StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Take a look at this article:

Shrinking Detroit has 12,000 abandoned homes

Detroit has become a veritable symbaol for urban decay and blight. When you think of burnt out, dystopic, crime ridden hellholes in America, Detroit almost inevitably comes to mind as the premeir example. The city is shrinking, crime is bad, taxes are high, infrastructure is breaking down, and it seems caught in a downward spiral that nothing can stop.

Some interesting extracts from the article make this point very well:

Detroit has lost more than half its population since its heyday in the 1950's. The people who remain are mostly black -- 83 percent -- and mostly working class, with 30 percent of the population living below the poverty line according to the US Census Bureau.

"The issue is not just getting people in the city. It's getting people in the city who can become property owners and stay property owners and pay taxes."

Perhaps the biggest challenge to luring the middle class from the area's swank suburbs is overcoming racial tensions, said Stephen Vogel, dean of the school of architecture at University of Detroit Mercy.

"Suburbanites are taking the bodies of their relatives out of cemeteries because they're afraid to come to the city," Vogel said. "There are about 400 to 500 hundred (being moved) a year which shows you the depth of racism and fear."

In his state of the city address, embattled mayor Kwame Kilpatrick said even if 10,000 new homes were built every year for the next 15 years "we wouldn't fill up our city."

And Detroit is still losing about 10,000 people every year.

Things are looking very bad in Detroit these days.

So let's say for the sake of argument, that a series of spectacular crimes capture public attention all across the country, and really focus enough national attention on the plight of Detroit to motivate the president himself (at the request of Michigan's governor) to declare a state of emergency in the city, and appoint you as head of special commission assigned the task of cleaning up the mess. Let's say also, for the sake of argument, that you have a lot of federal money at your disposal, and the support of the president and congress, so the wheels are greased for you to get a lot of federal, state and local agencies working on the problem. And you also have the cooperation of Michigan state and local authorities. What steps would you, or could you take? Bear in mind, you've got serious problems to cope with, and some of them, like the racial tensions, are not going to go away overnight. Also bear in mind that any workable solution cannot involve only government efforts and government programs. To turn the city around, you are going to have to rescue its economy, so your solution is going to have to involve businesses and the private sector as well. How will you motivate them to invest in the area? Whatever you do is really just going to be the start of a years long or decades long effort to turn the city's fortunes around. But what steps do you think you can take that will have a realistic chance of reversing, or at least arresting this downward spiral?

Following your sig, I believe the appropriate answer would be to blow up the city. No more Detroit = no more racial tensions, poverty, or slums in the city

Ok, on a more serious note, my first step would be to take every single city bureau under review of their performance. Any bureau employees that do not meet standards will find their ass riding out the door before they even know what hit them. Nobody is exempt, particularly those in administrative positions. Also, if a bureau is deemed a useless waste of resources, it's gone.

The next step would be to establish a temporary city council comprised of what city council members remain and elected reps of the local business community. This temporary council would then be tasked with prioritizing various problems in the city and coming up with short and long-term solutions.

I would also have the FBI run a top-down investigation of the Detroit PD for corruption. Once they've gone through the police, I would then try to hire exemplary officers and administrators from other police departments around the country.

As this thread is primarily directed toward residents of Michigan, I assume that increased use of government-run social programs will not even be considered as an option? Just policing and "business councils", etc?

Darth Wong wrote:As this thread is primarily directed toward residents of Michigan, I assume that increased use of government-run social programs will not even be considered as an option? Just policing and "business councils", etc?

Those would certainly have their place--they'd have to, with the city in the shape that it's in--but you're limited by money. Detroit can't pay for anything itself. The state of Michigan isn't in great shape, and they can't really pour more money into Detroit than they're doing already without the rest of the state screaming about it. The Feds can help, but they can't, say, offer free health care to everyone in Detroit and not to the rest of the country.

