Read the competing ordinances that will be on the Nov. ballot

 Tuesday, August 16 the Detroit Elections Commission, Council President Brenda Jones, Corporate Council Melvin “Butch” Hallowell and City Clerk Janice Winfrey, moved forward the People’s Community Benefits Ordinance along with the ‘Enhanced’ Ordinance.

Both will be on the ballot in November. The People’s CBO was designated as Proposal A and the ‘Enhanced’ Ordinance will appear as Proposal B.

Detroiters in support of the People’s CBO packed the Election Commission Meeting and spoke passionately about the importance of following the Democratic process and moving the People’s CBO forward.

Inline image 2
We want to thank and congratulate those who have supported and worked relentlessly for real Community Benefits in Detroit! Moving the People’s CBO toward the ballot has been a tremendous effort and an important act of citizen-led democracy on display with over 5000 Detroiters signing the petition over an 8 week period. In the face of voter suppression and suspension of democracy, the right of community to organize around an issue and move it to the ballot has become one of the last vestiges of the democratic process accessible to everyday Detroiters.

Read them for yourself!

Read the People’s CBO – Proposal A on the November ballot

 

Read the ‘Enhanced’ Ordinance – Proposal B on the November ballot

Watch and Share the People’s CBO VIDEO

Visit Rise Together Detroit to learn more, get involved and support this grassroots effort.

Social Media: #RiseTogetherDetroit #CBO #DetroitPeoples

Read the People’s CBO – Proposal A on the November ballot

BY COUNCIL MEMBER ­­­­­­­­­________________________,

AN ORDINANCE to amend Chapter 14 of the 1984 Detroit City Code, Community Development, by adding Article XII, titled Community Benefits, which consists of Sections 14-12-1 through 14-12-7, to provide for the purpose and applicability of this article; to provide for definitions of terms used in this article; to require provision of Community Benefits and executed Community Benefits Agreements for certain development projects seeking public support for investments above certain threshold levels; to provide for exemptions for applicability of the article, and to provide for penalties and enforcement of the article.

IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF DETROIT THAT:

Section 1.  Chapter 14 of the 1984 Detroit City Code, Community Development, is amended by adding Article XII, Community Benefits, which consists of Sections 14-12-1 through 14-12-7, to read as follows:

CHAPTER 14.  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

ARTICLE XII. Community Benefits

Sec. 14-12-1. Purpose; Title

(a) It shall be the policy of the City of Detroit to require, wherever feasible, proportional community benefits as a condition of significant public support for development in the form of subsidies, tax abatements, below-market priced land, or other enhanced public resources.

(b) This article shall be known as the “Detroit Community Benefits Ordinance.”

Sec. 14-12-2. Definitions

(a) “Community Benefits” means the amenities, benefits, commitments, or promises described in Section 14-12-3(a)(1)b. and in Section 14-12-4.

(b) “Community Benefits Agreement” means the legally enforceable contract negotiated and agreed to as set forth in Section 14-12-3(a)(1).

(c) “Contractor” means any person, firm, partnership, limited liability company, corporation, joint venture, proprietorship, or other entity that enters into a contract for performance of construction work on the development project within the Host Community, including subcontractors of any tier.

(d) “Detroit Business” shall mean any of the following businesses, as defined in Section 18-5-1 of this code:

(1)  Detroit-based business

(2)  Detroit-headquartered business

(3)  Detroit-resident owned business

(e) “Development Agreement” means, for the purposes of this Article, the agreement or agreements between the City and the developer pursuant to which the City provides or commits Public Support for Investment for a Tier 1 Development Project, Tier 2 Development Project, or High Impact Development Project, regardless of the label or title affixed to such agreement.

(f) “High Impact Development Project” means any development project that, because of the nature of the development and/or the Host Community, is reasonably expected to produce disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental impacts, including social, esthetic, economic, physical, chemical, or biological impacts, in the Host Community. Determination  of whether a project is a High Impact Development Project shall be made by City Council as set forth in Section 14-12-3(a)(3).

(g) “Host Community” means the community within the census tract(s) where the development project is physically located and may also include communities within adjacent census tracts that may be adversely affected by the activities of the development project, as determined by the agreement among members of the Host Community representative organization to a Community Benefits Agreement, but shall in no case be smaller than the census tract where the development project is physically located.

(h) “Public Support For Investment” means either or both of:

(1)  direct or indirect transfer to the developer of city-owned land parcels that have a cumulative market value of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000) or more (as determined by the City Assessor or independent appraisal), without open bidding or priced below market rates (where allowed by law); or

(2)  Provision or approval by the City of other forms of public subsidies to the developer, including but not limited to tax abatements or grants, that are cumulatively valued at Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000) or more, but not including Neighborhood Enterprise Zones.

(i) “Tier 1 Development Project” means a development project in the City of Detroit that is expected to incur the investment of Fifteen Million Dollars ($15,000,000) or more during the construction of facilities or plant, or to begin or expand operations or renovate structures.

(j) “Tier 2 Development Project” means a development project in the City of Detroit that is expected to incur the investment of more than Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000), but less than Fifteen Million Dollars ($15,000,000), during the construction of facilities or plant, or to begin or expand operations or renovate structures.

