Sunday, July 27, 2014

Citizen response by Terry Bankert , 235-1970, to Flint Blue Ribbon Report recommending a City Manager.

Terry Bankert’s response  to Flints “Blue Ribbon Committee on Governance”, the committee, Final Report  to  Mr. Darnell Earley, Emergency Manager City of Flint  July 2014” #flint
7/28/14 5 am.

cited as [1] Most comments of Terry Bankert Divorce Attorney 810-235-1970 are cited as [trb] Please share this article.

I am only an individual Flint Citizen with one vote, one voice. Please consider adding your voice  and your vote to the Flint Community Discussion on Charter Revision.  [trb]


"The findings will be presented to the council during its 5:30 p.m. Monday, July 28, meeting. Earley has asked residents to email him directly,    , with any comments they may have on the report".[2]

The Committee recommends that on the November Ballot the citizens vote to eliminate the Civil Service Commission and the Ombudsman's office. [trb]

I suggest you not do that . [trb]

These offices are currently not funded and can wait for the election of a Charter Commission to deliberate. 

The Committee also then recommends that  a yes or no vote “ Do you the voter want a Charter Commission “ to be placed on the November 2014 ballot. [trb]

I suggest you vote yes on this.[trb]

Not mentioned is the fact that in the November elections the candidates for the Charter Commission can be placed on the ballot.

If  this practice is followed at the same election also on the ballot will be a Charter Commission. The  highest vote candidates,1 per ward, could  be  elected to the commission. It has not been decided if this process will be used. Ask the EFM Earley

This Charter Commission Candidate election could all happen fast with little lead up time for Citizen candidate to the Flint Charter Commission.  Those with  moneyed support and advance knowledge are putting their campaigns together now.

Ask the EFM Earley , what he intends to do. Will the Candidates be on the ballot during the same election the yes or no vote is asked of the voters?

Ask the EFM if the voters vote down a Charter Commission will he prolong his rule of Flint?

I recall but am not certain that the Charter Commission candidacy requires a petition drive.  

Consider running for the Charter Commission or encouraging a friend  to run. Seek the support of any organization you belong  to  for help. Waiting will just allow the downtown and moneyed interest to get their candidates elected.

I suggest that  the community respond  by forming a number of  inclusive groups  to self educated and engage in the next steps of Change for Flint. Those steps  are the ones involving  the Voting Public.

I predict  events causing change will happen fast. 

Please call on me if I can help in any way.

COMMITTEE REPORT INTRODUCTION, this is not  comprehensive. The link above will allow  you to read the entire  document.

Mr Wesley [ Chairperson of Emergency Managers Committee on Governance in a letter to the Emergency Manager] said “Less than six months ago, you issued a charge to a group of 22 individuals to develop develop recommendations on how the City of Flint might strengthen its governance in order to avoid the possibility of a return to fiscal crisis.”
‘ [1]

‘We all came to the table willing to do the hard work of studying, learning, exploring, and debating the structures, policies and practices that helped Flint get to its current financial difficulties, and the changes that could help us prevent a return to that state.”[1] said Mr. Wesley.

“We made the determination early on in our process to operate by consensus, so the
recommendations contained in this report convey the carefully considered opinions of
the whole. Members of the Blue Ribbon Committee came to this process with different
perceptions and thoughts, and we took the time necessary to talk through points of
contention. While any of us could have drafted recommendations on our own, we feel
this process has enabled us to craft a report that is more balanced and well-rounded
than could have been achieved otherwise”.[1]said Mr. Wesley.

“After reviewing hundreds of pages of reports on municipal governance models and
financial practices, hearing from people with pertinent expertise from inside City Hall
and outside of the community, and holding three community workshops, we are
delivering our final report of recommendations to you.”[1]said Mr. Wesley.

These hundreds of pages of reports should be made available to the public.[trb]

“ We hope that it will prove a useful lens for understanding some of the complex governance challenges that Flint faces, as well as point a way forward for us to enjoy greater accountability and stability in our local government. It has been a pleasure to serve.” [1] pg 2 said Mr. Wesley.

