Detroit City Council Weighs Community Benefits ordinance on $15Mil+ Projects

**SyGolden48236** · October-12-14, 08:11 AM

What is all this nonsense that is proposed by the City Council? Are they trying to drive investment out of their city? Oy vey! Such stupidity!

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opi...ment/17056019/

**Cliffy** · October-12-14, 09:20 AM

I would like to review the details. The Detroit News is known for being a puppet to corporations and against the little guy.

**SyGolden48236** · October-12-14, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by Cliffy

I would like to review the details. The Detroit News is known for being a puppet to corporations and against the little guy.

Known as such to whom? Twenty something year old capitalism-hating Wayne State students? Occupiers? Ironic hipsters?

Oy! Here we go again with the class warfare. Oooh, evil corporations! Everyone is out to squash the "little guy". Such rubbish!

**EastsideAl** · October-12-14, 11:27 AM

All Cliffy said was what the News' editorial stance has been throughout the years. And it's indisputably true that of the 2 Detroit dailies the News has been notably the more pro-corporate and anti-labor, mostly pro-GOP, and definitely anti-Detroit city government, for quite a long time now. One doesn't have to be a Wayne student, or graduate for that matter, to know that.

**313WX** · October-12-14, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

All Cliffy said was what the News' editorial stance has been throughout the years. And it's indisputably true that of the 2 Detroit dailies the News has been notably the more pro-corporate and anti-labor, mostly pro-GOP, and definitely anti-Detroit city government, for quite a long time now. One doesn't have to be a Wayne student, or graduate for that matter, to know that.

Not just pro-corporate and anti-labor, but also pro-suburbs and anti-city [[since most of the metro area lives in the suburbs, and most folks in the suburbs tend to hold animosity towards the city)

**antongast** · October-12-14, 11:35 AM

Every time I think that "clowncil" joke couldn't possibly get more threadbare and unfunny, some suburbanite on DYes whips it out again and starts waving it around. Ha...ha?

**FlyOnTheWall** · October-12-14, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

Not just pro-corporate and anti-labor, but also pro-suburbs and anti-city [[since most of the metro area lives in the suburbs, and most folks in the suburbs tend to hold animosity towards the city)

Do you suppose that would be because most of their income comes from the suburbs? Could be.

**antongast** · October-12-14, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by FlyOnTheWall

Do you suppose that would be because most of their income comes from the suburbs? Could be.

Fucking journalism, how does it work?

**EastsideAl** · October-12-14, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by antongast

Every time I think that "clowncil" joke couldn't possibly get more threadbare and unfunny, some suburbanite on DYes whips it out again and starts waving it around. Ha...ha?

In my experience it represents a rather notable white suburbanite view of black elected officials of any sort. And, for that matter, the wacky but scary spectacle of black citizens exercising their democratic rights. It's what I call the "those crazy coloreds down in Detroit" effect.

**EastsideAl** · October-12-14, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by FlyOnTheWall

Do you suppose that would be because most of their income comes from the suburbs? Could be.

Equally true of the Free Press though, I would think.

**coracle** · October-12-14, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

All Cliffy said was what the News' editorial stance has been throughout the years. And it's indisputably true that of the 2 Detroit dailies the News has been notably the more pro-corporate and anti-labor, mostly pro-GOP, and definitely anti-Detroit city government, for quite a long time now. One doesn't have to be a Wayne student, or graduate for that matter, to know that.

"Detroit city government" has to be the Oxymoron of the week.

**Wesley Mouch** · October-12-14, 12:15 PM

I don't really care what folks think about the News or Freep. The issue here is Community Benefits Agreements.

They are increasingly used around the country to pursue social goals. They are popular with voters who often believe businesses exist to make profits on the backs of the poor.

Regardless of your politics, its hard to understand how this can be seen as a jobs creator. The one thing it seems certain to do is discourage riskier investment such as high tech firms. Look at Amazon. Bezos pulls no profits from that business, preferring to invest everything into the growth of the company, undercutting his competitors. Will the next Bezos want to invest in a city where some of his cashflow goes to someone else's vision?

I suspect San Francisco or Seattle have the momentum to digest this, living wage ordinances, or and minium wages for rich kids -- but I think Detroit CC would be wise to wait. That the council can't resist this suggests that they haven't learned the lessons of the last couple of decades. That is worrisome.

**Mark Smiles** · October-12-14, 01:08 PM

What is meant by "any form of public support"?

Is any income not taxed away considered a subsidy?

**Cliffy** · October-12-14, 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Blah Blah Blah

The article basically stated that their should be conditions on projects that are $15 mil or more and are using PUBLIC FUNDS. What are you blabbing on about Amazon and rich kids in San Francisco. READ.

**Cliffy** · October-12-14, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Smiles

What is meant by "any form of public support"?

Is any income not taxed away considered a subsidy?

