Okay, I’m with you; it was bizarre to hear Kwame Kilpatrick testify that he really doesn’t know if his wife has a job.  Nor does he apparently know how his living arrangements are paid for.  It makes no sense.  And yet, it is clearly part of a strategy.  Since Carlita Kilpatrick owes the city of Detroit not one dime, the family has given her all the gold in the kingdom for safekeeping.  And they’re hoping that Kwame’s plea of ignorance amounts to plausible deniability.  The problem here is that far too much money has moved through the former first lady’s checking account for prosecutors to simply let it pass.  More than a million dollars coming through and, just as alarmingly, being spent.  The old dictum in politics is “follow the money.”  No doubt, the digging is even more intense than it was before Thursday’s hearing.  As glaring as the loans from Detroit’s business leaders may be (or as the song says, “things that make you go ‘hmmm’), it’s doubtful there’s anything illegal about them.  It’s that extra money that isn’t accounted for yet that should be raising eyebrows right up off of the forehead.

     A few other random thoughts about the week that was.  We now know that Attorney General Mike Cox will be deposed in the lawsuit against the city for its investigation of the Tamara Green murder.  And there are many who feel he gave Kilpatrick a pass that was far too quick and cursory.  But Cox said something this week that bears repeating.  He described Kilpatrick as “the knucklehead I sent to Texas.”  It’s worth remembering that what finally drove the last nail into the Kilpatrick mayoral tenure was Cox filing assault charges against Kilpatrick for the shoving match on the porch.  But that won’t help Cox with…

     …the attorney in the Green case, Norman Yatooma.  He has a set of circumstances that look like lawyer heaven to me.  It’s really tough to prove a rumor; ask Gary Brown and the dozens of other investigators and reporters who’ve looked into the Manoogian tale.  But Yatooma now has the accused in this case having to DISprove a rumor.  That’s even tougher.  Good luck with that.

-devin

     This won’t sit well with Chicagoans (and quite a few Americans), but I tend to think the International Olympic Committee got it right in awarding the 2016 Summer Games to Rio de Janeiro.  Some want to see this as a pretty chilly slap at President Obama, Oprah Winfrey, and the thousands who gathered in downtown Chicago only to be left staring open-mouthed and silent at learning that they didn’t even make the first cut.  But to borrow a line, “this isn’t about you.”

     To me the deck seemed a little stacked from the time the four finalists were announced.  The IOC has plenty of goofiness on its resume, but they rightly understand the power of the Games to bring a city to the world stage.  And three of the four nations in the running have hosted Olympiads over the last two decades:  Spain had Barcelona in 1992; Japan had the Winter Games in Nagano in 1998; and the U.S. had two, Atlanta in 1996, and Salt Lake City in 2002.  That left seductive, vivacious, and completely sports mad Rio.  Not only had Brazil never hosted the Games, no city on the South American continent has ever hosted the world’s premier sporting event.

     It’s a fair question to wonder at the readiness of Rio, but the surge of infrastructure is a big of part of why cities fall all over themselves trying to lure the IOC in the first place.  The Games run for just two weeks, but the streets, public transportation, and venues are there long after the torch is extinguished.  The Olympics serve as a deadline-driven modernization machine.  Now, I’ll caution that it’s not magic.  A visit to Athens today will show you many of the once beautiful venues are now abandoned, covered in graffiti, and in sad disrepair (in the birthplace of the Games, no less).  But contrast that with Sydney which not only ran a textbook Games (I’ve never encountered friendlier, more helpful people) but used the world stage perfectly in introducing the land Down Under to the rest of the globe.  (Sydney managed to have the Games paid for before they began, and today, nearly all of the venues are in use.)  So of the four finalists, where can the Games do the most good?  Rio, with one foot in the first world and one in the third, seems ripe with possibilities.

