Mayor Dave Bing Asks for Corp Counsel's Resignation

**mam2009** · June-19-12, 05:09 PM

http://m.freep.com/localnews/article...0619069&f=1232

Somebody should ask for HIS resignation.

**401don** · June-19-12, 05:31 PM

You don't say you're going to council unless you have spoken to members privately and already are certain you have the necessary two-thirds vote to fire her. In that case you can tell Crittenten to resign and name the council members who will back you. Of course Bing still has no idea how things work so this hasn't happened.

**cla1945** · June-19-12, 05:34 PM

I think he is trying to do the best he can for the City but ultimately he is losing the battle. Bing looks tired and whipped and I don't think it will be long before he says "the He!!" with it.

As far as Crittendon is concerned, she is supposed to work for the City of Detroit, not against it. If the CofD pays her salary, they have the right to fire her. It would be a shame if Bing has to hire outside lawyers just to fire a lawyer from within the ranks. She has already cost the City a huge amount of money, and her cohort, Watson, should be gone, too.

**mam2009** · June-19-12, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by cla1945

I think he is trying to do the best he can for the City but ultimately he is losing the battle. Bing looks tired and whipped and I don't think it will be long before he says "the He!!" with it.

As far as Crittendon is concerned, she is supposed to work for the City of Detroit, not against it. If the CofD pays her salary, they have the right to fire her. It would be a shame if Bing has to hire outside lawyers just to fire a lawyer from within the ranks. She has already cost the City a huge amount of money, and her cohort, Watson, should be gone, too.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...RO01/205190353

She had both the Council's and the Mayor's support. If they were to try to fire her, a quick read of the transcripts from the closed session where they all expressed support would secure her multi-million dollar wrongful termination and/or libel/slander lawsuit settlement. I'm sure this is just something his outside Counsel instructed him to do for strategic reasons. It makes him look pitiful -- like a pitiful puppet. Just like when they [[I suspect) trotted him out to the City Council table to ”demand” the Council make her withdraw her request for declaratory judgment -- something he already knew they couldn't do just like HE couldn't make her do it.

**brizee** · June-19-12, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by mam2009

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...RO01/205190353

She had both the Council's and the Mayor's support. If they were to try to fire her, a quick read of the transcripts from the closed session where they all expressed support would secure her multi-million dollar wrongful termination and/or libel/slander lawsuit settlement. I'm sure this is just something his outside Counsel instructed him to do for strategic reasons. It makes him look pitiful -- like a pitiful puppet. Just like when they [[I suspect) trotted him out to the City Council table to ”demand” the Council make her withdraw her request for declaratory judgment -- something he already knew they couldn't do just like HE couldn't make her do it.

He looks like a piece of shit.

He encouraged her to start this process, lied about it, forced to admit it, and now wants to fire her.

You're really gonna leave an employee holding the bag like this?

Fuck Dave Bing.

Not only is he a liar, he's a coward.

**cla1945** · June-19-12, 06:46 PM

All this just makes me wonder why they are all playing these games...games that could ruin people's lives. The more time they waste the harder it will be to ever move Detroit in the direction it needs to go.

**313WX** · June-19-12, 06:50 PM

Bankruptcy darn it!!! NOW!!!

**motownmark04** · June-19-12, 08:49 PM

If Dave Bing were to be truly honorable, he would resign effective immediately.

He has been nothing short of a contradiction since he took office. Taking a look through these forums, as well as looking at a timeline of all that's transpired throughout his administration, and you will find little justification for the man still being in office.

Why can't Detroit bring itself to see that they deserve better than what they've been getting? If Detroiters want to have a better city, they can make a better city. It's all in your attitude. It's in what you choose to accept and what you choose to reject.

Making a better city is not a priority for the members of Detroit government, nor the minions that vote them in. It's all about me and screw you if you're perceived to be an outsider.

Tear it down and rebuild it the right way. NOW.

**rex** · June-19-12, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by mam2009

http://m.freep.com/localnews/article...0619069&f=1232

Somebody should ask for HIS resignation.

u probably think the state owes the city a couple hundred million too huh?
its us against them... right mam?

