Post Number: 536
|Posted on Tuesday, March 03, 2009 - 2:37 am: || |
http://www.helloworld.com/memb ers_myworld.aspx?ID=DCCTV&targ et=show
The is no way to scrub through the video you have to watch the whole thing.
Post Number: 784
|Posted on Tuesday, March 03, 2009 - 3:13 am: || |
Thanks Leland..shoulda known YOU would have a handle on it. FWIW, you can speed up playback by right-clicking on the video and selecting "Fast" under playback speed, or by hitting ctrl/shift/g.
Monica & the Chipmunks, as it were..
Post Number: 24
|Posted on Tuesday, March 03, 2009 - 11:14 am: || |
The real problem with how this is viewed is that a largely white readership wants their opinions of the city to be validated, and they found it in Finley, who's also long since made up his mind about the city.
Gotta agree with you there. Just look at the posts that immediately followed yours. Whether I completely agree with you or not, it's as though anything intelligent you had to say was totally ignored. There is no real discourse, just a bunch of people taking the opportunity to say what was probably already on their minds long before this debacle.
Post Number: 760
|Posted on Tuesday, March 03, 2009 - 11:29 am: || |
"There is no real discourse, just a bunch of people taking the opportunity to say what was probably already on their minds long before this debacle."
Welcome to DetroitYES!
Post Number: 964
|Posted on Tuesday, March 03, 2009 - 11:20 pm: || |
There's plenty of intelligent discourse here at DY, and no shortage of b+lls*#t either. You just have to read everything closely to discern which is which. It doesn't help that nuance is lost in translating the meaning of poster's emails. No facial expressions, no voice inflections. It's difficult to discern humour from sarcasm from vitriol.
Post Number: 518
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 10:28 am: || |
This embarrassing news has hit the front page of one of the most popular social news websites in the world.
http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/co mments/81vzb/whites_told_to_go _home_at_detroit_city_council/
Post Number: 1284
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 11:48 am: || |
Again would the feds just bring their charges against Monica so then we can be saved from her embarrassment?
Post Number: 1286
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 11:55 am: || |
Here's more from crazy.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20090304/M ETRO/903040436
Post Number: 78
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 12:02 pm: || |
When Beckmann said some interpret that opposition as "stupid," Conyers told him not to use that word.
"I don't think stupid is a very nice word to use," she said. "I would appreciate it if you don't use it."
She added that her relative used to tell her that "stupid is as stupid does."
Something tells me that she's heard that a lot.
Post Number: 1219
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 12:19 pm: || |
I watched a good portion of the council meeting on the video link above and though the racism is there, it's not as bad as I thought.
The stupidity by the council members and some of the speakers on the other hand is absolutely off the charts. You can't watch that without feeling embarrassed for the city.
The funniest part is when Coleman Jr. spoke and at the end he says, "Thank you and I'll take your questions."
Short pause and Jr. says, "There are no questions?"
Conyers responds in the negative and Jr. dejectedly walks off.
Post Number: 622
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 12:32 pm: || |
from the News article...
Conyers added that auto show organizers should reimburse the city for assigning 194 officers to provide protection.
"How many people are being protected in the city of Detroit?" she said. "Who is being protected, the people of Detroit or the auto show? The people of Detroit pay taxes."
Oh, my god! I agree with her.
I remember hearing about this a long time ago. The Tigers, Wings, and Lions don't pay for on duty police staffing of the arena either.
Why can't these places have private security and police on call if needed.
I know there are plenty of off duty cops who get in without paying at most events anyway.
Post Number: 772
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 12:40 pm: || |
^^^^ Why does Monica need police protection as well? The only protection she needs is birth control.
Post Number: 947
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 1:51 pm: || |
Well, at this point Cobo Hall is a Detroit City Building, hosting events negotiated with the city of Detroit. If the City wanted to put the cost of directing traffic in the contract with its customer, they could.
But the NAIAS has its own security at the doors, on the floor, etc.
The cops are traffic cops and street cops. I think the city has them all the time and has to pay them.
The situation re the stadia is a little different. Those are private. Cobo is owned by the City.