Sec. 14-12-3. Providing Community Benefits; Community Benefits Agreements; when required.

(a) Upon submission of a site plan for a Tier 1 Development Project to the Planning and Development Department or its successor, if the developer intends to seek Public Support for Investment in the project it shall notify the department, and the department shall then forthwith request that a written notice be generated by the City Clerk’s office, informing the Host Community of the proposed project and of a scheduled organizational meeting.  The first organizational meeting for purposes of forming the Host Community representative organization to negotiate and execute a Community Benefits Agreement shall be called by the City Council Member or Members in whose district(s) the project is located.  The Council Member(s) shall schedule and call the first organizational meeting of the Host Community for purposes of forming the Host Community representative organization within twenty-one (21) days of the date of notice informing the Host Community of the proposed project.  Other than hosting the meeting, Council members and other City officials shall have no direct involvement in the processes of forming the Host Community representative or negotiating the Community Benefits Agreement.  The following standards and requirements shall apply to providing Community Benefits as a condition of receiving Public Support for Investment:

(1)   Tier 1 Development Project.

  1. For any proposed Tier 1 Development Project that requests or proposes the receipt of Public Support For Investment, the developer shall engage Host Community residents for purposes of entering into a legally enforceable Community Benefits Agreement between the developer and representative residents, businesses and nonprofit organizations, collectively comprising the Host Community representative party to the Community Benefits Agreement.
  2. The Community Benefits Agreement shall provide for Community Benefits as negotiated by the parties, and shall specifically address each of the following:

(1)  targeted benefits

(2)  low- and moderate-income housing,

(3)  quality of life or environmental mitigations,

(4)  neighborhood, infrastructure and amenities, and

(5)  community representation for the benefit of the Host Community in the development and post-development processes.

Although the Community Benefits Agreement shall specifically address each of the above issues, that does not mean that the parties are required to reach an agreement providing any particular benefit, only that each of the above subjects must be recognized in the written agreement using language agreed upon by the parties.

  1.  Unless good cause is shown by a developer that it should receive an exemption as provided in Section 14-12-5, the developer shall include a copy of the executed Community Benefits Agreement with the request for City Council approval for the Public Support For Investment.  Violation without good cause shown by a developer shall result in denial of approval for any such Public Support for Investment.

(2)  Tier 2 Development Project.  For any proposed Tier 2 Development Project that requests or proposes the receipt of Public Support For Investment, the developer may but is not required to engage the Host Community residents to execute a Community Benefits Agreement describing the Community Benefits to be provided by the developer in the manner described by Section 14-12-3(1).  If no Community Benefits Agreement is executed, however, the developer shall adopt and implement a Community Benefits Package, the terms of which shall be included in the Development Agreement.

(3)  High Impact Development Project.  For any proposed High Impact Development Project that requests or proposes the receipt of Public Support For Investment, Detroit City Council may determine that the requirements of Section 14-12-3(a)(1) shall apply.  Determination of whether a project is a High Impact Development Project shall be made by finding of City Council expressed in a resolution, after a public hearing requested by a resident of the Host Community and duly noticed and conducted for the purpose of ascertaining whether the projects meets the definition of a High Impact Development Project.  City Council may call on the assistance of the City Planning Commission, the Planning Department, and other resources to assist in its determination.  The developer and residents of the Host Community shall be entitled to speak at the public hearing.

Sec. 14-12-4. Community Benefits

(a) The following is a non-exclusive list of examples of Community Benefits that may be considered on a voluntary basis for inclusion in a Community Benefits Agreement, or in a Development Agreement:

(1)  Educational Programs, such as:

  1. Education in the City’s high schools, community colleges and other educational programs.

b. One or more adult education programs operated by one or more qualified administration or an administrative collaboration comprised of organizations that benefit residents of the Host Community, including but not limited to agencies such as the Partnership fro Diversity and Opportunity in Transportation.

  1. Actively supporting educational activities that provide employment opportunities for residents of the Host Community, including but not limited to programs through federal funds received annually and allocated by agencies such as the State’s Michigan Works! Partner, Detroit Employment Solutions Corporation, or another appropriate agency or entity.
  2. Providing annual Contractor readiness training for Detroit Businesses, through the United States Department of Transportation Bonding Education Program or other relevant training opportunities.
  3. Hosting annual Contractor information and networking sessions about upcoming contracting opportunities with the Michigan Department of Transportation in the City of Detroit.
    1. Providing program materials, training and support for Detroit Public Schools/CTE (DPS) or other educational institutions in the Host Community.
    2. Providing employment and career mentoring opportunities for youths who reside in the Host Community, including but not limited to the Michigan Department of Transportation’s Youth Development and Mentoring Program.

(2)  Land Use Programs:

  1. Actively promoting City real estate and investment opportunities in the Host Community through agencies such as the Michigan Prospectus or another appropriate real estate investment agency or entity.
  2. Providing additional recreational activities, parks, educational services, environmental amenities, housing capacity or other benefits in the Host Community.
  3. Providing funds for demolition of abandoned homes or other structures in the Host Community.

