shy about using his freedom of speech to voice his opinions on hot button issues, and, love him or hate him,you have to admire his passion. His Monday evening show has gotten a buzz, has broken stories, and has engaged listeners who phone in to join the lively art of conversation by agreeing or disagreeing with his views on various topics. If dialogue is the lifeblood of a vibrant community, Dzuris is certainly doing his part to keep it pumping through the body politic.Fred Upton and Cindy McCain have been guests on his show, and so have Judy Truesdell and Kim Clark, not to mention Rev. Kenneth Mundt. He’s a longtime friend and supporter of Ibrahim Parlak, backing the Harbert restaurateur’s legal efforts to fight deportation back to Turkey and become an American citizen. If “Martin Dzuris Live!” isn’t your cup of tea, it’s preceded in the lineup by “Democracy Now,” and followed by the “Wilbur Fibble Comedy Hour.” That’s diversity, and an eclectic selection of shows that WRHC is rightly proud to be broadcasting.At this point it’s hard to tell how this controversy is going to end, but a decision on the appeal is expected to be handed down in the near future. Dzuris would like at least a six-month trial period of retaining his two hours on the air so he can prove to those in charge he is capable of making changes and being a little kinder and gentler to callers he may disagree with, while also taking steps to tighten up the content of his program.While the debate over the Dzuris situation got decidedly heated at times during the meeting, it was nice to see some cooler heads prevail near the end and ask for compromise and common ground to be found to resolve things in a more amicable manner. I also took it as a good sign that Dzuris stuck around long after the meeting adjourned to continue the conversation with some of his detractors and supporters. Managing to disagree agreeably is one of life’s biggest challenges, but somehow as a community and a country we’ve always been able to find ways to do that. One of the bright spots about living in this country is that our foundational similarities that bond us are much stronger than the differences that could otherwise pull us apart to the breaking point.“100 watts of power, 1000 watts of community” is the WRHC motto the late, great Mike Hojnacki came up with, and it’s a powerful statement for the little powerhouse of a radio station that always keeps things interesting.If you want to find out what happens to Martin Dzuris, don’t change that dial. Stay in touch, and stay tuned.

WRHC host sees political bias behind 1-hour cut for talk show

2008-12-22T08:44:00.002-05:00

By John Gunner Gooch
For The South County Gazette News

THREE OAKS - WRHC radio station program host Martin Dzuris has never been shy about airing his opinions during his weekly "Martin Dzuris Live!" program. During the Dec. 13 Radio Harbor Country general meeting, he was equally frank about a recent Programming Committee decision to reduce his Monday evening time slot from two hours to one.The Radio Harbor Country Programming Committee had voted 7-1 during a previous meeting on Dec. 8 to approve a motion to take away an hour of Dzuris' live broadcast, and also to reduce rebroadcasting of the show, a move that he's appealing to the station's Board of Directors.At the Dec. 13 general meeting, Dzuris said he feels the Programming Committee is discriminating against him and his show due to his conservative political viewpoints and political associations. He added that this violates some of Radio Harbor Country's bylaws including one that states the radio station values diversity and will take no action against any individual on account of his or her political association.

Read the rest here

Planning Commission denies The "Gentlemen's" Club application

2008-06-17T22:52:00.003-04:00

Today the New Buffalo Township Planning Commission recommended that the New Buffalo Township Board deny the application of NOI, LLC for a Special Land Use Permit for an Adult Entertainment Business, specifically a nightclub with topless dancers, on the grounds that the nightclub would not meet the criteria required for a Special Land Use under the New Buffalo Township Zoning Ordinance and has not fulfilled the requirements to apply for a license under the Township of New Buffalo Sexually Oriented Business Ordinance.

The vote was 7-0. My thanks to the commissioners.

Read the whole motion of the New Buffalo Township Planning Commission here

Insiders views of Strip bars

2008-06-16T11:38:00.002-04:00

Strip Club Testimony by Kelly Holsopple about her experiences in stripping over the course of thirteen years.

Sexually Oriented Businesses - An Insider’s View by David Sherman, a Former Midwest Manager of Déjà Vu strip bars with 14 years experience in the adult entertainment industry

How do Sexually Oriented Businesses (SOBs) affect communities?
a. Land Use Studies from cities around the United States were cited in both U.S. Supreme Court cases and clearly document the harmful secondary effects caused by SOBs such as those listed above.
b. These harmful secondary effects the Court identified are:

1. Increased Crime - rape, sexual assault, prostitution and illegal drug sales
2. Decreased Property Values - both residential and commercial
3. Urban Blight - people and businesses fleeing the community

c. Facts cited in three of the Land Use Studies or view the summaries of 32 studies.

