Emergency Financial Mgr. fires entire government of Benton Harbor, MI.

[douglasm]

I was thinking the same thing. If you're not in an incorperated city, you would be under township or county governance, both with elected officials operating the jurisdiction.

The electorate bothers me sometimes. I'm a city councilman in a small [[Washington) town. We've been talking about building a sewer system for years. Puplic meetings, hearings, council meetings, they're all open to the public. We've had very little public input at these meetings UNTIL recently, after the funding is in place and the contracts have been let. Now people have been coming out of the woodwork. Where have they been? 6 years on council, and it's a shock when we have an audience that consists of someone who isn't making a presentation.

I feel sorry for the people of Benton Harbor, as I do for the folks in Bell, California. But if they had paid ANY attention at all to what their government was doing, they could have stopped governmental abuse years ago.

Having said that though, I don't think the state has the right to strip residents of a jurisdiction that is run by an elected body of their representation, be those represenatives jackasses or not. I could see where an "Emergency Manager" could be apponted to work WITH the council. But I haven't seen any evidence that their officials have been recalled, so in effect, the residents have no say in 1) how their taxes are spent and 2) how their laws are enforced.

The article is not clear on the issue, so I'm wondering what Mr. Harris CAN do. Aparently, the council can call a meeting to order, approve minutes, and ajourn. Does Mr. Harris have the power to overturn or ignore laws currently on the books or void legal contracts [[not just labor ones)? Can he write and enforce new law? This could turn into a legal can of worms very quickly.

[mwilbert]

How is this true at all? 100% of Michigan is at least part of an incorporated township. That means that each resident is at least represented at the municipal level by a township board

I don't think townships are municipalities. Maybe I'm wrong about that?

[1KielsonDrive]

Yes. That's correct. And its because, and only because of their anti-social behavior. Remember that others have rights as well. I have a right to not pay for the actions of BH's elected officials, for example.

Looked at another way, the police have certain rights to detain you, but they have the responsibility as well to do so in accordance with rules. If they break rules, they lose their rights. Likewise, the public by electing idiots acts irresponsibily, they can have their rights taken away from them. To the extend necessary to protect the rights of others. They can continue to vote for idiots, and put them in office, and run their city into the ground -- but only until their actions infringe on the rights of others, including the city workers who rely on the city for pension funding, for example.

Anti-social behavior? Only because of their anti-social behavior? That's the best you can do? That's really weak. You forgot to mention poverty, classism, racism and a hundred other reasons. Some of our cities are jokes of the world not just due to voting patterns. Not to mention rural areas that are too far outta the way for our governing elite to find or care about them. Voting is an inalienable right in our country. I don't remember it being qualified as an inalienable right as long as you vote for whom others decide you should vote. Detroit happens to be a very large and important city in our world, even today, so it's always under a microscope. All the more reason for those who've abandoned it to decide they should run it. Benton Harbor more than likely mirrors Detroit in ethnic and economic demographics. When our wise fathers in Lansing and DC decide to work with our beleaguered cities and municipalities instead of telling them what to do, it'll be a new day in America.

[EL Jimbo]

I don't think townships are municipalities. Maybe I'm wrong about that?

Even if they aren't a municipality in the terms they aren't a city, they still are locally elected and have budgets. I'm sure they are part of the EFM thing if a township gets in trouble.

[professorscott]

I don't understand how someone can really be upset about the EFM business; essentially it is an attempt to avoid bankruptcy by a local unit of government. Now, let's say there is no EFM law, and a city like Benton Harbor goes bankrupt. A judge, not elected by the people of Benton Harbor, will appoint a trustee, not elected by the people of Benton Harbor, and that trustee will make drastic decisions [[such as voiding contracts) no matter what the elected officials want.

This is just, basically, a pre-bankruptcy type of bankruptcy, IMVHO. Like any company going bankrupt, once you've proved you can't run your shop, somebody else is going to come in and run it for you.

[RaumVogel]

Do ya know who else abolished unions and controlled governments in the midst of an economic crisis?

What? you people have never heard of a "Godwin"?

