Oakland Cty Commissioner: High Gas Prices Better for Economy

[Zaiko]

This is according to a Birmingham republican on the Oakland County Commission. He's not saying that it happens directly. But it sets a chain of events in motion that would lead to prosperity.

See about the event at the Birmingham Amtrak station last night.

http://www.michigannow.org/2012/03/2...kes-and-sense/

[rex]

leave it to a birmingham republican to come up with some isht like that.

[downtownguy]

I wonder what he thinks about Gingrich's promise to bring gas to $2.50/gallon if elected?

[Scottathew]

I wonder what he thinks about Gingrich's promise to bring gas to $2.50/gallon if elected?

LOL. I love the republican fuzzy math that tries to pretend that rising gas prices only happened on Obama's watch.

[ghettopalmetto]

To put the thread title in context, Commissioner Potts is arguing that high gas prices will force Southeastern Michigan to invest more in transit, and thus focus development in existing areas vis-a-vis continuing to sprawl ever-outward. That is the "improvement in the economy" of which he spoke.

County Commissioner Potts says things that would get him thrown out of office at any level higher than county government. He welcomes high gas prices. He believes that over time, they could make Michigan richer. They will force us to change our priorities.
“We don’t have European style $15 dollar gas. But we’re headed there,” Potts said. And then he argued that public investment in automobiles has made people poorer. Mass transit is a wiser investment.
“For a long time the mantra in Oakland County was we are the richest county in the country. What is it now? 61^st. The wealth has left us. It left with the children. It left with people moving to Florida. These magnet issues become pocketbook issues.”

[Cincinnati_Kid]

LOL. I love the republican fuzzy math that tries to pretend that rising gas prices only happened on Obama's watch.

Right. Blame everything on Obama. The Repubs can stick it up the gazoo.

[Bham1982]

Looks like no one bothered to actually read the link.

Mayor Nikita is totally out-of-touch, BTW. Won't be around long, because he has no clue that residents are outraged about property taxes and education, and don't care much about public transit.

[corktownyuppie]

Mayor Nikita is totally out-of-touch, BTW. Won't be around long, because he has no clue that residents are outraged about property taxes and education, and don't care much about public transit.

I read the link. Interesting position from an Oakland Country Republican. Don't usually see them so concerned about transit needs...then you see that he sees transit as a necessary component to attract corporate citizens, which I generally agree with

I'm curious about what you state about the attitudes in Birmingham. How did you arrive at the conclusion that Birmingham residents outraged about taxes and apathetic about public transit? It's not that I don't believe you, I had just never heard it put in those terms before.

[DetroitPlanner]

Looks like no one bothered to actually read the link.

Mayor Nikita is totally out-of-touch, BTW. Won't be around long, because he has no clue that residents are outraged about property taxes and education, and don't care much about public transit.

Isn't this the same guy who owns a Downtown Detroit architecture firm and Pure Detroit?

[Bham1982]

I'm curious about what you state about the attitudes in Birmingham. How did you arrive at the conclusion that Birmingham residents outraged about taxes and apathetic about public transit? It's not that I don't believe you, I had just never heard it put in those terms before.

Taxes in Birmingham are really, really high compared to "peer cities", and residents believe Birmingham schools and services are the same or worse. I hear this constantly from neighbors, and you see a similar theme from the online comments in Birmingham Eccentric [[newspaper).

Birmingham Schools generally trail Bloomfield Schools, yet we're being taxed a lot more than in Bloomfield Schools. Services are the same as in neighboring communities, yet we're paying a lot more. Assessments are way up, and I don't see the rise in sales comps.

This is relevant because it's why folks move to Birmingham in the first place. The whole appeal is schools and community, in a walkable format. They aren't moving here for the same reasons someone moves to Corktown, or Midtown, or even Royal Oak.

Birmingham thinks of itself as more of a walkable Bloomfield Hills than a snobby Royal Oak. I don't know if that makes sense, but I think it speaks to a disconnect between traditional snobbytown values "schools+community" and revitalizating inner suburb values "sustainable+diverse". Birmimgham is the former, but some folks in city govt. think it's the latter.

