Friday, July 29, 2011

EMERGENCY MANAGERS FOR MICHIGAN CITIES IS A GET RICH SCHEME FOR REPUBLICAN FINANCIAL MANAGERS AND BIG LAW FIRMS, UNIONS AND LIBERALS YOU NEED TO SHOW SOME BACKBONE ON THIS ONE.


On March 16 of this year, Governor Snyder signed into law the Local Government and
School District Accountability Act (hereafter referred to as Public Act no. 4). This law allows the governor to put local governments and schools under financial review.[2]

This article is posted by Terry Bankert a Genesee County , Flint Lawyer ,I m a a former City of Flint Ombudsman. This law is bad and must be overturned ad until then fought in the courts and politically on the streets. Labor Unions, liberals, libertarians, democrates and people that care about democracy must consider joining this fight. Interested  contact terry@attorneybankert.com, http://www.attorneybankert.com/, 1-810-235-1970. But why reinvent the wheel I would like to join in the fight with those that are already there.

Following are notes to be followed up with a series of articals and recommenddations onhow this battle can be won.
NOTES....FULLY CITED BY COMMENTS ARE IN BLOCK CAPS OR cited [trb] I will cites date and time of drafts here 7:32 07/29/11




If the appointed financial reviewers determine that the local entity is in sufficient financial trouble, the local government or school board will be disbanded and governance will be assumed by appointed officials—the so-called Emergency Managers. [2]



A recently enacted Michigan law permitting the state's governor to appoint emergency managers to replace the governments of municipalities in dire financial straits violates the Michigan Constitution, according to a lawsuit filed June 22 against Gov. Rick Snyder (R) and Treasurer Andrew Dillon (D) by a group of Michigan residents (Brown v. Snyder, Mich. Cir. Ct., No. 11-000685-CZ, complaint filed 6/22/11).[3]

The 28 plaintiffs—including a city commissioner of Benton Harbor, Mich., over which an emergency manager has been appointed—submitted a complaint in the circuit court for Ingham County, Mich.[3]



L. Brooks Patterson said the legislation, though reviled by labor unions because it allows contracts to be set aside by the appointed managers, has “teeth” so that state-appointed managers can pull struggling districts and cities out of their financial holes.[5]







These managers will have the authority, without public input, to do what they deem necessary to get the municipality or school back in the black. This could presumably include deciding to sell off key assets, close schools, raise taxes [according to the FAQs about the act posted on Treasury's site, "An Emergency Manager cannot impose taxes, over and above those already authorized, without the approval at an election of a majority of the qualified electors voting on the question. However, an Emergency Manager is authorized to order one, or more, millage elections for the unit of local government."—Ed.], cut programs and commissions, and eliminate other expenses.[2]



there’s tremendous powers,” Patterson said in an interview with The Oakland Press.



“He can go in and say, ‘OK, fine, this contract’s too expensive, these legacy costs are too expensive, these contracts are all gone,’” Patterson said. “That’s where the collective bargainers scream, ‘Hey, you can’t undo our contracts.’



“The law now has been changed and that’s exactly what can happen,” he said.[5]



Pontiac, which is the county seat and the only Oakland County community with a state-appointed emergency financial manager, will now operate under the new law once it’s signed, Patterson said.[5]



The city’s police department dissolved its union once it was clear the legislation would pass. Pontiac’s emergency financial manager has advocated turning police protection over to the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office.[5]







Our friend Emily Votruba down in Elberta, just south of Frankfort, in Benzie County recently started a community newspaper called The Elberta Alert. The Alert, which just published its second print edition with a run of a thousand copies, is whimsical, topical, and generating the kind of community dialogue that small towns need to survive in this era of corporate and media consolidation.[1]



They challenge the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, which states in part that the governor, upon determining the existence of a “local government financial emergency” without a satisfactory resolution in place, shall appoint emergency managers from the state's executive branch “to act for and in the place and stead of” the local government's governing body.[3]

“On its face and in practice, the Act violates the rights of local voters by delegating law-making power and the power to adopt local acts to unelected emergency managers, by suspending the rights of local electors to establish charters and to elect local officials, and by imposing new costs and expenses upon local municipalities without providing new revenue,” the complaint says. After the bill was passed by the state Senate on March 9 and the House on March 15, Snyder signed it into law on March 16, and it went into effect that day (51 DLR A-7, 3/16/11).[3]





The Alert placed a call to Terry Stanton, public information officer for the Michigan Department of Treasury, to find out the implications of our watch status.[2]



According to Stanton, the data for the fiscal indicator scores (our score being 8 ) was compiled from the U.S. Census, local government offices, local tax assessment officers, and the municipalities’ annual audit reports. (View our breakdown in the accompanying image and here.)

According to Stanton,[2]



“These fiscal indicator scores have no correlation to the statute [Public Act no. 4],” and are provided simply as information to local governments to help them assess where potential problems may lie.[2]



Rather than the fiscal indicator scores, Treasury will be watching for the occurrence of any one of the 18 “triggering events” listed in the Act (see here).[2]



A few examples of trigger events include: (a) The Village Council might actually request that it be preliminarily reviewed; (b) a creditor may write to the state claiming that a payment from the Village is six or more months past due; (c) the local government might fail to “timely file” an annual financial budget; (d) the Village may end a fiscal year in a deficit condition.[2]



Any one of these trigger events could, according to Stanton, prompt a preliminary review. And any one of these triggers could happen here.[2]



So far, according to Stanton, Elberta hasn’t hit any of the triggers in such a way as to elicit a preliminary review, and Treasury has no current plans to conduct a review of Elberta. For one thing, said Stanton, the data reflected in the fiscal indicator scores is about three years old at this point (based on the 2009 audit), and as Village Clerk Sharyn Bower pointed out in the Record-Patriot, “Our auditor said our 2010 audit was much better.” Further, the approved Village budget for 2011/12 entails significant cuts, including a total of $73,298 in cuts to the general fund, streets, sewer, and garbage funds; the elimination of one our DPW employee positions; and the elimination of spousal benefits for our Village employees.[2]



Stanton said the factors cited in the fiscal indicator scores “are not considered predictive” of whether Elberta will hit enough triggers to require intervention. Nevertheless, we should all be aware that our house does not seem to be in order. The 2009 audit revealed our revenues at $228,198 and our expenditures at $267,002. More startlingly, as of the 2009 audit we had a major fund deficit of $742,954, according to the Treasury Department breakdown.[2]





We’re excited about this budding endeavor and will help in any way we can.

Votruba, and Elberta, just stumbled upon an alarming and disturbing report. [1]



The tiny town could fall prey to Governor Rick Snyder and the GOP-controlled Michigan legislature’s controversial Local Government and School District Accountability Act. [1]



The Congressional Research Service reported on March 30 that the act could run afoul of the U.S. Constitution's contract clause (66 DLR A-6, 4/6/11). On April 18, two Detroit municipal pension funds filed a lawsuit challenging a portion of the Act that allegedly would unlawfully alter the Detroit City Charter and bargaining contracts (76 DLR A-8, 4/20/11).[3]





This means that debt-ridden and financially troubled Elberta could fall under government financial review and, hypothetically, the town could be disbanded and turned over to non-elected Emergency Managers. [1]



What would that mean? Selling off hereto preserved Lake Michigan frontage and Elberta’s pristine bluffs to developers in order to make Elberta solvent?[1]





Much of the alarm stems from a story in today’s Benzie Record-Patriot (the newspaper of record in Benzie County) with the headline, “Elberta ‘Working Diligently’ on Financial Woes Cited by State”.[1]



In her story, “Elberta Placed on State Government Fiscal Watch List,” Votruba cites, and provides links to a chart published in the Detroit Free Press on April 6 that details where statewide municipalities and counties rate in terms of fiscal solvency. [1]



According to a chart released on the Detroit Free Press website on April 6, Elberta has been placed on a state financial watch list and is “flagged for possible state intervention.” We scored an 8 out of 10 based on our fiscal 2009 audit. Frankfort, meanwhile, scored an impressive 2, placing it in the category “neutral—no action necessary” (view the breakdown for Benzie County here). Elberta did remarkably worse than any other Benzie County entity. Gilmore Township was also in the neutral clear as of 2009, with a score of 3.[2]





The Elberta Alert goes on to describe the town’s fiscal woes, including marina and condominium development that didn’t prove lucrative, expenses from the City of Milwaukee, lead and asbestos discovered at the waterfront park, and taxes that Native Americans no longer pay to Elberta.[1]



Suit Claims Law Misallocates Lawmaking Powers

The act violates the Michigan Constitution's Article III, § 2, and Article IV, § 1, which confine legislative powers to the state legislature, the residents' complaint asserts. It says the act impermissibly gives emergency managers the “sole discretionary power” to repeal, amend, and enact local laws and provides for consent agreements allowing the state treasurer to grant local government executive officers such power to adopt local laws, all without “reasonably precise limiting standards.”

