Browns budget to spend stimulus on police and fire instead of Flint Citizens

Flint Interim Mayor Mike Brown Monday took the wraps off a budget proposal he hopes will wipe away millions of dollars of red ink. [1]
To wipe out a $15 million budget deficit, Brown is calling for more job cuts. [1]

Temporary Mayor Michael Brown said the layoffs could be less severe if the city's unions agree to wage and benefit concessions.[2]


Pictures and short videos of Mike Budget Presentation 4/6/09
thumb nail
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30366181@N05/sets/72157616465792004/

slide show
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30366181@N05/sets/72157616465792004/show/



In his proposed budget, two of the hardest hit departments would be police and fire.[1]
Public safety jobs make up about 65 percent of the city's budget, which is why Brown had to look at those departments to get the budget back in the black.[1]

I went to City Hall and got the Adopted Budget for 2009 to compare last years figures with the Mayors Proposed. I used the Adopted 7/15/09

-
LINE ITEM
General Government 000
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
429051.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
0
-LINE ITEM
CITY COUNCIL 101
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
1131339.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
1000291.00
-
LINE ITEM
68TH DISTRICT COURT 136
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
5899204.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
5480269.00
-
LINE ITEM
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 171
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
329896.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
342393.00
-
LINE ITEM
CITY ADMINISTRATOR 172
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
765372.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
784785.00
-
LINE ITEM
LABOR RELATIONS 173
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
0
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
391858.00
-LINE ITEM
RISK BENEFITS MANAGEMENT 174
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
302553.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
304004.00
-
LINE ITEM
HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION 175
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
323494.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
224975.00
-
LINE ITEM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT 191
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
1882910.00
FY 9 ADOPTED
2037578.00


-LINE ITEM
BUDGET MANAGEMENT 212
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
96366.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
122863.00
-
LINE ITEM
CITY CLERK 215
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
749330.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
531245.00
-
LINE ITEM
INFORMATION SERVICES 228
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
0
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
279000.00
-
LINE ITEM
PURCHASING SERVICES 233
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
318418.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
278188.00
-
LINE ITEM
TREASURY CUSTOMER SERVICES INCOME TAX 253
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
1659029.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
1719076.00
-
LINE ITEM
ASSESSMENT 257
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
1446509.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
1510501.00
-LINE ITEM
CITY CLERK ELECTIONS 262
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
632841.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
477901.00
-
LINE ITEM
LEGAL DEPARTMENT 266
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
976305.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
1159471.00
-
LINE ITEM
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION 269
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
164936.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
158913.00
-
LINE ITEM
HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION 270
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
940753.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
599991.00
-
LINE ITEM
OMBUDSMAN 290
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
210132.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
342593.00
-LINE ITEM
POLICE DEPARTMENT 301
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
23049573.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
24793919.00
-
LINE ITEM
EMERGENCY 911 ,325
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
2851493.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
2522175.00
-
LINE ITEM
FIRE DEPARTMENT 337
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
13470750.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
14115539.00
-
LINE ITEM
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 371
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
111607.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
171498.00
-
LINE ITEM
TRANSPORTATION STREETS 443
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
2100000.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
2100000.00
-LINE ITEM
COMMUN ITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 690
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
346962.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
481266.00
-
LINE ITEM
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 748
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
0
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
1015145.00
-
LINE ITEM
PARKS AND RECREATIONS 751
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
2525998.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
3041696.00
-
LINE ITEM
FRINGE BENEFIT FUND-UNION REPS 1600/1799 , 835
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
389808.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
361356.00
-
LINE ITEM
EXTERNAL CONTRIBUTIONS 880
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
150,000.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
0
-LINE ITEM
TRANSFERS 966
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
3046633.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
131,389.00
-
TOTAL 101 GENERAL FUND
FY10 MAYORS RECOMMENDED
66301262.00
FY 9 ADOPTED 7/9/089
66461878.00



If council members approve Brown's proposed budget to fill the gap, 85 city jobs would get cut, mostly in public safety.[1]
"These tough decisions have to be made now," Brown said.[1]
The city must begin paying back its $14-million deficit, and the $66-million 2009-10 general fund budget includes a $2.4 million debt payment.[2]
Something does not sound right. When was the last time someone actually inspected the retirement fund. This should be looked into immediately.[Posted by Rabbidfoot at [2]

