Change is good!

Looks like I was ahead of my time yet again.  Common sense, transparency and integrity.  It ain't hard but sadly we must institutionalize what every human should hold dear naturally.  Why?  Because not all humans are nice humans of course.  Oh, the stories I could tell...

But alas vindication is well, kinda nice.  At least no one can tell lies to others about Ben and what a bad guy he is for wanting to get this done for our city...

From the Rochester City Council Meeting Minutes - January 28, 2008 (page 3): "As requested by Councilmember Giovanelli, Council discussed the possibility of developing an Ethics Ordinance. Council was in favor of going forward with drafting an ordinance for their consideration. Mayor Bikson requested City Attorney Cox proceed."

From the article below (sounds like some other citizen activist said this same thing in 2006...):
"...cronyism, nepotism and favoritism have been ongoing issues in his community over the last 20 years"

Scandal-weary cities call for ethics guidelines
Christine Ferretti / The Detroit News
Shelby Township -- It started with an alleged gesture of gratitude and ended in a furor.

The township's acting assessing director accepted $500 this spring from an area business as a gift after a tax parcel was split. He later told police he gave the funds to charity, but couldn't account for all of it. Officials determined the director violated a civil service rule that prohibits employees from accepting more than $25 from vendors. He was demoted and placed on unpaid suspension, and a criminal investigation ensued. But the incident has the township wondering if more can be done to avoid similar ethical conflicts in the future.

"It's frustrating. Doesn't everybody know it's wrong to take money or gifts?" asked Shelby Township Clerk Terri Kowal. "It plays into people's hands that are suspicious of politicians. It makes us all look bad."

But the township's dilemma is not unique. After scandals surrounding disgraced former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick -- and allegations involving other elected officials in cities such as Southfield and Ecorse -- a growing number of Metro Detroit communities are planning similar overhauls in hopes of restoring public trust.

Calls for reform
The Michigan Municipal League has teamed up with the state Association of Municipal Attorneys to evaluate the ethics policies of nearly 20 communities. Through the partnership, they created an online ethics manual that offers suggestions for dealing with conflicts of interest, disclosure, nepotism, and political and personnel concerns. It also covers enforcing violations.

"Transparency in government operations is something the public is increasingly expecting," said William Mathewson, general counsel for the league. "Local governments are facing tremendous financial challenges. It's a natural reaction that there would be more interest in the way that any government -- local or state -- is operated and how available funds are being utilized."

This fall, Attorney General Mike Cox made a similar move, unveiling a template and Web site to address local government ethics.

Since broader bills he's proposed for ethics reform have languished in the House and Senate, Cox said the new site provides helpful options now.

"We're trying to get the conversation started," he said. "We set up a template that elected officials can use."

The formula, Cox says, includes rules on gift bans, disclosure and nepotism, and calls for the creation of an ombudsman and three-member panel to field complaints and rule on penalties.

Warren Mayor Jim Fouts said he hopes his city will be the first in the state to adopt Cox's model, adding that Warren's current policy is inferior.

During his two-decade tenure on City Council, Fouts pushed for increased financial disclosure from public officials and prohibition against conflicts of interest. Under the previous administration, the city faced a multimillion dollar lawsuit after appointees solicited free tickets to sporting events and concerts.

"The present ordinance is not a complete package," he said. "It's open too much to interpretation and not very effective in assuring the public we've done everything we can to assure them there is no potential conflict of interest -- either real or imagined."

But some Warren officials question the scope and effectiveness of Cox's code. And so far, a vote on the measure has been postponed.

Warren City Councilman Mark Liss, who has proposed his own ethics ideas, said the current proposal has too many holes.

It fails to provide criteria for selecting ethics board members and doesn't allow them to initiate complaints or oversee ethics training. The board also needs at least five members, he said.

"We have to amend this thing ...it's just not there," said Liss, who claims Cox's policy is a political stunt. "It's not a bona fide effort. It needs to be done right."

Cox said people can pick and choose from the model.

"I've set the example," he said. "We can quibble about the details, but not about the point that it needs to be done."

Macomb paves the way
In November, Macomb County residents made history when they adopted a charter that will restructure the county's government. It calls for a full-time executive, a consolidated Board of Commissioners and an ethics board and policy. The changes are part of the county reorganization slated for 2011.

Charter Commissioner Jake Femminineo said right now, the county has a "suggested" ethics ordinance, but it doesn't specify any repercussions for violations. The new charter is very detailed in its minimum guidelines for the future ordinance, he said.

"Everything needs to be out in the open about what's going on and ensure that these things happening in Detroit -- like bribes and scandals involving contacts -- are not going to happen here in Macomb County," Femminineo said.

Femminineo said the future executive will appoint the ethics board members in five, staggered terms.

The five-member unpaid panel cannot include current or former employees or officials or their relatives.

St. Clair Shores resident Chris Vitale, who is a member of Shores Residents and Taxpayers Against Waste, is calling for many policies -- including ethics -- to be adopted in his city. The grass-roots group supports fiscal responsibility and transparency.


Vitale said cronyism, nepotism and favoritism have been ongoing issues in his community over the last 20 years. And although the city has a code of conduct, residents are hoping for an in-depth policy.

"It's a critical time. People are deciding if this is the place they want to stay or not," he said. "Sound financial policy and quality-of-life issues will keep people from migrating north of Hall Road."

Meanwhile, in Detroit -- currently the target of a widespread FBI corruption probe -- officials are also eager to revisit ethics practices.

"I think every elected official and every citizen shares a belief that transparency and ethics in government is needed," said Charter Commissioner Jenice Mitchell Ford, who served on Detroit's Board of Ethics from 2005 until last month, when she was sworn in as a charter commissioner.

Mitchell Ford said under the current system, the ethics board reviews complaints and determine if there is a violation. But members don't have the power to enforce it.

"All the board of ethics can do is make a recommendation," she said.

"Some people feel the board should have the power to discipline or remove. That power is all in the City Council right now."

cferretti@detnews.com (586) 468-0343

...cronyism, nepotism and favoritism have been ongoing issues in his community over the last 20 years.  Gee.  Sound familiar?  Luckily there is a FACTION on Council in Rochester today that gets this and is out to change it (against the wishes of the Old Guard and the other "FACTION".  Merry Christmas!