 

 

(3)Small Business Inclusion and Participation:

  1. Targeted outreach within the Host Community for Detroit-based small businesses, minority-owned business enterprises, women-owned business enterprises and relevant business organizations and chambers.
  2. Inclusion of Host Community Detroit-based small businesses, minority-owned business enterprises, women-owned business enterprises and relevant business organizations in pre-bid meetings and conferences with advance notice.
  3. Hosting annual procurement, contracting and hiring forums with information and networking sessions about upcoming procurement, contracting and hiring opportunities with the procurement department and Detroit Economic Growth Corporation in the City of Detroit.
  4. Meet with Host Community Detroit-based small businesses, minority-owned business enterprises, women-owned business enterprises and relevant business organizations to train, develop and prepare for potential contractual opportunities.
  5. Unbundling of construction work into bid sizes that will allow Detroit-based small businesses level competition, without restricting the project timelines.Assistance with access to bonding, lending, insurance, access to capital, procurement and other types of capacity-related assistance where necessary and available.

 

(4)  Provisions that require periodic reporting, the frequency to be determined by the parties, of activities and ongoing monitoring of compliance by the parties throughout the course of the project.

a. Provisions that require the parties to periodically meet and confer, the frequency to be determined by the parties, and disclose the parties’ activities and the status of compliance to the Host Community residents, and that require periodic public meetings with the opportunity for input and comments by Host Community stakeholders.

b. A community needs assessment regarding the Host Community at the developer’s expense.

c. An environmental and/or public health assessment of the impacts of the proposed development at the developer’s expense.

  1. Specified remedies for violation of the Community Benefits Agreement, which unless otherwise agreed to by the parties, may include, without limitation specific performance, liquidated damages, claw backs, or revocation or withdrawal of tax abatement and public subsidies, either directly by the City of Detroit, or by application to the Michigan Tax Tribunal or Michigan Tax Commission, as provided by law.

Sec. 14-12-5. Exemptions

(a)   The developer may request from the City Council a resolution exempting it from the requirement of entering a Community Benefits Agreement by demonstrating that:

(1)  Identifying a Host Community representative organization to negotiate with on behalf of the Host Community is infeasible or impractical; or

(2)  Good faith negotiations have occurred for a reasonable time period, but negotiations have reached an intractable impasse; or

(3)  Other exigencies make entering a Community Benefits Agreement infeasible in the particular instance.

(b)  To request an exemption, the developer shall

(1)  Provide to the City Council in writing the basis of its request,

(2)  State with particularity the efforts made by the developer to engage the Host Community and the efforts to reach accord on a Community Benefits Agreement, and

(3)  Document how it will otherwise seek to implement the purpose of this Article to provide Community Benefits.

Sec. 14-12-6. City as Third-Party Beneficiary; Development Agreement.

(1)  A Community Benefits Agreement under this Section shall include a provision that the City is an intended Third Party Beneficiary and as such the City may, in its discretion, enforce the Community Benefits Agreement.  Any Development Agreement shall not preclude, prevent, or otherwise limit the Host Community representative party or its successors from having standing to enforce a Community Benefits Agreement.  This subsection shall not be interpreted to change, alter, or diminish the legal and equitable duties, rights, and remedies of the parties to the Community Benefits Agreement.

Sec. 14-12-7. Penalties for Noncompliance; Enforcement;

(1)  The provisions of this Article are prescriptive in nature, and are set forth as required conditions to request, provision, and receipt of Public Support For Investment for Tier 1 Development Projects, Tier 2 Development Projects, and High Impact Development Projects.  Material failure to comply with the provisions of this Article may result in denial, suspension, terminate, and revocation, or withdrawal of Public Support For Investment, but shall not be subject to the penalties set forth in Sec 1-1-9 of this code.  Except, when obtained through substantial and material misrepresentation or fraud, the resolution of City Council approving the Public Support For Investment shall be  evidence of compliance with the provisions of this Article, and thereafter remedies shall be limited to enforcement of the Community Benefits Agreement and/or Development Agreement.

Section 2.  This ordinance is hereby declared necessary to preserve the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the People of the City of Detroit.

Section 3.  All ordinances or parts of ordinances that conflict with this ordinance are repealed.

Section 4.  In the event this ordinance is passed by two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council Members serving, it shall be given immediate effect and become effective upon publication in accordance with Section 4-118 of the 2012 Detroit City Charter.  Where this ordinance is passed by less than a two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council Members serving, it shall become effective on the thirtieth (30) day after enactment or on the first business day thereafter in accordance with Section 4-118 of the 2012 Detroit City Charter.

#END

Read the “Enhanced” Ordinance
http://www.detroitpeoplesplatform.org/read-the-enhanced-ordinance-proposal-b-on-the-november-ballot/

Read the ‘Enhanced’ Ordinance – Proposal B on the November ballot

S U M M A R Y
AN ORDINANCE to amend Chapter 14 of the 1984 Detroit City Code, Community Development, by adding Article XII, titled Community Benefits, which consists of Sections 14-12-1 through 14-12-5, to provide for the purpose and applicability of this article; to provide for definitions of terms used in this article; to require community engagement and community benefit for certain development projects seeking public support for investment above certain threshold levels; to provide for exemptions for applicability of the article, and to provide for enforcement of the article.

