|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
At one time the City Council wanted to bond $19 million to start the process of creating a new Flint District Court because they believed they were paying too much for the rent and other services. This court had been over budget for years. Plante Moran told council that was about the maximun they could bond at that time.
There have been other problems with the court. Channel 4 in etroit had video of an administrator leaving to get her hair done and going shopping while on the clock. She was a disgraced magistrate from Detroit and once tried to receive mileage from her home in Detroit.
Judge may be close to brokering deal on Flint District Court lease
Published: Thursday, March 03, 2011, 4:21 PM Updated: Thursday, March 03, 2011, 4:21 PM
By Ron Fonger | Flint Journal
GENESEE COUNTY -- Chief Flint District Court Judge Archie L. Hayman might be just the mediator to make peace between the county and the city of Flint and to help produce a new lease for Flint District Court.
Hayman emerged from separate meetings with city and county officials today, saying he was encouraged by what he heard and said both sides could agree soon on a new lease for the court at the newly reopened McCree Courts & Human Services Building.
Archie L. Hayman
County and city negotiators appeared to be closing in on agreement in advance of the McCree reopening Monday, but talks broke down after the county increased its lease asking price by more than $200,000 annually.
The county-owned McCree building also houses Genesee District Court and other county offices. It had been closed for more than five months as contractors repaired widespread water damage caused by a burst water pipe in the building.
Flint's lease for its district court offices and courtrooms expired at the end of 2010. County officials have since claimed they needed Flint to pay much more to cover the cost of providing security in the building.
In a Monday letter to the county Board of Commissioners, Walling called the county's proposed price increase "a deal breaker" and said the city was prepared to look elsewhere.
But Hayman said there could be a compromise in the making.
"I am pleased with parties on all sides," Hayman said, calling today's meetings "positive" and saying he expected Walling "may have an opportunity" to bring a proposed lease to the Flint City Council soon.
Hayman said the county "Sheriff's Department has done an excellent job in coming back with a (new) proposal."
Jamie Curtis, chairman of the county commissioners, also called his meeting with Hayman "very productive."
Earlier today, Walling said he supported Hayman's efforts to "insure (Flint) District Court has appropriate, long-term facilities."
Last edited by untanglingwebs on Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:29 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
Fri Mar 04, 2011 6:40 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
The council allocates the funding for the District Court and the city has to pay for any cost overruns and deficits. Read Walling's response. Go to the City of Flint website as Freeman has put the monthly budget to actuals on there. This budget year does not end until June 30, 2011.
The City did not prepare for the withdrawal of the Sheriffs crews and no one was at the temporary court recently for security. Judge Cathy Dowd wisely halted proceedings until security was in place.
Judge says Flint and Genesee County have deal in principle on new Flint District Court lease
Published: Friday, March 04, 2011, 4:36 PM
By Ron Fonger | Flint Journal
Follow
FLINT -- There's a proposed deal for Flint District Court to move back into the McCree Courts & Human Services Building, Judge Archie L. Hayman said today.
Hayman, who met with Genesee County officials Thursday and Mayor Dayne Walling today, said the county, which owns the McCree building, and the city, which leases space for the district court, have a meeting of the minds on a new lease.
"It's still left for the city council to approve (but there is agreement)," Hayman said after meeting with Walling and council President Jackie Poplar.
The two side have been negotiating a contract for Flint District Court for several months but talks broke down just days before the McCree building reopened on Monday. Walling has said the county attempted to bump up charges for building security recently, a "deal breaker" for the city.
Walling said Friday that he might be prepared to bring a new lease to the city council as early as Wednesday. He said a "slight increase" in security costs that he discussed with Hayman would be paid from the existing Flint District Court budget and have no effect of the city's general fund.
"The city had every intention from the beginning to have (Flint) District Court back in the McCree building," he said. "The terms had to be fair and a reasonable market rate."
The Flint Journal could not immediately reach Curtis for comment today, but the county board chairman had previously characterized his Thursday meeting with Hayman as productive.
phillip March 04, 2011 at 5:04PM
Follow
Walling is very spineless. Read what he said above the increase cost for security is a deal breaker. He then in the next paragraph admits the cost for security is going up. Walling caved to the county. What a man of his word. Did he really work out a deal with the city council because the county did not want to hear it? Yes city of Flint you mayor is a caver.
