Michigan to withhold $10M in aid to Detroit

**313WX** · November-22-12, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by michimoby

The only leg FD-NC has to stand on is the 0.1% income tax decline that occurred in July, but even that is a slim margin of concession.

Losing $8 Million dollars in tax revenue is hardly chunk change for a city that's broke.

Fact of the matter is, regardless if it were legal, the state of Michigan reneged on its end of the contract.

**313WX** · November-22-12, 10:06 AM

A non-partisan person though would have to ask why the state of Michigan and Mayor Bing would threaten of the health of the state's by-far largest city because one contract with 1 particular law firm [[who also drafted a law which was repealed) was not approved.

**Honky Tonk** · November-22-12, 10:22 AM

"A non-partisan person though would have to ask why the state of Michigan and Mayor Bing would threaten of the health of the state's by-far largest city"

Size doesn't matter. The "health" of said largest City is such that it's on it's death bed. The COD is a liability for the State, not an asset. However the question is valid, why is this point such a stickler. If the Council knows something, they really ought to share. They might just find more people in their corner instead of coming off like stuborn mules. A simple "The issue we have is...." instead of passing the buck, name-calling inuendos, would go a long way.

**313WX** · November-22-12, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

"A non-partisan person though would have to ask why the state of Michigan and Mayor Bing would threaten of the health of the state's by-far largest city"

Size doesn't matter. The "health" of said largest City is such that it's on it's death bed. The COD is a liability for the State, not an asset.

And of course, you missed the entire point about the law firm.

Why would the state of Michigan and Mayor Bing threaten the fiscal solvency of Detroit because one contract with 1 particular law firm who drafted a law that was repealed by referendum wasn't approved?

And if size doesn't matter, then let Detroit go bankrupt.

After all, the reason I'm understanding Snyder won't let Detroit go bankrupt is because it would damage the credit rating of every location in the state and thus every single municipality's ability to sell bonds, as Wall Street see Detroit as Michigan.

Let's not talk out of both sides of our mouth here, which unfortunately seems to be the popular to do in Michigan these days.

**Hermod** · November-22-12, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

Well I agree, except I'd add on one more thing... How? I keep saying that beggars can't be choosy....except here in backwards world. Let's end the charade. Lansing has us by the balls. You may think that their requests are unreasonable, fine.

Then let's debate and make the choice. We are either choosing bankruptcy or we are choosing consent. Let's quick arguing over piddly minute details. And if we choose bankruptcy, then let's get be transparent about it and get on with it.

For once I'd just like to hear Councilmembers say this:

"In weighing our options between demands handed out down by our lender of last resort vs. bankruptcy, our choice is clear. Bankruptcy will be painful for everyone, but we've come to the conclusion that it will be be painful either way. Although the process is going to be crippling and drag out over time, we still believe it is better than the alternative of taking orders and demands without due process and an objective 3rd party. In other words, Lansing, we don't trust that you have our best interests in mind.

We have elected to default on yesterday's interest payment due to the bondholders and have begun the process of filing Chapter 9 bankruptcy. We hold the opinion that the situation should never have gotten to this point and are choosing between what we believe is the best of several evils.

Our priorities as your representatives are to protect the interest of our citizens, starting with public safety, fire, and basic city services. A bankruptcy judge will have the ability to nullify labor agreements and force a restructuring of our city government. We are willing to accept this from a disinterested 3rd party who is obliged to follow due process as we believe that it the best route to maximizing the city services received by our citizenry and bound by law and legal precedent to honor our rights to be heard."

I don't agree with this but at least I find the position tenable.

At least with the consent agreement, they get to do some negotiating and retain some power as to priorities. The bankruptcy judge can be arbitrary as hell and any attempt to sway him or to appeal his decisions will entail significant legal costs.

**Honky Tonk** · November-22-12, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

And of course, you missed the entire point about the law firm.

I'm sorry, I never claimed to be the brightest bulb in the box. But by the same token, please reread my post about "If the Council knows something, they really ought to share."
You know, let's quit playing kid-shit games and doing renditions of "Onward Christian Soldiers". What's their beef? They have a real issue, what is it? If not, then let's move on to the task @ hand.

Why would the state of Michigan and Mayor Bing threaten the fiscal solvency of Detroit because one contract with 1 particular law firm who drafted a law that was repealed by referendum wasn't approved?

I dunno, why would the Council keep rejecting proposals without a valid reason? And "Just Because" doesn't count.

