Voters on Nov. 8 will have several important choices to make regarding the future of Detroit. Among these choices are two initiatives that address goals to provide community benefits for local development projects, Proposals A and B.
Proposal A, sponsored by Detroit citizens, says that if a developer requests tax breaks or reduced land transfers with a value of at least $300,000 and their project investment is $15M or more, that they should collaborate with the community to discuss benefits for the immediate neighborhood that will host the project. This discussion results in a legally-binding agreement, enforceable in a court of law.
Proposal B, approved for the ballot in a 6-3 City Council vote (in which I voted “No”), says that developers who request tax breaks or reduced land with a value of at least $1M and their project investment is $75M or more, would participate in a discussion of desired benefits, however with no legally-binding agreement as the outcome.
While questioning threshold levels that trigger CBA discussions, the answers did not appear to be data-driven. After researching all the developments since January 2014 that have received tax breaks, my office identified 55 projects. Under Prop A, 11 projects would qualify for a community benefits plan. Under Prop B, only one project qualified.
The community, frustrated with Council’s slow movement, created their own ordinance and launched a drive to have the measure placed on ballot. They collected over 5,400 signatures from Detroiters, who agreed they should have a seat at the table of dialogue for development deals. This strong voice of the people of Detroit, those who have encountered high taxes, shootings, increased parking fines, rising water bills and housing foreclosures, spoke loudly to me through their petition drive, so I supported their efforts.
Opponents of Proposal A, terrified at the prospect that it might pass, have launched a misinformation campaign to confuse and disoriented voters. They have used the image of former Mayor Coleman Young in a mailing to our seniors who historically vote by absentee ballot, to make them think he supports Prop B. They began a “just say no” drive for both proposals. They claim 100,000 workers are against Prop A, but have not produced petitions or signatures. A local newspaper (not this one) even erroneously reported that a project was fined $500M because they had not hired 51% of Detroiters in trades jobs (to support the claims of Prop B). Some have even attempted to circulate a rumor that I have backed away from Prop A. That is about 200 miles away from the truth.
I support Prop A because it is the right thing to do. Prop A will not stop developers from coming to Detroit. It will not stop job growth in our city. To suggest that I wouldn’t want jobs in a city with such high unemployment and “never-been-employed” rates is ludicrous. Some say Prop A invites suburban census tracts to participate in Detroit’s community benefits process, but since they do not grant the tax breaks or free land, they have no standing in the discussion.
What I insist on is an ordinance that includes and involves the community in Detroit’s rebirth. Proposal A allows that opportunity to exist.
About Post Author
