Another Detroiter makes the cycle

[canuck]

Hamtragedy, your post is dynamite. It's very emotional but as precise an evocation of Detroit that we will ever get in any medium. Your last sentence explains that everything leading up to it has brought havoc and a sense of betrayal by countless others.

The cycle continues unabated, the city becomes more or less a playground for punks on a roll.

[gazhekwe]

This is an old pattern, one that seems to have no solution and no one really wants to talk about it in a progressive manner. How DO we solve complete culture clash and get disparate groups to work together?

In the 70s, we bought a house just east of Grandmont, lovely neighborhood, stable and full of working and retired couples, some families with kids. Within two years the entire neighborhood swept out as all the older families left, and then the families with kids, because "the schools have gone." The schools were not gone, they are still there now, but guess what the code meant. New families moved in, lots and lots of kids because the homes were good sized with 3-4 bedrooms. I counted 110 kids playing on the block one morning. Things started to go downhill quickly. There were just one or two houses that seemed to contribute to the slide. The houses quickly deteriorated, and stolen cars were being stripped in the alley. People were out on the street all night, playing loud music, talking loudly. There were large barking dogs everywhere. Forget sleeping with the windows open. Some of the stable new neighbors left. We tried to start a block club, and met with polite objections that people always seem to try to get rid of other people. We finally couldn't take it any more either and moved north. It's interesting that we liked and got along with everyone we knew on the block, but couldn't take the whole ambience. We owned the house a total of just 5 years, that's how quick it went. Bought for $20,000, sold for $18,000 and felt lucky at that.

[iheartthed]

This is an old pattern, one that seems to have no solution and no one really wants to talk about it in a progressive manner. How DO we solve complete culture clash and get disparate groups to work together?

In the 70s, we bought a house just east of Grandmont, lovely neighborhood, stable and full of working and retired couples, some families with kids. Within two years the entire neighborhood swept out as all the older families left, and then the families with kids, because "the schools have gone." The schools were not gone, they are still there now, but guess what the code meant. New families moved in, lots and lots of kids because the homes were good sized with 3-4 bedrooms. I counted 110 kids playing on the block one morning. Things started to go downhill quickly. There were just one or two houses that seemed to contribute to the slide. The houses quickly deteriorated, and stolen cars were being stripped in the alley. People were out on the street all night, playing loud music, talking loudly. There were large barking dogs everywhere. Forget sleeping with the windows open. Some of the stable new neighbors left. We tried to start a block club, and met with polite objections that people always seem to try to get rid of other people. We finally couldn't take it any more either and moved north. It's interesting that we liked and got along with everyone we knew on the block, but couldn't take the whole ambience. We owned the house a total of just 5 years, that's how quick it went. Bought for $20,000, sold for $18,000 and felt lucky at that.

The book I mentioned earlier in this thread [[Some of My Best Friends Are Black) talks about how/why this exact same thing happened in some Kansas City neighborhoods. That wasn't just the result of a culture clash, it was planned...

[TKshreve]

The book I mentioned earlier in this thread [[Some of My Best Friends Are Black) talks about how/why this exact same thing happened in some Kansas City neighborhoods. That wasn't just the result of a culture clash, it was planned...

Care to elaborate on that planning?

I have so many books in line already, and would prefer not to add another one.

[gazhekwe]

In my experience, the whole thing is due to ignorance, broad ignorance on all sides, and complete lack of planning. Why do we want to fight and flee rather than sit down together and try to figure out how to live together?

[313WX]

In my experience, the whole thing is due to ignorance, broad ignorance on all sides, and complete lack of planning. Why do we want to fight and flee rather than sit down together and try to figure out how to live together?

We know WHY folks don't want to sit down and work together.

The question is if we can change that mindset and if so how.

[TKshreve]

In my experience, the whole thing is due to ignorance, broad ignorance on all sides, and complete lack of planning. Why do we want to fight and flee rather than sit down together and try to figure out how to live together?

Well..... throwing money at the issue seems to be the status quo these days.

But the dilemma is bigger than that and requires new, innovative problem solving. And something tells me some hands would need to be forced in order to make a paradigm shift such as this.

And yes, weeding out the bad apples would also have to be part of the equation, sadly.

I think that Detroit has been unable to function on a grand scale for some time. The cracks that are created by this lack of efficiency are a leading reason we have such a high level of disrespect for our neighbors and society in general.

