Belanger Park River Rouge
NFL DRAFT THONGS DOWNTOWN DETROIT »



Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 34 of 34
  1. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by firstandten View Post
    Maybe a more direct approach would be in order. The city could alway use its powers of Eminent domain to clear out and package certain areas for economic development [[industrial or residential).
    In part, this is the mechanism that was used in Youngstown. However, I believe that in Detroit today, thanks to Hathcock v. Wayne, eminent domain may no longer be used for this purposes. I have been researching alternative mechanisms for accomplishing rightsizing, mostly market-based approaches, and will ostensibly have a thesis on the topic by the end of the summer, but we'll see.

  2. #27

    Default

    I'd think the U.S. Supreme Court decision from 2005 would override that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London


    And I'm totally in favor of seeing condemned and abandoned buildings bulldozed for economic redevelopment, but not well-maintained residences, with owners who pay their taxes. Kicking some little old lady out of a house she's owned for 50 years so you can put up a shopping mall is just wrong.

  3. #28

    Default

    or it could be that the more rabble rousey among us will go constitutional:

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....43908e5d.html

    Support Council by Districts www.councilbydistricts.org.

    Sign the petition
    Circulate the petition
    Donate online

  4. #29

    Default

    There should be AT LEAST 15 districts, not seven.

    More districts would:

    -- Reduce the amount of power wielded per councilmember.

    -- Possibly allow for the election of "minority" [[read: Latino) representatives.

  5. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 48202 View Post
    The ballot language for Detroiters for Council by Districts indicates that “The election commission shall, to the greatest extent possible, establish wards that are compact, contiguous, and of equal population.” This proposal would create 7 wards of approximately 125,000 residents each.

    Nobody is proposing moving residents from one part of the city to another. Equating this with Council by Districts is a fear tactic. Don’t fall for fear tactics. Support Council by Districts.
    It's not about "supporting council by districts" or not supporting it. It's about using the forum to engage in a serious discussion of the council by district plan. You seem intent on seeing the measure passed, that's fine but it seems that in the heat of the campaign you are resorting to typical tactics of not acknowledging that your position has any drawbacks whatsoever. There are negatives to any system of representation. I'm not against council by districts, I just think we'll end up with a better plan in the end if we don't ignore anything that might be bad about council by districts.

  6. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fury13 View Post
    There should be AT LEAST 15 districts, not seven.

    More districts would:

    -- Reduce the amount of power wielded per councilmember.
    -- Possibly allow for the election of "minority" [[read: Latino) representatives.
    interesting-- perhaps arrange districts along police precincts..
    would a larger council then perhaps be a non-paid position, or at best, part time? hmm...

  7. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andylinn View Post
    In part, this is the mechanism that was used in Youngstown. However, I believe that in Detroit today, thanks to Hathcock v. Wayne, eminent domain may no longer be used for this purposes. I have been researching alternative mechanisms for accomplishing rightsizing, mostly market-based approaches, and will ostensibly have a thesis on the topic by the end of the summer, but we'll see.
    let us know, Andy...

  8. #33
    EastSider Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by humanmachinery View Post
    I'd think the U.S. Supreme Court decision from 2005 would override that.
    The Kelo decision doesn’t block stricter controls at the state level, such as Michigan ’s in the Hathcock case. In fact, they cited the Michigan case, IIRC.

    Given the history of abuse of eminent domain in the state, I wouldn’t support its use to “rightsize” the city.

    At some level, we’re overthinking the “rightsizing” issue. The people are moving out already. There are plenty of urban prairie streets on the east side where the city currently provides nothing [[except street resurfacing?!?!) already. Simply post signs at the designated boundaries, “You are now entering a nature preserve” and let the built environment disintegrate on its own.

  9. #34

    Default

    donate to www.councilbydistricts.org. today! any amount is appreciated. we've got a small army of petition gatherers out there right now. sign the petition. circulate the petition. we need your support to make this a reality!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

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.