[erikd]

Having said that though, I don't think the state has the right to strip residents of a jurisdiction that is run by an elected body of their representation, be those represenatives jackasses or not. I could see where an "Emergency Manager" could be apponted to work WITH the council. But I haven't seen any evidence that their officials have been recalled, so in effect, the residents have no say in 1) how their taxes are spent and 2) how their laws are enforced.

The article is not clear on the issue, so I'm wondering what Mr. Harris CAN do. Aparently, the council can call a meeting to order, approve minutes, and ajourn. Does Mr. Harris have the power to overturn or ignore laws currently on the books or void legal contracts [[not just labor ones)? Can he write and enforce new law? This could turn into a legal can of worms very quickly.

Unlike the 50 states themselves, the local governments within the states have no guaranteed constitutional rights or authority. Local governments are simply creations of the state, and the state has absolute authority to give and/or take power from local municipalities.

There is no federal case to be made here. There is no loss of rights, subversion of democracy, or "taxation without representation" in this case. Neither the US Constitution not the Michigan state Constitution guarantees citizens the right to be represented by a local mayor or city council.

If the citizens are not happy with the recent changes made by the state government, they are free to recall the state representatives, senators, and governor who instituted these changes.

Having said that, the Emergency Financial Managers appointed by the state have absolute authority within the guidelines set by state law. If the state says that EFMs have the right to dissolve local governments, overturn local laws, or void local contracts, then the EFMs have the power to do it.

[Hermod]

Are cities, counties, townships, and villages chartered by the state? Does the state have the authority to revoke the charter?

The EFM isn't "removing" the elected officials, he is just removing their access to the honey jar [[which is why they are squealing so loudly).

[gnome]

A lifetime ago I had a sister-in-law who moved to BH, so while I'm not as smart as Skipper is about the inner workings of BH government, I have a passing understanding of the place. My advice?

Stay the fuck out of there. Don't go. Don't think of going, but if you do go make sure you carry. I ain't talkin no .357, oh no, I'm talkin uziville. kevlar undies and gallon jugs of Kewell and Nix.

BH gives bad government a bad name. It redefines bad. High taxes and no services, at least here we get good water plus there is all the high culture of roller derby and the dso. BH got none of that. The closest thing is the House of David freak show remembered for Ben rolling his virgins in powered sugar for breakfast.

Skip, you go, stay a week, come back and tell us how Mr. Harris is a dick. Go on ... a little road tripping is good for everyone, you included.

[R8RBOB]

The Republicans in the Legislature claimed the reason for the Financial Marital Law bill was because Robert Bobb hands were tied in Detroit therefore the emergency financial manager needed more power to do his or her job. The bill was passed along party lines and signed by Rick Snyder and all is right in the world. {{{BULL}}} What the state did is give the EFMs steroids.

Once a EFM is placed in a failing municipality, the EFM is in control of the one thing that makes an municipality operate, the money. Without the money, the municipality dies. Robert Bobb was in control of the money of DPS. Therefore, he was the godfather. He answered only to the governor. RobBob not only wanted to control the financial side, he wanted to control academics. He refused to allocate any funds to pay the salary of an superintendent and since the board can't run the schools then Bobb would be emperor by default and this was before the Financial Martial Law bill. All the board wanted was for Bobb to consult with them but Bobb went in heavy-handed and gave the board the finger.

I know that the state wants people to think that Bobb was defenseless against an aggressive school board but that was not the case. People have to remember that one of the things that Bobb did over the last two years was privatize a number of DPS services to outside groups and Republicans in the state paid attention to Bobb's movements. Privatization is guaranteed money for any contractor looking to do work in a municipality. Why do you think Nolan Finley has a man crush for Bobb? He knows how to share the wealth to the business community. Having EFMs on steroids is very profitable for any business that wish to scoop up services in a city or a school district because again, it is guaranteed money.

[ja!mz]

I think a EFM will soon be coming to Detroit

[mauser]

Real democracy is when the public decides something..

nuh...that is what is known as "mob rules", and a democracy is set up to prevent that - especially ours.

what a democratic society does is to agree upon a set of rules for the game, i.e. "due process", and then sticks to the those agreed upon rules.

