Discuss Detroit » Hall of Fame Threads » 7 truths the city and region must accept to move forward. « Previous Next »
Archive through July 08, 2008Detroitplanner30 07-08-08  3:21 pm
    
  ClosedNew threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.        

Top of pageBottom of page

Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus

Post Number: 70
Registered: 06-2008
Posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 - 2:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Vizion:

My bad. For some reason I read it as "I don't worry about south of 8 mile".

Either way, my post still rings true.

(Message edited by thejesus on July 09, 2008)
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1803
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 - 2:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I guess the 70 year old with no experience running a major city was a better choice?

And being a member of city council doesn't garner any experience as we see so you can't play that card either.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ffdfd
Member
Username: Ffdfd

Post Number: 321
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 - 2:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Yup. Those Marylanders and Virginians with their county-wide services are completely insane. Detroit is doing things just fine.



Preach on Dan. It's like we're pissing away a golden opportunity for consolidation. We need to imagine ourselves in those attractive regions' shirts, so to speak.
Top of pageBottom of page

Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus

Post Number: 71
Registered: 06-2008
Posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 - 2:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Thejesus, so I guess the citizens of Hillsdale are dumb for writing in a 18 year old who won the election."

I didn't call anyone dumb, but you certainly take a huge risk when you vote for someone with no experience, and when they fuck up you can only blame yourself. Do you disagree?

I'm going to take a bit of a risk this year and vote for a 47-year-old with no experience to be President because I think the risk has a tremendous upside, but in the event he fucks up (and I mean REALLY fucks up like Kwame), then I'll take the blame and certainly won't vote reelect him.

(Message edited by thejesus on July 09, 2008)
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 4599
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 - 2:34 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

I didn't call anyone dumb, but you certainly take a huge risk when you vote for someone with no experience, and when they fuck up you can only blame yourself. Do you disagree?



KK already had experience as a state legislator! What's his excuse?
Top of pageBottom of page

Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed

Post Number: 3273
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 - 2:50 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

I would argue that electing a 32-year-old with no experience to run a major U.S. city didn't exactly represent sound decision-making on the part of the Detroit electorate.



Well, when you consider his alternative at the time... I think Detroit actually made the right choice. It was the second time around where they effed it up!
Top of pageBottom of page

Optima
Member
Username: Optima

Post Number: 17
Registered: 12-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 - 4:23 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Preach on Dan. It's like we're pissing away a golden opportunity for consolidation. We need to imagine ourselves in those attractive regions' shirts, so to speak."

I, too believe that regionalizing certain services would be an attractive and money-saving venture as long as the participants (officials) were non-partisian appointees (not elected). Many services could be provided through an existing agency like the Metropark system which currently exists in several SE MI counties to relieve smaller jurisdictions of the costs of programs such as recycling, street and park maintenance, street light maintenance, etc. Regionalization is the answer to successful cities and Detroit has never even researched the prospect to my knowledge.
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1804
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 - 6:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Many parts of NY, MD, VA and many other states use mainly county police to patrol everything and not these lil 4 person departments with limited resources. It's all about cooperation and not separatism when it comes to certain city services etc.

I forgot to say this earlier.. we elected a 32 year old with no mayoral experience over a 70 year old with the same qualifications. When it was reelection time... there seemed to be a bit of a conspiracy with the vote counting and no one really wanted to delve into that one... Freman was winning and Kwame pulled ahead out of the blue and won... so we can't really take the L on reelecting Kwame. After looking at all the bullshit that has come to light since January can you really rule out vote tampering and corruption?

(Message edited by viziondetroit on July 09, 2008)
Top of pageBottom of page

Higgs1634
Member
Username: Higgs1634

Post Number: 572
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 10:57 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Yup. Those Marylanders and Virginians with their county-wide services are completely insane. Detroit is doing things just fine.

Preach on Dan. It's like we're pissing away a golden opportunity for consolidation. We need to imagine ourselves in those attractive regions' shirts, so to speak.



