Does the CofD wan to save $200 million per year of the $1.1 billion budget?

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE

Some quotes from the article

”Detroit is a big spender. The city's general fund revenue slipped to $1.1 billion last year from $1.4 billion in 2006, but its revenue per resident is $1,560, or 60 percent higher than Milwaukee, 37 percent higher than Atlanta, 29 percent higher than Cleveland and 15 percent higher than St. Louis. Only Pittsburgh's revenue per resident exceeds Detroit — by one dollar.”

“Detroit spends more per capita on police and fire protection than Milwaukee, Cleveland, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Atlanta, even as police and fire officials here labor with sagging morale exacerbated by dilapidated equipment. Police Department costs per officer total $146,603, compared to $90,462 for Milwaukee, $83,716 for Atlanta, $87,198 for Cleveland and less than $66,000 for St. Louis and Pittsburgh.”

“Detroit's fire department costs per firefighter total $158,824, Harris found, more than double Atlanta's costs of $73,096 per firefighter. Measured per capita, Detroit's $267 firefighter expense is 60 percent higher than Atlanta's $167 and 112 percent higher than Milwaukee's $126.”

“If Detroit's costs per capita for police and fire attained the average of the other five cities he studied, Harris estimates the city could save more than $200 million annually — roughly $149 million in savings for police and $55 million for fire.”

So the data says the CofD has a greater revenue source than our peer cities, but [[more importantly) the CofD is a MUCH bigger spender. It is worthwhile reading the entire article and it asks a few nagging questions.

Why are Detroit's expenses to provide police, fire and other municipal services substantially above market rate for roughly similar cities?

Why can't the city more efficiently manage its human and financial resources?

What premium services do residents receive for the premium spent?