So - why can't Detroit just get smaller? Stupid question alert!

**Danny** · January-07-10, 12:33 PM

It's possible to have certian areas in Detroit ghettohoods to be broken off into smaller pieces. However it's take to take some bureaucratic voting from the State Boundry Commission to happen. If a certian Ghettohood of Detroit is to be broken off, a void must must be filled with a independent city. A new city charter based government must be established and along to its own police and fire Dept. and city services. Access to water, electricity and gas and oil must be founded. It must have a public library system and a proposed school district. That would take lots of money. Then that certian former Detroit ghettohood and business district must pay off the piece the debt from its city budget shortfall it which it not going to be cleared at all. For example when Oak Park voters decided to annex the Hasidic Jewish community of 10 Mile Rd. and Greenfield Rd. from Royal Oak Township in 2001 and the industrial complex in 2003, Oak Park citizens have to pay the piece of R.O.T.'s budget shortfall.

Also having a certian Detroit ghettohood be broken off to a suburb would a tough challege. Most suburbs near the Detroit border is mostly white. Their neighborhoods are well kept up with little vacant lots, houses and almost non-existant drug houses. If the suburb want to annex a Detroit ghettohood when it mostly black with fewer crime, gang activity and flow of drugs, plenty of vacant lots and abandon buildings; that suburb not only have to pay of the piece of Detroit's debt, but also clean up its mess from it that piece of ghetto. So having Detroit broken off will be tough and risky ideal because of money, government bureaucracy, crime and brownfield development problems.

**Lowell** · January-07-10, 12:41 PM

Hamtramck's wall-building is legendary and has always been in place. Garret v. Hamtramck is a good primer.

**Hermod** · January-07-10, 12:44 PM

I think that Lowell is saying to have the city "de-annex" those areas to Wayne County as "unincorporated county land". Wayne County would pitch a fit and the case would drag on in the courts for a long time. Wayne County would become responsible to re-establish the townships in those areas and provide county sheriff law enforcement, establish volunteer fire departments [[GFL), and contract with Detroit for water and sewer.

**Detroitnerd** · January-07-10, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Lowell

Hamtramck's wall-building is legendary and has always been in place. Garret v. Hamtramck is a good primer.

Actually, that's a reference to perennial mayoral candidate Richard Fabiczak. Last time he ran for the Hamtramck mayoralty, the former Shopper's World security guard's platform included a plank to end the war in the Middle East and to build a wall around Hamtramck.

**daddeeo** · January-07-10, 01:07 PM

This may not be a stupid question but a naive one. This is not a Sims game where you can pick up people and places and move them around.
It will take a long time [[if ever) for the tax base to be raised in Detroit. Downsizing will be the norm until then. No one is going to annex parts of Detroit.

**Lowell** · January-07-10, 01:08 PM

Come to think of it The Great Wall of Hamtramck might have some tourist potential! We talked about that in Highland Park for a while and figured that the toll gates on I75, the Lodge, Davison and Woodward would pay for it.

**Hypestyles** · January-07-10, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Fury13

A lot of Detroiters are still chasing that pie-in-the-sky vision of the city eventually becoming repopulated.

true, indeed..

as far as de-annexing... it's problematic.. do these neighborhoods get 'absorbed' by their suburban neighbors? my guess is most adjoining suburban towns are just point blank not interested... the new burden on city services, etc.

much better to leave detroit's boundaries as is, but get serious about aggressively removing blight, land-banking, incentives to move hangers-on from depopulated neighborhoods, etc. Detroit should have a lot more properly-managed greenspace than they do now.. urban foresting, new parks, etc.

**Hermod** · January-07-10, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Lowell

His new gerrymandered city would look something like this and recovery would be around the corner. Did I miss any cherries or include in bad ones?

Attachment 4694

Does your map represent the areas with the fewest people for retention??

**R8RBOB** · January-07-10, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by Fury13

A lot of Detroiters are still chasing that pie-in-the-sky vision of the city eventually becoming repopulated.

@ Fury13 and Hypestyles

You guys are looking at things too broad. It is not that Detroiters are chasing that pie-in-the-sky vision of the city eventually becoming repopulated, it is the entire region. I am not sure if you have noticed but Metro Detroit as well as the state is losing population. Businesses have packed up and fled to parts unknown, families have either lose their homes or left to find work out of state. If you are L. Brooks Patterson or Robert Ficano or the future Macomb Co. executive you want people to "repopulate" Detroit so that the "spillage" would repopulate your communities. Of course, without new industries coming to Michigan providing jobs it is a moot point but try not to minimized this to just a "Detroit" thing.

**RickBeall** · January-07-10, 02:56 PM

You can Gerrymander us into the Wayne County Wasteland, but Hamtramck will defend its own!

Hamtramck will defend its borders with a wall of IED's with jelly centers. The powdered sugar will explode in your hand, leaving your face a ravaged strawberry mess. Anyone approaching will instantly gain too much weight to run from the police, or ... be able to do much of anything really.

