Restoration at Woodward and Baltimore in Detroit
DETROIT SQUARE WINNING DESIGN »

FUN THINGS TO DO IN DETROIT »



Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 154
  1. #101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    And now when LBP dies, we know his beliefs will begin to die off too and we already know his power is already waning. And then we get to fix what he broke: trust between the counties in order to regionally cooperate and make Metro Detroit competitive on the world stage.
    Exactly how many billions should the burb's shovel at Detroit so as to make it competitive? Is that really the responsibility of other cities?

  2. #102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdd View Post
    Exactly how many billions should the burb's shovel at Detroit so as to make it competitive? Is that really the responsibility of other cities?
    It's not about shoveling money for Detroit only. It's about putting into the regional pot in order for all of us to grow, especially transit. Whether we do that via property tax or sales tax, the latter of which I think we would all prefer over the former but the powers that be have stuck us in a corner.

    Why is it we regionalized the water authority and MetroParks but haven't done the same for transit? It makes no sense.

    And yes, DDOT is partially to blame. But so is L. Brooks Patterson.

    There's no opt-out in MetroParks. Why should the same exist for transit?

    I get it, people who use transit are more likely to live in urban areas like Detroit. But the ENTIRE region is better off with a regional transit system. Literally any policy wonk in the top 10 US metros will tell you that.

    If Metro Detroit is going to want to grow, then we need multi-modal transportation options which includes a modern, functional transit system that is regionalized. If we wish to remain stagnant and become irrelevant, then by all means let's continue shooting ourselves in the foot.

    So let's reiterate again: We will stop being a donor region for other region's transit projects when we fully fund our own regional authority. So yeah, LBP can definitely take credit for building transit. In DC. Atlanta. Seattle. Minneapolis. But alas his stubbornness has made metro Detroit transit into a laughing joke compared to other regions.
    Last edited by dtowncitylover; April-04-19 at 02:15 PM.

  3. #103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    It's not about shoveling money for Detroit only. It's about putting into the regional pot in order for all of us to grow,
    Well,.. I don't think Berkley, Birmingham, Bloomfield etc are going to grow necessarily with increased transit. (Perhaps Pontiac will) If anything their property values might take a tiny hit. And even more of a hit if property taxes increase yet again to fund it. Much of the suburbs property taxes go to fund things outside the burbs, such as the Detroit Schools. I know people in Bloomfield Township,.. and something like 65% of their taxes leave the area, and go into general fund to pay for things like Detroit Schools,.. which are one of the top 8 most expensive districts in the country. The average cost per student in the USA is something like $8,500 per student. The top school district in the country by test scores in Miami-Dade County in Florida,.. and they spend like $8,700 per child. Detroit costs us like $14,500 per child,.. and is the single worst by test scores. It's stuff like this that causes the burbs to not want to fund any more things involving Detroit. Detroit is a seemingly endless vacuum for money. And then after asking for and getting billions,.. they'll curse the burbs while wearing their "Detroit v.s. everybody" t-shirt.

    So those guys up in Bloom have to pay $15,000 - $20,000 per year in taxes,.. yet when their street needs to be repaved, they have to write another $30,000 check,.. because the taxes can't cover it (because so much money gets sucked out)





    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    Why is it we regionalized the water authority and MetroParks but haven't done the same for transit? It makes no sense.


    I get it, people who use transit are more likely to live in urban areas like Detroit. But the ENTIRE region is better off with a regional transit system. Literally any policy wonk in the top 10 US metros will tell you that.


    So let's reiterate again: We will stop being a donor region for other region's transit projects when we fully fund our own regional authority. So yeah, LBP can definitely take credit for building transit. In DC. Atlanta. Seattle. Minneapolis. But alas his stubbornness has made metro Detroit transit into a laughing joke compared to other regions.
    Well,.. I don't think poor people here are really moving to Seattle or D.C to get better bus service. And until the city can prove it can do a better job with bus maintenance contracts and the like,.. people on the outside are unlikely to want to donate even more. Outsiders already subsidize 2/3 of the cost of bus service. Perhaps it's time for the people using it to pay half?

