State to Detroit: Drop consent suit or lose funds...

**313WX** · June-12-12, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

313WX -- No. I don't assume that the state would agree.

Whether the debt is truly owed is a matter that lawyers can work on and get settled by the courts. Disagreements over debts and everything else are worked through the legal system all the time.

It is 100% irrelevant whether there is or isn't a debt.

If Detroit's law department has a problem, they'd discuss it with the state, and they would all agree to restructure the alleged debt in a manner that would allow the parties to move forward. Perhaps an escrow. How they'd do it doesn't matter. This is done all day long everywhere. Lawyers work out how to get something done.

My point is that the Detroit Law Department isn't trying to work this out -- they're working to undermine a deal. Isn't that obvious when Detroit goes to Ingham County to find a judge they like?

That's why this is falling apart. Not because of the actual facts of the alleged debt. That's the MacGuffin here. [[See wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacGuffin)

Again -- in a functional city, the law department would have solved this problem -- not magnified it. That's the real problem. Ignore the MacGuffin -- or you'll miss the real fight. And it ain't about water bills at the State Fair [[or whatever).

There's no reason to negotiate a debt with someone if you don't feel you're indebted to them. If it were as easy as you describe on a personal level, there would be no need for civil courts and small claim courts.

As far as why the lawsuit is filed, of course its all about politic. Of course, it just so happens that Crittndon may very well have a legal loophole [[and mask it as such) to achieve the ultimate political goal at work.

The state of Michigan is just as guilty though. If Snyder was truly concerned about providing services to the citizens of Dettoit and organizing the city's finances, he would have sent in the efm in January.

Like with the city council and Mayor's office, it's all a matter of who's going to take the responsibility of telling the unions that their contracts are useless and the taxpayers their services will be cut futher. Snyder knows once he pulls the efm trigger, Detroit's fate is going to be in his hands. The consent agreement was an attempt to pass the buck of Detroit's financial re-structuing all onto city officials.

**Wesley Mouch** · June-12-12, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

...snip...The consent agreement was an attempt to pass the buck of Detroit's financial re-structuing all onto city officials.

...where it belongs. It is their job after all.

**webband1** · June-12-12, 03:05 PM

Bing orders Crittendon to drop lawsuit....

http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs...RO%2F206120429

The roller coaster continues! Weeeeeeeeeeee!

**313WX** · June-12-12, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

...where it belongs. It is their job after all.

Fact of the matter is everyone needs to get serious, stop the name calling and demonizing, put their pride aside, and resolve Detroit's financial crisis or you might as well consider the city dead while its death will drag down the state with it.

Bottom line is Snyder knew what he was getting himself into when he set up everything starting with the passage of thee fm law in 2011.

All parties involved are at fault for wasting time with the useless grandstanding and tit-for-tat while the weak foundation on the house of cards continues to crumble.

**Richard** · June-12-12, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by webband1

Bing orders Crittendon to drop lawsuit....

http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs...RO%2F206120429

The roller coaster continues! Weeeeeeeeeeee!

So now this is going to a whole different level,

Her position is supposed to be the public voice with no fear of reprisal from the city concile or the mayors office,the mayor ordering her to drop this places in jeopardy the whole reason for her to be there in the first place.

Now if the citizens said drop it or modify it until it is resolved then it would be different,if she drops it per his demand then once again the people will have no voice in city hall and be back to square one.

**Locke09** · June-12-12, 03:57 PM

The Mayor's letter is confusing to me. He already obtained outside legal advise to create the consent agreement in the first place. The Law Department was not involved.

Then, he implies that Crittendon's responsibility [[and most others seem to agree) is merely to do what is in the best financial interest of the city. But that is wrong. An attorney's responsibility is to do what is in the client's best interest so long as it is not unethical or a violation of the law. For instance, an attorney cannot knowingly allow their client to perjure themselves, even if it is in the client's best interest. An attorney cannot conceal physical evidence, even if it is in the client's best interest.

Once an interested party [[Watson in this case) involves an attorney in a legal matter, the attorney is obligated to represent that client within legal and ethical confines.

The same people pushing the voters to pass the charter are now whining because it gave the Corporation Counsel the autonomy they said the office needed. I bet both newspapers encouraged voters to vote yes on the charter revisions. I didn't think it should pass because I didn't like the fact that it kept 9 council members in a city with declining population. But here we are.

