As you may (or may not) have heard, our newest Historic District Commission (HDC) Commissioner, Annette Zemon-Parker, has resigned after only a few months on the Commission.
Weird, huh?
Especially since Zemon-Parker expressed an interest in the commissioner opportunity to Mayor Sue Wylie in Spring 2024 almost six months before there was an opening, took the time to prepare and submit a resume, and was the only one who bothered to show up to the November 25, 2025, city council meeting to interview and make a public statement for the council and the public to emphasize her background and interest.
So, the council took an immediate vote on November 25, right?
Wrong.
The council had lots of reasons to ignore Zemon-Parker in favor of someone (anyone?) else, like: We didn’t advertise enough! Hey, former council member Mark Lamphier is free after losing his last city council election and gosh darn it, he said he might be interested (guess he needed something to do with his free time?). And meeting junkie Cara Catallo knew about some super-secret potential third candidate who just wasn’t able to come to the meeting but apparently totally wanted to. You know, reasons. More likely the unstated reasons were more important – Zemon-Parker wasn’t one of the “old guard” and was nominated by Mayor Sue Wylie.
And so, the vote on Zemon-Parker’s candidacy was postponed until the next city council meeting on December 9, 2024. Zemon-Parker was unable to attend that meeting due to illness, but she made sure to contact Mayor Wylie to express her continued interest in the opening. Cara Catallo was there again and even though she claimed she had nothing against Zemon-Parker and she’d probably do a great job, she was concerned Zemon-Parker might not have an interest in historic preservation. Catallo also expressed irritation that anyone on the council would have the temerity to suggest that if someone is interested in an appointed position they should have to show up at a meeting, because the mayor’s position was open for a period of time after former Mayor Eric Haven’s resignation before Sue Wylie was appointed. (How totally nervy to expect someone to show up!) So, who was Catallo’s preferred super-secret candidate? Well, that person was a no show again – because of cyberbullies or something. Lamphier was also a no show again, so I guess he wasn’t all that interested either.
In the end, Zemon-Parker was selected because she consistently expressed an interest in the job, actually did something to demonstrate that interest, and she showed up for an interview with the city council.
But it didn’t take long for the a-holes to attack Zemon-Parker.
What did she do wrong? Well, apparently one of the things was to have the nerve to write a letter to the city council – written as a private citizen and without using her official commission title for heft (that most people would be unaware of if she didn’t mention it). In that letter, Zemon-Parker expressed anger at what she perceived was the lack of transparency demonstrated by the Historic District Study Committee to shoehorn even more homes into a historic designation (including her own home), to increase the “historic” designation to homes built up to 1970 (because adding 1970s homes just screams 19th century mill town, doesn’t it?), the study committee’s failure to expressly notify the affected homeowners what the one unrecorded public meeting concerning the study committee’s findings was about, and because of her quite reasonable belief that the HDC had a hand in the committee’s work as a way to increase its power over historic district residents. I’d also add that the study committee cut out the council as well as the individual homeowners, claiming the law didn’t require them to do any more than they did. Frankly, I suspect the study committee didn’t notify the newly affected homeowners because they didn’t want them to have the opportunity to make informed objections about what the committee was doing with the designation of their homes or their intent to publicly display their information on the library’s website. Zemon-Parker’s letter was read aloud at the January 27, 2025, city council meeting.
Whether you agree with Zemon-Parker or not, she has the right as a resident of the city to express her concerns about the actions of the study committee and to ask the city council not to approve their report. As I noted earlier, she did not use her status as an HDC commissioner to try to influence the actions of the council.
Let’s contrast that to HDC commissioner Lisa Patercsak, who felt compelled to publicly attack Zemon-Parker at the next city council meeting on February 10, 2025, over the contents of her letter, and on information and belief, Patercsak similarly attacked Zemon-Parker in public at the next HDC meeting. (I can’t verify that for certain, since the HDC refuses to record its meetings because it doesn’t want people to know what happens there.)