  4. #104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
    The biggest decline did come in the 1970s, but it is hard to attribute that solely to CAY,
    No it isn't, but what does this have to do with LBP's declining health?

  5. #105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    Name:  NotAgain.jpg
Views: 191
Size:  23.4 KB


    Not Again ....

  6. #106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    It's not about shoveling money for Detroit only. It's about putting into the regional pot in order for all of us to grow, especially transit. Whether we do that via property tax or sales tax, the latter of which I think we would all prefer over the former but the powers that be have stuck us in a corner.

    Why is it we regionalized the water authority and MetroParks but haven't done the same for transit? It makes no sense.

    And yes, DDOT is partially to blame. But so is L. Brooks Patterson.

    There's no opt-out in MetroParks. Why should the same exist for transit?

    I get it, people who use transit are more likely to live in urban areas like Detroit. But the ENTIRE region is better off with a regional transit system. Literally any policy wonk in the top 10 US metros will tell you that.

    If Metro Detroit is going to want to grow, then we need multi-modal transportation options which includes a modern, functional transit system that is regionalized. If we wish to remain stagnant and become irrelevant, then by all means let's continue shooting ourselves in the foot.

    So let's reiterate again: We will stop being a donor region for other region's transit projects when we fully fund our own regional authority. So yeah, LBP can definitely take credit for building transit. In DC. Atlanta. Seattle. Minneapolis. But alas his stubbornness has made metro Detroit transit into a laughing joke compared to other regions.
    Not sure what you were hoping for as far as transit goes during the LBP era. Did you really think we were going to have NYC type transit around here? Or anything even close to that? It wasn’t going to happen, no matter who was the Oakland County Exec, and it probably won’t happen with the next one either - they may extend the Woodward rail a few miles, maybe even take it to Pontiac, but we will all be dead by then.

  7. #107

    Default

    Pancreatic cancer is horrible -- having shorten the lives of many. Alex Trebek has also been recently diagnosed. Like so many diseases it cares little about your politics, or history. Befalling the just and the unjust. Here's hoping for earlier detection and a cure!

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/16/healt...ner/index.html

    From article:

    About 95% of people with pancreatic cancer die from it, experts say. It's so lethal because during the early stages, when the tumor would be most treatable, there are usually no symptoms. It tends to be discovered at advanced stages when abdominal pain or jaundice may result. Presently, there are no general screening tools....



    Alex Trebek announces he has stage 4 pancreatic cancer

    As people age, the risk of developing pancreatic cancer goes up. Most patients are older than 45, and nearly 90% are older than 55. The average age at diagnosis is 71.

    Researchers are working on better understanding the way in which pancreatic tumors grow and spread, Libutti said. There is also a lot of research focused on finding better treatments, targeted therapies, immune therapy, improving surgery and radiation therapy, according to the American Cancer Society....

    "There are a number of agents that are being looked at in clinical trials that focus on pathways that may allow pancreatic cancer to evade normal processes," Libutti said...

    Another line of research is focused on finding biomarkers of pancreatic cancer so that a simple blood or urine test could be developed.
    Last edited by Zacha341; April-05-19 at 06:55 AM.

  8. #108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdd View Post
    Well,.. I don't think Berkley, Birmingham, Bloomfield etc are going to grow necessarily with increased transit. (Perhaps Pontiac will) If anything their property values might take a tiny hit. And even more of a hit if property taxes increase yet again to fund it.
    Except we know that's a lie because study after study proves that property values increase the closer one is to a transit line, especially a rail line. For all the gripe about Gilbert, the main concern was the fact he is using QLine, among other ways, to boost his property values, which we know has already happened.

