Detroit's City Council Districts Decided

**corktownyuppie** · January-22-12, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

I expect there will be some shady dealings where carpetbags will "move from" Palmer Park to some in-name-only house where they spend a couple hours a week. How will we enforce district representation? That's another question we haven't answered.

It's a tough question, though I think it won't too much of a factor. At the end of the day, politicians are acutely aware of the people who are voting for them. If you look at the districts on any of those maps, someone living on the border of one district can be living in a totally different world from someone in the same district but on the other side. What will matter is that when money is spent campaigning, polling, and being out in the streets, politicians know who put them in office.

**Dexlin** · January-23-12, 06:45 AM

Rochelle Riley has an update on this, today. Apparently, they redrew them even since the ones of the first page were released to correct some glaring errors. Anyway, I'm for anything that both keeps the inner-city core together, and outside of that, minimizes the crossing of Woodward. Of the news ones, I like a mixture of one and two. On the west side, I'd like them to keep the districts divide on east-west streets [[7 miles, 6 mile, etc...) instead of north-south [[i.e. Livernois, Evergreen, etc...) simply because it makes more historical/geographic sense with how the city is oriented and how it was developed.

**313WX** · January-23-12, 09:09 AM

Now I can live with the new Draft #2, followed closely by Draft #3.

#1 can be shoved where the sun doesn't shine.

**Modusvivendi** · January-23-12, 11:15 AM

How are council members currently elected? By an "at large" system?

**Motor City Sam** · January-23-12, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by Modusvivendi

How are council members currently elected? By an "at large" system?

Yes, they are currently elected "at large".

**maxx** · January-23-12, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by East Detroit

I like option #3.

Gives the far northeast side its own representative who would concentrate solely on that area [[not Belle Isle or other monuments, just the neighborhoods).

Isn't that rather short-sighted?

**AGinthe313** · January-23-12, 04:09 PM

Based on the proposed maps it appears that Southwest Detroit will likely have their own district regardless of the final decision. Does anyone familiar with Southwest Detroit know of any potential candidates that might make a run for a seat on the city council? Are any of the current council members from that proposed district? I don’t know the community that well, so I’m curious to know if there are any highly regarded community leaders that are likely to emerge. One other point/question – has Sue Mosley [[Midtown area) ever campaigned for a city council seat? Personally I think she would be a great addition to the city council.

**SWMAP** · January-23-12, 04:23 PM

Does anyone familiar with Southwest Detroit know of any potential candidates that might make a run for a seat on the city council?

I predict the politically ambitious and race [[ethnicity)-card player Elena Herrada who so loathes the hard-working Rashida Tlaib and makes no secret of same.

**Homer** · January-24-12, 06:17 AM

Ken Cockrel lives in Woodbridge which looks to be in the SW slice.
Could always get a Matty Maroun financed Slappy from SW. Since he is losing influence in the area.

ps [[swmap, how did i know you would bring in herrada's name, she seems to be your nemesis)

**mam2009** · January-24-12, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by antongast

Just eyeballing these, the third one seems the most logical to me in terms of which areas are put together. It has the fewest votes in the poll, though.

Ditto. The way the neighborhoods are grouped seems to be more closely tied to how those neighborhoods historically have tended to identify with each other anyway. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

**mam2009** · January-24-12, 04:08 PM

While I agree wholeheartedly that the public should be heavily involved in the process of choosing the preferred map, I think its critical that folks remember that THESE districts are just about who you get to vote for in your neighborhood. Peoples' expectations need to remain realistic. Your district council member will have no more power than s/he does now and their primary responsibility will continue to be approving the budget. PERIOD.

The council FUNDS departments, but they will not be able to control how the department manages its resources to provide services within each district. That will continue to be the mayor's job. We should ALL continue to receive the same level [[or lack of ) of City service regardless of where we live and who is our elected council representative. There should be no special favors between the mayor any district representatives for extra resources for a particular district. That will just lead to another type of corruption. And isn't that what we we're trying to get away from?

Don't overthink this district model. We are a City that is 85% black.

**Richard** · January-24-12, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by East Detroit

I like option #3.

