Concept: Give abandoned homes to city workers?

[Crumbled_pavement]

I was on the Freep.com [[Mayoral Candidate Interviews) looking at the interviews given to both Ken Cockrel, Jr. and Dave Bing and one of the posters asked an interesting question. He suggested instead of the city tearing down abandoned homes that the city instead give those homes to police officers and fire fighters who currently live outside the city. I think this is an interesting idea. In my opinion it would take homes that are a detration to the city and make them an asset to the city [[productive neighbors, taxpayers, etc). I would go a bit further and give the homes away to any city workers [[obviously some criteria would have to be determined but current residency would not be one). I think this could also help the mayor's negotiation of reducing salaries for workers [[10% pay cut). The biggest expense most people incur is a place to live. If that was free, or near free, it would be like a pay raise even if the worker took a 20% pay cut. It is one creative way to deal with the glut of abandoned homes.

What are some other creative uses for abandoned homes that could benefit the city beyond just tearing them down? Granted, I am only referring to homes that can be renovated, not structures that are so derelict that they cannot be repaired.

[Russix]

Wow suddenly your paying city income and property tax, what a deal!

[lilpup]

AND you can't get rid of your [[much bigger) house and yard in suburbia!

[detr0itkid]

AND you can't get rid of your [[much bigger) house and yard in suburbia!

Houses are selling just fine when priced properly. Home owners are just unwilling to admit that property value is way down and wont be going back up any time soon. Like 10-20 years.

Most houses in the city are bigger than most houses in the suburbs. That is why they are messed upin the first place. It takes a lot more to maintain and operate a 2500 square foot 1920s detroit house than it does to maintain a 1200 sq ft 1950s ranch in the suburbs, people couldn't afford it.

I work on forclosures so I go to about 20 houses per week for the past 5 years.
In planned neighborhoods/subdivisions most detroit houses have lager yards than suburban homes. Although in the suburbs, especially further out suburbs, you do have more free standing homes with huge yards.

[detroitchef]

That idea sucks.
Like the city workers aren't punished enough, now you want to saddle them with the abandoned homes? What if they don't want one? We already abolished the silly residency clauses in their contracts. Simply pay them a fair wage and stop allowing folks like KK to screw with their ability to do their jobs.

Have you ever looked at the Fire or Police Commission boards? Art Blackwell and Rev. Holley sitting on those things, trying to decide which cops and firefighters deserve to keep their jobs? And now, instead of paying a fiar wage, spending money on equipment and programs to help them do their job, you're going to saddle them with some broken down and decrepit houses?

[Crumbled_pavement]

instead of paying a fiar wage, spending money on equipment and programs to help them do their job, you're going to saddle them with some broken down and decrepit houses?

Where in this concept did anyone say they had to take one of these houses? And if you listened to the interviews that I posted in my initial post, BOTH mayoral candidates already said PAY CUTS and JOB CUTS are coming. They don't receive a fair wage now? I got bad news then. They're pay is going to go down, they're jobs are going to be cut. Detroit is no longer a city of 1.8M residents and can't afford to staff for that. As far as I am concerned these houses can be given away free to anyone. It's just a concept. Got a better one, then spit it out. Or should we just leave these abandoned homes sitting and rotting for 20 years then bulldoze them over like we have been doing for the last 5 decades!

[Prodigal_Son]

I'm afraid that many city workers wouldn't accept the offer. You have to be a unique individual to move into the city right now, especially into an older home. Living in a 100-year-old beauty of a house is the best thing that ever happened to many Detroiters, but the value is hard to communicate to an outsider.
I don't think you can "push" people into the city, but I do think there are thousands of people in Michigan [[and tens of thousands in America) who would have a vision for living in Detroit, if they really thought about it.

Perhaps what we need is a massive PR campaign. But please don't put the city in charge of it! They're wasting enough money, and they'd be likely to make -- shall we say -- less than wise budgetary decisions.

If anyone is working on a PR project like I mentioned above, I'd love to help.

My website: http://risefromashes.wordpress.com/

[Locke09]

Maybe city workers can be given preference. Definitely police oficers because they help to stabilize neighborhoods. But why not also includeanyone who is willing to bring them up to code and live in them at least 10 years. No more absentee landlords needed.

Maybe they should also be able to demonstrate that they have the financial means to bring them up to code and maintain them.

[Sludgedaddy]

...what a wonderful concept! And while you're day dreaming of a Worker's Utopia, let's give Ireland back to the Polish.

[Crumbled_pavement]

...what a wonderful concept! And while you're day dreaming of a Worker's Utopia, let's give Ireland back to the Polish.

Or maybe you could come up with a better idea since that is the question I asked you!

AND you can't get rid of your [[much bigger) house and yard in suburbia!

Why can't you?

[lilpup]

Why can't you?

because the sales market sucks

After being laid off locally my brother just got a new job in Port Huron. He'll be commuting because houses in their neighborhood aren't selling right now.

[westsideffd]

Until the issues of schools and crime are addressed it just will not be appealing to the the young families.