Schadenfreude

From our friends over at Merriam Webster:

Pronunciation: \ˈshä-dən-ˌfrȯi-də\
Function: noun Usage: often capitalized
Etymology: German, from Schaden damage + Freude joy Date: 1895
: enjoyment obtained from the troubles of others

It is without Schadenfreude, but rather a sense of vindication on things I was villified for even discussing back in 2007, that I share the following from the Oakland Press a couple of days ago:

Council unhappy with new law enforcement contract

By LAURIE PUSCAS

Special to The Oakland Press


The Rochester Hills City Council, in a 6-1 vote, “regretfully” approved a contract this week proposed by Oakland County to continue law enforcement services for the upcoming year.


A contract first submitted to the city on Sept. 22 contained changes shifting risk and liability from the county to the city. The city is still in the process of assessing its actual and potential increased costs.


“This contract was a significant material change to our existing contract,” said council President Greg Hooper, who cast the dissenting vote. “Shifting the liability to the city is a significant risk. “This is no way to negotiate the contract and maintain long-term relationships. The subcontractor was dictating the terms of the contract.”


The city resolution accepting the contract stated, “The City Council is aggrieved that these proposed changes to the agreement were not fairly or properly presented, discussed with or explained to the city by the county or sheriff representatives.”


Council members also said they were not given a reasonable opportunity or adequate time to evaluate alternatives.


“It appeared the county position was take it or leave it. Contractually, there was the idle threat that they could leave the city,” Hooper said. This would leave the city with the daunting task of contracting with another source or creating a police department between now and the end of the year.”


Hooper said he offered to extend the current contract for three months or up to a year while they negotiated, but the county would not budge.


“I have no ill will against the Sheriff Department and the men and women who service our community,” Hooper said. “They have done an excellent and professional job for the city.”


The recent contracts between the city and county for law enforcement have only been a year in length because of the bargaining negotiations among the county and the deputies, said Oakland County Undersheriff Mike McCabe. “Deputies worked without a contract for six years. The deputy arbitration came back Sept. 11,” he said.


Under the current 2009 agreement, the sheriff is to present a new agreement in August, city attorney John Staran said.


“In reality, it was rolled out at least a month later to the various municipalities’ administration people,” he said. “It was then forwarded to me to review.”


Staran said he looked over the changes and compared notes with the other communities in October. “There was a lot of back-and-forth with administration and the county,” he said.


The first material change to the agreement had to do with who is responsible to any loss or damage to the Rochester Hills substation building.


“The building was constructed and paid for by the city,” Staran said. “The current 2009 agreement provides what it would expect it to. The tenant, in this case the sheriff department, is responsible if there is loss or damage to the premise (due to their actions). Now the city is responsible.”


The second item has to do with a mutual indemnification and hold harmless clause. The current 2009 contract states if there is a claim as a result of the sheriff ’s department’s acts or omissions, the city would be held harmless.


The 2010 contract eliminates this clause.


“The city’s concern is what happens if we have some type of incident where a deputy is involved where a claim is made not only against the sheriff department but the city, too, or just the city,” Staran said.


“An incident in the city where a claim is made where a person is wrongfully arrested or there was excessive force, or an officer was driving carelessly and caused injury will potentially cost the city money in defense costs and a settlement.”


Staran said he is in the process of making sure the city is properly insured to manage the risk.


Judy Cunningham, corporation counsel for Oakland County, said there has been an allegation that the county did not give enough time to review the contract. She said Rochester Hills and Commerce Township were in discussions regarding the upcoming contract as early as April. However, she said she could not say whether the county made the municipalities aware of the changes in April.


Cunningham said it came to county administration’s attention that it did not have the legal authority to indemnify, and therefore changed the language in the contract.


However, Commissioner Tim Griemel sent an e-mail to the Board of Commissioners and city of Rochester Hills officials on Nov. 30 spelling out a legal argument that the county does in fact have the authority to indemnify, she said.


“The only community that has a problem with the contract is Rochester Hills, Cunningham said. “They are not obligated to have us provide that service, and we told them that.”


The city and its predecessor, the Charter Township of Avon, have had a contract with the county for law enforcement services for more than 30 years.


According to Staran, the agreement between the county and the city has remained virtually unchanged for more than 10 years.

Back in 2006, it was *supposed to be* about the money.  We all know it was *never* about the money.

For those needing a walk down memory lane, I have assembled this retrospective.

Turnout - or lack thereof

Oh my.  In Precinct 1, my home precinct, out of 1,699 registered voters, 169 voted (9.95%).  Precinct 2, over in Stuart & Jeff Cuthbertson's neck of the woods, out of 2,363 registered voters, only 225 voted (9.52%).  Precinct 3, Old Town Rochester, exactly 10% of 1,340 registered voters voted - 134.  Precinct 4, Stony Pointe and The Bluffs, a whopping 77 out of 1,041 voted or 7.4%.  In Precinct 5, the Wyngate area & newly built-out area north east of Parkdale, 183 out of 2,663 voted or 6.87%.  Add in 750 absentee voters sprinkled from those areas gives us 1,538 voters out of 9,106 registered - or 16.9% turnout.  Baaaaaaa.  Man, this has to change.  Now I see how people get these gigs for 25-30 years.  Not good.

More importantly, the Absentee Voter rules the roost.  750/1538 is 48.76% or just under half of the election is decided largely by those that receive the Absentee Ballot.  Those, as everyone knows, are mostly retirees and those over 65.  In this election, with near mirror accuracy, the final votes were very closely aligned with the Absentee votes.  So...those who have the ear of the old folks have a theoretical leg up.  Hmmmmm.

It is done.

Well that was fun.  I'm sure everyone will try to spin our election in a thousand different directions to please their agendas but at the end of the day we end up at the same spot we were on Monday.  Same 4 guys.  Same story.  Same agendas.  Same same.

Here's my spin. First - hats off to the Daves.  Both deserve a congratulations and despite our vast differences on the role the Old Guard plays in today's Rochester, as well as the committment to institutionalizing transparency and fairness, I still look forward to getting some wins that we can share together. 

Alliances made appear to have paid off for Dave Z.  Looks like working with established political organization works.   For my colleague Dave B...got to be some dissapointment with back-to-back 4th place finishes in the past 2 elections with less than 100 votes separating 4th and 5th place.  Maybe there's a message there?