What about any person currently in a leadership role in Detroit (or likely to hold one in the near future) would make one think "regionalization" would be a success? "Consolidation", "regionalization" whatever euphemism we want to use is nothing more than a seizing of wealth. That "golden opportunity" is simply a redistribution scheme to prop up Detroit and wallpaper over the fact it can not provide basic services to its citizenry. I mean, after all we're not talking about regionalizing Wayne County to improve any suburban Wayne County schools, services, or police protection now are we?

HERE... (not in other places like Fairfax County that have thriving, growing, knowledge based economies, more homogeneous populations (both economically and racial), high 5s or even 6 figure median incomes, huge federal government presence, and one of the highest concentrations of educated people in the country) here "consolidation" would likely only lead to a huge degradation of services to the majority of the contributing region and only marginally benefit Detroit. When has throwing more money at a problem in Detroit ever solved anything?

About the only lasting effect "Consolidation" would have here is the complete collapse of the entire region's ability to provide any reasonable level of service. I can not imagine anything that would encourage people to head for regional exits faster than they are already than to tell them that Kwame Kilpatrick or the Detroit city council will be reaching beyond the city limits and directing how local tax dollars will be spent and deciding how services will be provided for the entire county.

On the flip side, I can think of nothing that would trigger riots in Detroit faster than telling the residents of Detroit that some guy from Grosse Pointe or Taylor or Livonia will be running all their services. Don't really have to look too far back in DPS's history to see how well "outsiders" are tolerated.

By a ridiculous margin, the two largest employers in the city are the schools and the city itself. 85% of the region's retail and roughly 90% of the private sector jobs are in the suburbs. If Detroit, as an entity, ceased to exist tomorrow would anyone, other than those that work in the city's bloated and dysfunctional bureaucracy, really even notice?

The #1 truth that must be accepted is that the City of Detroit is a failed city subsisting off of glory long past. We are way past the time where changes made on the margins will have any effect. There needs to be wholesale, massive and difficult change. The best thing for Detroit and the region is bankruptcy/receivership reorganization of Detroit. Detroit needs its government gutted from top to bottom and each and every service reorganized and right sized (probably things that are even beyond a receivers ability).

We can "imagine" change and stand around wringing our hands at how much is 'wrong' here as much as we want, but as long as the region's largely uneducated, apathetic, and uninvolved electorate keeps looking backward, keeps ignoring reality and keeps electing cowards and criminals to lead this region and state, nothing "real" is going to happen anytime soon to affect change here.

(Message edited by higgs1634 on July 10, 2008)
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 890
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 11:51 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fnemececk hit on it pretty well, but I'm gonna add to the zoning issue:

quote:

It also makes security needs easier to identify, station more cops in casino, club, and bar / entertainment districts.


So, let me get this straight. We'll put all the clubs in one area, and overload it with police to keep order, right? And since clearly Detroit's crime problem exists entirely around clubs, the rest of the city will manage fine with the reduced police coverage and longer response times.

And why is the proximity to lofts a bad thing? That's one of the advantages of loft living, you are close to it all - jobs, entertainment, sports, nightlife. You gotta take the good with the bad. If a particular club is causing problems, then do something about that particular club, don't ban all of them for the problems of one.

Another problem with your 'district' idea is that it actually makes the security situation worse. Go ahead, put all the clubs in one place. Who is in this district when the clubs are closed? It becomes a ghost town, and a haven for drug dealers and crime. But when you mix in other businesses, offices, and residences, this becomes far less likely. It's become a lively area, with people on the streets and looking out their windows - and that is a huge deterrent to crime. And the same goes for any single use district.

Also, it does NOT make things easier to find. Which is easier, giving confusing directions to a district on the other side of the city, or pointing to a store two blocks down? Your idea takes services away from where they are needed and make private or public transportation a necessity for basic needs. Walking can and should be an option for nearly everything - at least, in functioning city. The same is true for nearly everything - museums, parks, bars, entertainment, shopping... They should be as close as possible to the people utilizing those services, not centralized. (one exception: stadia, but that is due to the seasonal nature of sports. I wouldn't put two baseball stadiums together, but i would put a hockey arena and baseball field next to each other.)
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1808
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 12:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Reading this thread really makes it CLEAR EYES/VISINE clear why things are so fucked up in this area.

