Watson disses boxing instructor

Buy American · October-08-10, 08:13 AM

Here is another chapter in the never ending saga of the stupidity in Detroit. Here you have a man who is highly qualified, was a Detroit cop for 26 years, who is disqualified for a job because of where he lives. Since when does an address make the difference when residency laws are NOT in effect any longer? Isn't this profiling in some way?

http://www.freep.com/article/2010100...ed-for-address

**iheartthed** · October-08-10, 09:06 AM

Are there qualified applicants who live in the city? I don't entirely agree with her decision, but I understand her frustration. And where the law allows it, I have no problem with the city favoring applicants who reside in the city over those who don't.

Buy American · October-08-10, 09:29 AM

The article didn't say if there were other qualified applicants from within the City, however, this sentence... "State law bans cities from using residency as a condition of employment"...says it all. This is discrimination against the applicant pure and simple. He could have a pretty solid case against the City should he choose to take this to court.

**rjk** · October-08-10, 09:35 AM

Is it a question of hiring someone who is qualified or finding someone who is the most qualified? This guy seems to be a top notch candidate for this position. I'd like to see the qualifcations of the person who's next in line to see how they match up.

If there are two candidates who are pretty equal in their qualifications I wouldn't have a problem picking a city resident. It appears to me that Watson has placed far too much emphasis on city residency and not qualifications.

**iheartthed** · October-08-10, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by Buy American

The article didn't say if there were other qualified applicants from within the City, however, this sentence... "State law bans cities from using residency as a condition of employment"...says it all. This is discrimination against the applicant pure and simple. He could have a pretty solid case against the City should he choose to take this to court.

The article also said that the law doesn't apply to contract employees. This is a contract position.

**Johnlodge** · October-08-10, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by rjk

Is it a question of hiring someone who is qualified or finding someone who is the most qualified?

At $10 an hour, and assuming contract means no benefits, I'm sure they'll get the cream of the crop.

DetroitPole · October-08-10, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by Buy American

The article didn't say if there were other qualified applicants from within the City, however, this sentence... "State law bans cities from using residency as a condition of employment"...says it all. This is discrimination against the applicant pure and simple. He could have a pretty solid case against the City should he choose to take this to court.

Uh no. Wrong. As an independent contractor they are treated as a vendor.

Buy American · October-08-10, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by DetroitPole

Uh no. Wrong. As an independent contractor they are treated as a vendor.

When Claude Strickland applied for the job he must have filled out an application for the position. If this were a contract or vendor job, the application would have listed the do's and don'ts, residency requirements, etc. One of which would have been "you have to be a resident of the City of Detroit to apply for this position"... It got to Clowncil for approval didn't it? How did it even get that far? The City of Detroit youth, as usual, will be the biggest loser in this matter.

**rjk** · October-08-10, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Johnlodge

At $10 an hour, and assuming contract means no benefits, I'm sure they'll get the cream of the crop.

I'm not even sure I'm following your point. What does money have to do with it? There are a lot of people who donate their time without pay because they enjoy working with kids.

**rhythmc** · October-08-10, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Buy American

When Claude Strickland applied for the job he must have filled out an application for the position. If this were a contract or vendor job, the application would have listed the do's and don'ts, residency requirements, etc. One of which would have been "you have to be a resident of the City of Detroit to apply for this position"... It got to Clowncil for approval didn't it? How did it even get that far? The City of Detroit youth, as usual, will be the biggest loser in this matter.

If it is true that he was considered a vendor, the council would have the right to set the terms of its contracts. Not much the guy can do, though the idea that they would reject his contract simply because he doesn't live in the city is ridiculous.

Buy American · October-08-10, 11:03 AM

In my opinion, the Clowncil is too demanding. They have a qualified person, willing to be paid a minimal salary [[he must love his work and be totally dedicated), and they turn their backs on him because of where he lives. It didn't matter that Strickland devoted 26 years of his working life to Detroit and he probably lived in the City many more years than that.