  9. #109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by softailrider View Post
    Not sure what you were hoping for as far as transit goes during the LBP era. Did you really think we were going to have NYC type transit around here? Or anything even close to that? It wasn’t going to happen, no matter who was the Oakland County Exec, and it probably won’t happen with the next one either - they may extend the Woodward rail a few miles, maybe even take it to Pontiac, but we will all be dead by then.
    I think a moderate GOP with an ounce of pragmatism and foresight would've jumped on board with a regional transit plan, especially in the 1970s when it was the last time before LBP it could've happened.

    And yes, with a near-certain Democratic head at 1200 Telegraph before the 2020 election, that person can definitely break down for the people why we need a regional authority. LBP didn't care to do this in 2016 because he doesn't care about transit. His "support" of SMART is lip-service because he knows bare bones transit is at least needed and he still has the power of the opt-out clause.

  10. #110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Meddle View Post
    Not Again ....
    I'm sorry you feel mocking me for my passion makes you feel better.

    It is unbelievable this in this day and age that there needs to be explanation as to why this region needs transit and a regional transit authority.

    Then again, when this region is left with grey hair baby boomers and the rest of population is too small and can't support anything, don't say the warnings of the last one turning the lights out weren't there.

    A region cannot grow without a population increase. That increase isn't going to come until we can attract businesses and major, non-tax incentive investment. That can only come when we can make ourselves attractive to the businesses, investments, and new residents. That isn't going to come until we fix major issues like education, transit, and public safety.

    So yeah. TRANSIT. TRANSIT TRANSIT.

    FORK YOU.

  11. #111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    Except we know that's a lie because study after study proves that property values increase the closer one is to a transit line, especially a rail line. For all the gripe about Gilbert, the main concern was the fact he is using QLine, among other ways, to boost his property values, which we know has already happened.
    Yes, it does increase land values in big cities near transit routes,.. where you have high population density. But not in the burbs,.. where someone might have to walk 4 miles (sometimes with no sidewalks) just to get to the transit.

    Cities 100+ years ago were built around transit. Houses were narrow and tall (often duplexes) and they were squeezed tightly together (like Hamtramck is). This was to shorten the walk to the trolley and bus lines. The closer you lived to them, the more you were willing to pay for the house. My grandfather built 1,500 such homes a year. The closer you got to a main line,.. the more highly sought after the property.

    Of course this causes a big fire danger,.. and isn't even legal under today's fire codes.

    BUT,.. in some place like Birmingham or Bloomfield,... all a bunch of transit accomplishes is perhaps bringing in some more poor people to bag the groceries at the Krogers. And the tax penalties don't make up for that.

  12. #112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by softailrider View Post
    Not sure what you were hoping for as far as transit goes during the LBP era. Did you really think we were going to have NYC type transit around here? Or anything even close to that? It wasn’t going to happen, no matter who was the Oakland County Exec, and it probably won’t happen with the next one either - they may extend the Woodward rail a few miles, maybe even take it to Pontiac, but we will all be dead by then.
    Even if we could wave a magic wand and have the NYC subway (Or Paris Metro or a brand-new subway), I'm not so sure that's the right answer for Detroit today. These heavy, fixed systems made sense in 1950 -- but maybe not so much today. Perhaps light rail on Woodward, Gratiot, Michigan ... but even there it may be better to look at newer technologies. We have the chance to do things better than the systems of the past. And we have needs which may not work so well for old systems too. I wonder, for example, how Curitiba (Brazil) has found their BRT system to work for them. And maybe that's now old technology. Wonder what else is out there today that might work for a low-density city like Detroit.
    Last edited by Wesley Mouch; April-05-19 at 11:31 AM. Reason: correct spelling of curitiba

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,067

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    Except we know that's a lie because study after study proves that property values increase the closer one is to a transit line, especially a rail line.
    No, those "studies" are the same as the stadium and Qline "studies". They conflate correlation and causation. Property values were soaring on Woodward prior to the Qline announcement, yet curiously no one has ever concluded that the property values increased due to no rail.

    No one's property value in Bloomfield would go up if you somehow got light rail out there. It's more likely their property values would go down, because their taxes would have gone up to support such a boondoggle.

