«
»

Guest Column: L’Affaire Marge Powell

Dearborn City Council Needs to Quickly Reinstate Powell

If the Dearborn City Council doesn’t do everything in its power to make sure Marge Powell is legally able to exercise her duties as a Civil Service Commissioner, residents in this city will be left with the impression that our elected officials do not want the qualifications of potential city employees scrutinized.

At least that’s the conclusion of Morris Goodman, a Dearborn attorney, past president of the Dearborn Democratic Club, a longtime political activist and observer and regular reader of Deepsaidwhat.com.

Goodman’s column on this topic, one we’ve covered earlier HERE, begins below.

Morris Goodman

Anyone who knows Marge Powell cannot understand how there can be any question about her status as a member of the Civil Service Commission. She apparently was not asked to take the Oath of Office within 10 days of her appointment in the spring of 2009, but that problem can be immediately remedied by the City Council by its simply extending the time for the administering of the oath. That is, the City Charter would allow in a circumstance such as this — where through inadvertence an oath was not given in a timely manner — for the time to be extended.

The Council says it needs to have a Study Session on this topic which is scheduled for August 5th. There is no need to study this issue. The City Attorney, Deborah Walling, has made it clear that the Council can take this action. So why hasn’t it done so already?

For the last 17 years, Marge Powell has served with great distinction on Dearborn’s Civil Service Commission and has been elected President of the Commission by her peers many times. Before that she was a City Councilwoman for eight years. If there is anyone who can be called the “Conscience of Dearborn”, it is Marge.

One of the primary reasons that Dearborn has been so well governed for so long is that the Civil Service Commission makes sure that those who are to be appointed to positions of importance are in fact well qualified to do the jobs in question. Marge Powell has been the leader in making sure that Dearborn, unlike so many other jurisdictions (think Detroit, Chicago, FEMA under President Bush), does not have cronies of Mayors and Council people appointed to city positions as a “thank you” for help in getting them elected or re-elected.

So what’s the problem with simply extending the time now for this person who everyone publicly says has done a fine job and should be re-appointed? Well, Council President Tom Tafelski wants to make it “crystal clear that this [situation] is not about Marge Powell or her appointment — it’s about policies and procedures that were in place in the civil service commission itself, where you have to follow certain policies, procedures, and protocols.” The problem for Mr. Tafelski is that in fact Marge Powell has been following “policies, procedures, and protocols” so well that the person he wants appointed to a particular city job did not sail through the Civil Service Commission.

The reason being given for there not being immediate action to rectify the Powell oath omission is that “it would set a precedent which could open the city up to lawsuits.” Have there been numerous screw ups, that the public does not know about, in the giving of oaths to Dearborn office holders? Are we inundated by un-sworn elected and/ or appointed officials? Presumably not.

This situation reminds me of a Minnesota comedian’s joke more than 10 years ago at a local comedy club. He said while driving across I-94 going to Detroit, he passed Jackson, Michigan, the home of the world’s largest prison. He saw a sign (no longer there) that said: “Prison Area. Do not pick up hitchhikers.” The comedian wondered: “Are there so many prisoner escapes that drivers need to be warned about unsafe hitchhikers?”

The prisoner escape joke is of an absurdist nature. So is the precedent argument as a cause for delaying Marge Powell being properly sworn in to her rightful position as a Civil Service Commissioner. I seriously doubt that there is any other instance that anyone can point to that is, or would be, in any way comparable to the one here with Ms. Powell. Thus, no precedent would be set that could question the bona fides of any Dearborn official of the past, present, or future. There is one instance of an omission in the giving of an oath that everyone agrees was just that, an omission.

Ms. Powell has taken the oath to be on the Civil Service Commission in a timely fashion four previous times in her 17 years of service. Marge Powell’s colleagues think she is so trustworthy that that they have elected her numerous times to be the President of the Commission. She didn’t take the oath of office this time because no one asked her to, not because she refused to take it. As is often said in much more serious situations, “Mistakes were made.”

