Poll: Emergency Manager or Consent Agreement

**mam2009** · March-28-12, 06:21 PM

Public Act 4 exempts public employERS who are under a consent agreement from their obligation to bargain with unions -- meaning once contracts expire the City can just impose whatever they want into the contracts. The elected officials remain in place but financial decisions can be ”vetoed” by State.

Public Act 4 gives emergency managers the power to break union contracts. Elected officials are ”displaced” or have no real power.

Which do you prefer? EM or CA? Please indicate in your response whether you live in Detroit or not.

**mam2009** · March-28-12, 06:23 PM

By the way, I live in Detroit & prefer CA.

**mam2009** · March-28-12, 06:44 PM

http://m.detnews.com/topstories/arti...3280450&f=1207

**Wesley Mouch** · March-29-12, 03:28 PM

Of the choices, I prefer EM.

Born and lived in Detroit most of my life -- but not currently a resident.

**trotwood** · March-30-12, 07:09 AM

I prefer whichever gets the job done. Detroit has been in lost in chaos for far to long.

Lived in Detroit for over 22 years.

**corktownyuppie** · March-30-12, 08:38 AM

I prefer an emergency manager but also realize that it's a political nightmare. I'm good with a consent agreement, but it's gotta have real teeth in it and accountability -- including quarterly benchmarks to hit -- from both sides: state and city.

Currently live in Detroit, resident 20+ years.

**Hermod** · March-30-12, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

I prefer an emergency manager but also realize that it's a political nightmare. I'm good with a consent agreement, but it's gotta have real teeth in it and accountability -- including quarterly benchmarks to hit -- from both sides: state and city.

Currently live in Detroit, resident 20+ years.

I wonder if an EM which leaves the mayor and clownsil in place to have meetings and pass resolutions, but takes their checkbook away might pass political muster. You can still vote for whoever you want, but they will have no power.

**poobert** · March-30-12, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by Hermod

I wonder if an EM which leaves the mayor and clownsil in place to have meetings and pass resolutions, but takes their checkbook away might pass political muster. You can still vote for whoever you want, but they will have no power.

That's fine with me.

I live in Detroit and would take an EM or a Consent Agreement with some serious teeth [[i.e. veto power).

Whatever delivers city services.

**Scottathew** · March-30-12, 10:33 AM

EFM is the way to go. Any involvement of Detroit elected officials will only screw things up.

It's SimCity 2000, you're over $100,000 in debt. GAME OVER. You lose. The simulation ends and you're told to "run for senator" instead.

**cramerro** · March-30-12, 12:38 PM

How about an emergency consent manager? Or an emegency agreement? Or a consent agreer?

**ndavies** · March-30-12, 12:50 PM

I'm guessing both. The consent agreement will be entered into, then several months later the city will breach the agreement. At that time an EM will be put in place.

**Det_ard** · March-30-12, 01:13 PM

Time for the adults to take over. Junior spent all his allowance on candy and owes the neighborhood bully $20. Junior lost the right to make his choices the minute he put his hand out for a handout.

**Novine** · March-30-12, 02:37 PM

As others have stated, what's the long-term track records of EFMs in Michigan? Not very good. Many of the communities that have had EFMs have ended back up in financial troubles. Why? Because there's been no effort by the EFMs to educate the elected class of the communities on how to properly run a financially stable community.

It's like sending in someone to clean up the house of a hoarder. If you don't get the hoarder to understand their problem, as soon as you leave, they'll go back to hoarding. Likewise, if you don't educated the elected officials on the best practices of running a financially stable government, what happens when you leave and those people go back to running the government?

Many people seem to take glee in the idea of punishing the "bad children" by forcing the Mayor and the Council to the sidelines. Take away their toys! What happens when the EFM leaves and the elected officials take over again? How will that process have helped them to learn how to keep Detroit from getting into that position again?

**Wesley Mouch** · March-30-12, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by Det_ard

Time for the adults to take over. Junior spent all his allowance on candy and owes the neighborhood bully $20. Junior lost the right to make his choices the minute he put his hand out for a handout.

Great point. I hadn't realized that the consent agreement is probably nothing but a stalling strategy by those in power under the status quo.

**Wesley Mouch** · March-30-12, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by Novine

As others have stated, what's the long-term track records of EFMs in Michigan? Not very good. Many of the communities that have had EFMs have ended back up in financial troubles. Why? Because there's been no effort by the EFMs to educate the elected class of the communities on how to properly run a financially stable community.

It's like sending in someone to clean up the house of a hoarder. If you don't get the hoarder to understand their problem, as soon as you leave, they'll go back to hoarding. Likewise, if you don't educated the elected officials on the best practices of running a financially stable government, what happens when you leave and those people go back to running the government?

Many people seem to take glee in the idea of punishing the "bad children" by forcing the Mayor and the Council to the sidelines. Take away their toys! What happens when the EFM leaves and the elected officials take over again? How will that process have helped them to learn how to keep Detroit from getting into that position again?

Gee, nover. An EFM is an Emergency Financial Manager.

1) Only applies during emergency

2) Only addresses finances -- see the DPS fights about power of an EFM [[yes, I know that's not quite the same).

When Schimmel left Hamtramck, he said he had eliminated the financial emergency, but he warned that he felt that the city leaders who fought him tooth and nail on every reform were likely to return to their old ways.

Conclusion: The EFM process is not intended to permanently solve problems. That's left to the democratically elected officials. EFM is only to sold the emergency financial situation.

**Novine** · March-30-12, 09:52 PM

But that's not how the benefits of the EFM are being pitched to the public.

**corktownyuppie** · March-30-12, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by Novine

But that's not how the benefits of the EFM are being pitched to the public.

Rebuilding Detroit will require strategic injections of capital into the city and its operations. There's no doubt about that. But we can't ever get that capital to show up for as long as the perception [[and, frankly, the reality) is that municipal operations is a giant sinkhole for inefficiency, waste, and -- more often than it should be -- corruption.

So the EFM's job is just going to be about getting rid of the sinkhole. That may mean 12-24 months of pain just to slash, slash, and slash. But when it's done, then we'll be in a great place to get capital back into the city. And one think capitalists like is a safe investing environment with low barriers for entry.

There'll be more than enough capital showing up once we clear the place of all the waste...this will not please those who are causing the waste.

**Danny** · March-31-12, 09:41 AM

Emergency Manager or Consent Financial Team Detroit city government will have to surrender to Lansing. Bing will hand over the city seal to Gov. Snyder, the Nerd. thus ending of black control of Detroit and 311 years of home rule on April 5th.

This is truly the end of Black Detroit A.D. 1975 - A.D. 2012