I look at Jeff Cuthbertson and Stuart Bikson's tie for first with 150 votes separating them from 3rd place as pure affirmation that folks in our town are fully supportive of the direction this new council is taking us and a pox on those who have fought so hard to decieve, distort and destroy any positive being done here.  Get on board or go away.  I'm sure someone with a few lightbulbs not totally lit on the marquee will try to spin Jeff & Stuart's win as being bad for Rochester.  Ugh.

In an election year with no burning local issues to have a total newcomer be just 74 votes away from getting a seat is nothing less than amazing.  As you know I supported Cathy Daldin and still think she would have been a great add.  Aside from her real-world experience, would have been nice to have a little more estrogen on this testosterone laden council.

Lastly, Terry Tesh.  Let's not kid ourselves.  200 of his 259 votes came from the Old Guard as protests to Stuart and Jeff.  So for each of you that voted for Terry Tesh to spite the new leadership in Rochester - nice. 

Overall, turnout was pathetic.  I don't know how to fix that.  A topic for a whole 'nuther blog post.  One observation from next door...the results in the Hills' election show that maybe some folk's juice to get things done is on the wane.  One can only hope.

Time to get the Daves together and go out for a beer.

It's time!

The end of this month will mark my 2nd full year on Rochester City Council. Never being in politics before - it has been an interesting journey indeed. With the help of some really great people, we’ve established unprecedented levels of transparency and accountability in Rochester over the past 24 months, established sweeping changes in how our city is administered on a daily basis, have begun the process of cleaning up messes by institutionalizing the very things you and I live and breathe every day in the private sector.

This of course has not gone without pushback. At times significant pushback. People ensconced in the old way of doing things around here didn’t take too kindly to some new guy coming around and asking questions. And I’ve asked a lot of questions. I’ve been labeled persona non grata by our former City Manager, certain long standing members of the Downtown Development Authority and those still aligned to the former ruling elite. I’ve been called a liar and worse, only to be vindicated in the end. To me it is about letting common sense prevail with everyone having all their cards on the table so an informed decision can be made. This is the 21st Century folks.

Tomorrow, Tuesday November 3rd is of course election day. This council stuff is a lot of work so my hat is off to anyone who makes the sacrifice to serve. The election tomorrow is about moving Rochester forward. There are some candidates who in my estimation are aligned with that goal and there are others who are aligned with the old way of doing things.

Although four seats are open, tomorrow I will only be voting for three candidates:

• Mayor Jeffrey Cuthbertson
• Mayor Pro-Tem Stuart Bikson
• and a new person – Mrs. Cathy Daldin who is a downtown business owner and 20 year resident of Rochester.

In my opinion, these three give us our best chance of continuing our move out of the shadow of the past and into the bright future that awaits us.

Dave Becker has had over 25 years of public service and is to be commended for that. It is a real commitment and knowing what it takes he deserves a hearty thanks for his service to our community. But I feel it is time for us to move forward without him. Dave Becker was the only candidate to vote against the ethics ordinance I introduced this spring which requires people to disclose conflicts of interest and sets forth an independent Ethics Board to keep shenanigans out. He also voted this year against requiring organizations that receive taxpayer funds like Dinosaur Hill, RARA, RAYA and The Community House to submit their annual financial statements to the City so that we may see where our tax dollars are going. He also voted to sue private property owners who owned property on the Paint Creek Trail because they had a fence from a million years ago that was sitting on trail property, a lawsuit costing folks and business owners in some cases thousands in legal fees. Things like this lead me to believe a significant disconnect exists.

I backed Dave Zemens last election as you may recall. He didn’t get elected but came in fifth place. Council later appointed him to a seat that was vacated by Dave Katulic when Katulic quit late 2007. While we agree on many things, I’m not supporting Dave Zemens this time mostly because he has now aligned himself with the folks both he and I agreed represented what was wrong in Rochester back in 2007. Based on how much pushback I’ve had from this group over the course of the past 23 months, I really don’t see anything to have made me change my mind. Nor has Dave provided a good reason for me to understand why they're ok now.

I can work with anyone. Just be open, honest and accountable. Most of all be civil. We can respectfully agree to disagree then go out and get a beer afterwards. But these people are not civil. They are mean.  They have proven to be self-interested elitists who's only desire is taking care of their friends and pet projects held dear.  Be damned the cost (economic and non economic) and those who stands in the way (new guys). 

They are spiteful and have been way less than truthful when it comes to representing to their friends what I stand for, the direction this new Council is going and the truth behind the questions we ask.  Questions important to the effort of transparency, accountability and common sense in this city. Dave’s alignment with these nasty people for me is problematic.  But in the minority it is just a distraction.  A needless and unproductive distraction but a distraction nonetheless.  Time is valuable isn't it?

The last candidate Terry Tesh is not viable.

So its 3 for me: Cuthbertson. Bikson. Daldin.

Just my opinion of course, your mileage may vary. At a minimum, please just get out and vote. This is not a time to stay on the sidelines. We are facing an unprecedented challenge in the next several years. We need a strong bench that will do the right thing and look at things with a different eye. GET OUT AND VOTE!

This is our house

This past Saturday, as is the case with most fall Saturdays in Ann Arbor, you'll generally find me with a group of compatriots standing around the back of a car either on the Ann Arbor Golf and Outing golf course or the Victors Club lot between the Big House and Crisler Arena.  Sharing food and drink, waxing poetic about all things Maize and Blue.

This past Saturday we were humbled in extraordinarily crappy weather by a very good Penn State football team.  Good on them.  We are a work in progress and although we took a step backwards Saturday, I'm still very much a fan and looking forward to when the Freshmen are Junior and Seniors.

At any rate, near the end of the game, a large group of Penn State goofballs in the upper bowl started to chant "This...Is...Our...House".  That really pissed me off.  I mean congrats to the win but the last time you won in Michigan Stadium was like 1994.  So please.

I was talking with some neighbors yesterday during our neighborhood Halloween festivities where the kids get to be kids and the parents hang out and kibbitz.  One of my neighbors happens to be our Senate Majority Leader and he, I and a couple of other neighbors were speaking of Jennifer Granholm's visit to our town today.  She is coming (IMHO) specifically to mess with us in our house because of politics.  Frankly this pisses me off as much as those Penn State idiots did on Saturday.

She has messed with Rochester unmercifully solely in the name of politics for the past few years, moreso in the past year.  Killing projects, playing politics.  As a local government official in Rochester, and as a tax payer, it frankly grinds me.