The complaint claims that these granted powers also are at odds with Article IV, § 29, which stipulates that a local law shall not take effect without the approval of both two-thirds of the members of each house of the state legislature and a majority of the electors in the affected municipality. A majority of each house of the state legislature is required to repeal a local law, the section adds.

The residents contend the act also breaches Article VII, § 22, which exclusively provides municipal electors with the power to frame, amend, and adopt municipal charters, as well as Article IX, § 29, which bars the state from imposing new activities or services on local government units without the disbursement of funds to cover any increased costs.

Additionally, the complaint asserts, the act violates Article I, § 17's due process clause; Michigan residents' “right to a republican form of local government and to choose the officials of local government by democratic elections throughout the time that corporate body of local government remains in existence,” as recognized by Article I, § 23; and residents' similar inherent rights to local government, established by Article VII, §§ 21, 22, and 34.[3]

In addition to declaratory relief holding that the act is unconstitutional, the plaintiffs seek an injunction barring present and future emergency managers from using powers the act grants them, attorneys' fees and costs, and further equitable relief.[3]

Law Alters Local Government Norms, Official Says

“The core problem with the law is that it removes from local citizens their right to local representative government,” Tova Perlmutter, executive director of the Detroit-based Sugar Law Center for Economic and Social Justice, an organization representing the residents, said June 23. “It's an affront against the values of democracy and local control that are enshrined in the Constitution and in our society.”[3]

“Fundamentally, the law allows individuals with no accountability to the community they control to sell off community assets, destroy infrastructure and mechanisms for service delivery, and in fact even dissolve local communities entirely.”[3]

But Sara Wurfel, Snyder's press secretary, said June 23 that attacks on the act have ignored one of its key goals—to provide “early warning indicators” to prevent local government financial emergencies in the first place—that both Democratic and Republican governors have appointed emergency managers in the past, and that the state is constitutionally obligated to protect its residents' welfare. “Not only do we think [the Act is] constitutional, but we think it's vitally necessary to ensure the health of Michigan's communities,” she said. “The governor would be happy never to appoint an [emergency manager] if at all possible.”

By Elliott T. Dube[3]



Patterson lauds financial manager legislation as a good step

Published: Friday, March 11, 2011

By CHARLES CRUMM

Of The Oakland Press

New legislation giving emergency financial managers of school districts and municipalities more authority and broader powers will be signed into law by the governor within a matter of days, Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson predicted Friday.



Patterson said the legislation, though reviled by labor unions because it allows contracts to be set aside by the appointed managers, has “teeth” so that state-appointed managers can pull struggling districts and cities out of their financial holes.



“Under the new law that was just passed by the Legislature, and I’m sure it’ll be signed by the governor in the next couple of days, there’s tremendous powers,” Patterson said in an interview with The Oakland Press.



“He can go in and say, ‘OK, fine, this contract’s too expensive, these legacy costs are too expensive, these contracts are all gone,’” Patterson said. “That’s where the collective bargainers scream, ‘Hey, you can’t undo our contracts.’



“The law now has been changed and that’s exactly what can happen,” he said.



Pontiac, which is the county seat and the only Oakland County community with a state-appointed emergency financial manager, will now operate under the new law once it’s signed, Patterson said.



The city’s police department dissolved its union once it was clear the legislation would pass. Pontiac’s emergency financial manager has advocated turning police protection over to the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office.



The legislation was most recently passed by the state Senate this week and will go back to the House for a concurring vote next week, a House spokesman said, before being sent to the Gov. Rick Snyder for his signature.



Snyder’s office indicated Friday that the governor will have to see the final legislative product before deciding whether to sign it into law.



“He’s been very supportive of the concept but we’ll have to see what the final bill looks like,” spokesman Ken Silfven said.



“It’s a very, very strong law but it’s not that you can just march into Birmingham and take over,” he said. “You’ve got to miss bond payments, you’ve got to miss payroll, you’ve got miss paying venders. It doesn’t even happen then.



“Then a committee is brought together to look to see if a city’s really in dire financial straits,” Patterson said. “If the committee agrees, then the committee recommends to the governor the appointment of an emergency financial manager.



“So there is a process, and I call it due process, before someone walks in and takes control.”









---Copy of Complaint

STATE OF MICHIGAN

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF INGHAM

_____________________________________

Elizabeth Brown, Tameka Ramsey,

Emma Kinnard, Hon. Juanita Henry,

Barbara Ford, Edith Lee-Payne,

Evelyn Foreman, Jacqueline Steingold,

Leslie Little, Michelle Martinez,

Suzanne Sattler IHM, Barbara Davenport,

Irene Wright, Patrick O’Connor, Paul Jordan,

Michael Merriweather, Marcia Sikora,

Ahmina Maxey, Maryion Lee,

Lisa Oliver-King, Kimberly Spring,

Brenda Reeber, George Reeber,

David Frederick, John David Ivers,

Lori Christenson, Betsy Coffia

and James Clancey,

Plaintiffs,

Case No. __________

vs. Hon. _____________

RICHARD D. SNYDER, as Governor of the

STATE OF MICHIGAN, and ANDREW DILLON,

as the TREASURER OF THE STATE OF

MICHIGAN.

Defendants.

_____________________________________________________________________________/

John C. Philo (P52721)

Anthony D. Paris (P71525)

SUGAR LAW CENTER

FOR ECONOMIC & SOCIAL JUSTICE

4605 Cass Avenue, Second Floor

Detroit, Michigan 48201

(313) 993-4505/Fax: (313) 887-8470

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Herbert A. Sanders (P43031)

THE SANDERS LAW FIRM PC

615 Griswold St Ste 913

Detroit, MI 48226

(313) 962-0099/Fax: (313) 962-0044

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Richard G. Mack, Jr. (P58657)

Keith D. Flynn (P74192)

Robert D. Fetter (P68816)

MILLER COHEN PLC

600 W Lafayette Blvd Fl 4

Detroit, MI 48226

Julie H. Hurwitz (P34720)

William H. Goodman (P14173)

Brandon M. Stump (P74418)

GOODMAN & HURWITZ PC on behalf of

the DETROIT & MICHIGAN NATIONAL

LAWYERS GUILD

1394 E Jefferson Ave

2

(313) 964-4454/Fax: (313) 964-4490

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Detroit, MI 48207

(313) 567-6170/Fax: (313) 567-4827

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Darius Charney

CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

666 Broadway 7th floor

New York, NY 10012

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

_____________________________________________________________________________/

COMPLAINT

FOR DECLARATORY & INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

NOW COME Plaintiffs, Elizabeth Brown, Tameka Ramsey, Emma Kinnard, Hon.

Juanita Henry, Barbara Ford, Edith Lee-Payne, Evelyn Foreman, Jacqueline Steingold, Leslie

Little, Michelle Martinez, Suzanne Sattler IHM, Barbara Davenport, Irene Wright, Patrick

O’Connor, Paul Jordan, Michael Merriweather, Marcia Sikora, Ahmina Maxey, Maryion Lee,

Lisa Oliver-King, Kimberly Spring, Brenda Reeber, George Reeber, David Frederick, John

David Ivers, Lori Christenson, Betsy Coffia, and James Clancey and by and through their

attorneys and for their Complaint, do hereby allege as follows.