**mam2009** · June-19-12, 09:43 PM

Originally Posted by rex

u probably think the state owes the city a couple hundred million too huh?
its us against them... right mam?

If ur referring to that $225 million, no, I don't think the State ”owes” the City THAT money. Now what?

**rex** · June-19-12, 10:12 PM

perhaps it does. City probably should have challenged the profit sharing discontinuation in court way back when. All I see in this is desperate moves by desperate people trying their hardest to disrupt any sort of progress. Its the residents that ultimately lose. If city council were to get their hand on that money I wonder how much would simply disappear.
Now what.... i wish there was an ignore function

**SWMAP** · June-19-12, 10:46 PM

Mam , there won't be a "transcript" of a closed door meeting. the only thing that will be recorded is that meeting occurred to hear the written advice of Counsel, who was present and what times the meeting began and ended. I am reminded by this situation of the story of a long-dead neighbor of mine who was an appointee of Cavanaugh and Gribbs to be a Department head. He was a civil servant with a right to his grade. When mayor Young came to office, he wanted to appoint Department heads who were Black and, of course, his supporters. He couldn't somehow take away my neighbor's title - but he did move his workspace to under a stairway in the City-County Building and take away his reports and responsibilities and gave them to the Deputy that he appointed. This happened to two Deparment Heads that I know of. Seems to me that something similar could happen to the Corporation Counsel.

**Locke09** · June-19-12, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by motownmark04

Why can't Detroit bring itself to see that they deserve better than what they've been getting?

Detroit has been voting, for mayor anyway, precisely the way media and the business community has been suggesting they vote. Media and the business community said re-elect Kwame, and the business community spent big bucks ensuring his re-election. Media and the business community said vote for Bing. Now media is setting up Duggan as the next mayor. If he is elected and doesn't work out, the same media will ask why Detroiters keep electing the wrong person.

Oh, and most of the current council members were media and business community picks as well.

**corktownyuppie** · June-19-12, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

Mam , there won't be a "transcript" of a closed door meeting. the only thing that will be recorded is that meeting occurred to hear the written advice of Counsel, who was present and what times the meeting began and ended. I am reminded by this situation of the story of a long-dead neighbor of mine who was an appointee of Cavanaugh and Gribbs to be a Department head. He was a civil servant with a right to his grade. When mayor Young came to office, he wanted to appoint Department heads who were Black and, of course, his supporters. He couldn't somehow take away my neighbor's title - but he did move his workspace to under a stairway in the City-County Building and take away his reports and responsibilities and gave them to the Deputy that he appointed. This happened to two Deparment Heads that I know of. Seems to me that something similar could happen to the Corporation Counsel.

Yah, isn't that the whole purpose of a closed meeting? If they wanted everything on the record and have transcripts, they wouldn't be closed meetings.

Crittendon knew she was playing with fire. That lawsuit stimulated a bond downgrade which is only going to add to our borrowing costs.

Forget about what the Ingham County judge said for a second, because his ruling was not on the merits of the case, but only on whether she had authority to bring the suit.

If this was really about the money, then the City Council should and would be filing a lawsuit right now for that money.

This wasn't about the money. This was a suicide mission on Crittendon's part to give the Council cover so that they can make the case that they tried to fight the State. If I'm Crittendon, then before I take this case to court, I want complete assurance that I'm covered.

And not only that, she's a smart woman. She knows that the court didn't rule on any of her arguments and that they may still be valid. Why isn't she pounding the table, doing interviews with the media saying, "Judge said I couldn't bring suit. The Mayor and Council still can. The State owes us that money. And we should fight everyday until we get it."

But what are we hearing? Silence.

I'd say that Crittendon's going down because she doesn't have the shield she needs to survive this. Either that, or Bing is making a GIGANTIC miscalculation.

At this point nothing would surprise me, but I'm leaning toward Crittendon getting the ax.