     Make no mistake, perils abound.  Government corruption has long been ubiquitous in South America.  And Rio will have to convince some of the warier travelers that it can keep a lid on its famous petty crime.  But the IOC is seizing its chance to plow a new field, and those who’ve attended Carnivale will tell you that Brazil will put on a world class show.

     This stings in Chicago.  And it’s tough to swallow for a young President who may be wondering what happened to his Midas touch.  But rather than carping about the decision, let’s spend the time learning a little Portuguese.  Whatever happens, it’s not going to be dull.

-Devin

     The future’s in the air,  I can feel it everywhere, blowing with the wind of change…”  – “Wind of Change” by the Scorpions.

     Okay, so it’s a little melodramatic, but I couldn’t resist the chance to quote the Scorpions.  How often does an opportunity like that come along?  (I’ll try to work in “Rock You Like a Hurricane” a little further down…)

     Yes, we knew change was afoot.  But the depths of the desire for change among Detroit voters was even more palpable than most election watchers could have predicted.  Yes, many believed Martha Reeves would have a difficult time returning to the council.  But to see only two incumbants among the top five vote-getters was rather startling.  And for a political newcomer to outpace Ken Cockrel, Jr. by 10,000 votes for the top slot in the primary?  Even with a television career-aided profile, I doubt Charles Pugh saw that kind of finish in his wildest dreams.  (I doubt Cockrel was thinking along those lines either.)  But we went in knowing that three seats were coming open (Conyers, Rose-Collins, and Sheila Cockrel) and already we know that there will be at least four new faces on the nine member council.  Reeves is out, and Tinsley-Talabi was quite honest today in saying that her 9th place finish means she’s got some serious work to do before November.  Voters also no doubt got the attention of incumbents JoAnn Watson and Kwame Kenyatta who finished seventh and eighth respectively.

     The last incumbant to lose a city council election was Lonnie Bates, but at the time he had an indictment over his head.  Setting him aside, you have to go back to John Peoples in 1989 to find an incumbent getting voted off the city council island.  So the upheaval we’re watching is a jarring departure from politics as usual in Detroit.  (And Detroit voters, while not terribly numerous, deserve a fair amount of credit for wading through the 167 names on the ballot to craft a pretty clear message with their votes.)

     On the mayoral side, they apparently feel they’ve already voted for change; Dave Bing received an enormous 74 percent of the vote and barring an epic meltdown will stroll into the general election in November.  And of course Detroiters are watching serious change being enforced in the school system by emergency manager Robert Bobb.  Throw in the federal investigations that are forcing their own kind of behavioral adaptations and clearly, Detroit is a city in a state of change.

     Will it be enough?  Change for the sake of change isn’t worth much.  Hopefully in the next three months, the candidates can find the thread to sew a lining of progress into the fabric of change.

-Devin

     The last Detroit election (one of rather enormous consequence) pitted two well-known figures against each other in a mayoral race that needed to pull Detroit out of the post-Kwame morrass.  (Whether there’s such a thing as “post-Kwame” is a topic for another day.)  But the turnout for that election was dismal.  Barely one in ten registered Detroit voters could be bothered to weigh in.  While I’ll grant that some voters may have had a hard time discerning a real policy difference between Ken Cockrel, Jr. and Dave Bing, it was hard not to read the totals as a sad tesimony to ambivalence at best (and total disconnectedness at worst) on the part of Detroiters who for years have complained of a lack of self-determination.  But as we watch the votes being counted tonight, think about who you want turning out at the polls.

     Do you want everyone (and I mean EVERYONE) exercising their right to vote?  Or would you prefer that only those who’ve worked hard to understand the issues and personalities populating their ballot make their way to the polls?  Most of us in the media casually urge everyone watching, listening or reading to “make sure you get out and vote”.  A few however (Nolan Finley of the Detroit News is one such voice) refrain from the “everyone into the pool” kind of cheerleading.  He argues that while everyone has the right, not everyone has the talent.  (And this year, who among us can say they truly understand the positions and prospects of all 167 city council candidates?)  At first, this sounds like haughty sneering from the ivory tower, but there’s probably no getting around the fact that when voters turn out unprepared and voting simply because they believe they must, we may not get the most effective candidates in office.  (We do tend to confuse popularity with effectiveness.)