Thank You for Your service Mr. Wesley and the committee. [trb]


From January 2014 through June 2014, the Flint Blue Ribbon Committee on Governance Reform met to  address the issue of changes to governance in the City of Flint, Michigan in response to the ongoing  fiscal crisis facing city government. [1]

The Committee deliberated in private often. [trb]

“The committee’s objective was to address changes in governance  that it believed would lead to improved long-term fiscal health and fiscal stability for city government.These recommendations reflect a consensus of the group.”[1]

A summary of the recommendations is as follows:[1]  My numbers.[trb] My comments [trb]

1. Shifting to a hybrid form of Council-Manager government with an elected Mayor and an appointed City Manager.[1]

I disagree. The we do not need a full time Mayor. What we need is a traditional City Manager system.[trb]

A reduction in City Council is suggested with no number offered. see [1] 

I suggest the membership of the Flint City Coucil be reduced to 5 .[trb]

In the 1974 Charter 2 year council terms were voted in raised later to four years.
The Committee  recommends that the terms of the city council be reduced to 2 years. see [1]

I agree the Flint City Council should be reduced to a 2 yr term [trb

 At the same time the committee recommends a mayors term to be four year. see [1]

I disagree. We do  not need a Mayor and in the hybrid version this position has been made to powerful and unaccountable to the rest of the Flint City Council. I sense the Committee holds the Current and past Flint City Councils in contempt and has drafted a document that strips the Flint City Council of meaningful power.[trb]

“In addition, [the committee], recommend”s that the elections be held in even-numbered  years. By holding elections to coincide with Presidential and gubernatorial cycles we hope Flint can boost voter turnout. “[1]  

This is incredibly naive as  a basis for making government better, elections during a partisan election makes these positions partisan.[trb]

What they are suggesting is that in an era of soft money and coordinated campaigns when my Democratic Party  is in full electoral mode they  will dangle the bait of municipal elections. I guarantee that it will be mainstream Democrats that will be  elected. [trb]

Please move the elections to the even numbered years!We will strip Uptown and the Genesee Regional Chamber and their rich backers of any future power in flint and return our City of Flint to the neighborhood and other traditional community leaders. [trb]

2.Reconsideration of the City Council system by a Charter Commission. [1]This step inescapably involves the public under state statute.  But only 3/4 of a loaf will go to the Charter Commission. Structural change like eliminating the strong Mayor and changing to a city manager form of government requires an elected charter commission. Why put the Civil Service and Ombudsman on the ballot now? Why  not wait for a Charter Commission? [trb]

I found the language quite misleading in the recommendation on the Ombudsman vote to be put on the ballot now. The office is currently not being funded and will not be in the near future. There is no reason not to wait for a Charter Commission to deliberate on this issue.[trb]  see [1]

The committee gave a recommendation to  vote by ward in the primary and city wide in the general .[1] 

This might reduce representation in some areas. Bad idea. [trb]

3.Ongoing training for all City Council members.[1] We already have memberships in the ational League of Cities and the Michigan Municipal League. Who will do this training? Michigan State would be a good pick.  What is needed is a politically neutral respected group like MSU to oversee leadership education programs and produce impact statements on proposed policy statement for the elected officials and public. [trb

4.City-appointed officials report to and are hired by the City Manager (with the exception of the City Attorney and City Clerk)[1] 

That is how a professional city manager works. There is no need for a Mayor except  to  call the president of the council by  mayor to guide policy between meeting of the city council and attend ceremonial events.[trb]

5.Elimination of the Civil Service Commission and removal from Charter of Ombudsman Office.[1] This is a topic for the Charter Commission. Why put these on the ballot before before we have a charter commission? [trb]

6.Adoption of multi-year budgeting, strategic planning and long-term financial forecasts.[1]
I agree.[trb]

The rationale for the change of government and the role of specific individuals will be
discussed in greater detail below. A summary of the positions of City Manager, Mayor, and City
Council members under the proposed government-form change is as follows:[1]