People refuse to look @ what makes comparable cities/regions prosper and take those best practices and apply them or even being open to tweaking them to fit the area.

Detroit is Rear View City- too much time is spent talking about what it was and what it used to be etc and not enough real thought and practice being put into what it should and could be.
Top of pageBottom of page

Tetsua
Member
Username: Tetsua

Post Number: 1721
Registered: 01-2004
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 12:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

And since clearly Detroit's crime problem exists entirely around clubs, the rest of the city will manage fine with the reduced police coverage and longer response times.



I never said that the crime problem exist entirely around the clubs, however I don't think anyone can deny that club traffic can be trouble.

quote:

So, let me get this straight. We'll put all the clubs in one area, and overload it with police to keep order, right?



I don't know where the "overload with police" thought came from, but a small presence wouldn't hurt in a area where clubs generally are. This is nothing any different than an increased number of police during Tiger home games, or street festival.
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1809
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 12:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

....He was being overly sarcastic and an ass
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise

Post Number: 2789
Registered: 09-2007
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 12:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ok, so it would be better urban planning to create a red light district?
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 4607
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 12:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Higgs, you make it seem like Detroit and its suburbs developed in isolation from each other. Are they NOT economically, socially, and culturally interdependent? I think we're seeing the answer every day when we pick up the business section of the newspaper.

I don't think anyone is proposing (yet) anything so radical as a single-entity Metropolitan Detroit. It wouldn't hurt to start sharing redundant services, though. Is there any reason why each of these tiny fiefdoms would not care to save some money on unnecessary costs?

Even in Greater Cleveland, which is socioeconomically very similar to Detroit, some older suburbs have begun discussions to merge police and fire protection. Some of them already share municipal courts and purchase road salt together.

Then you post this:

quote:

HERE... (not in other places like Fairfax County that have thriving, growing, knowledge based economies, more homogeneous populations (both economically and racial), high 5s or even 6 figure median incomes, huge federal government presence, and one of the highest concentrations of educated people in the country) here "consolidation" would likely only lead to a huge degradation of services to the majority of the contributing region and only marginally benefit Detroit. When has throwing more money at a problem in Detroit ever solved anything?



Interesting that you pick the single wealthiest county in Virginia. What about the other 94 counties and 39 independent cities, many of which are far, far poorer than Metropolitan Detroit? What about Fairfax having one of the nation's best school systems, DESPITE an incredibly large immigrant population--much of which cannot speak English?

More of the same old woe-is-me bullshit, eh? Add Truth #9: People in (Metropolitan) Detroit have an overwhelming tendency to feel sorry for themselves.
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1810
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 12:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I couldn't agree more Dan
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2845
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 2:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

I don't know where the "overload with police" thought came from, but a small presence wouldn't hurt in a area where clubs generally are.


We can't do that. The police are preoccupied with all of the folks who keep trying to buy right shoes in the Left Shoe District.

And don't get me started on all of the troubles in the Office Supply District. People keep thinking it's a living set of "The Office".

We may have to set up a Dunder Mifflin District someplace north of 8 Mile in order to distract them.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2846
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 2:32 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Many parts of NY, MD, VA and many other states use mainly county police to patrol everything...


The only problem with us going to county-wide system would be that then all of Wayne County would have deal with being shaken down for $55 over a bicycle "license".

Does the rest of Wayne County really need that?
Top of pageBottom of page

Higgs1634
Member
Username: Higgs1634

Post Number: 573
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 4:24 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

More of the same old woe-is-me bullshit, eh? Add Truth #9: People in (Metropolitan) Detroit have an overwhelming tendency to feel sorry for themselves.



Ah...more patronizing comments by someone that doesn't live here.

I don't feel sorry for myself or the region. I left. I lived and worked in various places around the US and the world. I came back here fully expecting it to be like living one of the third world cities had lived in. The place hasn't let me down on that regard. Just like the third world, Detroit/Metro area can be a decent enough place to live as long as you are not tied to the local economy or part of the opposition to, or have to deal much with, the local dictator.

quote:

Interesting that you pick the single wealthiest county in Virginia. What about the other 94 counties and 39 independent cities, many of which are far, far poorer than Metropolitan Detroit?



