Mayor Dave Bing Asks for Corp Counsel's Resignation

**townonenorth** · June-22-12, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

I'm praying for a federal bankruptcy judge myself. everyone involved needs a reality check from a third party, none of them get it.

Just like with Ray LaHood and the Trolley to nowhere.

Well, that too. Of course, that will be this winter after the Kwame trial. Too many rings in that circus for there to be any attention paid to the bankruptcy. Or, conversely, maybe that's the time to do it.

**Detwa** · June-22-12, 06:06 PM

I have to say, I felt bad for Bing today. He looked really helpless at the meeting. Did I see his hands shaking? He just looked really lost. And the people addressing him, why didn't he turn to see them, or is that the way they do it, just start talking to someone's back? It was hard to watch. He didn't seem used to being tough or confrontation, but he did run a company for years. Didn't he?

**mam2009** · June-22-12, 09:35 PM

I feel bad for him too. He's in a thankless job and stuck between a rock and a hard place. On the other hand, leaving in the middle of a meeting because you can't deal with the things that the public are saying about the decisions you made...that's kind of...pitiful...especially when you're a very grown man. Members of the public come and voice their opinions to the City Council ALL THE TIME, but they don't cancel meetings because they can't stand the criticism. Lord knows those poor Financial Review Panel members caught real hell a couple months back, but they didn't cancel their public meetings either. You can't run from the public. Not when you're the mayor...and not when YOU were the one who called for the public meeting.

**313WX** · June-22-12, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by mam2009

Lord knows those poor Financial Review Panel members caught real hell a couple months back, but they didn't cancel their public meetings either.

Instead, they kicked them out and slammed the door in their face.

Yep, they were staying just as classy as Bing was today.

**mam2009** · June-22-12, 11:15 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

Instead, they kicked them out and slammed the door in their face.

Yep, they were staying just as classy as Bing was today.

I don't recall that. I recall an unruly public yelling Rosa Parks' name while sitting on the floor right in front of the panel, yelling about burning the City down, walking directly up to the financial review panel's meeting table, etc. None of that stuff happens at City Council meetings. Truly unruly people get thrown out [[just like in other local municipalities)...the Council President is somewhat flexible with his 1.5 to 2 minute time limit for public commenters so as not to upset the more passionate folks in the bunch, but there is no singing, chanting, etc during City Council meetings. Today's public was no more excitable than they normally are.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words that people to use to describe my actions will never hurt me.

**Hypestyles** · June-22-12, 11:50 PM

...sigh.. if... when... Snyder/state legislature start getting testy again about the pace of progress... are mayor bing and council going to have another joint press conference about "back off"? This business with the Corp. Counsel seems like a dodge.. not sure what is going to be solved, if anything, with her resignation... if she's fired, then what-- wrongful termination lawsuit? more expensive litigation to deal with, whether it eventually gets won, dismissed, or a settlement..

**firstandten** · June-23-12, 02:30 AM

Originally Posted by Detwa

I have to say, I felt bad for Bing today. He looked really helpless at the meeting. Did I see his hands shaking? He just looked really lost. And the people addressing him, why didn't he turn to see them, or is that the way they do it, just start talking to someone's back? It was hard to watch. He didn't seem used to being tough or confrontation, but he did run a company for years. Didn't he?

It's more an issue with control. When he had his company he could be very tough, but he was calling the shots totally, and that is the difference.

**mam2009** · June-23-12, 09:13 AM

Originally Posted by Hypestyles

...sigh.. if... when... Snyder/state legislature start getting testy again about the pace of progress...

"When" is right. Once the Mayor starts to try to get contracts approved by the Council for outside counsel rather than using the resources of the Law Department, the gauntlet will have been thrown. There's no way they are going to approve of that -- as the ultimate approving authority for contracts. Then it'll be said by the Mayor or the Program Manager that approval of those contracts is necessary to fulfill the terms of the consent agreement so the Council will be accused of defaulting on the consent agreement, then the Council will ask the Corporation Counsel to go back to court saying, again, that the consent agreement is invalid, then the State will say, "To hell with all this!" and declare the Program Manager or the CFO as the Emergency Manager.

Of course, none of that takes into account all of the other variables such as the potential suspension of PA 4, the lawsuits that are bound to brought by every City of Detroit union due to the suspension of collective bargaining rights by PA 4 as of July 1...and the continued budget mess that will exist because few of the cost-saving measures [[layoffs, union contract re-structuring, department closures and consolidations, process improvements, technology updates) will not happen because everyone will be pre-occupied with fighting rather than working together collaboratively.

