Detroit is a business?"

[Locke09]

And above all other considerations, consumers [[citizens) are turning to other businesses [[cities) when they are leaving Detroit for other cities.

Citizens are not strictly consumers. They don't necessarily pay for every service they receive. When they do pay, they mostly pay proportionate to their assets [[land, house, income). There are exceptions of course where there are fees that are the same for everyone in a particular category [[bus fare, for instance). Sometimes citizens pay for services that they don't receive, such as when they pay school taxes but send their kids to private school. I don't pay for anything I don't receive from a business and they cannot take my money to provide goods and services to someone else, unless I agree to make a donation.

Businesses are not going to charge based on income or assets, although they might run sales or specials designed to give a break to seniors or others.Cities cannot tell everyone to pay the same property tax regardless of the value of their property. Business can decide to relocate to where they will find more desirable customers. Cities must serve everyone within their geographic boundaries.And on, and on and on.

We are taking the analogy too far. Next, we're going to say consumers [[husbands) are turning to other businesses [[mistresses) when they leave their wives for other women

[digitalvision]

Conducting city business SHOULD be more business-like and professional. Many poor decisions have been made from a financial standpoint. I won't say they're wrong, because the city officials' priorities [[as elected by the citizens of Detroit) have supported those decisions - but they've had consequences.

For instance, many say that outsourcing to contractors doesn't save money. I would say that in general, the city does a shitty job of selecting and managing contractors.

The black-owned set-asides and preferences cost the city 5-20% on contracts, as what actually happens in many instances [[not all, of course) is that a local black front company is erected then selected, and then many of the firms that would of done the work who are qualified do it anyway, but with a mark-up because you now have an extra layer.

Also, you must be a union contractor in most cases for the bulk of the work the city needs done. Those wages and work rules are going to be more expensive, and frankly, not price competitive with the price the suburbs get where those rules in many instances do not apply. I'm not making a value judgement on if unions are bad, but they do in general cost more and if that's worth it to you, then fine. But realize the financial consequences of that decision.

Even in those cases, being better organized, having qualified people [[reading Bing's report, there's a lot of people who aren't, such as accounting) and being more efficient on the city side alone can save a lot of money. Union or not, being clear on directions saves a lot of time and effort.

Having to talked to a good share of officials and people over the years, I honestly don't think many citizens, employees or officials really understand the impact of their choices over the years, or how deep of a hole the city is in. They just assumed they're going to get saved somewheres along the line.

[EastSider]

Citizens are not strictly consumers. They don't necessarily pay for every service they receive. When they do pay, they mostly pay proportionate to their assets [[land, house, income).

I suggest this is the first type of thinking that needs to be changed everywhere, not just in the city: the idea that services are 'free.'

There is not, never has been, and never will be, any such thing as a 'free lunch.'

Residents absolutely do pay for every service they receive, and lots of 'services' they would never support if ever given the choice [[wait, I thought businesses were immune to democratic processes?!).

[Locke09]

For instance, many say that outsourcing to contractors doesn't save money. I would say that in general, the city does a shitty job of selecting and managing contractors.

The black-owned set-asides and preferences cost the city 5-20% on contracts, as what actually happens in many instances [[not all, of course) is that a local black front company is erected then selected, and then many of the firms that would of done the work who are qualified do it anyway, but with a mark-up because you now have an extra layer.

Also, you must be a union contractor in most cases for the bulk of the work the city needs done. Those wages and work rules are going to be more expensive, and frankly, not price competitive with the price the suburbs get where those rules in many instances do not apply.

Even in those cases, being better organized, having qualified people [[reading Bing's report, there's a lot of people who aren't, such as accounting) and being more efficient on the city side alone can save a lot of money. Union or not, being clear on directions saves a lot of time and effort.

Having to talked to a good share of officials and people over the years, I honestly don't think many citizens, employees or officials really understand the impact of their choices over the years, or how deep of a hole the city is in. They just assumed they're going to get saved somewheres along the line.

I can't speak for the union contractors, but I can speak for the white-collar non-union contractors. Their rates are astronomical compared to city employee rates, even with benefits. In most cases, they are no more competent than the city professionals. In many cases, they do their work by getting information from the city professionals and repackaging it.