Brown's breakdown looks like this: 48 positions would be eliminated from police forces and 24 from fire crews, and the rest would come from other offices.[1]
The police department was trimmed by nearly 50 positions in 2008. Sgt. Rick Hetherington of the police sergeants union said it's going to be difficult for the residents."The citizens are the ones who are going to suffer," Hetherington said. "There's going to be slower response times."
[2]

Many council members were not pleased public safety took the brunt of the hits.[1]
"Am I willing to work with you? Yes. To do all I can. But we cannot cut the service for the people in this city," said Councilman Kerry Nelson.[1]
"I think before we get to the point before we even look at that, we need to look at streamlining administration," said Councilwoman Sandy Hill.[1]
Police and fire union leaders say their departments are already stretched thin and can't take any more cuts.[1]
"All I hear is, 'Cuts in police and fire, cuts in police and fire,'" said Keith Speer with the Flint Police Officers Union.[1]
"We can't take it. We lost 48. We already lost 48. We need those guys back, let alone cut 48 more."[1]
"We only run the department right now with six stations," said Ray Barton with the Flint Firefighters Union.[1]
"That would take us down to four stations because 24 positions we would have to shut down two stations."[1]
The interim mayor says it's too early to talk about closing fire stations.[1]
There's hope potential federal stimulus money could help the budget. A public hearing on the proposed budget will happen later this month.[1]
A final budget has to be in place by June.[1]


So let me get this straight... Lay off 48 and use stimulus money to hire back 50? What a scam! Everyone involved with this should be ashamed of themselves. That stimulus money was/is intended for the already laid off officers. I'm guessing this is how it went down: when they applied for the stimulus money, their application stated they had 48 officers laid off and this money were to be used to bring them back.. It is quite convenient and obvious that they again are to lay off another 48 officers. Now, the stimulus money will pay for officers the city CAN afford and the money that is already there will be redirected to pay for something in the administration... ie Daryl Buchanan and other left overs from the previous administration. This is the same as making a false claim with your insurance company. [Posted by 48Forgotten
At [2]
And don't count on the police officers to make concessions. They already left the laid off officers out to dry when they voted against the Teamsters. It it clear to all of us they are only concerned for their own welfare. If you don't believe me, just check response time when they back up other officers that are still working. [Posted by 48Forgotten
At [2]
A couple of years ago the MSP Troopers paid for an entire recruit class (about 100 Troops) to stay on the road when Granholm threatened lay offs. They paid for them out of their own retirement fund. That is a brotherhood and their actions proved that they cared about each other. Too bad nothing like that will ever happen at the FPD. Everyone is out for themselves and that was proven when Williamson was mayor. [Posted by 48Forgotten
At [2]

Michigan police agencies are hoping the federal stimulus package will help end a seven-year decline in their ranks. [3]
So far, the stimulus money that has flowed to the state has not translated into a lot of new officers being hired, although the money could prevent some layoffs. [3]
But many agencies are applying for the next wave of police grants, which they're more likely to use to beef up their ranks. [3]
"With the times we're facing, with the way the economy is looking, we're ecstatic to have this money coming to us," said Lt. Noel Garcia, a spokesman with the Lansing Police Department. [3]
Many departments — including Detroit, Flint and Lansing — aren't sure how the initial money will be used. They'll make those decisions in the next few weeks, along with other regional partners that share drug investigation units or task forces that could benefit from the cash. [3]
"We don't want to jump the gun," Garcia said. "We want to make sure we're using the money wisely." [3]
See [3]
http://money.aol.com/article/michigan-police-bank-on-stimulus-to/414244?icid=sphere_classic




Sources
[1]
http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/story?section=news/local&id=6747499
[2]
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2009/04/proposed_flint_budget_includes.html

Sphere: Related Content

Family court judge flunks the basics!

