Discuss Detroit Archives - Beginning January 2006 Replacing SEMCOG Previous Next
Top of pageBottom of page

Bvos
Member
Username: Bvos

Post Number: 1295
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 66.238.170.39
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 2:10 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

At yesterday's meeting of regional politicians, it appears that KK and Sharron McPhail proposed replacing SEMCOG with a Detroit and first/second ring suburb organization. I can see their point in SEMCOG being edge community oriented, but replacing the whole thing and excluding the edge communities would be really short sighted and stupid.

http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll /article?AID=/20060321/OPINION 01/603210324/1068
Top of pageBottom of page

Jdkeepsmiling
Member
Username: Jdkeepsmiling

Post Number: 74
Registered: 01-2006
Posted From: 208.50.91.234
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 3:53 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Agreed, that would get us nowhere towards regional cooperation. Everyone needs to be able to be involved.
Top of pageBottom of page

Alexei289
Member
Username: Alexei289

Post Number: 1069
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.61.183.223
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 3:57 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

they could just change the makeup of SEMCOG... perhaps adopting a new charter... but replacing it is completely retarded...
Top of pageBottom of page

Dougw
Member
Username: Dougw

Post Number: 1025
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 136.1.1.154
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 4:02 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Interesting. Actually, if the threat of a competing organization motivates SEMCOG to change its voting makeup to be more population-based, that might not be a bad thing.

In fact, I wonder if replacing the whole thing with a somewhat smaller organization would be so terrible. At least as far as mass transit is concerned, it may make more sense to not include the edge communities. Do you *really* need (or even want) transit extending all the way out to Shelby Township or Wixom? They may be happier to not be included in the transit system and have slightly lower taxes. Everybody wins?

I guess the key would be that the smaller organization is still big enough to have critical mass, represent most of the metro area, and qualify for Federal funds for transit projects. (How big would it need to be to qualify? Danindc?) I'd think something including most of Wayne county, Washtenaw county, southern Oakland County (including the Woodward corridor) and southern Macomb would be big enough.

Maybe SEMCOG is just too big.

On the other hand, I suppose the excluded communities wouldn't be happy about not having a larger organization to lobby for road funding.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485

Post Number: 2462
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 66.238.170.40
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 4:13 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I prefer the smaller city-inner suburb organization. We have something like this in Chicago. They get along just fine.
Top of pageBottom of page

Hamtramck_steve
Member
Username: Hamtramck_steve

Post Number: 2816
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 136.181.195.65
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 4:21 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

To lop Shelby Township off the transit line would be to lose a huge pile of customers. Shelby's no longer the edge, anyhow. Try 10 miles north of there.
Top of pageBottom of page

Detourdetroit
Member
Username: Detourdetroit

Post Number: 175
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 68.255.237.71
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 4:52 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I hereby declare myself administrator of the regional District of Detroit, a newly formed city-state which leverages both Canadian and American jurisdiction in an innovative manner.

The District of Detroit includes areas associated with the 2000 Detroit MSA of Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Lapeer, Monroe and St. Clair counties, as well as those of Metropolitan Windsor, combining for a total regional population of nearly 5 million persons, just behind the District of Columbia MSA.

This radical change in organizing principle was facilitated through the State of Michigan and Federal goverment during recent deliberations over archaic home rule provisions in Michigan that had become wasteful and counter productive.

Liberalized laws regarding internationalized commerce, immigration and labor have since been ratified to facilitate concentrated economic development throughout the land. The District of Detroit has centralized and coordinated jurisdiction over metropolitan land use planning, civil law, water distribution, schools, transportation and roads, and certain regional cultural amenities, and can levy regional taxes to ensure sustainable funding mechanisms.

County function in the district has been eliminated and each municipal government that formerly administered a narrowly focused and often provincialized base is now represented by a population-based council that meets on a regular basis and answers to a regionally-elected administrative body, headed by me, Doctor Detroit.

Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1354
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 5:41 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It seems that this is more transit-related than anything else. SEMCOG is merely the federally designated MPO that conduits funds--not the regional transportation authority.

Instead of pushing to undermine SEMCOG, which in my opinion is counterproductive, why doesn't the City of Detroit engage with the inner-ring suburbs to get DARTA off the ground? Otherwise, create a mechanism within the city government that affords better transportation planning to work in concert with SEMCOG? After all, the reason SEMCOG isn't out there advocating for transit money is because no one is requesting it!

This grandstanding BS has got to stop if Detroit wants to get anywhere.
Top of pageBottom of page

Upinottawa
Member
Username: Upinottawa

Post Number: 244
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 198.103.184.76
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 6:02 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Other than the passage of appropriate legislation, are there other legal impediments to the creation of a Detroit/inner ring suburb DARTA? Can the interested muncipalities join without the approval of their respective county?