     I’m not sure I’ve got an answer because I am uncomfortable with the elitism of the argument, but I do like the intellectual gymnastics of the debate.  And I’ll be watching with that debate in mind as we see whether Monica Conyers, shamed and bound for prison, makes the cut of the final 18 council candidates.  Even her supporters who like the idea of using their vote to protest her legal quandry should see that a vote for her is a wasted vote.  She will not serve and it keeps a viable candidate out of the November field.  Clearly, voters have a right to vote for Conyers.  But the turnout debate isn’t about a right.  People like Finley would argue that it’s about getting it right.

-Devin

     In 1987, I was a very wet-behind-the-ears journalist in Tyler, Texas.  I was working on a documentary on the 50th anniversary of the disastrous school explosion in New London, Texas.  On a March day in 1937, a buildup of natural gas ignited; nearly 300 students and teachers were killed, making it the deadliest day ever at an American school.  One of the reporters dispatched to the scene was a young man named Walter Cronkite.  It was the first big story of Walter’s life and he was gracious enough to allow me and the producer of the documentary, Jerry Gumbert, to come to New York and interview him in his home about his recollections of that horrible ordeal.  As we set up the camera and lights and awaited his arrival, I stared at the Emmy awards which crowded his bookshelves.  And when he walked in, it was (keep in mind, I was a young reporter aspiring to follow in the great man’s footsteps) a bit like watching a saint step through the door.  Often, heroes let you down.  Not Walter.  He was kind, reflective, generous, and very understanding of the kind of impact he had had on his young guests.  Looking back, it was one of the early underpinnings for the career that I’ve enjoyed for the many years since.

     It’s hard to call Walter’s death a tragedy, or even a surprise.  He was 92 and had packed enough into his lifetime for a dozen men.  But what is sad is the passing of the character and grace that he brought to journalism.  For nearly a quarter century, Walter was very much our nation’s conscience.  We knew how to react to the death of John F. Kennedy once we saw Walter react on that dreadful day in 1962 (with a quiet tear).  When Walter gleefully gasped “Oh, boy,” we knew Neil Armstrong’s walk on the moon was indeed beyond special.  It’s hard to imagine now in our splintered, Twittered, Facebooked, Tivo’d media world, but there was a time when households all over America screeched to a stop each evening so that Uncle Walter could fill us in on the events of the day.  He was the classic, neutral observer, the omniscient narrator (and heavens, I miss the days when that was the critical marching order for any broadcast journalist).

     Only once did Walter opt out of his precise and practiced neutrality, and he did so with purpose, great forethought, and clear honesty.  To great effect, he told the nation after his tour of Vietnam that the war was lost and that a proud, well-meaning nation needed to understand that.  By the time Walter finished that broadcast, the nation was beginning to.

     Can you even imagine another figure approaching that kind of presence in American life, in or out of journalism?

     God bless you, Walter.  And that’s the way it is.

-Devin

     No, no, this isn’t a rant on what the President chose to wear today for his speech in Warren.  (His uniform of white shirt and solid tie, no jacket, always gives him his desired air of industrious elegance.)  No, my concern here was with the attire of many of those who were lucky enough to have tickets to attend.

     I’m all for America looking like its casual self.  And with most of the guests having to arrive several hours before the President’s arrival, it meant a long, very warm day without a single cloud to provide a moment’s shade.  There are also security realities which, as any air traveler knows, can lead you to pare down your wardrobe to a detector-friendly minimum.  And yet… it is the President.