Today at 1pm join us at an impromptu Tea Party on the front steps of the Rochester Community Schools building. Corner University and Wilcox (501 W. University, Rochester, MI 48307) East of Livernois, West of Rochester Rd. With Jen Jen's professed love of the Tea Bagger, this should be an interesting time.

God I can't wait until this vindictive woman is gone.  Seriously, her disconnect from reality is palpable.

...and they're off!

The first set of Absentee Voter ballots got mailed out yesterday and hit mailboxes today. Traditionally this marks the first day of the hard-core campaigning since as a general matter, the folks that got their AV ballots today are retirees who get them mailed automatically. Those in politics know exactly why this is important. Retirees vote. Always. And in an off-year municipal election where apathy reigns supreme (we generally have less than 20% turnout in the city council elections) this is important.

A lot of people have asked me who I support this election and why. I mean, I'm not up for two more years (assuming I want to do this again!) so who do I want to work with for the next 2 years.

I can't lie, the 2007 election was emotional. My first time doing this ever and it was the first primary in a quarter century in Rochester. I was campaigning for damn near 6 months straight. It took a real toll on my family as well as me. Came in second in the primary and third in the general. There was a lot of rough and tumble, most of which I was unprepared for. Lies and distortions were told door to door about me and certain others who ran on a change platform in 2007. Lies and distortions which were perpetrated by people I beat and unfortunately some by current council I sit with on the same podium today. I won't ever forget that. But that's politics, right? I digress...

This time around we face an even more critical juncture in Rochester than we did back in 2007. To be sure, the police issue was important and the death grip the Old Guardians had on our fair city was nearly impenetrable. But we did it. Myself and Jeff Matis were two new faces that ran on change and I am really proud of what we've accomplished in the past 2 years. But my goodness, the things we face today pale in comparison. We are fighting for our economic lives here. This is no time to sit this one out!

This election, I am supporting the re-election of Mayor Jeff Cuthbertson, Mayor Pro-Tem Stuart Bikson and newcomer Cathy Daldin. Jeff and Stuart are no brainers. Both have been at the forefront of responsible leadership on this council and are great assets to our community. Cathy Daldin is a newcomer and someone I think would be a great add to council. She owns Shamrock Travel in downtown, lives downtown and is a real straight shooter. She gets it and I really look forward to working with her on council in these uncertain times.

So there you have it. Ping me offline if you want to know more. You know how to get ahold of me!

Most of all, please vote. I can't tell you enough how critical it is that you participate. Your city needs you now more than ever!

If you don't think you'll be here on November 3rd, for any reason, ask now for an absentee ballot. It is painless. Click here for Absentee Voter Ballot information. Click here for the AV Ballot form

What's that smell?!?

Ok, I know. I've been away for a while. I'm sorry. The summer, all two and a half weeks of it, was jam-packed with family stuff. Now the kids are back to school, Julie is starting to work from home a bit and well things are starting to stabilize at work. Good news for this auto supplier and our 40 employees! I promise to set aside some more time to this blog. Now if we can just save our country from becoming the Soviet Union...I digress.

Is it just me or why is it when campaign season starts there are tons of dead skunks on the road. The campaign signs went up in Rochester last week and I swear, I've counted at least 10 dead stinking skunk carcasses around town in the same time frame. Coincidence? You be the judge.

In 2007, we campaigned on common sense, transparency and ending the deathgrip on power that was the Rochester Old Guard. Friends taking care of friends. Virtual clampdown on any transparency (absolute minimum to comply with the law excepted). Belligerent management left unchecked by a long-serving, friendly-to-the-cause council.

On November 6, 2007 the voters agreed and elected myself, Jeff Matis and Kim Russell to new seats on Rochester City Council. Within 3 weeks, long-serving City Manager Ken Johnson quit, and Councilperson David Katulic, the last of the old-guard Council Mohicans not displaced by the election, quit.

With the new council in place, a majority of which were like-minded in its assessment of what was wrong with Rochester's management team and direction, began to interject new life and new ideas into deeply held and entrenched ways of life. Not surprisingly, there were a few folks that didn't sit well with and they, as predicted, worked overtime to discredit, deceive and derail any attempt to instill transparency, common sense and fairness into the mix. But they were not successful.

Despite the pushback, and people changing sides, new folks were appointed to Boards and Commissions and voila! We have fresh new life and ideas throughout Rochester City Government. We have institutionalized common sense, have new, highly qualified and committed folks in places of authority throughout the City and everyone sees we are on the right track. Well, everyone except those that will never embrace the idea that Rochester is moving forward without them.

So while the skunks abound, this councilperson will work overtime to ensure that they do not return to drag Rochester back into its former self.

From the mailbag

Got this today - thought I'd share. Happy Tuesday!

PRESIDENT OBAMA's GOLF CZAR
ANNOUNCES THE FOLLOWING
RULE CHANGES TO THE GAME OF GOLF

Golfers with handicaps:
- below 10 will have their green fees increase by 35%
- between 11 and 18 will see no increase in green fees
- above 18 will play for free and even get a check from
the club/course played

The $ amount put in for bets will be as follows:
- for handicaps below 10 an additional $10
- between 11 and 18 no additional amount
- above 18 you will divide the tot al amount in the pot
(and you do not even have to play).

The term “gimme putt” will be changed to “entitlement putt” and will be used as follows:
- handicaps below 10, no entitlements
- handicaps above 11 to 17, entitlements for putter-length putts
- handicaps above 18, if on green, no need to ever putt; just pick it up

These entitlements are intended to bring about fairness in scoring so that the final scores of all players will be about the same.

In addition, a Player will be limited to a max of one birdie and/or six pars, any excess must be given to those fellow players who have not yet scored a birdie or par.

Only after all players have received a birdie or par from the player making the birdie or par, can that Player begin to count his score again.

The current USGA handicap system will be used for the above purposes but the term 'net score' will be available only for scoring those players with handicaps 18 and above.

This is intended to 'redistribute' the success of winning by making sure that in every competition the 'above 18' handicap players will post only 'net score' against every other player's gross score.

Per Obama.
“These new Rules are intended
to CHANGE the game of golf.
Golf must be about fairness only,
and have nothing to do with ability.”

It rolls downhill

Metro leaders brace for state cuts

From Christina Stolarz, Tuesday, July 21, 2009 The Detroit News (click on title above to read whole story - and you should)

"No one is immune from the budget challenges the state is facing right now," said Norm Saari, chief of staff for Sen. Jason Allen, R-Traverse City. "Everyone is feeling impacted by the budget reductions -- the medical community, the education community, the local government community."

