How damn convenient is that?
Printable View
I don't agree with you much, I'm with you on this position. I'm in favor of the EM laws, but let them be applied to everyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by brizee
Well, isn't that neat? A nice trick. They were so busy giving away free money to their developer friends that now they're going to get bailed out.
I'd rather have bailouts for services for people who actually live here, not so a bunch of unused sewer systems can sit in the ground...
silver lining to this is that its open to any community after failing to pass as originally planned [[which restores my faith, if only a little bit that someone in Lansing was paying attention)... and could, if I'm reading this right, right the ship in the affected communities a lot faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitnerd
Quote:
Harris’ plans include a 5-year deficit elimination plan and an application for a $7 million loan from the Michigan Department of Treasury. The loan is part of House Bill 5566 that provides low interest loans to struggling cities. If accepted, it would eliminate Benton Harbor’s deficit and pay off debts to vendors and pensions.
“It would be a game-changer for the city,” said [Benton Harbor Mayor James] Hightower, who likened the loan to paying off credit card debt with a student loan. “This bill was actually created with Benton Harbor in mind.””
Have either of the major dailies written about this at all?
Complete this phrase. What goes around...
What a well-written blog posting. From the article, it appears that the Republican-dominated townships of Livingstone County may not be out of the doo doo even with the bailouts.
Then what? They get to lose our State tax dollars by paying off their friends carrying the debt, and then go under? Hmm...
And, yeah, I hear you ihearthed where are the other major media on this?
And does this actually surprise anyone?
We all know the EM law was drafted specifically for Detroit. Flint, Benton Harbor, Pontiac, etc. were all test drives.
A most interesting article.Quote:
Originally Posted by brizee
Main point --> This doesn't seem to be a 'bailout'. Just a loan.
Nonetheless, the point is valid. You can always count on politicians to find a way to increase public debt.
You have to give them credit. When they've maxed out their credit card, they just find another way.
Want hamtramck mostly white when they had a financial manager? It always has to be about race in this region, doe st it,so sad.
In fairness to Handy Township [[Fowlerville), they were trying to stay ahead of the game.
When I worked for the City Engineer for Troy in 1959, they had a huge backlog of subdivisions built with wells and septic tanks when it was just a rural area.
As these subdivisions multiplied, the issue of septic tank drainage became acute and the city was rushed into a massive catch up program in the late 1950s and early 1960s to install city water and sanitary sewerage [[sewage is what runs through the sewerage, seven credit hours of Sanitary Engineering taught me something) to these subdivisions.
Handy County was "betting on the come" and it was only the collapse of the housing bubble that made it a bad choice [[and they were not the only ones caught with their pants down when the bubble collapsed).
It was a bad choice from day one. Local governments shouldn't be financing private development this way. As the past few years have shown, this has exposed taxpayers to huge financial risks and now taxpayers are eating the losses while those who saddled the communities with these debts have walked away from the mess that they have created.
So, "build it and they will come" is just fine as a justification for pissing away government money on the magic choo-choo up Woodward, but not to try to increase the tax base of your rural community?Quote:
Originally Posted by Novine
Yes. Government shouldn't ever be in the real estate speculation business. Look at Allen Park. This just proves that race has nothing to do with it. Stupid whites got into this mess. Stupid blacks got into this mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Novine
Lessons:
1) Government stay out of anything except the basic.
2) Money in government has corrupted government just as much as it has in the private sector. Get the money out of government.
Hermod! 1963 is calling. They want their ideas back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
Difference is that transit is a traditional function of the government. When residential development is funded by the government it's usually called "the projects"...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
1. Transit is supposedly for moving people and eliminating traffic clogs. The justification that I keep hearing on DetroitYes is that it will promote the establishment of delightful little boutiques and coffee houses along Woodward.Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
2. Provision of water/sewer services to an area is a valid government function as well. In this case, the government tried to anticipate the needs and got caught holding the bag. They were not trying to build housing.
Government is just there to aid market forces and investment.
Except when it's using a mode I wholeheartedly object to.
Attachment 15882
Moving people is a good reason for building transit. Detroit has people in it and they need to go places.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
Eliminating traffic clogs in central cities is a dumb policy goal in the first place, regardless of how you go about doing it. Traffic clogs are a side effect of a vibrant and thriving urban agglomeration, and the only real way to eliminate them is to make your city crappier so fewer people will want to spend time there. Detroit has been employing this congestion-mitigation strategy for decades, and it has been spectacularly successful.