NATURE OF PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS

1. This lawsuit arises from violations of Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights under the

Constitution of the State of Michigan of 1963.

2. The Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, Act No. 4,

Public Acts of 2011, MCL §§ 141.1501 et. seq. (the Act) effectively establishes a new form of

local government within the State of Michigan. The new form of government allows Michigan

cities, villages, townships, and other forms of municipal corporations to be ruled by one

3

unelected official and that this official’s orders, appointments, expenditures, and other decisions

are not reviewable by local elected officials or local voters.

3. On its face and in practice, the Act violates the rights of local voters by delegating

law-making power and the power to adopt local acts to unelected emergency managers, by

suspending the rights of local electors to establish charters and to elect local officials, and by

imposing substantial new costs and expenses upon local municipalities without providing new

revenue.

4. The Act thereby violates Art. I, § 17, Art. I, § 23, Art. III, § 2, Art. IV, §§ 1 & 29,

Art. VII, §§ 21, 22, & 34, and Art. IX, § 29 of the Michigan Constitution.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. Jurisdiction is conferred by MCL § 600.601 and § 600.605 and by MCR, Rule

2.605.

6. Venue is proper pursuant to MCL §600.1615, since the offices of the Governor

and State Treasurer exercise governmental authority within this county and judicial circuit.

PARTIES

7. Plaintiff Elizabeth Brown is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Jackson, County of Jackson, and State of Michigan.

8. Plaintiff Tameka Ramsey is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Pontiac, County of Oakland, and State of Michigan.

9. Plaintiff Emma Kinnard is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City

of Benton Harbor, County of Berrien, and State of Michigan.

10. Plaintiff Hon. Juanita Henry is a current City Commissioner of the City of Benton

Harbor and is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of Benton Harbor, County

4

of Berrien, and State of Michigan.

11. Plaintiff Barbara Ford is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of

Detroit, County of Wayne, and State of Michigan.

12. Plaintiff Edith Lee-Payne is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Detroit, County of Wayne, and State of Michigan.

13. Plaintiff Evelyn Foreman is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Detroit, County of Wayne, and State of Michigan.

14. Plaintiff Jacqueline Steingold is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Detroit, County of Wayne, and State of Michigan.

15. Plaintiff Leslie Little is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of

Detroit, County of Wayne, and State of Michigan.

16. Plaintiff Michelle Martinez is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Detroit, County of Wayne, and State of Michigan.

17. Plaintiff Suzanne Sattler IHM is a citizen of the United States and a resident of

the City of Detroit, County of Wayne, and State of Michigan.

18. Plaintiff Barbara Davenport is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Pontiac, County of Oakland, and State of Michigan.

19. Plaintiff Irene Wright is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of

Pontiac, County of Oakland, and State of Michigan.

20. Plaintiff Patrick O’Connor is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Pontiac, County of Oakland, and State of Michigan.

21. Plaintiff Paul Jordan is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of

Flint, County of Genesee, and State of Michigan.

5

22. Plaintiff Michael Merriweather is a citizen of the United States and a resident of

the City of Ann Arbor, County of Washtenaw, and State of Michigan.

23. Plaintiff Marcia Sikora is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City

of Farmington Hills, County of Oakland, and State of Michigan.

24. Plaintiff Ahmina Maxey is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City

of Ferndale, County of Oakland, and State of Michigan.

25. Plaintiff Maryion Lee is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of

Flushing, County of Genesee, and State of Michigan.

26. Plaintiff Lisa Oliver-King is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Grand Rapids, County of Kent, and State of Michigan.

27. Plaintiff Kimberly Spring is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Grand Rapids, County of Kent, and State of Michigan.

28. Plaintiff Brenda Reeber is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City

of Ludington, County of Mason, and State of Michigan.

29. Plaintiff George Reeber is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City

of Ludington, County of Mason, and State of Michigan.

30. Plaintiff David Frederick is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Montague, County of Muskegon, and the State of Michigan.

31. Plaintiff John David Ivers is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of St. Clair Shores, County of Macomb, and State of Michigan.

32. Plaintiff Lori Christenson is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

City of Southfield, County of Oakland, and State of Michigan.

6

33. Plaintiff Betsy Coffia is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Traverse

City, County of Grand Traverse, and State of Michigan.

34. Plaintiff James Clancey is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City

of Negaunee, County of Marquette, and State of Michigan.

35. Defendant Richard D. Snyder is the Governor of the State of Michigan. Governor

Snyder maintains his principal office at the Office of the Governor, 111 S. Capitol Avenue,

George W. Romney Building in the City of Lansing, County of Ingham, and State of Michigan.

36. Defendant Andrew Dillon is the Treasurer of the State of Michigan. Treasurer

Dillon maintains his principal office at the Department of Treasury, 430 W. Allegan Street in the

City of Lansing, County of Ingham, and State of Michigan.

COMMON FACTS

37. Through its provisions, the Local Government and School District Fiscal

Accountability Act, Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011, MCL §§ 141.1501 et. seq. (the Act)

establishes a new form of local government, previously unknown within the United States or the

State of Michigan, where the people within local municipalities may be governed by an

unelected official who establishes local law by decree.

38. On its face and in practice, the Act flagrantly violates the Constitution of the State

of Michigan by:

a) Delegating legislative powers without limiting standards to emergency managers;

b) Granting unelected emergency managers the power to enact local law without the

constitutional restraints placed on state and local governments;

c) Usurping the vested rights of local electors to adopt and amend local charters

which govern cities and villages within Michigan;

7

d) Suspending the rights of local electors to a republican form of government and to

elect the officials of local government through democratic elections; and

e) Imposing substantial new costs upon local municipal corporations without

providing offsets or additional revenue streams to affected communities.

39. Prior to 1988, local government was placed into receivership by the courts, not

the state legislature or executive branch. Compensation for court-appointed receivers was

derived from property that the courts placed within the care of the receiver. Fisk v Fisk, 333

Mich 513 (1952).

40. In 1990, the legislature passed the Local Government Fiscal Responsibility Act,

Act No. 72, Public Acts of 1990 (the former Act). This statute authorized state officials to

intervene when local governments were facing a financial emergency. Pursuant to the former

Act, when a financial emergency was found to exist and there existed no satisfactory plan to

resolve the emergency, an emergency financial manager could be appointed by a state board.

41. In February of 2011, the bill for the Local Government and School District Fiscal

Accountability Act (the Act) was enrolled and fast-tracked through the Michigan legislature.

42. The Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act bill was

presented to the Governor for signature approximately one month after its introduction before the

legislature.

43. Governor Richard D. Snyder signed the Local Government and School District

Fiscal Accountability Act into law on March 16, 2011.

44. The Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act (the Act)

replaced the Local Government Fiscal Responsibility Act (the former Act) and radically revised

state law.

8

45. The Act grants the Governor broad discretionary powers to declare that a local

government is in a financial emergency and to determine whether the local government has a

satisfactory plan to resolve the emergency. MCL §141.1515 (1).

46. The Act grants a state financial review team power to enter into a consent

agreement with local government to address local financial problems and purport to provide

financial stability to the local government without a finding that a financial emergency exists.

47. The Act further states that the consent agreement may grant the state treasurer

power to vest a local chief administrative officer, the chief financial officer, or other officers of

the local government with the powers and authority of an emergency manager under the Act.

MCL §141.1514a (9).

48. The Act further provides that once the Governor has unilaterally declared a

financial emergency and found that no satisfactory plan exists to resolve the emergency, the

Governor shall appoint an emergency manager to act for, and in place of, the governing body of

the local government. MCL §141.1515 (4).

49. The emergency manager is an appointed official of the executive branch of state

government. Alternatively, the emergency manager is a private contractor working as an agent

of the executive branch of state government.