Public Act 4 and its implementation has made for very bad public policy. I do believe that there is a place for Emergency Managers and a place for Consent Agreements. It has become more and more apparent that Public Act 4 was tailor made to assist Mayor Bing in reigning in the finances of Detroit. But, it seems, somewhere between its passing in early 2011 and November 2011 [[probably starting with the whole Kirk Lewis becoming DPS EM debacle -- likely Gov Snyder's first experience with the flip-flopping Bing) the Governor and the Mayor's relationship broke down. [[More conjecture on my part -- probably because the Governor no longer was looking toward the Mayor being the EM of the Detroit due to his flip-floppiness.)

In my history of posting on this message board, I think I've tried my best not to discuss individual elected officials in a negative way -- not even the former Mayor. I sympathize greatly with elected officials because it is very tough to make very public decisions while trying to seem sensitive to all of your constituency's points of view while being subjected to, often, cruel assessments of every decision you make -- again very publicly. But I finally see that this really is the end of elected leadership in this city for a little while and I'm absolutely disgusted by that. The impending loss of self-governance was avoidable [[even under the bad policy that is PA 4). This mayor made a bad deal [[I'm guessing) with the Governor in helping to craft PA 4 [[bad policy) and then realized he was getting burned by it, resisted it and that resistance is what has ultimately gotten us to where we are. His resistance made him drag his feed on drafting the consent agreement, so we ended up with a rushed and legally flawed document. This mayor's leadership is ultimately responsible for what I think is the loss of self-governance for the City of Detroit and as a public policy professional and a true believer in government by the people, I am beyond disappointed. This consent agreement could've allowed the City to remain self-governed -- with the State there to provide serious consequences for non-compliance, but this Mayor [[joined by five members of the City Council) blew it big time!!!

**Danny** · June-23-12, 09:37 AM

Dave Bing on Detroit City Council's refusal to fire Crittendon.

"FINE! If the City Council refuse to fire Crittendon. I will appoint my own attorney. That attorney will answer only to me. I'm sick and tired of their bull^&%@!"

**mam2009** · June-23-12, 09:41 AM

^^Then again, maybe the Mayor's latest flip-floppiness is his last ditch effort at convincing the Governor that he is capable of being Detroit's EM after all. I'll stay tuned to this political theater because it's just too damn interesting for me to turn away.

**313WX** · June-23-12, 10:31 AM

Bankruptcy is the only option, can't say it enough.

Besides avoiding the obvious political and legal drama, along with the fact that the shared pain will sober up all the parties involved [[city vs. city vs. Lansing vs. city vs. suburbs vs. Democrats vs. Republicans vs. Snyder), the government would be more open to giving us an actual bailout [[versus more bond money) if they're able to restructure our debt, and maybe even institute some sort of Marshall Plan for the city.

And lets be honest, that's what Detroit need as well as spending cuts, a no-strings attached liquid infusion like GM got.

**Wesley Mouch** · June-23-12, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by mam2009

...snip...
But I finally see that this really is the end of elected leadership in this city for a little while and I'm absolutely disgusted by that. The impending loss of self-governance was avoidable [[even under the bad policy that is PA 4). This mayor made a bad deal [[I'm guessing) with the Governor in helping to craft PA 4 [[bad policy) and then realized he was getting burned by it, resisted it and that resistance is what has ultimately gotten us to where we are. His resistance made him drag his feed on drafting the consent agreement, so we ended up with a rushed and legally flawed document. This mayor's leadership is ultimately responsible for what I think is the loss of self-governance for the City of Detroit and as a public policy professional and a true believer in government by the people, I am beyond disappointed. This consent agreement could've allowed the City to remain self-governed -- with the State there to provide serious consequences for non-compliance, but this Mayor [[joined by five members of the City Council) blew it big time!!!

Very interesting and insightful post.

Two questions:

1) What allows you to believe so strongly that 'self-governance' can solve Detroit's financial and structural problems -- when it was the method that got us here -- and has so far failed to stop the financial bleeding.

2) What do you think Detroit does to achieve financial stability?

**Motor City Sam** · June-23-12, 11:13 AM

So, Bing wants to contract another lawyer to handle his business, a lawyer only responsible for doing the wishes of the Mayor, rather than acting in the best interests of the City.

Isn't that a big part of why we had so much trouble in the last administration?

