DEGC to run Woodward Light Rail?

[Dexlin]

Thanks for the update, MSUguy. This sounds promising, and I'm glad to see some kind of common sense compromise, here. Sounds like they are hoping that this construction authority actually forms the very beginnings of the regional system as a whole, a kind of placeholder that can interact with the feds while a regional system is being cobbled together over the coming years. I kind of wish things would come together faster, because I'm kind of wary of continuing to fragment the system. Now, you'll have DDOT, SMART, the Detroit Transportation Corporation, and the new local/municipal authority that will only oversee the Woodward line, when we should probably be merging these or winding down some of these departments and authorities in conjunction with forming a regional authority.

[stasu1213]

Bing and members of the council are just doing what the corporations are telling them to do. Both haven't done anything for the residents of the city but for the eintities who had put them in office which was the corporation and special interest groups. Bing and council are doing what Kilpatrick was accused of doing; inacting a family and friends policies but in this case it is more like friends

[Detroitnerd]

Bing and members of the council are just doing what the corporations are telling them to do. Both haven't done anything for the residents of the city but for the eintities who had put them in office which was the corporation and special interest groups. Bing and council are doing what Kilpatrick was accused of doing; inacting a family and friends policies but in this case it is more like friends

I get that feeling too. And I guess, whatever we all think of George Jackson, the real problem for me is a lack of democracy and accountability. Authorities, especially authorities for something as vague as "economic development," are accountable to nobody. Why should they be empowered with running anything the people will fund? Ultimately, don't they get to make decisions whether the people agree or not?

Is this going to be a mass transit system, planned and executed by people who understand it, and for the purpose of moving people? Or is this going to be another sham effort to please the powerful while not doing what the people want?

[corktownyuppie]

I get that feeling too. And I guess, whatever we all think of George Jackson, the real problem for me is a lack of democracy and accountability. Authorities, especially authorities for something as vague as "economic development," are accountable to nobody. Why should they be empowered with running anything the people will fund? Ultimately, don't they get to make decisions whether the people agree or not?

Is this going to be a mass transit system, planned and executed by people who understand it, and for the purpose of moving people? Or is this going to be another sham effort to please the powerful while not doing what the people want?

Well, sometimes "doing what the people want" isn't in the best interest of "the people". Look at Greece. 50% of their population is working directly on the government payroll -- not for govt contractors -- actual government employees. Their social security starts at age 55 and goes until they die.

That's great, in the sense of giving the people what they want. It also is unsustainable and can't last for ever...and that's why Greece is in a 4-year recession and on the verge of bankruptcy.

Yes, I agree that many times what's in the interest of big powerful corporations and what's in the interest of the people are in direct conflict. I don't think that anyone would argue that Matty Moroun is doing what's "in the best interest of the people".

Right Bing is trying to do what's in the long-term best of the city...which is to make it financially viable. The problem is that in doing so, it has to make decisions that might "make the people unhappy".

Do I have faith that George and the DEGC will design a mass transit system that is best for the people and its needs? No, of course not. But if "the people" had the funding and credibility to make this happen, then we wouldn't have to listen to the decision and opinions of powerful entities representing small numbers of people. But right now we need to those entities to make this thing happen.

We are on the verge of the beginnings of mass transit for the first time in decades. Talking about an RTA is no longer political suicide. If "we the people" need to bend to corporate interests to get the thing off the ground, then it's a very, small price to pay to make this happen.

If we stand tall, with our hands on our hips, saying, "hell, no...you can't tell us what to do"...well. We'll never get anywhere.

[Detroitnerd]

Well, sometimes "doing what the people want" isn't in the best interest of "the people". Look at Greece. 50% of their population is working directly on the government payroll -- not for govt contractors -- actual government employees. Their social security starts at age 55 and goes until they die.

That's great, in the sense of giving the people what they want. It also is unsustainable and can't last for ever...and that's why Greece is in a 4-year recession and on the verge of bankruptcy.

Yes, I agree that many times what's in the interest of big powerful corporations and what's in the interest of the people are in direct conflict. I don't think that anyone would argue that Matty Moroun is doing what's "in the best interest of the people".

Right Bing is trying to do what's in the long-term best of the city...which is to make it financially viable. The problem is that in doing so, it has to make decisions that might "make the people unhappy".

Do I have faith that George and the DEGC will design a mass transit system that is best for the people and its needs? No, of course not. But if "the people" had the funding and credibility to make this happen, then we wouldn't have to listen to the decision and opinions of powerful entities representing small numbers of people. But right now we need to those entities to make this thing happen.

We are on the verge of the beginnings of mass transit for the first time in decades. Talking about an RTA is no longer political suicide. If "we the people" need to bend to corporate interests to get the thing off the ground, then it's a very, small price to pay to make this happen.

If we stand tall, with our hands on our hips, saying, "hell, no...you can't tell us what to do"...well. We'll never get anywhere.

I think your line of reasoning is ... a stretch. I'm talking about hometown democracy and you're rushing off to Greece? And caricaturing my point of view as some Z-snapping sassmouth? Umm ... you can do better, CTY...

[corktownyuppie]

And caricaturing my point of view as some Z-snapping sassmouth? Umm ... you can do better, CTY...

Sorry...I didn't intend for my words to come off this way, and I apologize that they did. I don't always agree with you, though I do respect that you're writing strikes me as deliberate, articulate, and well thought out.

I recognize my tone was harsh...what was trying to get across was that we need to focus on finding where the *overlapping interests* are between the corporate insiders and the masses. We both need each other. The masses need the money from the powerful. The powerful don't want to invest funds into a project that the masses will reject.

Yes, there are conflicts of interest, and God knows this region is all too familiar with them. I just want to keep focusing on where our interest coincide, because we have an opportunity to really get some great things done right now.

[Detroitnerd]

Sorry...I didn't intend for my words to come off this way, and I apologize that they did. I don't always agree with you, though I do respect that you're writing strikes me as deliberate, articulate, and well thought out.

I recognize my tone was harsh...what was trying to get across was that we need to focus on finding where the *overlapping interests* are between the corporate insiders and the masses. We both need each other. The masses need the money from the powerful. The powerful don't want to invest funds into a project that the masses will reject.

Yes, there are conflicts of interest, and God knows this region is all too familiar with them. I just want to keep focusing on where our interest coincide, because we have an opportunity to really get some great things done right now.

Well, when you're dealing with the business community, remember how they deal with each other. One businessperson sits down with another businessperson understanding that there is no such thing as good faith. He knows the other guy is out to game him, and he's out to game the other guy as hard as he can too. And they draw up pages and pages of agreements, trying to foresee every point where the other person could game them. Then, after tense negotiations, they cement their "agreement."

This is how they behave with EACH OTHER.

Yes, it's nice to know where the interests overlap, but any "partnership" the public enters into with business has to be negotiated just as toughly. There need to be mechanisms for the public to say yes or no. There need to be some teeth to any agreement, not just a PR rep to shoo away troublesome public complaints.

The powerful don't want to invest funds into a project that the masses will reject? Then the powerful better listen good, long and hard to the public so they don't produce something the public doesn't want, yes?

I worry that there is a fundamentally flawed transit plan that the business community wants to put us all on the hook for. Beneath their proud declarations of "getting great things done right now" and that "you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs," I fear we're going to get a lot of smooth talk and then a People Mover II. Since the operating costs are going to be paid publicly, shouldn't the public ultimately get the mass transit system it deserves? Not a parking trolley designed to boost downtown business interests?