[Novine]

"Taxes in Birmingham are really, really high compared to "peer cities", and residents believe Birmingham schools and services are the same or worse."

Care to cite some numbers that show this?

[corktownyuppie]

Taxes in Birmingham are really, really high compared to "peer cities", and residents believe Birmingham schools and services are the same or worse. I hear this constantly from neighbors, and you see a similar theme from the online comments in Birmingham Eccentric [[newspaper).

Birmingham Schools generally trail Bloomfield Schools, yet we're being taxed a lot more than in Bloomfield Schools. Services are the same as in neighboring communities, yet we're paying a lot more. Assessments are way up, and I don't see the rise in sales comps.

This is relevant because it's why folks move to Birmingham in the first place. The whole appeal is schools and community, in a walkable format. They aren't moving here for the same reasons someone moves to Corktown, or Midtown, or even Royal Oak.

Birmingham thinks of itself as more of a walkable Bloomfield Hills than a snobby Royal Oak. I don't know if that makes sense, but I think it speaks to a disconnect between traditional snobbytown values "schools+community" and revitalizating inner suburb values "sustainable+diverse". Birmimgham is the former, but some folks in city govt. think it's the latter.

Got it. It's not a perfect comparison, but I saw a similar dynamic going on in the Brother Rice/U-D Jesuit rivalry. Both are academic powerhouses, but there's definitely a cultural disconnect between the general [[and I'm generalizing here) types of people who are attracted to both schools.

Here's the million-dollar question: Does Birmingham see itself as a self-sustaining entity? Or as a major and critical piece [[but just a part) of the greater whole of Metro Detroit?

I ask this because Grosse Pointe is very much the schools+community culture. And being an Detroit east-sider plus a U-D student, many of my friends were from Grosse Pointe. But even there, the political climate is shifting [[gradually) to realizing that what happens in all of Wayne County and [[gasp) Detroit, does affect them too, especially in comparison to the attitudes during the 80s and 90s

[hybridy]

Gas prices' jump attests to upbeat economy

Demand for crude oil has risen as the recovery from the global recession has picked up steam. That, in turn, has helped fuel higher prices at the pump, economists and analysts said.

This week, however, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke warned that rising gas prices could lead consumers to cut back on other expenditures, choking off the spending that has helped fuel stronger growth in recent months.

"I think higher energy prices would probably slow growth, at least in the short run," Bernanke told a House committee Wednesday.



http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...,7347982.story

[Bham1982]

"Taxes in Birmingham are really, really high compared to "peer cities", and residents believe Birmingham schools and services are the same or worse."

Care to cite some numbers that show this?

Birmingham Schools trail Bloomfield Schools on most measures [[state test scores, SAT/ACT scores, admittance to top universities, etc.). Unlike Bloomfield, Birmingham students don't have an IB option [[Bloomfield has International Academy). This is a big deal in a community with many temporary non-U.S. residents [[mostly Germans and Italians working in the automobile industry).

Taxes in Birmingham are, by any measure, high. Compare to Bloomfield, Troy, Rochester. There are all kinds of questionable expenses, based on delusions of civic grandeur.

Instead of selling an empty school for millions [[they had offers from private schools), they spent millions to tear it down and build a little-used park. Across the street from an existing park.

They tore up a well-used downtown park to build a Rolls Royce of a little-used civic plaza.

They have five [[!) city parking garages, all free and half-empty, but still want to build more. Underground, of course, for extra wastefullness.

They used city money to buy an empty hotel, as if the city should be in the hospitality business. They tore it down, and now the site sits empty, generating no taxes.

Lots of other examples of civic waste. They think Birmingham should be a Midwest Mini-Manhattan, and just don't get the idea of organic growth.

