Stephen Henderson: A Detroit review team with Detroit roots

[corktownyuppie]

Personally, I don't like strings; even more so when the City gave the State 1/4 of a billion with no strings so I don't see a reason why that money should be conditionally returned. Giving this money back, IMHO, would go a long way .... publicly, PR wise, what have you ... .to show that the State isn't out gunning for "failed" Cities. Right now the EFM is seen [[among other things) as a way for Republicans to take the Left down a few notches by hurting their pocketbook. It's happening in the State around us so ....

Any ways; instead of the State saying [[yes, some of the present State Congresspersons, figuratively) "we were not there at that time and we can't be held to that agreement so go fuck yourself) the State could say "yes, we owe you that money and you will be paid".

I mean if the State can't even pay back a "loan" that it's biggest [[and one of its most important) City gave to them, how can the State even have the balls to come in with an EFM? That's so wrong at so many levels we don't have the time or bandwidth to go over it.

Ok. I think your ideas are reasonable, even if we disagree. Let's take your proposition and look at the next step. If we agree that the state should give the city the money it's owed, how can we assure the state that the funds will be put to good use? Certainly, I'd hope that you agree that spending a single dollar on operating costs without restructuring the severely imbalanced revenue shortfall is just throwing good money after bad.

Even if we agree that the state should send the funds -- and being a Detroit myself, it'll be a whole lot easier to convince me than some of the out-staters -- how can we convincingly state the funds will be put to good use?

The state's willingness to go along with this has to be more than "please prove to us that you're not setting us up to fail." It almost has to be, "A municipal bankruptcy would so royally screw the credit rating of the surrounding counties that it will drive everyone's taxes up for a long time. And since you owe us this money ANYWAY...why don't you help us use that money to re-structure our finances and help save your credit ratings?"

And even THAT would be a hard sell. But I were a state rep, I'd go to bat for the city with it.

[Novine]

"The above statement is only true if you presume that the above businesses would locate their business inside the state without the tax subsidies.

Answer? They won't."

My fault for using the phrase "tax breaks". This amount isn't from tax breaks given to businesses to locate here. It's from the elimination of the MBT and change to the a 6% state corporate tax will result in a $1.8 billion reduction in revenue to the state from businesses that are here today and pay taxes today. I believe that 2/3rds of all existing businesses will be exempt from the corporate tax. Some will make that up by paying more in individual income taxes on pass-through profits but either way, the hit on the state's bottom line is $1.8 billion. At the same time, Snyder also cut revenue sharing to local governments. The reduction was roughly 1/3 of the dollars that were coming from Lansing. Gone with no opportunity to recover those dollars.

[Hypestyles]

I wonder how will these reviewers will be received.. will they be doing any press? have any specific job assignments been mentioned yet?
...not liking the prospect of EM, but I want the full truth of the city's finances to be exposed, embarrassment be darned.. Pugh's comment about not wanting to "alarm" the public was wrong.
I wonder what all departments or services will get recommended for privatizing.. and how that will affect such services..