BY COUNCIL MEMBER__________________________________________:

AN ORDINANCE to amend Chapter 14 of the 1984 Detroit City Code, Community Development, by adding Article XII, titled Community Benefits, which consists of Sections 14-12-1 through 14-12-5, to provide for the purpose and applicability of this article; to provide for definitions of terms used in this article; to require community engagement and community benefit for certain development projects seeking public support for investment above certain threshold levels; to provide for exemptions for applicability of the article, and to provide for enforcement of the article.

IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF DETROIT THAT:
Section 1. Chapter 14 of the 1984 Detroit City Code, Community Development, is amended by adding Article XII, Community Benefits, which consists of Sections 14-12-1 through 14-12-5, to read as follows:

CHAPTER 14. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ARTICLE XII. COMMUNITY BENEFITS

Sec. 14-12-1. Purpose; Title
(a) The City is committed to community outreach and engagement that promotes transparency and accountability and ensures development projects in the City of Detroit benefit and promote economic growth and prosperity for all residents.
(b) This article shall be known as the “Detroit Community Benefits Ordinance.”
Sec. 14-12-2. Definitions
Community Benefits Provision means the agreement made by and between the Planning Director and the Developer which specifically addresses the issues raised by the NAC.

Enforcement Committee means a committee led by the City’s Corporation Counsel and composed of representatives from the Planning and Development Department, Law Department, Human Rights Department, and other relevant City departments as determined by the Planning Director.

Impact Area means an area determined by the Planning Director that includes all census tracts or census block groups in which the Tier 1 Project is located, and any other areas as determined by the Planning Director.

NAC means the Neighborhood Advisory Council.

Planning Director means the Director of the City of Detroit’s Planning and Development Department, or a member of the Planning Director’s staff working on behalf of the Planning Director.

Tier 1 Development Project means a development project in the City that is expected to incur the investment of Seventy-five Million Dollars ($75,000,000) or more during the construction of facilities, or to begin or expand operations or renovate structures, where the developer of the project is negotiating public support for investment in one or both of the following forms:
(1) Any transfer to the developer of City-owned land parcels that have a cumulative market value of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) or more (as determined by the City Assessor or independent appraisal), without open bidding and priced below market rates (where allowed by law); or
(2) Provision or approval by the City of tax abatements or other tax breaks that abate more than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) of City taxes over the term of the abatement that inure directly to the Developer, but not including Neighborhood Enterprise Zone tax abatements.

Tier 2 Development Project means a development project in the City that does not qualify as a Tier 1 Project and is expected to incur the investment of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) or more, during the construction of facilities, or to begin or expand operations or renovate structures, where the Developer is negotiating public support for investment in one or both of the following forms:

(1) Land transfers that have a cumulative market value of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000) or more (as determined by the City Assessor or independent appraisal), without open bidding and priced below market rates; or
(2) Tax abatements that abate more than Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000) of City taxes over the term of the abatement that inure directly to the Developer, but not including Neighborhood Enterprise Zone tax abatements.

Sec. 14-12-3. Tier 1 Projects.

(a) Community Engagement Process for Public Meeting.
(1) Prior to submitting to City Council a request for approval of Land transfers or Tax abatements related to a Tier 1 Project, the Planning Director shall hold at least one public meeting in the Impact Area as defined in this Section.
(2) The City Clerk shall forward notice of the public meeting via First Class Mail no less than 10 days before such meeting to all City of Detroit residents within three hundred radial feet of the Tier 1 Project. The notice shall include:
a. The time, date and location of the public meeting;
b. General information about the Tier 1 Project;
c. A description of the Impact Area and the location of the Tier 1 Project;
d. Information related to potential impacts of the Tier 1 Project and possible mitigation strategies; and
(3) In addition to the notice requirement contained in Subsection (2) of this section, the Planning Director shall work with the District Council Member or Members representing the district or districts where the Tier 1 Project is located and at least one At-large Council Member to ensure that local residents, businesses, and organizations, especially those located in the Impact Area and those expected to be directly impacted by the Tier 1 Project are informed of the public meeting.
(4) At the public meeting, the Planning Director will present general information about the Tier 1 Project, discuss ways in which the Tier 1 Project is anticipated to impact the local community, and ways in which the Developer and the Planning Director plan to address or mitigate these impacts.
(5) City Council shall appoint a liaison from the Legislative Policy Division to monitor the community engagement process and provide updates to City Council.
(6) The Planning Director shall provide notice to the liaison of all upcoming meetings and activities associated with the community engagement process related to the Tier 1 Project.

(b) Neighborhood Advisory Council.
(1) The Planning Director will accept nominations to the NAC from any person that resides in the Impact Area.
(2) All residents over the age of 18 that reside in the Impact Area are eligible for nomination.
(3) The NAC shall consist of nine members, selected as follows:
a. Two Members selected by residents of the Impact Area chosen from the resident nominated candidates;
b. Four Members selected by the Planning Director from the resident nominated candidates, with preference given to individuals the Planning Director expects to be directly impacted by the Tier 1 Project;
c. One Member selected by the Council Member in whose district contains the largest portion of the Impact Area from the resident nominated candidates; and
d. One Member selected by the At-Large Council Members from the resident nominated candidates.
(4) If the Planning Director receives less than nine nominations, the Planning Director may seek out additional nominations from individuals that live outside the Impact Area but within the City Council district or districts where the Tier 1 Project is located.
(5) All actions of the NAC may be taken with the consent of a majority of NAC members serving.

