In Detroit's distressed areas, the neighbors left, and now services disappear

**begingri** · May-20-12, 12:57 PM

By Cecil Angel

Detroit Free Press Staff Writer

In the Davison Freeway and East McNichols area on Detroit's east side, Rosetta Newby knows the cost of living in a neighborhood marked by abandonment.

Her homeowners insurance is escalating, and no other company will insure her at an affordable rate, she said. Her bank turned her down for a loan for new windows and other improvements to her home of 44 years on Charest.

There's no grocery store near her, and few streetlights work. All that's left is a sprinkle of residents, shells of houses and vacant lots framed by crumbling sidewalks.

Living on Social Security, and at 75, Newby has few options.

"If I had the money, I'd move," Newby said.

That's exactly what the city is banking on.

Amid dwindling population and revenue, the city is trying to encourage -- or push -- people out of rundown neighborhoods that are largely vacant, yet drain the city of its resources. That means many of the services that once were available to residents such as Newby are no longer an option in her neighborhood and others.

One of the biggest changes involves the citywide drawing for the Senior Emergency Home Repair program funded by Community Development Block Grants.

Previously, an average of 5,000 people would stand in line for hours at Cobo Center hoping to be one of the 500 or so seniors chosen in a lottery to receive home repair grants of up to $12,000. Now, those living in neighborhoods deemed distressed, like Newby, are not eligible to receive the grants.

http://www.freep.com/article/2012052...text|FRONTPAGE

**begingri** · May-20-12, 12:59 PM

See also:

It's a struggle to live in a neighborhood that's dying

http://www.freep.com/article/20120520/NEWS01/205200480

Graphic: Detroit neighborhood rankings

http://www.freep.com/article/20120520/NEWS01/120519037

**Jimaz** · May-20-12, 01:33 PM

Oh! Thanks for the map. In today's hardcopy version of the article it was too difficult to differentiate between the "steady" and the "distressed" colors.

**eastsidechris** · May-20-12, 02:12 PM

I appreciated the graphic, but it's too bad there wasn't a way to indicate which way the transitional areas [[in yellow) are heading.

**Mark Smiles** · May-20-12, 02:28 PM

According to the City of Detroit, there are distressed neighborhoods on Belle Isle.

This should be a clear indication that the City Planners have no clue about what is going on in the city.

**Crumbled_pavement** · May-20-12, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by eastsidechris

I appreciated the graphic, but it's too bad there wasn't a way to indicate which way the transitional areas [[in yellow) are heading.

Pretty much the entire city is rapidly [[and increasing in speed) going downhill. If its transistional, assume most of those neighborhoods are going waaaaaaaaaaaaay down.

Originally Posted by begingri

Amid dwindling population and revenue, the city is trying to encourage -- or push -- people out of rundown neighborhoods that are largely vacant, yet drain the city of its resources. That means many of the services that once were available to residents such as Newby are no longer an option in her neighborhood and others.

Isn't this pretty much the whole city?

**313WX** · May-20-12, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement

Pretty much the entire city is rapidly [[and increasing in speed) going downhill. If its transistional, assume most of those neighborhoods are going waaaaaaaaaaaaay down.

Pretty much.

I'll be surprised if the city's population is still above 650,000 now.

**Crumbled_pavement** · May-20-12, 05:24 PM

What's amazing about this city is the speed in which deterioration is picking up. Some say Detroit starting going downhill in the 50s and 60s. It escalated in the 70s only to pick up steam in the 80s and 90s. Once the 2000s hit the speed of deterioration sped up even faster. We are moving at super speeds now. And the only thing that looks like is coming out of city leadership is more failed ideas that are only speeding up the deterioration even more!

At NO point in the last 5 decades of Detroit's history has the bleeding even leveled off, let alone reversed. We are still NO WHERE NEAR the bottom. It's so hard to fathom how a city can get things so screwed up decade after decade after decade only to screw things up far worse in the current decade.

