Potential emergency managers for Detroit

[Dexlin]

I would sign it in a second, and am currently looking for the petition to do so. The EFM law didn't need any more power than it already had. The guy up in Pontiac that was replaced a few months ago show exactly how the new rules can be abused, or how incompetent some of these people can be. I believe that most of the EFM's have their heart in the right place, but it only takes one bad one to reveal the foolishness and unacceptability of these expanded powers.

For something as grave and serious as losing local control over your town, you should't have to hope that you'll get a good and competent manager. So long as there are not stronger controls on who the managers are accountable to, and better oversight of them, I do not support their expanded roles, at all. If anything, I support going back to the original law and adding extra hiring and oversight rules for the EFMs.

[Dexlin]

The size of a budget's problems is a direct and specific result of it's spending habits.

That's a nice, conservative talking point and all, and at a time when the economy was strong it may have been true for cities that even managed to struggle, then, but even historically fiscally sound communities in this state are now struggling, and it has WAY more to do with a sharp decline in property values and median income during the recent recession than it does spending habits for these communities. In an already slowly declining economy here in Michigan, you add on the national recession [[which hit Michigan particularly hard), and there was absolutely no way to plan for the kind of drops in value [[of land and skills) that we saw.

[detroitsgwenivere]

I'll sign it.

EFM's are necessary in some situations, but not with the sweeping powers this law gives to em. This kind of legislation needs to go through the proper democratic process. I never voted for this shit and neither did any of you.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

That's a nice, conservative talking point.

That's why I say it. Sure, when the economy tanks, every community has to make some cuts or increase taxes a little. But I defy anyone here to name a Michigan community on the brink of fiscal collapse that kept their spending in line with inflation compounded by population increase. There isn't one.

[Jimaz]

See especially 2:00 through the end: Michigan is screwed..

Hence, my earlier reference to Shock Doctrine.

[rjk]

I'll sign it.

EFM's are necessary in some situations, but not with the sweeping powers this law gives to em. This kind of legislation needs to go through the proper democratic process. I never voted for this shit and neither did any of you.

So what powers do you think they should have?
Without sweeping powers what motivation would a city have to get their house in order? Isn't the point to force a city and its unions to deal with the tough decisions before a efm comes in with an ax?

[R8RBOB]

That's why I say it. Sure, when the economy tanks, every community has to make some cuts or increase taxes a little. But I defy anyone here to name a Michigan community on the brink of fiscal collapse that kept their spending in line with inflation compounded by population increase. There isn't one.

How about we wait until next year when the communities are functioning with less money from the state before we start asking the question of which towns are on the brink of fiscal collapse.

[corktownyuppie]

I'm in favor of the law allowing a strong EFM.
I'm not in favor of an EFM being assigned to run the City of Detroit.

But sometimes it takes the threat of having an EFM show up in order to get politicians and leaders to do hard, but necessary things. The EFM is what will give the union leaders the political cover to say, "guys, we've done everything we can do...but if we don't take this paycut, then things could get a lot worse. The devil we know is worse than the one we don't."

No one is going to happy. The city is shrinking. There are pockets of economic growth, and then vast nothings for miles. We have an aging infrastructure. Our cost to borrow is through the roof. And we will likely run out of money to make payroll in under 12 months.

No one is happy because no one is supposed to be happy under these circumstances. It's like when you're a farmer and a drought kills your crop for the entire year. You think you're supposed to be happy? No one is going to be happy under your circumstances. At that point, your hope is to simply survive and have enough left to plant a new crop next year.

Detroit needs economic growth. It is the "crop" which pays for all the services. Yes, we also need to eliminate the thieves from within the system that are:

- collecting bribes and choosing contractors that overcharging
- billing the city millions for services that were never rendered
- etc.

But right now, the city's economic health is rough and getting rougher. The areas that are actually quite healthy are growing...but guess what, the people who will be positively impacted by these areas are younger, better educated, and more able to working in today's new economy than the hundreds of thousands that will be left behind.

Sign in the EFM law. Force city council to re-build the whole thing from scratch. Let's do everything we can so that 10 years from now, the city is seen not as a vacuum that sucks away money in exchange for nothing, and instead a place that is attractive to homeowners and businesses because the ratio of costs to services are perceived as valuable.