Pardon me. I thought you were posting from D.C/ Northern VA area...it was the first county that came to mind. I would contend there is no county in Virginia that is like Wayne County, Michigan (population of 2 MILLION). Fairfax...is the one the biggest county right? it's what? half of the size of Wayne.
I mean you can't be comparing Norfolk to Detroit. Remove the Navy and Norfolk doesn't exist. Actually..remove the Navy and you would have a reasonable facsimile of the Detroit Metro area on a smaller scale.

Maybe there are some counties as poor as DETROIT, but not as large as, not with the pockets of wealth as, or the level of economic and racial segregation and isolation as found in WAYNE COUNTY. I believe year in and year out the Metro Detroit area far and away leads all comers in regards to those issues. You don't get to be named the most miserable area of the country for nothing!

quote:

What about Fairfax having one of the nation's best school systems, DESPITE an incredibly large immigrant population--much of which cannot speak English?



Seems incredibly obvious why that is.. Fairfax, as you stridently noted, is one of the wealthiest in the country. From what I understand it also has an incredibly educated population. I would also guess that those that do not speak English as a first language are immigrants from cultures where education is primary focus and their children are encouraged to assimilate and learn.

I believe a recent survey here highlighted the fact that residents of Detroit and most of the region are far less concerned with the benefits of receiving an education. .

quote:

Even in Greater Cleveland, which is socioeconomically very similar to Detroit, some older suburbs have begun discussions to merge police and fire protection. Some of them already share municipal courts and purchase road salt together.



Is the discussion concerning the fact it's silly for the 5 grosse pointes or bloomfield and BHills to maintain separate services and those should merge OR that older suburbs should merge it services with Detroit? Those are two vastly different discussions.

quote:

Higgs, you make it seem like Detroit and its suburbs developed in isolation from each other. Are they NOT economically, socially, and culturally interdependent? I think we're seeing the answer every day when we pick up the business section of the newspaper



I said no such thing. I'm simply saying that TODAY... NOW not 35 years ago... Detroit (the city) has become irrelevant to the REGION. As noted the vast majority of jobs, of private sector activity, and of people in SeM are located OUTSIDE of Detroit. During the somewhat boom-ish years of the nineties for our lone regional industry, did Detroit come bounding back? It would seem the region is simply tied by proximity versus anything else. Honestly, what about Detroit makes it relevant? Ford is in Dearborn, Cerberus Motors long ago moved to Auburn Hills (Highland Park and surrounding areas did SO well after that), GM...while it's still in business...is Detroit's largest single private sector employer and it employs less that 10,000 IN Detroit (and I'd be stunned to find a majority of them actually live in Detroit). DPS ALONE employs more than TWICE what GM employs in Detroit. Would anyone but Detroit be affected if GM consolidated at the Warren Tech Center?

Why, if we are going to go all "Marshall Plan" in the area should that focus be on Detroit? The center of population for the region is what...Southfield now? Some say Troy? Why, if we are in "re-build it and they'll come" mode should Detroit be the focus? Because it once was a functioning city? Because it has the largest collection of derelict,mid rise, early 20th century architecture? I'm being somewhat sarcastic, but.... I ask again, when has throwing money at any problem in Detroit fixed anything?

None of Detroit's problems are going to be solved by confiscating regional wealth and dumping it south of 8 mile in the name of "regional cooperation". Solutions to a great many of Detroit's problems are going to have to come from Detroiters themselves. If the last round of scandals hasn't shown there is little chance of that happening I don't know what does.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 11878
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 4:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

So if Detroit goes away the regions homelessness and poverty issues go away.

i support your theory. Let's end Detroit and move the few jobs to the suburbs. Now which side of your home do you want an NSO, halfway house, etc built.

If Detroit goes away the rest of the region won't have the luxury of pushing the issues into the city and expecting the city and residents of the city to deal with it.

I say we distribute the jobs evenly and distribute the issues evenly to the rest of the region.

Deal?
Top of pageBottom of page

Higgs1634
Member
Username: Higgs1634

Post Number: 574
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 4:54 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

If Detroit goes away the rest of the region won't have the luxury of pushing the issues into the city and expecting the city and residents of the city to deal with it.