Now, as for fixing Detroit: one quick and dirty way to do it would be to annex the suburbs and restore the tax base. Part of why Canada's cities avoided the urban decay American cities did was that Toronto, Calgary, Vancouver, et al annexed their suburbs. Populations shifted within the city limits, but middle-class flight never happened. The problem is that it will be politically extremely difficult. The suburban residents will, of course, resist the move. And so might the political class in Detroit. Annexing middle-class Republican suburbs will break the Democratic machine in the city. Add to that the race problems, which are just astounding--you're going to have a lot of white soccer moms whispering "We can't live in the same city as those people" and black workers saying "This is our city, and we're not letting those crackers tell us what to do".

That, of course, is the answer... OCP to the rescue!

More seriously? There's not much you can do which won't be horrendously expensive and extremely dramatic (and quite difficult to do) politically. One thing's for sure, if the place's to get fixed up, it'll take a fair while...

RedImperator wrote:Now, as for fixing Detroit: one quick and dirty way to do it would be to annex the suburbs and restore the tax base. Part of why Canada's cities avoided the urban decay American cities did was that Toronto, Calgary, Vancouver, et al annexed their suburbs. Populations shifted within the city limits, but middle-class flight never happened. The problem is that it will be politically extremely difficult. The suburban residents will, of course, resist the move. And so might the political class in Detroit. Annexing middle-class Republican suburbs will break the Democratic machine in the city. Add to that the race problems, which are just astounding--you're going to have a lot of white soccer moms whispering "We can't live in the same city as those people" and black workers saying "This is our city, and we're not letting those crackers tell us what to do".

I think you're likely right about the need to annex the suburbds. One of Detroit's biggest problems is poor revenue, which would be greatly alleviated if the middle calls taxpayers in the suburbs were kicking in along with inner city residents. It might be politically risky, given all the opposition, but this could be one of those times where the federal government would have to stand behind it and say: "tough shit. We're now in a state of emergency. You let things get this far out of hand that now we have to come in and clean up your mess. You'll just have to live with our solution." Not very democratic, but possibly necessary.

A shakedown of the police department (along with every other city agency) is likely necessary. As are federal funds allocated to hire new officers. Tax credits for a period of years for business may be a way to get businesses to invest in the area. And the only way you're going to turn things around so that they stay turned around is to improve the city's economy. Government run social programs are almost certainly going to be a part of the solution, but how big a part I couldn't guess. I'm not sure what programs you could tailor specifically for Detroit in a scenario like this, and how that would improve things over the ones the citizens there already have access to.

Another potential problem I see is the unions, especially UAW. The most obvious economic pillar in Detroit is the auto industry. In order to make it stronger, you are not only going to have to get some concessions and cooperation from the automakers with factories in the area, you may also have to get the UAW to make some concessions as well, all aimed at reducing the cost of producing cars, hopefully allowing them to be sold for less, and increasing sales -- hopefully creating a few more jobs in the area.

As this thread is primarily directed toward residents of Michigan, I assume that increased use of government-run social programs will not even be considered as an option? Just policing and "business councils", etc?

What ones are you talking about? Currently they are talking about a government run rail link to make it easier to work in the city, more cops, and a slew of job training initiatives.

The big problem with Detroit is that just about everyone who can move out, does. If you do give a mother better welfare, her children better meals, education, and job placement then the most likely consequences will be her kids making enough money to move to the suburbs and bring her along.

Those would certainly have their place--they'd have to, with the city in the shape that it's in--but you're limited by money. Detroit can't pay for anything itself. The state of Michigan isn't in great shape, and they can't really pour more money into Detroit than they're doing already without the rest of the state screaming about it. The Feds can help, but they can't, say, offer free health care to everyone in Detroit and not to the rest of the country.

Michigan is broke. The budget is in deficit by three quarters of a billion dollars; and that is after raising all the hidden taxes (fees, fines, and under the radar taxes) the state government could fine. The money simply isn't there to be had. Theoreticly the state could raise taxes to increase revenue, however the electorate will vote out the governor and the legislature.

The state's economey is tied up in the auto industry and that suffers from the fact that you can go south for lower taxes and cheaper workers or you can head east for lower taxes, marginally cheaper workers, and government subsidized healthcare - raising taxes will almost certainly move automotive jobs out of the state (which is why the Democratic governor wants to lower the business tax) and likely be a net drain on the budget.

one quick and dirty way to do it would be to annex the suburbs and restore the tax base.