And if size doesn't matter, then let Detroit go bankrupt.

Good, I'm glad we resolved. Too bad thousands of lives are now screwed up. Let's go get a $10 Latte, then shop for $250 jackets @ Moosejaw.

After all, the reason I'm understanding Snyder won't let Detroit go bankrupt is because it would damage the credit rating of every location in the state and thus every single municipality's ability to sell bonds, as Wall Street see Detroit as Michigan.

Are you absolutely sure about that, or is that just wishful, let me rephrase that, HOPEful thinking. Or will Wally Street just say "It was a screwed up town anyway, who cares?"

Let's not talk out of both sides of our mouth here

Here I totally agree with you.

And it keeps going on......

**Wesley Mouch** · November-22-12, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

<snip>

Why would the state of Michigan and Mayor Bing threaten the fiscal solvency of Detroit because one contract with 1 particular law firm who drafted a law that was repealed by referendum wasn't approved?

<snip>

Maybe because sometimes you just don't change jockeys during a race.

All this fighting on fine points about who set the fire and which water hose to use has nothing to do with the issues.

I believe the State has a strong desire to see Detroit avoid bankruptcy -- for all the right reasons.

I believe the City Council knows this, and has chosen to use it to their advantage to fight against reform. For the small swallowing of pride as the fire rages, they could settle this. Instead, they're again doing anything possible to avoid reform.

This has nothing to do with anything but power. Detroit council would vote against the Detroit River flowing if Lansing was for it.

**Honky Tonk** · November-22-12, 11:46 AM

"This has nothing to do with anything but power."

And jobs. Where else are these guys going to find them?

"Detroit council would vote against the Detroit River flowing if Lansing was for it."

Nice.

**313WX** · November-22-12, 12:00 PM

I dunno, why would the Council keep rejecting proposals without a valid reason? And "Just Because" doesn't count.

Who said they didn't have a valid reason? The SE Michigan Free Press/News?

I think being handed a vague contract to a firm that already has a sketchy background at best and being told to approve it without anymore information is a good reason to not approve someone. Bing keeps claiming Miller Canfield are HIS lawyers and that he shouldn't have to release information about his client relationship with him he doesn't want to, yet he wants my taxpayer dollars to pay for his lawyers. That shouldn't happen and hopefully it won't.

Good, I'm glad we resolved. Too bad thousands of lives are now screwed up. Let's go get a $10 Latte, then shop for $250 jackets @ Moosejaw.

The lives of thousands of PRESENT Detroit taxpayers are being screwed under this questionable Consent Agreement. Now Snyder and Bing are telling me my neighborhood may not have street lightning, my water could be controlled by a private for-profit corporation and I have a greater chance of dying or being the victim of a crime because my emergency response times have increased even more, although at the same time they still expect me to write a check to the city of Detroit at the end of every fiscal year. And this is all only to protect the pensions and bondholders.

But of course, I guess we the citizens we elected to serve [[which for the record I did not vote for Snyder or Bing) don't matter.

Are you absolutely sure about that, or is that just wishful, let me rephrase that, HOPEful thinking. Or will Wally Street just say "It was a screwed up town anyway, who cares?"

Then again, I say let Detroit go bankrupt.

**313WX** · November-22-12, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Maybe because sometimes you just don't change jockeys during a race.

At the same time, you shouldn't choose to visit a specialist who has been sued for malpractice just because your docotr told you to do so or you'll die.

**Honky Tonk** · November-22-12, 12:27 PM

"At the same time, you shouldn't choose to visit a specialist who has been sued for malpractice just because your docotr told you to do so or you'll die."

What were the specifics of the suite? Is someone upset because one implant is 3 cm larger then the other, or did someone die on the operating table because the specialist decided to take a timeout to reply to a Detroit Yes post?

"But of course, I guess we the citizens we elected to serve [[which for the record I did not vote for Snyder or Bing) don't matter."

Did you vote in City officials to waste time and money, not show up to meetings, get nothing accomplished, keep their fingers in the cookie jar, and make a worse mess out of an already bad situation? Well, I sure as hell didn't. MY tax $s are being pissed away as well.

**corktownyuppie** · November-22-12, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

At the same time, you shouldn't choose to visit a specialist who has been sued for malpractice just because your docotr told you to do so or you'll die.

Close. In my opinion is more like this...

You're already dying. Only doctor for hundreds of miles has questionable motives. It's him or nothing. What do you do?