**corktownyuppie** · June-23-12, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by mam2009

"When" is right. Once the Mayor starts to try to get contracts approved by the Council for outside counsel rather than using the resources of the Law Department, the gauntlet will have been thrown. There's no way they are going to approve of that -- as the ultimate approving authority for contracts. Then it'll be said by the Mayor or the Program Manager that approval of those contracts is necessary to fulfill the terms of the consent agreement so the Council will be accused of defaulting on the consent agreement, then the Council will ask the Corporation Counsel to go back to court saying, again, that the consent agreement is invalid, then the State will say, "To hell with all this!" and declare the Program Manager or the CFO as the Emergency Manager.

Of course, none of that takes into account all of the other variables such as the potential suspension of PA 4, the lawsuits that are bound to brought by every City of Detroit union due to the suspension of collective bargaining rights by PA 4 as of July 1...and the continued budget mess that will exist because few of the cost-saving measures [[layoffs, union contract re-structuring, department closures and consolidations, process improvements, technology updates) will not happen because everyone will be pre-occupied with fighting rather than working together collaboratively.

Public Act 4 and its implementation has made for very bad public policy. I do believe that there is a place for Emergency Managers and a place for Consent Agreements. It has become more and more apparent that Public Act 4 was tailor made to assist Mayor Bing in reigning in the finances of Detroit. But, it seems, somewhere between its passing in early 2011 and November 2011 [[probably starting with the whole Kirk Lewis becoming DPS EM debacle -- likely Gov Snyder's first experience with the flip-flopping Bing) the Governor and the Mayor's relationship broke down. [[More conjecture on my part -- probably because the Governor no longer was looking toward the Mayor being the EM of the Detroit due to his flip-floppiness.)

In my history of posting on this message board, I think I've tried my best not to discuss individual elected officials in a negative way -- not even the former Mayor. I sympathize greatly with elected officials because it is very tough to make very public decisions while trying to seem sensitive to all of your constituency's points of view while being subjected to, often, cruel assessments of every decision you make -- again very publicly. But I finally see that this really is the end of elected leadership in this city for a little while and I'm absolutely disgusted by that. The impending loss of self-governance was avoidable [[even under the bad policy that is PA 4). This mayor made a bad deal [[I'm guessing) with the Governor in helping to craft PA 4 [[bad policy) and then realized he was getting burned by it, resisted it and that resistance is what has ultimately gotten us to where we are. His resistance made him drag his feed on drafting the consent agreement, so we ended up with a rushed and legally flawed document. This mayor's leadership is ultimately responsible for what I think is the loss of self-governance for the City of Detroit and as a public policy professional and a true believer in government by the people, I am beyond disappointed. This consent agreement could've allowed the City to remain self-governed -- with the State there to provide serious consequences for non-compliance, but this Mayor [[joined by five members of the City Council) blew it big time!!!

Well put. - CTY

**corktownyuppie** · June-23-12, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

Bankruptcy is the only option, can't say it enough.

Besides avoiding the obvious political and legal drama, along with the fact that the shared pain will sober up all the parties involved [[city vs. city vs. Lansing vs. city vs. suburbs vs. Democrats vs. Republicans vs. Snyder), the government would be more open to giving us an actual bailout [[versus more bond money) if they're able to restructure our debt, and maybe even institute some sort of Marshall Plan for the city.

And lets be honest, that's what Detroit need as well as spending cuts, a no-strings attached liquid infusion like GM got.

I'm starting to lean toward your view as well. One point I'd like to clarify. How is it the perception that GM got a no-strings attached infusion of capital?

The lenders were required to accept significantly less than they were owed.
The owners of the company lost everything.
And the people who gave them the "no-strings-attached liquid infusion" controlled the company, rendering the former owners completely powerless in any decision making.

**Richard** · June-23-12, 12:10 PM

IMHO they should hold an emergency meeting to move forward the new city council replacement per charter,who ever they is because the currant council would be in essence replacing themselves.

Because really now you have a totally non functional city government if the mayor and council cannot and it seems like now it is cemented get along nothing will get done because it now is becoming a you do as I say and no you do as I say scenario.

I am sure Mr Bing means well but his business attitude of I am the boss and things will be this way does not suit well when you need a give and take situation with the council and his flip flopping makes the city look unstable.

The city needs outside investors providing employment as of now you have a city council member standing up and saying the newest member to the team is a good choice because he is africian amercian and he has good credentials so to me your government portrays the citizenry it governs.

Bankruptcy to me is not going to help without changing the cause of the problem,which is the absence of leadership,what is the difference between a dysfunctional city government and a bankrupt city government?