1. Indianapolis, Indiana: Crime increased 23% in the study areas containing SOBs versus study areas containing no SOBs. Sex related crimes were 4 times more common in residential study areas than commercial study areas with SOBs.
2. Cleveland, Ohio: In one study tract with 5 SOBs and 730 people, there were 136 robberies. In the city's largest tract (13,587 people and no SOBs) there were only 14 robberies. Of the three tracts with the highest incidence of rape, two had SOBs and the third bordered a tract with such businesses. In these three, there were 41 rapes - 14 per tract - nearly 7 times the city average of 2.4 rapes per census tract.
3. Phoenix, Arizona: On average, sex offenses were 506% greater and property crimes were 43% greater in neighborhoods where SOBs were located as opposed to neighborhoods containing no SOBs.
4. Click here for a more comprehensive list of key court cases, land use studies, and testimonies

What can a community do to protect itself from SOBs?

a. The U.S. Supreme Court, in two landmark decisions --Young v. American Mini Theaters, Inc., (1976) and Renton v. Playtime Inc. Theater, Inc., (1986) concluded "...that municipalities have a substantial interest in protecting and preserving the quality of life for its community against the adverse secondary effects of SOBs...." - regardless of the size of the community.
b. This means that legislative bodies - villages, cities, townships, counties - not only have the right but have the duty to protect its citizens from these harmful secondary effects.
c. Such legislative protection can be passed in the form of zoning ordinances, licensing procedures, permit requirements and operational regulations.
d. All these legislative tools are needed to make it extremely unattractive for SOBs to open in a community.

Source: www.ccv.org

The "Gentlemen's" Club

2008-06-10T22:01:00.001-04:00

I encourage the New Buffalo Planning Commission in regards to the proposed "Gentlemen's Club" to uphold their existing zoning ordinance and recommend denial of a special land use permit allowing the N.O.I. Inc to build/open a strip club. The existing zoning ordinance calls for sexual oriented businesses to be 1000 feet from residences as well as businesses serving alcohol which the N.O.I. Inc. proposed establishment does not meet.

Our community is supposed to believe that the proposed club will be a high quality multimillion-dollar business. Yet, the proprietor, Dave Roberts, couldn't even answer basic questions such as the number of proposed employees or whether or not the business would provide lap dances. When asked, Roberts couldn't even vocalize a list of investors. When Roberts was asked how many investors have invested over 20%, he stated only he and his wife. By his own admission, he has no experience running a sexually oriented business (S.O.B.). Something appears fishy here. Roberts is requesting a topless bar, but when the board asked if lap dances would be provided, Mr. Roberts' only answer was that he would do everything within the law and his attorney, Mr. Mark LaRose, informed the board that full nudity is legal. So should we expect a full-nudity lounge club? We are made to believe that local attorney, Mark LaRose, is only representing Roberts; however LaRose's own choice of words have created questions as to the extent of his involvement. Mr. LaRose stated "I guarantee you if you put reasonable, understandable, safe restrictions on this business, they will be complied with." Let me ask a question. If you are only an attorney representing a client, how can you guarantee such a thing? Unless perhaps you are part owner, silent partner, or investor that actually has a say in how the business will be run? Additionally and even more revealing, LaRose continued "When a guy gets out the back door of McDonalds or Casey's, or some other of the establishments in town; we can't guarantee what that guy or woman will do but while they're in OUR establishment, WE can guarantee that WE'LL do the best WE can to follow the law and prosecute those that don't" (emphasis added). Notice that LaRose doesn't say, "my client's establishment, my client can guarantee, or that my client can do the best. It seems obvious that the involvement of LaRose is deeper than we are made to believe. Their attempt to keep us in the dark not only forms mistrust to the actual extent of the S.O.B., but also fails to provide any form of confidence that this business will be run according to the law. I also would like to know, in what capacity, if any, Mr. Alan Gull, the owner of the property for the proposed strip club is involved.

We are made to believe that legally we cannot prevent this S.O.B. from coming to our community. I disagree. The Michigan State Supreme Court has already provided precedence by rulings that a subsequent zoning ordinance can be enforced, even when proprietor was already given a building permit; as well as a ruling that when an application for a permit is pending and rezoning takes place before the permit is issued, no prior right exists. Whatever the recommendation of the New Buffalo Planning Commission will be, I encourage the New Buffalo Township Board to deny the special land use permit based on the fact that the S.O.B. fails to meet the existing zoning ordinance. I encourage the Board to uphold their existing ordinances and avoid being bullied by the threat of a lawsuit. If the board denies the application and N.O.I. Inc files a lawsuit against New Buffalo Township, just as I have organized grass-roots movements in the past, I am willing, if necessary, to form a group of citizens opposed to the strip joint to do what is necessary to support the township's legal battle. I didn't back down from a fight against the United States Federal Government and I'm not about to back down from a fight against some N.O.I. Inc. - and neither should any others opposed to this strip joint.

Breaking News – Three Oaks is Bankrupt!

2008-05-10T22:51:00.002-04:00

There was a special emergency meeting of the Village of Three Oaks council on May 9th. During the meeting it was revealed that Three Oaks is financially broke.