**Wesley Mouch** · June-12-12, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

...snip...
Her position is supposed to be the public voice with no fear of reprisal from the city concile or the mayors office,the mayor ordering her to drop this places in jeopardy the whole reason for her to be there in the first place. ...snip...

Would you please enlighten me on this? She's head of the law department, right? And there's some new charter provisions here? I'm not informed on this, so please update me.

Normally, a corporation counsel helps the administration with legal needs -- generally at their direction. Clearly, that doesn't extend to law-breaking or cover-ups of illegal activity. This 'past due invoice' theory of home rule might be found valid by a court -- but there's no reason to think that this was an 'illegal' act. At worst, only a misguided one.

Thanks.

**Locke09** · June-12-12, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Would you please enlighten me on this? She's head of the law department, right? And there's some new charter provisions here? I'm not informed on this, so please update me.

Normally, a corporation counsel helps the administration with legal needs -- generally at their direction. Clearly, that doesn't extend to law-breaking or cover-ups of illegal activity. This 'past due invoice' theory of home rule might be found valid by a court -- but there's no reason to think that this was an 'illegal' act. At worst, only a misguided one.

Thanks.

The charter revisions, which the state approved, makes her responsible for upholding the charter. That is new. They also give her increased autonomy to do so. That is new. She doesn't need the mayor to tell her to act to uphold the charter. She is obligated to respond to a complaint that the charter is being violated.

The supposed illegal [[though not criminal) act is entering into a contract with an entity that owes the city money.

**Richard** · June-12-12, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Would you please enlighten me on this? She's head of the law department, right? And there's some new charter provisions here? I'm not informed on this, so please update me.

Normally, a corporation counsel helps the administration with legal needs -- generally at their direction. Clearly, that doesn't extend to law-breaking or cover-ups of illegal activity. This 'past due invoice' theory of home rule might be found valid by a court -- but there's no reason to think that this was an 'illegal' act. At worst, only a misguided one.

Thanks.

To add a little bit more ,

It is kinda like this ,there was a new charter passed that is in many ways beneficial to the taxpayer moving forward into the future.

In the past the city council or mayors office may or may not have had the perception that the office is working for them and should do as they say or they may have had influence as to decisions that were made. BTW very valid points brought up earlier in the posts as to what was going on before.

So in comes a new charter designed for the people but is really pointless if its laws can be influenced by the mayor or council or discrepancies can be buried.

So you can look at it like this she is your attorney put in place by you to protect your charter and make sure it is enforced without influence from the mayor nor the city council.

She answers to you ,she is your voice in city hall when you have no other.

She is doing what she is supposed to be doing and making sure the charter is being enforced,to me she gets a gold star because in light of everything happening she is showing you that she can and will do the job that is necessary to protect your interests.That speaks volumes when it comes to Detroit moving forward and it proves that the people are getting their voice back in city hall and are being represented.

Sure she is going to piss people off ,especially the ones that are in it for themselves and not for the good of the community.

As an example I posted above the city real estate auction coming up,in the past there were speculators and others that owed unpaid back taxes and were still buying property at auction and owing even more taxes unpaid,there have been posts here about that,this tells you that this is stopped in its tracks because if you owe taxes you owe the city money and cannot buy more until the debt is paid.

And you cannot go to your buddy at city hall and say hey can you have this go away because nobody else can influence her office.

So weather you agree with what is being presented right now or not she is doing what she is entrusted and paid to be doing.

**townonenorth** · June-12-12, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

To add a little bit more ,

It is kinda like this ,there was a new charter passed that is in many ways beneficial to the taxpayer moving forward into the future.

In the past the city council or mayors office may or may not have had the perception that the office is working for them and should do as they say or they may have had influence as to decisions that were made. BTW very valid points brought up earlier in the posts as to what was going on before.

So in comes a new charter designed for the people but is really pointless if its laws can be influenced by the mayor or council or discrepancies can be buried.

So you can look at it like this she is your attorney put in place by you to protect your charter and make sure it is enforced without influence from the mayor nor the city council.

She answers to you ,she is your voice in city hall when you have no other.

She is doing what she is supposed to be doing and making sure the charter is being enforced,to me she gets a gold star because in light of everything happening she is showing you that she can and will do the job that is necessary to protect your interests.That speaks volumes when it comes to Detroit moving forward and it proves that the people are getting their voice back in city hall and are being represented.

Sure she is going to piss people off ,especially the ones that are in it for themselves and not for the good of the community.