     Those who assumed the “invitation only” crowd would amount to a who’s who of Michigan politics and business would have seen plenty of faces they recognized. Yes, the expected luminaries were there, and thank goodness because they arrived looking like they knew the President was coming.  I don’t want to sound like Mr. Blackwell, and yes, there was much more to discuss today than fashion, but I was, ahem, rather stunned.  A number of women seemed to dress as if they had heard that the President was available (and not particularly discerning).  A number of the men apparently couldn’t be bothered to find their very cleanest t-shirt.  There were more than a few people like me who longed to be free of their suit and tie in the blistering sunshine, so I’m not expecting Savile Row here.  But I was rather dismayed by the array of tank tops, nylon sports shorts and flip flops.  (Does it really get too hot for a bra?)

     Okay, I’m off the soapbox.  Back to politics….

-Devin

     When I talked to Mayor Dave Bing up on Mackinac Island at the beginning of June, I could see that his education on what being the Mayor of Detroit is all about was underway in pretty intense fashion.  He seemed bemused and a bit startled at the same time by the endless demands of his time and attention.  While many want to suggest that running a city is the same as running a business, the difference between being a CEO and an elected official is roughly the difference between a sandwich and a monkey wrench.  (That’s what keeps people like Dave Brandon from jumping into politics.)  And these past few days, we’ve seen the Mayor hit the bumps that don’t exist in the private business world.

     When he decided to get rid of James Barren and appoint Warren Evans the city’s new police chief, he did it in a way that would’ve barely caused a ripple at the Bing Group; he had a “supervisor” (his deputy mayor) deliver the news that Barren’s services were no longer needed and figured he’d make a nice and tidy official announcement three days hence.  Not quite the way it works outside the Bing Group.  Running off a popular chief without a personal face-to-face (especially one you had vowed to keep) seemed insensitive among the city’s police officers who largely adored Barren.  And expecting that it would stay under wraps until Monday was fantasy.  Once the news did break, we needed a mayor in front of the cameras instead of a kind of South-Carolina-Governor-who’s-in-charge-around-here? style weekend.  

     The first few e-mails I received about the switch mentioned first and foremost the affect on morale in the department.  While that’s terribly important, we can’t expect that to be a dealbreaker for Bing.  I suppose he may be looking to the impact Robert Bobb has had on the school system in a short period of time; he may doubt that real revolution can come from within and must be delivered by someone with an outsider’s view.  (Yes, claiming that Warren Evans is an “outsider” may be a stretch.)  But while Barren has been a strong and very credible voice for the department, the fact remains that most of the murders on the city’s off-the-chart crime count go unsolved, and done in a “head on” way, many Detroiters would be on board with their popular mayor from the start.  But voters have trouble with secrecy and disorganization, and to some, this had hints of both.

     Bing has enjoyed a pretty turbulence-free ride thus far.  (Who’s going to argue with ethics initiatives, dress codes and earlier work hours?)  But he may be on the clock now.  And so is Evans.

-Devin

     It’s been odd that Monica Conyers was given a local TV show; most politicians have to buy time to get the kind of airtime given to Detroit’s most quotable but ultimately corruptible politician.   But today’s 60 minutes of television was a kind of surreality TV that most of the cable networks aspire to but seldom deliver.

     Four days after pleading guilty to being on the take (and just a few months before she’ll be sent to prison for same), Conyers looked pleasantly into the camera and spoke as if she’d just tidied up a little problem with a parking ticket.  At the outset she said she wouldn’t be talking about her legal troubles as she didn’t want to anger the judge and noted that she didn’t want to go to jail.  On several occassions, she did apologize for anything that might have disappointed the citizens of Detroit.  But after claiming that she’s leaving the city council before she legally has to, she talked almost buoyantly about getting back to being a mother and a wife and a homemaker.  (Um, no, Mrs. Conyers; you’re headed for prison.)  She also took the opportunity to tweak her former chief of staff, Sam Riddle, who has already been left high and dry by her plea.  (She said that the stories he told Monday’s Detroit Free Press “are the reason I fired him,” and that she should have listened to her husband who told her to dispatch Riddle long ago.)