This is either by design or shows unbelievable incompetence. Even on a multiple choice question with 5 answers you have a 20% chance of just guessing the right answer. If you guess wrong, on your second attempt you have a 25% chance of getting the right answer. 3rd attempt? 33% chance. 4th attempt? 50% chance. On the 5th attempt you should not be able to get the question wrong at all. Detroit can't figure it out no matter what - or maybe for some reason Detroit doesn't want to figure it out?

**Detroit_uke** · May-20-12, 05:40 PM

If you're talking about the "transitional" area in 48228.....way down...it's already gone..................long gone.......what do you say......5% of the city is "steady"....not more than 10%....yup...pat yourselves on the back mayor and council..........

**313WX** · May-20-12, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement

What's amazing about this city is the speed in which deterioration is picking up. Some say Detroit starting going downhill in the 50s and 60s. It escalated in the 70s only to pick up steam in the 80s and 90s. Once the 2000s hit the speed of deterioration sped up even faster. We are moving at super speeds now. And the only thing that looks like is coming out of city leadership is more failed ideas that are only speeding up the deterioration even more!

At NO point in the last 5 decades of Detroit's history has the bleeding even leveled off, let alone reversed. We are still NO WHERE NEAR the bottom. It's so hard to fathom how a city can get things so screwed up decade after decade after decade only to screw things up far worse in the current decade.

This is either by design or shows unbelievable incompetence. Even on a multiple choice question with 5 answers you have a 20% chance of just guessing the right answer. If you guess wrong, on your second attempt you have a 25% chance of getting the right answer. 3rd attempt? 33% chance. 4th attempt? 50% chance. On the 5th attempt you should not be able to get the question wrong at all. Detroit can't figure it out no matter what - or maybe for some reason Detroit doesn't want to figure it out?

You know, if Engler didn't lift the residency requirement in the late 1990s, I honestly think Detroit would have stopped bleeding [[the declind slowed quite drastically).

Of course, if you cut through the PC crap in the article, they are pretty much given everyone in Detroit who doesn't live in the Palmer Parks and Downtown a big "fuck you, and we're still taking your money." So clearly the decline is being done by design now, and I do believe the city will fall below 500,000 by 2020.

**Crumbled_pavement** · May-20-12, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

So clearly the decline is being done by design now, and I do believe the city will fall below 500,000 by 2020.

You get no argument from me there. It's obviously no one is putting in any intentional worthwhile effort to reverse the bleeding.

**karenka** · May-20-12, 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement

Pretty much the entire city is rapidly [[and increasing in speed) going downhill. If its transistional, assume most of those neighborhoods are going waaaaaaaaaaaaay down.

Isn't this pretty much the whole city?

The area just north of Hamtramck, east of Campau is stable and I'd say on the way up. The folks aren't well off financially, but the population is growing with lots of families, as well as the Powerhouse arts community.

**313WX** · May-20-12, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by karenka

The area just north of Hamtramck, east of Campau is stable and I'd say on the way up. The folks aren't well off financially, but the population is growing with lots of families, as well as the Powerhouse arts community.

Only that area bounded by Caniff, Conant, Mound and Charles is the area that posted a population gain that's not in Hamtramck.

That said, I'm looking at the census tracts and it only saw a 7% gain. What's really interesting though is while the percentages of Asians and Native Americans increased ovr 200%-400%, the percentage of whites and blacks still decreased a fair amount.

**nain rouge** · May-20-12, 08:07 PM

I remember laughing when Rick Snyder said during the EFM negotiations that he wanted to see Detroit's population back up to "900,000, or a million" - yeah, maybe by the year 2,100. It's clear that people like Snyder and Dave Bing want the city to shrink in actuality.

This article also reminds me of how much I dislike Richard Florida, a senior editor at The Atlantic Cities that happens to be responsible for this series. He's one of those people who loves talking about how cute and quaint their dream Detroit of 400,000 people will be, as the city's urban farms and hip breweries save the region from all suffering. What Florida always fails to mention is all the blood Detroit will have to shed to get such a point, and that a lot of good people are going to get screwed yet again. No, for him, negativity is lame, boring, and overdone - why not check out the new vegan restaurant on the corner, instead?

