What would you call progress?

Like a lot of others on this board, I don't live in the Detroit area any more, but still care deeply about the area I grew up in. So here's a question for you all, both resident and non.

What's progress, and how fast can it be resonably expected to come?

Detroit's been slipping since the late 60's. Through bad planning, corrupt leadership and plain old bad luck, the Detroit metro area has come near bottom, and although some things appear to be changing, graft and corruption trials are going to go on for a long time, deminishing the reputation of the city even further.

Now, given those "facts", how long would one resonably expect it to take before the area has a major turnaround? Has it started? Given the instutional history of city government, could Mayor Bing be expected to turn it around in 2 years, or are those people who grumble here correct in their belief that the area can't be saved?

That's a tricky subject, covering a lot of ground. I would say Bing, just by being reasonably decent and honest, has been able to change the conversation somewhat. You see the word "Detroit" on the cover of, say, Time magazine, and you no longer automatically cringe.

Detroit's biggest two problems are: First, the City is flat effing broke, and there's no simple resolution to that. That prevents Detroit from doing a lot of things it ought to do, and forces service cuts where service is already inadequate. Second, there are a lot of corrupt and inept people within the City bureaucracy, mostly left over from prior administrations.

Now, has it started to turn around? Certainly. I don't know how long ago you were last living in the area; I came here in the late 1970s and have seen it go up and down. If my life circumstances permit, I would consider living in midtown for example; in the 1990s I never would have. On the other hand, Old Redford is shaky compared to, say, fifteen years ago. I think basically there is an opportunity, and slowly becoming a trend, for the City to rebuild out from its core, the same way in which it collapsed. But much remains to be done.

I don't see how any significant change can occur within the neighborhoods until the educational/cultural level of the bottom 3rd of Detroit's citizens rises significantly. It's a chicken & egg problem of course requiring economic opportunity as motivation. I would think it would take at least a couple of generations to change things significantly but without a major investment in the city by all levels of government it's a pipe dream for the forceeable future.

Start with getting all the streetlights turned on.

I would call progress when we finally hit the bottom and can't go any lower and thereby finally after decades and decades start to stabilize. We've been in decline since the 50s, but now we're in free fall with absolutely NO sign of slowing down. There are only signs that we are speeding up our demise every year. So the day we actually hit the bottom will be major progress.

I'm going to answer this a bit differntly than how it was asked using a 10 year time frame. Let's see a few tangibles...

- Getting murders down to the rate of a city like Philly, which is, itself, considerd a relatively violent city. This would mean getting murders down to about 140 given the current population. I use murder as it's the most symbolic statistic concerning violent crime if even the least.

- Reducing the overall poverty rate at least back down to where we'd gotten it in 2000 [[26%) from the current rate [[37.6%), so, that'd mean reducing poverty just over 1% per year.

- Dedicated, region-wide funding of transit to ensure a reliable option for folks to get to and from their jobs if jobs refuse to come back to the city proper in any real number [[this connections to the poverty rate, of course).

- More and more non-motorized transit options [[i.e. bikelanes, greenways, etc...), which is something already happening by the month, now, and an act of council to somehow disincentivize fast food and/or incentivize the creation of even more gardens and produce markets. All of this to improve the city's health statistics.

If I knew high school ACT statistics off the top of my head and things like that, I'd set a benchmark for primary school achievement, too. Sorry that this turned more into a wishlist than anything else, but progress in my eyes will see statistical improvements in the areas of health, transit, school achievement and crime. Everything else would be gravy or will come as a result of those things.

This is something I know we can do, because Detroit had the largest drop in poverty of ANY major city in the nation during the 90's. So, this can be done, but national policy also have to be inline to do it, which is how it was done during the 90's.

There will be no progress until several years after the criminals [[particularly murderers) have been driven from the City. I don't see that even starting to happen any time soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coracle

There will be no progress until several years after the criminals [[particularly murderers) have been driven from the City. I don't see that even starting to happen any time soon.

---

Agree. While the economy is partly ties to this, it is the criminal element that makes living here unbearable, and those with jobs an easy mark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 401don

I don't see how any significant change can occur within the neighborhoods until the educational/cultural level of the bottom 3rd of Detroit's citizens rises significantly. It's a chicken & egg problem of course requiring economic opportunity as motivation. I would think it would take at least a couple of generations to change things significantly but without a major investment in the city by all levels of government it's a pipe dream for the forceeable future.

---

This. The high concentration of uneducated/illiterate populace in this area is a stranglehold.

Imagine a rotting apple.

The outside is ugly, but there are a few beautiful seeds inside just waiting to flourish.

We can keep trying to paint the apple red-making it look fresh but that really does nothing beside waste valuable money on paint.

We can cut away the rot, but that doesn't stop any future rot. It may be palatable for a moment but the problems simply find a new place to exist

Or we can just remove all the rotting flesh straight down to the seeds and restart.

Vince Lombardi said, "If you can't accept losing, you can't win."

Detroit needs to accept some losses. Draw the lines. Make "On your own zones." If you refuse moving assistance [[150% of fair market value for owners/$1000 straight cash for renters) and continue to live within the St. Aubin/Gratiot/I-94 triangle [[and other areas like it)- You are on your own. Feel free to form your own governments.

Once evacuated, these zones will play host to the Mayor's Cup- Straight line bulldozer races from one end to the other. Once cleared, the land will be allowed to revert back to green zones and will be placed in a federal trust. No fencing. No maintenance. No nothing.

I think 2000-2020 will be looked back on as a transformative time for the city.

One part of that is the growth of the greater downtown area, and the new demand and interest and engagement with it.

The other part is the political side of it, with the issue of corruption finally being worked on, and with the financial side of things push has finally come to shove.

So I think things are changing, and whether or not they're changing for the better depends on what the EMF does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hamtown mike

Once evacuated, these zones will play host to the Mayor's Cup- Straight line bulldozer races from one end to the other. Once cleared, the land will be allowed to revert back to green zones and will be placed in a federal trust. No fencing. No maintenance. No nothing.

---

The problem is this could cost billions of dollars to do, and with that much money you could focus on positive efforts elsewhere [[transit, redevelopment, etc.) instead.

The problem is this could cost billions of dollars to do, and with that much money you could focus on positive efforts elsewhere [[transit, redevelopment, etc.)

This is kind of a chicken or the egg problem. Which is the longer term solution? Building an infrastructure around a steaming pile, or cleaning up the pile before rebuilding? Which is a better stabilizer? Which is a better draw?

Though it may seem pointless to adopt a slash and burn policy, I think these immediate monetary losses are needed for Detroit to start winning.