**firstandten** · June-20-12, 12:02 AM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

I'd say that Crittendon's going down because she doesn't have the shield she needs to survive this. Either that, or Bing is making a GIGANTIC miscalculation.

At this point nothing would surprise me, but I'm leaning toward Crittendon getting the ax.

I think we are seeing a bit of political theatre here. Mayor Bing should know he doesn't have the six votes needed to remove her, at best he may have three more likely only two.

It looks like a desperate attempt by the mayor to get the people on his side, because I believe he can sense a second term slipping away. However when he does this kind of stuff it just makes him look more pathetic and miscast as mayor.

**Hermod** · June-20-12, 04:22 AM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

Mam , there won't be a "transcript" of a closed door meeting. the only thing that will be recorded is that meeting occurred to hear the written advice of Counsel, who was present and what times the meeting began and ended. I am reminded by this situation of the story of a long-dead neighbor of mine who was an appointee of Cavanaugh and Gribbs to be a Department head. He was a civil servant with a right to his grade. When mayor Young came to office, he wanted to appoint Department heads who were Black and, of course, his supporters. He couldn't somehow take away my neighbor's title - but he did move his workspace to under a stairway in the City-County Building and take away his reports and responsibilities and gave them to the Deputy that he appointed. This happened to two Deparment Heads that I know of. Seems to me that something similar could happen to the Corporation Counsel.

Does the corporation counsel have civil service protection or is it a political post which is "at will"??

**SWMAP** · June-20-12, 06:36 AM

Unsure about civil servant status. But we do know that, like my neighbor, she probably won't have to resign because not enough support for idea on Council. But can Mayor provide punishment if she doesn't ? I think something has to happen behind scenes.
Although there were lots of apologists for the new Charter over the week-end, this mess really makes the Charter writers look lame. I did not vote for this Charter revision because changes to Police Commission seating in it. THAT will be a circus and a shame when played out. Marie Thornton will end up on the Police Commission, or Otis Mathes or someone just like those two. Watch for it.

**mam2009** · June-20-12, 06:37 AM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

Mam , there won't be a "transcript" of a closed door meeting. the only thing that will be recorded is that meeting occurred to hear the written advice of Counsel, who was present and what times the meeting began and ended...

I'm sure that's what Mayor Bing thought too...but I'm sure his outside counsel has reviewed the Michigan Open Meetings Act to correct his misunderstanding. By the way, Meddle, it really annoys me when people don't get their FACTS straight. We are all entitled to our opinions, but lets get our objective facts right.

**SWMAP** · June-20-12, 07:10 AM

I am involved in open meetings and FOIA compliance. Are you?

**mam2009** · June-20-12, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

I am involved in open meetings and FOIA compliance. Are you?

I'm not the one disputing someone else's post. How about you provide an objective reference for your position that no minutes are taken at a closed session of a legislative body?

**SWMAP** · June-20-12, 11:14 AM

There will not be a verbatim transcript. The Open Meetings Act is interpreted thusly:

Closed session minutes

– a separate set of minutes must be taken for closed sessions. While closed session minutes must be approved in an open meeting [[with contents of the minutes kept confidential), the board may meet in closed session to consider approving the minutes.83

Closed session minutes shall only be disclosed if required by a civil action filed under sections 10, 11, or 13 of the

OMA.84 The board secretary may furnish the minutes of a closed session of the body to a board member. A member's dissemination of closed session minutes to the public, however, is a violation of the OMA, and the member risks criminal prosecution and civil penalties.85 An audiotape of a closed session meeting of a public body is part of the minutes of the session meeting and, thus, must be filed with the clerk of the public body for retention under the OMA.86

Closed session minutes may be

destroyed one year and one day after approval of the minutes of

What must be in the minutes

– at a minimum, the minutes must show the date, time, place, members present, members absent, any decisions made at a meeting open to the public, and the purpose or purposes for which a closed session is held. The minutes must include all roll call votes taken at the meeting.The OMA does not prohibit a public body from preparing a more detailed set of minutes of its public meetings if it chooses to do so.