Would "pocket communities" be an option? Those which provide ancillary services such as police, fire, refuse, etc.? I'm sure we have similar ideas in place now, but could we build and improve upon what has been tried.

[antongast]

Well..... throwing money at the issue seems to be the status quo these days.

It does? Who's throwing money, and how do I catch some?

[Richard]

Care to elaborate on that planning?

I have so many books in line already, and would prefer not to add another one.

Without reading the book I can elaborate on one of the plans a little bit,it had good intentions but devastating results in every city and suburb across the country.

It was the brain child of HUD and it was called HOPE VI [[Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) it started with Cabrini Green as the first in 1994.

In the past you had projects that had a lot of residents in a confined area that was to an extent easily controlled or ignored,because most of the crime was concentrated in a small area the resources were not needed as much in other areas.

There is good and bad in everybody and the ones that climbed out of the projects wanted a better life for their families and they integrated nicely into other areas because they shared the same common interests.

So now you mostly the bad left in confined areas demanding more resources.

HUD comes up with the idea that maybe if we close down the projects and integrate the "bad" with the good maybe the good will rub off and they will not be bad anymore.

Interesting concept but until 2005 and the housing boom the monthly housing allowance was low enough that the only rental options available in that price range were per say older homes with cheaper rents this is where you see the decline starting in the surrounding neighborhoods.

Then back to the housing boom and a lady called Katrina,New Orleans had several large projects that were destroyed and a large amount of displaced residents which is bad enough but because of the housing boom the average monthly rental rates were no longer affordable at the currant monthly allotments.

HUD goes back to the think tank and decides to raise the monthly allotments according to the average suburban rate which at the time in most cases was in the $1500 a month range for a family of four,they also decided to give grants to new apartment builders large chunks of monies to allow a percentage of units to remain low income,it was also at this time you start to see the rapid decline of the apartment complexes and suburbs which in turn helped to create sprawl.

If you are working hard to pay your mortgage and keep your house up and then somebody moves next door at no cost and no incentive to maintain their property what are you going to do? Move further out away from the headache.

Like I said not everybody is bad but it only takes a few to have a heavy impact on a neighborhood and make everybody else look bad.

To make a long post even longer I can give you an example of how we tried a different approach and it seemed to work well.

The state was going to expand the highway and in the way was 30 or so 1900 to 1930s bungalows,we teamed up with the city and state and took an empty block long parcel and moved those houses to that parcel creating a new city block of homes,the homes were rehabbed and offered as a low income alternative,but before they could become home owners they had to complete a 60 day course on home ownership which included the financial aspect,maintenance,
and even lawn care tips. This was all included in the purchase contract and they received a handbook that also offered tips.

This was 5 years ago and 90% are still there and the block looks the same as the day it was delivered.Sense then the rest of the surrounding area has also greatly improved considering the house movers at the time required police escort for protection.

There are no easy answers I guess but the results of snap decisions and their massive impact are clear.

[noise]

In my experience, the whole thing is due to ignorance, broad ignorance on all sides, and complete lack of planning. Why do we want to fight and flee rather than sit down together and try to figure out how to live together?

Convenience, maybe. In my own life, it's easiest to just pack up and move if I want some different scenery.

[iheartthed]

Care to elaborate on that planning?

I have so many books in line already, and would prefer not to add another one.

Long explanation short... Blockbusting tactics. Real estate brokers worked in cahoots with residential developers to get white homeowners to sell in city neighborhoods and move to new developments that the developers built [[mainly in the suburbs). Unscrupulous brokers would buy a house in a white neighborhood then rent it to the worst black tenant they could find to spook the immediate neighbors into selling. This would start a selling frenzy that would spread throughout the neighborhood as neighbors witnessed their property values plummet and tried to get out before the prices dropped too low. By the time a neighborhood got to the frenzy stage legitimate brokers would not sell in those "transition" neighborhoods, legitimate banks would not lend for mortgages or equity loans on properties in those neighborhoods, and insurance companies would not insure properties in those areas without a very high premium.

On the other side the blockbusters were selling to legitimate black families at much higher prices than the properties were worth, which the black families were willing to pay since they thought they were buying into stable upper class neighborhoods. The blockbusters were buying up the houses from the white families at a discount and flipping it to a black family for a premium. Also, since black families largely didn't have access to the legitimate lenders that white families had access to, they often used subprime loans that came with higher interest rates, and subsequently, higher rates of foreclosure. The subprime loans were often written by those blockbusters too.