     Oddly, she also decided to make endorsements in the upcoming council race.  (She suggested voters return Martha Reeves and JoAnn Watson to the council, and then plugged Fred Hall’s candidacy.)  But do you want the endorsement of a woman who’ll likely be in prison by the time the general election occurs?

     If you haven’t seen it, this is ostensibly a “call in” show, and how serendipitous for Conyers that every caller seemed sympathetic to her cause.  (“Detroit loves you,” one caller gushed, “you go, girl!”)  So in the end, I was left to wonder not so much at Conyers (she probably would be foolish to make any comments regarding the bribery case before sentencing, and who can blame her for accepting unfettered access to the airwaves?) but at WHPR Channel 33.  I’m all for public service television, and I can see fair value in a program that allows citizens to connect with the elected representatives to hear their issues addressed.  But politicians need to pay for their commercials.  And from the guilty plea, it appears Conyers has some extra money to do that.

-Devin

     It won’t be an easy apology for many to make, but it may be time for those who villified the “obstructionists” on the Detroit City Council to give them their due on Cobo (and that includes Monica Conyers, though it won’t help her much in her current troubles).  The new deal reached late last week in Lansing is (face it) a better deal for the city of Detroit.

     The new deal means the city retains ownership (as expected), but also includes some hidden gems — the enhanced parking revenue set-up, for example.   And the deal is fashioned in a way that allows Cobo to start spending money on upgrades even before the new Cobo governing authority is created.  That means improvements that can be in place in time for the 2010 auto show in January.  So while then Mayor Ken Cockrel, Jr. and those who voted for the first offer from Lansing seemed rightly focused on the urgency of taking what was offered, the truth is the holdouts ended up getting a better bargain for the city (and, some would argue, for all parties involved since the new deal includes job preferences for the region).  Yesterday, the chairman of the DADA, Doug Fox, told me on Flashpoint that while it isn’t an easy thing to say, you have to hand it to Conyers and Rose-Collins and company.  They may have over-reached in expecting Lansing to give them another (and better) shot at it, but in the end, they’re holding better cards.

     Of course, kudos also have to go to the legislators who pulled it together.  But as Monica Conyers heads off to federal prison, one of the scars on her record probably should be amended to look more like a win.

-Devin

      Pick your favorite Monica Conyers moment.  There are many, everything from the dust up at a hotel in Denver during the Democratic National Convention to her coarse “Shrek” comment aimed at Ken Cockrel, Jr.  (At that meeting, when Cockrel threatened to adjourn the meeting unless some order was restored, she memorably cooed, “Do it, baby!”)  But set aside the histrionics at the moment and consider the deeper (and much darker) implications of the fact that we now know she has been a crook.  The charges that will send Conyers to prison center on the Synagro deal (remember that Synagro became the city’s sludge handler because of one changed and paid for vote, that of Monica Conyers), but are we to believe she acted corruptly in this one, singular instance?  How many decisions might have been compromised by the quiet offer of cash or goodies?  As a member of the council, her desk was what someone inclined to bribery might refer to as a “target rich environment.”  And then her position on the Detroit pension board would have presented yet another (and perhaps even more lucrative) array of decisions.  The whole thing calls to mind the adage that exterminators like to throw around — the problem isn’t the cockroach that you find; it’s the dozens you don’t.

     But Detroit has been presented with a rather unflattering mirror over the course of the last year.  In that mirror, we find a corrupt and disgraced mayor removed from office, a corrupt and disgraced city council member headed for federal prison, and a school system that is apparently rife with fraud.  The city’s reputation is in shambles.  (Sam Riddle’s assertion that the only difference between Detroit and third world corruption is the goats in the streets resonates at the moment.)  But the only way out is to start taking steps out of the muck.  Kilpatrick and Conyers are probably best viewed in the rearview mirror.