**Wesley Mouch** · November-22-12, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

At the same time, you shouldn't choose to visit a specialist who has been sued for malpractice just because your docotr told you to do so or you'll die.

Sure -- but this isn't just any lawfirm. We're not talking about Geoffrey Fieger here. Miller Canfield is a large, international firm with a great reputation. Sure, they're still lawyers, and that's a major strike against them. But I'd trust that group of greedy corporate lawyers any day over the Detroit Council. At least Miller Canfield no doubt practices honor among thieves.

**evergreen** · November-22-12, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Sure -- but this isn't just any lawfirm. We're not talking about Geoffrey Fieger here. Miller Canfield is a large, international firm with a great reputation. Sure, they're still lawyers, and that's a major strike against them. But I'd trust that group of greedy corporate lawyers any day over the Detroit Council. At least Miller Canfield no doubt practices honor among thieves.

Yeah trust, but verify. Miller Canfield has refused to submit detailed invoices to City Council. They've been on all sides of the "negotiations" [[I question the integrity of any "negotiations" involving our current mayor, he is less than a straw man) involving the consent agreement and the bonds issued.

The new city charter, which Dave Bing vowed yesterday to defy at will, requires the approval of corporation counsel before retaining outside counsel. Miller Canfield was working without obtaining this approval and without a contract for much of the highly publicized work they performed after April. In addition, given their representation of other parties involved in the consent agreement, one can certainly see potential conflict of interest problems here.

I fully appreciate the dire financial straits of the city. And I also recognize that any deal will entail pain. But there is a growing sentiment that Dave Bing is little more than a puppet for Snyder, et al. and the city has no effective advocate during this crisis - a role which neither Snyder nor Miller Canfield can play. Bing is doing little more than giving them the key to the city's resources and telling them to wake him up when they are finished.

Inducing panic by waiting until the very last session before recess to tell Council they have to agree to terms that Snyder and Miller Canfield have "negotiated" failed this time. [[And don't forget the added terror of no paychecks starting in December.)

People on both sides should admit that Dave Bing has been a horrible failure as mayor.

**mam2009** · November-22-12, 03:28 PM

Why even have a legislative body in our governments? Let's just get rid of our system of checks and balanced & let the mayors, county executives, governors & President make all the decisions. And we should model that in other non-government bodies too. The presidents and CEOs of the PTAs, non-profit organizations, universities, Fortune 500 companies, block clubs, unions,etc should make all decisions for those organizations without a pesky board to make sure decisions of the executive are properly vetted.

Those pesky multi-member bodies just muck up the process & stall progress. Down with representative democracy!!! Dave Bing has done EVERYTHING right since he got in office so why oh why would the Detroit City Council ever challenge his wisdom & incredible business and political acumen? I mean five of them voted for the consent agreement but he could only get one of them to vote in favor of this ONE law firm contract...how is it that four of those five reasonable members became so UNreasonable as to vote to DELAY a vote in order to try to negotiate further with the Mayor? THE NERVE!!! How dare they?!

Clowncil haters know that Detroit mayors perform better when left to their own devices with no challenge to their decision-making. I mean that last mayor of Detroit left the City in GREAT SHAPE while he was all chummy with most of that previous City Council!

**Wesley Mouch** · November-22-12, 03:37 PM

This has NOTHING to do with anything but power. Its not about invoices, or conflict of interest, or anything else.

Miller Canfield knows this. They're smart enough not to be drawn into a power struggle between Mayor and Council.

If this were so simple as a dispute about invoices.... ha. You're all so distracted that you're missing the real game. And that's the idea.

It'd be a welcome change to have a council that truly wants to fight misappropriation of funds.

**mam2009** · November-22-12, 04:18 PM

Miller Canfield is already in it. Miller Canfield is the largest law firm in the state of Michigan. It has a large municipal law practice and is the general counsel for MERS, the Michigan Employee Retirement System, the same system that had been [[and probably still is being) contemplated to manage the Detroit pension funds. You don't think the largest LAW FIRM in the state of Michigan is interested in power and influence? You should ask the Detroit Pension Boards if THEY think Miller Canfield is interested in power and influence. I wonder if that may be one of those interesting little "conflicts" the City Council could be referring too?