I respect that a Detroit of 400,000-500,000 will most likely be better for citizens in the long run, and could help some of those precarious "transitional" neighborhoods to truly recover. But we need to have show some respect and decency to how we handle this, and let's just say that I'm not exactly hopeful given the actions of both the city and state government to date.

And with that all made clear, I just want repeat this quote from the Free Press's article, made by a resident of one of the distressed neighborhoods:

"That may be fine and good," [Barbara Ford] said. "But is it right?"

**softailrider** · May-20-12, 08:26 PM

So the city is going to eliminate services but people living in those areas are still supposed to pay property taxes? Doesn't sound real fair to me.

**professorscott** · May-20-12, 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

You know, if Engler didn't lift the residency requirement in the late 1990s, I honestly think Detroit would have stopped bleeding.

That's hard to fathom. The City and Detroit Public Schools are among the top employers in Detroit, if not numbers 1 and 2. You can't sustain a local economy when everybody works for the government.

It would be like solving my household budget problem by this brilliant idea: my wife and I will just pay each other! It doesn't work that way. Money has to be coming in from somewhere else.

Originally Posted by softailrider

So the city is going to eliminate services but people living in those areas are still supposed to pay property taxes? Doesn't sound real fair to me.

No, it doesn't. So what would be fair? Taking a revenue stream insufficient to provide services to 139 square miles, yet spreading it thinly among the entire area [[as they do now)? What would be fair? Griping about a proposed solution is useless. Propose a better one.

**Locke09** · May-20-12, 11:34 PM

The whole point of property taxes is to cover the services necessary for that property, its owners and residents. If you are not providing services for an area, it should be illegal for you to tax that area. If you close their neighborhood schools, don't respond when they call EMS or DPD, don't provide them with streetlights, sidewalk maintenance, transportation and other services, then you shouldn't need their money for anything. In fact, the knowledge that Detroit has abandoned some of its citizens is well known by the criminals that are preying on them. What's the 75 year old woman to do? I don't hear that the City has offered her a new home in some more viable area.

By the way, people don't have to have an alternative to know that a current situation is unfair or not right.

**nain rouge** · May-20-12, 11:37 PM

Originally Posted by professorscott

That's hard to fathom. The City and Detroit Public Schools are among the top employers in Detroit, if not numbers 1 and 2. You can't sustain a local economy when everybody works for the government.

It would be like solving my household budget problem by this brilliant idea: my wife and I will just pay each other! It doesn't work that way. Money has to be coming in from somewhere else.

Detroit is not necessarily unique in this regard. Check out this link. Cities like Chicago, Philadelphia, Miami, and Los Angeles are in the same boat. But I suppose you are the expert on how things work in cities. I apologize.

**Locke09** · May-20-12, 11:45 PM

I actually get confused when people are surprised that big city governments are among the top employers in their areas. Government provides services. Providing services requires people, whether you hire those people directly or contract the work out to other people that hire them.

Government is not like manufacturing where a large percentage of the cost might go to supplies, equipment, utilities, etc. Government needs teachers, cops, healthcare workers, bus drivers, pothole fillers and the like. Even if they contract this work out, it still translates to employees.

**Flintoid** · May-20-12, 11:57 PM

Wow. Where did the Freep get that map. It looks nothing like the actual map the city provides. Hey Free Press, you cant just make up your own designs of the city and play urban planner for the day. I feel that alot of the discussion on this thread is based on this god awful map, so here is a link to an extensive powerpoint from the city that has a more accurate map [[along with several more) http://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/d...esentation.pdf. The Freep map shows the following neighborhoods as "distressed:" Downtown, Midtown, New Center, Woodbridge, Eastern Market, hell the only greater downtown neighborhood that isnt erroneously listed as distressed is Lafayette Park. They also include Palmer Park [[not the apartments, the park itself for god's sake) as distressed. Getting past this god awful map, I think this plan is an excellent idea. Let's be honest, the city will probably shrink to 500,000, but that can be a city of 500,000 people living in successful districts. It makes no sense to pour just as much money into the neighborhood around city airport as Sherwood Forest. And to the idea that the city is only pouring money into Palmer Park or Downtown, that is an obnoxiously uneducated claim. The districts that will get the most attention, according to these designations, are the "transitional" areas. It really helps to read this set of maps and the accompanying data, not this made up image the freep gave us.