Low taxes, low services = ok
High taxes, high services = also ok
High taxes, low services = unsustainable.

[Jimaz]

Thom Hartmann: Now it's Michigan - The war on labor continues...

It gives that emergency manager the ability to go out there and wipe out bodies of government.

[skyl4rk]

I support the current EFM law and would not sign the petition.

The EFM is a preventative to bankruptcy. If City of Detroit leaders cannot put together a balanced budget next year, I would call for an EFM takeover.

[jackie5275]

Isn't Joe Harris still the EFM in Benton Harbor at least until January?

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Thom Hartmann: Now it's Michigan - The war on labor continues...

I know I will get ripped for this, but here goes... ORGANIZED LABOR IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR HAS BEEN FINANCIALLY RAPING THE PUBLIC FOR YEARS. "The War On Labor" is actually just the public fighting back against the public pick pockets. Organized labor [[and I am referring to the heads of the labor unions here, not the rank and file) is upset and lashing out in the same way drug dealers do when their trade is threatened. It's irrational, it can get violent, and it does not enjoy popular support. Thankfully, the public is catching on. Even liberals like Andrew Cuomo and Jerry "To the Left of Trotsky" Brown are cutting back on public sector salaries, benefits, pensions and the total number of state workers. Brown proposed this week to increase retirement age of some workers by TWELVE YEARS.

[Dexlin]

Mikey, how can you stand living in Brooklyn [[let alone commenting on Detroit) with views like yours? You seem far more suited to some narrow-minded country town.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Bill Bonds for EFM. At least it would be fun to watch.

[R8RBOB]

I know I will get ripped for this, but here goes... ORGANIZED LABOR IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR HAS BEEN FINANCIALLY RAPING THE PUBLIC FOR YEARS. "The War On Labor" is actually just the public fighting back against the public pick pockets. Organized labor [[and I am referring to the heads of the labor unions here, not the rank and file) is upset and lashing out in the same way drug dealers do when their trade is threatened. It's irrational, it can get violent, and it does not enjoy popular support. Thankfully, the public is catching on. Even liberals like Andrew Cuomo and Jerry "To the Left of Trotsky" Brown are cutting back on public sector salaries, benefits, pensions and the total number of state workers. Brown proposed this week to increase retirement age of some workers by TWELVE YEARS.

You know Mikey, there was a time when public union workers got paid less than private sector employees. Private sector employees enjoyed those high wages because they weren't union. Being in a union provided protections that the private sector was not willing to provide to their employees.

A strange thing. What happened? Oh yes, outsourcing. Jobs leaving the United States, companies downsizing and the private sector saw their jobs disappearing and poof they were unemployed and those union workers who still had their jobs became the enemy because they didn't get shafted like those private sector employees who lost their jobs because of greed.

"The War on Labor" is a con job because like all things in this country, we need an enemy to fight.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Mikey, how can you stand living in Brooklyn [[let alone commenting on Detroit) with views like yours? You seem far more suited to some narrow-minded country town.

I live in Detroit. I am a native Detroiter, but I did live in brooklyn for 11 years. Started posting here when still there, thus my screen name.

As for "standing" living in Detroit, I love it. And I have never lived in a country town. For the record, though, I think people in small towns are far less likely to subscribe to "groupthink" than city sophisticates are. When I lived in Brooklyn, I worked as a waiter, then a manager in some very nice Manhattan residents. Nothing like hearing rich, liberal, white people all spout the exact same thought on every single political subject. Ivy League schools might teach you a lot, but apparently not to think for yourself. I knew a couple who complained bitterly that the city wasn't doing enough to help the hungry, and then paid for their $40 breakfast and went right to the airport, where they flew to their house in the Canary Islands. They honestly don't see any irony. In Detroit it's sort of different. Not too many "limousine liberals" [[although there is an off-shoot I think of as young, affluent UM grads who feel they are doing thier part to save the world by living a hip existence in Detroit). But Detroit does have a collective political mindset that more or less says: "Disagree with lefty groupthink and your a hating outsider who wants to oppress us." But I think that's changing. Get punched in the gut enough times and you will alter your reaction to it. Detroit has suffered badly by having essential the same set of policies and proposals put before it for half a century. I don't think even the most committed liberal would say that every single liberal idea is a homerun or every conservative idea terrible [[I am not an orthodox conservative myself). But for decades there have only been liberal ideas here. Even the disagreements are among the same set of general principles. Injecting a little right wing common sense here and there, even when most people oppose it, will hopefully cause a few people to wake up and think for themselves. Note: I am not saying that liberals don't think for themselves, I just think many don't, and those that do are ignored in favor of those who don't.