You are accurate that there is some overhead associated with having minority fronts. But there are a plethora of non-minority companies, with no one fronting for them, that provide white collar workers and professional services at ridiculous prices. I've sarcastically challenged the press to ask for real substantiated numbers whenever they cry out for privatization - at least where the white collar jobs are concerned.

If you really want to save money, you must also want to understand the real numbers. I'm not interested in privatization just because it is politcally correct or the current mantra. I am interested in what actually results in a lower tax burden on citizens.

Which by the way is why I'm voting no on Proposal S. It doesn't make good "business" sense to build more buildings when you cannot afford the ones you currently have. Doesn't make sense when you cannot afford teachers and counselors. Doesn't make good sense when residents are already not only losing their homes to mortgage foreclosures, but also to tax foreclosures.

[Stosh]

And if you look within Locke's response you find this:

Sometimes citizens pay for services that they don't receive

Exactly why people are abandoning Detroit for other businesses.. I mean cities.

[Locke09]

I suggest this is the first type of thinking that needs to be changed everywhere, not just in the city: the idea that services are 'free.'

There is not, never has been, and never will be, any such thing as a 'free lunch.'

Residents absolutely do pay for every service they receive, and lots of 'services' they would never support if ever given the choice [[wait, I thought businesses were immune to democratic processes?!).

I reread my post and this is what I meant: Not all residents pay property and/or income tax. So some residents are getting a free ride at the expense of those who are paying. I think the remaining body of my post makes clear what I meant.

I also noted that some people don't pay property tax, but send their kids to public school. Others pay property tax but don't send their kids to public schools. Somebody's paying, but not necessarily the person receiving the goods or services. That is unlike the business model.

[iheartthed]

I reread my post and this is what I meant: Not all residents pay property and/or income tax. So some residents are getting a free ride at the expense of those who are paying. I think the remaining body of my post makes clear what I meant.

I also noted that some people don't pay property tax, but send their kids to public school. Others pay property tax but don't send their kids to public schools. Somebody's paying, but not necessarily the person receiving the goods or services. That is unlike the business model.

I understood it pretty well the first time you said it. Not sure why that wasn't clear to others...

[Detroitnerd]

Oh, bullshit. Profits are not proof of "exploitation." Put away your tired Marxist cliches and join the grown-ups.

Oh, you grow up. Try to crack your mind back open and resist the urge to catcall everybody you think doesn't agree with you as a Marxist. This isn't 1955 anymore, EastSider.

[Retroit]

A city is a business where the owners are also the customers; where the creditors are also the debtors. It should run neither an excessive profit or deficit, because either one is harmful to its owners/customers. If it runs a profit, that means too much was taken; if it runs a deficit, that means much more will have to be taken.

[Det_ard]

If Detroit's a business, when's the going out of business sale going to happen? And when can the receiver take over and whip it into shape?

[Luckystrikes]

Absolutely, yes. Cities need good common sense money managers. If you do not have the mental ability to allocate funds to pay for police protection, utility upgrades, etc., your municipality will be in the dark and dangerous. If the people who handle our municipal funds do not understand the basic laws of business and possess a strong ethic code, we have -- Detroit.
The people we elect to national offices [[President, Congress) should have a foundation based on [[of course) not only management skills, but also implementing ideas that will strengthen our constitution and protect and nurture our citizens.

Ideas have a place on a national government level. Eisenhower had a vision and an idea of a country with citizens who could travel on well maintained, planned and accessible roads. His idea became the interstate system.

I don't know much about New York's Mayor Bloomberg ideology, but he can handle my checkbook anytime.

[digitalvision]

Locke09,

[[RATHOLE WARNING: EXPLAINING SCHOOL FUNDING FOR OTHERS)

Proposal S is written the way it is because of the fubar State of Michigan funding system. Follow the rabbit hole written by our "esteemed" government.

You can't tax yourself, as a school district, for anything but capital improvements. It's illegal to use that money for teachers, in the classroom, etc. and it's against the law in Michigan to pass a tax that pays for salaries, benefits, etc or the direct educational experience, which the state now controls the dollars to.