If the suburbs go away, Detroit will lose the luxury of shifting the blame for all its problems to outsiders.


(Message edited by higgs1634 on July 10, 2008)
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1811
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 4:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

...the never ending tug of war. Who can pull the other into the blame pit.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 11879
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 4:59 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Higgs - You didn't answer my question. I am not blaming the suburbs for Detroit's problems but your silly little 'Detroit could go away' solution ignores the fact that Detriot carries the majority of the burden to deal with and care for the homeless, impoversihed and mentally ill people in SE Michigan.

If you are willing to get rid of Detroit are you and others in the suburbs willing to take on the homeless, impoversihed, mentally ill, NSOs, shelters, etc that Detroit and its citizens deal with?

Looks like someone is willing to get rid of Detroit and take the jobs but not the problems.

Why is that?
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 4608
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 5:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Maybe there are some counties as poor as DETROIT, but not as large as, not with the pockets of wealth as, or the level of economic and racial segregation and isolation as found in WAYNE COUNTY. I believe year in and year out the Metro Detroit area far and away leads all comers in regards to those issues. You don't get to be named the most miserable area of the country for nothing!



Queens County and Kings County, New York. Rationalize away.

What you seem to be saying, Higgs, is that Southeast Michigan is just fine the way it is. I strongly beg to differ.

Excuses haven't helped the region for the past 60 years. Why would you expect the status quo to work in the future if it doesn't work now?
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1812
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 5:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Excuses are monuments of nothing that build bridges to nowhere. Those that choose to use these tools of incompetence are masters of nothing.
Top of pageBottom of page

Warriorfan
Member
Username: Warriorfan

Post Number: 921
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 5:23 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

They would prefer to have the urban big city feel, and Detroit offers this.



So does Chicago. And it has far far far more to offer than Detroit with far far far fewer drawbacks.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ggores
Member
Username: Ggores

Post Number: 182
Registered: 10-2007
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2008 - 8:35 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I had an idea, but it is elsewhere here, something about a revitalization of something that really was once vitalized - the new ballpark, and I aint talking hot dogs. Mmmmmm...
Top of pageBottom of page

Higgs1634
Member
Username: Higgs1634

Post Number: 575
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Friday, July 11, 2008 - 10:48 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Queens County and Kings County, New York. Rationalize away.



I didn't realize Queens County and Kings County were now part of VIRGINA OR MARYLAND, which was what your original condescending statement concerned. But let's take a look at both shall we..Both are Burroughs of a famously huge city... gosh I can't quite place it. Some call it the Capital City of the World..The "Big" something...I know I should know it... is it NEW YORK? Wow, I wonder if being one of the five Burroughs of NEW YORK CITY has anything to do with the fact the area is able to function with shared services? Or maybe it's because they always functioned as such since their inception? That might have something to do with it too.

But since we're just talking about random counties now. How's Fulton County, Georgia (home of the "city too busy to hate") doing these days? I would suggest Fulton has more in common with Detroit than Kings or Queens on their worst day.


quote:

Higgs - You didn't answer my question. I am not blaming the suburbs for Detroit's problems but your silly little 'Detroit could go away' solution ignores the fact that Detriot carries the majority of the burden to deal with and care for the homeless, impoversihed and mentally ill people in SE Michigan.

If you are willing to get rid of Detroit are you and others in the suburbs willing to take on the homeless, impoversihed, mentally ill, NSOs, shelters, etc that Detroit and its citizens deal with?



What your comments seem to imply, is that Detroit citizens are powerless to object to these things and are without voice or representation. Comments on here about "which side of your house do you want a half-way house" and "let us know where to ship our homeless"...etc can only be taken to mean your position is; Detroit has nowhere in which to turn to combat the region allegedly dumping its problems on the city "expecting the city and residents of the city to deal with it."