EFMs are deal breakers, rule changers and Constitution violators. there is a proper process for things in Michigan, and that process is not optional. it can be changed by the People, but they also have to change that via the proper Constitutional process.

otherwise you have a bunch of radicals running around slashing and burning and pillaging. many would say that is what is happening now.

[Wesley Mouch]

Anti-social behavior? Only because of their anti-social behavior? That's the best you can do? That's really weak. You forgot to mention poverty, classism, racism and a hundred other reasons. Some of our cities are jokes of the world not just due to voting patterns. ...

Social = for the best of all of society; addressing the issues you raise; poverty, classism, racism...

Anti-social = greedy, scum-suckers who don't support their community, but suck it dry for their own personal gain [[see Kilpatrick, Kwame)

[Detroitnerd]

Democracy is for those who can afford it. The rest get autocracy.

Ah, but how long before the autocracy creeps up and bites you in the ass? Remember, this is "austerity" coming from the same people who hosed you: Your 401K, your home values, the foreclosures on your block. Oh, well. Go ahead and trust them. You'll regret it later ...

Suckers ...

[Fnemecek]

There is no federal case to be made here. There is no loss of rights, subversion of democracy, or "taxation without representation" in this case. Neither the US Constitution not the Michigan state Constitution guarantees citizens the right to be represented by a local mayor or city council.

Yeah, there's no federal case here at all.

Well, except for the fact that Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution makes the whole thing illegal in the first place.

And one could argue that the rather inconsistent manner with which an EFM is called in may or may not constitute a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

Other than that, you're right. There's no federal case here at all.

[Fnemecek]

This is just, basically, a pre-bankruptcy type of bankruptcy, IMVHO. Like any company going bankrupt, once you've proved you can't run your shop, somebody else is going to come in and run it for you.

The difference between an EFM and bankruptcy is important.

In a bankruptcy proceeding, the judge's rulings are subject to appeal. With an EFM, they are not.

In a bankruptcy proceeding, everything is conducted in the open. With an EFM, the degree of transparency is entirely at the discretion of the EFM. He or she can be as transparent [[or not) as they desire.

In a bankruptcy proceeding, every contract and obligation that the local government has is subject to review - union contracts as well as contracts with politically connected vendors and bond obligations. An EFM, however, tends to confine his or her focus on just the unions.

To argue that the EFM process is a "pre-bankruptcy type of bankruptcy" is the logical equivalent of saying that being robbed at gun point is just, basically, a pre-tax audit type of audit.

[1KielsonDrive]

A lifetime ago I had a sister-in-law who moved to BH, so while I'm not as smart as Skipper is about the inner workings of BH government, I have a passing understanding of the place. My advice?

Stay the fuck out of there. Don't go. Don't think of going, but if you do go make sure you carry. I ain't talkin no .357, oh no, I'm talkin uziville. kevlar undies and gallon jugs of Kewell and Nix.

BH gives bad government a bad name. It redefines bad. High taxes and no services, at least here we get good water plus there is all the high culture of roller derby and the dso. BH got none of that. The closest thing is the House of David freak show remembered for Ben rolling his virgins in powered sugar for breakfast.

Skip, you go, stay a week, come back and tell us how Mr. Harris is a dick. Go on ... a little road tripping is good for everyone, you included.

Been there, done that. Also SF, LA, Newark, Gary, southside Chicago, Phoenix, Flint, Cleveland and a few others. I never said they were 'great places', I never claimed an expertise of inner workings of BH government, as you imply sarcastically. Our society has ignored, neglected and just plain beat up on the poor and lower classes for so long that we continue to heap it on them. Instead of investing in schools and communities and their safety and security, we continue to filter the money upwards. Is it any wonder BH has problems? How about Troy? Allen Park? Are they going to get EMF's due to high crime and bad governement? The problems are endemic and only going to get worse as we allow Snyder and other pro-business, pro-rich, politicians stick it to the poor and middle class. Sorry, I don't possess the second-hand experience you gained from your sister from 'a lifetime ago'. But, I have been to BH and St. Joe in the last few years. It ain't pretty and it ain't going to git prettier. Stripping bargaining rights, firing cops, firefighters and teachers is going to accomplish what? And it ain't going to git prettier with an EFM - you know, a buddy of one of our politicians who all of a sudden has magical abilities and knowledge never possessed or experienced by anyone else. Joe Harris? WTF does he know about BH? Will there ever be a situation where and EFM is needed? Probably. But not under the iron rule of business and rich friendly tea-party politicians.

