Detroit workers dread more pay cuts from city council

**cla1945** · January-08-13, 11:22 AM

I wanted to spit nails when I read what Gary Brown said...

"Council President Pro Tem Gary Brown said Monday that he knows the cuts are painful, but he said they are essential to Detroit's efforts to balance its books after racking up another $130-million deficit in 2011-12, pushing its accumulated deficit to near $327 million."

http://www.freep.com/article/2013010...m-City-Council

Mr. Brown, do you really know how painful the cuts will be to a worker who makes $28,000/year? You probably get that much in interest on your 7 Million Dollar settlement you received from Detroit in the whistleblower case. What the average worker has to lose is a home, cars, college education for children, so many things that you can't even begin to imagine. You, on the other hand, have nothing to lose. The council, the mayor, appointees, commissioners, chiefs, supervisors all need to feel the pain...not the worker who makes just over poverty level.

**rex** · January-08-13, 12:36 PM

I fully agree. Its pretty offensive. Talk about a stressful work environment

**corktownyuppie** · January-08-13, 12:38 PM

Hey, I don't like the idea of making cuts either, except that we're running a $300MM deficit annually, and no one is willing to lend more money to us.

Ok, Detroit. Now what.

**Crumbled_pavement** · January-08-13, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

Hey, I don't like the idea of making cuts either, except that we're running a $300MM deficit annually, and no one is willing to lend more money to us.

Ok, Detroit. Now what.

Personally, I pride myself on being moderate. I lean left but I like to think practically. If we have a $300M deficit then cuts have to happen. Should those cuts start with the rank and file that actually produce something or should those cuts start with the do-nothing city council? I vote we start with the do-nothing city council and work our way through all the administrative fat in the city first, then whatever else needs to be cut can come from the rank and file.

**Tig3rzhark** · January-08-13, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement

Personally, I pride myself on being moderate. I lean left but I like to think practically. If we have a $300M deficit then cuts have to happen. Should those cuts start with the rank and file that actually produce something or should those cuts start with the do-nothing city council? I vote we start with the do-nothing city council and work our way through all the administrative fat in the city first, then whatever else needs to be cut can come from the rank and file.

Let's all agree to that and put this toward action.

Our city has only 700,000 people, and that population is decreasing. Let's get rid of a few council seats while we're at it.

The next election the council will be elected by district. Each person on city council should be represented by district and only add a seat when there is a population increase of 100,000.

In fact, there should be five districts and 2 at large by November election. If the population decreases even further, get rid of a city council seat.

Also, the city council need to use their own cars to get to the municipal center. If they don't have cars, they can catch the bus, like the rest of us. The mayor can cut his executive protection unit.

You wanna cut the fat? Start from the top and work your way down.

**Crumbled_pavement** · January-08-13, 07:40 PM

Originally Posted by Tig3rzhark

Let's all agree to that and put this toward action.

Our city has only 700,000 people, and that population is decreasing. Let's get rid of a few council seats while we're at it.

The next election the council will be elected by district. Each person on city council should be represented by district and only add a seat when there is a population increase of 100,000.

In fact, there should be five districts and 2 at large by November election. If the population decreases even further, get rid of a city council seat.

Also, the city council need to use their own cars to get to the municipal center. If they don't have cars, they can catch the bus, like the rest of us. The mayor can cut his executive protection unit.

You wanna cut the fat? Start from the top and work your way down.

Amen to everything you said.

**corktownyuppie** · January-08-13, 10:45 PM

Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement

Personally, I pride myself on being moderate. I lean left but I like to think practically. If we have a $300M deficit then cuts have to happen. Should those cuts start with the rank and file that actually produce something or should those cuts start with the do-nothing city council? I vote we start with the do-nothing city council and work our way through all the administrative fat in the city first, then whatever else needs to be cut can come from the rank and file.

I have no problem with cutting the fat there either.

**cla1945** · January-08-13, 11:04 PM

I think the feeling is mutual among most of us....the only ones who don't agree are the ones who have the power in the CAY building right now. Charles Pugh, a man who can't handle his own finances and has been foreclosed on more times than we can count wants to keep things status quo...Kwame Kenyatta and his pompous attitude is also having financial problems and was foreclosed on in 2009...Joann Watson pays only $69/year in taxes on her home and didn't think a thing about it. Gary Brown doesn't give two shits about Detroit while he sits there with almost 7 Million dollars of the Citys money. This is where the fat is people. Bing needs to get a sharp knife and start trimming and forget about spending almost 4 million dollars to consultant companies, law firms and others to tell him what to do. I thought that was what the Mayor was for, I thought that was what Council was for...to make major decisions for the good of Detroit. Instead, a broke, delapitated, shell of a City is forking out millions to others when that money could be used to help itself. What is wrong with the fucking politicians in Detroit anyway? Isn't there anyone left with any integrity or honesty or common sense? If we can all figure it out sitting with coffee at our kitchen tables, why is it so damn difficult for people who work for the Detroit taxpayers to figure it out? I know I'm ranting and I'm sorry, but this has become such a ridiculious situation that I feel like screaming.

