WE NEED A PUBLIC LAND USE POLICY DEBATE IN FLINT

GOOD MORNING FLINT!
Posted here by Terry Bankert
12/3/09
WHAT WE NEED IS PUBLIC DEBATE ABOUT THE FUTURE OF FLINT MICHIGAN.

The Flint Journal recently ran on MLIVE and article by Andrew Heller on Flint Shrinking City policy initiative. The article can be seen at http://blog.mlive.com/flintjournal/aheller/2009/12/flint_should_lead_by_shrinking.html

I wrote the following on the comment section of the article which follows.

I agree we should be managing decline gracefully, even creatively.

The market already is doing it. What is needed is public policy to clean up the edges of neighborhoods already in a state of abandonment and plan for the future.

How that policy is created is my difference with some.

I do not think that groups or people I did not elect or that are not accountable to an electorate should make the decision.

Specifically I mean the shrinking City policy should not be set by the following : Downtown business people, Mott Foundation, Land Bank leaders who ever they are, Phil Shaltz, smart aleck Flint Journal writers, college kids doing term papers, political gadflies, bloggers, posters, trolls, and even retired ombudsman.

We need an active debate, publicly involving decision makers.

If your grandmothers home is the only one left on the block and she does not want to leave should we make her?
Happy New year.

I then responded to Andrew Hellers, Yoopers first response.

YOOPER-So, Terry, what's the alternative?
TRB- Protect the rights of the home owner before exercising the oppressive act of state action through “Eminent Domain.

YOOPER-Continue providing full city services to that one home, or raise that person's bill to pay for a full block's services?
TRB-Why not upgrade the block , create a park, encourage new housing. Lets reward the Flint Citizen who has chosen to stick it out, not punish them. The real cost saving are minimal by taking that last house off the block against their will. When you ride in the country there are long stretches between housing so why not in Flint? I believe economic interests are attempting to assemble large blocks of land for the benefit of larger developers. There is no crisis that demands immediate action. The Flint Citizens through our elected leadership , public hearings and a public decision making process should be allowed to be fully engaged in this debate.

YOOPER-I agree it needs studying, but why invalidate so many opinions from the people you mention.
TRB-There are a variety of opinions on this issue. The opinions that matter are those of our elected leadership after full public debate. What’s going on now is a selling of the idea before public deliberation. I am demonstrating that there are opinions in opposition or at least the position that this should be done with get care.

YOOPER-Sometimes smart aleck columnists know a thing or two.
TRB- As rare as a blue moon, but then we did just have one.

YOOPER-Or is intelligence only the province of attorneys?
TRB-No it’s a large province with many actors. You should stop by.

I lastly responded to Andre Hellers second response.

ANDY-Terry, wonderful snide tone. Much appreciated.
TRB- I must have just finished one of your old articles. But what is wrong with my conclusion, “We need an active debate, publicly involving decision makers. “
　
ANDY-But listen, are you serious when you say the only opinions that matter are elected officials? Wow. That's stunning. I won't say it's dumb, especially in a democracy, but I will say I disagree strongly.
TRB- I did not say that. What I said was
“I do not think that groups or people I did not elect or that are not accountable to an electorate should make the decision. “ Meaning we need this issues debated before the City formally with citizens differing opinions voiced. The media ,you, are just cheerleading one side of the question.
I said “Specifically I mean the shrinking City policy should not be set by the following : Downtown business people, Mott Foundation, Land Bank leaders who ever they are, Phil Shaltz, ..[the usual suspects]…smart aleck Flint Journal writers, [you] college kids doing term papers, [ Good Job].. political gadflies, ..[they will surface]… bloggers, posters, trolls, [ mostly un named]..and even retired ombudsman. ..[that would be me]”
This debate means nothing until its in front of a duly elected public body. All opinions matter, but it is a public decision. There are differing opinions. What is wrong with wanting our elected leadership to weigh, ponder and debate these issues? I said “What is needed is public policy to clean up the edges of neighborhoods already in a state of abandonment and plan for the future. “
　
　
ANDY-And you say (without a question mark, I might add, snidely), "Why not upgrade the block , create a park, encourage new housing." Again, you're kidding, right? The reason for shrinking is lack of money, and you're saying add a park? Flint has an enormous park system that it already can't take care of.

