James Tate quits DPD, will run for Council

**spiritofdetroit** · April-21-09, 11:25 AM

interesting....

http://freep.com/article/20090421/NE...y+council+seat

**kraig** · April-21-09, 11:40 AM

Just checked out his website, and it's outlining a lot of things. It's going to be interesting to see how the public responds to him, after all, he was in the unenviable position of having to explain a lot of the police departments actions during the Kilpatrick era. I'm willing to keep an open mind, after all, the city council we have right now sucks.

**digitalvision** · April-21-09, 11:46 AM

I'm intrigued. I love the professionalism, the focus on the economy...

It'd be interesting to see who endorses him, but since I get nine slots to vote for I'm predisposed to give him one for council at this point. I don't have nine solid candidates yet... and he's got potential from his site.

There's a long way to go - so who knows what will come up - but I'm initially encouraged.

**exdetroiter** · April-21-09, 11:58 AM

YES for Tate, surely he's one of the intelligent, articulate Detroiters whom refuses to sit back and be represented by the clowns that currently sit at the City Counsel table or in the back of the city issued vehicles being driven around as if they are celebrities.

**SWMAP** · April-21-09, 12:28 PM

"but since I get nine slots to vote for "

No! That's the way to really dilute your vote and practically guarantee that most of your candidates won't be elected. Have you heard of "plunking?"
Plunking involves voting for only one candidate [[or only a few) when you have the option of voting for more than one candidate. It is a way to maximize the effect of a vote for a single candidate in a multicandidate race.

**Bobl** · April-21-09, 12:41 PM

SWMAP is correct. Groups like "Call 'em Out" will be using this technique.

**bdglsmn** · April-21-09, 12:46 PM

This looks interesting. We know that he is articulate and that he can maintain his composure when in tense situations in front of a camera which is a HUGE step up from what we have right now.

**gnome** · April-21-09, 12:49 PM

Gary Brown, John Bennett, now Mr. Tate ... looks like a thick blue line in 09

**exdetroiter** · April-21-09, 01:33 PM

Don't forget Charles Pugh is also running for City Counsel, but he is a cousin of Monica Conyers. So, although their is no name affilation, there is blood line/genes.

**daddeeo** · April-21-09, 02:29 PM

More responsible people need to be outraged in Detroit
and get involved with city council in turning things around

**spiritofdetroit** · April-21-09, 02:32 PM

Council certainly can't get worse...

As of now, I'd fill in
Cockrel
Pugh
Brown

Considering: Tate, Bennett, Kenyatta

**digitalvision** · April-21-09, 03:02 PM

Don't forget Charles Pugh is also running for City Counsel, but he is a cousin of Monica Conyers. So, although their is no name affilation, there is blood line/genes.

First, proof? I hear all kinds of rumors around town about everything.

Second, if true, I have some cousins I'm not too proud of. I don't hold it against my other cousins. We've all got screwed up family somewhere :-)

**miketeevee** · April-21-09, 03:47 PM

I think that James Tate would be a great councilman.. a million times better than the morons representing the city right now. I know James personally. He's a stand up guy.. with a big heart and good head on his shoulders. If I still lived in the city, he would get my vote.

MIRepublic · April-21-09, 08:29 PM

“There’s a lot of talk about various groups trying to come in and take our jewels, but we’re losing jewels to other cities and states every day in this city, and those are the residents and the businesses.”

I thought this was quite a poignant comment by Mr. Tate. Enough, in fact, that I believe he should be given something more serious than a thorough look. It shows a pretty profound understanding of the central issue the city is facing, and if that's the base from which he starts, he can only get better.

All of this said, I'd definitely take into account his former job. PR people are paid to be spin doctors and consummate bullsh%tters, and it's certainly a concern and something to be careful about and vigiliant of when he gives responsed. That aside, sounds like a promising candidate, and certainly better than most of what's currently on the council.

I'd like to advise, though, against using this current council a baseline for much of anything. Given the region's grave challengers, Detroit has to do better than just "better than status quo." Detroit has to look for candidates that'd be at the top of the heap in even more healthy and functional cities, because enough isn't any longer good enough considering how Detroit is losing the game of "catch-up". Hope that makes sense.

