Oakland County's County seat is, to put it mildly, not in great shape.
You'd think with the re-newed interest in Urban/walkable environments that Pontiac could be Oakland County's ace in the hole, it could be a much bigger royal oak if redeveloped correctly.
If Macomb County can at least make Mt. Clemens a somewhat appealing place for jury duty, why can't one of america's wealthiest county's do something about its county seat?
Not being a resident of Oakland County I only have an uneducated, outside opinion. It seems to me that Pontiac is a problem LBP ignores because if he acknowledges it, then he is acknowledging that there are problems in Oakland County. He'd rather point out the positives than actually tackle the problems. It is my opinion that if a giant sinkhole were to open up and take every square inch of Pontiac [[but no more,) LBP would relish the opportunity to have Auburn Hills #2 built on the site.
As an Oakland County resident myself I think you may be on to something.Quote:
Originally Posted by jtf1972
LB Patterson deserves a lot of the credit for Oakland County's success, and he also shares some of the blame for Pontiac's failure. The issue with Pontiac is that as County Executive he just didn't/doesn't have the ability to do much. Yeah, he could have thrown money at the city and possibly delayed the financial train wreck, but without the ability to influence or make direct decisions that would have just delayed the inevitable. The elected officials in Pontiac were nearly as corrupt and ineffective as in Detroit, but I've never heard anyone try to put the blame for Detroit's failures on Ficano.
I think in both cases [[Detroit and Pontiac) state intervention is the only way these cities stand a chance. It has helped in Pontiac with the expansion of the sheriff's department, fire response times, and the reworking of the finances surrounding the waste water treatment plant. Hopefully the EFM in Detroit will be able to make some similar changes.
Oakland County has been serving as the planning department for Pontiac for several years now. They have plans to rid the town of the Woodward Loop and to daylight the Huron River as a way to reconnect the City Center with the neighborhoods and bring a San Antonio style riverwalk.
http://pontiaclivability.org/about/r...ternative.aspx
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/artic...3604084396.txt
Well, for one thing, in Pontiac you're not going to Jury duty downtown, you're going out to 1200 Telegraph in a stand alone complex..which predates LBP. What would Downtown Mt. Clemens look like if the Courthouse and Govt seat was up at Gratiot and M-59?Quote:
Originally Posted by gameguy56
They've been knocking that idea around for at least 7 years. It will never happenQuote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
No, not really. When he took office, OC was one of the five richest counties in America. Not anymore. His big initiative - Automation Alley - hasn't exactly brought in droves of economic investmentQuote:
Originally Posted by Johnnny5
He's been leading Oakland County for over 20 years, so he was here for much of the growth and prosperity. Even with the lengthy recession and dwindling tax revenues Oakland County is still on solid financial ground and much of that is due to his leadership. I know a lot of Detroiters hate the guy, but he has done a very good job for the citizens of Oakland County [[And that's what he was elected to do). He's only a county exec, so you can't really blame him for the negative effects that the near death of the Big 3 and globalization have brought to Michigan.Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
All Brooksie had to do was show up in time for a giant wave of taxpayer-funded sprawl to wash over Oakland County.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnny5
Mt. Clemens is a dump and barely in better shape than Pontiac. Pontiac, BTW, was never that urban. It was mostly thrown up on the cheap in the early 20th century, with simple working class housing, to serve auto workers. And, it isn't nice to say, but Pontiac, in its current shape, serves a need for the wealthy and connected . It's the most heavily Mexican community in Metro Detroit, and those workers serve as low-cost labor for the adjacent Bloomfields. Improvement in Pontiac would probably worsen the labor pool for the wealthy.
And Lord knows we can't have that! I mean, who will cut my grass and clean my house and take Buffy to her tennis and horse-riding lessons?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
Just shove it. Really. Your contempt for working people--and their neighborhoods--is disgusting.
What? You don't care that the richest, most well connected among us would suffer if we started caring about poor people?Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
I never said I supported this viewpoint, but it is what it is. If you want capitalism, and you don't want non-market housing solutions [[say massive affordable housing), then it's essential you have some undesirable communities. If Pontiac were magically a desirable place, it would probably be a zero sum game, and other places would be less desirable, and we would have the same discussion about those places.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
Now people who live in Pontiac are "undesirable"? You're really on fire today, aren't you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
How about this? How about we stop giving a shit about the wealthy and catering to every whim we think they *might* have? We don't need to go out of our way to create servant ghettoes, just so your ilk can escape the day-to-day tasks that the rest of us call LIFE.