City Manager
Appointed by and reports to the elected City CouncilPage
9 [1]  I agree. [trb]

o Chosen through a nationwide search
ICMA Credentialed Manager designation recommended
Responsible for hiring, firing, and managing all city staff including the City Treasurer,
Assessor, and all department heads (with the exception of the City Attorney and City
Clerk) [1] and Ombudsman, I agree [trb]

o Selects department heads based on education and relevant experience [1] I agree [trb]
o Conducts annual performance reviews of department heads
Recommends candidates for City Attorney and City Clerk
Delivers annual budget message.[1] I  do not agree.the City Manager should have no involvement in the selection process of these two positions. [trb]

Full-time employee of the City of Flint (with appropriate fringe benefits)[1] I disagree [trb] No separation of powers no need for this position nor has there been one for  several years..[trb]
Runs city-wide as Mayor who will sit on the City Council
Acts as a policy leader and the ceremonial designee for the City of Flint
Sits as President of City Council, [1] Note the council is powerless it cannot appoint its own leadership.[trb]
Votes on council matters[1]The way this is configured it  relegates the Flint City Council to an advisory committee. Big business and big money can load up and deliver the election to a city wide mayoral candidate who appoints the committees for the council, and has a vote on the council. A council that cannot realistically ever fire the manager. Earley the EFM  phase City Manager has is making the City Manager in Flint politically bullet proof from the voters. Earley and Snyder serving Downtown have no plans to give up power. Powerful never does give up power we have to take it. [trb]

Delivers State of the City address annually

City Council
Part-time employees (without fringe benefits)[1]
o Not involved in day-to-day operations of City Hall[1]
Meets, deliberates potential policies, gathers information from citizens, and moves
forward on the passage of policies important to the city. [1] Who sets the budget if not the council. [trb]
Confirms appointments of City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk by two-thirds
majority[1] This is a super majority. They cannot effectively remove those the hire.[trb


Long Term Sustainability- The Big Picture


This first category of recommendations relates to reforms designed to move the City of
Flint toward long-term fiscal sustainability.[1]


Form of Government

Under Flint’s current Charter, an elected council and mayor have responsibility for setting
policy. [1]  I agree, the Mayor has veto power. Will the Mayor in the hybrid system have veto power.[trb]

Under the current Charter  the Council sets the budget and the Mayor spends the tax money? [trb]

Under the strong-mayor form of government, the mayor also is charged with policy
implementation and managing the day-to-day operations through 21 appointees who serve at the
Mayor’s pleasure. [1] Within this alignment of personnel is the current position of City Administrator which was intended to be a city manager embedded into the Mayors office. The paradigms of good government and excellence in the management of local government were to be found here. [trb]

There are three challenges with this current system that contribute to
financial instability. They are: [1]

1. Reporting Structure: Once appointed, senior City officials, with the exception of the
Treasurer, Clerk, Assessor, and including the City Administrator (who has broad
responsibility for the daily oversight of a multi-million-dollar city budget) serve at the
pleasure of the Mayor and report only to the Council through the Mayor’s permission.[1] This was intended to remove the Mayors officials from the  influence of local politics by City Council meddling. What happened? Why will the same dynamic not affect the City Manager?[trb]

When the Mayor and Council do not have a smooth working relationship—which has
been often—the City Council may not have access to the timely information needed to
make effective policy choices and respond to changing economic realities.[1] The same dynamic  can happen in CIty Manager Cities. We should ask prior and current members of the Saginaw City Council.[trb]

While the Council does have the power to subpoena witnesses, including the City Administrator,
this is not an efficient way to obtain necessary information.[1] Yes it is, look at Congress.[trb]

2. Qualifications: There are no qualifications in the Charter that are required to serve as
any of the Mayoral appointees.[1] We relied on the City Council to keep the CIty Administrator professional which all councils failed .[trb]

Few of the appointees chosen since the current Charter was adopted in 1974 had the training and expertise in municipal finances that would have enabled them to foresee and respond to changes in Flint’s finances or manage the complicated budgeting and compliance procedures that must be in place. [1] Obviously none of them did.[trb]