I am in Detroit not to harm it or to save it. Instead, I want to live in it, make money in it, buy a house in it, find a husband in it, adopt 3 kids in it, send them to private school in it, and then retire in it. I love Detroit, missed it while I was away, am glad to be back, and intend to keep on keepin' on.

[gnome]

good post Mikey. Well written and dispassionate.

[R8RBOB]

Mikey, good post. I know we have our tit for tat but we both care about the future of Detroit and that what matters

I am one of those people who understand the saying "more with less." Detroit can no longer provide the services that one might expect. The city no longer have a stable tax base that can sustain the people. Many residents blindly believe that the city can continue to provide services that they should get but the truth is that is no longer possible.

[Melocoton]

I would never sign it. While EMs are harsh and should be seldom used, they do have a purpose. Part of governing- perhaps the major part of governing- is raising money and spending it on services. When said government is unable to pay for its services, it effectively ceases to be self-governing.

The logic of your argument seems to be that poor cities are "effectively" non-self-governing because they can't efficiently provide services. Therefore, removing the elected government's authority via an EFM isn't violating citizens' rights to self-government, because they've already "effectively" lost it. You're essentially saying that poverty disqualifies cities from governing themselves.

[professorscott]

Shit, man, I could do that job. I would be very effective, very quickly, and then would have to leave the midwestern United States because I would be the most hated man in the history of Detroit.

Anyone who wants to be effective in that job had better not give a damn what people think about him or her. Detroit is still operating a bureaucracy as if there are 1.6 million people in the City with a great deal of wealth. They aren't even close to what they need to do in order to be financially sustainable with a population under 800K and still dropping, and [[on average) quite poor.

Best of luck to whoever does it. If you do a good job I'll let you hide out at my crib until you can sneak out of state entirely.

[Wesley Mouch]

The logic of your argument seems to be that poor cities are "effectively" non-self-governing because they can't efficiently provide services. Therefore, removing the elected government's authority via an EFM isn't violating citizens' rights to self-government, because they've already "effectively" lost it. You're essentially saying that poverty disqualifies cities from governing themselves.

That's a persuasive argument, if you have compassion.

So what to do about cities that can't afford to pay their own way? Ideas?

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

The logic of your argument seems to be that poor cities are "effectively" non-self-governing because they can't efficiently provide services. Therefore, removing the elected government's authority via an EFM isn't violating citizens' rights to self-government, because they've already "effectively" lost it. You're essentially saying that poverty disqualifies cities from governing themselves.

Well, not really. First, Detroiters vote for state legislators and the governor, so it's not like an "outsider" group is taking over; their own state goverment is. Second, the process is not permanent. The city gets self-government back when finances stabilize. Third, what is the point of electing a city government? Is it to have pride in your self-government, or is it to render services? If it is the former, a state takeover is a terrible violation. If it is the latter, an EFM actually saves long term self-government. A Detroit in bankruptcy won't have self-government. Wouldn't it be funny if Detroit did enter bankruptcy and a conservative, Bush-appointed bankruptcy judge took over? There are 2 ways to avoid that: the city council and mayor bring spending in line with revenue in the long-run; or, the state appointed EFM straightens things out.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

I made this point in another post the other day. An EFM will be a thankless task. No one enjoys chemotherapy. The person will be viewed as worse than Satan by many. And that will be how they are doing a good job.

[QUOTE=professorscott;282802
Anyone who wants to be effective in that job had better not give a damn what people think about him or her.[/QUOTE]

[HistoryNotHisStory]

The Emergency Financial Manager Laws in this states ends the democratic process.

[manualshift]

Isiah Thomas