(c) Engagement with Developer.
(1) In addition to the meeting required in Subsection (a)(1) of this section, the Planning Director shall facilitate at least one meeting between the NAC and the Developer to allow the NAC to learn more details about the project and to provide an opportunity for the NAC to make Developer aware of concerns raised by the NAC.
(2) City Council by a 2/3 vote of members present or the Planning Director may facilitate additional meetings which the Developer, or the Developer’s designee, shall participate in as directed.
(3) As part of community engagement the developer, or their designee, shall be required to meet as directed.

(d) Community Benefits Report.
(1) The Planning Director shall provide a Community Benefits Report to City Council regarding the Tier 1 Project prior to the request for any approvals related to the Tier 1 Project.
(2) The Community Benefits Report shall contain:
a. A detailed account of how notice was provided to organize the public meeting.
b. A list of the NAC members, and how they were selected.
c. An itemized list of the concerns raised by the NAC.
d. A method for addressing each of the concerns raised by the NAC, or why a particular concern will not be addressed.
(3) The Planning Director, where possible, shall provide a copy of the Community Benefits Report to the NAC prior to submission to City Council.
(4) To ensure an expeditious community engagement process, the Planning Director, where possible, shall submit the initial Community Benefits Report within six weeks from the date the notice is sent of the public meeting.
(5) The Planning Director shall work with City Council to assure that, to the maximum extent possible, all of the approvals required of City Council may be considered simultaneously and subject to one approval vote.
(6) The Planning Director shall work with other City departments to facilitate that Tier 1 Projects receive expedited City-required approvals.

(e) Development Agreement.
(1) All development agreements made between the Developer and the City related to the land transfers or tax abatements associated with a Tier 1 Project shall include the Community Benefits Provision, which shall include:
a. Enforcement mechanisms for failure to adhere to Community Benefits Provision, that may include but are not limited to, clawback of City-provided benefits, revocation of land transfers or land sales, debarment provisions and proportionate penalties and fees; and
b. The procedure for community members to report violations of the Community Benefits Provision to the NAC.
c. The length of time that Annual Compliance Reports as outlined in Subsection (f)(2) of this section, are required to be submitted.
d. Continued community engagement or community meeting requirements.
(2) The Developer shall not be required to enter into a legally binding agreement with any individual or organization other than the City for the express purpose of fulfilling the requirements of this ordinance or other City-mandated community engagement processes.
(3) The Developer may voluntarily enter into any contract or agreement related to the Tier 1 Project that does not pose a conflict of interest with the City.

(f) Enforcement.
(1) An Enforcement Committee shall be established to monitor Tier 1 Projects.
a. The Enforcement Committee shall be comprised of, at minimum, the following four individuals:
i. Corporation Counsel for the City of Detroit; or their designee.
ii. a representative from the Planning and Development Department;
iii. a representative from the Law Department;
iv. a representative from the Human Rights Department.
b. In addition to the members of the Enforcement Committee as identified in Subsection (1)a of this section, the Planning Director may require that other departments participate in the Enforcement Committee as needed.
(2) The Enforcement Committee shall provide a biannual compliance report to the City Council and the NAC for the time period identified in the Community Benefits Provision.
(3) The Planning Director shall facilitate at least one meeting per calendar year between the NAC and the Developer to discuss the status of the Tier 1 Project for the time period identified in the Community Benefits Provision.
(4) The NAC shall review any allegations of violations of the Community Benefits Provision provided to it by the community, and may report violations to the Enforcement Committee in writing.
(5) Upon receipt of written notification of allegations of violation from the NAC, the Enforcement Committee shall investigate such allegations and shall present their written findings to the NAC based upon the following:
a. Whether the Developer is in compliance with the Community Benefits Provision; and
b. How the Community Benefits Provision will be enforced or how violations will be mitigated.
(6) The findings of the Enforcement Committee shall be presented to the NAC no later than 21 days from the date the violations were reported to the Enforcement Committee, unless the need for additional time is reported to City Council and the NAC within the original 21 day time frame.
(7) If the NAC disagrees with the findings of the Enforcement Committee or determines that the Enforcement Committee is not diligently pursuing the enforcement or mitigation steps outlined in its findings, the NAC may send notice to the Enforcement Committee, and the Enforcement Committee shall have 14 days from receipt of notice to respond to the concerns outlined.
(8) If the NAC is not satisfied with the Enforcement Committee’s response, the NAC may petition the City Clerk and request that City Council schedule a hearing with opportunity for both the Enforcement Committee and the NAC to present information related to the alleged violations of the Community Benefits Provision and any enforcement or mitigation efforts that have occurred.
(9) If City Council elects to hold a hearing, or based upon the written information 22 submitted, City Council shall determine whether the Enforcement Committee has made reasonable efforts to ensure that the Developer has complied with the Community Benefits Provision.
a. If City Council determines that the Enforcement Committee has made reasonable efforts, City Council shall notify the NAC and the Enforcement Committee of their findings.
b. If City Council finds that the Enforcement Committee has not made reasonable efforts, City Council shall make specific finding to the Enforcement Committee on the steps that need to be taken to comply with the Community Benefits Provision.
i. The Enforcement Committee shall provide City Council and the NAC monthly updates on compliance actions until City Council adopts a resolution declaring that the Developer is in compliance with the Community Benefits Provision or has taken adequate steps to mitigate violations.
ii. City Council may hold additional hearings related to enforcement of the Community Benefits Provision as needed.