On More than one occasion, mayors have appointed political friends or campaign managers to this key  position despite not having the skills needed to carry out the job. [1]

On every occasion the City Council did not demand professionalism in this position. Charters are pieces of paper is Flint Citizens that breath life into our local government.[trb]

3. Information: Because the City Administrator, department heads, and other mayoral
appointees serve solely at the pleasure of the Mayor, they may overlook financial
information or performance inadequacies that would be politically inconvenient. [1] 

City manager that survive by simple majority will suffer the same pressure. Managers like the hybrid with the protection of a super majority may adopt their friends agenda like Uptown for instance and cannot realistically  be removed. The Ombudsman's could not be removed except by super majority but that office had a fixed term. Possibly this hybrid  model must stand a simple majority confidence vote every four years. If they fail they are gone.[trb]

Naturally, employees may feel pressured to downplay sobering information or risk losing
their jobs. This prevents the public and City decision-makers from accurately
understanding the City’s financial position and making timely, informed choices.[1]

Flint has had a manager for a half dozen years or so an emergency manager to be specific. How effective have these managers been?[trb]

As such, we recommend that the City of Flint’s form of government be changed from the
current strong-mayor form of government, in which the mayor is ultimately responsible for the
day-to-day management of City Hall, to a hybrid form of government in which the Mayor is a
voting member of City Council; a City Manager appoints department heads and manages City
operations. [1]

I agree we should have a traditional City Manager but not this ill defined hybrid.[trb]

This will encourage greater collaboration between the Mayor and the City Council
and separate policy development (which is the purview of elected officials) and implementation
(to be carried out by a professional, competent, and trained staff). [1]

Nonsense. The Mayor without budget expenditure control and personnel that report to him will be ineffective , just like the incumbent is today. What is being described is a President of the City Council  being called Mayor with ceremonial responsibilities.[trb

Such a structure will enable the government to be run efficiently and effectively[1]. More will be required.[trb]

The Mayor would sit as the President of the City Council, voting on council matters, and
act as policy leader and ceremonial designee for the City of Flint. Rather than being selected by
City Council from among their members as is the case in many council-manager governments, [1] (This is a good system[trb]).....
we recommend a hybrid in which the Mayor runs for and is elected to that position by voters.
While the Mayor may have public events, meetings, and other duties that require attention
throughout the day, the rest of the Council will have a role that does not require involvement in
day-to-day operations.[1] I disagree [trb]

The City Council members’ responsibilities will be to meet, carefully
deliberate potential policies, gather information from citizens, and move forward on the passage
of policies important to the city.[1] I agree. [trb]

We recommend that the Mayor be a full-time employee of the  City of Flint (with appropriate fringe benefits) and Council members be part-time employees (without fringe benefits).[1]

I disagree.   The Mayor and council should receive  no compensation. The Council President /Mayor should receive a per diem for  City related travel and each member encouraged to attend meetings of state and national Municipal Government Associations. [trb

The Local Officials Compensation Commission is advised to consider
appropriate compensation for the roles of the elected officials. Council members’ compensation
should not be so high as to eclipse a desire for public service as the chief motivation for running
for the position. [1] pg 10

I disagree this body should be disbanded and no compensation offered to elected officials in Flint. [trb]

What do you think? Will you be active in the future charter revisions activities. Several of us are organizing and meeting. If you would like to participate let us know.


Terry Bankert

cited as [1]

Most comments of Terry Bankert are cited as [trb] Please share this article.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, July 6, 2014

CELEBRITY WOMEN WHO PAY GAL-IMONY by Terry Bankert Flint Divorce Attorney 810-235-1970


Thank You Gloria Steinamn.

Halle Berry’s case and others mentioned here, Madonna  , Kirstie Alley and Britney Spears are not Michigan cases or from #Flint.

Genesee Flint Michigan law of spousal support is found here using the celebrity cases as a backdrop.