Wouldn't cut it. Several of the suburbs themselves are in deficit and they are also witnessing the wealthy, educated, and unionized workers moving farther out. For a while Hamtramck was in such dire straights that the state actually took over their budget. The only way to be sure of setting right the city's budget through annexation would be to create the largest city (by land area) in the country.

Even assuming you manage that, I will give you great odds that flight will begin all over again. Wherever you draw the dividing line - even if its Ann Arbor city limits, people will move to the other side. You will need a massive margain to keep the tax base from simply falling through further flight - the early suburbs are already seeing this - their residents are getting the hell out as crime rates and incomes fall.

The problem is that it will be politically extremely difficult. The suburban residents will, of course, resist the move.

It would require an amendment of the State constitution which requires a statewide vote in favor and would have to bypass the state legislature meaning you'd have to go through a massive petition drive ... and it would still be shot down. You can't annex the burbs without their consent, particularly since most of them are already incorporated into towns and cities in their own right.

And so might the political class in Detroit. Annexing middle-class Republican suburbs will break the Democratic machine in the city.

The political class in Detroit are easy: bribe them. There are a few people in power in Detroit who aren't beholden to cronyism, under federal investigation, or admitted to unethical behaviour, but they aren't a majority.

Add to that the race problems, which are just astounding--you're going to have a lot of white soccer moms whispering "We can't live in the same city as those people"

Bullocks. The Detroit suburbs are one of the more diverse regions in the country. Their are thriving Arab, Persian, Indian, Polish, Chinese, Southeast Asian, African, etc. communities within the burbs. The University of Michigan has been drawing thousands of international students for decades, those families have moved throughout the area and virtually no major incidents have occured in middle class areas. Likewise middle class black flight from Detroit to the burbs has been documented. The problem isn't skin colors, it is gang colors. If you tell people who forked out 100,000 dollars to get their kids out of the Detroit school system they are back in - then I suggest you invest in real estate just on the other side of the dividing line.

Southeastern Michigan is first and foremost divided by class, race is largely an issue because of the overlap. Wealthy blacks vote Republican as much as wealthy whites, they live in the same communities, and attend the same schools; recently they've even begun attending the same churches. Intermarriage in some areas, like most of Ann Arbor, is so common it fails to raise eyebrows (to be fair in Ann Arbor a bi-racial gay couple raises few eyebrows).

black workers saying "This is our city, and we're not letting those crackers tell us what to do".

Middle class black workers? No. Most of them have gotten the hell out or are sufficiently enlightened to see beyond the race card (these are people staying in the city for altruistic reasons). The rest of the population, perhaps, the electoral demagogues routinely blame whitey for holding down the city.

Realistic ways to reverse the decline:

1. Fix the educational system. Detroit, its remaining voters, and the educational system have made a mutual suicide pact. Graduation rates are abysmal, reading comprehension is terrible (and functional illiterates do graduate out), violence in schools is horrid, as is drug use, etc.. Right now many future productive citizens of Detroit get shafted by an education system that spends too much time, money, and effort on losers. What is needed in education is some way of allowing the kids who can learn and want to to get the hell away from those who don't and can't. Either you'd have to force the teacher's union to repitively fail the losers (and that requires breaking the union) or you have to go for seperate schools. Vouchers will most likely suck off the intelligent and driven kids, as well as those whose parent(s) really care - leaving behind a bigger mess in the public schools. Frankly I think it is the lesser of evils to let those within the system effectively rot and let those who want to enroll their kids in schools where they fail, punish, and expell the losers.

Minimally you need to abolish the school board and have it run by some one nicely apolitical and compotent. After that you need to get the budget directed to useful expenditures (a "state of the art" high school for the fine and performing arts ain't it), have it out with the teacher's union, and rewrite the cirrculum.

2. Sell off all the cultural institutions the city budget is carrying. The Detroit Zoo, the DIA, etc anyone who buys such an institution will be allowed to operate it with no taxation so there is a chance some of them will survive. Yes cutting such funding will not be popular, but given a choice between laying off cops and firemen or saying goodbye to the Zoo - I know which one I prefer.