(g) Development projects that are allowed as by-right or conditional land uses under the Detroit Zoning Ordinance and located downtown, the area bounded by the Detroit River and the center lines of Brooklyn Avenue (extended), West Jefferson Avenue, Eighth Street, West Fort Street, Brooklyn Avenue, Porter Street, John C. Lodge Freeway (M-10), Fisher Freeway (I-75), Chrysler Freeway (I-375), East Jefferson, Rivard Street, Atwater Street, and Riopelle Street extended to the Detroit River do not qualify as Tier 1 Projects.

Sec. 14-12-4. Tier 2 Projects.
(a) Developers shall:
(1) Partner with the City, and when appropriate, a workforce development agency to promote the hiring, training and employability of Detroit residents consistent with State and Federal Law.
(2) Partner with the Planning Director to address and mitigate negative impact that the Tier 2 Project may have on the community and local residents.
(b) The Developer’s commitment as identified in Subsection (a) of this section shall be included in the development agreements related to any land transfers or tax abatements associated with the Tier 2 Project for which the Developer seeks approval.

Sec. 14-12-5. Exemptions.
The requirements of this ordinance may be waived by resolution of the City Council upon submission by either the Planning Director or the Developer identifying reasons that the requirements of this ordinance are impractical or infeasible and identifying how the Developer will otherwise provide community benefits.

Section 2. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, that conflict with this ordinance are 1 repealed.
Section 3. This ordinance is declared necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the People of the City of Detroit.
Section 4. The article added by this ordinance has been enacted as comprehensive local legislation. It is intended to be the sole and exclusive law regarding its subject matter, subject to provisions of state law.

Approved as to form:

_____________________________
Melvin B. Hollowell
Corporation Counsel

#END

Read the People’s CBO

http://www.detroitpeoplesplatform.org/read-the-peoples-cbo-proposal-a-on-the-november-ballot/

Detroit Election Commission meeting Tues, Aug 16th 2pm 2978 W. Grand Blvd.

Update: The Detroit Election Commission will meet on Tuesday, Aug 16th at 2 pm to decide if the People’s Community Benefits Ordinance will go on the November 2016 ballot. This is a public meeting and is open to supporters to come and voice their support in public comments. The election commission will hold the meeting at the Detroit Election Department on 2978 W. Grand Blvd. across the street from the Fisher Building. Please come out and show your support. ‪#‎RiseTogetherDetroit‬ ‪#‎CBO‬

Community Benefits Timeline

CBMTimelineSM

Please Watch and Share the new CBO video!
Community Benefits Ordinance, Development in Detroit, Who benefits?

#RiseTogetherDetroit #CBO #DetroitPeoples

Separate and Unequal, Thinking for ourselves By Shea Howell

Thinking for ourselves
By Shea Howell
 

Separate and Unequal

August 14, 2016
SeparateUnequal
This week the New York Times published yet another story about the reality of two separate and unequal Detroits. With the title “In Detroit’s 2-Speed Recovery, Downtown Roars and Neighborhoods Sputter,” Peter Applebome points to critical questions the Mayor and his administration would like to avoid.
After a brief sketch of downtown, Midtown and Corktown development, Applebome raises the question of what development means to neighborhoods. He says, “But what that means for the rest of the city and who is benefiting have set in motion a layered conversation about development, equity, race and class. It is playing out with particular force here in what was once the nation’s fourth-largest city and is now a place at once grappling with poverty, crime and failing schools, but also still animated by the bones of its former glory.”
This is a conversation the Mayor avoids. Yet even a transient observer like Applebome concludes, “The lack of progress is just as noticeable in the sprawl of often dilapidated neighborhoods, baking in the summer heat.”
Many are baking in that heat without water. Nowhere is the lack of progress and the denial by the Mayor and his administration clearer than in the water shut off crisis. The day before the New York Times article appeared, a group of community based researchers issued an important report. Mapping the Water Crisis: The Dismantling of African American Neighborhoods in Detroit: Volume 1 is the result of an 18 month study documenting water shut offs in the city.  The report demonstrates in clear and specific detail that neighborhoods are suffering from a combination of foreclosures and shut offs, diminishing the quality of life for everyone in the community. Last year 23,000 homes were shut off from water. Over the last decade the city has endured 110,000 foreclosures.
Underscoring the growing divide in our city, Monica Lewis-Patrick, a guiding force in the research collaborative, said, “There is a renaissance downtown full of newcomers, while they are shutting off water for those who stayed and paid” their bills for years.
The impact of these shut offs in a city where 40% of the people live in poverty and many are paying more than 10% of their income for water is to actively drive people out of their homes. Dr. Gloria House, Professor Emerita of the University of Michigan-Dearborn and Wayne State University explained that the mapping documents that  “The incidents of shutoffs, foreclosures and school closures are not random, but intentional and specific… We believe it’s about the dismantling of neighborhoods.”
The Mayor continues to deny this reality. He refuses to consider the consequences of his policies in the lives of people in neighborhoods. Instead he chooses to pretend his water assistance plan (WRAP) is solving the problem.  No one but the Mayor and his administration believes this. No one who sees the shut off trucks moving through neighborhoods on a daily basis believes this.
The objective statistics do not support this. The WRAP is a failure.  It has a waiting list of 3,000 customers and the majority of people who have been signed up simply cannot keep up with the monthly payments.
The work of the We the People Detroit Community Research Collective documents in stark terms that our city is devolving into two separate, unequal, and unhealthy realities.
It does not have to be this way. Community activists and researchers have consistently advocated plans to make water available to all at affordable prices. They have developed programs to keep people in their homes and to stop foreclosures.  The real choice we face is about whose lives matter in our city.