50. The Act seeks to grossly expand the powers of emergency managers over all

operations of local government. The emergency manager’s powers extend not only to financial

policy and decision-making, but also to all other areas of local government. The Act seeks to

accomplish this expansion of powers without dissolving the corporate body of local government

and without first removing or suspending the offices of local elected officials.

9

51. The provisions of the Local Government and School District Fiscal

Accountability Act establish a form of local government that is repugnant to the constitutional

liberties of Americans under settled law, as well as the rule of law itself. Under this new form of

government, the people become subject to a form of governance where an unelected local

official wields absolute power over all aspects of local government and whose decisions are

without review by either local elected officials or local voters.

52. Without limiting standards, the Act delegates the state legislature’s general

legislative powers to emergency managers. The Act delegates such powers through provisions

that vest emergency managers with sole discretionary power and authority to:

a. Contravene, and thereby implicitly repeal, local laws such as city and

village charters and ordinances; and

b. Explicitly repeal, amend, and enact local laws such as city and village

ordinances.

53. The Michigan Constitution of 1963, Art. III, § 2, prohibits executive branch

officials from exercising general legislative power granted to the state legislature by Art. IV, § 1.

54. The Michigan Constitution of 1963, Art. IV, § 1, vests the state senate and house

of representatives with general legislative power.

55. The Act grants emergency managers greater power than the state legislature

possesses regarding the adoption and repeal of local acts. The Act grants such power through

provisions that seek to vest emergency managers with sole discretionary power and authority to:

a. Contravene, and thereby implicitly repeal, local laws such as city and

village charters and ordinances; and

10

b. Explicitly repeal, amend, and enact local laws such as city and village

ordinances.

56. The Michigan Constitution of 1963, Art. IV, § 29, prohibits the state legislature

from adopting local acts without the approval of two-thirds of the members serving in the state

legislature and without the approval of a majority of the electors voting in the affected locality.

Furthermore, Article IV, § 29 only permits the repeal of local acts by a majority vote of the state

legislature.

57. The Act violates the exclusive constitutionally mandated rights of local electors to

adopt and amend local charters. The Act violates such rights through provisions that seek to vest

emergency managers with sole discretionary power to contravene local charter provisions.

58. The Michigan Constitution of 1963, Art. VII, § 22, vests the sole right to frame,

amend, and adopt charter provisions in the electors of cities and villages. So long as the

corporate body of local government remains in existence, the charter exists as local law to be

followed by all persons within the local jurisdiction.

59. The Act usurps the constitutionally mandated rights of local electors to a

republican form of government and to choose the officials of local government by democratic

elections. The Act usurps such rights through provisions that seek to vest emergency managers

with sole discretionary power and exclusive authority to act for, and in the place of, local

government.

60. The Michigan Constitution of 1963, Art. I, § 17, grants due process rights to all

persons in the state. Due process rights include a right to procedural due process during the

repeal of local charter provisions and during the repeal, amendment, and adoption of local

ordinances. Due process rights further include, a substantive right to a republican form of local

11

government and to choose the officials of local government by democratic elections throughout

the time that corporate body of local government remains in existence.

61. Under the Michigan Constitution of 1963, Art. VII, §§ 21, 22, and 34, local

electors possess an inherent right to a republican form of local government and to choose the

officials of local government by democratic elections throughout the time that corporate body of

local government remains in existence.

62. Under the Michigan Constitution of 1963, Art. I, § 23, local electors possess a

retained right to a republican form of local government and to choose the officials of local

government by democratic elections throughout the time that corporate body of local government

remains in existence.

63. The Act requires local governments to increase activities and incur necessary

expenses by requiring local governments to fund emergency managers, their staffs, auditors,

financial review teams, technical advisors, consultants, firms, and other expenses incurred when

complying with the mandated activities of the Act.

64. In 1978, the Michigan Constitution was amended to include Art. IX, § 29, which

prohibits the state from mandating new activities or services upon units of local government

without making a state appropriation of funds to be disbursed to local government to pay for any

increased costs.

65. At the time of filing, emergency managers have been appointed over the cities of

Benton Harbor, Ecorse, and Pontiac and over the Detroit Public Schools. As such, these

emergency managers are currently exercising powers unconstitutionally granted by the Local

Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act.

12

COUNT I – Constitutional Violation

1963 Const. Art III, § 2 and Art. IV, § 1

Nondelegation Doctrine

66. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 65 above as though fully

stated herein.

67. Article III, § 2 of the Michigan Constitution of 1963 states: “No person exercising

powers of one branch shall exercise powers properly belonging to another branch except as

expressly provided in this constitution.” Article IV, § 1 of the Michigan Constitution of 1963

vests the state senate and house of representatives with legislative power.

68. Pursuant to Article III, § 2 and Article IV, § 1, the Michigan legislature is

prohibited from delegating legislative powers, not only to executive branch agencies and

officials, but also to private contractors.

69. When delegating rule-making authority to executive branch agencies and

officials, the state legislature must articulate reasonably precise limiting standards to avoid the

constitutional prohibition against the delegation of legislative powers.

70. On its face, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act,

Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011 violates the prohibitions of Article III, § 2. The Act violates the

nondelegation doctrine through provisions providing for consent agreements that, without a

finding of a financial emergency and without reasonably precise limiting standards, permit the

state treasurer to delegate sole discretionary legislative power to a local government’s chief

administrative officer, the chief financial officer, or other executive officers of the local

government. See MCL §141.1514a (9).

71. On its face, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act,

Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011 violates the prohibitions of Article III, § 2 and the nondelegation

13

doctrine through provisions of the statute that, without reasonably precise limiting standards,

delegate to emergency managers sole discretionary legislative power and authority to:

a. Act for and in the place and stead of the local governing body of cities and

villages over matters unrelated to the financial emergency and unrelated to

the fiscal policies, practices, and circumstances of the local government.

See provisions including but not limited to MCL §141.1515(4);

§141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and (ff) and §141.1519(2);

b. Contravene, and thereby implicitly repeal, local laws such as city and

village charters and ordinances; See provisions including but not limited to

MCL §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and (ff) and §141.1519(2);

and

c. Explicitly repeal, amend, and enact local laws such as city and village

ordinances. See provisions including but not limited to MCL §141.1519

(1) (dd).

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Court order declaratory relief and declare that

the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, Act No. 4, Public Acts of

2011, MCL § 141.1501 et seq., unconstitutionally delegates legislative power to the emergency

manager, and that this Court provide injunctive relief restraining present and future emergency

managers appointed under the Act from implementing or exercising authority and powers

purportedly conveyed by §141.1514a (9), §141.1515(4), §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee),

and (ff) and §141.1519(2).

14

COUNT II – Constitutional Violation

1963 Const. Art. IV, § 29

Local Acts

72. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 71 above as though fully

stated herein.

73. Article IV, §29, the Michigan Constitution of 1963 prohibits the state from

enacting local acts “until approved by two-thirds of the members elected to and serving” in the

state legislature and until approved “by a majority of the electors voting” in the affected district.

The article further requires approval of a “majority of the members elected to and serving in each

house” of the state legislature before a local act can be repealed.

74. City and village charters, adopted by local electors, and ordinances, adopted by

local legislative bodies, are local laws – equivalent to local acts adopted by the state legislature.

75. On its face, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act,

Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011 violates the prohibitions of Article IV, § 29. The Act violates

the local acts clause through provisions providing for consent agreements, without a finding of a

local financial emergency, that permit the state treasurer to delegate sole discretionary power to

adopt local acts to a local government’s chief administrative officer, the chief financial officer, or

other executive officers of the local government. See MCL §141.1514a (9).

76. On its face, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act,

Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011 violates the prohibitions of Article IV, §29. The Act violates the

local acts clause by delegating more power than the legislature possesses. The Act violates the

clause by granting emergency managers sole discretionary power and authority to:

a. Contravene, and thereby implicitly repeal, local laws such as city and

village charters and ordinances; See provisions including but not limited to

15

MCL §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and (ff) and §141.1519(2);

and

b. Explicitly repeal, amend, and enact local laws such as city and village

ordinances. See provisions including but not limited to MCL

§141.1519(1)(dd).

