Originally Posted by
downtownguy
I say bravo Detroit City Council for delaying the vote today and for calling for a public hearing.
From what I have read in news articles, the Hantz website, and so many "expert" opinions on both sides of the issue posted in this thread, I am inclined to support the project. However, I still have many unanswered questions including what are the exact locations of these properties, details of the agreement between the city and Hantz, what happens if Hantz doesn't adhere to the agreement, fair market value of the properties [[yes, even they have a market value), etc.
For those of you critical of Council [[and I am with you on a regular basis), they are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing: getting all the facts, allowing public discourse, digging into the detail of the agreement, and debating the merits of the plan in an open forum.
So much misinformation has been spewed here. They are not contiguous parcels. I did some rough math. The area described is about 2 square miles. 200 acres would occupy about 1/6th of that. According to the Hantz website, the plots would contain rows of trees on grass lots to be mowed and maintained by Hantz. The public would have access and there would be no fences. If not for the uproar, I would call these parks.
But, then there's this from an opinion piece published by the Michigan Citizen in July:
If indeed the agreement is so vague on issues like this, then some more due diligence is justified. It would be nice if the major media in this town would dig deeper on these points rather than parroting much of the pr coming from Hantz and offsetting that by ginning up the conflict in the community over the plan. But that might require some real journalism.