AMERICAN INTERNET NEWS
vol 4/4/09
http://www.americaninternetnews.com/
The" new" news alternative. Free writers invited, Free advertising invited, subscription free with your email address. Paid premium ,2 above the cut, advertising available.
* * *
Good Morning Flint!,By Terry Bankert ,http://www.divorcelawguy.com/
Full article at
http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
* * *
-
Do You want to be in a movie? Casting call in Flint noon to 5 pm. Sunday 4/5/09 at Buffalo Wild Wings,3192 S. Linden Rd. Lyon Productions movie "Minor League a Football story" Terry Bankert is planning on trying out.
- ad-
http://www.divorcelawyguy.co/SATURDAY’S Radio show "Know the Law" 9-9:30 AM. WFLT 1420 A.M. broadcasting from Flint Michigan. 239-5733 (810). Call in your Family Law Questions.
http://www.ontheradio.net/radiostations/wfltam.aspx
-ad-
SUNDAYS’S Family Law Column in the Flint Newspaper CPSA Courier See
http://cpsacourier.com/
- - -
THE JUDGE JUST CANNOT SAY MY REFEREE DID A GOOD JOB, THEN CHANGE CUSTODY!
Necessary optimization. Flint Divorce Lawyer Terry Bankert today reviews an order to change child custody. Terry Bankert Flint child custody attorney observes as does the Court of Appeals that judges cannot blindly accept the finding of a referee, especially when custody of a child is changed. For more Flint Family Law attorney articles read the articles posted on the website of Flint Divorce attorney Terry Bankert. The complete article can be found at http://terrybankert.blogspot.com/

Today’s Issues Released 3/26/09 Unpublished:

1.Custody; Fletcher v. Fletcher; Powery v. Wells; Order modifying parenting time; Whether the trial court properly affirmed the referee's decision to modify the established custodial environment based on a preponderance of the evidence; Vodvarka v. Grasmeyer; Terry v. Affum (On Remand);

2. The clear and convincing evidence standard; MCL 722.27(1)©);

3.Consideration of the best interest factors required by MCL 722.23; Rivette v. Rose-Molina;
4.No contact order between the child and the defendant-mother's current husband
[This opinion has been modified for media presentation. Consult an attorney before you rely on its content.-Terry Bankert]
ejournal summary

