Has Detroit Common Council taken any budget reductions?...

[fanniemae]

I think Snyder is on a mission to get an EM in there. As long as the courts don't muck it up, we will have an EM by the end of the year. IMO, Detroit needs one. Stop the fools on the council, they are a big part of the problem. Bing is clueless.

[mam2009]

I really hate when folks go on a rant about totally incorrect facts. In 2010 I was one of those City Council staffers. I have previous posts on here telling other posters that Council has cut its budget several times in the last 3 years. So much so that the staffs of all offices & administration were cut significantly. Real people lost jobs, benefits, houses, retirement savings, cars, etc. Stop living in this alternate universe, please. Council persons & remaining staff got furlough days just like everybody else -- in fact, they took them FIRST before union workers did. And I said before that it barely gets covered in the press when Council cuts its own budget because folks just like to hop on the bandwagon & bitch about nonsense. Yes, a small minority of Council staffers did/do have big paychecks, but they also didn't/don't get fringe benefits [[those pesky legacy costs that significantly add to the City's liabilities). The Council office where I worked was downsized by 50%, but I know there are still those posters who will say, ” So what? Your staff was probably too big anyway” or who just flat out will think i'm lying. A couple weeks ago there was a blip in the paper i'm sure about the City Council approving furlough days for non-union executive & LEGISLATIVE employees. Who do you think that is? Since that Pew study the City Coucil members' own salaries were cut by 10%. We rationed copy paper & shook our toner cartridges & bought our own office supplies just like every other City of Detroit worker because the City can't provide what we need to get the job done. Stop bitching about what you clearly either don't know or choose to ignore because it doesn't fit in your narrow paradigm of what you THINK is a bunch of ignorant fools who are oblivious to and immune from feeling the effects of the City's financial crisis. NO DETROIT CITY COUNCIL CUT ITS OWN BUDGET IN AT LEAST THE LAST TWENTY YEARS UNTIL THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL WHICH HAS CUT ITS BUDGET AT LEAST THREE TIMES & IMPOSED FURLOUGH DAYS AT LEAST TWICE. IF A ”STAFFER” ON CONTRACT FOR $50,000 [[no fringes) gets a 10% cut, that staffer then gets $45000. AND WHEN THAT STAFFER THEN GETS FURLOUGH DAYS IMPOSED ONCE EVERY OTHER WEEK, THAT EQUATES TO ANOTHER 10% CUT, SO NOW THAT SY STAFFER GETS $40,500 [no medical, pension & don't forget to take out taxes). That scenario has played out at least twice now both inside Council offices & with all City employees [[not to mention the ones who were just flat out laid off or contracts not renewed).

[kenp]

Real people lost jobs, benefits, houses, retirement savings, cars, etc. Stop living in this alternate universe, please. Council persons & remaining staff got furlough days just like everybody else.

The City Council and staff should not be about having a job and making a living. It should be a part time nominal fee position.

[313WX]

In 2010 I was one of those City Council staffers.

I KNEW you worked for the city council, I KNEW it!!!

[Eber Brock Ward]

I KNEW you worked for the city council, I KNEW it!!!

Exactly. He/She actually *defended* Watson at some point.

[313WX]

Exactly. He/She actually *defended* Watson at some point.

I'm pretty sure he/she was Watson's staffer.

[Honky Tonk]

I really hate when folks go on a rant about totally incorrect facts. In 2010 I was one of those City Council staffers. I have previous posts on here telling other posters that Council has cut its budget several times in the last 3 years. So much so that the staffs of all offices & administration were cut significantly. Real people lost jobs, benefits, houses, retirement savings, cars, etc. Stop living in this alternate universe, please. Council persons & remaining staff got furlough days just like everybody else -- in fact, they took them FIRST before union workers did. And I said before that it barely gets covered in the press when Council cuts its own budget because folks just like to hop on the bandwagon & bitch about nonsense. Yes, a small minority of Council staffers did/do have big paychecks, but they also didn't/don't get fringe benefits [[those pesky legacy costs that significantly add to the City's liabilities). The Council office where I worked was downsized by 50%, but I know there are still those posters who will say, ” So what? Your staff was probably too big anyway” or who just flat out will think i'm lying. A couple weeks ago there was a blip in the paper i'm sure about the City Council approving furlough days for non-union executive & LEGISLATIVE employees. Who do you think that is? Since that Pew study the City Coucil members' own salaries were cut by 10%. We rationed copy paper & shook our toner cartridges & bought our own office supplies just like every other City of Detroit worker because the City can't provide what we need to get the job done. Stop bitching about what you clearly either don't know or choose to ignore because it doesn't fit in your narrow paradigm of what you THINK is a bunch of ignorant fools who are oblivious to and immune from feeling the effects of the City's financial crisis. NO DETROIT CITY COUNCIL CUT ITS OWN BUDGET IN AT LEAST THE LAST TWENTY YEARS UNTIL THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL WHICH HAS CUT ITS BUDGET AT LEAST THREE TIMES & IMPOSED FURLOUGH DAYS AT LEAST TWICE. IF A ”STAFFER” ON CONTRACT FOR $50,000 [[no fringes) gets a 10% cut, that staffer then gets $45000. AND WHEN THAT STAFFER THEN GETS FURLOUGH DAYS IMPOSED ONCE EVERY OTHER WEEK, THAT EQUATES TO ANOTHER 10% CUT, SO NOW THAT SY STAFFER GETS $40,500 [no medical, pension & don't forget to take out taxes). That scenario has played out at least twice now both inside Council offices & with all City employees [[not to mention the ones who were just flat out laid off or contracts not renewed).