    And there are no sidewalks anyways, and most of the properties are multiacre, and many streets are unpaved. I seriously doubt some doctor is gonna trudge a mile down snow-clad, muddy, winding dirt roads to commute via transit to Beaumont, when he could drive from his insulated attached garage to Beaumont in 1/3 the time.

    And in case you haven't noticed, Bloomfield already has the highest property values in the state, and they don't even have a single bus stop.
    Last edited by Bham1982; April-05-19 at 11:34 AM.

  14. #114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdd View Post
    Yes, it does increase land values in big cities near transit routes,.. where you have high population density. But not in the burbs,.. where someone might have to walk 4 miles (sometimes with no sidewalks) just to get to the transit.
    No, having a regional rail system would still increase property values, even if your community is not directly serviced. You can expect to sell your house for more in an auto oriented suburb that is located in a region with a good rail network than you would in an analogous suburb located in a region without one.

  15. #115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdd View Post
    Yes, it does increase land values in big cities near transit routes,.. where you have high population density. But not in the burbs,.. where someone might have to walk 4 miles (sometimes with no sidewalks) just to get to the transit.

    Cities 100+ years ago were built around transit. Houses were narrow and tall (often duplexes) and they were squeezed tightly together (like Hamtramck is). This was to shorten the walk to the trolley and bus lines. The closer you lived to them, the more you were willing to pay for the house. My grandfather built 1,500 such homes a year. The closer you got to a main line,.. the more highly sought after the property.

    Of course this causes a big fire danger,.. and isn't even legal under today's fire codes.

    BUT,.. in some place like Birmingham or Bloomfield,... all a bunch of transit accomplishes is perhaps bringing in some more poor people to bag the groceries at the Krogers. And the tax penalties don't make up for that.
    This is all incredibly still wrong. Property values in Bloomfield and Birmingham and Inkster and let's say Mt. Clemens if there's ever a NE commuter rail option developed, would ALL have improved property values because of the single fact there is now both bus and rail transit. And all would lose property value if SMART, God-forbid, be taken away.

    Yes, I now how urban planning 100+ years ago developed. That's how places like Royal Oak and Birmingham developed, because the trails and rails ran through first. I would say Metro Detroit has some of the finest collection of streetcar/interurban suburbs in the nation. Royal Oak, Ferndale, Rochester, Farmington, Plymouth.

    And no, transit is NOT JUST FOR FUCKING POOR PEOPLE (who btw have every right to be in places like Birmingham). It's to serve EVERYONE equally except here in backwater Detroit where we've been so brainwashed by people like LBP into believing transit is some "poor people option". FUCK THAT SENTIMENT.

    You want to live in Birmingham and Bloomfield, fine. Go ahead. You're still a part of this region. And if it's decided there's going to be a commuter rail or BRT or LRT between Detroit and Pontiac, it's only a good thing. And no you're not going to walk. In the case of commuter rail, you're gonna drive or be dropped off and wait for a train like hundreds of thousands of suburbanites in major metro areas across North America and the world do every single morning to go to work in their central city. We're not inventing the fucking wheel.

    Equal access for all along major thoroughfares and to major points in the metro area is point of regional transit.

    And this is the biggest consternation with L. Brooks: he has repeatedly stifled regional economic growth by blocking transit efforts in which more parts of the region would open up to people who may not afford to drive but may have an opportunity to work (The Walking Man), may be visiting in Detroit and don't have a car (I guess we don't want tourists), or simply cannot drive for whatever reason (so basically fuck people with disabilities). Never mind the fact that transit systems produces its own jobs, it produces transit oriented development by attracting new residents and non-auto related industries because they usually don't need the sprawling industrial parks, and therefore housing and new business centers are located along major transit lines and points.

    Anti-transit=anti-economic growth.

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,067

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
    No, having a regional rail system would still increase property values, even if your community is not directly serviced. You can expect to sell your house for more in an auto oriented suburb that is located in a region with a good rail network than you would in an analogous suburb located in a region without one.
    There's no evidence this would happen, especially in a region where employment isn't centralized, so there's little need for fixed routes. It's more likely that the increased property taxes on affluent households from such a network would lead to lower property values.