"For the past eight years, government officials statewide have groaned as more than $3 billion in state-shared revenue cuts forced them to slash services and shrink jobs. The sharp decline in property taxes and a $1.7 billion state budget shortfall makes this year even worse.

City budgets are left to officials' best guesses -- followed by midcourse adjustments -- because it may take all summer for state officials to determine the latest round of cuts in state-shared revenue, said Summer Minnick, director of state affairs with the Michigan Municipal League.

State-shared revenue comes in two forms: a constitutional portion, which is tied to state sales taxes and is based on a distribution formula, and a portion through statutory funding, which is appropriated each year by the state. The statutory portion is what's being cut, Minnick said.

The upcoming cuts could range from $5 million to $100 million -- on top of Gov. Jennifer Granholm's executive order that cut $41 million in state-shared revenue from the 2008-09 budget, Minnick said. However, Granholm told the Associated Press on Friday that she won't support deeper cuts in state-shared revenue, saying "dangerous" cuts to public safety would further endanger the state's economy and must be avoided."

Looks like we were on to something

Sure, I'll take all the credit. Back in 2006, I started a push for transparency in this City and between myself and other newcomers to this Council, we were successful in shining lights into corners dark for decades. As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said...“Sunshine is the best disinfectant”.

On Tuesday, the Detroit News ran this editorial that completely validates what we've been trying to do around here. No longer do I have to sit in the audience as a private citizen with our home video camera, taping council meetings and posting them, along with city financial and other information, to my own website. Your City now does that for you. Heck, meetings are even on Cable TV now. Oh, the horror.

Change is good indeed!

Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Editorial: Here comes the sun
Movement to bring transparency to public spending is gaining real momentum
The Detroit News

In a short time, transparency in public spending has become the expectation rather than the exception. And now that the U.S. House and Senate are just a step away from passing a transparency law that would place office budgets -- including travel costs and staffer names and salaries -- online for all to see, we have one question for any unit of government that prefers to keep its spending in the dark: What's there to hide?

Elected leaders, whether statewide or nationally, have been bold in making their expenditures public.

While the Congress is expected to pass its transparency law by the end of the summer, the Michigan Legislature already posts its office spending online, as do Attorney General Mike Cox and Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, who got the transparency movement rolling in Michigan.

Even Gov. Jennifer Granholm has adopted limited transparency.

But if transparency is going to filter down to the local level, it'll be because vigilant taxpayers and voters demand to know that their money is being put to good use.

Public money, let's remember, is taxpayer money. And with Michigan's unemployment rate approaching 15 percent, we simply can't afford the wasteful spending that is allowed to flourish when there's no oversight.

President Barack Obama has made the wages of the White House staff available online. Surely a city like Detroit -- not to mention its school system -- could do the same.

With government picking up the rear...

Whether you like it or not, even government (well except of course our federal government) has to live within their means. A year or so late but...

Oakland County wants 5% in pay cuts
BY KATHLEEN GRAY and ZLATI MEYER • FREE PRESS STAFF WRITERS • July 16, 2009

Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson is asking county employees to take a 5% pay cut to help make up for expected shortfalls in the 2010-11 and 2011-12 fiscal year budgets.

The wage cut would be spread out over two years, with employees taking a 2.5% pay cut in 2010 and 2011.

"It's that or losing 150 jobs," Patterson said Wednesday afternoon. "And I would certainly want that rather than laying off those people."

The county is facing a $14.3-million deficit in the $409-million general fund budget for the 2010-11 fiscal year. Patterson made the announcement during his budget presentation Wednesday night in the Oakland County Board of Commissioners auditorium.
"I want to emphasize that this is a team effort," he told those in attendance.

Patterson said all elected officials, whose salaries can't be changed in the middle of a term, have agreed to a salary rollback. He also has asked county employees who have county cars to return them.

The crowd of approximately four dozen people -- made up of both employees and taxpayers -- applauded after those two statements.

In June, Oakland County's fiscal managers said fewer sheriff's deputies on patrol, fewer clerks in the courts and longer lines at county office counters were some of the likely changes coming to the county as it looks to cut $219 million from the budget over the next four years.

County officials said they were preparing to trim an additional $80 million from the 2010, 2011 and 2012 budgets, on top of the $128 million they already had planned to cut.

Staff writer John Wisely contributed to this report.

More from the Oakland Press...

Oakland County employees are facing cuts to balance budget
By CHARLES CRUMM

When Andy Meisner was sworn in as county treasurer last week — the first Democrat to hold the position — Republican Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson joked he was entitled to a county car and could pick up his Studebaker from the vehicle pool.

Meisner may not keep it for long.

County cars for elected officials are among the cuts proposed by Patterson to balance the county budget over the next three fiscal years.

But the hallmark of the budget balancing in the face of declining property values and a corresponding drop in tax revenues is pay cuts for the county’s 4,400 employees. Patterson, in his budget address to county commissioners Wednesday night, wants to cut employee pay by 2.5 percent in fiscal 2010 and another 2.5 percent in fiscal 2011.
The pay cuts, if approved by county commissioners, would save the county $5.5 million in fiscal 2010 and $10.9 million in fiscal 2011 and each year after.

Patterson said that the business sector has cut pay by 6.2 percent and other governments are proposing 10 percent pay cuts through various means. He also noted the county has lost 133,000 jobs so far this decade, many related to auto company woes and restructuring in a state with the highest unemployment rate in the country.

“We’ve taken some huge body blows and we’re still hanging on,” Patterson said. In addition to pay cuts for employees, Patterson also proposes deleting one support person for each Oakland County judge, trimming the capital improvement program by $2 million and suspending the annual $2.25 million contribution to the road commission for the next three years.

The cuts are necessary because the county expects as much as a 12 percent decline in property tax revenues over the next three years, Patterson says.

In total, Patterson proposed a fiscal 2010 budget of $818 million with $409 million in general fund spending, a fiscal 2011 budget of $788 million with $381 million in general fund spending, and a fiscal 2012 budget of $779 million with $372 million in general fund spending.

It covers the following departments: county executive, county commissioner, sheriff ’s office, water resource commission, treasury department, prosecutor’s office and the circuit courts.

