Wards or no?

**maxx** · August-12-09, 04:53 PM

I didn't see another thread on this topic so I'm starting this. Some people have been talking about bringing back the ward system for Detroit. I'm in the burbs so I really don't know if this would be a good idea or not. Are all parts of the city represented on Council now?

**jbd441** · August-12-09, 05:23 PM

By wards you are referring to districts? If so I'm sure district boundries would be redrawn. Also too I'm sure a candidate would have to live in the district to be eligible to run?... I maybe wrong on this.

**Crumbled_pavement** · August-12-09, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by maxx

I didn't see another thread on this topic so I'm starting this. Some people have been talking about bringing back the ward system for Detroit. I'm in the burbs so I really don't know if this would be a good idea or not. Are all parts of the city represented on Council now?

Does anybody on this forum live in the city now? Not that they have to in order to be a member and participate, or even that they should. All opinions should be welcomed and encouraged by any and all people, regardless of where they live. I'm just always amazed that next to no one on a board called DetroitYes actually lives in Detroit.

As for wards, there is a thread here that talks about that issue:
http://detroityes.com/mb/showthread.php?t=2000

**msamslex** · August-12-09, 06:18 PM

I do Crumbled_pavement. Aviation Subdivision. Tireman, Wyoming, Joy Rd by the Detroit/Dearborn border. I don't comment too often, I mostly read other's opinions but your wondering if anybody that is a member of this forum actually lives in Detroit struck me as odd. There have been many folk that mentioned where they live, Corktown, Midtown, Downtown, whatever part of the city or suburb and out of state. But as you say all are welcome no matter where you live.

Now as for any City Council member living in my area, none that I know of. I think the closest was Kwame Kenyatta and didn't he walk away from his home in Rosedale Park?, which is nowhere near my neighborhood.

Stosh · August-12-09, 06:35 PM

IF I lived in Detroit, I' want to have my neighborhood's interests represented by someone that actually lives in my district. Hell, I want that where I live too!

**dtowncitylover** · August-12-09, 07:31 PM

I don't want to hijack the thread, but do any of the suburbs have a ward system?

I find while researching different Canadian cities & towns, even the smallest of towns have their council members elected from wards. Windsor is to raise their ward number to 10, I heard yesterday, I believe, on CBC News @ 6.

**R8RBOB** · August-12-09, 07:37 PM

I live in Detroit and I would prefer to call them districts if we get them. Wards sound so Chicago, Houston and Naw'lins.

**erichp77** · August-12-09, 08:08 PM

If Detroit had wards, the voices of residents in those communities would be heard....if they care of course. It would be an interesting change.

**kraig** · August-12-09, 08:58 PM

The only real difference a district system will make is that the cost of a special election to fill a council vacancy won't be as great. As far as better representation, well, most of the School Board members are chosen by district. That hasn't been working out very well.

Lorax · August-12-09, 09:01 PM

Wards, yes.

Montgomery Ward's, no. Some things are better left to the past.

**Russix** · August-12-09, 09:17 PM

I'm confused how we would vote for council president with a district/ward system.

**R8RBOB** · August-12-09, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by Russix

I'm confused how we would vote for council president with a district/ward system.

Technically Russix, you really don't vote for a council president. You know the council president is picked by being the top vote-getter. I find this to be very flawed because the current setup allowed Monica Conyers to be the president pro-tempore in 2005 and possibly will elevate Charles Pugh to the presidency in 2009.

Council president should be chosen by peer vote. The two most senior councilmembers should be president/ppt based on a vote of seven members. One of the reasons why Conyers butted heads on council was because she was not respected because of the ppt title. To have Pugh as council president with possibly 4 or 5 incumbents returning in January will be a mess.

**EastsideAl** · August-12-09, 10:49 PM

I live in the city and I'm against a return to the ward system. They were gotten rid of for damn good reason, and a return to them promises a City Council that may look far too much like Board of Ed or our state legislature delegation. District are no panacea for bad voting habits and will create local power bases and political machines, and make bad councilpeople even more difficult or impossible to remove.

**JVLIVS** · August-13-09, 12:01 AM

That would be a bit of a change. I grew up in what used to be-and still might remain-the 13th District. The only thing that has to be changed [[in my opinion) would be to bring in some fresh meat with some new ideas. If we keep having the same folks in office every few years after every few years at a time, it get stale after a while. Heck, WE are the prime example of that one!

I will agree that maybe the communities will finally put their heads together should this come about. BTW, I still stay in the 13th District even though I briefly resided in the burbs [Mt. Clemens in case anyone's curious]. Last I heard, it actually covered a great deal of territory from the heart of the eastside to the suburban border. That was many moons ago [[I had just started high school then).