Why bonds and sinking funds are important is that some, if not many repairs any school district has to make on their buildings, if they're paid for by the bond or sinking fund they then don't come out of the general fund, reserving more money for teachers and the like. Roofs still need replaced, tuckpointing, boilers, etc. It's a complicated and confusing game that not even our current legislators [[none of them were here at the time, thank you term limits) understand.

It's really sad when you talk to legislators and they literally have no idea that the bonds their districts pass cannot be used for teachers and so don't understand the ramifications of their actions. Some actually think that the local district can tax themselves to make up the difference the state cuts, which, as I mentioned before, is in violation of state law!

Proposal A was a windfall at the time for districts, but no one thought the ride would end [[of course). It didn't take into account the fact that economic cycles occur and it's devastating in a downturn.

So in short, in MI, passing a bond, in theory, helps relieve the pressure on the general fund, therefore freeing up money for teachers and core stuff like that.

It's a bad, confusing way of doing things, but we live in Michigan - where we've been doing things right for so long, it's obvious why we lead the nation! [[In Unemployment).

[Detroitnerd]

Absolutely, yes. Cities need good common sense money managers. If you do not have the mental ability to allocate funds to pay for police protection, utility upgrades, etc., your municipality will be in the dark and dangerous.

I don't know about the way you're couching it. In Detroit, for instance, we're far past any question of "mental abilities." The money is not there. The revenues are not there. It's not a matter of doing it smarter. Sometimes accounting abilities do make the difference, but I'd argue the applications are narrow.

Take L.B. Patterson. He's a competent administrator, but you could have had a trained monkey in charge of Oakland County at its zenith and things would have run fine. Similarly, I doubt Patterson would be able to do much with Detroit, other than thump his chest and blame Detroiters.

I have to laugh though. When you say a city is "dark and dangerous," do you mean the city? Or the people?

[Luckystrikes]

I don't know about the way you're couching it. In Detroit, for instance, we're far past any question of "mental abilities." The money is not there. The revenues are not there. It's not a matter of doing it smarter. Sometimes accounting abilities do make the difference, but I'd argue the applications are narrow.

Take L.B. Patterson. He's a competent administrator, but you could have had a trained monkey in charge of Oakland County at its zenith and things would have run fine. Similarly, I doubt Patterson would be able to do much with Detroit, other than thump his chest and blame Detroiters.

I have to laugh though. When you say a city is "dark and dangerous," do you mean the city? Or the people?

I meant we will not have street lights or police protection.

[EastSider]

Oh, you grow up. Try to crack your mind back open and resist the urge to catcall everybody you think doesn't agree with you as a Marxist. This isn't 1955 anymore, EastSider.

I used the word 'marxist' because it fit, dumb ass, not because I'm stuck in some arbitrary year pulled out of your butt.

Profits are not 'skimmed off someone else's labor.' Try running your own business, and then come back and tell us you didn't work for your profits.

[LouHat]

Detroit is a city and it should be run like a city, not a business.

First of all, iheart, this is not a personal rebuttal, rather, you have succinctly expressed a concept which lays bare the gist of the matter. A city is nothing more, and nothing less, than the people who live there. The business model assigns these people both the role of consumer, and the role of stockholder. As consumers, they expect quality products such as public safety and a nurturing environment for their children. As stockholders, they retain the power and initiative to fire the CEO [[the mayor). In this model, Dave Bing brings respectable credentials, he's a self-made man, untainted by the dubious accomplishments typically associated with affirmative-action and race-mongering. He's not in it for the money, he's not in it for the ego. He doesn't need this, but if he does succeed, and we should all hope that he does, it will be entirely because he "means business".

[Locke09]

First of all, iheart, this is not a personal rebuttal, rather, you have succinctly expressed a concept which lays bare the gist of the matter. A city is nothing more, and nothing less, than the people who live there. The business model assigns these people both the role of consumer, and the role of stockholder. As consumers, they expect quality products such as public safety and a nurturing environment for their children. As stockholders, they retain the power and initiative to fire the CEO [[the mayor). In this model, Dave Bing brings respectable credentials, he's a self-made man, untainted by the dubious accomplishments typically associated with affirmative-action and race-mongering. He's not in it for the money, he's not in it for the ego. He doesn't need this, but if he does succeed, and we should all hope that he does, it will be entirely because he "means business".