General fund spending is the money that county commissioners can shift around.
The rest of the county budget comes from state, federal and other revenues earmarked for specific purposes.

The county’s fiscal year begins Oct. 1 each year.

Between now and then, commissioners will hold budget hearings for each department and tweak the budget proposed by Patterson.

Not everyone views the cuts and budgets proposed by Patterson as a slam-dunk, especially when it comes to pay cuts for employees.

“It’s not a done deal,” said Commissioner Dave Coulter, DFerndale.
Wednesday’s meeting was a rare evening meeting for county commissioners.

They typically meet in the mornings but have set aside five evenings this year to gauge whether more people will attend.

The county commission auditorium was nearly full but people signed up for public comment didn’t address the pay cuts in the proposed county budget.

They asked for an expansion of health insurance for the county’s poorest residents — a measure pending before county commissioners — and thanked commissioners for trying meetings at night.

“It’s been seven years since the last county commission meeting I’ve been able to go to,” said Ryan Gesund, of Royal Oak.

The Great American Bubble Machine

Worth 15 minutes of your time:

CLICK: Inside The Great American Bubble Machine

.

The Weather Underground

Haven't heard of them? Interesting documentary. Interesting it was not well known until after the election...

He works for Goldman Sachs

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6

Channel: Fox News Strategy Room
Show: Freedom Watch
Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Date: 7/8/2009

Transcript of Ron Paul’s appearance

Judge Andrew Napolitano: The Federal Reserve is a private, unregulated bank into which the Obama administration wants to put all regulatory authority for financial institutions, from the compensation of executives to the investments companies make, to the locations of their franchises, to the amount of fat in McDonald’s hamburgers, and they want to the Fed to have this power without appeal and without having to state the reasons for the regulations that the Fed may promulgate.

All grouped investments, even if the investors owned the group like hedge funds will be subject to the Fed’s new rules. Under these new proposed rules all state-chartered banks will now be subject to the Fed. All businesses, whether financial in nature or not, that are owned by any financial institutions will be subject to the Fed, even and Mom and Pop shops and stores that if, in the Fed’s opinion, should they fail, could produce systemic harm to the economy will be subject to the Federal Reserve.

The Fed and the Fed alone shall have the authority to require your lawyer and your accountant to report data to the Fed that even the IRS can’t get. There appears to be no limit to the private human behavior that the Fed cannot find a way to regulate under this proposal of the Obama administration.

But who will regulate the Fed? What will become of the clauses in the Constitution that were written to prohibit just this very type of regulation? What ever became to the word “free” in “free market?”

You know who is coming. It’s my great pleasure to introduce one of the great defenders of freedom and liberty in America today, Congressman Ron Paul joins us from our nation’s capital. Congressman Paul, welcome back to Freedom Watch.

Ron Paul: Thank you, Judge. It’s good to be with you.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: What is the status of your bill, which now has a huge number, well, more than half of co-sponsors in the House to regulate the Fed? What is its status in the Senate?

Ron Paul: Well, in the House, we have 250 co-sponsors and 80 Democrats, so we’re doing very well. Of course, in the Senate, we don’t have as many members, just a few, but Jim DeMint is doing a tremendous job over there and tried to attach it last week. Now, that was denied on a technicality, but that is just a facade because the technicalities are always ignored for things that they want. This means they don’t want it and this is their organized effort now to stop us, but we’re not going to be stopped.

It’s just going to energize everybody at the grassroots because the grassroots are for this, that’s why we have 250 co-sponsors and as you just described in your opening statement, this whole idea that the Fed created the problem that we have, created the bubble, and then we’re going to give the Fed more power? It makes no sense.

The only place anybody can figure out how this can happen, it would be in Washington, DC. You know, someone creates a problem, so we get them promoted.
Judge Andrew Napolitano: What are the powers that be afraid of that might be revealed if and when the Fed is audited?

Ron Paul: I think the biggest thing is the cronyism, you know, who got the benefits, who really got some of these Federal Reserve funds as well as TARP funds and I don’t think they want people to know about it and also for me, internationally, I’d like to know what they’re doing internationally. What kind of agreements they have with international banks, with other governments and also what they do in the gold market and how they manipulate the value of the dollar by manipulating gold prices.

So there is just so much that we can learn, but the truth is when people asks me, “Exactly what are you going to find?”, the whole point is we don’t know exactly what we’re going to find. But we know one thing, they’re going to dig their heels in. They’re going to do everything in the world to prevent this bill from passing.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: I hope that you find, that the public recognizes, that since the Fed began its secretive and monopolistic ways of regulating our monetary policy and our money supply in 1913, that the dollar has lost about 95 percent of its buying power. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if people discover that and found it out? We all know it already and decided to get rid of the Fed.

Ron Paul: Well, I think this is the first major step. Of course, we have more co-sponsors on this bill not because we’ve taken position exactly what we should replace it with, but everybody agrees we need to know what they’re doing.

Whether you believe in a monetarist approach or Keynesian approach or a hard money approach, the American people now want us to find out what’s going on. They want transparency and that to me is good time for us to find out what is happening, but like you say, when we discover what’s really been going on, I think the American people are going to demand the next step. They are going to demand honest money. It’s happened many times over history. Usually, when you have the vote by the general public on honest money, sound money, hard money versus paper, the people always vote for sound money becauase it makes so much sense.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Your dogged, indefatigable, tireless effort to expose this monster is so revealing and so rewarding of your own personal understanding of how our economic society works. It’s amazing to me the number of people from all across the political spectrum of every type of political ideology imaginable in the House of the Representatives that is now in favor of this.

What frustrates me is that the structure of the House of the Representatives starting with Mrs. Pelosi and going to Congressman Frank, gives such extraordinary power to individual or human beings who have positions and hierarchy in the House that they can frustrate what has now become the overwhelming majority will of members of the House.

Ron Paul: Yeah, I think this is great, but I give credit to the grassroots and I think we’d get the kind of government that we deserve and I think that if the grassroots in America wake up, they can change government. I mean, the system still works to that degree. It’s getting on shaking grounds, but it will work if the American people will really wake up and demand changes.

The members of most of the parties that are members of Congress are decent people and they like their job and so if they like their job and the American people say, “Look, you can’t have that job unless you do our bidding.” Now, that means we need to get this thing under control and that to me is a healthy sign.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: This morning the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued about 110-page report, which basically told us what we already knew. But Peter Schiff, who will be on in just a few moments, predicted before September of 2008 that the housing crisis would cause this recession. Tom Woods, who will also be here in a few minutes, has catalogued and has outlined itbrilliantly in his book, “Meltdown”.