Reminder TONIGHT! A Chance to Speak on Community Benefits and NEW VIDEO!

CITY WIDE MEETING

Reminder TONIGHT! A Chance to Speak on Community Benefits!

Citywide Community Meeting

Mayor Duggan will be hosting a Citywide Community Meeting at 6:30 PM on Thursday, Aug. 4. The meeting will be held in the Erma Henderson Auditorium on the 13th floor of the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center, 2 Woodward Ave.

NEW VIDEO Community Benefits Ordinance, Development in Detroit, Who benefits?

People’s Platform News VOL. 8

The new People’s Platform NEWS is out!

DOWNLOAD, PRINT and SHARE! PeoplesPlatformNews8sm1 PeoplesPlatformNews8sm2

 Development in Detroit.  Who benefits?

  • For too long, the city has given our tax money and public resources to large developers who often harm our communities and leave us in worse condition than before they arrived.  Marathon Oil is a great example
  • For too long, corporate interest have superseded community interests and often displaced, disrupted, or caused harm to those existing communities.   Marathon Oil is a great example of this.
  • The old way of thinking got us the deal from Marathon, less than 25 jobs for Detroiters after a $175 million tax abatement.
  • The old way of development allowed the Ilitch deal to happen before most people knew it was happening. The deal included public investment ($250 million dollars) and virtually free public land granted to the Ilitch family for the new hockey complex. (35 parcels of downtown land for $1 dollar )
  • Now we hear that Dan Gilbert is demanding that the state provide similar public benefits to support his proposed downtown development with at least $500 million of public investment.
  • In the meantime, 60% of our children 5 years or younger live in poverty; record numbers of Detroiters have lost their homes to foreclosure; and the real unemployment rate among Detroiters is unknown since so many have given up the hope of ever finding work.

 No more business as usual

  • Community Benefit Agreements (CBAs) puts community at the table with developers; if we invest in your project, you should invest in our communities – development should be a WIN-WIN for everyone. Thus our coalition name – Rise Together Detroit!
  • CBAs can expand education, economic development, incentives for small business opportunities; affordable housing, and health and environmental protections for many Detroiters that are not presently benefiting from the new wave of investment in the city. CBAs bring us into a new way of thinking about the benefits of development.
  • For more than two years, community groups worked with City Council in the hope that Council would pass a meaningful CBA ordinance that would ensure that Detroiters had a seat at the table when big developers got big public resources. Development projects of 15 million dollars or more and $300, 000 in public investment. Public investment can include resources like tax abatements; free land or land below market rates.  If a developer does not accept public investment, there is no need for a community benefit agreement.
  • The CBA Ordinance ballot initiative allows Detroiters to tell our local government that we deserve a seat at the table and want community benefit agreements with all large-scale developments that receive public investment.
  • The CBA Ordinance engages residents in the decision-making process, and includes a legally binding contract that holds the developer accountable to the agreement negotiated between the developer and the community.  City council has the power of review and approval of the agreement that is negotiated. Failure on the part of community and the developer to reach an agreement means the developer may seek a waiver from council. There is every incentive for community and the developer to work together in good faith and produce a worthwhile agreement.