I find that odd since Detroit has the largest single voting bloc in the State's legislature, Michigan's second term governor cut her teeth in Detroit and Wayne County, Detroit has a second term Mayor, a City Council with very few "new" faces (even a former US congress woman!), Detroit has a TWENTY ONE term congressman in the U.S House (with residence in Detroit and is MARRIED TO A CITY COUNCIL WOMAN..WOW! Imagine the influence!) representing the 14th district, he is second only to another representative with Detroit in his district who is currently the longest serving member of congress (and 4th longest EVER). AND you have the Mayor's MOTHER (also living in Detroit) representing the last chuck of Detroit in the 13th. Let's also not forget the many, many local elected and appointed representatives (some are even FAMILY of elected officals! I mean how great is that to get things done?) on the various county and state boards, commissions, and like that set local regulations and enforce the rules that affect all those items you noted.

You surely can not be saying that ALL of these people charged with serving the needs of the residents of Detroit, some of which who have INCREDIBLE amounts of seniority (or connections) at the local, state, and national levels are FAILING to effectively represent the interests of Detroit citizens?

quote:

What you seem to be saying, Higgs, is that Southeast Michigan is just fine the way it is. I strongly beg to differ.



Are you dense? Seriously. No. To clarify for those just joining...I am in no way, shape, or form saying the region is "just fine". I'm simply saying the status quo (and by status quo, I mean continual decline) will remain until radical change is made in Detroit. That is #1 and needs to happen before anything else is possible.

Until Detroit changes and projects at least a modicum of self sufficiency and competence, it will continually be viewed by a majority of the region as a largely irrelevant place to go to a museum, watch a game, maybe hit a bar or casino (only if there is secured parking and good freeway access), but most definitely not a place in which to live or support. They type of change needed can only be wrought by Detroiters demanding it from the people they put in office. There is nothing indicating that is going to happen. I'm just stating reality... and that is definitely not 'fine'.

(Message edited by higgs1634 on July 11, 2008)
Top of pageBottom of page

3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity

Post Number: 1193
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Friday, July 11, 2008 - 11:45 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Top two (of 200) changes that need to be made:

1. Citizens must demand a fully functioning, uncorrupted school system. (Let's see the top 10 reasons that will never happen.)

2. Citizens must demand that the City be administered and governed by honest, smart, experienced (in business or something practical), dedicated leaders. (Yeah, right.) It can't remain the dysfunctional place it is now.

Real estate taxes are ridiculous. My home in a northern suburb (with the best school district and superb city services)is SEV'd at well over $100,000, is compatable in size to most of the homes in Palmer Woods, and my taxes are $3,800 per year.

There are many nice neighborhoods in Detroit, but it seems there are at least equally as many or more that are riddled by the thousands of abandoned homes that blight the city. Pass legislation to permit the city to tear them down quickly. It's the best money the city could spend.

Mass transit might be nice but it's just another public works project in my opinion. The city thrived for many years without the kind of mass transit people seem to think will be a cure-all.

I'd like to see the city improve and once again become a viable, functioning place, if for no other reason than I still have a financial interest there.

Frankly, I see little or no hope of any of these things happening.

Why doesn't someone present a realistic, achievable scenario whereby the city will ever become something to be proud of, a city which the suburbs might consider a partner, not an embarrassing money drain, in some type of regional government? No pie-in-the-sky dreams please.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 4611
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, July 11, 2008 - 4:32 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

I'm simply saying the status quo (and by status quo, I mean continual decline) will remain until radical change is made in Detroit. That is #1 and needs to happen before anything else is possible.



Yet you rail against radical change at every opportunity, including now. What makes you think that Detroit--bearing the burden of the region's poor, uneducated, homeless, and disabled--is going to magically pull itself up by the bootstraps? The suburbs only seem to succeed because they geographically removed themselves from those problems.

quote:

Mass transit might be nice but it's just another public works project in my opinion. The city thrived for many years without the kind of mass transit people seem to think will be a cure-all.



What years were those?

Shit. This isn't rocket science, kids. Emulate cities that work (Hint: SE Michigan ain't one of 'em.)
Top of pageBottom of page

Higgs1634
Member
Username: Higgs1634

Post Number: 576
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Friday, July 11, 2008 - 5:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Shit. This isn't rocket science, kids. Emulate cities that work (Hint: SE Michigan ain't one of 'em.)



Astute analysis.

