Loyd, Freeman, Kincaid lose anti- Flint Ombudsman iniative, AGAIN!

THE CITIZENS OF FLINT WANT A PUBLIC SAFTEY PRIORITY. THE FLINT CITY COUNCIL DELIVERED. WHEN ITS SLASHED THE MAYORS OFFICE BUDGET AND SHIFTED THE MONEY TO PUBLIC SAFTEY


THE COUNCIL WAS CONSIDERING REFORM
The Flint City Council tonight was expected to discuss two of the most widely debated issues in Flint politics — reducing the size of the City Council and axing the city ombudsman’s office.[1]

THERE IS NO REAL SUPPORT ON THE COUNCIL TO ELIMINATE THE OMBUDSMANS OFFICE.

But the council voted to drop both issues from its agenda without much discussion, and it was clear neither idea had much support from the majority of the council members.[1]

FREEMAN DID GREAT WORK ON THE BUDGET

City Councilman Joshua Freeman brought the issues to council in hopes of starting a discussion that might eventually lead to a vote of the public and some potential budget savings for the city of Flint.[1]

THE SUPPORT TO ELIMINATE IS NOT THERE



He said he plans to bring the ombudsman issue back before the council in 30 days, but said reducing the council doesn't have the support right now.[1]

YHE VOTERS HAVE SAID IN THREE ELECTIONS THEY SUPPORT THIS OFFICE

Cutting the charter-mandated offices would require putting charter amendments before voters.[1]

LET IT GO

City Council President Delrico Loyd, along with Freeman, is a supporter behind the discussion of shrinking the council and eliminating the ombudsman.[1]

JUST PROVES THE COUNCIL WAS WILLING TO LOOK AT ALL COST CENTERS

Loyd said the city’s dire economic straits force the council to at least entertain the cost-cutting moves, especially when the city is also cutting services like public safety.[1]

THERE IS NO MEANINGFUL COMMUNITY SUPPORT TO PUT THIS OFFICE ON THE BALLOT- OMBUDSMAN

“We have to make tough choices from the top, even if it’s not politically safe for us,” Loyd said. “We have to exchange dialogue; We have to start the conversation so we can get it on the ballot for voters to decide.”[1]

But putting the ombudsman’s office on the chopping block could prove to be unpopular. Three years ago, voters soundly rejected a proposal to abolish the office.[1]

See:[1]
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2010/06/flint_city_council_drops_discu.html#incart_rh


THE PROPER TERM IS “OMBUDSMAN”

Ombudswoman Brenda Purifoy said her office is truly an “office of the people,” designed to help residents wade through bureaucratic red tape or issue opinions on city government conflicts.[1]

WE DO THINK THE OFFICE IS IMPORTANT

"When nobody is helping them, they come here and we step in,” she said. “The people of this city, they think this office is important.”[1]

THE OFFICE IS A COST SAVINGS,

The ombudsman’s office was created 34 years ago and is required under the city charter.Flint and Detroit are the only two communities in the state with an ombudsman, and the office has battled claims that it’s an unnecessary luxury in the face of looming budget cuts.[1]
NEELEY IS RIGHT AGAIN

Councilman Sheldon Neeley said the ombudsman's office provides a key avenue for residents to have their voices heard.[1]

ITS CHARTER MANDATED. HE SHOULD HAVE TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT THE OLD FASHIONED WAY BY PETITION. ONCE HE GETS ON THE STREET HE WILL SEE THE MASSIVE COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR THIS OFFICE

But Freeman has said the city could put a couple of police officers on the street with the $323,443 that is budgeted for the ombudsman’s office in the upcoming year.[1]

LOYD HAS BVACKERS WHO HAVE TRADITIONALY OPPOSED THE OFFICE

Loyd said the ombudsman discussion would be difficult but necessary — though maybe not as difficult as the idea of cutting two of their own.[1]

CAN’T TOUCH THAT

Councilwoman Jackie Poplar said she's not in favor of shrinking the council because she's worried some city residents could fall through the cracks as the wards are changed. She said she wants to learn more about the issue.[1]

GREAT IDEA TO REDUCE, AND THE ORIGIONAL CHARTER CALLED FOR 2 YR COUNCIL TERMS PUT THAT ON THE BALLOT AN SEE WHAT HAPPENS

Loyd said he supports reducing the council from nine to seven members, especially since the city has shrunk drastically over the years, but there was not the same kind of support from his colleagues.[1]

A SPLIT

The issue was dropped from the meeting agenda on a 5-4 vote, with Loyd, Freeman, Kincaid and Sarginson dissenting.[1]

KEEP US INFORMED

“The discussion will be controversial — we are not all in favor of it,” Loyd said. “But the city is facing very, very tough financial issues.” [1]

Posted here by
Terry Bankert
http://attorneybankert.com





[1]
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2010/06/flint_city_council_drops_discu.html#incart_rh
[2]
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2010/06/flint_city_council_discussing.html

Sphere: Related Content