[corktownyuppie]

Birmingham Schools trail Bloomfield Schools on most measures [[state test scores, SAT/ACT scores, admittance to top universities, etc.). Unlike Bloomfield, Birmingham students don't have an IB option [[Bloomfield has International Academy). This is a big deal in a community with many temporary non-U.S. residents [[mostly Germans and Italians working in the automobile industry).

Taxes in Birmingham are, by any measure, high. Compare to Bloomfield, Troy, Rochester. There are all kinds of questionable expenses, based on delusions of civic grandeur.

Instead of selling an empty school for millions [[they had offers from private schools), they spent millions to tear it down and build a little-used park. Across the street from an existing park.

They tore up a well-used downtown park to build a Rolls Royce of a little-used civic plaza.

They have five [[!) city parking garages, all free and half-empty, but still want to build more. Underground, of course, for extra wastefullness.

They used city money to buy an empty hotel, as if the city should be in the hospitality business. They tore it down, and now the site sits empty, generating no taxes.

Lots of other examples of civic waste. They think Birmingham should be a Midwest Mini-Manhattan, and just don't get the idea of organic growth.

I'm not anti-suburbs at all...but wouldn't it make more sense of Metro Detroiters focused their efforts on making downtown Detroit mini-Manhattan? If the whole region pooled their resources it really could be great. And rather than having 37 different mini-downtowns, we could have one really nice one.

I know I'm biased...but even with all the wealth in Birmingham, you couldn't possibly support 30 different high-rises and hotels. Let alone a mini-Manhattan.

[Bham1982]

Here's the million-dollar question: Does Birmingham see itself as a self-sustaining entity? Or as a major and critical piece [[but just a part) of the greater whole of Metro Detroit?

I would say that, traditionally, Birmingham was very similar to the Pointes in that they were both very family oriented, conservative, prosperous and WASPy.

Both communities have changed, though not exactly in the same way. Both are much less conservative nowadays, though Birmingham is notably more diverse than the Pointes [[more Jewish and International, especially) and less of an "enclave" feel than the Pointes.

And if success can be measured by relative real estate values, then Birmimgham has left the Pointes in the dust, though it's come at the expense of the neighborhood feel [[Bigfoot homes everywhere).

I think the Pointes are much more tied to Detroit [[due in part to obvious proximity) and somewhat more regionally minded. They know their "boat" is tied to the city's and region's fortunes. Birmingham is more of a regional center, and seems to be in more of a competitive mindset for economic power. It wants luxury hotels, fancy stores/restaurants and the like. The Pointes want to be nice bedroom communities, not some regional economic center.

[Bham1982]

I'm not anti-suburbs at all...but wouldn't it make more sense of Metro Detroiters focused their efforts on making downtown Detroit mini-Manhattan? If the whole region pooled their resources it really could be great. And rather than having 37 different mini-downtowns, we could have one really nice one.

Yes, I think you're right. It would make more sense to concentrate resources downtown.

For example, the Townsend Hotel is the celebrity hotel for Metro Detroit. Lady Gaga or whomever stays there, not downtown. If you didn't have the Townsend, perhaps you would have a stronger downtown luxury hotel market.

There have also been some very high-end condos [[mostly empty, though). I'm talking $3 million asking prices and not even particuarly large units, which is insane in the Midwest. Maybe some of that condo activity could be shifted downtown.

Then there's the restaurant/shopping scene. Lots of high end restaurants with an urban feel. It isn't crazy to think that some of this urban commerce comes at the expense of downtown Detroit.

[Det_ard]

I'm not anti-suburbs at all...but wouldn't it make more sense of Metro Detroiters focused their efforts on making downtown Detroit mini-Manhattan? If the whole region pooled their resources it really could be great. And rather than having 37 different mini-downtowns, we could have one really nice one.

I know I'm biased...but even with all the wealth in Birmingham, you couldn't possibly support 30 different high-rises and hotels. Let alone a mini-Manhattan.

Your right if you're looking at it from a SimCity perspective, but in the real world each individual makes their own decisions and those in aggregate result in Birmingham the way it is, and Detroit the way it is.