As an example I posted above the city real estate auction coming up,in the past there were speculators and others that owed unpaid back taxes and were still buying property at auction and owing even more taxes unpaid,there have been posts here about that,this tells you that this is stopped in its tracks because if you owe taxes you owe the city money and cannot buy more until the debt is paid.

And you cannot go to your buddy at city hall and say hey can you have this go away because nobody else can influence her office.

So weather you agree with what is being presented right now or not she is doing what she is entrusted and paid to be doing.

That, she can do. Suing the state is another matter. See the reasoning in this letter:
http://download.gannett.edgesuite.ne...bingletter.pdf

**Richard** · June-12-12, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by townonenorth

That, she can do. Suing the state is another matter. See the reasoning in this letter:
http://download.gannett.edgesuite.ne...bingletter.pdf

What she is doing is not holding things up, the city council has not even finished their part for it to move forward anyway.

At a council meeting earlier today, Council President Pro Tem Gary Brown again sought to get council members to move forward with their two appointments to the Financial Advisory Board, the panel that will oversee the city's fiscal restructuring. Again, his plea was rebuffed by a majority of the council. He reiterated that council should move forward and not wait for a lawsuit that could take weeks or months to resolve.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz1xcZfcqC3

If it goes to court tomorrow and is resolved it still will not matter it will just be another step completed towards the end result.

In a statement, Bing said while he has urged Crittendon to drop her lawsuit, he does not have power under the city's charter to make her do so. Crittendon did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/detroi...201217521.html

City Hall officials, preparing for the worst, scurried Monday to find money somewhere. Detroit workers never have missed a payday because of a lack of money, said John Riehl, president of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 207.
"They've been crying wolf for years," Riehl said. "Multiple funds are out there — water, sewerage, municipal parking. I think if they don't get paid it's because the mayor is intentionally not paying."

http://news.yahoo.com/mayor-lawsuit-...--finance.html

So if the city is going broke in a week and this is so important but yet nobody is ready?

They are trying to refi the 80mil so they can borrow another 100 plus million in bonds.

**townonenorth** · June-12-12, 09:02 PM

2nd UPDATE: Detroit Postpones $596 Million Water, Sewer Muni Bond Deal

http://news.morningstar.com/all/dow-jones/us-markets/201206121527/000499/2nd-update-detroit-postpones-596-million-water-sewer-muni-bond-deal.aspx

Where is the link to where they are trying to refi the 80 mil? Who's stupid enough?

**townonenorth** · June-12-12, 09:04 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

What she is doing is not holding things up, the city council has not even finished their part for it to move forward anyway.

At a council meeting earlier today, Council President Pro Tem Gary Brown again sought to get council members to move forward with their two appointments to the Financial Advisory Board, the panel that will oversee the city's fiscal restructuring. Again, his plea was rebuffed by a majority of the council. He reiterated that council should move forward and not wait for a lawsuit that could take weeks or months to resolve.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz1xcZfcqC3

If it goes to court tomorrow and is resolved it still will not matter it will just be another step completed towards the end result.

In a statement, Bing said while he has urged Crittendon to drop her lawsuit, he does not have power under the city's charter to make her do so. Crittendon did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/detroi...201217521.html

City Hall officials, preparing for the worst, scurried Monday to find money somewhere. Detroit workers never have missed a payday because of a lack of money, said John Riehl, president of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 207.
"They've been crying wolf for years," Riehl said. "Multiple funds are out there — water, sewerage, municipal parking. I think if they don't get paid it's because the mayor is intentionally not paying."

http://news.yahoo.com/mayor-lawsuit-...--finance.html

So if the city is going broke in a week and this is so important but yet nobody is ready?

They are trying to refi the 80mil so they can borrow another 100 plus million in bonds.

It has been stated before that the FAB can proceed without the council choices, so that's no impediment.

If the City decides to raid the water and sewer fund for general bullshit, they better be ready for a fight. That's segregated funds, and not theirs to spend, cowboy. Besides, they probably don't have anything in it. If they did, this article would not be out there on Morningstar.

2nd UPDATE: Detroit Postpones $596 Million Water, Sewer Muni Bond Deal

http://news.morningstar.com/all/dow-...bond-deal.aspx

**Richard** · June-12-12, 10:16 PM

Originally Posted by townonenorth

It has been stated before that the FAB can proceed without the council choices, so that's no impediment.

If the City decides to raid the water and sewer fund for general bullshit, they better be ready for a fight. That's segregated funds, and not theirs to spend, cowboy. Besides, they probably don't have anything in it. If they did, this article would not be out there on Morningstar.