Gives the far northeast side its own representative who would concentrate solely on that area [[not Belle Isle or other monuments, just the neighborhoods).

Originally Posted by maxx

Isn't that rather short-sighted?

maxx in the interest of the discussion would you care to elaborate a bit more as to your views as to why it is a bit short-sited?

**corktownyuppie** · February-03-12, 10:22 AM

This newly proposed district map makes the most sense to me and still meets the demographic guidelines set by the law.

http://www.freep.com/article/2012020...xt|FRONTPAGE|p

But local think tank Data Driven Detroit has come up with a fifth option -- districts drawn to respect longstanding neighborhood boundaries and intended to build on the sense of community that residents in different parts of the city already have.D3's map, which also offers a more even balance of population among districts, is the first I've seen that draws on qualitative input as well as rudimentary quantitative measures.And what would be a better qualitative consideration than neighborhood sensibilities, which were the impetus behind the drive to convert from an at-large City Council in the first place?

Name: C418458922.jpg
Views: 774
Size: 73.3 KB

**antongast** · February-03-12, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

This newly proposed district map makes the most sense to me and still meets the demographic guidelines set by the law.

http://www.freep.com/article/20120203/COL33/202030342/Stephen-Henderson-A-smarter-council-district-map-links-neighborhoods?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE| p

Mmm, I like.

**stromberg2** · February-03-12, 02:40 PM

Yep, that looks like the best one......which, of course, will never be considered.

Stromberg2

**corktownyuppie** · February-03-12, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by stromberg2

Yep, that looks like the best one......which, of course, will never be considered.

Stromberg2

I am the eternal optimist

I think it will be considered...

...though I'm not saying it'll win. We'll see....

**erikd** · February-05-12, 04:39 AM

Originally Posted by mam2009

While I agree wholeheartedly that the public should be heavily involved in the process of choosing the preferred map, I think its critical that folks remember that THESE districts are just about who you get to vote for in your neighborhood. Peoples' expectations need to remain realistic. Your district council member will have no more power than s/he does now and their primary responsibility will continue to be approving the budget. PERIOD.

The council FUNDS departments, but they will not be able to control how the department manages its resources to provide services within each district. That will continue to be the mayor's job. We should ALL continue to receive the same level [[or lack of ) of City service regardless of where we live and who is our elected council representative. There should be no special favors between the mayor any district representatives for extra resources for a particular district. That will just lead to another type of corruption. And isn't that what we we're trying to get away from?

Don't overthink this district model. We are a City that is 85% black.

It is true that the mayor is in charge of city departments, not city council, but the council members do have leverage to get things done, due to their power over the budget.

In the current system, we have ten elected people who all represent the city at large. If there is an important issue affecting one neighborhood or area of the city, there is no single elected representative of that area to contact, or hold responsible. As it stands now, there are ten people responsible for everything, but nobody responsible for anything in particular.

If I call all nine city council members and the mayor about a problem in my neighborhood, and nobody does anything about it, who is to blame? Who do I hold accountable? Who do I vote out of office? Who do I vote for instead that will make my local neighborhood issue a priority?

The district plan is all about bringing some accountability to city council. We don't need ten people all representing the same area, and using the redundancy as an excuse to pass the buck and escape responsibility.

And what is up with your comment "Don't overthink this district model. We are a City that is 85% black." What exactly do you mean by that?

**Parkguy** · February-06-12, 04:25 PM

I went to the council hearing at Greater Grace Temple on Friday. There are more hearings scheduled around the city this week, with an additional one that may be scheduled next week in Southwest Detroit. Go and let your opinions be heard. The full council was there on Friday.

Dates and times here.

**mam2009** · February-08-12, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by erikd

It is true that the mayor is in charge of city departments, not city council, but the council members do have leverage to get things done, due to their power over the budget.

In the current system, we have ten elected people who all represent the city at large. If there is an important issue affecting one neighborhood or area of the city, there is no single elected representative of that area to contact, or hold responsible. As it stands now, there are ten people responsible for everything, but nobody responsible for anything in particular.

If I call all nine city council members and the mayor about a problem in my neighborhood, and nobody does anything about it, who is to blame? Who do I hold accountable? Who do I vote out of office? Who do I vote for instead that will make my local neighborhood issue a priority?