I would think the inner ring burbs would be somewhat interested in a transit initiative with the city to keep the inner burbs competitive.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1355
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 6:23 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

From what I understand, Michigan municipalities and charter townships are chartered of the State of Michigan. Counties don't have much actual power other than courts, welfare, community colleges, roads, and drain commissioner (There may be other powers of which I'm not aware, but they don't run school districts, police, fire, etc. county-wide like they do in other states.) It does not seem like counties have authority to prevent one of their subunits from joining such an authority.

Was SMART created by legislation of the state government? Because, ya know, all it would take is Detroit merging DDOT with SMART to create a truly regional authority, but that would be too easy.

The way I see it, if Maryland, Virginia, the District of Columbia, and Congress can resolve their differences (which, believe me, are far greater than those in SE Michigan) to form a transit authority, then there's no reason it can't be done wholly within SE Michigan.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 3368
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.172.95.197
Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 8:46 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yes, there is a reason why it can't be done: a culture clash you will find almost nowhere else in the country, at least not on this scale. Regionalism is avoided because everyone is afraid of losing power to eachother.

IMO, while this is a PR stunt, it may actually help in the long run. Plus, I don't see why this can't be taken a step further and create, and Detroit stay in BOTH SEMCOG and the newly created inner-ring organization to handicap the outerring sprawlburbs and show how much they ware hurting themselves. Drastics steps need to be taken by someone, and soon, and maybe this will get the far-outs to wake up.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jsmyers
Member
Username: Jsmyers

Post Number: 1495
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 69.213.205.130
Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 12:05 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I agree that it seems to be a PR stunt, but maybe PR isn't exactly the right thing to call it. Maybe a negotiation tactic.

The good thing is that it means Detroit's leadership is now putting pressure on SEMCOG, not just small groups likes TRU, MOSES, and the Michigan Suburbs Alliance.

I believe that Detroit always had the power, it is good to see them exercising it. I've often thought that SEMCOG harms Detroit not despite Detroit, but with the help of Detroit, because of disconnected or short-sighted leadership.

But....the Freep is right, this region needs one regional bodies, not two.

How about a regional government that is responsible for many things, like HMCA and SEMCOG functions, the zoo, water, transportation, cobo, the airport, etc, that is formed with elected representatives districted exactly the same as the state house or senate?

It wouldn't be more government, it would be consolidated governement.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 3374
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.172.95.197
Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 12:14 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

That's the thing, regional government is only popular to Detroit if it's run like a house (i.e. by population of individual cities), and to the suburbs only if run like the a senate (i.e. equal representation regardless of size). The region has not been able to get beyond that.

IMO, if it takes Detroit pulling out and taking the inner-ring/urban suburbs as its allies to show the outer-ring/sprawlburbs what it is missing out on, so be it. I fear that cities like Livonia, just as an example, will never get on the regional bandwagon unless forced to. It's like waiting around for a train that's never going to come.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dougw
Member
Username: Dougw

Post Number: 1027
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 68.252.4.228
Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 12:58 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Good points Lmich, I think it may help one way or another, whether via refocusing SEMCOG, or forming a more appropriately-sized organization, which could at least work on getting DARTA going, if nothing else.


quote:

To lop Shelby Township off the transit line would be to lose a huge pile of customers.



Eh, I doubt it. What percentage of Shelby Township residents need to use transit on a regular basis? (The tax base loss would be more substantial, though.) It's not like Livonia opting out, creating more of a swiss cheese problem since it's so much closer to Detroit... that's a more serious problem IMO.

(Ok, Shelby Township isn't the edge edge anymore, but it's still pretty far out there...)
Top of pageBottom of page

Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell

Post Number: 2391
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 66.167.58.120
Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 2:10 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Wrong direction completely, SEMCOG [dreadful acronym] needs to be expanded, if anything, and given teeth by state mandate to consolidate public safety, water, drainage, power, gas, care of the indigent, education and other basic needs. It also needs to include Essex County in any way possible as much as international law and treaty allows.

Our divisions are killing our international metropolis economically.

"The sign of a failed ship is when the captain cries 'Every Man for Himself'."
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 3377
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.172.95.197
Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 3:14 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Is it such a bad idea for Detroit to leverage itself especially when much of suburban leadership has pretty much told Detroit to Go to Hell on issue after issue (i.e. mass transit, Cobo Expansion...)? I think it's about time Detroit grew some balls and moved its weight around to effect some change. Lowell, really, tell me how else Detroit is supposed to bargain with the like of Patterson and other's who seem to understand nothing other than threats, and use the same tactic masterfully?
Top of pageBottom of page

Hamtramck_steve
Member
Username: Hamtramck_steve

Post Number: 2818
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 69.209.177.70
Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 7:53 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Doug, I may have mistyped by calling them "customers". Call them "potential customers." Shelby residents may not currently use mass transit, but Shelby is chockful of the type of professionals who successfully use mass transit in other cities. To leave them out of any planning is stupid.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.