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Court order declaratory relief and declare that

the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, Act No. 4, Public Acts of

2011, MCL § 141.1501 et seq., violates Article IV, §29 of the Michigan Constitution, and that

this Court provide injunctive relief restraining present and future emergency managers appointed

under the Act from implementing or exercising authority and powers purportedly conveyed by

§141.1514a (9), §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and (ff) and §141.1519(2).

COUNT III – Constitutional Violation

1963 Const. Art. VII, § 22

Electors’ Right to Form Charter

77. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 76 above as though fully

stated herein.

78. The Michigan Constitution of 1963 at Article VII, §22 vests city and village

electors with exclusive power to “frame, adopt and amend its charter, and to amend an existing

charter of the city or village heretofore granted or enacted by the legislature for the government

of the city or village.”

79. Once a city or village is incorporated and so long as it continues to exist, its

charter constitutes local law that is required to be followed by all public officials, the local

governing body, and all persons within the local government’s jurisdiction.

16

80. On its face, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act ,

Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011 violates the prohibitions of Article VII, § 22. The Act violates

the rights of local electors through provisions providing for consent agreements that, without a

finding of a local financial emergency, permit the state treasurer to delegate sole discretionary

power to a local government’s chief administrative officer, the chief financial officer, or other

executive officers of the local government to contravene, and thereby effectively suspend and/or

implicitly repeal, the provisions of city and village charters. See MCL §141.1514a (9).

81. On its face, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act,

Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011 violates local electors’ rights as vested by Article VII, §22. The

Act violates the local electors’ charter clause by granting emergency managers sole discretionary

power and authority to:

a. Contravene, and thereby effectively suspend and/or implicitly repeal, the

provisions of city and village charters. See provisions including but not

limited to MCL §141.1515(4), §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and

(ff) and §141.1519(2).

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Court order declaratory relief and declare that

the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, Act No. 4, Public Acts of

2011, MCL § 141.1501 et seq., violates Article VII, §22 of the Michigan Constitution and that

this Court provide injunctive relief restraining present and future emergency managers appointed

under the Act from implementing or exercising authority and powers purportedly conveyed by

§141.1514a (9), §141.1515(4), §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and (ff) and §141.1519(2).

17

COUNT IV – Constitutional Violation

1963 Const. Art. I, §§ 17 & 23 and Art. VII, §§ 21, 22 & 34

Electors Rights to Republican Form of Local Government and

to Elect Local Government Officials

82. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 81 above as though fully

stated herein.

83. The Michigan Constitution of 1963 at Article I, § 17 provides that no person shall

be deprived of liberty or property without due process of law. The Constitution’s due process

clause protects the rights of persons to both procedural and substantive due process.

84. Michigan’s due process clause requires that local governments observe procedural

due process during the repeal of local charter provisions and during the repeal, amendment, and

adoption of local ordinances.

85. Michigan’s due process clause protects local citizens’ substantive due process

rights to a republican form of local government and to choose the officials of local government

by democratic elections throughout the time that corporate body of local government remains in

existence.

86. The Michigan Constitution of 1963 at Article I, § 23 recognizes and protects

rights retained by the people of the state of Michigan. The retained rights of the people include a

right to a republican form of local government and to choose the officials of local government by

democratic elections throughout the time that corporate body of local government remains in

existence.

87. The Michigan Constitution of 1963 at Article VII, §§ 21, 22 & 34 establishes the

rights of the people of the state of Michigan to local government. Michigan citizens’ right to

local government inherently vests citizens with a right to a republican form of local government

18

and a right to choose the officials of local government by democratic elections throughout the

time that corporate body of local government remains in existence.

88. On its face, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act,

Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011 violates Article I, §§ 17 & 23 and Article VII, §§ 21, 22 & 34 of

the Michigan Constitution of 1963. The Act violates the due process clause, the retained rights

clause, and the inherent rights of the people by granting:

a. The State Treasurer power, without the finding of a financial emergency,

to delegate the sole discretionary powers and authorities of an emergency

manager to a local government’s chief administrative officer, the chief

financial officer, or other executive officers of the local government;

MCL §141.1514a (9);

b. Emergency managers sole discretionary power and authority to act for and

in the place and stead of the local governing body of cities and villages

over matters unrelated to the financial emergency and unrelated to the

fiscal policies, practices, and circumstances of the local government. See

MCL §141.1515(4), §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and (ff) and

§141.1519(2);

c. Emergency managers sole discretionary power and authority to rule by

decree over cities and villages on matters unrelated to the financial

emergency and unrelated to the fiscal policies, practices, and

circumstances of the local government through powers that permit the

emergency manager to contravene, and thereby implicitly repeal, local

laws such as city and village charters and ordinances and to explicitly

19

repeal, amend, and enact local laws such as city and village ordinances.

See provisions including but not limited to MCL §141.1515(4);

§141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and (ff) and §141.1519(2); and

d. Emergency managers sole discretionary power and authority to overrule

and supersede and assume all the powers and authority of the local

governing body and of all local elected officials over matters unrelated to

the financial emergency and unrelated to the fiscal policies, practices, and

circumstances of the local government. See provisions including but not

limited to MCL §141.1515(4); §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and

(ff) and §141.1519(2).

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Court order declaratory relief and declare that

the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, Act No. 4, Public Acts of

2011, MCL § 141.1501 et seq., violates Article I, § 17 of the Michigan Constitution, and that this

Court provide injunctive relief restraining present and future emergency managers appointed

under the Act from implementing or exercising authority and powers purportedly conveyed by

MCL §141.1514a (9), §141.1515(4), §141.1517(1), §141.1519(1) (dd), (ee), and (ff) and

§141.1519(2).

COUNT V – Constitutional Violation

1963 Const. Art. IX, § 29

Headlee Amendment

89. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 88 above as though fully

stated herein.

90. In 1978, the Headlee Amendment to the Michigan Constitution of 1963 at Article

IX, § 29 was enacted to prohibit the state from:

20

a. Requiring a new activity or service by local government, unless a state

appropriation is made and disbursed to pay for any necessary increased

costs; and

b. Enacting an increase in the level of any activity or service by units of local

government beyond that required by existing law, unless a state

appropriation is made and disbursed to pay for any necessary increased

costs.

91. At the time that the Amendment was adopted in 1978, the state did not intervene

in local financial emergencies, emergency managers were not appointed by the state, and local

governments were not required to pay costs and fees related the appointment of emergency

managers.

92. The Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, Act No. 4,

Public Acts of 2011 violates Article IX, § 29 of the Michigan Constitution of 1963 by imposing

new and increased activities upon local government without making an appropriation and

disbursement to pay for necessary increased costs to local government.

93. New and increased activities imposed upon local government by the Act include,

but are not limited to:

a. Requiring the local government to pay the compensation, salary, benefits,

and expenses of the Governor’s appointed emergency manager. See MCL

§141.1515(5)(e);

b. Requiring the local government to pay the compensation, salary, benefits,

and expenses of any employee, agent, appointee, or contractor of the

emergency manager including inspectors, auditors, and technical

21

personnel hired at the discretion of the emergency manager; See

MCL§141.1515(6) and §141.1519(1)(o) and (p);

c. Requiring the local government to pay the costs and expenses of the

attorney general to defend in civil lawsuits brought against the emergency

manager; See MCL §141.1525(3);

d. Requiring local government to pay general liability insurance, professional

liability insurance, workers compensation insurance, automobile

insurance, and other insurance for the benefit of the emergency manager

and any employee, agent, appointee, or contractor of the emergency

manager; See MCL §141.1525(4); and

e. Requiring local government to pay for attorney fees and all costs of civil

litigation brought against the emergency manager and any employee,

agent, appointee, or contractor of the emergency manager if such expenses

are not covered by applicable insurance policies; See MCL §141.1525(5);

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Court order declaratory relief and declare that

the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, Act No. 4, Public Acts of

2011, MCL § 141.1501 et seq., violates IX, § 29 of the Michigan Constitution, and that this

Court provide injunctive relief restraining present and future emergency managers appointed

under the Act from implementing or exercising authority and powers purportedly conveyed by

MCL §141.1515(5)(e) and (6), §141.1519(1)(o) and (p), and §141.1525(3), (4) and (5).