I am sure there are qualified people in Detroit who could do the job but did any of them apply for it? So, instead of getting a bigger bang for their buck, Clowncil will pick through some applications until they find someone less qualified, possibly a felon, to teach these kids....they will do that with police applications, fire applications, etc. As far as I'm concerned they don't care about Detroit, it's residents, the young people, good services, etc. They are all grandstanding, posturing, taking a stand...for what?

**daddeeo** · October-08-10, 11:09 AM

Watson is so dumb that she'd probably turn down Emmanuel Stewart if he
offered his services. With her mind set, she'll be the last one to turn of the lights [[oops, they'll be off by then).

DetroitPole · October-08-10, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Buy American

In my opinion, the Clowncil is too demanding. They have a qualified person, willing to be paid a minimal salary [[he must love his work and be totally dedicated), and they turn their backs on him because of where he lives. It didn't matter that Strickland devoted 26 years of his working life to Detroit and he probably lived in the City many more years than that.

I am sure there are qualified people in Detroit who could do the job but did any of them apply for it? So, instead of getting a bigger bang for their buck, Clowncil will pick through some applications until they find someone less qualified, possibly a felon, to teach these kids....they will do that with police applications, fire applications, etc. As far as I'm concerned they don't care about Detroit, it's residents, the young people, good services, etc. They are all grandstanding, posturing, taking a stand...for what?

Is there something you don't understand here?

First, why did you say, "if this were a contract or a vendor..." Did you read the article? It says contract. Therefore they are a contractor. With a handle like Buy American, you should have a better grasp of the English language.

They cannot do this with Police and Fire Department employees, or any City Employees as a matter of fact. That is against the law. This person would be considered an independent contractor and not a city employee so they can do what they like. This individual will not receive a city paycheck, rather, a vendor check. I'm not agreeing with it, but you're not fucking listening.

JoAnn Watson is nothing but a rabble rouser. She came in last in the last round of elections and is trying to play to the base that elected her. I support the residency requirement, but uniformly. It should be brought back, but not used arbitrarily against contractors or vendors.

**SWMAP** · October-08-10, 01:23 PM

"I support the residency requirement"
I am a life-long resident of Detroit. I do not support the residency requirement as such a requirement would, at present and in this place, drastically limit the talent pool that Detroit can hire from. It would put undue stress on already-stressed public servants who would be forced to raise their families in seriously disfunctional neighborhoods, leave their wives and families at the mercy of predators with grudges while they are gone, be interrupted at all hours and off-hours by neighborhood issues such as domestic violence, gang troubles, etc. I think they have hard lives, rough mariages because of the ugliness they are forced to face - why demand that they immerse themselves 24 hours a day in it all - and that's what the pro-residency people want. They often say: our neighborhoods would be safer if police officers lived in them. What do they expect - that a police officer off-duty would get involved in every dispute that rages through neighborhoods? That a police officer would want his/her children to be singled out and marked because the parent took action? Residency to achive a social goal is ridiculous.

So the argument must be economic. but I just don't think that a single percent of payroll tax from about 10,000 people into the city's coffers balances all the negatives of residency.

Recent events have demonstrated that the members of the DPD and the DFD are willing to put their lives and futures on the line irregardless of where they own their homes. Do you think they have to do more, demonstrate some particular sensitivity that would automatically follow buying a house in Detroit?

How do you support your view?

Buy American · October-08-10, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitPole

Is there something you don't understand here?

First, why did you say, "if this were a contract or a vendor..." Did you read the article? It says contract. Therefore they are a contractor. With a handle like Buy American, you should have a better grasp of the English language.

They cannot do this with Police and Fire Department employees, or any City Employees as a matter of fact. That is against the law. This person would be considered an independent contractor and not a city employee so they can do what they like. This individual will not receive a city paycheck, rather, a vendor check. I'm not agreeing with it, but you're not fucking listening.