The biggest irony of blockbusting is that property values didn't actually drop because black people moved into the neighborhoods. In fact, they actually didn't drop at all since black families were buying the houses at even higher prices than a white family would have paid before the transition. But since the blockbusters were acting as mediators neither side ever had a true sense of what the properties they were buying and/or selling were actually worth. To white sellers it looked like they were losing their asses and to black buyers they thought they were buying into a higher class.

[Jimaz]

Long explanation short... Blockbusting tactics....

That was an excellent description. I believe the scam was explained well in the book Common Ground.

[Detroitnerd]

Long explanation short... Blockbusting tactics.

A good synopsis of the phenomenon.

Unfortunately, people live a mythical existence. The myth always trumps the reality. White metro Detroiters of a certain age have built up such a mythology of what happened and why that they have never examined the underlying business and institutional practices that drove it all.

Now, with scholars like Sugrue uncovering the history of what happened, about blockbusting, or about the points system in Grosse Pointe, we are uncovering the hidden history behind that narrative.

I don't believe the people who lived through it want to examine those underlying truths. Whether their children will is an open question.

[TKshreve]

Long explanation short... Blockbusting tactics. Real estate brokers worked in cahoots with residential developers to get white homeowners to sell in city neighborhoods and move to new developments that the developers built [[mainly in the suburbs). Unscrupulous brokers would buy a house in a white neighborhood then rent it to the worst black tenant they could find to spook the immediate neighbors into selling. This would start a selling frenzy that would spread throughout the neighborhood as neighbors witnessed their property values plummet and tried to get out before the prices dropped too low. By the time a neighborhood got to the frenzy stage legitimate brokers would not sell in those "transition" neighborhoods, legitimate banks would not lend for mortgages or equity loans on properties in those neighborhoods, and insurance companies would not insure properties in those areas without a very high premium.

On the other side the blockbusters were selling to legitimate black families at much higher prices than the properties were worth, which the black families were willing to pay since they thought they were buying into stable upper class neighborhoods. The blockbusters were buying up the houses from the white families at a discount and flipping it to a black family for a premium. Also, since black families largely didn't have access to the legitimate lenders that white families had access to, they often used subprime loans that came with higher interest rates, and subsequently, higher rates of foreclosure. The subprime loans were often written by those blockbusters too.

The biggest irony of blockbusting is that property values didn't actually drop because black people moved into the neighborhoods. In fact, they actually didn't drop at all since black families were buying the houses at even higher prices than a white family would have paid before the transition. But since the blockbusters were acting as mediators neither side ever had a true sense of what the properties they were buying and/or selling were actually worth. To white sellers it looked like they were losing their asses and to black buyers they thought they were buying into a higher class.

Interesting..... but how this applies to the post housing bubble movement is almost irrelevant. That was then, this is now. And they appear to be two very different situations.

While the Metro Detroit real estate market slipping well before 2008, we had a big exodus from Detroit where the lowest income earners were given mobility they never had. Nobody pushed them out.

I'm having trouble understanding what historic racial reality practices have to do with the OP's case study.

Granted the effects may be similar, but the causes are extremely different. Were you alluding to the effects?

[iheartthed]

Interesting..... but how this applies to the post housing bubble movement is almost irrelevant. That was then, this is now. And they appear to be two very different situations.

While the Metro Detroit real estate market slipping well before 2008, we had a big exodus from Detroit where the lowest income earners were given mobility they never had. Nobody pushed them out.

I'm having trouble understanding what historic racial reality practices have to do with the OP's case study.

Granted the effects may be similar, but the causes are extremely different. Were you alluding to the effects?

Well, I was responding to gazhewke's post about her neighborhood in the 1970s... However, it's not irrelevant to the current situation in Detroit today.

[ordinary]

Living in Detroit, over the years, you get used to the kiss-off essay. Some of them have been great, pointing out in very neutral terms why they can't live in the city, and I feel for those people and don't blame them one bit. But something about the tone of this essay bothers me. It's almost like it should be retitled, "I made a lot of poor decisions buying an overvalued house in a neighborhood I didn't know very well and am OUTRAGED that it didn't turn into Ann Arbor in five years, like I had hoped."