Halle Berry falls in line with a growing number of women who pay child support.[3]

"The law is gender neutral and support is the right of the child not the parent," said Jonathan Wolfe, an attorney and partner with Skoloff & Wolfe. "If you are the higher wage earner, man or woman, be prepared to pay."[4]

IN MICHIGAN,The court may award spousal support as is just and reasonable if the property award is insufficient for the suitable support of either party and any children of the marriage of whom the party has custody. The court must consider “the ability of either party to pay and the character and situation of the parties, and all the other circumstances of the case.” MCL 552.23(1).[5]

A 2013 Pew report found that women are the sole or primary breadwinners in 40 percent of households with children under 18. [2]

Halle Berry  is now a ranking member of an exclusive club in Hollywood: celebrity women who've had to pay their exes after their split.[3]

More than half of divorce lawyers surveyed by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers cited an increase in the number of mothers assigned to make child support payments in the past five years.[4]

The long-lived child support battle between Halle Berry and ex-lover, Gabriel Aubrey, appears to be over—for now at least.[1]

According to People, the Academy Award-winning actress has been ordered to pay Gabriel $16,000 per month in child support for their daughter, Nahla, until she either turns 19 years old or finishes high school. That’s a pretty long time considering that Nahla is only six.[1]

The Oscar-winner will fork over $200,000 per year plus tuition money for the ex-couple’s six-year-old daughter Nahla. Berry must also make a retroactive payment of $115,000 and another $300,000 to Aubry’s attorneys to cover their fees.[2]

IN MICHIGAN, Factors to be considered  in awarding spousal support include the following:
  • Past relations and conduct of the parties. How the parties conducted the marriage as well as fault in the breakdown of the marriage. Fault is only one factor and should not be assigned disproportionate weight.
  • Length of the marriage. A long-term marriage is especially relevant where one spouse has no career or marketable skills and his or her standard of living may be reduced because of the divorce.
  • Ability of the parties to work.
  • Source of and amount of property awarded to the parties.The focus is on the income-earning potential of the assets rather than their value; a spouse is not required to dissipate property awarded to meet daily needs where spousal support can be available.
  • Ages of the parties.
  • Ability of the parties to pay spousal support. Sources considered in determining the ability to pay include earnings, pension plans, unemployment compensation, tax refunds, and Social Security benefits. Ability to pay includes the payer spouse’s unexercised ability to earn if income is voluntarily reduced to avoid paying spousal support. Factors relevant to the ability to pay include (1) the parties’ employment histories, (2) reasons for any termination of employment, (3) work opportunities available, (4) diligence in trying to find employment, and (5) availability of employment.
  • Present situation of the parties.
  • Needs of the parties.
  • Health of the parties. The parties’ health is relevant to the ability to work and to the personal needs of the spouse seeking support.
  • Prior standard of living of the parties.
  • Whether either party is responsible for the support of others.
  • General principles of equity.
The court must make findings on each factor relevant to the claim before it.[5]

Berry and Aubry have been locked in a bitter custody battle over their daughter, Nahla, since 2012, the same year a judge blocked the actress from moving with their daughter to France.[3]

Halle Berry’s... shocking ruling was delivered in a Los Angeles court room on May 30. ... Halle has also been ordered to pay Gabriel $300,000 in attorney’s fees. Court documents reveal that the two share equal custody of Nahla.[1]

IN MICHIGAN, Factors relevant to the amount of support.
  • duration of the marriage
  • the parties’ contribution to the joint estate
  • the parties’ ages
  • the parties’ health
  • the parties’ stations in life
  • the parties’ necessities and circumstances
  • the parties’ earning abilities

Halle and Gabriel’s co-parenting situation certainly has not been the most ideal over the past couple of years.[1]

[T]he former couple’s 2012 Thanksgiving was stained with memories of bloodshed and a prison cell after Gabriel got into a physical altercation with Halle’s now-husband, Olivier Martinez.[1]

Aubry, 38, and Berry, 47, dated from 2005 to 2010 but never married. In 2012, the couple became involved in a custody dispute over Nahla, when a judge blocked the X-Men: Days of Future Past star from moving their daughter to France to live with her and her now-husband Olivier Martinez. The fight culminated in a physical altercation between Aubry and Martinez in November of 2012, People reported. Aubry and Berry now share equal custody of the girl, according to court documents.[2]