The court reversed the trial court's order modifying parenting time and remanded the case because it was not clear whether the referee applied the correct burden of proof (clear and convincing evidence), the failure to definitively use the correct burden of proof constitutes clear legal error, and the trial court erred in failing to consider the best interest factors as required by MCL 722.23.
HIGHLIGHTS
THE LOWER TRIAL COURT DID WHAT?
1.DAD SAYS I SHOWED CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES! DID THE REFEREE USE THE RIGHT LAW?
2.HIGH COURT TELLS THE JUDGE AND REFEREE TO DO IT RIGHT.
3.A BEST INTEREST ANALYSIS IN FAMILY LAW IS AS FUNDAMENTAL TO CHANGES IN CUSTODY AS AIR IS TO BREATHING.
4.REFERRING 101 FAILED!
5.THE TRIAL COURT JUDGE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER
"A mere statement by the trial court that the referee's findings were in the best interests of the child is not a sufficient review of the best interest factors." Reversed and remanded.
–
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S
e-Journal Number: 42269,CHAD S. MAXAM, Plaintiff-Appellee,
UNPUBLISHED,March 26, 2009,v No. 280827,Van Buren Circuit Court
CRYSTAL A. NIEMI, f/k/a CRYSTAL A.SNYDER,
LC No. 02-049876-DC ,Defendant-Appellant., Before: Cavanagh, P.J., and Fort Hood and Davis, JJ.,PER CURIAM.
6.THERE WAS ABUSE OF DISCRETION
7.PROPER CAUSE. CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCE, PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
8.IF CHANGE PROVEN, CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT THEN CLEAR AND CONVINCING
9.MOM’S LONG TERM BOYFRIEND IS A SEX OFFENDER
In the instant case, plaintiff established by a preponderance of the evidence that there had
been a change in circumstances warranting modification of parenting time. Vodvarka, supra;
Terry, supra. Plaintiff discovered in April 2006 that defendant’s long-term boyfriend (now
husband) was a registered sex offender. Defendant had knowledge of her husband’s criminal
background for many years but never informed plaintiff of this information.
10.BUT HE WAS ONLY A MODERATE RISK
11.THERE WAS A JOINT CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT THE CHANGE IN PARENTING WOULD CHANGE THE CUSTODY
12.JUST WHAT BURDEN DID THE REFEREE USE
It is not clear on the record whether the referee in fact applied the correct burden of proof
(clear and convincing evidence) in the determination of whether to modify the existing custodial
environment. The referee noted the appropriate burden, with case citation, in the initial
recommendation and order. However, he mistakenly stated the "preponderance of the evidence"
standard in the second recommendation following remand, and did so without case citation.
13.JUST WHAT BURDEN DID THE JUDGE USE?
Similarly, the trial court failed to indicate which standard it applied when accepting the referee’s
recommendations. Rather, it just found the referee’s recommendations were appropriate and in
the child’s best interests.
14.CLEAR ERROR ON THE PART OF JUDGE
The failure to definitively use the correct burden of proof constitutes
clear legal error. Powery, supra.
15.THEY SENT IT BACK AND TOLD THEM TO DO IT RIGHT
16.JUST HOW DID A FAMILY COURT JUDGE FORGET ABOUT THE BEST INTERESTS
Furthermore, we also find the trial court erred by failing to consider the best interest
factors required by MCL 722.23. Neither the referee nor the trial court referenced the statutory
best interest factors in their orders. Rather, the referee recounted the findings of fact and the
referee and trial court both summarily stated the custody modification was in the child’s best
interest because it was neither reasonable to expect, nor possible to ensure compliance, with
defendant staying away from her husband every other week.
THEY SENT IT BACK AND TOLD THE JUDGE TO DO IT RIGHT
Because there was no reference on the record by either the referee in his recommendations and order, or by the trial court in its order, to the best interest factors, a remand for such findings is required. Rivette v Rose-Molina, 278 Mich App 327, 329-333; 750 NW2d 603 (2008). A mere statement by the trial court that the referee’s findings were in the best interests of the child is not a sufficient review of the best interest factors.
- ad
On 4/30/09 at 6:30 PM The Genesee County Democratic Party is sponsoring a forum/debate between the Flint Mayoral candidate. The location is UAW Local 651 on Robert T Longway. This will be the last forum before this most important election in May. You are invited.
- - -
World News,
http://news.google.com/nwshp?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8
Flint Commercial News
www.mlive.com/flint ,
http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/index ,
http://www.wnem.com/index.html,
Posted here by
Terry Bankert
http://www.flintdivorce.com/
You are invited to continue these discussions on my face book.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry-Bankert/645845362
Email through my web site,http://www.terrybankert.com/ , Family Law advice at ,
http://www.attorneybankert.com/, Need Divorce Now! , http://www.3hourdivorce.com/ ,
http://www.dumpmyspouse.com/ , http://www.spousedumpster.com/Special Family Law needs ,
http://www.changemychildsupport.com/ , http://www.seemygrandbabies.com/ ,
Daily Blog Posted to:gmf,http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/ , http://twitter.com/terrybankert
other , http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry-Bankert/645845362
, http://www.flinttalk.com/ , http://www.myspace.com/terrybankert
, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Flintcitizen/ , http://www.bloggingformichigan.com/
advertising ,gmf post, 2 above cut $25 per day below $25 per week. Free at end.

Sphere: Related Content

When does the public have a right to know about a Federal Judges retirement letter to the President?

Good Morning Flint
4/2/09
Terry Bankert
http://www.FlintDivorce.com

Having just gone through the interview process for judicial appointment to a State Court position I was curious , no interest in serving, about the selection process for the Federal Court . I heard a rumor about a possible retirement from the Federal Bench and the scrambling of local State Judges for consideration. I do not know if anybody is retiring. I do wonder if the letter of intent to retire is public? How does the public know of the intended retirement of a jurist?

HOW DOES A FEDERAL JUDGE RETIRE and WHEN THE PROCESS BEGINS IS IT PUBLIC?