One would think the City Council would want to do everything in its power as quickly as possible to make sure that Marge Powell is legally able to exercise her duties as a Civil Service Commission member. Anything less would give the impression that the City Council does not want the qualifications of potential city employees to be closely scrutinized. They certainly don’t want to give that impression, do they? The citizens of Dearborn and Marge Powell deserve this situation to be remedied forthwith.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 30th, 2010 at 1:11 am and is filed under City Hall. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

DeepSaidWhat.com welcomes your views and encourages lively -- but civil -- discussions. Comments are unedited, but submissions reported as abusive may be removed.

  • MyTwoSenseToo

    Who is the person that Mr. Tafelski wants appointed to a particular city job?

    Why didn’t this person sail through the civil service commission?

    Something smells in the City of Dearborn.

  • Diogenes

    Apparently Mr. Goodman does not believe we are a country of laws. Like all liberals, he wants to do what feels good. The extention of time, would that be for all offices, all officals, or just Marge Powell? Diogenes

  • Dearborn Observer

    Hey, ‘Diogenes’ : Look again. The problem here is that Tom Tafelski – whose Mom should have taught him better – tried to push Marge Powell and the civil service commission around. Marge is stronger than that, so Tafelski is trying another tactic to get around her. Not about Marge Powell? Nonsense.

    What caused Powell to reject Tafelski’s plan to move one of his employees under the budget of the Clerk’s office was straight thinking…just what she is supposed to employ in her duties. Tafelski is revealing himself to be quite a bully in this affair.

  • oldalldayschoolmom

    ACCORDING TO MR. GOODMAN:

    One of the primary reasons that Dearborn has been so well governed for so long is that the Civil Service Commission makes sure that those who are to be appointed to positions of importance are in fact well qualified to do the jobs in question.

    CAN SOMEONE PLEASE POINT TO PROOF OF THIS STATEMENT?

  • Lisa

    My first question: why was Ms. Powell’s oath not given in a timely fashion? If she has been President “many times,” shouldn ‘t it have dawned on her that she hadn’t taken the oath?

    I am just curious as to how this missing oath slipped by so many people.

  • LifelongDbnRes

    Guess what, the reality is the oath wasn’t taken. At this point it is NOT about Marge Powell (who I love dearly and is a friend of my family), but about making sure that we do not set an unanticipated precedent. There is no business to be done by this commission until after the August meeting so CHILL OUT AND WAIT PEOPLE. No big deal. Take the time to make a wise decision that doesn’t open some loophole that you’ll all be yelling about in 10 years.

  • Selective Enforcement

    As a former commissioner on a commission of lesser importance, I can tell you many commissioners had not taken their oath in years and were never removed from the commission. This stinks of politics as usual.

  • cloe

    Lisa – I have asked the same question since I first heard about this.

    Mr. Goodman – nice soapbox. Too bad that, you, as a lawyer, don’t seem to think that it is necessary to follow the law.

    Was Tom Tafelski in charge of making sure that she took her oath? I don’t think so. You can say that this all about in-fighting. It’s not. It’s about equal laws for everyone.

  • Dearborn Watcher

    “One of the primary reasons that Dearborn has been so well governed for so long is that the Civil Service Commission makes sure that those who are to be appointed to positions of importance are in fact well qualified to do the jobs in question.”

    Oh really? How exactly did Dave Norwood, an attorney in the Mayor’s office, end up as Director of Building and Safety for seven years? He was well qualified how? Or how about his predecessor Lou Duncan, another cronie from the Mayor’s office? Can someone actually point to a “well qualified” appointment that has made it past the Civil Service Commission?

  • Wanting Better for Dearborn

    I thought lawyers job was to follow rules and uphold the law. Morris must believe in bending and breaking rules for the elite and the regular people are the only ones who has to follow the rules.

    Norwood destroyed Building and Safety and was rewarded with another Department. In the ‘real world’ he would have been fired.

    Something is fishy with Tafelski. Did he know all along she did not take the oath and saved it for when it would benefit him the most?

    People, please wake up in time for the next election. We need these people with their own agendas to go. Lets get some new people in who want the best for the City, not themselves. Someone who can clean City Hall. Big O promised but really disappointed. It is still the Guido administration and corruption.