JoAnn Watson is nothing but a rabble rouser. She came in last in the last round of elections and is trying to play to the base that elected her. I support the residency requirement, but uniformly. It should be brought back, but not used arbitrarily against contractors or vendors.

You didn't understand my point, which was if this were a contract or a vendor position it would have clearly stated on the application that ONLY CITY OF DETROIT RESIDENTS SHOULD APPLY. Obviously this wasn't on the application, otherwise why would Mr. Strickland waste his time and efforts to apply.

Again....ask those firemen who were injured in the fire if residency made a difference in their dedication to Detroit. Ask the family of Walter Harris, the fireman who was killed a year ago if it made a difference in his dedication. You people who are so gung ho about residency need to step back and reconsider what you're talking about.

Your sarcasm isn't appreciated as well. Seems to me there are too many of you who use foul language to get your point across and it doesn't work. It just makes me consider the source and ignore your statements.

**iheartthed** · October-08-10, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by Buy American

Your sarcasm isn't appreciated as well. Seems to me there are too many of you who use foul language to get your point across and it doesn't work. It just makes me consider the source and ignore your statements.

Says the person who continues to refer to the City of Detroit's legislative body as the "Clowncil".

Buy American · October-08-10, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Says the person who continues to refer to the City of Detroit's legislative body as the "Clowncil".

I didn't coin that term, someone else did....and....if the shoe fits.
Do you love the D so much that you're blind to what's going on in the City County Building?

**iheartthed** · October-08-10, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by Buy American

I didn't coin that term, someone else did....and....if the shoe fits.
Do you love the D so much that you're blind to what's going on in the City County Building?

You can respectfully disagree with them without name calling... Which is what you chastised Detroitpole about.

**JBMcB** · October-08-10, 03:49 PM

Why not go all the way? Require all contractors to be second-generation lifelong Detroit city residents, and have them swear a loyalty oath promising to never leave Detroit, nor spend any money outside it's borders.

Revitalized Detroit here we come!

**Patrick** · October-08-10, 04:07 PM

And what if the city of Sterling Heights did the same to a person from Detroit? People would be screaming bloody murder on here....

DetroitPole · October-08-10, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

"I support the residency requirement"
I am a life-long resident of Detroit. I do not support the residency requirement as such a requirement would, at present and in this place, drastically limit the talent pool that Detroit can hire from. It would put undue stress on already-stressed public servants who would be forced to raise their families in seriously disfunctional neighborhoods, leave their wives and families at the mercy of predators with grudges while they are gone, be interrupted at all hours and off-hours by neighborhood issues such as domestic violence, gang troubles, etc. I think they have hard lives, rough mariages because of the ugliness they are forced to face - why demand that they immerse themselves 24 hours a day in it all - and that's what the pro-residency people want. They often say: our neighborhoods would be safer if police officers lived in them. What do they expect - that a police officer off-duty would get involved in every dispute that rages through neighborhoods? That a police officer would want his/her children to be singled out and marked because the parent took action? Residency to achive a social goal is ridiculous.

So the argument must be economic. but I just don't think that a single percent of payroll tax from about 10,000 people into the city's coffers balances all the negatives of residency.

Recent events have demonstrated that the members of the DPD and the DFD are willing to put their lives and futures on the line irregardless of where they own their homes. Do you think they have to do more, demonstrate some particular sensitivity that would automatically follow buying a house in Detroit?

How do you support your view?

First off, this has nothing to do with the merits of the city, police, and fire employees who currently serve the city every day, wherever they live. I don't think you have to live here to do just as honorable a job as anyone else.

Buy American, really tasteful of you to use the family of a fallen fire fighter to advance your argument. You're a class act. You can count on me ignoring your inane posts from now on. WHAT YOU POST, I WON'T BOTHER TO READ!!!!

I refuse to concede that all of Detroit is some ring of hell unfit for human existence. Of course, a lot of it is. However there are plenty of people who do raise family here who don't get raped and pillaged or turn to a life of crime. I live in one such neighborhood.