Just one man throwin' his two cents in!

MIRepublic · August-13-09, 01:18 AM

JVLIVS,

Are we on the same page, here? Wards were abolished in Detroit 90 years ago. You sure you're not talking about congressional district instead of municipal wards.

BTW, the silly argument that wards were abolished for good reason as if those reasons still exists are just that: silly. The problems that plagued wards in the '10s of the last century simply couldn't plague the system, again, due to city, state, and federal governmental reforms since then [[i.e. open meetings, FOIA, etc...). The ward system was abolished mostly because of lack of governmental transparency that didn't exist at the time but exists now [[and for decades before that, really). When you considering just about every other major city in the United States moved to the ward system over the rest of that century the argument against them holds even less weight.

One more thing, I really don't care what the districts of the council members are called, but the idea that we don't wanting it sounding "too Chicago" is another illegitimate concern. Detroit had a "board of aldermen" and "wards" when Chicago was still in diapers.

**sumas** · August-13-09, 04:57 AM

District representation can't come soon enough for me. I am tired of a council that all live in north west Detroit with the exception of Ken Cockrel.

EastSider · August-13-09, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted by sumas

District representation can't come soon enough for me. I am tired of a council that all live in north west Detroit with the exception of Ken Cockrel.

Doesn't Tinsley Talabi live on the lower east side?

**urbanophile** · August-13-09, 07:51 AM

I don't know if there's a polisci definition out there, but I think there is a big difference between electing council members by district, and a ward system. Cities cities seem to elect by district, but most don't have a full on ward system.

I'd define a ward system as one where the locally elected councilor has statutory or de facto of a significant number of legislative and executive decisions regarding their district. This is what we see in Chicago with its famed "aldermanic privilege". Alderman are basically the gods of their ward. They have 100% say on items such as zoning, parking regulations [[partially removed with the recent meter lease deal), street design [[e.g., traffic calming), and other matters.

The challenge is that from what I've seen, most ward systems are only that way because of tradition. There's no statutory authority granting Chicago aldermen their power, however. But a sort of tradition grew up in the city council where aldermen agreed amonst themselves to defer to each other's wishes in their home ward. It is sort of like the tradition of how the President defers to the desires of the senior senator from his own party in selecting district prosecutors and such.

I'm not sure how you prevent a council system from becoming a ward system over time. It seems to depend on local dynamics. Fewer rather than more councilors would seem to be a place to start.

**Corktown Mark** · August-13-09, 08:15 AM

I think you are spot on Eastside Al. And come on now Mirepublican do you really think all those systems of state and federal oversight solved the corruption problems in local goevernments? I do not have a particular problem with wards or districts. I think the word silly or naive could be applied to believing that district city council elections will solve our problems [[assuming you to live in detroit)

**Fury13** · August-13-09, 09:08 AM

So many are worried about corruption; yet, what really matters is having a system that is responsive to the people -- and one that produces a better quality of life.

Say all you want about the potential for corruption in a ward setup like Chicago's -- but, that city succeeds on many levels. The aldermen get things done. There is major accountability. And, you can't argue with the quality of life that Chicago offers -- the transit system actually works; trash gets picked up; the sidewalks are clean; codes are enforced; streetscapes are constantly being beautified; hell, even the ALLEYS are plowed in the winter, not to mention the streets.

But no, let's NOT emulate success. Let's stick to what we know. After all, Detroit is such a great place to live and work, as is.

**Danny** · August-13-09, 09:12 AM

Wards HELL NO!

Wards are evil! The newly reformed Detroit City Council get rid of it over 90 years ago due to voter buyouts and having too much strong governing individual over its districts. Ward system in Detroit would not happen again.

It's an urban dictatorship.

**Fury13** · August-13-09, 09:16 AM

Dictatorships are efficient.

**Danny** · August-13-09, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by erichp77

If Detroit had wards, the voices of residents in those communities would be heard....if they care of course. It would be an interesting change.

Technically not true! Take Chicago for example, some folks in those wards will not have a governing voice over any political official [[Alderman) and others would have a voice. Wards is just a another system where a any individual can have a strong governing power over the districts. It's too corrupt and it would NEVER be use again in Detroit.

**gumby** · August-13-09, 10:44 AM

Wards are not the panacea that everyone would like them to be. We have them here in Flint and we have the same ridiculous council you have in Detroit. That said I do like the idea of a ward system better because as a voter it is easier to vote for one position instead of 12 or whatever. plus with the council person living in the neighborhood they are more motivated to work for the neighborhood in question.