  • rami

    Applause, Applause to you Dearborn watcher you are so correct in your 2 examples that you mentioned, someone on the Commission must have been sleeping when the votes to certify the names mentioned were brought up. Who knows how many other times this took place?

  • Hakim

    Goodman, you must be a junky attorney, because O’Reilly bullied u at the council meeting, and we know he never practiced. Go back to writing columns because that way there is no one to bully you, and see u cave in like a weasel. Tafalski was right in what he did, and Darany and Abraham showed their grandstanding efforts, which were horrible. Rami I agree with u and the Dearborn watcher, and I would agree with O’Reilly but he gave Norwood a fictional position, just to keep him quiet, so he won’t spill the beans on him. Keep up the good work Tommy.

  • Milwood Fordson

    Selective enforcement

    its easy enuff to FOIA the records and find out just how meny have not taken the oath or were beyond ten days without council extention. Then if there are some, I guess some people at city hall would have a little crow pie to eat.

  • Joe Dearborn

    To set the record straight, department directors in Dearborn are mayoral appointments and NOT approved or vetted by the Civil Service Commission. As a 70 year resident, I do think Dearborn has benefitted from a relatively stable government which has done a better job than most other area cities in keeping up neighborhoods and business areas.

  • oldalldayschoolmom

    What is the function of the civil service commission that makes this position sooo powerful and important, although it is an unpaid position???

  • Michael D. Albano

    Morris and anyone else reading:

    Many who know me know that I am usually the ultimate optimist about Dearborn and it is VERY rare that I criticize anyone, but the paragraph below I MUST comment on. I also want to state that I’ve met Morris Goodman and he is a very involved citizen and excellent writer and Dearborn could use more citizens like Morris Goodman. Nonetheless, below Morris’ comments are my thoughts:

    “One of the primary reasons that Dearborn has been so well governed for so long is that the Civil Service Commission makes sure that those who are to be appointed to positions of importance are in fact well qualified to do the jobs in question. Marge Powell has been the leader in making sure that Dearborn, unlike so many other jurisdictions (think Detroit, Chicago, FEMA under President Bush), does not have cronies of Mayors and Council people appointed to city positions as a “thank you” for help in getting them elected or re-elected.” By Morris Goodman.

    Michael Albano Comments:

    I know nothing about Marge Powell, so I cannot state anything about her qualifications, pro or con or who may be right or wrong on this issue. However while I agree with Morris that Dearborn has been well governed for quite some time, I would have to say that I have been VERY disappointed in much of the government of Dearborn the past few years, even though I know many of these leaders. Most are fine, hardworking, decent people, but since the “buck stops at their desks”, in my opinion many of them have been a BIG disappointment to me as well as to many others and the PROOF is in what a mess the state of the City of Dearborn is now and has been for the past few years.

    I also take issue with Morris’ comment that people appointed to positions in Dearborn are well qualified to do their jobs. I would change that to SOME people appointed to positions in Dearborn are well qualified to do their jobs, because as we know, some that should have been fired for the proven corruption of their employees were given raises and a new position. Most of us also know that in the private sector if a leader does not do their job, they are simply fired and there have been some leaders in Dearborn that are appointed that have made a total mess of their departments or have performed terribly. In the real world these people get a terrible performance review and if they do not improve within a reasonable time frame, they too are fired. But then again, this is government, which is usually lifetime employment regardless of whether one is qualified or not, regardless of what their job performance is. Then it is us taxpayers stuck with the damage they have done or the damage they have allowed by their poor performance and when these same people retire we still fund their pensions and benefits.

    I would also like to know WHY when over 25% of the city employee full time positions have been eliminated, WHY city department heads, supervisors, etc. have NOT taken a pay and benefit cut equal to the percentage of what their department has been cut. Many of the city employees left I have spoke with have had their job duties increased, yet received no increase in pay or perks, yet the dept heads and supervisors are still on the gravy train. Why is that? When is the city going to make this FAIR to everyone?

    Sorry to sound so negative, as I am usually so positive, but I call ‘em like I see ‘em and I’d bet that few disagree with me here. Enough is enough!!!!!