However as a life-long Detroiter I'm sure you noticed the near instantaneous decline of many neighborhoods when Engler forced Detroit to drop residency requirements. It isn't about having a round-the-clock cop nearby to bust the hoodlums, it is about neighborhoods with middle class people with stable lives and jobs.

This has been Detroit's unsolvable and greatest problem for the past 50-some odd years: the flight of the middle class. This was something politically the city was actually able to do about it.

Nobody is holding a gun to someone's head and forcing people to move here. If you don't find Detroit suitable for habitation, then you can look for a job elsewhere. Right now look at job postings at non-profit organizations that require buy-in from there employees to their missions - with many Jewish organizations that means support of Isreal. The same goes for pro-life or pro-choice orgs. Not to mention the ever-prevalent pee-in-the-cup or more invasive hair sample to flip burgers or make coffee. I consider those to be more invasive than residency.

It may limit the talent pool, but then again it may not. With so many people out of work in Metro Detroit, people are willing to do nearly anything for a job. They are willing to follow jobs anywhere, even if it means uprooting their lives and families. Take that with the changing attitudes about Detroit and I think a surprising number of people would be willing to move to the city to get a full-time job with benefits.

You mention the city income tax. Yes, it is miniscule. But take 10,000 people and have them start paying property taxes...well now we're talking some desperately needed funds.

Let's also not act so outraged about the residency requirement or like it is some insane, revolutionary idea. It was on the books for a long time and people dealt with it.

What I will say about the recent events with the rash of fires is, buried in the Free Press, many of the off-duty firefighters who were called to be asked to come in while the infernos raged lived as far as 25 miles away from the city. This made the situation all the more dangerous. What if there were a civil disturbance or something that required DPD to call off-duty cops to ask them to come in and they're off in Lake Orion?

Again, in the interest of fairness, I strongly oppose using it arbitrarily against people. Not to mention this is all theoretical, since the residency requirement is now illegal.

Buy American · October-08-10, 04:35 PM

The biggest crooks in Detroit are all the politicians and appointees at the top...they are the loudest supporters of Detroit and they all want what's best for Detroit and they don't want help from anyone outside of Detroit....all the while they are stealing from the very people they claim they want to help. They have the City of Detroit right where they want, under their thumb.

To DetroitPole..."Buy American, really tasteful of you to use the family of a fallen fire fighter to advance your argument. You're a class act."

Walter Harris' family would want me to tell you that residency wouldn't have made a difference in his dedication to the City of Detroit. I know his family, as I know all of the 7 firefighters who were injured and know the horrific injuries they have been suffering. They are the class act in Detroit....and you....well, you know what you are.

**mam2009** · October-09-10, 04:27 PM

I find it interesting that the same people who have spoken loud and proud on other threads about how important it is to save American jobs and buy American-made products and have chastised the auto companies and other manufacturers for sending jobs overseas make it seem so ridiculous that a Detroit City Council Member would have the audacity to express the same sentiment regarding Detroit. I disagree with Councilmember Watson quite a bit, but she has a point on this one. Getting rid of the residency requirement was a major blow to the our local economy that we just didn't need.

**hhockey** · October-09-10, 08:44 PM

If we are only talking about repopulating Detroit with Police and fire personal to increase the tax base, should we then require Detroit auto plant workers to live in Detroit? For that matter should any person who owns a busines in Detroit or works in a business in Detroit be required to live in Detroit? Why should police officers and fire fighters be the only ones required to live in Detroit? Lets be real no person should be denied a job if he is well qualified no matter where he lives. Many people choose to live in Detroit for many reasons, and many have left Detroit because of its crime problem. Lets forget about residency and hire people who are qualified.

**trstar** · October-09-10, 10:46 PM

I agree with Councilperson on this issue. I resident should be looked at first for this contract. If no acceptable/qualified/available person is found, then this guy should be considered next.

No issue here.