3. Demolish every vacant home you can legally get away with.

4. Build walled and gated communities to bring back in the middle class.

5. Hire a crapload of undercover cops, deputize and train neighborhood watches, and place a few snipers on various rooftops throughout the city at random times and locations. The general idea is to arrest as many criminals as possible and to place a healthy fear that they will eventually be caught or killed.

Really though I don't think you can solve Detroits problems without burning down the city and rebuilding. You've had decades of corruption, mismanagement, and educated flight. In certain parts of Detroit all that remains are the poor, the criminals, and the drug addicts.

As someone who was raised in the Detroit area, all I can say is that I got the hell out when I was 18 and never looked back.

I don't think Detroit can be fixed... stop pouring money into and let it sink back into wilderness.

As far as suburbanites paying - all the years my dad worked in Detroit he paid city income tax, regardless of where we lived.

And it's not just racism that keep people out of the city - I remember one occassion when I had the hubcabs shot off my car going down Woodward Avenue. It's fucking dangerous in parts of that city even in the middle of broad daylight. When people can move away from flying bullets only the stupid refuse to do so - and that's true of the blacks in the area as much as any other ethnic group.

Though I won't pretend to know how to fix Detroit (even though I live right next to it ) I do know one thing that might help: get rid of Kilpatrick.

The man is an embarassment, he spends millions of dollars keeping his friends on the city payroll, having expensive parties and keeping around a security detail the size of a small army, all the while trying to hide his expensives and claiming that $10,000 dinners help get "business into the city". He's trying to live like he's a rap star, and it's hurting the city.

[/rant]

I think you're likely right about the need to annex the suburbds. One of Detroit's biggest problems is poor revenue, which would be greatly alleviated if the middle calls taxpayers in the suburbs were kicking in along with inner city residents. It might be politically risky

Risky? Are you kidding me? It would be be suicidal and possibly not just in the political sense.

As noted before you have to annex a crapload of territory to get to the good tax base.

We're now in a state of emergency. You let things get this far out of hand that now we have to come in and clean up your mess. You'll just have to live with our solution.

Nope. Michigan is a home rule state with constituional rights of local communities. The surrounding areas are already incorporated; bringing them in against their will requires an amendment to the state constitution. That amendment requires a popular statewide vote, and the entire state outside of greater Detroit, Marquette, Lansing, Ann Arbor, and Flint is solid red and will vote it down. Further even in Ann Arbor there are literally islands of other municipalities that refuse annexation into Ann Arbor city (because of the tax issue). A supermajority voting down the amendment would not be unlikely.

If you want to forcibly annex the surroudning communities into the city, then you are going to have to piss on the state constitution, which will piss off numerous senators and representatives at the federal level. Certainly the local congressional reps would raise hell (like say requiring a voice vote on every damn vote in Congress). Even if you can get your bill through congress you still have to deal with the SCOTUS bitchslapping it and the fact that most of your federal agencies who would enforce it live in the burbs and will be opposed. They might not outright defy you, but you can bet the wheels of the mandarinate will grind to a halt.


Again even if you manage to get the suburbs into Detroit, you will see a demographic shift out of the city in response. You'd do far better just imposing a statewide poor tax which would be funneled to Flint and Detroit, that might slip under the radar (doubtful) but forced annexation is a recipe for all hell breaking loose. The burbs have the money, the native lawyers, the congressional representation, and the sympathy of the rest of the state. Annexation is a non-starter.

Perinquus wrote:Add to that the race problems, which are just astounding--you're going to have a lot of white soccer moms whispering "We can't live in the same city as those people" and black workers saying "This is our city, and we're not letting those crackers tell us what to do".

You've obviously never been to the Detroit suburbs.

First of all, it's as integrated an area as you'll see in the US - it is NOT an unrelieved carpet of "white soccer moms". Second, the vast majority of the blacks in the 'burbs are there because they got the hell out of Detroit while they could. It wasn't white flight - it was everybody flight that reduced that city's population.

I think you're likely right about the need to annex the suburbds. One of Detroit's biggest problems is poor revenue, which would be greatly alleviated if the middle calls taxpayers in the suburbs were kicking in along with inner city residents.