Mr. Bing has not tackled anything with the complexity of a multibillion dollar conglomerate like Detroit [[since we insist on calling it a business). The sheer number of unions, job types and titles, functions and services, regulations and laws [[not all of them local), and different constituents alone [[businesses, visitors, citizens, partnerships) puts it outside of the realm of anything he has had to deal with. He has never, to my knowledge, turned around a corporation that was 300 million dollars in the red [[since we insist on calling it a business). Has he? He has only ever had one or two automotive customers to satisfy, not hundreds of thousands of customers [[since we insist on calling it a business). He has never provided a service, the success or failure of which might truly mean someone lives or dies. He has never run a company where "meaning business" and huffing and puffing might not produce any real results [[how are we doing with the 300 million dollar deficit?).

If this really were run like a business we would have hired a CEO with more relevant experience, wouldn't we?

I actually don't care about any Mayor/CEO. I care about the quality of life in the City of Detroit.

[LouHat]

I actually don't care about any Mayor/CEO. I care about the quality of life in the City of Detroit.

Then volunteer to go clean up the parks or something. Leave the heavy-hitting to the Bing-ster.

[Lorax]

The best cities in the world are run like businesses.

Examples, please.

Paris is not run like a business, and things get done fairly quickly. Under Mitterand the Grand Travaux, or 'great works' projects transformed the city in a relatively few years.

France spends 57% of each tax Euro on "culture" as they call it- which includes renovation of historic structures, public lighting and art displays, museums, opera, stabilizing retail sectors, parks, education, etc. No business would operate on that model and stay in business very long.

Your primary example I'm sure will be New York, which has been run like a business in recent years under Guiliani and now Bloomberg, and that's why New York is still dirty, the subways are still antiquated, and Disney has been allowed to transform formerly seedy areas like times square into tourist traps.

Be careful what you wish for.

[Stosh]

Mr. Bing has not tackled anything with the complexity of a multibillion dollar conglomerate like Detroit [[since we insist on calling it a business). The sheer number of unions, job types and titles, functions and services, regulations and laws [[not all of them local), and different constituents alone [[businesses, visitors, citizens, partnerships) puts it outside of the realm of anything he has had to deal with. He has never, to my knowledge, turned around a corporation that was 300 million dollars in the red [[since we insist on calling it a business). Has he? He has only ever had one or two automotive customers to satisfy, not hundreds of thousands of customers [[since we insist on calling it a business). He has never provided a service, the success or failure of which might truly mean someone lives or dies. He has never run a company where "meaning business" and huffing and puffing might not produce any real results [[how are we doing with the 300 million dollar deficit?).

If this really were run like a business we would have hired a CEO with more relevant experience, wouldn't we?

I actually don't care about any Mayor/CEO. I care about the quality of life in the City of Detroit.

Christ. It's just unbelieveable. Do you really think for a second that any CEO doesn't depend heavily, if not totally, upon managers and underlings for effective performance? What do you think he was handed the day he took office? An actual working city? You think the 300 million was ran up overnight?

[LouHat]

Your primary example I'm sure will be New York, which has been run like a business in recent years under Guiliani and now Bloomberg, and that's why New York is still dirty.

Be careful what you wish for.

Hi Lorax. Au contraire, big time. I lived in Brooklyn many moons ago, and not too long ago traveled with an acquaintance from Long Beach to Manhattan on the subway. I looked at the map and saw that we had to transfer at Decalb, and I was so embarrassed, big mistake, should have known better, aw-shucks, etc. etc., and I told her to stick close to me, it was going to be dangerous and "ghetto". And we get there and it's so lame and peaceful, like a mall in Minnesota. And I'm like "well, back in the day, it was really nasty, believe me, for real, honest injun, etc., etc.". I felt like a wimp, getting all dramatic about it. And I blame Giuliani, he cleaned things up and neglected to inform me about it.