**313WX** · May-21-12, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by Flintoid

Wow. Where did the Freep get that map.

The map in the article is on page 25 of your link [[just in different colors and slightly more detailed.

**brizee** · May-21-12, 08:03 AM

Absolutely shameful.

I will never be convinced that you improve by ignoring citizens and shrinking.

It's DAVE BING for chrissakes! The company bearing his name crumbled as soon as he looked away for two seconds. Why does this lying doddering fool get to just decide people's fate with the twirl of his finger? He won't even be here 18 months from now.

There are ways to improve this city. The state, city and local governments don't really want that of course.

We need a complete apolitcal sociopath running this town. A near anarchist to draw blood and bully through what Detroit needs.

**ghettopalmetto** · May-21-12, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement

At NO point in the last 5 decades of Detroit's history has the bleeding even leveled off, let alone reversed. We are still NO WHERE NEAR the bottom. It's so hard to fathom how a city can get things so screwed up decade after decade after decade only to screw things up far worse in the current decade.

This is either by design or shows unbelievable incompetence. Even on a multiple choice question with 5 answers you have a 20% chance of just guessing the right answer. If you guess wrong, on your second attempt you have a 25% chance of getting the right answer. 3rd attempt? 33% chance. 4th attempt? 50% chance. On the 5th attempt you should not be able to get the question wrong at all. Detroit can't figure it out no matter what - or maybe for some reason Detroit doesn't want to figure it out?

I thought Super Bowl XL was going to fix all that? Hundreds of millions of people were going to see Detroit on television, and somehow everything would magically be better. And the casinos were going to make Detroit an international tourist destination! Where are all the Saudi sheiks dropping their oil fortunes at Detroit's tables? I know--it must be the lack of international flights into DTW, right? Or they just can't find Detroit on the map. I know what to do: let's make a new PR campaign!

I just don't understand why these time-honored strategies aren't working!!!

**iheartthed** · May-21-12, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement

What's amazing about this city is the speed in which deterioration is picking up. Some say Detroit starting going downhill in the 50s and 60s. It escalated in the 70s only to pick up steam in the 80s and 90s. Once the 2000s hit the speed of deterioration sped up even faster. We are moving at super speeds now. And the only thing that looks like is coming out of city leadership is more failed ideas that are only speeding up the deterioration even more!

At NO point in the last 5 decades of Detroit's history has the bleeding even leveled off, let alone reversed. We are still NO WHERE NEAR the bottom. It's so hard to fathom how a city can get things so screwed up decade after decade after decade only to screw things up far worse in the current decade.

This is either by design or shows unbelievable incompetence. Even on a multiple choice question with 5 answers you have a 20% chance of just guessing the right answer. If you guess wrong, on your second attempt you have a 25% chance of getting the right answer. 3rd attempt? 33% chance. 4th attempt? 50% chance. On the 5th attempt you should not be able to get the question wrong at all. Detroit can't figure it out no matter what - or maybe for some reason Detroit doesn't want to figure it out?

Well, the 1990s was the only decade since the 1940s where Detroit didn't shrink by more than 100,000 residents. So I guess that's a slight leveling off...

But I think the point you're getting at is Detroit's decline is structural. If that's what you're saying then I agree 100%.

**iheartthed** · May-21-12, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by professorscott

That's hard to fathom. The City and Detroit Public Schools are among the top employers in Detroit, if not numbers 1 and 2. You can't sustain a local economy when everybody works for the government.

I think city government is always among the largest employers in most places. What makes Detroit unique is that most of the middle class residents work/worked in city government and a very small percentage in the private sector. This is due to 1) the Detroit region being segregated along municipal lines and 2) middle class black workers being overwhelmingly employed in government jobs.