Detroit has had a city income tax since the early 1970's, at least - as I already mentioned, my family had to pay it for decades since my dad worked within the city limits, even when we didn't actually live in the city of Detroit. The "middle class" living outside the city HAVE been paying, at least in part, because of that tax. And that money has done... what? Subsidize corruption and waste.

It might be politically risky, given all the opposition, but this could be one of those times where the federal government would have to stand behind it and say: "tough shit. We're now in a state of emergency. You let things get this far out of hand that now we have to come in and clean up your mess. You'll just have to live with our solution." Not very democratic, but possibly necessary.

Why necessary? Why should the suburbs pay for the mismangement of the city of Detroit? People voted with their feet for decades. What the fuck is so very important about the city of Detroit that we can't live without it? Just let the fucker die completely. It wouldn't be the first time a city was abandoned. Sometimes these things happen for good reason.

Another potential problem I see is the unions, especially UAW. The most obvious economic pillar in Detroit is the auto industry. In order to make it stronger, you are not only going to have to get some concessions and cooperation from the automakers with factories in the area, you may also have to get the UAW to make some concessions as well, all aimed at reducing the cost of producing cars, hopefully allowing them to be sold for less, and increasing sales -- hopefully creating a few more jobs in the area.

The auto industry pulled out of Detroit years ago. Do you get it? There is no industry in Detroit. At all. Period. Nada. There hasn't been a car made IN Detroit in several decades. Your "obvious economic pillar in Detroit" hasn't existed in Detroit for over 25 years.

Dearborn - now Ford is still in Dearborn. And there's Flint. Flint is more the "motor city" than Detroit is these days.

There isn't even a fucking grocery store in the city of Detroit. Not one grocery store. They just tried bringing some back in this year and so far the experiement hasn't been going well, even with subsidies.

This situation with Detroit sounds almost exactly like New Orleans, particularly the race-relations, one-note-economy, and government-corruption bits. Worse: Detroit has no real chance of a random Cat 5 hurricane parking itself over the city to end the suffering.

As long as there's racism, short-sightedness, and this cancerous 'society-of-thugs' mentality perpetuated by rap and causing racism on both sides, Detroit and New Orleans will never get their problems fixed; with the possible exception of total destruction of New Orleans via hurricane.

Broomstick wrote:

Perinquus wrote:Add to that the race problems, which are just astounding--you're going to have a lot of white soccer moms whispering "We can't live in the same city as those people" and black workers saying "This is our city, and we're not letting those crackers tell us what to do".

You've obviously never been to the Detroit suburbs.

First of all, it's as integrated an area as you'll see in the US - it is NOT an unrelieved carpet of "white soccer moms". Second, the vast majority of the blacks in the 'burbs are there because they got the hell out of Detroit while they could. It wasn't white flight - it was everybody flight that reduced that city's population.

In the interests of accuracy, I feel constrained to pointt out that while you quoted this with "Perinquus wrote:", I never said that. It was Red Imperator.

Broomstick wrote:Why necessary? Why should the suburbs pay for the mismangement of the city of Detroit? People voted with their feet for decades. What the fuck is so very important about the city of Detroit that we can't live without it? Just let the fucker die completely. It wouldn't be the first time a city was abandoned. Sometimes these things happen for good reason.

It would be the first time that a city of that size was "abandoned" in the United States. We aren't talking about some little podunk outpost that dried up when the nearby silver mine plays out, and as a result becomes a ghost town. We are talking about a major metropolis, with millions of people living in it. How do you just abandon that? And what about all those people still living there. Not all of the them are depraved criminals and gang bangers who deserve anything they get. Some are just people who are too poor to afford to move out. And your solution is apparently "fuck 'em". Well, they are still citizens, and are still entitled to all the rights and protections that are supposed to come with that. The government has a duty to try and safeguard the welbeing of its citizens, and I am asking what could possibly be done to salvage Detroit. The city is not going to be abandoned; it's too large and well established. It may never regain its former size and importance, but it's not going to go away. So writing it off, and thereby also writing off all the people who live there is simply not an option.

"Nuke the place from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

It would be the first time that a city of that size was "abandoned" in the United States.

So?

We are talking about a major metropolis, with millions of people living in it.