"I'm 90 pounds overweight, but LOOK, I lost 5 pounds"

[detbest]

The original question was about whether Council has cut their own budget. Having personally looked at this in the past I can say that yes, they have cut their staff budgets as well as their own salaries. I recall that this current Council cut their own salaries 10% early into their terms. I don't have exact figures but I know that Council's budget has been cut fairly significantly in each of the past few budget cycles. Along with the furlough days that someone above pointed out.

There's enough to criticize this Council and Mayor about without having to make up and/or ignore facts. I would gladly accept their budgets and salaries if they would be more visionary on things such as Belle Isle and less divisive about things such as this $200 million that the State legally does not owe the City.

On the cars, a few of the Council still drive city-owned vehicles. I know a few of them do drive their own vehicles. Again, don't know the exact numbers on this.

On the part-time Council, some of that can be a bit misleading. From the linked article some cities pay their Council over $100k and classify it as part-time. From my experience, that part-time can often just mean that they can hold another job. In DC, the Council is supposedly part-time but they get a $100k+ salary and can hold an outside job on top of that.

[313WX]

"I'm 90 pounds overweight, but LOOK, I lost 5 pounds"

Yep, pretty much.

[Wesley Mouch]

Why shouldn’t the voters who voted for the debt be liable for the results of their votes?

Voters in Detroit vote for bonds they have no intention of paying off and you expect voters/taxpayers in Grand Rapids or Warren to pick up the slack?

Don’t the people of Grand Rapids or Warren have their own bonds to pay off?

Hells bells, why not let everyone run up their credit cards, and lets force out neighbors to pay it off.

One more question, Shouldn’t those calling for Detroit to go bankrupt be first in line to loan Detroit money before the bankruptcy? It cant be they expect others to do what they are unwilling to do.

What I am saying is that the voters who approved much of the debt and pension obligations MOVED to the burbs. They're who I think should also pay.

You can't move out of Detroit after voting for a fool and then disavowing the consequences.

This problem was created by us all to some degree. Moving out. Leaving laws in place that allowed retirement in your 40's while life expectancy moved upward. Subsidizing transportation to the burbs while ignoring Detroit. Building your own suburban schools while leaving Detroit to carry the debt burden you created without your contribution.

My solution. No support from anyone in the form of EM/EFM/loans, etc. until Detroit cleans its own act up. And that includes as a flagship reducing the size of council costs. Heal thyself, and then society will help.

[Honky Tonk]

My solution. No support from anyone in the form of EM/EFM/loans, etc. until Detroit cleans its own act up. And that includes as a flagship reducing the size of council costs. Heal thyself, and then society will help.

I agree. There might be a 500 pound elephant in the room, but there are a boatload of smaller rats running around as well.

[downtownguy]

I really hate when folks go on a rant about totally incorrect facts. In 2010 I was one of those City Council staffers. I have previous posts on here telling other posters that Council has cut its budget several times in the last 3 years...

Thanks for your perspective, mam. I often disagree with council, but I always strive to form my opinions based on facts. It appears you have provided detail here that most of us are oblivious to.

IMHO, there was no reason for several folks to mock your post.

[Hypestyles]

At this point- I wonder if even idealists, once they get into office, can’t help but to do whatever it takes to hang onto the salary & perks?
Back when the city charter was being officially revised and the commission solicited suggestions from residents, one of the suggestions I submitted was to make city council part-time, with part-time pay. My rationale was that, theoretically, it would help encourage a more diverse pool of applicants, knowing that this would not be a full time job. Thus if you had people involved with active careers/businesses, they wouldn’t necessarily feel compelled to be careerists on council.
Obviously, this suggestion didn’t make it. Would an EM have the power to make changes in the structure of council?