Because the number of female breadwinners is at a peak and more men are asking for shared custody, cases of women paying child support are likely on the rise, too. A 2012 survey of divorce lawyers in the United States found that 56 percent of attorneys saw an increase in numbers paying child support since 2009.[2]

"Courts look at income from all sources, such as earned income and income earned from their assets," Wolfe told MainStreet. "When fixing the rate of return for unearned income, courts will be guided by the actual historical returns or impute a reasonable assumed rate of return."[4]

Rehabilitative spousal support.
Rehabilitative spousal support is temporary spousal support to help the dependent spouse make the transition to self-support. It can be appropriate to
  • encourage a spouse to seek full-time employment and self-sufficiency
  • allow a spouse to complete an advanced degree or obtain a marketable skill when he or she had worked while the other spouse obtained a degree
  • allow a spouse to adjust to a lifestyle not based on combined incomes
  • allow a spouse to obtain new job skills and enter the workforce
Permanent spousal support (generally until death or remarriage).
It has been found appropriate when there is
  • a long-term marriage with a spouse who has no career or marketable skills
  • a long-term marriage, one spouse with superior earning skills, and the other spouse with questionable earning capacity
  • great discrepancy between incomes and a wife who devoted most of her adult life to homemaker role
  • serious doubt that a spouse could support himself or herself because of a disability[5]

Berry isn't the first female star to be on the hook for child support. [Others]... who had to pay big.[3]


The Material Girl's reported $76-$96 million settlement in 2008 with Guy Ritchie was considered a record payout, let alone one by a woman. Even her publicist, Liz Rosenberg, acknowledged its significance.[3]


When the marriage broke up five years later, Laffoon sought at least $33,000 a month in spousal support and custody of Homer, claiming that Heche was a poor parent with "bizarre and delusional behavior," according to a court filing obtained by People magazine. [3]


In one filing,...Kristi Alley’s husband... Stevenson asked for "sufficient support" to "maintain a lifestyle commensurate to that which Kirstie and I had enjoyed during our marriage," including $18,000 a month to pay rent on a home in Bel Air.[3]

Though Stevenson once enjoyed the spotlight, he claimed that his earnings were only a fraction of what Alley earned and he did not expect to ever approach her income. Ultimately, he settled for a one-time payout of $6 million, according to[3]


Federline was embroiled in a custody battle with Spears, who only had visitation rights to see their children. In 2008, she gave up her custody fight but gained more visiting time with the boys. At the same time, her child support payments to Federline reportedly increased by $5,000 to $20,000 a month.[3]

Spears was also on the hook for Federline's legal fees to the tune of nearly half a million dollars.[3]

What can these Ladies do now?


Modification. §§6.43–6.51.

If the court had personal jurisdiction over the payer at the time of the judgment, the court has continuing jurisdiction to revise or amend the order.

No minimum period must elapse before modification can be requested.

Retroactive modification is not available. However, the court can approve the parties’ agreement for retroactive modification.

Modification is possible only on a showing of new facts or changed circumstances since the judgment that justify a revision. The petitioner has the burden of justifying a change by a preponderance of the evidence.

Once a change in circumstances is shown, the court considers all the circumstances in deciding what modification to make.[5]
Factors indicating a change in circumstances.
  • Remarriage—can trigger modification or termination unless specifically stated otherwise in the judgment, but remarriage can be only one consideration.
  • Cohabitation—does not constitute a de facto marriage; can be relevant where it improves a spouse’s financial position.
  • Changes in need—see examples in §6.48.
  • Changes in ability to pay—see examples in §6.49.
  • Retirement—effect appears to depend on whether parties fashioned award with retirement in mind; see examples in §6.50.
  • Death of the payer—does not terminate the support obligation, which can be enforced against the estate, unless stated otherwise.[5]





Michigan Family Law Benchbook ch 6 (ICLE 2d ed 2006), at
(last updated 06/27/2014).



Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, July 2, 2014


Feinberg's recent press conference could have started with his saying the following. “Hi, I am a lawyer and I am here to help!” When the GM victim payout is over will we think Kenneth Feinberg helped. I vote NO!


Families of those killed in crashes involving General Motors’ deadly ignition switches will be offered at least $1 million if they can prove the defective part caused their accidents.[12
GM victim compensation director Kenneth Feinberg, who also led the 9/11 compensation and BP oil spill funds, said today that people who suffered injuries or families of victims who died because of the defect qualify for settlements and can begin filing claims Aug. 1.[12]

I wrote the following while following the BP Gulf payout as an observer. I think it applies to todays analysis of Feinberg.
Kenneth Feinberg:  "Who Gets What: Fair Compensation after Tragedy and Financial Upheaval."SOME SAY unfair compensation creating more Tragedy and increasing the Financial Upheaval

Kenneth R. Feinberg  sings Irish ballads as the Gulf of Mexico Charter Fishing Industry mourns the loss of its livelihood and the life of one Captain that committed suicide.

See: [12] & [13]

About the Author
Kenneth R. Feinberg ... has been front and center in some of the most complex legal disputes of the past three decades: Agent Orange, asbestos, the closing of the Shoreham Nuclear Plant, and 9/11. He is adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University, the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, and the University of Virginia.[3]

Many people complained about the lack of communication or claims paid under the administration of Kenneth Feinberg, the appointee who disbursed $6.1 billion in oil spill claims to 221,000 claimants. Patrick Juneau was installed in March to implement a new court-supervised process for distributing what BP estimates will be $7.8 billion for claims covered by a recent class-action settlement.[7]

Feinberg the British Petroleum BP money man and overseer of the bureaucratic misery caused by his administration of victim claims against BP British Petroleum whose negligence diminished the fishing industry in the gulf of mexico and destroyed economic and real lives of thousands  dependent on this economy.

As he explains in his new book Who Gets What, his task is to maximize prompt, fair payouts and minimize dilatory litigation.[1]

Feinberg wasn't part of the VOO program, that was bp and the subcontractors. Feinberg came in on the back end of that.

"There's never been a private claims facility like this. We received over 1 million claims from 50 states and 35 foreign countries we paid out $6.5 billion before the first trial was even scheduled to begin," said Feinberg.[2]

The judge brought payments to the halt the day the settlement was reached "in principle" and feinberg was dismissed. The buck was passed to the court claims, and even though the infrastructure was the same key players; no economic claims are moving. Why? In many cases claimants have provided documentation from 2007- 2011 month and months and month ago?

Feinberg has done all his government and university work pro bono, but he figures that BP paid his law firm around $18 million. “It depends on the circumstances,”he says. “Another terrorist attack? Of course I’d do it for free. Another shooting at a university? Of course I’d do it for free. Oil company, wrongdoer, willing to foot the bill—of course I won’t do it for free.” [1]

Do not trust Feinberg to do the right thing in the GM Ignition Victem payout!
Feinberg had mentors that mapped every move of his elite career. What is his history. He is nothing more than an apologist for Big Corporations the ultimate corporatist.  Feinberg was the administrator  of the chaos remedy, his real job to keep the public at bay and the press muffled.  His personal history is one of protecting government, the politicians he socializes with from that mix of intellectual and money elites   are high positioned people  we  defer too but whose true agenda is preservation of their wealth and power and their dependence  on corporation political support.

Feinberg assignments have always ended with payouts equal to what insurance would cover.His mission is to make us feel good and minimize the corporate damages.

He is  a Corporatist as defined by Naomi Klien in Shock Doctrine.

Did you know the smallest players whose lives  were so totally devastated the Charter Fishing Captains and those that book their clients have yet to be paid.