A dysfunctional government can be replaced with minimum ramifications a bankrupt city government will force its citizens to pay the price for many years to come.

**Wesley Mouch** · June-23-12, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

I'm starting to lean toward your view as well. One point I'd like to clarify. How is it the perception that GM got a no-strings attached infusion of capital?

The lenders were required to accept significantly less than they were owed.
The owners of the company lost everything.
And the people who gave them the "no-strings-attached liquid infusion" controlled the company, rendering the former owners completely powerless in any decision making.

Bankruptcy -> the main argument against seems to be the long time it would take -- but the current path is sure looking like a long one as well. So I agree -- just do it once, and do it right. If you spend too much -- you get bankrupt -- everyone loses.

GM -> the perception that the GM 'infusion' was 'no strings' -- is standard ideology amonst those who think all corporations and their profits categorically evil -- rather than bad behavior by companies. This no more speaks to the nature of companies than Jeffrey Dahmer, Jerry Falwell or Jesse Jackson speaks to the nature of humans.

[[btw, I lost money in the GM bankrupcy.)

**Richard** · June-23-12, 12:20 PM

The U.S. government is currently biggest owner of General Motors stock. It was a condition of that company’s bailout in 2009. So when you hear that the government is looking at selling off all its stock, that may seem like a good thing. Until you read what the Wall Street Journal put out today. Mainly, that GM stock is currently at about $30 and in order for the government to break even it needs to sell its shares at about $53. And then you read that despite the over $11 billion loss that would ensue, the Obama administration might do it anyway this summer. Why? Because 2012 is an election year.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/govt-looking-to-sell-its-gm-stock-a-potential-loss-of-over-11-billion/

**313WX** · June-23-12, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

I'm starting to lean toward your view as well. One point I'd like to clarify. How is it the perception that GM got a no-strings attached infusion of capital?

The lenders were required to accept significantly less than they were owed.
The owners of the company lost everything.
And the people who gave them the "no-strings-attached liquid infusion" controlled the company, rendering the former owners completely powerless in any decision making.

The owners of the company should lose everything if the company failed.

As far as the lenders go, they will just have to accept the fact that they can't pump water from a turnip. They'll be less likely to lend to the city for a while, but the city still needs that money to function. The state of Michigan will thus have to sell bonds for the city.

And by no-strings attach cash infusion, I'm referring to the federal dollars GM received, long enough for them to do some restructuring themselves before being sent through bankruptcy. '

I understand the state is trying to do a shoddy job of that now, but it can't expect the current taxpayers in the city to handle the burden of all of Detroit's unfunded liabilities alone in the form of even fewer services. They shouldn't have to give up their municipal assets they've paid for either, because in the long term losing those assets does lower their quality of life. And ultimately, a bankruptcy judge can't interfere with the governance of th city outside of financial decisions, unlike the state can now.

Detroit's biggest problem is going to be its pension obligations and union contracts, which is the lion's share of the city's debt. A bankruptcy judge can wipe those out completely, no question. They may be some whining for a little while, but most city workers will get over it once they realize there are no other jobs out there for them, and thousands of other popl in the region will take their jobs in a second, union contracts or not.

**Wesley Mouch** · June-23-12, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

The U.S. government is currently biggest owner of General Motors stock. It was a condition of that company’s bailout in 2009. So when you hear that the government is looking at selling off all its stock, that may seem like a good thing. Until you read what the Wall Street Journal put out today. Mainly, that GM stock is currently at about $30 and in order for the government to break even it needs to sell its shares at about $53. And then you read that despite the over $11 billion loss that would ensue, the Obama administration might do it anyway this summer. Why? Because 2012 is an election year.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/govt-looking-to-sell-its-gm-stock-a-potential-loss-of-over-11-billion/

Of course right now this isn't yet the days of wine and roses.

But you should step back a bit and look at the big picture

First -- GM stock will likely recover. Its not at $30, but at $20 right now. Nearly at its 52 week low of $19. But it will recover. I would recommend buying GM right now.

Second -- GM is paying its pension obligations, not the taxpayers. If it had gone under, the US government would have been likely stepped in, as it did with the steel industry years ago, and cover these obligations as a social cost. That means taxpayers would end up bearing much of that cost. As it is, GM is paying cost.

And that's before we get to what the real cost of a GM bankruptcy would have meant.

So let's not confuse what Obama might do for his reelection chances with a move that has benefited most of us by saving GM.

**Richard** · June-23-12, 01:01 PM

I would agree 100% that the bailout has helped all across the country and to me it is kinda no different then giving company x 500 million in incentives to employ x amount of people.