Judges cease performing their judicial duties when they retire by choice or because of ill health or death, or when they are subjected to the disciplinary actions of others.[5]

FEDERAL JUDGES

The main actors in the federal system are the men and women who serve as judges and justices. What characteristics do these people have that distinguish them from the rest of the citizenry? What are the qualifications – both formal and informal – for appointment to the bench? How are judges selected and who are the participants in the process? How do judges learn to be judges? How are judges disciplined and when are they removed from the bench?[5]

WHEN JUDGES RETIRE

Perhaps more problematic than removing jurists for misconduct is the removal of those who have become too old and infirm to carry out their judicial responsibilities effectively. Congress has tried with some success to tempt the more senior judges into retirement by making it financially more attractive to do so. Since 1984 federal judges have been permitted to retire with full pay and benefits under what is called the rule of 80; that is, when the sum of a judge's age and number of years on the bench is 80. Congress has also permitted judges to go on senior status instead of accepting full retirement. In exchange for a reduced caseload they are permitted to retain their office and staff and – equally important – the prestige and self-respect of being an active judge.[5]

Judges often time their resignations to occur when their party controls the presidency so that they will be replaced by a jurist of similar political and judicial orientation. A 1990 study found that especially since 1954, "judicial retirement/resignation rates have been strongly influenced by political/ideological considerations, and infused with partisanship," thus indicating that many jurists view themselves as part of a policy link between the people, the judicial appointment process, and the subsequent decisions of the judges and justices.[5]

WHEN A JUDGE NOTIFIES THE PRESIDENT OF INTENT TO RETIRE, IS THIS PUBLIC INFORMATION?

Technically, the president nominates all judicial candidates, but historically the chief executive has been more involved in appointments to the Supreme Court than to the lower courts. [5]

FEDERAL JUDGES ARE NOMINATED BY THE PRESIDENT CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE

Federal judges are nominated by the President, confirmed by the United States Senate, and serve a life term. Potential nominees are usually recommended by members of the Senate who are from the President's political party. The Senate Judiciary Committee is responsible for conducting confirmation hearings for each nominee. In this framework, whom you know as well as your political leanings count. [4]

THE PRESIDENT DELIBERATES THEN ANNOUNCES TO THE PUBLIC

The framework of judicial selection is the same for all federal judges, although the roles of the participants vary depending on the level of the U.S. judiciary. All nominations are made by the president after due consultation with the White House staff, the attorney general's office, certain senators, and other political operatives. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), an arm of the Justice Department, customarily performs a routine security check. After the nomination is announced to the public, various interest groups that believe they have a stake in the appointment may lobby for or against the candidate. Also, the candidate's qualifications will be evaluated by a committee of the American Bar Association. The candidate's name is sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which conducts an investigation of the nominee's fitness for the post. If the committee's vote is favorable, the nomination is sent to the floor of the Senate, where it is either approved or rejected by a simple majority vote.[5]

OBAMA HAS 40 PLUSE JUDGESHIPS TO NOMINATE CANDIDATES FOR.

Nationwide, at least 41 vacant judgeships - 29 district and 12 circuit - will await Obama once he takes office, according to the Federal Judicial Center.(11/23/08)
The President will convey to a judge his interest in nominating him to the Federal District Court. Following confirmation by the United States Senate. This creates the impression that it may be a non public process in the beginning.

THE CONSTITUTION GIVES THE PRESIDENT AUTHORITY TO APPOINT JUDGES

"The Appointments Clause of the Constitution vests the President with the authority to nominate people to federal judgeships, and it vests the Senate with the authority to give its Advice and Consent on nominations to the federal bench," explained Gerhardt. "Article I of the Constitution further empowers the Senate with the authority 'to determine rules for its proceedings.'" Consequently, the Senate has developed a number of procedural rules to govern confirmation decisions. [4]

US SENATORS OF THE STATE OF THE APPOINTMENT AND PARTY OF THE PRESIDENT HAVE A GREAT INFLUENCE ON THE PICK OF A FEDERAL JUDICIAL NOMINEE

A second reason why presidents are likely to devote more attention to Supreme Court appointments and less to lower court appointments is that tradition has allowed for individual senators and local party leaders to influence, and often dominate, lower court appointments. The practice known as senatorial courtesy is part of the appointment process for district judges. Under senatorial courtesy, senators of the president's political party who are from the home state of the nominee are asked their opinions of the candidate by the Senate Judiciary Committee. In expressing their views about a particular candidate, these senators are in a position to virtually veto a nomination. Senatorial courtesy does not apply to appellate court appointments, although it is customary for presidents to defer to senators of their party from states that make up the appellate court circuit.[5]

US SENATORS WILL SUBMIT NAMES TO THE PRESIDENT.