**Wesley Mouch** · November-22-12, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by mam2009

Miller Canfield is already in it. Miller Canfield is the largest law firm in the state of Michigan. It has a large municipal law practice and is the general counsel for MERS, the Michigan Employee Retirement System, the same system that had been [[and probably still is being) contemplated to manage the Detroit pension funds. You don't think the largest LAW FIRM in the state of Michigan is interested in power and influence? You should ask the Detroit Pension Boards if THEY think Miller Canfield is interested in power and influence. I wonder if that may be one of those interesting little "conflicts" the City Council could be referring too?

I would never suggest they weren't interested in power and influence.

So let's agree there. This is about power and influence.

Do you think Miller Canfield is interested in making a few bucks by overcharging Detroit? That's small change. There's nothing to be seen there. Even if true.

To quote those freeway signboards, 'seek alternate route'.

**mam2009** · November-22-12, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

I would never suggest they weren't interested in power and influence.

So let's agree there. This is about power and influence.

Do you think Miller Canfield is interested in making a few bucks by overcharging Detroit? That's small change. There's nothing to be seen there. Even if true.

To quote those freeway signboards, 'seek alternate route'.

Who said anything about "overcharging"? Did I miss something? Invoices don't just tell how much you paid for something, but WHAT you paid for. The Council is suggesting conflicts exist and seeing invoices is one way of seeing what conflicts may exist. Why doesn't the Mayor want the City Council to see what the citizens are paying for? Why is HE putting Detroit's receipt of its bond money in jeopardy over some invoices? Why is he choosing not disclosing invoices over securing Detroit's financial solvency?

**Wesley Mouch** · November-22-12, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by mam2009

Who said anything about "overcharging"? Did I miss something? Invoices don't just tell how much you paid for something, but WHAT you paid for. The Council is suggesting conflicts exist and seeing invoices is one way of seeing what conflicts may exist. Why doesn't the Mayor want the City Council to see what the citizens are paying for? Why is HE putting Detroit's receipt of its bond money in jeopardy over some invoices? Why is he choosing not disclosing invoices over securing Detroit's financial solvency?

I sure don't know why the mayor doesn't just release. But who cares.

What I do know is that they can force the mayor's hand in another way, another time -- that doesn't gum up the works. They're gumming the works up -- not the mayor.

When a guns to your head, you don't debate fine points. You do that later.

The council has had years to discover their moral principles. Its too late for that now.

This isn't about the invoices at all.

Seems to me like you're just itching to blame the mayor for something. Maybe he is up to something. Council has the chance to lead here and get something done. Do they? No. They suddenly find their morals. How politically convenient.

**mam2009** · November-22-12, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Seems to me like you're just itching to blame the mayor for something. Maybe he is up to something. Council has the chance to lead here and get something done. Do they? No. They suddenly find their morals. How politically convenient.

Seems to me like you're just itching to blame the Council for something.

I'm still waiting to hear how DELAYING a vote is the same as voting against getting something done. When did "not yet" become "hell no"? Showing the invoices could turn that "not yet" into "awwww, go ahead" if all is on the up and up, right?

**corktownyuppie** · November-22-12, 05:37 PM

Wes, the city has a gun to its head, but most of its citizens don't know it or believe it. I think it's time for the furloughs to kick in. Then maybe people will realize that we are in no position to negotiate.

**Hermod** · November-22-12, 05:51 PM

A few payless paydays and missed pension checks are probably needed to get everyone's attention and to light a fire under the clowncil. A few outraged folks with torches and pitchforks would send those idiots scrambling for the fire exit.

**mam2009** · November-22-12, 06:28 PM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

...I think it's time for the furloughs to kick in. Then maybe people will realize that we are in no position to negotiate.

That is a reasonable, honorable and excellent idea -- make the workers suffer more so you can hide some invoices from the City Council. Something about that kind of thought process sounds so...Kwamesque. Like demoting a certain DPD Internal Affairs commander and harassing other DPD officers and then hiding the conditions of a settlement agreement with those officers from the previous City Council -- all to hide a mayor's secrets.

The Council didn't have a problem with approving the Ernst & Young contract which was also part of this deal too. Why would they arbitrarily throw up an objection to the Miller Canfield contract?

**mam2009** · November-22-12, 06:41 PM

The Council is providing a reason for its position. Has the Mayor provided any reason for not showing the Council the invoices?

I know our local media can be quite lacking in providing any depth in their basic reporting, but I'm willing to admit that if he OFFERED his reasoning to the same local media he provides his press releases to, I have missed it.

Just ask the big question, local reporters, "WHY"?