**MSUguy** · January-08-13, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by Tig3rzhark

Let's all agree to that and put this toward action.

Our city has only 700,000 people, and that population is decreasing. Let's get rid of a few council seats while we're at it.

The next election the council will be elected by district. Each person on city council should be represented by district and only add a seat when there is a population increase of 100,000.

In fact, there should be five districts and 2 at large by November election. If the population decreases even further, get rid of a city council seat.

Also, the city council need to use their own cars to get to the municipal center. If they don't have cars, they can catch the bus, like the rest of us. The mayor can cut his executive protection unit.

You wanna cut the fat? Start from the top and work your way down.

I don't think city council size is an issue historically, when we had 1 million + ours was very small compared other cities, because we elected at large. If look at cities with similar populations to Detroit like Columbus, Ft Worth, Boston, SF they have 7-13 council members, so Detroit CC is not oversized by any means. This true even you look at smaller cities Atlanta[[15) and Raleigh [[9) or even local suburbs you're pretty much not going to find a city council of less than 7 members. Nevermind that Detroit is geographically bigger than most of these places. Of course, this talk about size doesn't account for things like pay, staffing, fringe benefits,etc

**stasu1213** · January-09-13, 06:13 AM

I would rather have the city go into bankruptcy than the council to continue making unnecessary cuts making life more miserable in Detroit. This is the same song and dance given to residents this time last year. Go after the millions f dollars owed to us. Gary Brown, Charles Pugh, and others will be well taken care of when they leave office. They probably would move out of the city leaving residents to waddle in the dire conditions made by the bought off council

**corktownyuppie** · January-09-13, 07:20 AM

Originally Posted by stasu1213

I would rather have the city go into bankruptcy than the council to continue making unnecessary cuts making life more miserable in Detroit. This is the same song and dance given to residents this time last year. Go after the millions f dollars owed to us. Gary Brown, Charles Pugh, and others will be well taken care of when they leave office. They probably would move out of the city leaving residents to waddle in the dire conditions made by the bought off council

I still am having a hard time grasping this argument. Even if you buy the argument that we are owed $150MM dollars, that will only fund our employees for the next 5 months.

Then what?

**Honky Tonk** · January-09-13, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

I still am having a hard time grasping this argument. Even if you buy the argument that we are owed $150MM dollars, that will only fund our employees for the next 5 months.

Then what?

Exactly. If it's concrete, written in stone, the City is really owed the money, then it's a matter of pursuing it legally. My guess is the debt circumstances are questionable, therefore Detroit isn't actively going after it. The City needs a solid game plan for it's recovery, and I don't see that. I still get the impression everyones running around putting duct tape on the holes in the ship. Stasu1213 does make a good point. City services are dismal as it is, and more cuts couldn't possibly help. Not only are you going to be dealing with disgruntled employees, your going to be dealing with residents who already are on the borderline of leaving.

**Dexlin** · January-09-13, 08:54 AM

A few things...

The city's deficit seems entirely doable without perpetual, annual, and archane cuts. Simply collecting outstanding tax bills would do a lot to avoid sustained massive staffing cuts that can no more be sustained than continued spending without collecting the taxes. There is this conventional wisdom that Detroit is way over-staffed, and that's simply not the case, anymore. This is something that needs to be done IMMEDIATELY, and if it needs to be farmed out, so be it.

The long-term debt is a whole other issue, and quite a bit harder to resolve without some kind of managed municipal bankruptcy, eventually. Not sure how to fix it otherwise. It's already been made known that the city could literally stop paying EVERY single employee, tomorrow, and Detroit still couldn't keep up with debt service. That's a long-standing issue that has its makings way, way, way back at the beginning of the decline.

As for the money owed it by specific and large entities like businesses and the state, the irony is that there simply isn't the money or personnel - especially when you're making archane cuts - to get this money back. I don't think it's an issue of there being much ambiguity. We may be talking the difference of a million or two here or there, but the fact is that the city is owed tens-of-millions of dollars by various parties. Yeah, a lot of that is incompetent book-keeping, but that doesn't mean that the money isn't owed. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not sure how to solve this particular issue, either. Obviously, the state can't be of any help in trying to retrieve any of this, because it'd be impossible for them to be an honest broker because of its role as a scofflaw.

I guess it's why while I think a bankruptcy is terrible, it's probably the best of shitty options. No party left in this battle has the moral high ground, anymore. At this point, the state is ruling and threatening through sheer force legitimately provided to them by the fact that municipalities are ultimately subjects of state governments. But, no, there is no moral superior anywhere to be seen.

Lastly, I've always said it, but to just be the vice president of the council, Gary Brown sure has had a lot of shit to say since being elected. He seems to think he's mayor. Whether he is right or wrong - and I think he's been particular haughty and uncaring in his role for the human element in this crisis - I think he's more than once overstepped his authority as first-among-equals. If he wants to run for mayor, great, run for mayor, but stop acting like your shit doesn't stink and that you're in a position to dictate anything.