In the case of district judge appointments, where names are often submitted by home-state senators, the Justice Department's function is more that of screener than of initiator. Regardless of who comes up with a list of names, the Justice Department's primary duty is to evaluate the candidate's personal, professional, and political qualifications. In performing this role the department may work closely with the White House staff, with the senators involved in the nomination, and with party leaders who may wish to have some input in choosing the nominee.[5]

THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION RATES CANDIDATES

For more than five decades, the Committee on the Federal Judiciary of the ABA has played a key role in evaluating the professional credentials of potential nominees for positions on the federal bench. The committee, whose 15 members represent all the U.S. circuits, evaluates candidates on the basis of three criteria: judicial temperament, professional competence, and integrity. A candidate approved by the committee is rated either "qualified" or "well qualified," whereas an unacceptable candidate is stamped with a "not qualified" label.[5]
Posted Here by Terry Bankert 04/02/09 You are invited to continue this discussion on my Face Book Page. http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry-Bankert/645845362


-
Sources
[1]
http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/metro.ssf?/base/news/122743180354080.xml&coll=2

-
[2]
http://www.fjc.gov/

-
[3]
http://washburnlaw.edu/news/2004/2004-04pdp-crow.php
-
[4]
http://www.lawcrossing.com/article/861/Careers:-Federal-Judge/
-
[5]
http://www.america.gov/st/usg-english/2008/May/20080522224217eaifas0.5669672.html



-FYI
Judge Paul V. Gadola
United States District Courtfor the Eastern District of MichiganFederal Building and U.S. Courthouse600 Church Street, Room 132Flint, MI 48502Courtroom: Room 127Chambers Telephone Number: (810) 341-7845Courtroom Deputy - Ruth Brissaud: (810) 341-7845Electronic Court Recorder - Jennifer Chase : (810) 341-7882
The Honorable Paul V. Gadola was born in Flint, Michigan, on July 21, 1929. Judge Gadola graduated from Michigan State University, with honors, in 1951, and received his Juris Doctor Degree from the University of Michigan Law School, in 1953.
He served in the U.S. Army from 1953 to 1955. Judge Gadola was in private practice in Genesee County, Michigan, from 1955 to 1989. Judge Gadola was nominated by President Ronald Reagan to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and took office on January 6, 1989. Prior to taking office, he was certified as a Diplomat in Civil Trial Advocacy by the National Board of Trial Advocacy, and as a Lifetime Fellow of the American Trial Lawyers Foundation, and served as a arbitrator for the American Arbitration Association and as a mediator for the Circuit Courts of Genesee and Shiawassee Counties. Judge Gadola is also a Fellow of the Michigan State Bar Foundation.
He is a member of the Executive Board of the Federal Bar Association - Eastern District of Michigan Chapter, and is the President of the Michigan Chapter of the Incorporated Society of Irish/American Lawyers, and is a member of the Board of Directors of the Historical Society for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, and is also a member of the Michigan Supreme Court Historical Society.
Judge Gadola is a member of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, and of the Advisory Committee of its Michigan Chapter, and of the Board of Directors of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. He is also a member of the Philadelphia Society, the Economic Club of Detroit, and the Committee of Sponsors of the Flint College and Cultural Development Fund.
He is a member of the Hannah Society and the President's Club of Michigan State University and has served as a member of the Board of Directors of the Michigan State University Development Fund and as a member of the National Board of Directors of Michigan State University Alumni Association, and served as a member of the Board of Directors of the Mott Community College Foundation.
Prior to taking the bench, Judge Gadola was an elected member of the Board of Trustees of Mott Community College, located in Flint, from 1969 to 1989 and served as its Chairman from 1983 to 1989. He formerly served as President of the Urban League of Flint, President of the Cystic Fibrosis Research Foundation of Genesee County, Chairman of the March of Dimes of Genesee County and Vice-President of the Genesee County Legal Aid Society and as a Director of the Flint Environmental Action Team. He also formerly served as a Director of the Flint Area Convention and Tourist Council.
-
http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/Judges/guidelines/topic.cfm?topic_id=160

-
http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/Judges/guidelines/index.cfm?judgeID=10

Sphere: Related Content