What transit does help you eliminate is the need to use a bunch of land in what should be your densest and most interesting parts of town to store people's cars. This allows those parts of town to become denser and more interesting, and helps them compete with suburban areas on their own terms instead of on the suburbs' terms. Whether this results in boutiques and coffee shops or something else seems like mostly a demographic issue that's largely irrelevant to the case for or against transit.
Hermod is absolutely correct. In the little Washington town where I'm a city councilman, we just completed a $10m project to bring wastewater treatment to the whole [[275 ERUs) town. One of the main reasons was that failing septic systems had seriously degraded our water supply.
And yes, you're taking a chance. The other justification was that it would allow for development. We're 8 miles south of the nearest "large" city and land is reletively cheap here. But without sewer, due to our soil composition, you'd need a quarter acre lot to accomidate the drain field if you want to build a single family home. With sewer, 80 X 120 works just fine. As a town of 900, we could not sustain city services without increasing our population [[read tax) base. And frankly, I'd rather take a chance on being ready for development rather than what some communities did during the last housing boom, that is, pushing development then going around and playing catch up when things begin to fail.
"2. Provision of water/sewer services to an area is a valid government function as well. In this case, the government tried to anticipate the needs and got caught holding the bag. They were not trying to build housing."
Let's repeat - Local governments shouldn't be financing private development this way. There are ways for water and sewer service to be extended to these developments that didn't leave local taxpayers footing the bill. The way they chose did the opposite.
Construction of water and sewer services are not "private development", they are a very specific government function [[has to do with public health and the environment doncha know).Quote:
Originally Posted by Novine
These are paid for with some mix of user fees, direct impact fees paid for by developers, assessment on the property serviced , and by general revenue.
In this case, the governing bodies chose to do a direct assessment to be paid at the time the property sold. Was it wise? Obviously with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, it was not. Was it legal? Yes, it was within the powers of the locals to do this.
I agree Hermod, I am not seeing anything other than bad guessing coupled with bad timing. There has not been a spread of evidence placed into review that shows otherwise.
The money raised through the bonds is not unusual and has not disappeared down a Bobby Ferguson rabbit hole. According to news reports, the pipes are laid, the facilities built, they are just not being used right now.
Is there anyone here that will bet their paycheck that housing will not continue to be developed in Livingston County once the Recession is over? Not that it should be built, but that it won't be built?
I understand the feeling here that all sprawl is evil, and I would tend to agree, however, despite my feelings to the contrary folks like to build on the outer fringe of the metroplex. They've been doing that since before Urbanrest changed its name to Ferndale; before Halfway changed to East Detroit and before Westland named itself after a shopping mall.
To lay some evil intent on the hapless folk in Handy Township is a bit of an overreach considering the folks in Washington and Wall Street didn't see this crash coming.
Who here did? who here used that insight to their advantage? Who here shorted GM or Chrysler? Who here knew Counrtywide was bogus, or Bear Sterns? Who here could swear they saw Freddie Mac dissolving?
Yet, that is what many here are saying, that these politicians are guilty of not looking in their crystal balls correctly.
hog-wash.
You can not like them, campaign against them, give money to their opponents, write letters to the editor, but can you really blame them for being bad soothsayers?
Again, Hermod is correct when it comes to funding. I don't know about 15 years ago, but nowadays, funders want to see a repayment plan. That is, an income stream projection for how you're going to pay for a project. But they're called "projections" for a reason. A town north of here had been growing like a weed before the recession, and had laid a lot of pipe and had projected rates and repayment based on 20 ERUs coming into the system a year. Alas, when the bottom dropped out, that rate dropped to about 5, and now they're going to have to raise their sewer rates to cover their expense.
These debts are for the water and sewer lines within the developments that went belly-up. Those costs should have been the responsibilities of the developer of those properties, not the local government. The fact that many other local communities saw similar developments go bust and weren't left on the hook for the costs shows how poorly those communities that are left paying the bill were served by their elected officials.
More importantly, the fact that the state is coming it to bail out these communities, with state tax dollars, without imposing the same strict requirements that are being imposed on communities like Flint and Detroit shows the hypocrisy of Lansing lawmakers. It's one standard for the cities and another for the suburbs.