Inappropriate? Alert us.Reply Post new
shanedr March 04, 2011 at 6:13PM
Follow
I don't much care for Walling, but you need to go back and read the article again. The difference in cost is supposedly going to covered out of the Flint District Court budget and would not come out of the city operating budget.
But that raises the question: Where does the Flint District Court budget come from? I just checked both my Winter and Summer Taxes and neither has a millage for the court. This sounds like the court budget comes out of the cities operating fund millage or from the city income tax. If so, why is the court budget so high that money can be spared for increased rent but can't be reduced and the excess transferred for say public safety, a grossly underfunded necessity.
How much subterfuge is going on with the money received from the city income tax?
Inappropriate? Alert us.Reply Post new
DWCBOB March 04, 2011 at 6:15PM
Follow
It won't be official until Mayor Eason approves it, not Figurehead Walling. |
|
|
|
Fri Mar 04, 2011 6:51 pm |
|
|
whiteknight
F L I N T O I D
|
| OK the roof on the north building was just done last summer (the old court house) So why don't we reopen it again? why pay rent to the county? If we have money to pay for "increased cost for security" to the county why not keep the money in our own house? Politicians can't seem to grasp the concept of real money and how us common folk have to work with a budget with the money we have and how to prioritize what we spend. When money gets tight we hunker down and keep the money @ home. Not waste it and hiding our head in the sand. What is the amount that the county wants a month, how much could we save by reopening the court house and how could this help public safety. And lets not forget about the Impound Yard fiasco, how much has this political favor cost us as citizens? REALLY am I just a genius? Because these idea just seem like really simple ways to be fiscally responsible. |
|
|
|
Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:16 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
To reopen the former Court House means moving and relocating 4 offices when there is no room in City hall. Only the City Council, by ordinance, can allocate space and then only at Budget time, which does not start until about May.
Kurtz removed the Ombudsman office to the Phoenix Building and then moved them back. City paid for that office space even when vacant.
Major Grants has been moved about 5 times and each move means a greater risk of losing and misplacing documents needed for HUD and compliance issues. One move was made by giving city employees in other departments the HUD paid for furniture and giving Major Grants some relics. This resulted in a HUD finding that took years to resolve. Peter D from Finance tried that play a second time and luckily the auditors "headed him off at the pass". With all of our HUD problems, do we really want to compound them with another move? Kincaid once wanted to move them to the Great lakes Technology Center.
Parks and rec has a lot of unused space. The back room was once used for drafting, etc and may have once been a planning office. Old chemicals (leaking) were stored in a cabinet . Maybe the drafting tables, etc could be sold at auction.
The union office is also on the second floor and both Parks and this office can be reached by a back staircase from the courthouse days. The union office was remodeled when it was an Ombudsman office and the current Ombudsman office on the first floor was remodeled twice.
All new courtrooms would have to be construted. The North building could house four courtrooms at most and i believe there are five judges. Plus you need space for the court clerks office, the prosecuting attorney, the administrator, the guards and file storage. File storage is a huge space, but older files could be stored in an off site, necessitating storage expenses and retrieval costs. Prisoners would have to be transported from Jail to the lockup and then to the Court, so you would have to maintain and clean the lockup and incur transport costs.
Several years ago the City Council decided their cubicles were not private enough, so they usurped a portion of the City Attorneys office and remodeled it into private office space with computers for all council. Not all of the council can even use a computer. There were remodeling costs for this renovation and moving of the attorney into a space previously used for major grants and remodeling that space.
The current court room in City Hall was intended to be a training space and already had been partially remodeled. Don't forget that the State has to approve any arrangements made. |
|
|
|
Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:58 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
The five officers brought back did not go to guard the courts. That is angering some Flint police and other officials.
One returned officer is Jesse Carpenter, who is back running the PAL program.
Who is working security for the Court. |
|
|
|
Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:53 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Did Walling and Eason renige on the settlement to move back to the McCree building? Some think so as there has been no movement in that direction. Is Walling trying to save money by keeping things as they are? County officials will only say they had an agreement.
The council committee last Wednesday was revealing. Some on council want the county to take over the functions of the 68th District Court and combine them with the 67th. That way the county and the state would finance the courts, leaving the city out of the mix. All revenues generated would then go to the county, but revenue projections were never realized in the past.
What about city ordinances. Budget projections on revenue were partially predicated on the assumption the mechanism would be in place to enforce these ordinances. However the city eliminated a vital part time attorney, a magistrate and until recently all code enforcement. There is no way to enforce city ordinances without these in place.