[Hermod]

Will there ever be a situation where and EFM is needed? Probably. But not under the iron rule of business and rich friendly tea-party politicians.

To boil your anti-EFM argument down to the basic premise, "EFM would be great if Democrats were in charge, but not if Republicans are in charge.".

i

[Novine]

"I don't think townships are municipalities. Maybe I'm wrong about that?"

Townships are municipalities just like cities and villages. Michigan's municipalities may be creatures of the state. But the state constitution has a strong "home rule" provision that's intended to prevent the state from meddling in the affairs of local governments. That provision came about from the historical experience of local communities having their affairs dictated by the powers in Lansing. Wanting to keep the state powers limited to the affairs of the state, home rule has been a key aspect of Michigan government for the last 100 years.

What Joe Harris is doing in Benton Harbor is a sign of an EFM out-of-control. Benton Harbor is a mess. But he's asserting complete authority over every activity of the city, some of which have no financial obligation or impact on the city's finances. Go read the order he issued. It is dictatorial in nature and for a democratic society, frightening in its breadth of powers that it assumes.

[dtrrman]

Do ya know who else abolished unions and controlled governments in the midst of an economic crisis?

What? you people have never heard of a "Godwin"?

And how did unions do under Stalin and Mao?

[Zacha341]

Hah! No you didn't 'go there'.... Good point!

To boil your anti-EFM argument down to the basic premise, "EFM would be great if Democrats were in charge, but not if Republicans are in charge."

[mwilbert]

But the state constitution has a strong "home rule" provision that's intended to prevent the state from meddling in the affairs of local governments.

It doesn't really. There are specific prohibitions against specific kinds of meddling, but there is certainly much meddling that isn't prohibited. I would assume that if there are serious questions about an EFM overstepping those bounds it will be litigated.

Go read the order he issued. It is dictatorial in nature and for a democratic society, frightening in its breadth of powers that it assumes.

I did read it. I don't see it as you do. I don't particularly object to temporary local dictatorship where the dictator is constrained by state and federal law.

[R8RBOB]

To boil your anti-EFM argument down to the basic premise, "EFM would be great if Democrats were in charge, but not if Republicans are in charge.".

Here's the thing. Since you wanted to bring the D's and R's in this argument, then allow to add on to your statement. If the D's would have proposed increasing the power of an EFM to the levels that the R's have done, the R's would have said that D's are usurping the Constitution by creating dictators that goes against the will of the people. The R's would go further and say that the D's are on a power grab by making it easy for the state to place a EFM in an troubled school district or city. The R's would insist that the people would want government out of their lives and a EFM on steroids is representing big government.

[bartock]

Perhaps it's me, but I find pictures of Hitler in the context of this discussion completely inappropriate..

[bailey]

Yeah, there's no federal case here at all.

Well, except for the fact that Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution makes the whole thing illegal in the first place.

And one could argue that the rather inconsistent manner with which an EFM is called in may or may not constitute a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

Other than that, you're right. There's no federal case here at all.

Your repeated posting of that section doesn't make your point any stronger. The contracts clause is not a complete bar the Snyder's measures. From the depression on there are a raft of cases that correctly note that the clause is not a bar to action in emergency situations. There is strict scrutiny, but it's not unconstitutional if it passes that scrutiny.

Further, to supplement erikd's point with the citation,

There is no constitutional right to local self-government in the United States. In 1907, the Supreme Court decided, in Hunter v. Pittsburgh, that under the Constitution local governments are nothing more than "convenient agencies for exercising … such powers as may be entrusted to them" by the state. As a result, "the state may modify or withdraw all such power, may take without compensation such property, hold it for itself, or vest it with other agencies, expand or contract the territorial area, unite the whole or part of it with another municipality, repeal the charter and destroy the corporation … with or without the consent of the citizens, or even against their protest."