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Elizabeth Brown, Tameka Ramsey, Emma Kinnard, Hon.

Juanita Henry, Barbara Ford, Edith Lee-Payne, Evelyn Forman, Jacqueline Steingold, Leslie

22

Little, Michelle Martinez, Suzanne Sattler IHM, Barbara Davenport, Irene Wright, Patrick

O’Connor, Paul Jordan, Michael Merriweather, Marcia Sikora, Ahmina Maxey, Maryion Lee,

Lisa Oliver-King, Kimberly Spring, Brenda Reeber, George Reeber, David Frederick, John

David Ivers, Lori Christenson, Betsy Coffia, and James Clancey pray this Honorable court enter

Judgment against Defendants providing:

a. For declaratory relief holding that the Local Government and School District Fiscal

Accountability Act, Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011 violates the Michigan

Constitution of 1963;

b. For injunctive relief restraining present and future emergency managers appointed

under the Act from implementing or exercising authority and powers purportedly

conveyed by the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act,

Act No. 4, Public Acts of 2011;

c. For attorneys’ fees and costs; and

d. For such further relief as is just and equitable.

_________________________________

John C. Philo (P52721)

Anthony D. Paris (P71525)

SUGAR LAW CENTER

FOR ECONOMIC & SOCIAL JUSTICE

4605 Cass Avenue, Second Floor

Detroit, Michigan 48201

(313) 993-4505/Fax: (313) 887-8470

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Herbert A. Sanders (P43031)

THE SANDERS LAW FIRM PC

615 Griswold St Ste 913

Detroit, MI 48226

(313) 962-0099/Fax: (313) 962-0044

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

23

Richard G. Mack, Jr. (P58657)

Keith D. Flynn (P74192)

Robert D. Fetter (P68816)

MILLER COHEN PLC

600 W Lafayette Blvd Fl 4

Detroit, MI 48226

(313) 964-4454/Fax: (313) 964-4490

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Julie H. Hurwitz (P34720)

William H. Goodman (P14173)

Brandon M. Stump (P74418)

GOODMAN & HURWITZ PC on behalf of the

DETROIT & MICHIGAN NATIONAL

LAWYERS GUILD

1394 E Jefferson Ave

Detroit, MI 48207

(313) 567-6170/Fax: (313) 567-4827

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Darius Charney

CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

666 Broadway 7th floor

New York, NY 10012

Co-Counsel - Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Date: June 22, 2011





[1]



[2]



[3]



[4]



[5]

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2011/03/11/news/local_news/doc4d7a9c5102809556524186.txt

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

MAYOR THROWS KATE FIELDS AND ADVANCED SOLUTIONS UNDER THE BUS IN FEDERAL INVESTIGATION

FLINT CITY COUNCIL 7/25/11


Yesterday 07/25/11 Droid thumb live blogged the Flint City Council meeting typos and all.. There Mayor Dayne Walling announced his full cooperation with an ongoing and rare FBI Investigation of City of Flint Activities. One Mayoral Opponent Daryl Buchanan had scheduled an “emergency press conference” last Friday on that issue.



From the Mayors announcement to council one corruption target of the FBI is an organization called Advanced Solutions rune by Kate Fields, she also instructs at University of Michigan Flint or at least did last year.



Flint Mayor Walling strongly stated to the council and community that corruption will not be tolerated in his administration. He pledged to be transparent to the voters and regularly report on this issue. He seemed to blame the controversy on past administration but was rebuked by Flint City Council member Sheldon Neely that essentially the implementation of the federal program that the aledged miss appropriations came from was done during the Walling watch.



My corrected face book notes follow. They are numbered in the order they were posted, but here modified. in the order they were origonally presented with contemporaneous thought and commentary.



The Mayor was given special privlage to address the Flint City Council.



1.Mayor Walling talked about the FBI investigations. He is co-operationg. Some candidates [ Darryl Buchanan] are taking cheap shots. No Flint City employee is going before a grand jury on these public corruptions charges the FBI is investigation. The FBI is suboening information from before his administration. If so that would be during the Buchanan /Williamson administration. Buchanan was city administrator Daryl Buchanan was City Administration and is fully responsible for anything that ocured the Williamson Mayoral terms that he held that position.



2. The Mayor welcomes the Federal oversight. Federal Funds allocated to Flint are being frozen by the Federal government. Flint cannot spend its federal money allocated to it.



3. Mayor Walling is notifying vendors that the source of payment for there efforts has dried up and they will not be paid until and if the funds are released by the Federal Government.What hard ship is being placed on these businessmen. You wonder why any firm would risk doing business with the City of Flint.



4.The Mayor is doing an external legal review. This topic degenerated into Councilperson Neeley proclaiming the Mayor was going to hire an outside attorney to investigate him and his administration. This review effort would be hird by hime and report to him.



5. There have been $450,000 in draw down of federal money that are being investigate amid allegations of public corruptions.

6. Flint Mayor Dayne Walling announced he welcomes early review by the FBI to stop corruption.



7.Walling pledged that he will not sweep problems under the rug in Flint its a big rug. Walling said we have a responsibility to be transparent. He will take questions from the council.



8. Flint Council person Josh Freeman asked how the external review will be paid for. Walling said out of the City Attorney Cost Center.



9.David Davenport was making noise and appeared ti be trying to disrupt the meeting.



10.Councilperson Neeley to Mayor Walling. A federal review of Flint is a serious matter and nnot to be brushed over.Walling responded ,there will be a whole series of issues. The Feds are suspending the funds until an investigation is completed.



11.Neeley to Mayor. What is the scope of review that you will assign to an attorney that you hire to investigate you?



12. Neeley to Mayor. The dollars in question were spent during your administration.



13. Neeley to Mayor. Ypu said prior administration but some time you Mr. Mayor will have to step up to the plate and take responsibility.

14. Walling said he has been proactive with his co-operation.



15.Neeley chastised the Mayor for blaming the council for weakening the city of flint purchasing guidelines when appropriating the federal money in question. There appears to be some council complicity in this issue. Ms. Fields was a darling of the Flint City Council and vilified by the Buchanan/Williamson Administration.



16.The Mayor of Flint Dayne Walling was strong in his presentation. He announced that he is freezing more of the money than the feds required. One thought is that he is punishing Fields and pulling all her funding. Pay backs can be hell. Council person Freeman asked if named Flint City employees were being suspended. I think he was talking about Steve Montel and Tracy Atkins. The Mayor said no, and appeared to dream up some sort of positive spin on that.



17.Kudos to the Mayor of Flint for going into the lions den to make this announcement and take questions directly from the council. That’s the toughness I expect from my Mayor of Flint.



18. Neeley chastised Flint City Council President Jackie Poplar for her rebunking of David Davenport. I think she went a little over the top but Davenport was fully co-operationg as this drew attention to him.Neeley said her relative and city department head Donna Polar was also talking loudly. Donna Poplar was talking to Barbara Griffiths Wilson said Ms Wilson later. My tjhought was that Jerry Springer has nothing on the turmoil of a Flint City Council meeting.



19.Flint City Council President than loudly announced the rules for the public to address the Flint City Council.



20. Alex Harris stopped by my seat to tell me some tidbits. The Federal Corruption charges are all on Wallings watch [ I doubt this] .



21. The public began to address the Flint City Council. The first speaker was the mother of a murdered child, heart rendering.



22. Looking at the council agenda another Attorney Dean Yeotis sewer lawsuit notice has been given concerning events of May 19 and 25. Have we not fixed this multi million dollar deficiency in out sewer system?



23.The mother of a murdered child is criticizing the recently announced cease fire a cowardly act by the city essentialy codeling criminal. My observatoin that we have had diversion programs for first ffendersfor decades this is just another variation.