But it’s astonishing to me that some aspect of the Congress has finally acknowledged that the government was behind the housing crisis, that the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 forced banks to loan monies in neighborhoods and at amounts where the banks would not do it if they were permitted to be motivated by just the free market, that Fannie and Freddie were willing to take all the bad mortgages and all the bad loans that the government encouraged other banks to make, that the Bush administration ordered the Department of Housing and Urban Development to make available 150,000 mortgages with zero money down, which as you know Congressman, in some states isn’t even considered a purchase; it’s considered a lease. I’m sort of stunned that anybody in the government now admits this, but I’m not expecting that they’ll change their ways, are you?

Ron Paul: No, I think the leadership still likes those programs. The basic flaw is easy money, the easy credit and lower the market interest rates, that causes the difficulties. But then when you add on it the CRA and these other government programs dictating the terms, they literally encourage at the threat of punishment if you do not make these bad loans. So that’s like pouring gasoline on a fire, it made the bubble grow that much bigger and finally it burst. So yes, and what are we doing now? We’re trying to bail that system out. We reignite that whole process and I’ll just say that it will be totally, totally impossible for them to achieve any recovery into what they’re doing here.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: We’re chatting with Congressman Ron Paul, Republican of Texas. Congressman Paul, the president in Russia two days ago and your colleague from the other side of the aisle, Senator Whitehouse from Rhode Island last night, a Democrat, both suggested that the government might need that the administration might propose a second stimulus. I only chuckled because of your view and my view that you can’t solve a problem caused by too much borrowing and spending with more borrowing and spending.

Ron Paul: Yeah.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: But the money that the government is authorized to borrow under the so-called stimulus program, which is about $780 billion on February of 2009, they’ve only borrowed and spent about 10 percent of that. Under what conceivable theory do they now think they can go back to Congress and get the authority to borrow more money when they haven’t even spent 90 percent of what they have the authority to borrow?

Ron Paul: Well, there are a lot of reasons to be pessimistic about what is happening down here and I always try to look on the positive side and search out for a positive program or whatever movement or direction we’re going in. But if they came along and they’re able to do that, believe me, that will be just more discouragement to everybody who’s trying to correct this mess and the American people would just become more outraged because they’re upset about the first one. How do they believe that the American people are going to say, “Yeah, that’s a great idea, another $700 billion. Pass it on out to your cronies and bail out your friends and your buddies, close the books and don’t even talk about the Federal Reserve.”

The American people are catching on. I just think that the time has passed when they can run rough-shot over us and try to talk the American people into just blindly endorsing everything that we do here. So that to me is a good sign that the American people are fed up with this.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Switching gears a little bit, Congressman Paul, what’s your take on the President’s trip to Russia and the President’s trip to Italy, to the G-8, to the G-20? First with Russia, do you think that he’s involved in some kind of negotiations or deals that we should know about? Do you think that he, not withstanding his protest to the contrary when he was a senator, will pick up the same cudgel, the same mantle of sort of a muscular bullying foreign policy that his predecessor employed? What’s your best guess?

Ron Paul: Well, I think he’s burning up too many fossil fuels with what I think he’s doing. I think he ought to stay home and park Air Force One for a while. Well, yeah, all kinds of things could be happening. I don’t know what he’s promising. You know, he went over earlier in the spring to one of the group meetings and said, “Oh, yeah, we’ll give you $105 billion to the IMF.” So he comes back and he says, “Hey, Congress. I promised them $105 billion, you better do it.” So the party comes up and says, “He made a promise. His honor is on the line.” So we gave him $105 billion.

So all these negotiations or what he’s doing, who knows what he’s talking about. But so far, he hasn’t indicated that he’d take those anti-ballistic missiles from the borders of Russia. If he really wants to improve relations with Russia, why don’t we just bring those missiles home. What would we say if the Russians were doing that in Mexico? We’d be furious. So I don’t know what he’s talking about. I don’t think he’s up to much good. But I know that one thing that if you wanted to change policy, you could probably do it over the telephone.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: There you go. On Sunday afternoon at 6 PM, it was a Sunday, it was a 3-day holiday weekend, a Federal judge walked into his courtroom in Lower Manhattan and read into the record an 85-page opinion authorizing and approving the proposed bankruptcy sale and creation of a new General Motors. This was done after very, very minimal and virtually meaningless testimony. It took fewer than five weeks. It was arguably the biggest bankruptcy in American history and it put the American taxpayer on the tab for $50 billion.

This is a company that loses money on every car it makes and not a peep of protest, except from folks like you and I and the people watching us now who monitor this all the time. Not a peep of protest was to be heard. Is government nationalization of failing businesses now about to become so commonplace that we are not shocked when things like this happen?

Ron Paul: Yeah, I refer to this process as “nationalization without a whimper.” It just goes on and on, but fortunately, we have you and others out there talking. But I have to add, Judge, I have to run. The bells are ringing and I have about a minute to get to the floor.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Get there in time to vote, Congressman Paul. Thanks for joining us.

Ron Paul: Bye bye.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Until next week on Freedom Watch.

Ron Paul: Thank you.

Take the quiz

and test your knowledge of our leaders

CLICK HERE to begin

Going into labor

Well not that kind of labor...

Each year, The American Society of Employers (ASE) does a survey of its member businesses to establish trends for the coming year. The survey data is primarily Michigan based, heavily concentrated in southeast lower Michigan.

As a member, my company gets access to all the studies which are extensive, long and honestly a lot of work to compile. Kudos to the folks at ASE. If you are not a member, I suggest you become one. They are really very good.

By necessity, the data points are a year behind in their reporting as ASE gathers data from the prior year to apply for the coming year.

2009 as we all know in southeast lower Michigan has been nothing short of devastation. So, this survey for 2010 will be very interesting indeed. But, we can use the 2009 data (gathered in 2008) to begin to develop what the “marketplace” is doing relative to compensation, benefits and other employee costs.

I wanted to review the data for service businesses under 100 employees as how it compares to what we do in my company and surprisingly I found that we were on balance “average”.