[Lorax]

It's good that you were pleasantly surprised, but I am there frequently, 5-6 times per year, and find some thing improved, and many places still dirty. Grand Central Station, Central Park, the Met and the library are looking better, Times Square is a little too cheesy for my tastes, and a less Disneyfied atmosphere would have been better.

Turning Manhattan into a tourist attraction of that kind is a shame. I remember when Giuliani would have bogus traffic tickets handed out by cops as if they were handing out candy, claiming there was some sign blocks back about no turning right on Broadway, etc., and when people would all be turning, they'd have ten cops waiting, standing there directing turners to the curb and handing out tickets.

Giuliani ruled by entrapment, thievery and crass brass knuckly politics. Giving in to corporate interests did not make Manhattan better.

And the subways are still antiquated and dirty.

[LouHat]

It's good that you were pleasantly surprised, but I am there frequently, 5-6 times per year, and find some thing improved, and many places still dirty. Grand Central Station, Central Park, the Met and the library are looking better, Times Square is a little too cheesy for my tastes, and a less Disneyfied atmosphere would have been better.

Turning Manhattan into a tourist attraction of that kind is a shame. I remember when Giuliani would have bogus traffic tickets handed out by cops as if they were handing out candy, claiming there was some sign blocks back about no turning right on Broadway, etc., and when people would all be turning, they'd have ten cops waiting, standing there directing turners to the curb and handing out tickets.

Giuliani ruled by entrapment, thievery and crass brass knuckly politics. Giving in to corporate interests did not make Manhattan better.

And the subways are still antiquated and dirty.

I'll give you all that, Lorax, but there's a certain electricity about it, and it's the people, and when I was home on leave hanging out with some Hamtramck buds, I observed that I was feeling the same vibes there that I felt on 86th and 5th [[Bay Ridge). But I date myself

[iheartthed]

First of all, iheart, this is not a personal rebuttal, rather, you have succinctly expressed a concept which lays bare the gist of the matter. A city is nothing more, and nothing less, than the people who live there. The business model assigns these people both the role of consumer, and the role of stockholder. As consumers, they expect quality products such as public safety and a nurturing environment for their children. As stockholders, they retain the power and initiative to fire the CEO [[the mayor). In this model, Dave Bing brings respectable credentials, he's a self-made man, untainted by the dubious accomplishments typically associated with affirmative-action and race-mongering. He's not in it for the money, he's not in it for the ego. He doesn't need this, but if he does succeed, and we should all hope that he does, it will be entirely because he "means business".

What you're describing is a corporation, which is not completely synonymous with "business". A corporation is only a subset of business types. Municipal governments are not a subset of business types.

Not to come across as an arrogant egghead, but when people say that a city should be "run like a business", I have to question if those people know what is the true definition of business. This entire discussion reminds me of Michael Moore's new documentary [[Capitalism - A Love Story), in which the filmmaker repeatedly conflates the definition of an economic system with that of a political system.

Detroit is a city, and should be run like a city. If the leadership tried to run Detroit like a city, instead of always trying to create new definitions of what a large city should be, I am certain that Detroit would be a better place right now.

[Locke09]

Christ. It's just unbelieveable. Do you really think for a second that any CEO doesn't depend heavily, if not totally, upon managers and underlings for effective performance? What do you think he was handed the day he took office? An actual working city? You think the 300 million was ran up overnight?

I can't argue with anything you've said here, but it doesn't negate anything I said.

A CEO will depend heavily on managers, advisers and other employees. But that CEO had better have enough relevant experience to make good decisions based on the information being provided by the "underlings". The CEO had better know when people are feeding him or her BS. The CEO had better be able to spot both competence and incompetence. A CEO walking into a complex organization had better have some experience with complexity. A CEO needing to deal with a huge deficit and an organization in need of change should have some experience turning around an organization in the past. Otherwise, we're saying the City's CEO is just a "figurehead"?

So, a company is going to look for a CEO that has played a similar type game in a similar arena. Hey, maybe Detroit should be run like a sports team

Oh, and I don't think anyone expects the deficit to be wiped out in 6 months. I'm just asking what progress has been made. Is it still 300 million or is it down to 290 million now?