Blight Removal in Detroit, Mayor Duggan and a $200million bond issue

[iheartthed]

d) Jason Hackworth has a forthcoming book, Governing the Deprived City. He devotes three chapters to Detroit. He present evidence convincing him that if a city razes blighted homes but does not put the vacant land into productive use, the blight removal does almost nothing to raise property values or stabilize population in the neighborhoods where the blight was removed. Blight removal seems important to me but there is a literature saying that it may not be a productive use of tax dollars.

Exactly. This is why, in many cases, city governments shouldn't be in the demolition business. Some exceptions would be governments tearing down single use structures like malls and stadiums after they become defunct.

[Dumpling]

Somewhere I think I read that someone has arranged for
a recorded message for 911 calls. No, no, and no. That is
an unworthy improvement on calling 911 and getting no
answer, which has happened.

Properly improving 911 response would go deeper than
staying away from recorded messages and making sure
all calls are answered quickly, competently, and respectfully
[[truly a difficult task) or at least answered [[that shouldn't
be hard).

[Dumpling]

A lot of decisions being made in cities and elsewhere are
much more investment bank friendly than citizen friendly.

Selling the Blue Water Bridge would be another instance
of this. This would very likely be better for the
investment bank[[s) than people working at or near
the bridge or people paying the tolls after the bridge
changed hands. Not to mention...private bridge owners
sometimes do like to fund campaigns for state
representatives and senators who then tend to
look out better for the bridge owners than anyone
else.

[archfan]

Exactly. This is why, in many cases, city governments shouldn't be in the demolition business. Some exceptions would be governments tearing down single use structures like malls and stadiums after they become defunct.

Two thoughts:
1. If the city doesn't tear it down, the arsonists may burn it down. Then it's a problem for the overburdened fire department.
2. By the time a blighted building is being torn down, it is probably in a land bank, which makes it the city's [[or county's) property.