Those pipes are owned by the governmental entity and are laid in easements deeded to the governmental entity by the developer. The pipe connections from the individual homes in the subdivision to the government-owned common lines running to the subdivision are the responsibility of the developer and were not paid for by the township as most of the houses were not built.Quote:
Originally Posted by Novine
Do you have any idea as to exactly what a rural township is? Do you have any idea as to the scope of its budget? We are not talking about cleaning up a nest of grifters and professional politicians here. This is a case where bankruptcy courts would provide relief under a "debtor in possession" system rater than appoint a receiver because of the relatively small amount of money involved. This is a temporary loan to help them get their house in order.Quote:
"More importantly, the fact that the state is coming it to bail out these communities, with state tax dollars, without imposing the same strict requirements that are being imposed on communities like Flint and Detroit shows the hypocrisy of Lansing lawmakers. It's one standard for the cities and another for the suburbs."
Aha, there's the problem. Out here, it is the developer's responsability to lay infrastructure within his development. "Water and sewer to the property" is a common term around here, meaning utilities come to the lot line.
I have to agree with Novine here that the government entity got hosed [[although maybe not according to Michigan law). Like roads, the developer should pay to have installed water, sewer and electricity main lines which are then deeded over to the utility when they go into service. It's a cost of development, and that requirement should be in the development codes.
Defend this all you like. But if you're in favor of emergency managers coming in and cleaning up messes, why should you be opposed to them cleaning up this mess?
This dogged defense of these suburban and outstate officials only adds to the perception that these EMs are really for minority communities only.
Benton Harbor got the clamps as soon as soon as Snyder's signature was dry on the EM bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitnerd
Wasn't Allen Park supposed to be investigated for takeover back in May? They gambled on the movie businees that the gov aborted, and lost. What came of that?
These communites don't need defending or excuses. It's different when white people do it.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitnerd
People who are defending the Livingston County mess see the differences. And there is a difference between Detroit-style financial problems [[w/ significant corruption and waste) and Livingston County-style problems [[government supporting sprawl).
I don't see much difference between the two. Because I don't like either. They both stink.
The real lesson to be taken away here is that anytime government gets involved with things beyond basic governance, they are subject to the same problems as the corporate world -- corruption, debt, waste. The best thing to do is to get government out of all of this -- and just focus on core needs.
It was a mistake in Livingston County to issue bonds to finance sprawl. Not because sprawl is bad [[and it is), but because they have no business financing it. Even if it is a long-standing practice.
It was a mistake in Detroit to pay Bobby Ferguson and his ilk for doing nothing. Not because corruption is bad [[and it is), but because the city shouldn't have been doing most of what he was paid to ostensibly do.
Stop trying to be the tool for all purposes -- and just do the basics right.
WOW. Normally I don't buy into the us vs. them, black vs. white, affluent vs. not-affluent.
However, this is what it is. A bailout for the rich sprawlburbs...
Its just a loan. More rope. Not a bailout. Just rope.Quote:
Originally Posted by 48091
It is a bailout according to popular, and unfortunate, usage. Most bailouts [[e.g. Greece, U. S. banks) are loans on very favorable, unrealistic terms. Sometimes a bailout is a direct investment for a share of ownership [[e.g. GM). Rarely is it a gift of free money, although the zero interest rate policy is an example for investment banks.
The press is very loose with the term bailout, and most people aren't aware of the distinctions.
Handy Township has a population of 5,100 people as of 2010 and very lowly paid township trustees.
Here is the story as seen by the Township Supervisor. It reads a little bit different than the politically charged blog quoted by the thread starter.
Quote:
HANDY TOWNSHIP SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
In 2002 Handy Township was presented with a proposed manufactured home development consisting of approximately 500 units. The development was denied by the Planning Commission and the Township was sued by the developer. A consent judgment was entered into providing for the developer to reduce the number of units and other concessions and for the Township to provide waste water treatment services. Waste water treatment services were to be provided by a Township built plant to be financed through Livingston County issued bonds and secured by Special Assessments on the development. Other property owners joined the Special Assessment District. The waste water treatment plant was built to handle over 700 REUs with capacity to be phased in as needed. To date approximately 200 REUs are being utilized. Several properties are delinquent and scheduled for tax sale in 2013.
In 2003 Handy Township passed an Affordable Housing Ordinance [[AFO) allowing denser development of homes on smaller lots. The location and number of the developments was to be controlled by availability of municipal services. Shortly after the enactment of the AFO the Lake Isabella Village court decision allowed developments that required community waste water treatment facilities to install private systems if municipal services were not available. The Department of Environmental Quality was responsible for permitting and not the Township. The Township rescinded the AFO in 2005.