**R8RBOB** · April-22-09, 01:45 AM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

No! That's the way to really dilute your vote and practically guarantee that most of your candidates won't be elected. Have you heard of "plunking?"
Plunking involves voting for only one candidate [[or only a few) when you have the option of voting for more than one candidate. It is a way to maximize the effect of a vote for a single candidate in a multicandidate race.

This is the reason why Detroit needs to wave bye-bye to the at-large method of electing city council members. Detroit needs districts or wards.

**firstandten** · April-22-09, 02:03 AM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

"but since I get nine slots to vote for "

No! That's the way to really dilute your vote and practically guarantee that most of your candidates won't be elected. Have you heard of "plunking?"
Plunking involves voting for only one candidate [[or only a few) when you have the option of voting for more than one candidate. It is a way to maximize the effect of a vote for a single candidate in a multicandidate race.

I don't feel we should plunk for the primary lets get 18 solid candidates coming out of the primary. I know of 2 or 3 who are looking at running and would be very solid candidates. At that point after we had a chance to vet some of the newcomers, plunking I think would be in order.

**sumas** · April-22-09, 05:56 AM

I'll plunk my vote in the fall if any of the current council makes the finals with the exception of Cockrel and Kenyetta. I am looking at several others candidates. Can anyone suggest some good eastsiders? Here on the eastside, we have some very strong area organizations but get largely ignored. Kenny Cockrel and Mahaffey were the only ones who made it a point to show up at our meetings.

I still think District representation is the way to go. When we lived in a near area suburb [[school issues) We knew our mayor, city manager and reps. Shopped the same shops, restaurants etc. Heck, even knew lots of cops and the judge who were neighbors. Could knock on doors and get personal attention with concerns.

Each city neighborhood deserves that type of representation.

I also believe that non resident city workers should get some kind of vote too. I am all for eventual regionalization. We need to pool resources not polarize.

**Danny** · April-22-09, 07:18 AM

Great ideal for Tate. The Detroit City Council needs new people who can stand on their principles. Maybe he could replace Conyers and get this city forward.

**Dan_the_man** · April-22-09, 03:28 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't plunking only be useful if there were fewer than 9 candidates that you were knowledgeable about and wanted to vote for? If you only vote for two people those votes don't have any more weight to them than one of the nine votes from someone that votes for nine people does it?

**Homer** · April-23-09, 12:56 AM

"I also believe that non resident city workers should get some kind of vote too"

Excuse me but non residents already voted with their FEET.

lilpup · April-23-09, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by Dan_the_man

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't plunking only be useful if there were fewer than 9 candidates that you were knowledgeable about and wanted to vote for? If you only vote for two people those votes don't have any more weight to them than one of the nine votes from someone that votes for nine people does it?

But some will vote for nine just because they think they should [[and that's probably where a lot of the 'name recognition only' votes come from). The idea is to get them to vote only for the people they really want to see elected.

**sumas** · April-23-09, 02:56 AM

Originally Posted by Homer

"I also believe that non resident city workers should get some kind of vote too"

Excuse me but non residents already voted with their FEET.

We left for a period of time relating to school issues. Stayed involved with non profit city related organizations though. We have been back several years now. You talk feet, I talk heart and soul.

Non resident workers pay taxes and I think that deserves some respect.

MIRepublic · April-23-09, 03:04 AM

If you can find an American city that allows non-residents to vote in municipal elections, let me know.

**sumas** · April-23-09, 03:17 AM

To be honest, I know of no "American" city that allows non resident city workers to vote. I just think it is time for a change in thinking.

Tate looks interesting. I believe my vote is important and will do all necessary to make it count!

**rondinjp** · April-23-09, 08:56 AM

If non-residents are upset about paying taxes to Detroit, talk to your state reps. The power for Detroit to tax non-residents is in the State Constitution.

I have already done so. I am tired of my money going to an inept board I have no power to elect. Maybe it's time we cut off the money train to Detroit.