The county is in a deficit themselves, so I don't see the county taking on this burden |
|
|
|
Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:13 am |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
untanglingwebs schreef:
The five officers brought back did not go to guard the courts. That is angering some Flint police and other officials.
One returned officer is Jesse Carpenter, who is back running the PAL program.
Who is working security for the Court.
Two men in Flint Police uniforms were at the 68th District Court in the Great Lakes Tech Center last Thursday morning. Judges Marable and Crawford are there for civil cases. The other three (Perry, Dowd, and Collier-Nix) hold court in the basement of City Hall. |
|
|
|
Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:12 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
That way the county and the state would finance the courts, leaving the city out of the mix. All revenues generated would then go to the county, but revenue projections were never realized in the past.
nicely said. millions in unreceived fines and fees. Chief Judge and Court Administrators have done little or nothing to recoup funds. OOps. I forgot. They no longer accept checks. The one place a person should be most afraid to write a rubber check. People are so afraid of our courts they write the courts bad checks.
Just think of the millions the courts could re coupe if they just hired a collection agency. 70 percent of nothing is still nothing. Or how about hiring laid off police officers to collect fines and fees? Someone has got to have a better idea than what we've had for years. |
|
|
|
Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:26 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
It is not tthe job duties of the court to recoup fees. When Tachelle Young was the City Attorney, she and her staff worked to put teeth in the ordinances as many had no financial penalties.Add a magistrat to deal with ordinance violations and a part time city attorney and you are in business. I believe they even added a person who was to work on collection.
Then you have a council take code enforcement out of the budget as well as a magistrate and a part time attorney, and you have successfully axed the program mechanism. If you had been at all council meetings, you would have heard Jessie Buchanan speak about the $289,000 plus in fines stuck in the process because of no part time city attorney to process the cases.
Judhes and Court Administrators do not make those kind of decisions. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:08 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
that kinda makes sense. however.Why a magistrate? With half the case load of 2005 and too many judges. Why not have A Judge or even all of them working on it.
The courts in Flint used to be set up like the majority of other district courts. Where all the judges heard all different types of cases. Flint is one of only a hand full of courts that assign only Criminal, or only Small claims etc to certain judges. It used to run by Whatever the next case was coming in went to the next judge. So all the judges got to hear all the different types of cases. Code enforcement hasn't been done in Years. If i remember Just before the flood they finally decided to attempt to hear code enforcement but I don't know if it's being heard now. But the back log was immense.
I still a little fuzzy on what City Council has to do to get fines and fees recouped by the courts. That doesn't make sense to me. I could just be stupid. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:42 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
There is a legal process that must be followed. I went to fight an ordinace issue years ago and went to a magistrate prior to having a court date set. I was able to prove the issue was bogus but I had to go through that system. Back then even traffic tickets went to a magistrate first before going to a judge. Magistrates cost less and don't jam the courts up.
Blight officials write the tickets and there must be a method for appealing the tickets. Flint needs the equivalent of the out county prosecuting attorney and every community has one. Without a city attorney to prosecute the offenders who don't pay, the ticket is in limbo. Buchanan (Jesse) told council that over $280,000 in previous fines because there was no mechanism in place to take these individuals to court. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 01, 2011 5:12 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
| Well this is what is throwing me off? So are you saying that since the court's inception they've never been bale to collect on Fines and fees? When I went to court for my bogus speeding ticket. I agreed to pay a fine to have the ticket dropped without getting points. (My speedometer was actually off while the car was all OE except for the stereo.. weird the bigger speakers in the dash threw off the speedo) (But back on topic) I paid the fine as I was leaving the court. Are you saying had I not paid the ticket. I wouldn't have had to pay the fine? Because the court has no process (EVER) to collect if I don't pay? I feel like I'm missing something here??? That's keeping me from understanding the big picture? |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 01, 2011 7:16 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
| No I am saying that many ordinances regarding blight enforcement were not properly written originally and they had to be revised in order to be properly enforced. It was discussed intensely during council meetings and council should have known that the cuts they made meant enforcement of these ordinances was being made a moot point. |
|
|
|
Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:15 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
| i can buy that.. but blight enforcement doesn't account for the millions in unpaid fines over the years. |
|
|
|
Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:16 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
| They had a collections person. I don't know if they still do. |
|
|
|
Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:08 am |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
