Ah, Michigan, where everything proceeds backward. Auto companies announce downsizing, housing markets crumbling - and now our governor saying raising taxes is the only way to remain competitive. At this rate, the United States will number only 49 in a matter of years, as you can't think about the possibility of federal receivership anything less than seriously now.
The Detroit Public School system is much the same way: another article in the paper today detailed outlandish amounts being spent by school board members to California and even Disney World in Orlando... while back home, roofs are leaking, boilers aren't operating, students have as many guns as they have books, and teachers are woefully underpaid. The vicious circle only continues as parents rightfully pull their children out of these poor conditions, which leads to less state money and a continuation of these problems two-fold.
The school district has spiraled out of control and is too expansive for a school board to supervise properly. The state has been out of control for years; a huge bureaucracy is to blame as THEY cannot supervise properly, either.
If it's too huge, perhaps responsibilities should be cut back; a borough-type of thinking where a big area is split into parts which can be better supervised by a small group of people. Thinking along those lines, I reprint for you a computer essay I wrote two years ago, when I thought the city of Detroit needed to go the way of New York and split into boroughs:
I had actually thought up this idea to myself well over a decade ago, and shiver when I find it's only now being discussed. Rather than elect an at-large council, elect a representative from a specific boundary to have a place on council. Simple idea, now why don't we have a simple resolution to make that law around there?
Some parts of Detroit are obviously in better shape and are more affluent than others. Are the "haves" the only ones being represented? Do the have-nots even have a voice? I am sure so many people would like to run for council to make a difference, but when they see this strong-arm system in place, their hopes are deflated before they can inflate. Never mind battling the egos, but where will the issues of the down-trodden be placed? Forever to be discussed; never to be enacted.
Under the new system, you may well have someone representing the gated communities with top security. But what about the one representing those on a street with many potholes, poor trash collection, street lights out, and crime all over the place?
Moral of the story: wise ideas like this one begat more responsibility and effort placed in a smaller area, which could result in more progress and a shorter lifespan for that vicious circle mentioned above.
Current methods simply aren't working. It's worth a stab (or a thought) at change.