2nd UPDATE: Detroit Postpones $596 Million Water, Sewer Muni Bond Deal

http://news.morningstar.com/all/dow-...bond-deal.aspx

I believe that Mr Riehl comments were mostly a veiled threat
of what would happen should the pay not show up,knowing
full well if DW is touched the city would have to drop it like a
hot rock and considering it is the golden egg doing so would
make bankruptcy look good.

Like there is not enough pressure already.

**rex** · June-12-12, 10:39 PM

city attorney... wont even bother learning her name is looking to make a name for herself. Regardless if her claims have any merit. Not sure, dont really care. If the city was in any sort of shape the charter wouldnt need to be challenged. I hope this buries her career.

**313WX** · June-13-12, 07:26 AM

The union leader for the DDOT bus drivers says it's quite likely the buses will stop running as early as Saturday, as he will not force the drivers to come in for work if the city can't pay them.

**townonenorth** · June-13-12, 07:43 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

The union leader for the DDOT bus drivers says it's quite likely the buses will stop running as early as Saturday, as he will not force the drivers to come in for work if the city can't pay them.

That's funny, I didn't know he employed them. How can he force anybody to come in?

Besides that point, I hope that there's some jitney services ready to spring up in lieu of busses. There's a bill in Lansing now to allow jitneys, I hope they put that on a fast track, it appears as if we may need it.

**313WX** · June-13-12, 07:49 AM

Originally Posted by townonenorth

That's funny, I didn't know he employed them. How can he force anybody to come in?

Whether or not he can force anyone to do anything wasn't the key point in that post.

**Locke09** · June-13-12, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by townonenorth

That, she can do. Suing the state is another matter. See the reasoning in this letter:
http://download.gannett.edgesuite.ne...bingletter.pdf

First, she is not suing the state.

Second, the section of the charter quoted says she shall bring actions "when directed to do so by the Mayor," not "only when directed to do so by the Mayor." Syntax is important.

I also think this is being blown out of proportion with the fear tactics. So the state is saying it has to withhold a "portion" of revenue sharing to ensure the $34 million bond payment is made. Well state, go ahead and withhold $34 million dollars and use it to make the bond payment you say you are withholding it for. The payment has to be made. What does it matter whether the city pays it directly or the state withholds it and pays it?

Withhold $34 million, make the bond payment, give the city the remainder that is due the city and let the courts decide on Crittendon's legal action. Unless there is some other reason for withholding the money - like extortion.

**Danny** · June-13-12, 08:55 AM

This Detroit City Government plantation politics is getting out of hand. Snyder wants Detroit to move forward accept his consent business deal or have their funds cut. Mayor KING BING and Detroit City Council wants state funds or suffer. Detroit corporate council [[That is Detroit city lawyers) wants the Synder and State of Michigan to back off or they will sue.

It's like living in 1984. Detroit is Oceania where Mayor Bing is BIG BROTHER. The Corporate Council [[ Detroit City Lawyers) is East Asia where Crittendon is performing Death Worship. Eurasia [[ The State of Michigan Government) where Synder is the first Premier of Caucasian Corporation of Neo-Boshevism. They always in war with each other to the end.

**Richard** · June-13-12, 09:07 AM

The sad part is that they are using bonds as an ATM to cover daily operating costs as the infrastructure crumbles and bonds retain the value because worse case serniao taxes can be raised to cover them.

There are some who feel that there is going to be a bond bubble burst and then the feds will have to step in and bail out the bond dependent cities.

**Danny** · June-13-12, 09:12 AM

Gov. Snyder on the Crittendon's lawsuit.

" If she wants to play hardball against me, go right ahead. She has no business to sue the State of Michigan over consent agreements and other demanding bond issues. Mayor Bing, Detroit City Council must stop Critterdon's unconstitutional practices for face the consequences. I want to move Michigan forward, but Detroit must move first. The Detroit can't handle its own funds and cutting its own city services in a 'scortch Earth' tactics is not pleasing to Detroiters, its suburbs and entire regional structure. If Detroit City government wants 80 million dollars back, they must give in to my demands. During my campaign for governor I'm one tough nerd. I don't need to be push around by some yahoos who think they can handle business with the state. As long as I'm governor I will strike down hard to any poltical or public lobby official who defies my orders including from the legislatures. Detroit, get your act together so we can create a better metropolitan core with an improving regional infrastructure."