July 31, 2010
Jim's in Royal Oak | David Lewinski
Blog

Post No. 5

Posted By: Michael Doyle, 9/26/2007
 
For my fifth and final post here, I want to address a concept which has not been discussed nearly as much as it should: a borough system for Metropolitan Detroit. What does that mean exactly? Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties would be incorporated into one mega-city of five million residents with each former county being a borough - much like New York did in 1898 and Toronto did as recently as 1954. This is not a new concept, but it has never been seriously considered, primarily because of the social-economical-political-racial rift between the more economically powerful suburbs and the core City of Detroit. This rift was not created by, but is perpetuated to this day by small-minded folk jockeying for power in both places.

It's a given that neither side would want to share political power with the other.  The mental fortresses built of fear are too strong. But imagine if you will, a Detroit with the diversity and economic power of the entire region - shared services, shared infrastructure and shared tax base. The transition may be more difficult than the joining of East and West Germany, but I truly think it would be in the best interest of all parties and all the residents of the region in the long run.  

In theory, the former geographic City of of Detroit would share tax revenue from the entire the region, while the outer suburbs would be absorbed into a newly defined Detroit City with a revived core. The economic advantages seem to be clearly in the former Detroit's favor, but the social and political power would shift to the outer boroughs (due to population figures)... at first. Think twenty, fifty years in the future, after the most stubborn politicians have long since retired.  Imagine a unified Detroit that extends as north as the neighborhood of Ortonville and as far west as Canton Village. Imagine five million people sharing the responsibility for 3,913 square miles, rather than their individual enclaves. Before you say this sound like a communist plot, this is exactly how many real, vibrant cities in the North America work.

As one city, many of the social divides that tear us apart would be rendered irrelevant. A singular metro Detroit municipality will not solve the social and economic problems we face, but it would remove some of the barriers which help them thrive. There would still be richer and poorer neighborhoods, but posturing would be pointless. The point is: we'd all be in it together. Royal Oak, Ferndale, Corkrtown and Midtown would all be neighborhoods of Detroit, much like Greenwich Village, Williamsburg, Astoria and Midtown are neighborhoods of New York. We wouldn't lose the character of any area, but we would lose some of the mental boundaries which keep us apart. A real metropolitan mass transit system could be a reality for the first time, without municipalities blocking bus service for thinly veiled racist motives.

A true metropolitan City of Detroit would take time - probably a generation or two to really work, but it would be worth it. Re-drawing city lines won't solve the "us vs. them" mentality, but it would be a huge step in the right direction. It would also return Detroit to it's status an economic and cultural powerhouse. In the eyes of the world, Detroit could be one of the greatest cities in the U.S. once again. (In my sick version of justice, there would some satisfaction in seeing all who fled to the farthest reaches of the area being forced to take responsibility for the city that provided their existence, as well as forcing those within the city to acknowledge the importance of the surrounding communities.)

This macro outlook addresses some issues, but a micro outlook is needed as well.  What makes today's Detroit strong and relevant is not big industry, but its entrepreneurs and DIY'ers. In this hypothetical mega-city of the future, we must more than ever foster and promote the diversity and individuality that makes our place unique.

Andy Malone is a life-long Detroit resident, artist, architect, community leader and DIY'er.  I've been fortunate to be a close friend and professional colleague with Andy for some twelve years, to serve on the CAID board of directors and co-curate The Other Auto Show with him. On the topic of Detroit entrepreneurship, Andy says, "Detroit necessitates an entrepreneurial spirit that creative people thrive on. Almost every Detroiter I know has done (or valiantly attempted) extraordinary things. It's not unusual to run into someone who started their own magazine, painted a mural, opened a restaurant, started a poetry festival, or shot a feature length movie (sometimes simultaneously.)  In other cities, the creative resources are jealously protected by the established community.  Detroit is about sharing. We have no choice." 

He continues, "Apathy is my least favorite aspect of Detroit. From political corruption to litter on the streets, apathy is the root of everything that's wrong with the city. There are so many neighborhoods that are at a tipping point right now. As trite as it sounds, the smallest improvement could have a lasting impact. The best way to improve Detroit is also the most basic: Create a close-knit network of positive nodes throughout. Slow's and CAID are good examples of businesses that moved into neglected neighborhoods and challenged people's perception of Detroit."

From a network of positive individual actions to a metro-area wide sense of shared responsibility and pride, the combination of creativity, passion and midwestern hard work are the keys to a better metropolitan Detroit for everyone.  If we can open our minds and remove fear and apathy from the equation, there is no limit to what we can do and what we can become.
Comments:
Thursday, September 27, 2007 12:40 AM by Jamie Latendresse
Having read this, I can't remember the last time I had such a vivid daydream about my hometown's future. The image you've posited is the kind that we who see through the city's current facade hope and work for. Imagining it coming to fruition is damn blissful.
Thursday, September 27, 2007 9:36 AM by jim piana
Like Messrs. Doyle and Latendresse, I share a happy vision of what could be. Of course this vision is tempered with political and cultural realities of the area we live in, that’s the practical engineer-geist in me thinking too far ahead. But at any rate, I wonder what it would really take to push the often myopic leaders of our cities, counties, and state to see the light and seize on a regional vision? The City of Detroit in receivership? Mass budgetary crisis in the ‘burbs? Critical infrastructure failures? I submit that real leadership shouldn’t require these sorts of events to open its eyes.

