3 Questions About The Motor City

[Wesley Mouch]

Why are Detroit officials simultaneously moving to cut municipal workers' pensions while spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a new professional hockey stadium?

The overall welfare of the citizens of Detroit requires both prudent expenditures and future income. Hockey arenas and other economic development are investments in the future of our citizens. No pension cuts have yet been proposed. But we all know that there are some pension abuses, like people who make over $100,000 in retirement. The courts have decided that pensions can be adjusted, if done so fairly and with great care and respect.

Why are municipal employees being blamed for Detroit's woes when data prove they had little to do with the city's fiscal problems?

I don't hear anyone blaming municipal employees, but it is beyond doubt that Detroit's administration has not been well managed to control costs and has burdened Detroit taxpayers with costs out of line with the services delivered. Some do blame the employee Unions for not allowing workplace adjustments to work rules to reduce that burden. But I've never heard anyone say the municipal employees are to blame.

If Michigan is so strapped for cash, why is Gov. Snyder almost doubling the salaries of his top officials?

I've not heard that Michigan is strapped for cash? As with almost every unit of government, money is tight. But Michigan appears able to borrow as it needs to invest and to spend as it feels it best needs.

I don't know if those individuals deserve those raises. Compensation of public employees from rank and file up through the top of the public bureaucracy should be reorganized. Turkia Mullins and that other WC retiree that'll be collecting over $100,000 a year in pension on our tab are examples.

But that said, you have the opportunity to call for new ways of managing public compensation. You might start with capping pensions at 100% of average salary for last 10 years worked -- never less. If you don't like Snyder's management, you'll have the opportunity to vote against him soon.

[Don K]

Hockey arenas ... are investments in the future of our citizens.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Nobody has been able to show that publicly-funded arenas and stadiums result in a net benefit to cities or regions. Numerous studies have shown that they're a net drag, siphoning off money that could be spent on things that truly matter to the future of the region, like schools and transportation.

Publicly-funded sports facilities are welfare for billionaires, pure and simple.

[Wesley Mouch]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Nobody has been able to show that publicly-funded arenas and stadiums result in a net benefit to cities or regions. Numerous studies have shown that they're a net drag, siphoning off money that could be spent on things that truly matter to the future of the region, like schools and transportation.

Publicly-funded sports facilities are welfare for billionaires, pure and simple.

I've never seen a credible study either. But I can tell you that much of Downtown Detroit's success would not have happened with the Wings in Auburn Hills [[where they were headed). Sports teams in the City do help, IMO.

[MizMotown]

I've never seen a credible study either. But I can tell you that much of Downtown Detroit's success would not have happened with the Wings in Auburn Hills [[where they were headed). Sports teams in the City do help, IMO.

Who does it help when the main money maker of the deal also buys a huge chuck of land around it to make more business in which they will get more money. Maybe there will be some part-time seasonal work starting at $7.40 an hour for a few lucky pheasants.

[Wesley Mouch]

Who does it help when the main money maker of the deal also buys a huge chuck of land around it to make more business in which they will get more money. Maybe there will be some part-time seasonal work starting at $7.40 an hour for a few lucky pheasants.

Who does it help?

1) It helps the property owners who sold the land at increased prices,

2) It helps the workers who are employed. [[Don't we all want jobs in Detroit, not Auburn Hills),

3) It brings several hundred million dollars a year of economic activity to your door, not someone elses,

4) It helps those on the path of travel by shifting activity to the Buddy's Pizza in Dearborn where the Wayne resident stops on the way to the Arena -- rather than helping the Troy or Auburn Hills business,

5) It helps the image of Detroit nationally -- as a place where things happen. Instead of being a place that's famous for being avoided. I think Ford Field and Comerica Park being shown on national TV as part of Downtown Detroit is very positive for our image.

6) It helps give those who like to whine about anyone else's success something to bitch about. I don't care for Mike Ilitch, but I don't care if he makes money, so long as he does so in Detroit. I'm glad we can have someone with whom we can argue about how to develop Detroit -- rather than watch him develop Auburn Hills.

[Bham1982]

Hockey arenas and other economic development are investments in the future of our citizens.

How is a hockey arena "economic development"? Is there an economist on earth who thinks a taxpayer subsidized hockey arena is "economic developmment", especially when it's just a relocation of an existing team in an existing taxpayer subsidized arena?

If Detroit refused any subsidies for Illitch, what would be Illitch's possible moves? He could 1. build the arena himself, or 2. do nothing and stay in the Joe. In either case, the city wins.