24. David Davenport began has address toi the council talking about his alledged disruption of during Mayor Wallings presentation. He said he was laughing at the lies.



25.Davenport said that Walling is trying to blame the corruption charges on past city administrator Michael Brown.



26. David Davenport called anyone who supports Mayor Walling a criminal.



27. I continued my review of the city council agenda.

Item 110988 Settlement / Speer vs City of Flint. Violation of first amendment rights amount of $30,000 to Keith Speer and his attorney Leonard Kruse. The events surrounding this cause arose during and by the Buchanan/Williamson adminstration. Possible Buchanan should pay the money back to the city.



28. Other settlements, $12,500 to Charles Young, $30,000 to Kar;l Petrich, $75,000 to Christina Conely a whistleblower issue, $30,000 to Joseph Anderson.



29. Next public speaker Chris Delmoroney talked to signs on city property between the sidewalk and the road.



30. Council person Lawler refered the sign issue to the Flint City Attorney. I have a financial interest in this issue.



31. Mayor Walling was compared to Obama by one speaker.



32. Another speaker, Barbara Griffiths Wilson talked of the investigation of Buchanan when he was ombudsman for sexual harrassment, this eventually cost him his job and destroyed the reputation of that office by the removal and the protracted litigation. This speaker also was critical of Smiths residency.





33. Neeley then chastised Poplar for letting the previous speaker talk politics at the mike.

34. Flint City Council President interjected that it was the Flint Emergency Financial Manage that gave the Flint Journal a sweet heart tax abatement. He actualy blamed the state intervention on this issue. When the council would not approve the abatement because of its conditions were not met the Flint Journal used its then great power to go to the state , destroy the mayor office, cripple the council oversight power cause the appointment of an emergency financial manager that gave them what the wants and now took. I think that is what he ment..



35.Flint City Council President Jackie Poplar then turned to Neeley in response to his criticizing her and said. Mr. Neeley when Mr. Davenport called me a whore you did not defend me . Why are you defending others now. Neeley and Davenport erupted, probably the desired result that ended with Poplar ordering the Flint police officers present to escort Davenport from the chambers which they did.He went loud.



36. At the public mike Eric Mays joined the fray. He said the Feds are coming after City Administrator Greg Eason. There will be indictments before the November election. The FBI is investigating a sitting Mayor of Flint Michigan that has never happend before.



37. Mays said that the police are investigation absentee ballot abuse. Eric is know as the king of absentee ballot campaigns. With prior allegations of abuse that resulted in changes of the state law.



38. Mays [ I assume talking about his absentee ballot advocacy] declares he will affect the rsult of the August election. He says he has done it three times before. Thanks for the heads up Eric that will justify any amount of increased scrutiny of any absentee ballot you touched or caused to be sent to a voter.



39. Alex Harris sai what the Mayor is selling is a fraud.



40 Harris said, do not fall into the shame that the feds are not looking at Walling. There was a meeting of a Federal Grand Jury on this issue July 6th. The mayor announced tonite that he is hiring an attorney to investigate him. [ Could this be an attorney to defend him?].Alex Harris said that he has documentation that mayoral appointee Tracy Atkins is double dipping like former police chief Dicks was and he was charged.



41. Alex Harris asks why his close friend and very public political ally Kate Field of Advanced Solutions is being thrown under the political bus and having these federal charges directed at her.



42. Harris pointed out Walling lost the funding for Montel and Dawn but kept them employed by paying them from other cost centers. He said the Mayor Broke the Law and not there is a full cover up in progress.



44. End- I think the Mayor did the right thing tonite and showed his integrity and strength, just what we need in a Flint Mayor.-Terry Bankert 7/26 2011 on Flint City Council meeting of 7/25/11







This post is by Flint Divorce and Bankruptcy Attorney Terry Bankert. Divorce lawyer Terry Bankert often is involved in child custody, child support, parenting time and grandparents rights.



Flint Matrimonial Lawyer Bankert’s articles on Family Law to include Divorce they can be found at http://terrybankert.blogspot.com/. Flint Bankruptcy Lawyer Bankert also writes about chapter 7 bankruptcy at http://dumpmycreditors.wordpress.com/
 Divorce, custody child support and other topics at



Bankert is active in his community and presents information on a wide variety of topice through his blog at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/




You are invited to Join Bankert’s Face Book group “ Family Law and Bankruptcy Discussions” at





You can join Bankert on facebook at http://www.facebook.com/attorneybankert










Family Law attorney Bankert can be reached at http://www.attorneybankert.com/


or 1-810-235-1970.



Bankert post often on Flint Talk . Look for the thread Good Morning Flint at





Bankert has posted over 4,000 pictures and videos on his expierence as a FLINTOID at

/ , included are origional picture of daily FLINTOIDS talking to you see http://www.flickr.com/photos/30366181@N05/sets/72157627214317302/show/

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, July 22, 2011

FLINT MICHIGAN, AMERICAS MOST VIOLENT CITY , FLOATS UP A CEASE FIRE PROGRAM. IT WORKED IN CHICAGO AND BOSTON WILL IT WORK IN FLINT?

FLINT THE MOST VIOLENT CITY IN AMERICA PRESENTS A CARROT AND STICK CEASE FIRE CRIMINAL JUSTICE DRIVEN MODEL TO LOWER THE LEVEL OF VIOLENT CRIME!

Is this Mayorial politics or a well researched and effective program representing  professional intergovernmental relations to reduce violence in our troubled city. I think the latter.[trb]




FLINTS CEASEFIRE, PREEMPTIVE STRIKE OR JUST ANOTHER LIBERAL PROGRAM TO CODDLE CRIMINALS?[tr]



I support and appreciate this effort just exercising my right here to bring forth information and ask a few questions.[trb] The use of the term “ Cease Fire” denotes to me taking guns off the street and reducing firearm related crimes. The Flint model as explained so far seems to have a few but not all of the essential criteria for this model to work. Hope they let me into the press conference I have a couple of questions.[trb]



FLINT, Michigan -- The first "call-in" meeting of the city's Ceasefire anti-crime program is under way at a Flint community center.[3]



This post is by Terry Bankert of GOOD MORNING FLINT! He is the reporter publisher. http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/




GOOD MORNING FLINT! A community focused blogg and news source. Bankert ,born in Flint, is a divorce/bankruptcy attorney and previously was Flint Ombudsman and before that Flint City Clerk. See vita at http://www.attorneybankert.com/
. His comments are CAPS OR cited [trb].The style is to minimize transitions, fully cite draw your own conclusions.[trb

THE FIRST FLINT "MEETING"!

The meeting, which is not open to news media, started with a session that included a crowd of residents, followed by a meeting among authorities, selected community figures and non-violent criminal suspects offenders called in to be offered a conditional hold on arrest warrants and a new path in life with the help of a social services and guidance.[3]



HERE IS WHAT WORKS



Tactics That Can Reduce Gun Violence



NIJ researchers have identified several intervention tactics that, if implemented properly, successfully disrupt or prevent offenders and potential offenders from acquiring and using illegal firearms. The researchers use special terms to describe these tactics, outlined below.[10]



Is the flint program firearm focused or intented to bring teenagers back from the brink of criminality?[trb]

Suppression and Deterrence



Interventions to stop or reduce gun violence within a community involve either suppression or deterrence. The most successful interventions do both by integrating tactics first developed in Boston (see Project Ceasefire and Focused Deterrence) and expanded upon by other cities. These tactics are:

"Retailing" — Retailing is deterrence intended to prevent crimes from happening.[10]

[Retailing Ensuring that an anticrime measure is known to the target criminal audience (e.g., gathering together all gang members to warn of prosecution, posting notices at notorious hangouts or conducting a media campaign about gun possession).[10]



WHAT RETAILING WILL THE FLINT PROGRAM DO?[TRB]

"Levers"/"Pulling Levers" — Preventing violent behavior or gun use by exploiting a targeted individual or groups' vulnerability to law enforcement to get them to comply. Levers involve suppression or the threat of suppression — increased police presence and use of harsh measures or sanctions against high-profile offenders.[10]