When must the minutes be available

– proposed minutes must be made available for public

**Novine** · June-20-12, 11:23 AM

Bing's a fool. Anyone can count the votes on Council and see that he doesn't have the votes to accomplish this. One more sign of a guy who's in way over his head. When are the Bing cheerleaders finally going to admit that he was the wrong person for the job and his failure to get much of anything accomplished during his time in office demonstrates that?

**Hypestyles** · June-20-12, 11:27 AM

this ongoing saga is interminably bizarre.. this latest "situation" doesn't help at all, or rather, builds up sympathy for simply appointing an EM..

**corktownyuppie** · June-20-12, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by Novine

Bing's a fool. Anyone can count the votes on Council and see that he doesn't have the votes to accomplish this. One more sign of a guy who's in way over his head. When are the Bing cheerleaders finally going to admit that he was the wrong person for the job and his failure to get much of anything accomplished during his time in office demonstrates that?

I agree that he has not been able to accomplish much during his tenure. Are you saying that this is a result of him being incapable? And that if only here were a better politician, he would have been able to sway the obstructionists on Council?

Putting aside whether or not Bing is in office, part of the problem here is that some Councilmembers see it as their personal mission to prevent those things from "getting done" at all.

For example, I'm still trying to figure out what the whole lawsuit was about. Everyone said it was about the money. Ok, then...

[[1) If it's about the money, then why aren't they going forward with the suit, and
[[2) Even if it's about the money, what will we do when the money is gone in 6 months?

I agree with your conclusion that Bing is in over his head. So now the question is why? Is it an indication of his failings as a politician? Or is it because there are forces on City Council that are against doing things that need to be done?

**mam2009** · June-20-12, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

There will not be a verbatim transcript. The Open Meetings Act is interpreted thusly:

Closed session minutes

– a separate set of minutes must be taken for closed sessions. While closed session minutes must be approved in an open meeting [[with contents of the minutes kept confidential), the board may meet in closed session to consider approving the minutes.83

Closed session minutes shall only be disclosed if required by a civil action filed under sections 10, 11, or 13 of the

OMA.84 The board secretary may furnish the minutes of a closed session of the body to a board member. A member's dissemination of closed session minutes to the public, however, is a violation of the OMA, and the member risks criminal prosecution and civil penalties.85 An audiotape of a closed session meeting of a public body is part of the minutes of the session meeting and, thus, must be filed with the clerk of the public body for retention under the OMA.86

Closed session minutes may be

destroyed one year and one day after approval of the minutes of

What must be in the minutes

– at a minimum, the minutes must show the date, time, place, members present, members absent, any decisions made at a meeting open to the public, and the purpose or purposes for which a closed session is held. The minutes must include all roll call votes taken at the meeting.The OMA does not prohibit a public body from preparing a more detailed set of minutes of its public meetings if it chooses to do so.

When must the minutes be available

– proposed minutes must be made available for public

I read very well. No where in that post do I see that no minutes [[verbatim or otherwise) will be taken in a closed session of a legislative body. This is what I see in the Open Meetings Act.

OPEN MEETINGS ACT [[EXCERPT)
Act 267 of 1976

15.267 Closed sessions; roll call vote; separate set of minutes.Sec. 7.

[[1) A 2/3 roll call vote of members elected or appointed and serving is required to call a closed session, except for the closed sessions permitted under section 8[[a), [[b), [[c), [[g), [[i), and [[j). The roll call vote and the purpose or purposes for calling the closed session shall be entered into the minutes of the meeting at which the vote is taken.

[[2) A separate set of minutes shall be taken by the clerk or the designated secretary of the public body at the closed session. These minutes shall be retained by the clerk of the public body, are not available to the public, and shall only be disclosed if required by a civil action filed under section 10, 11, or 13. These minutes may be destroyed 1 year and 1 day after approval of the minutes of the regular meeting at which the closed session was approved.

History: 1976, Act 267, Eff. Mar. 31, 1977 ;-- Am. 1993, Act 81, Eff. Apr. 1, 1994 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 464, Imd. Eff. Dec. 26, 1996