Post Number: 255
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 6:08 pm: || |
Why quote Frank Beckmann? He's the Colonel Sanders of Detroit radio. An argument between Beckmann and Conyers will have no winner. Anyone that's traveled
outside our fair city knows that our news media, be it radio or print, is a wasteland. It seems third world by comparison. Beckmann and Finley are the poster children.
Post Number: 410
|Posted on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 - 6:09 pm: || |
Setting aside her choice of words and her total inability to communicate civilly or effectively, I am wondering, is she right? Does anyone know? Are black people shut out for jobs at Cobo?
Post Number: 970
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 2:03 am: || |
Thanks Python. Well said!
Post Number: 792
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 2:21 am: || |
"Setting aside her choice of words and her total inability to communicate civilly or effectively, I am wondering, is she right? Does anyone know? Are black people shut out for jobs at Cobo?"
The theory is that "Detroiters" will be shut out by "outside" labor..this means "blacks will be shut out by whites" in Mon-Con's eyes..
But when push comes to shove, who gives a rat's behind how jobs are awarded so long as it's done honestly? Since when is skin color the determining factor when taking bids for work?
When you need a plumber, a roofer, or an auto mechanic, do you say "Oh, sorry..you've got a great reputation, and you made the best offer on price, but I'm holding out for a guy with different colored skin?"
This city is in the toilet thanks to decades of decisions made in this manner.
Pity Bobby Ferguson wasn't white..we'd have saved millions by now.
Post Number: 745
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 8:26 am: || |
But Zrx_doug there lies the problem in Monica's eyes and other Detroiters. Its not so much the contractors but the subs of that contractor in which the city has less control. The fear is that those jobs won't be awarded honestly.Detroit has a history of having people controlling contruction contracts that don't look like the majority of residents.
You can also make a case that if jobs were awarded "honestly" minority companies would still get the short end of the stick, due to the overall resources of that company it may cost them more to bid on a job.
I'm not making excuses for Ferguson, KK went overboard in throwing business his way, and I sure the procurement process when it came to his company wasn't on the up and up.
Just remember as much as you may hate Monica and the other black nationalist on the council, this subject of contruction contracts and the way they have been awarded historically is a big reason they act the way they do.
Post Number: 793
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 12:28 pm: || |
And my point has NOTHING to do with "hate" of Monica or black nationalism. (I don't "hate" MonCon, I just don't want her wasting any more of my tax dollars, and "black nationalists" are fine in my book so long as they don't practice racial favoritism on my dime.)
My point is that it is FAR better for the city as a whole to hire whoever is most qualified for any job, regardless of race..if qualifications are equal, lowest price becomes the deal maker.
Race/geographic location shouldn't have a damned thing to do with the process.
Ask yourself this:
What's better for the city?
1. Hiring an outside firm at a lower cost and failing to provide jobs for a miniscule percentage of citizens.
2. Providing jobs for less than a tenth of a percent of the citizens, but at a far higher cost?
As a Detroit taxpayer, I would MUCH rather pay three guys from Grand Rapids half the cost, as opposed to paying three guys from Detroit double just so I could say "look, I employed my neighbors."
The question is, are you looking to benefit the WHOLE city, or a handful of employees?
Post Number: 949
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 1:25 pm: || |
Are Cobo jobs closed to Black Detroiters?
Not sure about the concessions ownership anymore. Karl Kado (KK's special friend) used to own electrical, cleaning, part of catering and owned the sundries business in the Atrium. I think he gave up the ownership of cleaning, electrical (the people who do booth set-up connections for lighting, monitors, etc.)
Re: cleaning: these jobs would be open to Detroit/Black applicants and I think that minorities mostly fill these jobs.
Re: electrical: most of the jobs would be for certified electricians. Who would that be?
Re: food-service: most of the jobs (the line jobs) appear to be held by monorities.
In the atrium there is an ice cream shop (minority-owned & staffed) and the Pizza Queen (minority-owned & staffed. also: Cobo Hospitality - does not appear to have minorities on staff, which is limited to one or two persons.
it just seems to me that "the jobs" are held now by Black Detroiters (from casual observation). As to the owners of the big concessions (electrical,catering, cleaning) I don't know.