So what is average you ask??? According to the ASE 2009 Salary Survey, companies were taking one or more of the following approaches to adjust to the new realities in 2009:

• Reducing merit increases
• Extending the time between salary increases (>1 yr)
• Reducing the size of bonuses and incentives
• Instituting hiring freezes
• Instituting salary freezes
• Instituting company-wide salary reductions
• Changing the mix of salary and bonus structure
• Eliminating/reducing overtime
• Forcing mandatory unpaid time off

In addition, firms were also implementing the following strategies to reduce employee carrying costs in general:

• Implementing/changing benefits cost share
• Early retirement incentives
• Reducing travel
• Cross training
• Reducing/eliminating employee training programs
• Merging
• Obtaining price concessions from suppliers
• Elimination of shift(s)

The average merit increase for salary exempt employees statewide for 2009 was 1.28% and the average pay range adjustment over 2008 was 0.86%.

Some key salary ranges from the survey – averages for all businesses between 1 & 100 employees: (in most cases service based business averages were lower):

• Accounting Clerk I: $39,869
• Accounting Clerk II: $36,592
• A/P Clerk I: $35,312
• A/R Clerk: $36,011
• Payroll Clerk I: $41,085
• Bookkeeper: $42,948
• Billing Clerk: $31,405
• Administrative Assistant I: $45,821
• Administrative Assistant II: $40,077
• Receptionist: $29,533
• General Clerk I: $38,610
• General Clerk II: $29,468
• Office Manager: $49,137
• Purchasing Clerk: $36,467

HEALTH BENEFITS
Regarding employer provided employee health benefits, the 2009 ASE Health Insurance Benefits Survey reports for salary exempt positions in firms with 1-100 employees, 88% of the participating firms offer a PPO and 38% an HMO with three tier coverage (employee, EE+1, family) with some smaller percentages (less than 10%) offering traditional “old school” POS plans, etc. The conclusion here is that firms are offering more than one type of insurance and most offer family coverage. On those firms that offer health insurance plans, 69% report that they are fully-insured, 18% are partially self-insured and 14% are totally self-insured.

With respect to median numbers for exempt salaried personnel in the survey:

• 80% of employee and family premium was paid by the employer (20% paid by employee)
• $200 monthly employee contribution towards their insurance (employee + family)
• $250 in-network deductible/$500 out of network per employee/each person covered
• $500 in-network deductible/$1,000 out of network per family
• $20 office visits in-network
• $10 generic/$30 brand formulary/$40 brand non-formulary prescription co-pays
• $1,000 maximum in-network per employee/$2,000 per family ($2,500/$5,000 out of network)
• $4,894 annual cost per employee for medical only for a PPO plan, $3994 for HMO

BENEFITS COST TO EMPLOYER
According to 2008 ASE data, as a percentage of total compensation, the average employer of a firm from 1-100 employees spends 20.4% of compensation on benefits. The median was 18.3%. For every dollar of revenue generated, on average service businesses spent 37.8 cents on total compensation (comp+benefits) and for all businesses under 100 employees, it was 30.9 cents.

SEVERANCE
64% of companies had a “reduction in force” (RIF) last year and 53% were planning RIF in 2009.

PAID TIME OFF
Sick days. 23% of firms report that they do not pay for sick days. 34% have between 1 and 7 days per year. 94% of firms do not have any increase in sick days based on length of service. 80% do not let you bank sick days and 94% do not receive compensation from unused sick days at the end of the year.

Personal Days. 65% of companies do not have personal days at all and 15% have 1-2 per year. 69% of firms do not permit combining personal and sick days.

Vacation Days. 88% of all companies participating report offering paid vacation to employees. 87% require at least 6 months of service before giving one week vacation. 52% require 1 year service before 2 weeks are given; 58% require 5 years service before 3 weeks are given and 64% require between 10 and 20 years of service before giving 4 weeks vacation. Interestingly, 55% have policies that forfeit unused vacation at the end of the year and only 5% actually pay for unused vacation time.

Bereavement Days. 75% of firms give bereavement time and of those firms 76% give 3 days a year.

RETIREMENT BENEFITS
Only 11% of firms have a defined benefit (pension plan) 89% do not. 91% have a defined contribution plan (401k type). Of those with defined contribution plans, 68% offer a match. Of those matching, 44% match 5% or less, 39% match between 5% and 7% and of the match portion, 64% require vesting to receive the match portion.

Based on my own experience and supported in large part by these data points, it is clear that on average, in Southeast Lower Michigan, benefits as a percent of total compensation are around 20%. Nearly all employers require some employee sharing in benefit premiums, hardly anyone has a defined benefit (pension) type retirement plan anymore, those with a 401k type plan match 5% or less and the trend is that employees will be sharing in more and more of their “hidden comp” cost of benefits in the coming years.

We are in very different times and I honestly shudder when thinking what these surveys will look like for next year and in the coming years. How we did things yesterday is gone forever. The trick is to identify how we will motivate employees who are used to the old ways.

Luckily (or unluckily as the case may be) there are a lot of good people out there who were the subject of a "reduction in force" this year. Hopefully that pressure will make things more real for those who are not yet on board with today's realities.

A 20−Year Bear Market?

I read a fascinating piece this morning. Take a few moments and check it out. It will be well worth your time. CLICK HERE to read piece

Who started what

This is my last post on this silly matter but I really must get it off my chest. I did not pick this fight. In point of fact I thought we were beginning to find our groove regarding the DDA - everyone getting on the same page. I was becoming energized again at moving forward as we started to walk out of the shadow of days gone by. We had all sort of found our place and were starting to move forward. Then Bob laid his "report" on us (me).

Mr. Donohue needs to own the fact that he started this nonsense and the fact that it's spiralling out of control. I'm pretty certain he wishes he'd omitted his editorialization (covered by his Beard "Jeff from Ohio") and just stuck to the facts. Not too sure what debt was paid but the cost (at least to me) certainly seems high.

The change movement began in Rochester back in 2006. It was started by a website called saveourpolice.com and then transitioned into 48307.org, a community chat board I created.

Blogs and the internet have leveled the playing field. There are many who despise their existence since they are not controllable (or are proving troublesome to control). But that's the beauty of it. The internet is the great equlizer.

Thomas Paine is one of my heroes. Absent his "Common Sense", the thought behind the title of this very blog, the American Revolution would have never occurred.

There is of course an easy way to get us all back on track. Own your mistake so we can all move on. We all have more important things we should be doing. Don't we?

We The People

A friend forwarded this to me today. Thought I'd share.