My only thought on GM stock is that their growth is in overseas lands and if they should choose to separate those companies from GM U.S. as the US car sales is a declining aspect.

The steel companies used their bailout to reinvest in other ventures then shut the steel aspect down.

But it seems to me if Detroit went the bankruptcy route her assets would be picked clean and she would end up being a floating city or a city in name only ,I am sure that there are those that would like to see that.

They say there is no money but they still have not shown an accounting,so you do not know where you stand just what you are led to believe and you should take their word on that.Sure the city could be broke but given once again the current management that may never be known.Cannot pay out to fix streetlights but spend millions out in lawsuits?

Those same millions could have or can be spent on more police or improved city services so the problem does not exist to begin with ,reactive or proactive?

**313WX** · June-23-12, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

The U.S. government is currently biggest owner of General Motors stock. It was a condition of that company’s bailout in 2009. So when you hear that the government is looking at selling off all its stock, that may seem like a good thing. Until you read what the Wall Street Journal put out today. Mainly, that GM stock is currently at about $30 and in order for the government to break even it needs to sell its shares at about $53. And then you read that despite the over $11 billion loss that would ensue, the Obama administration might do it anyway this summer. Why? Because 2012 is an election year.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/govt-looking-to-sell-its-gm-stock-a-potential-loss-of-over-11-billion/

Besides the fact that your article is from a far-right publication, that article is over a year old, and the government still has their stock in GM.

But Wesley Mouch is right. The bigger picture is what's important, and overall GM and those who depend on GM are much better off thank to the restructuring the government sent it through.

**313WX** · June-23-12, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

But it seems to me if Detroit went the bankruptcy route her assets would be picked clean and she would end up being a floating city or a city in name only ,I am sure that there are those that would like to see that.

They say there is no money but they still have not shown an accounting,so you do not know where you stand just what you are led to believe and you should take their word on that.Sure the city could be broke but given once again the current management that may never be known.Cannot pay out to fix streetlights but spend millions out in lawsuits?

My understanding is assets can't be touched in Chapter 9 bankruptcy.

It's really fellow DYes members such a Ray1936 an Buy American, who both receive a pension from the city, that will be hurt the most.

I'm also starting to suspect mam2009 works for the city currently, which is why they don't want bankruptcy either as a judge can rip up their contracts.

I really just want the most legal and least painful path through all of this for me as a taxpaying resident of Detroit. Me and my children shouldn't have to take the brunt of all of the punishment for the poor decisions other Detroiters [[including present-day suburbanites) made in the past.

**mam2009** · June-23-12, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

My understanding is assets can't be touched in Chapter 9 bankruptcy...I'm also starting to suspect mam2009 works for the city currently, which is why they don't want bankruptcy either as a judge can rip up their contracts.

I thought I was "Joann". Anyhoo...just chiming in with facts again...union contracts can and will be imposed by the City once they have expired [[a new PA 4 power for cities under a consent agreement -- no long-term EM necessary). Many expire June 30, 2012 including the largest union in the City, the Detroit Police Officers Association).

AND an EM can cancel active contracts and impose whatever they want on the unions.

I don't know if Bankruptcy is Detroit's best option or not. I'll leave that to the municipal finance experts. All I know is -- if Mayor Bing insists on using outside counsel, Detroit will swiftly get an EM.

**Richard** · June-23-12, 03:07 PM

I am not an advocate for bankruptcy or not I would be an advocate for a strong city that would nice to invest in knowing that your employees can go home at night and enjoy a peaceful evening or weekend and be at work and not have to worry if their loved ones are at risk or not.

But what is the price for that? In the earlier days city workers did not make a bunch of money the perks were the benefits and comfortable knowing their retirement was taken care of.These are people that put their lives on the line for a city.It seems to me and it may just be me,that if you look all across the country the first thing that is looked at is the legacy costs,before the meltdown were those costs not being met? You did not hear about getting rid of the city unions.

My whole thing with Detroit is that she does not know where she would have been before all of the pillaging and lack of government,so if there was good government in place and that government took care of the city before lining their pockets even with the population loss how strong would she be and would there even be a need for EFM or bankruptcy?

So now they are using bond monies to cover costs while they are doing that if they cannot get along and actually work towards a strong city with good government ,promoting safety,investment,pride etc. it does not matter what you do you still have not gotten to the root of the problem,you have reacted to it and said the legacy costs are killing us and that is the easiest thing to go after,dump that and all the problems are solved.