The council formed and approved an Emergency Finance Committee.
The new committee members are:
Bret Witkowski - Berrien County Treasurer
Frank Walsh – St. Joseph City Manager
David Grosse
Chris Siebenmark

The Village president Philip Smith was asked to resign by Chris Ranzenberger, the village trustee.

Tune to Martin Dzuris Live on Monday May 12th for more info…..

You can listen to the audio of the meeting here.

There Will Be A New Mayor In New Buffalo

2008-05-06T21:28:00.001-04:00

Major Bob Westergren will not be the mayor of New Buffalo. He has lost his re-election bid in today’s elections. His last city council meeting will be on May 13th. The city budget will be on the agenda that day.
Rusty Geisler was re-elected and newcomer Susan Maroko will be the new council member of New Buffalo.
Susan Maroko will be seated for the first time on the council May 20th.
The new council will select a new mayor and mayor protem on May 20th.

Results for city council:
Susan Maroko 247
Rusty Geisler 202
Bob Westergren 193
Ray Lawson 174

There are 1427 registered voters in New Buffalo; 447 voted in the election.

There is no change on the New Buffalo School Board. Lisa Warner and John Anderson got re-elected as they ran unopposed.

Breaking news – update on the Birchwood Development in New Buffalo Township

2008-04-16T11:32:00.001-04:00

“The Martin Dzuris Live Radio Show” has obtained a complaint filed with the 2nd Judicial Circuit Court against Rolland Oselka. The complaint can be seen at www.dzuris.com.

The residents opposed to the development formed a group called “Friends Of Good Government”, obtained an attorney and filed a lawsuit against Rolland Oselka, clerk of New Buffalo Township, in his official capacity. According to the complaint, Rolland Oselka used inappropriate standards in canvassing the petition to put the issue of the Birchwood Development on the ballot and his review exceeded his proper ministerial role. The complaint also states that under the law the Clerk has no discretion to evaluate the validity of petition signatures using anything other than the signers’ address and voter registration status and may not conduct any independent investigation to determine the genuineness of signatures appearing on a petition for referendum.
I wonder who will represent Mr. Oselka. The same attorney who failed to represent the residents of New Buffalo Township in the first place and according to the filed complaint even advised the Clerk himself improperly? This is going to cost the taxpayers of New Buffalo Township a lot of money and they should be outraged and voice their outrage in the upcoming election.

Birchwood Development on Kinst Road

2008-03-10T22:28:00.001-04:00

Elected officials are supposed to represent the will of the people rather than defy their will to promote their own agenda and interests. In the case of the Birchwood development, I wonder whose interest the three board members of New Buffalo Township Board, Rolland Oselka, Pete Rahm and Jack Rodgers are representing. They sure are not representing the people. Not only have the board members approved this development to go forward against the recommendation of the New Buffalo Township Planning Commission and the Berrien County Planning Commission, they have also stonewalled any effort of the New Buffalo Township citizens to put the decision into the hands of the voters by refusing the voters a chance to vote on this issue on the ballot, simply based on a technicality.

Our laws are supposed to protect the rights of citizens to vote and prevent voter fraud rather than taking the right to vote on an issue away from its citizens. Unfortunately, this is exactly what the New Buffalo Township Board has done. We elect officials to represent the community and help the community achieve its desires; not to stonewall our efforts and silence our voice. The duty of the officials is to give all the information needed to perform a civil action rather than trying to prevent an effort with any means possible as done in this case. To go as far as using a township attorney against the township citizens is not only an outrage but also a violation of their civil duties. Our government, even local government, should be transparent in its conduct and efforts rather than withholding information and hiding behind “client/attorney privilege” as done in this case. The New Buffalo Township attorney’s clients are the people of New Buffalo Township; not the actions of certain board members. The board is elected to represent the people, therefore when the attorney represents the Township Board he represents the people of New Buffalo, not those elected as the board. However, unfortunately, the attorney in this case, is protecting the board’s decision rather than the will of the people. The will of the people is to have this decision on the ballot in order to vote on the decision, as expressed in a petition signed by 185 township citizens. Right now, according to the board, the zoning for the proposed development has been changed from an agricultural-residence to R—3 to make the project possible. As of now, all that is needed for this development to go further is the approval of the township board; and by noting their previous actions; one can safely assume their approval. The next meeting of the New Buffalo Township Board is March 18. I encourage every person outraged about the Board’s conduct to appear at the next meeting and voice your disapproval. Also vote these officials out of office in the next elections. Regardless of whether or not you disagree or approve of the Birchwood development itself, I fail to see how anyone can approve of the conduct of the board officials who neglect and fail to represent the citizens whom they are suppose to represent, stonewall them in every effort, and use the township attorney against the citizens. Keep in mind, even if you have no opinion regarding the Birchwood development, perhaps next time the board may use the same approach to decide an issue about which you do care.

Remember, it’s “we the people” not “the officials” who still have the power. Exercise such power while you still can.