The one person you hold accountable is the one person who IS accountable in a strong-mayor form of government -- THE MAYOR. The district model we have voted for doesn't give the Council any more power than they currently have. The only real accountability they should have is to be a strong advocate for you. For example, it seems like State Rep. Rashida Talib [[forgive me if I spelled her name wrong) is a very strong advocate for her district, but should her constituents "vote [[her) out of office" because of legislation passed by the Republican led state House and Senate and approved by the Governor Snyder, or for crowded lines at the Secretary of State's office, or for the grass not being cut on state highways and roads, etc?

Originally Posted by erikd

And what is up with your comment "Don't overthink this district model. We are a City that is 85% black." What exactly do you mean by that?

Forgive me for not elaborating and, therefore, not being clear. Typically, citizens fear dilution of their vote [[where their vote is inconsequential to the outcome of elections) when district lines are drawn or re-drawn. The vast majority of the citizens in Detroit are not only black, but also vote Democratic, so vote dillution is not an issue to 85% of the citizens who live here. Hopefully, districts will make it easier for you and your neighbors to pick a district council member that you are more familiar with, whom you believe has integrity, intelligence, good judgment, a helpful heart and who is in tune with the needs of your geographic area. That's all that's really needed in our district system. And if you happen to live in a district border area where your interests are served by two Council members, then, hopefully, you just have one extra advocate [[or voice) for your geographic area.

Due to the fact that the City Council has not been granted any additional powers that would increase its level of accountability for the delivery of city services, the drawing of these district lines means only one thing -- the unique viewpoint of each geographic district's voters should be a part of City Council deliberations on the budget & land-use matters, etc. That's it. As far as whether my streetlight gets turned on or not, I do hope that my Council member has a great relationship with the mayor. Otherwise if I rely solely on him or her to get my light on, I might be up a creek.

But we should also remember that in politics, the relationship another district's Council member has with the Mayor may be better than the one my Council member has. And often those kinds of good relationships come with a price. And sometimes those prices lead to corruption or, at the very least, an unfair playing field.

**mam2009** · February-08-12, 08:14 AM

Has anyone been to any of the District public hearings yet? The one in my neighborhood is not until Friday.

**corktownyuppie** · February-08-12, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by mam2009

The one person you hold accountable is the one person who IS accountable in a strong-mayor form of government -- THE MAYOR. The district model we have voted for doesn't give the Council any more power than they currently have. The only real accountability they should have is to be a strong advocate for you. For example, it seems like State Rep. Rashida Talib [[forgive me if I spelled her name wrong) is a very strong advocate for her district, but should her constituents "vote [[her) out of office" because of legislation passed by the Republican led state House and Senate and approved by the Governor Snyder, or for crowded lines at the Secretary of State's office, or for the grass not being cut on state highways and roads, etc?

Forgive me for not elaborating and, therefore, not being clear. Typically, citizens fear dilution of their vote [[where their vote is inconsequential to the outcome of elections) when district lines are drawn or re-drawn. The vast majority of the citizens in Detroit are not only black, but also vote Democratic, so vote dillution is not an issue to 85% of the citizens who live here. Hopefully, districts will make it easier for you and your neighbors to pick a district council member that you are more familiar with, whom you believe has integrity, intelligence, good judgment, a helpful heart and who is in tune with the needs of your geographic area. That's all that's really needed in our district system. And if you happen to live in a district border area where your interests are served by two Council members, then, hopefully, you just have one extra advocate [[or voice) for your geographic area.

Due to the fact that the City Council has not been granted any additional powers that would increase its level of accountability for the delivery of city services, the drawing of these district lines means only one thing -- the unique viewpoint of each geographic district's voters should be a part of City Council deliberations on the budget & land-use matters, etc. That's it. As far as whether my streetlight gets turned on or not, I do hope that my Council member has a great relationship with the mayor. Otherwise if I rely solely on him or her to get my light on, I might be up a creek.

But we should also remember that in politics, the relationship another district's Council member has with the Mayor may be better than the one my Council member has. And often those kinds of good relationships come with a price. And sometimes those prices lead to corruption or, at the very least, an unfair playing field.