You are no one to pass judgment on what is "good enough" for someone else, especially if they're of a lower socioeconomic status. Those folks who live in Pontiac deserve to live in just as nice a neighborhood as any spoiled brat in Birmingham.
I'm becoming less and less convinced that I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
I said Pontiac was undesirable. You disagree with this?Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
Ok, so if I understand this thread, the solution to income inequality is to take the one place in Central Oakland County affordable to the poor, and turn it into another d-bag frat boy place like Royal Oak, right? Basically Buffalo Wild Wings and Dave & Busters will reduce income inequality, and poor immigrants will benefit from higher home prices and longer commutes? Because if you "fix" Pontiac, the poor will go somewhere else, and there will be another DYes thread on how Waterford is a dump, and why Evil Brooks doesn't have 0% poverty rate in his county.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
Pontiac is clearly not undesirable. There are people who are able to find housing there. That doesn't mean you let it die on the vine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
And maybe to you, "nice" neighborhood equates to superficial .........s and trixies. If you grew up in Birmingham, I can see how you might have this misconception.
Just because some people are poorer doesn't mean they shouldn't have clean and safe, if modest, neighborhoods, with roads and sidewalks in good repair, trees and flowers, good public services, and the like. Nowhere is it written that poor people are REQUIRED to live in a hellhole. Maybe if the snobs didn't run away and segregate themselves in marketed "communities", there woudn't be so much ghettoization.
In other words, you present a false choice. Contrary to your limited worldview, it's not a matter of Ghetto vs. BW3. And it *definitely* shouldn't be an issue of rigging the game to make sure the wealthy are comfortable.
We would all do well to remember that L. Brooks Patterson began his public career by publicly showing contempt for a large percentage of Pontiac's population and their children.
I think you can make life better for Pontiac residents without displacing them whole hog.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
I also don't think LBP is 'evil', just a guy who is a bit misguided.
Does anyone have an idea on what LBP could do to help Pontiac? I do know the Sheriff now patrol the streets after the PPD was disbanded. Waterford now provides fire safety.
As a former Pontiac resident I have witnessed the long miserable decline of the city. My grandfather moved there in 1929, raised his family on wages from Pontiac Motors and built a home in the shadow of the Baldwin plant. I moved in with Grandpa when he was getting on in years and stayed there until he died. A family difference of opinion required the home to be sold. 30 + years later that same house is for sale at a third of its 1980s price.
I place much of the blame on GM for closing most of their manufacturing facilities. The Baldwin Plant is an example of a complete corporate fuck up. It had been rehabbed to build Fieros on a Japanese-style team approach. An idea where a group of 7 - 10 people built a single car and elected their own management. Incentives where set up to meet quality and productivity benchmarks. The Fiero was a massive success when it was first introduced, but fell out of favor when its marketing didn't live up to promised performance.
what was once a vehicle that sold hundred of thousands of units was discontinued when sales leveled off at about 50k a yr.
contrast that with the Mazda Miata which has been a success for the brand while never selling more than 40k units a yr.
corporate myopia killed Pontiac. IMHO .
I never said we shouldn't try and improve Pontiac. Obviously we should try to improve all communities. I am, saying, however, that in our capitalist framework you need low income areas, and the "solution" of turning Pontiac into a Royal Oak would be harmful, not beneficial, to reducing income inequality.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
Pontiac isn't a hellhole. It's far, far better than most of Detroit. Most of North Pontiac looks the same as Waterford. And obviously we should strive for improvements, I just disagree with the "help the poor by gentrifying their city" solution. Concentrate on schools, services and safety, and f--- subsidies for downtown Pontiac, which serves no useful purpose. The immigrants revitalizing Pontiac have no stake in downtown.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
The more you write, the more you expose how shallow and naive you really are.
Why do there even NEED to be "low-income" neighborhoods? Are poorer people not worthy enough to live in "regular" neighborhoods? And must you go out of your way to cordon off an area in which The Poors are allowed to live and fend for scraps?
Nobody ever discussed turning Pontiac into Royal Oak. Well, nobody except you. Such a thing is wholly unnecessary. But since you are clearly only aware of two possible urban environments [[POOR and CHAIN D'BAG), I don't expect you'd understand what a decent, modest, blue-collar neighborhood looks like. Or the fact that even worker bees like nice things too.
No one is talking corporate gentrification of Pontiac...except you.
Neither one of you two have the faintest idea about what you are talking about.
GP is making vague philosophical concepts and applying them to specific realities that do not jibe.
bham, likewise tries to shoehorn personal worldviews that bear little resemblance to facts.