Looking around, baby steps are being taken on this front, from shared services (such as fire and police) across neighboring municipalities to incubatory convergences of leaders to start discussing a real regional transit plan. But these are tactical in nature, designed to avoid the financial crises of the day in individual city budgets.

Where do we turn for leadership and vision that can drive real regional policy? Lansing lacks the courage to tackle such a large issue, county leaders protect their own empires. The only places I see vision that doesn’t have “us vs. them” as a central motivation is at the city (and really only suburban city, not the City of Detroit) government level. And in all practicality, this local support for regional policy simply can’t extend past nonbinding resolutions passed at city council meetings. There are also plenty of grassroots organizations out there focused on regional issues, but many of these are so focused on a single issue (transportation, or housing, etc), that a critical mass of issues as a unified strategy is hard to see.

Can a DIY groundswell focused on regionalism bring the same creativity we see in the arts and business community to governmental organizations? When, in the course of local events, does it become possible for a people to dissolve the political bands that have separated them from one another?
Thursday, September 27, 2007 1:47 PM by O_O
This was a very inspiring series of reports! We are the developers that we've been waiting for.

Harlem is a good example of wholistic urban planning. The developers didn't have to contend with the "chicken before the egg" problem because they improved the entire social infrastructure at the same time (schools, safety, housing, streetscape and commercial).

It required a focused effort, but it was well worth it.
Saturday, September 29, 2007 3:11 AM by Michael Doyle
I'm a little surprised that nobody has said that this proposal would "take political power in Detroit away from black people" or "no way my Bloomfield Hills taxes are going to service people in Detroit."

Perhaps the apathy in this region is so strong that a borough system is viewed as such an impossible pipe dream that it's not even worth giving thought to.

That's really messed up.

Will it take Detroit going into the receivership and fiscal disaster in the suburbs, or the L Brooks Pattersons and Barbara Rose Collins of the world being incarcerated or forcefully removed before drastic and necessary measures are seriously considered?

I hope not. I hope there are enough forward thinking people in the region to make this a reality. We need to step up and do it. as I said in the second post, "nobody is going to do it for you."
Sunday, September 30, 2007 6:35 PM by Michael Doyle
Thanks Jamie, Jim and O_O for the great comments. Very much appreciated. My last reply was mostly fishing for problems, because that's often the best way to get at solutions. Thanks to Jim Piana especially for asking "what it would take." That's the big question. I'd hate for this to get shelved as just another nice idea. Staying the course isn't working for Michigan, and it would be great if we could do something large scale before the 11th hour for once.

It's discouraging that visionary leaders like Al Gore and Dennis Archer don't want to run for political office anymore. Not that I can blame them one bit, but what does that say to potential leaders of our generation? Is the system so corrupt that we are more effective outside the political arena? Perhaps, but politicians are still in the position to make the decisions needed for real change. Who are the Gores and Archers of the future who will tackle the system?
Wednesday, December 05, 2007 9:55 PM by Ryan
Many people feel such an idea would mean they would have to give up the identity of their community.

Take Royal Oak for instance. I've read many view points from fellow Royal Oakers who like the idea of having their own police, DPS, firefighters, etc., and it is something they are proud of and would not like to see merged into one huge regional service shared by other communities (even if it did cut costs). Many Royal Oakers like the fact that they alone have the "local" power to add additional funding through millage requests or other ways. If the residents don't want it, then they vote the millage down and services are cut. People seem to like the fact that it's our choice, and not the choice of an enormous collection of communities who can't even agree with one another.

As one poster mentioned above, some baby steps are being made. Years ago Royal Oak stopped doing garbage collection inhouse, and joined a SE Oakland County regional group that is doing a good job in cutting costs associated to trash and recycling. I even believe we share animal control services with Berkley. :-)

But other services like fire, police, and schools especially are going to be a touchy subject to many, and their feelings need to be respected on this.

I'm not saying a disagree, because I actually like the idea. Only that if such an idea does move forward, it will be interesting to see how each and every community will agree upon what level of service is acceptable to them, and at what cost.

I will agree that some of the problem lies with our own politicians. I've had discussions with many people about how the Oakland County Board of Commissioners are almost an invisible entity to each of their communities. Nobody seems to know what these people do. Few of them rarely attend local City Commission Meetings on a regular basis (Clawson, Oak Park and Huntington Woods do but Royal oak certainly does not), and many complain they never even get a reply from their County Rep when they contact them (Myself included). I guess what I'm saying is if the representatives in Oakland County can't even talk to each other about "regionalization" in our own Oakland County, how will we have any hope getting Wayne, Macomb and Oakland County talking together?

Great topic! Thanks for the dialog everyone...
Wednesday, December 12, 2007 2:01 AM by Ryan
I thought of this blog posting while watching the latest Royal Oak special budget meeting last weekend. Some interesting discussion was brought up about possible regionalization in some of the services. If I had to take a guess, I believe many leaders of local municipalities would be very open to the idea of saving money though sharing many of the services (with the exception of getting rid of our own Police and Fire). I imagine though the problem lies with where do we begin?
Leave a comment
Name
Url
Comment

Submit