    Cleveland, which is much more centralized than Detroit, and has a regional transit network, including frequent rail to its wealthiest suburbs, yet property values are a fraction of those in Metro Detroit.

    Even in Chicago, an extremely centralized metro with (at least arguably) the second best metropolitan rail network in North America, property values are pathetic by global standards. They were higher 20 years ago.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,067

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    And all would lose property value if SMART, God-forbid, be taken away.
    Just to be clear, SMART was "taken away" by Bloomfield Hills, a few years ago. Property values have since soared.

    Now, granted, I'm not arguing that property values soared because they took away SMART. That would be as silly as arguing property values would soar if you reinstated transit. They soared because the 1% in the U.S. got much richer.

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post
    And no you're not going to walk. In the case of commuter rail, you're gonna drive or be dropped off and wait for a train like hundreds of thousands of suburbanites in major metro areas across North America and the world do every single morning to go to work in their central city. We're not inventing the fucking wheel.
    Most successful commuter rail networks around the world are based on walking or transit to the station, not driving. You kinda defeat the purpose if you're just creating a park-and-ride situation, because you aren't building anything walkable or sustainable, and if you're already in your car, there's no point to switching modes unless congestion is horrific (which it isn't locally).

    If you take the commuter lines outside NYC, London and Paris, most commuters are getting to the station by foot, transit, or getting dropped off. There may be some parking, but usually limited and expensive.

    Here's an example I'm familar with Bronxville, NY. If you scroll around the neighborhood, the station is clearly geared towards walkers, transit and dropoffs. There's parking, but it's limited, expensive and requires permits. The neighborhood demographics, BTW are not dissimilar to Bloomfield Hills (but the built form and local commuting patterns are radically different).

    https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9414...7i13312!8i6656

  18. #118

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bham1982 View Post
    There's no evidence this would happen, especially in a region where employment isn't centralized, so there's little need for fixed routes. It's more likely that the increased property taxes on affluent households from such a network would lead to lower property values.

    Cleveland, which is much more centralized than Detroit, and has a regional transit network, including frequent rail to its wealthiest suburbs, yet property values are a fraction of those in Metro Detroit.

    Even in Chicago, an extremely centralized metro with (at least arguably) the second best metropolitan rail network in North America, property values are pathetic by global standards. They were higher 20 years ago.
    Cleveland's rail goes to one affluent suburb: Shaker Heights. The other suburb it services is East Cleveland which isn't at all affluent. No commuter rail. I would probably guess that metro Cleveland housing prices have always been cheaper than metro Detroit considering we have been more economically relevant.

    In the last paragraph, you seem to be implying that it's Metra's fault those prices have gone down because why else it would it matter to mention that? And of course, correlation doesn't mean causation. And it probably has nothing to do it with it. Any reduction in service or coverage of Metra would reek havoc on Chicago's already terrible traffic congestion which would then cause further decline of housing prices.

    Going back to your first paragraph, the whole point of rebuilding the metro area is in order to bring Detroit back to be the employment center of the region where it belongs. And it order to do this we need to build ourselves a regional transit system that can take us both in and out of the city center and across the metro area to the airport, Ann Arbor, and between Oakland and Macomb counties. So yes, there's need for fixed route service.

  19. #119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bham1982 View Post
    Most successful commuter rail networks around the world are based on walking or transit to the station, not driving. You kinda defeat the purpose if you're just creating a park-and-ride situation, because you aren't building anything walkable or sustainable, and if you're already in your car, there's no point to switching modes unless congestion is horrific (which it isn't locally).

    If you take the commuter lines outside NYC, London and Paris, most commuters are getting to the station by foot, transit, or getting dropped off. There may be some parking, but usually limited and expensive.