No we aren't. We are talking about former major metropolis with well less than a million people living in it.

And what about all those people still living there. Not all of the them are depraved criminals and gang bangers who deserve anything they get. Some are just people who are too poor to afford to move out.

How much money are you going to be dumping into the place through your increased tax revenue scheme? Would it not be cheaper just to buy out the remaining residents, relocate them all over the country, and then bulldoze and start over again?

Well, they are still citizens, and are still entitled to all the rights and protections that are supposed to come with that.

As are the citizens of the burbs, which includes home rule in Michigan.

The government has a duty to try and safeguard the welbeing of its citizens, and I am asking what could possibly be done to salvage Detroit.

The best thing that could happen to most citizens of Detroit would be to get the hell out of Detroit, which has been the ambition of most Detroiters in recent history. If you care about the people then relocate them. That will be quite expensive in the short term, but might well be cheaper in the long term.

It may never regain its former size and importance, but it's not going to go away.

If present trends continue it might. Anyone with any brains in Detroit is trying to get out or is altruistic and trying make things better for others. Detroit has already reached a point where morons who graduated from a failed school system are now being elected for life to further run the school system into the ground.

Detroit could easily get billions of dollars if it allowed nuclear waste to be stored within the city limits. From what people are saying that shouldn't make things any worse, since everyone who can leave already has. All the armed guards involved could also cut down on crime.

OK, if people feel that a restoration of welfare funding, community centres, school funding from the state level etc. is impossible, then perhaps the only solution is to declare martial law within the city limits in order to restore law and order. That sounds better than letting lawlessness rule and essentially abdicating the region to armed thugs, which seems to be what I'm hearing.

Darth Wong wrote:OK, if people feel that a restoration of welfare funding, community centres, school funding from the state level etc. is impossible, then perhaps the only solution is to declare martial law within the city limits in order to restore law and order. That sounds better than letting lawlessness rule and essentially abdicating the region to armed thugs, which seems to be what I'm hearing.

That would certainly work. Except.

This situation has not been in the press long enough; aside from the residents surrounding the Michigan area, I'm pretty sure not a whole lot of people either know/care about conditions in Detroit-- I certainly didn't till I read this thread.

If martial law is declared in Detroit, the media will EXPLODE-- people would be arguing vehemently against the legality of such an action, against the administration, and so on ad infinitium. This would be comparable to the Al Ghraib shitstorm if that happened; about the only way for the government of Michigan and the US to pull this off successfully would be to let Detroit fuck itself over first, stay on the headlines for the next few days, AND then move in. Without people realizing the true state of affairs in the city, they would consider martial law an extreme overreaction, an abuse of the rights of the citizens of Detroit. That's why I don't see this happening unless there's some major justification for it, like city-wide rioting or some such like what happened in Los Angles in the 'seventies (eighties? Not sure, I wasn't around then).

The city proper only has about 950,000 people in it, give or take.

GM is the only car company that maintains a presences in the city.

When you have a city that has Devil's Night every year, I think its time to admit that nothing can be done.

It might just be time to start a systematic demolition of the abandoned areas, declare martial law, or something that will allow law and order to be restored and start rebuilding. You may just have to make the city smaller, and accept that its not a major city anymore and build from there.

"We Hope For Better Things; It Shall Rise From the Ashes" Is the city motto for christ sake. Time to throw in the towel.

Perinquus wrote:Well, they are still citizens, and are still entitled to all the rights and protections that are supposed to come with that.

They are also responsible for their community. That's why they have the right to organize, the right to speak, and the right to vote. It's their job to quit playing games and decide to get shit done. If they don't want to cut the crap and get serious then they can at least benefit the rest of the country by being an example of what not to do.

Zed, what is Devil's Night?

Bob the Gunslinger wrote:Zed, what is Devil's Night?

Devil's Night,a round here, is the night before halloween when kids go out and pull pranks(TPing a house, eggings, what have you). In Detroit, I'm willing to bet it involves a huge amount of crimes done in one night.

Okay, for whatever reason the link doesn't want to be dressed. So, I present a naked link.

*http://web.linix.ca/pedia/index.php/Devil's_Night

Sorry about that.