Patercsak attacked Zemon-Parker in Patercsak’s capacity as an HDC commissioner. She started by assuming everyone at the meeting was a moron and pedagogically explained what the study committee, HDC, and the Clarkston Historical Society are, a rather bizarre recitation since the Clarkston Historical Society had nothing to do with the discussion at hand. In addition to excoriating Zemon-Parker for having an opinion that differed from her own, Patercsak also attacked Mayor Wylie for reading Zemon-Parker’s written public comment “out of context.” Please note that Patercsak’s “out of context” claim in this scenario was Mayor Wylie simply reading a public comment when an agenda item was considered while also entertaining comments about that same agenda item from other members of the public who were present at the meeting, which is the city council practice. Among the “other members of the public” who commented after Zemon-Parker’s letter was read were Nancy Moon, Chair of the Historic District Study Committee and her husband Michael Moon, HDC commissioner, so I think the opposition to Zemon-Parker’s personal opinion was well represented at that meeting.
Patercsak also accused Mayor Wylie of being irresponsible and claimed the current HDC commission chair is, among other things, committed to following the law (the HDC wasn’t following the law then, and I don’t think they are now, but I’m keeping my powder dry on that for the moment). Completely ignoring the history of HDC abuse against historic district residents and without offering any evidence, Patercsak asserted that it’s unfortunate there’s a continuing negative narrative about the HDC that is perpetuated by city leadership. Patercsak thought it was totally awesome that the Historic District Study Committee invaded the privacy of all historic district residents for the benefit of the community, its residents, and for the next generations.
Oops, sorry; the invasion of privacy is my characterization, not hers. Patercsak apparently thinks it’s wonderful that people associated with the study committee skulked around the city with cameras taking as many photos of private homes as possible, scouring the internet for tidbits, and publishing all of it without telling anyone what they were doing. I wrote previously about Patercsak’s attack on Zemon-Parker and Mayor Wylie here.
When did Patercsak become such a self-proclaimed expert? Maybe it was through osmosis or something, because she certainly brought nothing to the table when she was appointed to the HDC at the December 11, 2023, city council meeting. You can go to the meeting video or the informal transcript linked above, but here is my summary of the extent of Patercsak’s qualifications to serve as an HDC commissioner: she’s lived here since 2018, is “familiar with the area” because she used to live in Springfield Township, loves the downtown area, worked with the HDC on her own renovations, had zero building or architectural experience but greatly appreciates city history, talked to a couple HDC commissioners, was willing to go to classes and read books, and would be enthusiastic and appreciative to be appointed. Amazing how far she’s come – from knowing nothing to insulting the mayor and lecturing a fellow HDC commissioner for expressing a personal opinion after only 14.5 months of going to monthly HDC meetings.
Anyone care to guess who was whispering in Patercsak’s ear shortly after she delivered her attack on Zemon-Parker on February 10, 2025, and captured in this screenshot?
Patercsak is the blond in the white sweater on the lower right of the screen, and I’d bet my next paycheck that the whisperer in the grey hooded jacket with the camo green beanie identified by the blue arrows is none other than Cara Catallo. I’m pretty sure it is Catallo since she likes to cover her green (or blue) hair with a beanie and sit in the back during city council meetings. Though I have no proof, I wouldn’t be surprised if Catallo assisted Patercsak with her attack screed because Catallo has also attacked mayor Wylie in the past and admittedly preferred her super-secret HDC candidate to Zemon-Parker. (If anyone wants to correct me about the identity of the woman whispering in Patercsak’s ear at the February 10, 2025, city council meeting, I will be glad to publish the correction.)
You’d have to ask Zemon-Parker about any additional reprehensible treatment she received from Patercsak and any other fellow HDC commissioners since her December 9, 2024, appointment, but it was all apparently enough for Zemon-Parker to throw in the towel and resign after a few short months doing a job she really wanted to do. That’s too bad, because we need more Zemon-Parkers and less Patercsaks on the HDC if they ever want to improve their reputation within the community, and anyone who attacked Zemon-Parker and made her feel unwelcome should be deeply ashamed of themselves. But I doubt they will.
So, now what? Well, I expect that there has been a whisper campaign to try to get someone deemed more “suitable” for an HDC appointment, and you may hear some names put forward at the next council meeting.