    Here's an example I'm familar with Bronxville, NY. If you scroll around the neighborhood, the station is clearly geared towards walkers, transit and dropoffs. There's parking, but it's limited, expensive and requires permits. The neighborhood demographics, BTW are not dissimilar to Bloomfield Hills (but the built form and local commuting patterns are radically different).

    https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9414...7i13312!8i6656
    Hey, that would be amazing! And while yes, I know there's plenty of walkable suburban options even here in the metro area, much of suburban Detroit is low-dense cul de sacs developments that would need park and rides, which is what I'm familiar with when I visit family in exurban Chicago and use the nearest Metra station to get downtown, which is park and ride.

    Bloomfield Hills, in my millennial lifetime, has never had SMART service considering they opt-out first in 1995. The city council voted down a second time in 2015.

  20. #120

    Default

    I apologize for hijacking a thread about LBP's eventual demise.

  21. #121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bham1982 View Post
    There's no evidence this would happen, especially in a region where employment isn't centralized, so there's little need for fixed routes. It's more likely that the increased property taxes on affluent households from such a network would lead to lower property values.

    Cleveland, which is much more centralized than Detroit, and has a regional transit network, including frequent rail to its wealthiest suburbs, yet property values are a fraction of those in Metro Detroit.

    Even in Chicago, an extremely centralized metro with (at least arguably) the second best metropolitan rail network in North America, property values are pathetic by global standards. They were higher 20 years ago.
    Cleveland has one train line. It's hardly a system.

  22. #122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bham1982 View Post
    It's more likely that the increased property taxes on affluent households from such a network would lead to lower property values.
    Bham, this false argument is straight out of LBP's (and his clueless sidekick Mark Hackel's) propaganda playbook. 1.5-2 mills for a transit tax would ding the vast majority of Bloomfield folks for less than $600/year while generating billions of dollars over a 15-20 year time frame. $600 or less is spare change for a community with an average household income exceeding $150k. There's no chance it would lead to lower property values.

    On the contrary, an actual working regional mass transit system in SE Michigan would improve housing values region-wide (in an amount certainly far more than $600/year for the Bloomfield folks) almost regardless of proximity to the system. The benefits of transit extend far beyond what it does for ridership. Regions with working transit have higher per capita GDP and household incomes than SE Michigan. Such regions have higher college attainment. Transit attracts employers. It promotes better land use policies. Nonetheless, LBP and Hackel continue to pander to uninformed voters who think that transit should only be paid for by the people who use it, even though the transit "business model" doesn't work that way in any city on the planet.

    LBP has managed Oakland County budgets well for most of his tenure and that will be a positive part of his legacy. His racism and opposition to transit have harmed the region and contributed to its decline nationally and globally. He will be remembered for that as well.

  23. #123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dtowncitylover View Post

    Bloomfield Hills, in my millennial lifetime, has never had SMA.....
    Woah,.. wait a minute. Are you telling us that you're a Millennial,.. yet you pretend to have a valid opinion on highly complex and very expensive systems like regional transit?

    How about first you acquire a few million in income properties, start a few businesses,. make a few hundred payrolls and then get back to us in 30 years. I'll bet you a Bentley your opinion will have changed by then.

  24. #124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdd View Post
    Woah,.. wait a minute. Are you telling us that you're a Millennial,.. yet you pretend to have a valid opinion on highly complex and very expensive systems like regional transit?

    How about first you acquire a few million in income properties, start a few businesses,. make a few hundred payrolls and then get back to us in 30 years. I'll bet you a Bentley your opinion will have changed by then.
    Some of the richest people in the history of the world are millennials.

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,638

    Default

    When LBrookP passes , does expect major, radical, UNexpected change ?
    It's going to take a while to turn that ancient ship 180 degrees to progress

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Instagram
BEST ONLINE FORUM FOR
DETROIT-BASED DISCUSSION
DetroitYES Awarded BEST OF DETROIT 2015 - Detroit MetroTimes - Best Online Forum for Detroit-based Discussion 2015

ENJOY DETROITYES?


AND HAVE ADS REMOVED DETAILS »





Welcome to DetroitYES! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
DetroitYES! is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to DetroitYES! [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.