Retailing and lever pulling are accomplished using "carrots and sticks" — the simultaneous use of incentives and hardball law enforcement to show gang members or other targets of the intervention that the police and the community are serious, while offering alternatives to criminal behavior.[10] What levels will the flint program use?[trb]

An example of an effective stick is threatening federal prosecution for possession — not use — of an illegal weapon. Boston retailed to gang members that police were using this stick by posting announcements about the two-year imprisonment of a leading gang member for carrying a gun.[10]

A lever used to make gang members desist from violence is the threat of holding all of them accountable for violence committed by any one of them.[10]

Carrots provided by these programs are usually free access to services such as job placement and counseling. This requires considerable commitment by the local community to ensure that youth receive viable alternatives to violence and crime.[10]

Project Safe Neighborhoods continues to refine and implement these tactics nationwide.[10



HERE IS SOME BACK GROUND ON CEASE FIRE. [TRB]





CeaseFire is a national public health strategy proven to make communities safer...[4]



CeaseFire is a national public health strategy that has been scientifically proven to reduce shootings and killings. An interdisciplinary model, CeaseFire maintains that violence is a learned behavior that can be prevented using disease control methods. Concentrating intervention on communities most severely impacted by violence the model uses data to identify and detect potentially violent events, interrupt and intervene on situations likely to result in a shooting or killing and works to change the behavior and social norms that perpetuate violence [4]



IN BOSTON

The working group included community-based, street-wise individuals familiar with the local gang culture, such as a police gang unit known as the Youth Violence Strike Force (YVSF). The group struggled for months to design, implement and test an intervention [opens in pop-up window]; the result was Operation Ceasefire, which reduced firearm violence by 68 percent in one year.[9]

The two main elements of Ceasefire were (1) a direct attack on illicit firearms traffickers and (2) a set of intervention actions that gave gang members a strong deterrent to gun violence. Police placed strong and targeted enforcement pressure on gang members to discourage gun carrying. The researchers called this strategy "lever pulling [opens in pop-up window]" and called efforts to spread the word among gang members about increased enforcement "retailing [opens in pop-up window]."[9]

Why Ceasefire Worked



The "levers" were the youths' vulnerabilities to a wide range of penalties, from deportation, to going to prison for parole violations, to receiving a sentence for 10 years without parole in a federal penitentiary. Intervention operations involved cooperation between local police and federal law enforcement: [9]

The main components of the Ceasefire program can be replicated through a dedicated collaboration between local, state and federal partners that is evidence-based, uses proven tactics and strategies, continually monitors progress, and adjusts to circumstances. [9]

IN FLINT
About 80 cars sat outside the building when the meeting started. About half that many remain after residents were asked to leave so the session directly addressing the suspects could begin.[3]



Pastor Ronnie Wiggins of Higher Quality of Life Ministries sat in on the beginning of the meeting. He said he didn't know how many in the crowd were those invited as potential Ceasefire participants.[3]



But he believes the program will have an effect with time, as trust builds between the organizers and the individuals invited to participate.[3]



"It's a good start," he said. "I think it'll have to be an ongoing process."[3]



Bettie Wilborn, another resident who attended the first part of the meeting to hear about the effort, was pleased.[3]


The Program

Based on a public health model, CeaseFire works to interrupt the cycle of violence and to

change norms about behavior.

[7]



Some program elements focus on risky activities by a small

number of carefully selected members of the community with a high chance of either “being shot

or being a shooter” in the immediate future.

[7]



An outreach staff counseled clients they recruited on

the street. In the main, they were young men already marginalized from the rest of society; they

found their friends, identity and respect among their youthful peers, as far from the constraints of

society as they could put themselves.

[7]



The job of outreach workers was to mentor and counsel

them, assess their needs, and connect them with a broad range of services. CeaseFire’s violence

interrupters worked alone or in pairs, mediating conflicts between gangs and intervening to stem

the retaliatory violence that threatens to break out following a shooting.

[7]



They worked the street in

the night, talking to gang leaders, distraught friends and relatives of recent shooting victims, and

others who were positioned to initiate or sustain cycles of violence.

[7]

Local clergy and community

groups participated in marches, rallies and prayer vigils focused on reinforcing the

unacceptability of violence in the community. Educational materials were distributed that aimed

at changing norms about violence and enhancing knowledge of the risks of engaging in violence.

[7]



"It's reaching out to one another and trying to make the world better," said Wilborn, 72. "It's going to be alright if we keep working together. We have to watch out for one another."[3]


WHAT SOME MLIVE READERS SAID


intheknow767 July 21, 2011 at 9:02PM



THIS IS DANGEROUS BACK ROOM STREET JUSTICE THAT OUR CONSTITUTION WAS MEANT TO KEEP FROM HAPPENING. THERE WILL BE CLAIMS OF DISCRIMINATION, ETC. COURT PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE POTENTIAL DEPRIVATION OF ONE'S LIBERTY ARE HELD IN PUBLIC TO PROTECT EVERYONE...

THIS IS WHAT IS DONE IN THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES AND CERTAIN MID-EAST COUNTRIES...

TRIAL IS SECRECY...[3]





drummersmom July 21, 2011 at 8:09PM

I love how bad guys are always offered 'deals' while the rest of us are expected to play by the rules. [3]









jazzman71 July 21, 2011 at 8:39PM



The criminals get the deals because they do understand the rules. They know how to play the system and when to do it. They know who to con and how to do it. Twenty years from now the same criminals will be offered the same deals by the same people at the same expense to the taxpayers. Buy them a one way bus ticket and see what kind of deal they can get somewhere else. Those who support them can go with them, on the same bus, at their own expense. [3]





intheknow767 July 21, 2011 at 9:04PM

Follow

If you have arrest warrants, I demand, as a taxpayer that you arrest them...not coddle them into being "good".... Are you kidding me???[3]







976431 July 21, 2011 at 10:39PM





Then they'll throw in some bonuses, like the pukes in Detroit and Saginaw did. You know, the ones who want to have all the job application forms stripped of questions like "have you ever been convicted of a felony"?

Absolutely disgusting.

You pukes are pathetic.[3]




MORE ON THE NATIONAL MODEL BEING APPLIED TO THE STREETS OF FLINT.


The Department of Justice report validates the CeaseFire model as an evidence-based intervention that reduces shooting and killings and makes communities safer. The report found the program “effective” with “significant” and “moderate to large impact,” and with effects that are “immediate.”[6]

Summary of the Results – CeaseFire Chicago intervention is effective at:

Decreasing shootings and killings

41-73% drops in shootings and killings in CeaseFire zones.

16- 35% drop in shootings directly attributable to CeaseFire.[6]

Decreasing retaliatory murders

100% reductions in retaliation murders in 5 of 8 neighborhoods.[6]

Making shooting “hot spots” cooler

“In every program area there was a substantial decline in the median density of shootings following the introduction of CeaseFire.”[6]

Effectively helping highest risk youth

85 – 99% of high-risk clients needing help, received help from CeaseFire.

Clients received help in getting jobs, education, drug treatment, and more.

99% of clients reported that CeaseFire had a positive effect on their lives.[6]

Making neighborhoods safer

A positive effect on neighborhood safety was shown in every community studied.[6]




THE RECENT STICK.



"We want the criminals to know that if you use a gun in Flint, you're going do hard, federal time in prison," said U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade.McQuaude, alongside Genesee County Prosecutor David Leyton and nearly even level of law enforcement in Genesee County, announced a new initiative Thursday. It's aimed at shooting down guns crimes[2]



This is a well documented approach that should be supported by the comunity that should demand and reciueve transparency and commiunity reporting. [trb] http://www.attorneybankert.com/










SOURCES

[1]



[2]



[3]



[4]



[5]CeaseFire Illinois (CeaseFire)





[6]

l



[7]





[8]

Slide show on Chicago program.



[9]





[10]

http://www.nij.gov/nij/topics/crime/gun-violence/prevention/tactics.htm

Sphere: Related Content