I guess that MC wants the concessionairres to be Black Detroiters - what else can she be talking about?
Post Number: 747
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 3:33 pm: || |
I think MC wants all services related to city assets that is performed by outside agencies to be reflective of Detroiters (which by design would also reflect the racial composition). The construction industry is one that the big boys in the industry aren't minority for the most part. Its a good old boy business when it comes to their subs and city rules forces them to have a certain percentage of minorities on Detroit jobs.
" My point is that it is FAR better for the city as a whole to hire whoever is most qualified for any job, regardless of race..if qualifications are equal, lowest price becomes the deal maker"
I wish it were just that simple!
If there was a level playing field the statement above might work but the reason the city has those covenants in place is because these companies haven't been fair on a historical basis.
Post Number: 541
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 5:27 pm: || |
More fuel for the fire...
http://apps.detnews.com/apps/b logs/nolanfinleyblog/index.php ?blogid=1212
"Imagine my surprise this morning while listening to the Frank Beckmann show on WJR to hear Detroit City Council President Monica Conyers recounting a brief conversation we had last week.
Conyers accurately recalled bumping into me at the grand opening party for the Fort Shelby Hotel downtown.
But that's all she got right.
She told Frank she urged me to stop writing racist articles.
Not even close.
What she said to me was, "Are you going to keep writing bad things about me?"
My response: "Yes, I probably will."
Clearly, this woman interacts with the world through her own fantasy filter.
I'd urge anyone who wants to know what's wrong with Detroit to listen to the interview. No one would ever make the faux pas of calling Conyers articulate."
Post Number: 796
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 6:35 pm: || |
First&Ten..I don't CARE if workers come from the city, or if they're black, white, or purple..
As I said, workers on this project (and at Cobo in the future) are but a miniscule percentage of the total number of Detroiters..
So we shelve a project that benefits the whole city for the benefit of these few?
As for your "old boy network" comments, all I can say is too f**king bad!
I'm a small business owner..when I see a larger company grab a contract which I can't handle, I've never once felt the urge to cry "unfair," and I damned well don't understand anyone who does. Why the hell should race entitle one to special privilege or considerations in the business world?
Does Detroit no longer grasp the concept of "capitalism?"
Post Number: 1619
|Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 - 6:38 pm: || |
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. has been spinning in his grave over the Detroit situation. His dream is being trampled.
Post Number: 749
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 1:04 am: || |
Zrx_doug I agree with you concerning Cobo I think that the project should not have been voted down. Your idea however that this deal benefits the many over the few is subject to interpetation and not necessarily agreed upon by many detroiters. While I agree with Mayor Cockrel on this deal I think we could have gotten a better deal. The lack of transparency on how this deal got done makes a number of folks think. Did the mayor get us the best deal or did he sell us out?
Secondly you ASSUME that because a larger company grabbed a contract that the smaller company didn't get it was because the company couldn't handle it. Not always the case. You seem to have some myopic vision of what capitalism is all about. I'm not going to get into a discussion about capitalism because that would be way off topic but there's a reason the city has ordinances on the books concerning levels of contracting with city businesses and hiring of city employees and has had those on the books for years.
(Message edited by firstandten on March 06, 2009)
Post Number: 3576
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 1:26 am: || |
The title of this thread reminds me of the not so distant past when I saw the Larouchies hawking papers criticizing the Bush admin..
Post Number: 802
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 1:35 am: || |
Please, explain the reasoning behind this artificial "leveling" of the playing field. (actually it's tilting the damned thing on end to show favoritism based on race/region)
If a Detroit/minority company has the qualifications for the job, and the low bid, why would they NOT be hired? If they lack in either, why SHOULD they be hired?
I don't have a "myopic view" of capitalism, I see the world as it is. The qualified survive, and when those less qualified are artificially made to prosper thru assinine regulation, someone must pay for the difference between "the best for the job" and "the best to fill a quota."
In this case, "someone" is me and you, fellow taxpayer.