TRB-GRAMMAR POLICE? What money is saved by shrinking? Just what does shrinking look like? Just what do we do with the existing utilities? What maintenance will be required? None possibly? What will be the impact on the rest of the system if one part is left un-maintained? If we have shrunk within the city does that mean no policing? What do we do with the squatters villages? No fire protection? What if the abandoned uncut grass and trees catches’ fire? Will the storm drains be sealed? Blaa, blaa, blaa. My point is there are many variables. These should be debated publicly before a public body with free debate. The pre-selling of this idea should seed debate, as here, not stifle it.

ANDY-I suppose there are ways to encourage new housing, but again, have you looked around? The area is filled with housing at 50 percent off.
TRB-The market will return slowly. Possibly it may be better to keep the blocks in a reduced state of maintenance, than to abandon by force this private property. Possibly by batching small groups of properties already vacant this will cause developments, market driven activities, to occur. Drive up MLK and look at the new construction. Its already happening. With under valued property the market will react.

ANDY-So why would someone build in a vacant area of Flint.
TRB- Because they own the Block? Because they own the house next door? Because they own the church next door. Because they can buy multiple parcels. I said
“We need an active debate, publicly involving decision makers.
If your grandmothers home is the only one left on the block and she does not want to leave should we make her?”
　
ANDY-One idea off the top of my light-headed head that might work is a version of homesteading. Let people who have a job have empty houses. Put them to some use.
TRB- Light-headed is your diagnosis. I am heartened to see you to realize there are opinions other than forced abandonment. Yours is an excellent idea. My point is that we must explore all alternatives before we put grandmother out of her home. We have not done that. All that’s going on now is that the “usual suspects “are pre selling the phrase “Shrinking City” with out knowing the implications.
　
ANDY-Ignorantly yours, Andy
TRB-Your choice of words. This might help, look up transparency in government, accountability , democracy, protection of individual property rights, and any treatise on the role of the media in a democracy. You probably have one somewhere!


Then another voice joined.

Posted by starvingartist January 02, 2010, 11:50PM

Terry, you are in dreamland if you think the people will slowly return. What are they going to do when they get here?

What do you want to do, talk this thing to death and then do nothing, just watch it all fall apart? We have a chance to be proactive, we have a chance to set the precedent for the country. Let's be proud of Flint! [end]

With this I concluded.

The people will slowly return.

Couples are still having babies.

A new business base will develop ,part of it is here.

What can Flint be to attract the new order?

So far all that is going on is a study that has generated media speculation that something called shrinking our city is a good thing.

The credit takers for this acclaim are lining up.

But what does shrinking a city mean? I agree we must do something.

That something is to create public policy through our elected officals.

These officals will protect our individual property rights while reorganizing Flint for the future. I am for us leading the country in how to downsize a city.

To date there is no plan only an idea. I support the idea.

The worst thing we could do is to adopt some half baked plan.

We have the resources to actually do this one right.

The right people in the Mayors office, the right people on the city council, a downtown and regional chamber of commerce with a track record of development success and an electorate willing to back up a well thought out initative.

Remembering AutoWorld a good idea executed horribly hurts us all.

The real work of this initative will soon begin by the people who can actually cause change.

This is just a discussion to see if your eyes are open.

===

Everyone has the right to their opinion.

Where are the elected City Council and Administrations opinions on this issue.

The policy of shrinking Flint should be developed publicy, not presented as a done deal.

I hope I have encouraged debate.

But I do intend to read the UofM full report.




Posted here
Terry bankert
http://www.flintfamilylaw.com/

Sphere: Related Content