I've read all the posts in this thread and I'm going to try and point out, as Detroitnerd says, in neutral terms why my family and I are throwing in the towel.

We've had a house in the Cornerstone Village area in Detroit since 1938. It was probably one of the first houses on the street. My grandparents had it built. My mom and dad bought it from them and raised us 5 children there. My mom died in 2010 and all 5 of us siblings now own the house. My oldest son moved in there. The neighborhood has become pretty rough so it was good to have somebody living there, paying the utilities and the taxes. So he was the fourth generation of our family living in that house. He doesn't make a lot of money so it was ideal for him.

I had some ideas about buying out my siblings and having a place to store an extra car and maybe one of my kids could remain there. I had no illusions about it becoming some shangri-la, but maybe just remaining stable. Just before X-mas last year, the house across the street was firebombed. We were pretty sure that the young man in there was a drug dealer but he actually seemed like a nice kid. My son had talked to him a few times. Anyways, just this past March, I was on vacation in Florida and my son calls me up and tells me that some Detroit detectives stopped by and told him that a couple of days before the place was set on fire, they pulled two dead bodies out of that house.
The scrappers showed up within a month or so after the fire and were doing what they do. Now they're working on the house a couple of doors down in broad daylight with no repercussions. How can this be?! I mean, this is some scary stuff. Dead bodies?! Arson?! We are actually scared. My son is scared. My younger brother, only half kidding says we should just abandon the place, to hell with it. But that would be a terrible thing to do to the neighbors on either side who are great people and helped my mom out a lot. My son is planning on moving back in with me until he can find something else. I'm going to stay there every other night just to have somebody in there until we sell it.

It's just so sad. I saw Duggan on TV the other day talking about trying to have people move back into the city but I don't know how that's ever going to happen with the way things actually are.

[Dumpling]

I am mildly curious, are you just walking away or have you put the house
up for sale?
Yesterday a black SUV came down my street. It had cameras noticeably
mounted on it [[though wrapped in cloth) and a yellow flashing light.
I have no idea who that was really but wasn't surprised to see it. At a community meeting several years ago there was a couple that didn't get a desired response from the police, so they took it upon themselves to videotape drug transactions in their neighborhood. This seemed to have some good effect, they were telling us, but they had to leave the meeting early because their home alarm system went off.
Last November a brick was thrown through my big front window after two
squatters were arrested at the vacant house for sale across the street.
I vacated my premises for about a month, just stopping by daily to check on the house and the "no nos moveran" cats that were left there. This was out of some concern that a firebomb might be next. The homeowner of the vacant house pressed the home invasion charges and, long story short, the home invader with the prior record who was on probation at the time did not have any money to make bail, pled guilty, and will cool his heels for a nominal two to fifteen years. Thank you cops; notice home invasion is not that
bad of a crime relatively so the minimum or less is likely.
This kind of thing doesn't happen so much in Farmington Hills. If you are done with the struggle I can't blame you but I hope you put the house up for sale and can stay there until it is sold.

[illwill]

Without reading the book I can elaborate on one of the plans a little bit,it had good intentions but devastating results in every city and suburb across the country.

It was the brain child of HUD and it was called HOPE VI [[Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) it started with Cabrini Green as the first in 1994.

In the past you had projects that had a lot of residents in a confined area that was to an extent easily controlled or ignored,because most of the crime was concentrated in a small area the resources were not needed as much in other areas.

There is good and bad in everybody and the ones that climbed out of the projects wanted a better life for their families and they integrated nicely into other areas because they shared the same common interests.

So now you mostly the bad left in confined areas demanding more resources.

HUD comes up with the idea that maybe if we close down the projects and integrate the "bad" with the good maybe the good will rub off and they will not be bad anymore.

Interesting concept but until 2005 and the housing boom the monthly housing allowance was low enough that the only rental options available in that price range were per say older homes with cheaper rents this is where you see the decline starting in the surrounding neighborhoods.

Then back to the housing boom and a lady called Katrina,New Orleans had several large projects that were destroyed and a large amount of displaced residents which is bad enough but because of the housing boom the average monthly rental rates were no longer affordable at the currant monthly allotments.