Gosh, I wonder if it will be any of the following supporters of the anti-HDC charter proposal campaign, a campaign that pushed lie after lie to Clarkston residents about a charter proposal that would have provided some additional protection to taxpayers and to historic district residents from HDC overreach? I will eventually give them all a permanent place of honor on this website, but for now, I’ve listed their names, contributions, and an occasional interesting fact or two about them below. (You can verify their contributions to the anti-HDC charter proposal campaign by going here and here and here.)
-
- Cara Catallo, donated $88.50 for website fees for the anti-HDC charter proposal website that was used as one of the vehicles to push falsehoods about the HDC charter proposal.
-
- Steve Hargis, donated $100.
-
- Eric Haven, former mayor, donated $100 and signed a letter to the editor “from four former mayors” that made false claims about the charter proposal.
-
- Nancy Haven, Eric’s wife, donated $100.
-
- Mary Himburg, donated $100.
-
- Kevin Knapp, donated $350.
-
- James Markwalder, donated $435 in cash and wrote a letter to the editor falsely claiming the HDC charter proposal would micromanage social behaviors, attempted to legislate personal and subjective conduct, and gosh darn it, it had just too many words (because apparently Clarkston residents are too stupid to understand things when there are too many words!)
-
- Scott Meyland, donated $100 in cash and also wrote a letter to the editor claiming a citizen-initiated charter proposal should follow the same procedure as a city-initiated charter proposal, demonstrating his inability to read and understand the requirements for either of them. (Meyland’s comments were included on Catallo’s anti-HDC website, suggesting a coordination of effort.)
-
- Margaret Sans, councilmember Eric Jones’ roommate, donated a total of $1,602.63 – $300 in cash with the remainder used toward newspaper advertisements making false claims about the HDC charter proposal.
-
- Frank Schoebel, donated $300 in cash and $91.71 for printing.
-
- Robert Sowles, donated $100.
-
- Diane Wayne, donated $200.
-
- Nancy Wint, donated $50.
The following people made donations but are not eligible for an HDC appointment. I’m including them because I think it’s helpful to know who knows who (and who supported a campaign that lied to an entire city):
-
- Joe Luginski (former mayor) and Melissa Luginski (former HDC commissioner) donated $223.53 and $134.80 to the campaign respectively. Joe organized the anti-HDC charter proposal ballot committee and also signed the “four former mayors” letter to the editor with Haven and two others. On information and belief, Melissa was instrumental in the anti-HDC charter proposal lawn sign campaign and made false statements about the charter proposal on social media. Both Luginskis were Independence Township residents at the time of the campaign, and neither were registered to vote in Clarkston. They’ve since left their Clarkston rental home for their permanent home in Independence Township (and I offer their new domicile my deepest sympathies.)
-
- Nancy Moon, Historic District Study Committee Chair, $300 in cash. Used her council-appointed position to try to obtain what she characterized as “Promotional Material to Stop the [HDC Charter Proposal] Petition” from the State Historic Preservation Office. Moon also provided false anti-charter proposal advocacy statements to the HDC that her husband/HDC Commissioner Michael Moon dutifully recorded in the HDC minutes. (These actions are the subject of a pending campaign finance violation complaint.)
-
- Lisa Patercsak, HDC commissioner, $400 in cash and $17.49 for labels. Patercsak falsely claimed on social media that the charter proposal would allow development at the corner of Waldon and Main without HDC involvement.
-
- Ted Quisenberry, city council member and failed candidate for mayor, donated $300 and falsely claimed the HDC charter proposal would gut the HDC and eliminate the legal authority we have to preserve our history.
-
- Jennifer Radcliff, HDC commissioner, donated $100.
-
- Derek Werner, Planning Commission chair and Cara Catallo’s ex-husband. Donated a total of $55.91 – $32 in cash with the remainder to purchase a P.O. Box and office supplies. Wrote a letter to the editor suggesting the charter shouldn’t be changed because it was drafted by wise people (even though he signed a petition a few years ago to change the charter and allow two marijuana dispensaries in residential neighborhoods). Despite also claiming the HDC charter proposal’s protections were already present in state law and the historic district ordinance, oddly thought the charter proposal would irreparably damage the historic district.
Let the replacement games begin.