People who are willing to pay $200 - $300/sqft want excellent safety, schools, city services and amenities now, not when another 10,000 like-minded people hypothetically decide to move in next to them.

[iheartthed]

Yes, I think you're right. It would make more sense to concentrate resources downtown.

For example, the Townsend Hotel is the celebrity hotel for Metro Detroit. Lady Gaga or whomever stays there, not downtown. If you didn't have the Townsend, perhaps you would have a stronger downtown luxury hotel market.

There have also been some very high-end condos [[mostly empty, though). I'm talking $3 million asking prices and not even particuarly large units, which is insane in the Midwest. Maybe some of that condo activity could be shifted downtown.

Then there's the restaurant/shopping scene. Lots of high end restaurants with an urban feel. It isn't crazy to think that some of this urban commerce comes at the expense of downtown Detroit.

Hence my comment in the other thread about more centralized planning in Metro Detroit.

Birmingham is an interesting case. On a micro level, I can see why a local government would want that type of stuff, but on a macro level [[meaning metropolitan wide perspective) it doesn't really make much sense for the long term. Birmingham's downtown rivals Ann Arbor, yet Ann Arbor has over 5 times the population of Birmingham, not to mention room to grow. Without some annexing, Birmingham will probably not grow much larger in population than it is now... Unless it's willing to sacrifice some of the characteristics that has made it attractive to the people who live there now [[i.e. increase density).

Then there is the regional perspective... I don't think there is much economic spin-off to decentralizing your urban amenities. An entertainment/retail/residential hybrid district 14 miles from your core probably doesn't contribute much to the economic bottom line when the core is in tatters. Birmingham's property values would probably be as high or higher if downtown Detroit was solid, and Bham was a bedroom community with a commuter rail station.

[antongast]

Unlike Bloomfield, Birmingham students don't have an IB option [[Bloomfield has International Academy).

IA isn't a Bloomfield Hills school, it's just physically located there. The Birmingham school district has shares in IA, and can send as many students there as they own shares. Same with Bloomfield Hills, Berkley, Royal Oak, and all the other districts that bought into IA at whatever level.

[Bham1982]

IA isn't a Bloomfield Hills school, it's just physically located there.

I know, but it was founded and housed by Bloomfield Hills schools, and BH kids can attend [[as can other Oakland schools in a consortium).

Birmingham District students can't presently attend, and this has been a sore spot among some parents.

[antongast]

I know, but it was founded and housed by Bloomfield Hills schools, and BH kids can attend [[as can other schools in a consortium). Birmingham schools can't presently attend.

I know for a fact that Birmingham was in the consortium five years ago, and they're on the list of consortium districts that I linked to in that post. Maybe they pulled out recently and someone forgot to update the website or something, I don't know.

[Gistok]

I don't study the real estate comparisons of Grosse Pointe versus Birmingham/Bloomfield. But you certainly get more for your money in the Grosse Pointes. And they've been upgrading their shopping areas [[such as the Hill) by building [[or re-building) some very classic looking buildings.

Whatever some here would say about the merits of the architecture... it's definitely made of quality materials... and has a lot of charm.... and even the Pointes were sophisticated enough to leave the Marcel Breuer designed library alone.

And I know some here absolutely hate the new library... but the Post Modern Elizabethan style comes across much better than the boring older parts of the library behind it... and again... quality materials... not just glass and steel...

[Bham1982]

The Pointes are definitely much more uniform architecturally, and probably more aesthetically pleasing overall.

You certainly don't have the jarring juxtaposition of tiny bungalows and giant McMansions side-by-side like in Birmingham.

[Gistok]

The Pointes are definitely much more uniform architecturally, and probably more aesthetically pleasing overall.

You certainly don't have the jarring juxtaposition of tiny bungalows and giant McMansions side-by-side like in Birmingham.

Did Birmingham put a stop to that? Some of those McMansions have huge expanses of windowless walls that I'm sure the neighbors absolutely hate. Or is the city just being more picky about architectural details for teardowns?