Detroit's City Council Districts Decided

[erikd]

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?

[mam2009]

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?

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.

[corktownyuppie]

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]

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.