First, let me state that I generally agree with the substance of your position. At the end of the day, it's the Mayor that has the most direct control over the day-to-day operations of the city. And given the "strong Mayor" design of Detroit government, the city council generally works as a minor check & balance against Mayoral power.

Howeva...

In a city where the Mayoral/City Council relationship has been historically characterized by total dysfunction and gridlock [[let's not forget the Cobo Hall fiasco)...combined with former councilmembers whose personality styles and psyches were as extreme as their political positions...combined with a distrustful electorate....a council-by-district model does the following:

- forces council members to run "against" someone...rather than relying on city-wide name recognition to show up in the Top 9 rankings. This will result in one-on-one competitions where poorly informed ideas will be tested

- allows an electorate to focus on one electoral contest in their district, rather than forcing the individual voter to evaluate 15-different politicians, and then ranking them in order of desirability [[a tall order even for the most civic minded of us)

- helps build trust between citizens and their elected reps because one rep will focus all of his/her time among a smaller number of people.

Nothing is more frustrating than finding a workable solution to complex problems only to have it bogged down in political procedure. That isn't to say that this solution will force agreement or consensus all the time...hardly. But this way, if someone is just truly incompetent -- and that incompetence is slowing things down -- they will now have to face head-to-head competition for their seat, rather than a diluted electoral process.

So I don't think that the council-by-district idea is meant to make sure that appropriations funnel back to individual districts, I think it's biggest advantage is that when one councilman votes up or votes down a proposal, I know that he/she is answerable only to me and the people in my area.

If, for some reason I disagree with that vote, then I can focus my efforts on persuading the people most likely to live my daily life. Moreover, if I don't agree, at least I know that he/she is answerable to the people who I live and work around, rather than strangers in a neighborhood that is a world apart from where I live.

Palmer Woods does not equal Del Ray does not equal EEV.

In that sense, I think this is a big improvement...though I do agree that, as you say, its powers in any specific sense are very limited.

**mam2009** · February-08-12, 05:51 PM

Agreed, Corktownyuppie. :0) I do hope that people don't get sooo wrapped up in specific neighborhoods being within the same district that these districts end up breeding ”turf wars”. We need to remember that many of or neighborhoods are already split up by congressional lines, state House lines, state Senate lines, Wayne County Commission lines, Board of Education lines, etc. I haven't heard anyone ever complain about that. Why? Because citizens, regardless of their lines can STILL WORK TOGETHER ON ISSUES REGARDLESS OF WHAT DISTRICT THEY ARE IN. We need to be careful to work more for a better Detroit, rather than create a neighborhood versus neighborhood mentality. These districts, again, are just about deciding the geographic area from which your elected official will come from. That's it.

**stasu1213** · February-08-12, 05:58 PM

Charlie Leduff had reported that there were no comments from the Mayor's office or Charles Pugh pertaining to the circumstances that had surrounded the death of Charles Pugh's brother. The EMS was slow coming again due to cuts done by Pugh and council. Fellow officers had to drive Pugh's brother to the hospital. I hate to use this as an example of shortsightedness on the Mayor and councils decisions but the result of it had hit home.

**mam2009** · February-15-12, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by MSUguy

I don't see major any issues with them, but I'm inclined to pick 1 or 2 as they keep downtown and midtown together.

MSUguy, why do you think its better to group all of Downtown and Midtown together in one district? It seems to me that downtown doesn't need any additional help having its voice heard since downtown has been getting quite a bit of attention over the years in terms of economic development, attraction of large employers, special tax districts with tax resources devoted solely to downtown, etc.

Although, I opposed districts, I thought the idea of the proponents was to give NEIGHBORHOODS a greater voice in government. Downtown is always going to be a priority. Downtown has never had a problem having its "voice" heard or getting the attention of elected officials. I'm of the opinion that downtown should be shared amongst two or more districts. Downtown should belong to everybody.

If downtown belongs to the entire City [[as I think it does and should), shouldn't other districts and their representatives have a hand in deciding downtown priorities; not just the downtown and midtown residents and business owners?

I would not support the Council choosing any map that carved out a special district just for downtown and midtown.