Kildee Seeks Funds for Demolitions
U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee, who was instrumental in creating land banks in Michigan, has introduced legislation that would free up $1 billion in federal funds to demolish abandoned property in Michigan and several other states. Todd Spangler of The Detroit Free Press reports:
Kildee's legislation, which he plans to introduce today, would give
the 18 states and Washington, D.C., that were promised funding under a
foreclosure mitigation program the ability to spend up to 25% of that
money on demolitions. Under the original interpretation of the program,
which dates to 2010, the $7.6 billion in funding could not be used for
The legislation, which Kildee is sponsoring
along with Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Dayton, Ohio, wouldn't change
any of the existing allocations or spend more, it would only give states
the flexibility to move up to 25% of their total awards into
demolitions if they chose. The original program was intended to target
programs that helped homeowners pay back taxes, make mortgage payments,
or otherwise avoid foreclosures.
Kildee and his approach to "shrinking cities" like Flint and Detroit is profiled extensively in Teardown: Memoir of a Vanishing City by Gordon Young. The book is forthcoming from the University of California Press in June.
Have anyone suggested Homesteding blocks of the inter city. This could be done by blocks and taxes could be held back for some number of years. The land during this time could be farmed and cleanup. Great thing about it the water and sewer are in. The land could also be uesed for Cows, chickens or other live stock?ReplyDelete
One problem would be that farmers and ranchers can't afford urban property taxes, but those taxes are necessary to pay for the police and fire protection and other land-based services provided by the City, and there's no practical (or, perhaps, legal) way to provide a rural level of such protection (i.e. considerably less than the currently reduced Flint level) to some blocks but not others.Delete
The City *might* be legally able to "de-annex" significant chunks of its area, back to the County. If that were done, the services provided within such a detached parcel would be those provided by the County, or by a Township. I don't think a de-annexation capability currently exists in State law, though, so Lansing support would be needed. And, I'm pretty sure the legal complexities would be such that that wouldn't be considered for individual blocks, especially if they weren't contiguous to a City boundary.