Hint: SE Michigan ain't a city. It's half the state's population, a vast majority of which, have decided Detroit offers them nothing.

What radical solution are you are proposing exactly? Your only "radical" solution is a revenue grab by consolodation, which isn't too surprising as you are posting from D.C.

quote:

What makes you think that Detroit--bearing the burden of the region's poor, uneducated, homeless, and disabled--is going to magically pull itself up by the bootstraps?



That bootstraps crap is a total cop out. What a majority of the region is looking for is a good faith effort out of Detroit...not scandal and corruption at every turn.

Why do you refuse to place any burden of accountability on those who are elected to address these problems? Again, Detroit has the most senior (some serving longer than most of us have been alive), most cohesive, and most far reaching influence in regional government, yet all I read on here is how Detroit is a victim of homeless/mentally ill "dumping". Well, how about asking governor-do-nothing to scrap asinine programs like the Cool Cities farce, grow a fucking backbone, and re-open some fucking charity wards.
Top of pageBottom of page

3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity

Post Number: 1194
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Friday, July 11, 2008 - 5:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"What years were those?" Well how about the '50's or thereabouts when the population was 1.8 million?

"Emulate cities that work." I hope, Higgs, that your comment, "Astute analysis," was sarcasm. That advice is like telling some poor guy with cancer that he can cure himself by "emulating" a pro athlete at the peak of his career.

And of course Detroit can't pull itself up be its bootstraps. This city is doomed to decline for many years. Unless of course someone accepts the challenge in my previous post to come up with a reasonable scenario which will result in a restoration of at least a shadow of its former prestige and glory.
Top of pageBottom of page

Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox

Post Number: 742
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Saturday, July 12, 2008 - 2:35 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Well how about the '50's or thereabouts when the population was 1.8 million?

The last streetcars in Detroit were taken out of service in 1956, by which time the city's population had already started to decline (the oft-cited 1.85 million number is from the 1950 census--by 1960 it had dropped to 1.67 million). I'm not saying it wasn't a far more vibrant, functioning city at that time than it is now, but the trend toward disinvestment in the central city was well underway by then. The mentality that caused the streetcars to be removed was closely related to the one that promoted suburban expansion and wholesale clearing of vibrant central-city neighborhoods for freeways and high-rise housing projects.

(Message edited by bearinabox on July 12, 2008)
Top of pageBottom of page

Higgs1634
Member
Username: Higgs1634

Post Number: 577
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Monday, July 14, 2008 - 9:05 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

"Emulate cities that work." I hope, Higgs, that your comment, "Astute analysis," was sarcasm. That advice is like telling some poor guy with cancer that he can cure himself by "emulating" a pro athlete at the peak of his career.



Yes, it was sarcasm.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2848
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Monday, July 14, 2008 - 11:06 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

There are many nice neighborhoods in Detroit, but it seems there are at least equally as many or more that are riddled by the thousands of abandoned homes that blight the city. Pass legislation to permit the city to tear them down quickly.


The problem isn't legislation. That already exists. The thing that keeps most abandoned homes standing is a lack of money.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lodgedodger
Member
Username: Lodgedodger

Post Number: 94
Registered: 05-2008
Posted on Monday, July 14, 2008 - 3:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Other than property taxes (I've already said my piece on that problem), how about a reliable bus system? That would go quite a way towards solving the transportation issue. I think enlarging the People Mover to its original plan would be fantastic--but a fast fix would be to add more buses.

Am I full of it on this one?
Top of pageBottom of page

3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity

Post Number: 1202
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Monday, July 14, 2008 - 5:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fnemeck: Do you think that a lot with the house removed, the basement filled, and lawn seeded, would be worth more than the cost to demolish and remove the house? (I know there are many factors used to determine value such as location, condition of the remainder of the neighborhood etc., but generally is what I'm interested in.)

If the value of the lot would exceed the cost to demolish and remove, then possibly the city could convey lots to speculators/developers who would restore lots to a buildable condition at their own cost in return for a deed to the lot. No taxes for 5 years as long as the lot is maintained satisfactorily. The lot would revert if it became an eyesore.

Sounds like a good idea if the numbers work. What do you think?