To protect the public health and to provide capacity for the developments approved under the AFO the Township partnered with the Village of Fowlerville to construct a waste water treatment facility to be owned and operated by the Village in which the Township would have over 500 REU capacity. The Township portion of the project was financed by Livingston County issued bonds and secured by Special Assessments on the properties. To date just over 20 REUs are being utilized and the majority of assessments are delinquent and scheduled for tax sale in 2013.
Livingston County has refunded [[refinanced) the bonds at a lower interest rate and extended the payment period on the 2005 bonds to lower the annual payments. Compounding the bond debt are the chargebacks to Livingston County’s revolving fund plus interest in the amount of $2,900,000 due at the beginning of 2014.
For the fiscal year 2011-2012 ending June 30, 2012 Handy Township collected approximately $950,000 in total operating revenues. Some of the revenue is restricted for specific use. For the same period Handy Township spent approximately $760,000. These figures DO NOT include the SAD collections and payments vary from year to year. The Township has been able to live within its income and has a modest fund equity. SAD bond payments for the next 10 years will average close to $570,000. Currently only $150,000 is being collected and the remainder is delinquent. This leaves a delinquency of approximately $420,000 per year. Coupled with the delinquencies on the bond payments there are the chargebacks due to the County of close to $3,000,000. Township fund equity and the amount saved annually will be totally exhausted when the chargebacks are due.
Dr. Henry M. Vaupel
Handy Township Supervisor
Handy Township's total operating budget wouldn't support the Detroit Clowncil and their chauffeurs, executive assistants, public relations flacks, body guards, and the rest of their entourages.
So they were living WAY beyond their means then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
Oh, really? I expected the guy who was in the middle of all this nonsense to do an expose on himself and his colleagues. [[eyeroll)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
Just when EM proponents can's stop saying the legislation isn't about sticking it to Detroit ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
Handy Township is a podunk town that lived beyond its modest means by shoveling resources it didn't have at developers who left it holding the bag. Poor choices. Therefore it doesn't need an EM.
But Detroit is a big city with large budget and substantial bonding authority that would have been able to meet payments if it hadn't had its state revenue-sharing pulled. Outside forces, more than anything, did it in. Therefore ...
You know, when I first read the blog that started all of this, I took it at face value. I assumed that they got in trouble trying to service some developers that wanted to build McMansions way out in Livingston County at the outer reaches of the exurbs and got caught with the housing bust. I was blaming the township for getting caught with their pants down.
If the township supervisor is telling the truth [[and that is an excerpt from his annual report as found on the Livingston County website) it would appear that the trouble started when the trailer park got forced down their throats by the courts and they were required by the court to provide waste water treatment to the trailer park. Then they got into further trouble by wanting to keep the affordable housing developer from building with septic tanks. The hole in their budget to pay for this is about $450 thousand a year and with some relief, they will eventually pay it off. Hardly the degree of hanky-panky noted in the original political blog.
Please explain what in this law indicates that this not a true restructuring of debt, but a forgiveness of debt. I don't see that the State is assuming responsibility for city nor sprawl debt here. If so, I truly would like to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by prokopowicz
I love you, Mr. Nerd -- and you so often have a refreshingly clear opinion -- but do you really believe that it was 'outside forces'? Oh, but for that one revenue-sharing agreement being fulfilled, then joy would abound.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitnerd
From reading both the Livingston County website and the handy Township website, it would seem that handy Township is hardly a "sprawlburg" and isn't populated by rich Republicans with millionaire developer friends as people would have you believe. It is a rural area beyond the current spread of sprawl that got done in by a trailer park and a series of unfortunate circumstances. If they are only bringing in $950 thousand a year from 5,000 residents, the place must be semi-impoverished.
OK, little bit of research on Handy Township:
1. Population went from 7,000 in 2000 to 5,100 in 2010 [[hardly an up-and-coming sprawlburg.
2. Median house values well below median house values for state of Michigan.
3. Median income well below state of Michigan.
4. Population 897% white with 90% of population claiming Norwegian or German ancestry.
5. 71% of all houses in township are heated by bottled propane gas.
Hermod....
......let's see if I understand you correctly. The health department OK'd septic for the development AND there was no pipe nearby, correct? Yet they ran the pipe anyway with no guarentee of income from hookups. If we tried something like that funders would throw it back in our face. And I'd expect to be voted out of office.