Feinberg has long stated that he put himself behind the proverbial eight-ball in the Gulf by overpromising how quickly he could get emergency payments to spill victims. In the book, he is even more self-critical on that point:
"In meeting after meeting during the first weeks of the GCCF, I made the ridiculous public pledge that 'the GCCF will pay eligible individual claimants within forty-eight hours and eligible businesses within one week.' Talk about a self-inflicted wound!" Feinberg writes. "Underestimating the volume and complexity of the claims, I promised what I could not possibly deliver. As a result, the GCCF was immediately placed on the defensive."[4\]
The compensation fund is unlimited, he said. If Feinberg determines that the defect was the “substantial cause” of the accident, he will use actuarial tables and average medical cost data to calculate the size of a payout. The families of people who died will get at least $1 million.[12]
He said the volume of claims kept him from holding individual meetings with claimants, something he considered critical to upholding a sense of justice. It was clear that Feinberg wanted to do that because throughout the GCCF, he promised claimants who confronted him in person or sent him letters and emails that he would review their claims "personally." That sometimes got him in trouble, making it appear that he was providing certain claimants with negotiated settlements rather than adhering to a formulaic method for paying similar claims equitably. [4]

Feinberg fumbled another ball as the administer of BP claims. Millions suffer yet he stands to make millions from telling the story . Where is the justice. He should profit no more from his book than a serial killer telling his tale.

Did you know  Feinberg let a fleet of out of state boats come into the clean up and paid them yet the charter captains will be paid only if the offset against their claims of ⅓ is accepted.

Feinberg lied directly to my primary source  out of Bon Secour booking charter out of Gulf Shores Alabama  and surrounding areas. He told her there were no glitches in the online system which is even worse now that the courts have taken over.   Feinberg made the local claims adjusters impotent and the distribution of  economic claims to come to a halt.

Feinberg called the emergency payments received in Aug-Nov 2010 a gift. The amount of paperwork to qualify was mountainous and he called it a gift?

Victims must submit evidence substantiating their claim — such as police reports, hospital records, vehicle data, insurance information and even the car involved in the accident if it’s still around.[12]
GM can provide evidence to dispute victims’ claims. But the company has agreed not to challenge the claims after Feinberg makes a determination.[12]

In March, Feinberg’s run at the helm of GCCF ended when a New Orleans federal judge appointed a new administrator. Congressman Jo Bonner sent out a tweet that read: “End of an Error.”[2]

He and his Washington law firm, Feinberg Rozen, was paid $1.25 million a month to dole out BP's money, leading to complaints that Feinberg was protecting BP's assets. On the other hand, he took just 18 months to pay 225,000 victims more than $6.2 billion, a record of speed and distribution that put to shame similar-scale compensation efforts, such as the post-Katrina Road Home program for homeowners.[4]

"That criticism is absolutely to be expected I accept it in good faith."
But he does not accept the assessment of his reign as being a failure. "By all accounts, I think that the distribution and just 18 months of $16.5 billion to 220,000 people is evidence of success," Feinberg said.[2]

Public officials at the state level have not been so reserved, harshly criticizing Feinberg and warning Gulf Coast residents about the claims process.
"I would not give him (Feinberg) very high marks, and I've said that personally to him in meetings, face-to-face," Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange said in a Wednesday telephone interview.[5]

Strange added that the Obama administration "could do a much better job in holding his feet to the fire."[5]
A Feinberg spokeswoman declined to comment.
Feinberg has been increasingly under fire along the Gulf Coast, with local leaders accusing him and his staff of misleading the public, unfairly denying claims and managing the process with too little transparency.[5]

The livelihood of Charter Captains, men and women with everything at stake, has been destroyed by the BP oil spill and the incompetence of the  Feinberg claims center.

The Charter Fishermen were told that if they helped in the clean up which they did it would not lower their claims which it has. This ⅓ pay back applies only to charter fishermen and  not shrimpers, not oystermen, not the guys that fish for the same fish but sell them, just the Charter Fishermen. Where is the justice in this? TO PRESIDENT OBAMA WHERE IS THE JUSTICE.

“We are pleased that Mr. Feinberg has completed the next step with our ignition switch compensation program to help victims and their families,” Barra said in a statement. “We are taking responsibility for what has happened by treating them with compassion, decency and fairness. To that end, we are looking forward to Mr. Feinberg handling claims in a fair and expeditious manner.”[12]






Sphere: Related Content