I'm guessing the arena project in Detroit is a great example of corporate welfare that the doesn't really benefit the local citizens much.

anonJD · October-12-14, 05:08 PM

In short, the ole Detroit saying is alive and well, "I gotsta get mines."

**Mark Smiles** · October-12-14, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Cliffy

I'm guessing the arena project in Detroit is a great example of corporate welfare that the doesn't really benefit the local citizens much.

The new stadium should not be built with pubic funds. I really don't think the Red Wings need such a gift from the tax payers.

**Detroit Stylin** · October-12-14, 06:48 PM

Originally Posted by anonJD

In short, the ole Detroit saying is alive and well, "I gotsta get mines."

All while they were shuckin and jiving eh...

**Wesley Mouch** · October-12-14, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by Cliffy

I'm guessing the arena project in Detroit is a great example of corporate welfare that the doesn't really benefit the local citizens much.

Seems to depend on your politics whether it benefits the citizens. I detest stadium construction for private use, but it is our nations method of financing sports/entertainment facilities. Detroit can either play the game, or see the teams move out to the suburbs. Many seem to think that Ilitch & Co. would stay anyway. Therefore the public infrastructure, beneficial financing, and tax breaks [[no property tax) do become 'corporate welfare'. However in the real world, Ilitch can't run a sports team against other teams that have more money because they are getting 'welfare' from their cities.

**antongast** · October-12-14, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Ilitch can't run a sports team against other teams that have more money because they are getting 'welfare' from their cities.

This makes no sense. Sports leagues aren't competitive marketplaces. They're cartels. In the real world, the Red Wings aren't going to lose fans to the Blackhawks or Canadiens if the stadium isn't nice enough, and the NHL isn't going to let me start the Warren Antongasts to compete against Ilitch and get Jim Fouts to build me a big fancy arena.

**BankruptcyGuy** · October-12-14, 07:26 PM

Compare and contrast the approach of this ordinance to the approach that Nevada, California, Texas and their respective municipal governments to the possibility of a Tesla battery factory:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/tesla...ory-1409871734

The latter was a free-for-all of subsidies [[Tesla will get free electricity that, if excess remains after their use, they can resell to the grid for a profit), tax breaks and giveaways.

Interestingly, the giveaway approach was the same in an all-blue [[CA), all-red [[TX) and mixed [[NV, R governor, L senators leading the charge).

As long as the rule is clear [[tax break of $X requires benefits of Y), the only thing the law accomplishes is a reduction in the value of land [[when the profits of a project are reduced, the value of the land falls).

When the law is unclear as to what's required, this is an invitation for graft.

This law is a BAD idea [[as I understand it today).

**Richard** · October-12-14, 07:29 PM

It sounded like a good idea when it started years ago, but now that it has been tested it is up to you to decide and voice your opinion to your city council, but maybe read a little to help in the decision.

http://goodjobsny.org/sites/default/...port-final.pdf

Maybe what they are trying to avoid is companies setting up under the agreement then changing ownership and voiding the agreement , the flavor of the year.

**Johnnny5** · October-12-14, 07:47 PM

Many of these large projects are receiving substantial tax breaks and other notable benefits from the city. IMO city council would be in dereliction of their duty if they did not ensure that these projects result in guaranteed short and long term benefits to the citizens of Detroit. As recent projects have proven [[Marathon Refinery being one) many of the promises these developers make often go unfulfilled and are forgotten.

Any development receiving substantial public funding should be providing a substantial public benefit. Not only that, but honestly it's a nice change to see Detroit City Council fighting for the benefit of their constituents [[At least they are appearing to) as opposed to just pocketing brown paper bags of cash. As mentioned above these laws need to be written carefully so that they don't lead to more of the back door payoffs of the past.

**Wesley Mouch** · October-12-14, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by antongast

This makes no sense. Sports leagues aren't competitive marketplaces. They're cartels. In the real world, the Red Wings aren't going to lose fans to the Blackhawks or Canadiens if the stadium isn't nice enough, and the NHL isn't going to let me start the Warren Antongasts to compete against Ilitch and get Jim Fouts to build me a big fancy arena.

But the Wings will lose out to the Pistons.

Do you think the Red Wings would be what they are today if they were still playing in Crane's Olympia Stadium -- as much as I'd love that?

But let's get back to the thread.

**BankruptcyGuy** · October-12-14, 08:41 PM

Let's also be clear: TIF financing is NOT public funding. There may be bonds floated for infrastructure, but if the work is in the public way [[fixing up roads), that's not solely for private benefit, either.

If you've got a project that generates $1MM in tax revenue, and an owner wants a cap on taxes to expand, the City is out $0. That's not "taxpayer funding." The treasurer is getting what they previously got.

I'd be interested in hearing more details about what the exact structure of "public financing" is in the arena example [[or the Marathon example).