[Novine]

"I really hate when folks go on a rant about totally incorrect facts. In 2010 I was one of those City Council staffers. I have previous posts on here telling other posters that Council has cut its budget several times in the last 3 years."

I was pretty sure that this was the case. Too bad that some posters decided to attack you instead of admitting that they had been wrong by claiming or implying that Council and staff hadn't taken any cuts.

[313WX]

For the record, no one has said the City Conncil didn't take any cuts, but plenty of people, rightfully, have said they haven't taken enough cuts.

[mam2009]

For the record, no one has said the City Conncil didn't take any cuts, but plenty of people, rightfully, have said they haven't taken enough cuts.

For the record, if they cut their entire budget it still wouldn't be enough.

[313WX]

For the record, if they cut their entire budget it still wouldn't be enough.

I agree.

Still doesn't mean the council's budget still isn't too big. There's absolutely no reason why we can't have a part-time council on a part-time salary [[council members that aren't double-dipping in their pensions I might add) with only one or two executive assistants per member and no security or city cars.

Let's all share in the pain if we're all supposedly committed to having a leaner/meaner Detroit.

[mam2009]

The City has gotten a lot leaner. That's part of why City services are so poor. The problem, which I think even YOU have said previously is much bigger than just making CUTS, especially when the costs of employing people grows more & more expensive each year & far outpaces revenue generation. So what's too big? What percentage of the City's total budget should the City Council represent in your opinion?

[313WX]

The City has gotten a lot leaner. That's part of why City services are so poor. The problem, which I think even YOU have said previously is much bigger than just making CUTS, especially when the costs of employing people grows more & more expensive each year & far outpaces revenue generation. So what's too big? What percentage of the City's total budget should the City Council represent in your opinion?

I just gave my proposed structure of the city council's budget.

[Wesley Mouch]

For the record, if they cut their entire budget it still wouldn't be enough.

I just can't stop myself from responding to posts that say this.

Too much is too much -- even if you have the money. But when you don't, too much is much too much.

1) Council doesn't need as much staff as they have,

2) Every little bit of a cut helps.

3) Setting an example is also very important.

Yes, it 'still wouldn't be enough'. Even if council each contributed a million, 'it still wouldn't be enough'.

It doesn't matter than its not enough. It only matters that its the right thing to do.

[mam2009]

I just gave my proposed structure of the city council's budget.

Well the rest of us live in the real world where the Council is full-time, but their still
paid less than some of those part-time Councils in the country as someone pointed out earlier. Just accept that your perception of the Council's budget is skewed & move onto a different Council criticism. There are many to choose from. They are flawed in many ways,but to say they are overpaid & over-staffed is no longer even close to being correct.

[mam2009]

I just can't stop myself from responding to posts that say this.

Too much is too much -- even if you have the money. But when you don't, too much is much too much.

1) Council doesn't need as much staff as they have,

2) Every little bit of a cut helps.

3) Setting an example is also very important.

Yes, it 'still wouldn't be enough'. Even if council each contributed a million, 'it still wouldn't be enough'.

It doesn't matter than its not enough. It only matters that its the right thing to do.

Agreed. But I addressed that in my original post which was responding directly to the subject of this thread & to those who implied or explicitly stated Council has not cut their own budget or led by example regarding their budget.

[313WX]

Well the rest of us live in the real world where the Council is full-time, but their still
paid less than some of those part-time Councils in the country as someone pointed out earlier. Just accept that your perception of the Council's budget is skewed & move onto a different Council criticism. There are many to choose from. They are flawed in many ways,but to say they are overpaid & over-staffed is no longer even close to being correct.

1. What Wesley Mouch said.

2. Who care what other cities pay their councils [[I didn't post that link)? Chicago and New York are not on the verge of bankruptcy and are not bleeding taxpayers at the rate Detroit is. On top of that, their Council members aren't ineffective like Detroit's.

[313WX]

But I addressed that in my original post which was responding directly to the subject of this thread & to those who implied or explicitly stated Council has not cut thruout budget or led by example regarding their budget.

No one said the Council has not cut through their budget.

[mam2009]

No one said the Council has not cut through their budget.

Posts 4, 13 & 38 did make that implication, for the record. And you still haven't said how much of the City's budget is appropriate to be allocated to the City Council. How are you determining that the Council has not made enough cuts? How do you determine if they're 90 lbs overweight or just 5 lbs overweight?