Please, do not take this to mean that anyone's race is "less qualified" I am speaking in terms of businesses, not individuals.
Look around you at our city, and ask yourself if those ordinances you speak of have succeeded..
Post Number: 4230
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 2:35 am: || |
Affirmative action has been discussed to death on, here. It's good to know where you stand, because it explains just about everything, now. It shows where your concerns and sensitivities are, and where they are not, more particularly, and it's hardly surprising to learn why you'd think some of these concerns are ridiculous.
(Message edited by lmichigan on March 06, 2009)
Post Number: 4231
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 3:11 am: || |
Looks like the Free Press is doing a piece on the question Thames asked Wednesday evening:
Conyers' point called OK, but not her words
John Riehl, president of AFSCME Local 207, representing hundreds of Detroit Water and Sewerage Department workers, said there is a separation of growth in the labor movement between public employees, auto workers and steelworkers -- more diverse unions -- as opposed to the building-trade and construction unions.
"President Conyers touched on an important issue that is a global battle, and really an affirmative action issue," said Riehl, who is white. "Her point is that we must keep the employment levels up for black Detroiters, both as public employees and construction workers, and that is totally supportable. Detroiters are very keen on keeping as much work in Detroit as possible and keeping black Detroiters employed. Detroit is an 85% black city, and people want to see their neighbors working."
In an opinion piece published in the Free Press last month, Conyers wrote that she was concerned an initial provision in the Cobo deal that would employ "Detroiters first" was taken out of the final legislation.
Post Number: 806
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 4:07 am: || |
If you're attempting to impress me with heartfelt testimony from an honest source, you're going to have to search somewhat further than an AFSCME rep.
My original point still stands..those directly employed by Cobo are a meager handful, while those benefitting from a thriving Cobo include everyone in the city..successful events generate cash flow for the whole region.
Tossing out the greater good to satisfy the needs of a few is shitty logic.
(Message edited by ZRX_Doug on March 06, 2009)
Post Number: 4232
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 4:51 am: || |
I think you got me wrong. I don't think the bidding preference, alone, should have derailed the deal. If you think I'm talking about throwing out the baby with the bathwater, you're mistaken.
I'm just not much a fan of your dismissive and glib attitude towards those that would be concerned about things like bidding preferences for city-based companies given the questionable history of bidding preferences in certain industries.
I posted the comment by the AFSCME because as far as race is concerned, the guy pretty much describes very well the debate that's always gone on. You know, the debate you so glibly dismiss as irrelevant because you don't believe in things like AA. Sorry, if you're not a fan of preferences and what they are aimed to correct; many people are. Your dickish personality is getting in the way.
No one is asking you to support derailing a Cobo deal over this. But, if you're not going to even recognize the legitimate concerns of others, the history of bidding in particular industries, and give us conservative talking points about how things are already equal and how silly AA is, well, just expect to be treated in the same way.
(Message edited by lmichigan on March 06, 2009)
Post Number: 807
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 4:54 am: || |
Perhaps your entitlement mentality is what is getting in the way.
Post Number: 4233
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 5:10 am: || |
Well, glib and dismissive were not nearly strong and descriptive enough words for your general tone on these controversial issues. Dickish seems to fit you like a glove.
I'm not usually a fan of ad hominems, but for someone like yourself that won't even recognize the other side of an issue, I find their use quite effective. Since you don't much care for thoughtful conservation and/or debate, you know, the give and take and looking at both sides of a debate that someone like Firstandten was providing, I certainly won't entertain you with it any further. The ad hominem was offered because it's obviously the only thing that you understand, and the only thing that you want. Your mind is already made up, since, for you, there is no legitimate concerns to be found about the Cobo deal. If that's how you see, then there really isn't much left for you, here, besides the personal back-and-forwards.
It's really a pity, then, that you'd take a big shit in the room where most everyone's on the same general page on the Cobo deal and the council's antics. I wasn't asking you to oppose the Cobo deal; in fact, many of the people that recognize that there are legitimate concerns about the plan weren't asking you to oppose it, either. What started any of this was your dismissive tone and attitude toward some of these concerns.