HUD goes back to the think tank and decides to raise the monthly allotments according to the average suburban rate which at the time in most cases was in the $1500 a month range for a family of four,they also decided to give grants to new apartment builders large chunks of monies to allow a percentage of units to remain low income,it was also at this time you start to see the rapid decline of the apartment complexes and suburbs which in turn helped to create sprawl.

If you are working hard to pay your mortgage and keep your house up and then somebody moves next door at no cost and no incentive to maintain their property what are you going to do? Move further out away from the headache.

Like I said not everybody is bad but it only takes a few to have a heavy impact on a neighborhood and make everybody else look bad.

To make a long post even longer I can give you an example of how we tried a different approach and it seemed to work well.

The state was going to expand the highway and in the way was 30 or so 1900 to 1930s bungalows,we teamed up with the city and state and took an empty block long parcel and moved those houses to that parcel creating a new city block of homes,the homes were rehabbed and offered as a low income alternative,but before they could become home owners they had to complete a 60 day course on home ownership which included the financial aspect,maintenance,
and even lawn care tips. This was all included in the purchase contract and they received a handbook that also offered tips.

This was 5 years ago and 90% are still there and the block looks the same as the day it was delivered.Sense then the rest of the surrounding area has also greatly improved considering the house movers at the time required police escort for protection.

There are no easy answers I guess but the results of snap decisions and their massive impact are clear.

That was explained perfectly.

[illwill]

Interesting..... but how this applies to the post housing bubble movement is almost irrelevant. That was then, this is now. And they appear to be two very different situations.

While the Metro Detroit real estate market slipping well before 2008, we had a big exodus from Detroit where the lowest income earners were given mobility they never had. Nobody pushed them out.

I'm having trouble understanding what historic racial reality practices have to do with the OP's case study.

Granted the effects may be similar, but the causes are extremely different. Were you alluding to the effects?

I think this scenario took place when people began integrating legally.

[Wesley Mouch]

We know WHY folks don't want to sit down and work together.

The question is if we can change that mindset and if so how.

Judge Sotomayor said about the same thing. She wondered why we can't have a 'discussion' about our differences.

Total BS. Meaningless words. Conversation. No. I want to live in a neighborhood that I like. I don't need a conversation with the drug dealer who's son broke into my house. If I can move, I will move. Is that racist? I don't see how. I think most whites dislike white criminals too.

I don't deny racism -- but frankly its a lazy generalization. So go have a conversation with someone and make it better. Don't call them racist. That doesn't help.

[wolverine]

Owning a house at a young age is too much responsibility anywhere. But doing so in a place that's challenged and lacks services just compounds the hardships.

I don't know why people buy a house in places where there is no market confidence. And I'm not saying Detroit in general. Certain neighborhoods are worth buying a place, but why not wait on others

And why not wait like most normal millennials to purchase a house after you've figured out what you are doing in life. Educated and with a job you can live your life [[in your 20's) in luxury as a renter or be dirt poor paying a mortgage on a home you may get tired of.

[ordinary]

No we're not walking away. We couldn't do that to the neighbors. My son's still there for now. We haven't done anything with it yet. I'm just thinking to the future when my son leaves the house. Being that it is owned by 5 people at the same time, it's going to take a while. We're butting heads a little bit about what to do with it.

It's interesting that the homeowner of the vacant house actually pressed charges. I think the problem in our situation that nobody knows who owns the houses across the street. How could I find out?

[ordinary]

I agree about the home ownership. I remember my poor dad saying that if he had to do it over again, he'd "live in a tent." In the neighborhood where our house is, a person would have to be totally dedicated to making it work and have a huge family/friend support system.

[Dumpling]

Here are the resources I would use to try to find out who owns a home:

1.) The Register of Deeds Office for Wayne County - so far as I know,
it is still located in the large office building kitty corner from the Old
Shillelagh on Monroe Street in Greektown. I know some Wayne County
functions have relocated recently so please double check this.
There is a delay so recent transactions aren't recorded.
2.) The Why Don't We Own This? website has one page that gives
owners' names for properties, but it isn't fully updated and accurate.
3.) There is an expensive directory called Bresser's that you might try
to find in a reference library that gives cross-indexes.
4.) Your state representative's office probably has one person that just
does this exact stuff all day, day in, day out for the constituents.
5.) The City of Detroit Buildings & Safety Department has a database also.

[ordinary]

Dumpling,
Thanks for that information. I'm going to look into it.

Ordinary