According to the chart linked to by RO_Resident, it has hovered at 15,XXX for the past 4 years or so, so that's probably what it was at the time of the LA Times article. For purposes of ballparking, if we accept a figure of 900,000 residents, that's 900/15 = 60, so one city employee per maybe 50-60 city residents. I have no idea what that figure looks like for other cities. It does seem higher than necessary, but a smaller figure has been proposed for 2010-11.

If people are going to start comparing this ratio with that of other cities - and that could certainly be insightful - I do want to put forward the idea that Detroit does have a lot of neighborhoods with very low density, and so would have to employ more people per resident than other cities in order to administer the area.