Really, my friend, it's not me; it's you.
(Message edited by lmichigan on March 06, 2009)
Post Number: 412
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 8:43 am: || |
I don’t like MonCon. I think she’s part of the problem, not part of the solution. When some said to the white man “go home”, MonCon should have admonished them and reminded them that the man had just as much right to be there as them. Instead she fanned the flames.
If she had a valid issue regarding FAIR employment for black Detroiters, it’s now been dismissed as a racist rant and the problem (if there is one) won't even be addressed. That does more harm than good for the people she's trying to help.
I appreciate the responses to my question, but I'm still left wondering if she had legitimate argument.
Post Number: 12
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 8:55 am: || |
Lmichigan, your recent posts have been...well, kinda "dickish." Not just on this thread but many others. Those commenting here may have opinions and attitudes different from yours, may not keep all of their posts in one consolidated thread, and may not always have the most intelligent things to say, but at least they're engaging in the discussion.
Post Number: 4235
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 9:52 pm: || |
You're spot on in your observation, Heedus. My response to Doug was meant to be dickish. I'm not above returning a favor when forced to, nor do I easily suffer fools whether they be Monice Conyers, Nolan Finley, or those that side with either extreme. I'm also more than willing to suffer the consequences of getting in the mud with pigs when it is my choice to do so. The difference between my dickishness and someone like Doug's is that I'm fully aware of it; it's a conscious decision and a choice, for me.
One of the greatest perpetuated myths about the ideology of tolerance and suffering fools is that tolerance demands that those that follow its teachings tolerate intolerance or dickishness. It demands no such thing.
(Message edited by lmichigan on March 06, 2009)
Post Number: 810
|Posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 - 10:43 pm: || |
Okay, let's see..so far, I've been called dickish, intolerant, a fool and a pig..
And this by the guy who apparently feels he's got the moral high ground..
You have yet to present ANY sort of argument to rebut my opinion, or any sort of factual statements to support your own opinion.
I get it..you think AA is a wonderful thing..I don't. I think it's a crutch for a man whose legs have long since healed.
Prove me wrong, don't call me names.
(Message edited by ZRX_Doug on March 06, 2009)
Post Number: 4236
|Posted on Saturday, March 07, 2009 - 12:09 am: || |
This isn't, whether you or Monica want to believe it, a debate over AA, because under our existing state law, it simply can't be. If you want to argue the value of geographically-based preferences, though, well, that's actually relevant to the discussion.
And, if it was about AA, I'd definitely not waste my time arguing it with you. Why would anyone waste their time arguing with someone that's already glibly dismissed the idea as unimportant or silly? But, more importantly, I want you to notice that I never called you out to debate AA. You displayed in your tone and attitude what you thought about it. I called you out for your glib and dismissive responses to Fiveandten, who's displayed a thoughtfulness you've yet to display.
Still, all of that doesn't really matter to where the issue is, now. It's gone beyond that. The issue, now, is whether the state's deferred power to the legislative body to reject or pass this deal can then be vetoed by the municipal executive branch? That is, if the state legislature didn't mean or intend for the city council's decision to be a binding decision, why'd they defer the power to pass or reject the deal down to the city council? I want Cockrel's veto to stand, but it'd definitely be winning by a technicality, because it was not the state legislature's intent that the council's decision be overruled, or they'd not have even included the council in the deal in the first place. I think the state legislature dropped the ball on this one if they wanted a fool-proof bill for the authority. This is a mess, because as I see it, even if Cockrel's veto is deemed legal, it'll convince even those totally on the fence that this authority was approved by subverting the intent of the legislature to allow the council to have the final say on the authority. Then, it will really look like a conspiracy to the already paranoid.
(Message edited by lmichigan on March 07, 2009)
Post Number: 815
|Posted on Saturday, March 07, 2009 - 12:38 am: || |
Well..given the folks making up the legislative body, there will never be a clean "win" for Detroit. By definition, there cannot be..they refuse to consider cooperation with "outsiders," despite the fact that the tasks they wish to undertake simply are NOT possible without the monetary help of said outsiders. I don't see any happy outcomes here..
