Mayor Dave Bing Asks for Corp Counsel's Resignation

[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.

[corktownyuppie]

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]

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]

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"??

[mam2009]

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.

[mam2009]

Mam , there won't be a "transcript" of a closed door meeting.

Again, I say, what makes you think there will not be a transcript of the meeting? There is nothing in the legislation to support your declarative statement of "fact". The legislation does not bar transcripts from being included in the minutes. I just outlines what is minimally required to be in the minutes and that access to those minutes can only be made available to "the public" if required in a civil action.

[mam2009]

For all of those who disregard the legality of the consent agreement, I ask do Detroit's finances and management need reform at ANY cost? Would it be ok if, say, the State required that Detroit's [[or even all residents' and businesses' of the State) tax rates be raised without conforming to the requirements of the State Constitution? What if our Constitution required that all tax increases be approved by the Legislature or by the voters each time there is an increase? Would it be ok for the Governor and the Treasurer to just illegally decide on their own to raise taxes?

Would it be any more legal if the Legislature signed an agreement that said, no, Mr. Governor, you can raise our taxes whenever you feel like it [[because we are in a financial crisis), even though the Constitution says the Legislature MUST vote on each tax increase? If it wasn't legal for the Legislature to give the Governor permission to raise taxes whenever he wanted without coming to them first for approval, wouldn't that mean the tax hikes made after that agreement was signed weren't legal and, therefore, unenforceable?