Five hundred pound Bunker Busters, or Bunk Bed Busters are also in development.

**Detroitnerd** · January-07-10, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by RickBeall

You can Gerrymander us into the Wayne County Wasteland, but Hamtramck will defend its own!

Hamtramck will defend its borders with a wall of IED's with jelly centers. The powdered sugar will explode in your hand, leaving your face a ravaged strawberry mess. Anyone approaching will instantly gain too much weight to run from the police, or ... be able to do much of anything really.

Five hundred pound Bunker Busters, or Bunk Bed Busters are also in development.

Paczki Claymores?

**DetroitPlanner** · January-07-10, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by Hermod

Does your map represent the areas with the fewest people for retention??

I don't get it either, Oakman and Warrendale are out, but Brightmoor is in? Why Keep so much of the SW side? This looks about as arbitrary ans any other political boundary!

**Ocean2026** · January-07-10, 07:13 PM

Maybe a better question would be what's wrong with Detroit losing population? Many small communities can thrive and bigger doesn't necessarily make better. In the reverse you see in fast -growth places many saying they want no growth.

A problem in this situation is that the people leaving Detroit are higher edcuation and income people and that's not good. If it were the unemployed and criminal element leaving, who knows?

**English** · January-07-10, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by R8RBOB

I am not sure if you have noticed but Metro Detroit as well as the state is losing population.

Yep. SE Michigan played... and it lost. Game, set, match.

**R8RBOB** · January-07-10, 07:29 PM

Originally Posted by English

Yep. SE Michigan played... and it lost. Game, set, match.

You could say that SE Michigan lost because it was determined to isolate Detroit and by doing so it crippled the region.

**Det_ard** · January-07-10, 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by R8RBOB

You could say that SE Michigan lost because it was determined to isolate Detroit and by doing so it crippled the region.

You could say that, but I think you'd be wrong since you're ignoring the fundamental cause of SE Michigan's particularly hard fall, the heavily auto-based economy.

**R8RBOB** · January-07-10, 07:56 PM

Originally Posted by Det_ard

You could say that, but I think you'd be wrong since you're ignoring the fundamental cause of SE Michigan's particularly hard fall, the heavily auto-based economy.

DUH!!! Everyone knows that.

Retroit · January-07-10, 10:15 PM

You can put your red crayons away - Detroit politicians are not going to willingly shed Detroit of their most loyal voters.

**Lowell** · January-07-10, 11:30 PM

Depends on which politicians you are talking about. To many it would shed their opposition. I would bet very few, if any, high up in Detroit government lived outside the cherry zone.

**MJCMEX** · January-07-10, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by Retroit

You can put your red crayons away - Detroit politicians are not going to willingly shed Detroit of their most loyal voters.

Aw! I wanted to play with MY red crayons.

Actually Retroit makes an excellent point. The local politicians are not going to redistrict their way out of office.

**RickBeall** · January-08-10, 12:08 AM

MJCMEX, has a point, find the self interest, and you find the real reasons for most everything.

**Rockin' Best** · January-08-10, 10:01 AM

From what I understand, Discovery Net did some shooting in Detroit for its series "Life After People." The image of areas of the city going feral and being overtaken by the brush is certainly rather haunting. Especially when one considers why this has taken place. The city will probably remain in its same physical size, but of course, it will never
look the same. And, that can be both positive and worthy of some regret, depending on the specific conditions at hand. Something new will inevitably come about. We just don't know for sure what that might be.

**Fnemecek** · January-08-10, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by DetroitDad

I was under the impression that the outer areas were still relatively decently populated. It is the centers that are heavily depopulated and in the worst shape.

Compare Joy Road and Evergreen Avenue with Brush Park or Gratiot and Mack.

Indeed. On top of that, I can assure everyone that folks in this part of town are getting tired of paying 2 - 3 times as much in taxes as our suburban neighbors and getting more excuses than services.

I could easily see a few sections of Detroit becoming their own cities. The question is: what happens to the rest of Detroit when it loses the tax subsidy that these neighborhoods provide?

**Fnemecek** · January-08-10, 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by Retroit

You can put your red crayons away - Detroit politicians are not going to willingly shed Detroit of their most loyal voters.

There's Detroit politicians and then there's Detroit voters.

Every politician in Detroit was adamantly opposed to electing the City Council by district. However, the voters of Detroit said, "tough, we're doing it anyway."

**Hermod** · January-08-10, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by Fnemecek

Indeed. On top of that, I can assure everyone that folks in this part of town are getting tired of paying 2 - 3 times as much in taxes as our suburban neighbors and getting more excuses than services.

I could easily see a few sections of Detroit becoming their own cities. The question is: what happens to the rest of Detroit when it loses the tax subsidy that these neighborhoods provide?

The elephant in the room is race. The feds and courts will not allow annexations or deannexations which affect racial voting strengths and patterns. Any modification of Detroit boundaries must proceed under those strictures.