Council gets their way, the city retains full ownership of yet another soon to be unused building, everyone loses..
Council agrees to work with "outsiders," then their core supporters will burn them at the stake for it. (a prospect I can live with, actually)..
Council is forced to agree thru veto, the city/region will prosper, but at the cost of K. Cockrel's political future at the hands of those same stake-burning folks.
It's basically fucked from any POV, primarily because council chooses to foster the view of neighboring communities as hostile enemies rather than potential partners.
Post Number: 4238
|Posted on Saturday, March 07, 2009 - 1:55 am: || |
Yes, it's very hard to get a clean win as far as the city politicians are concerned, but the trick, then, becomes how to minimize the damage to your own side (i.e. regionalization) by dotting all of your I's and crossing all of your T's. In this instance, I'd have to concede that the legislature didn't do nearly enough to cover themselves from the inevitable charges of conspiracy and power grabbing.
The best way to have written this would have been to defer the power of approval to the mayor, who is both the symbolic leader of the city and its chief executive. In that way, it's have been much more difficult a case to make that Cobo was 'stolen' from the city. The way that this has devolved was quite possibly the worst possible way that it could have been.
Again, by deferring the power of approval of this authority to the city council, their intent is more than clear that the council's decision is the binding one. The legislature didn't write this in a way that it could be construed that they were asking for an opinion from council, or that the mayor would have any formal decision-making over the process; it's written so umabiguously that I'm not sure how anyone could argue that the legislature wasn't asking the council for a ruling on this, and that is what scares me.
IMO, this was a fail of massive and epic proportions that started at the top. Yes, the legislature could have only done so much, and that's how it should be, but I'm not sure that the sponsor of the bill was careful enough to have done as much as he could have to get the intended result (a regionalized Cobo) with the minimal amount of damage (anger directed at the mayor instead of just about everyone that isn't a Detroit).
You describe the victim in your first scenario to a tee (i.e. everyone). You also describe the victim in your second scenario correctly, as well. In your third scenario you miss one of the victims, and that happens to be not only the mayor but every non-Detroiter.
I just think that if they'd have devolved the approval power to the mayor's office that there'd have been much less residual damage from this. My other preference would have been that the mayor kept those on council in favor of the regionalisation abrest of the legislatures actions from the beginning so that no one council couldn't have claimed that this was sprung on them or that they were shut out of the process.
Does that make sense?
Post Number: 753
|Posted on Saturday, March 07, 2009 - 1:56 am: || |
This Cobo deal has been going on since the Archer administration. The council is taking a chance that the stimulus money can be used to refurbish the arena thereby not making it necessary to regionalize it. One of the councils major concerns is the Executive order 2007-1 which maintains that any least 51% of any City of Detroit construction projects are to be residents of Detroit and perform at least 51% of the working hours on the project. KK put this revision in the books after prop 2 passed. The original executive order was put in the books by CAY back in 1983. With the regional authority that executive order goes away, and the city would only have a 20% say in any construction that goes on with that project. Now for those that think there is no more need for preferences now that President Obama is in office, here is an example of what can happen if no restrains are put on the capitalist system
In Grand Rapids
http://blog.mlive.com/wmbr/200 8/04/construction_contracts_up _in_g.html
I don't want to go into a long rant about AA other than to say this. If you assume capitalism will make you do whats in your best economic self interest that would be an incorrect assumption. One example, during sweeps week you always get a TV station set up an apartment sting whereby a minority couple with economic means gets turned down for an apartment. The owners would rather have the apartment empty than rent to that couple. That kind of action created laws that makes these kind of owners pay dearly for that kind of discrimination. The laws have been on the books for years but I bet if they did the sting during the next sweeps week they would find somebody.
Back to the council, I still maintain that the deal should be done, its not the best deal for Detroit and I wouldn't be against some items being revisted but looking at the bigger picture regionalization is going to be important on other issues down the road and we should start breaking down some of the walls that exist between city and burbs. And even though Monica and her gang of 4 have some valid points I could do without the political theatre.