Council CBA Ballot competes with Community CBA Ballot

  • With the failure of city council to act on the proposed ordinance, In June, Rise Together Detroit, the city-wide CBA coalition representing over 100 community groups, collected over 5400 signatures of Detroit voters to get the Community Benefits Ordinance proposal on the November ballot therefore putting the question to Detroiters to decide.
  • Detroit City Councilmember Scott Benson created an “Anti-Community” Benefits Ordinance proposal to compete with the community-led proposal. The Benson ballot proposal is said to be favored by the city administration.
  • In July, Council voted 6-3 to move Scott Benson’s “Anti-Community” Benefit Ordinance toward the ballot in November to compete with the People’s Community Benefits Ordinance.
  • We call Scott Benson’s Ordinance “Anti-Community” The purpose of a CBA is to hold large-scale developers legally accountable to the local residents. Benson’s proposal forbids legally binding contracts between the developer and community.  It’s not a CBA if there is no legally binding contract between Community and the developers. Benson’s ballot proposal forbids a legally binding agreement. Community participation is reduced to the role of a Neighborhood Advisory Council only.
  • Scott Benson’s “Anti-Community” Benefit Ordinance raises the total investment limit of new projects within the city. In the Citizens-led proposal, community establishes CBAs with developments over $15 million. This is a reasonable number based on the average of the most recent large scale development deals.
  • Under Benson’s proposal, the project development level would be raised to $75 million dollars. Detroit has seen only ONE development exceed $75 million in the last decade. Under Benson’s proposal, CBAs will occur once every 10 years.
  • Scott Benson’s “Anti-Community” Benefit Ordinance takes away the true community voice. City council and the Administration will hand-pick residents to represent the community to engage in the CBA negotiation process in six weeks.
  • The community driven CBA relies on the skills and experience of a broad based community coalition to negotiate with the developers. The ordinance allows the developer and community to define the timeline for getting the negotiations done.

What comes next

In the next couple of weeks, both the Benson Anti Community benefit agreement and the community driven CBA proposal will go before the Detroit Election Commission.

The Election Commission will decide if one or both of the proposed CBA ballot ordinances is lawful and will appear on the November ballot.

Follow the Rise Together Detroit Campaign on our website at http://risetogetherdetroit.com

“If we have to pay, we get a say!”
#RiseTogetherDetroit

This week! Vote in the Primary Tuesday, Thursday Duggan Community Meeting

Community Benefits on Mildred Gaddis today.
This morning, Mildred Gaddis will host Council President Brenda Jones on her radio talk show at 11 am. President Jones has been asked to speak on the Community Benefits Agreement issue. If you are near a radio tune into WCHB 1200 AM and, if you can, please call in and show support for the council president and the People’s Community Benefits Ordinance.
Citywide Community Meeting
Mayor Duggan will be hosting a Citywide Community Meeting at 6:30 PM on Thursday, Aug. 4. The meeting will be held in the Erma Henderson Auditorium on the 13th floor of the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center, 2 Woodward Ave.
Vote in the Primary Tomorrow!
Polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
You can view a sample ballot here: https://webapps.sos.state.mi.us/MVIC/
Find your polling place: http://www.vote411.org/

Detroiters will be voting for:

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
REPRESENTATIVE IN STATE LEGISLATURE
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE
WAYNE COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
WAYNE COUNTY SHERIFF
WAYNE COUNTY CLERK
WAYNE COUNTY TREASURER
WAYNE COUNTY REGISTER OF DEEDS
WAYNE COUNTY COMMISSIONER
CITY COUNCIL MEMBER AT LARGE
DELEGATES TO COUNTY CONVENTION
DPS SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS

Tuesday! – Night Out for Safety and Liberation Detroit
Detroit Public Library – Main Branch from 5pm – 8pm
What is safety to you? Freedom from harm, illness, violence, poverty? #SafetyIs more than a conversation about crime and policing. Let’s redefine what #SafetyIs and how we can build equity, power, opportunity, and prosperity in our communities. Join us for Night Out for Safety and Liberation on August 2 from 5-8pm at the Detroit Public Library – Main Branch and help change the conversation. Light refreshments and child care services will be available.

To kick off the event, the the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights will host a 1 hour TweetChat on Tuesday, August 2nd at 2pm EST. The TweetChat is an online conversation that will take place on Twitter. Participants can tweet their questions to @EllaBakerCenter using the hashtag #SafetyIs and or #NOSL16. Organizations can register for the TweetChat in advance here.

Thursday! Constitutional challenge to Michigan’s Emergency Manager law
Oral argument will be held in the constitutional challenge to Michigan’s Emergency Manager law (PA 436). The argument will take place at the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. The court is located at (100 E 5th St., Cincinnati, OH 45202).

13580574_1202975799735377_4698888726739015415_o

Thinking for ourselves By Shea Howell: Community wisdom #CBO #RiseTogetherDetroit

Thinking for ourselves
By Shea Howell

Community wisdom

July 26, 2016
 
Last week a majority of the Detroit City Council voted to place an anti-community proposal on the November ballot.  The intent of this proposal is to confuse voters and protect the interests of big business. Council members Benson, Leland, Tate, Spivey, Cushingberry, and Ayers voted to support the proposal. It was developed hastily by Scott Benson in an effort to destroy a people’s initiative to legally mandate a community voice in major, publicly supported developments.
 
With this decision, Detroit voters are likely to have two competing proposals with the same name on the ballot. One, supported by the people, would use the force of law to ensure that communities have a voice and receive agreed upon benefits from developments that use public money or get tax breaks.  The other, sponsored by Benson, only mandates a public meeting, where developers get to tell citizens what they plan to do.
 
 Mayor Duggan and the business elite oppose a meaningful Community Benefits Agreement (CBA). They argue that a real CBA would limit development and jeopardize job growth. These claims are nonsense. And they are not the core of the objections. The sad truth is that the Mayor, Councilman Benson, the majority of the Council and the business elite fear democracy. They distrust the wisdom of people. They see a CBA only as something that takes away from profits and control. They cannot imagine that a real CBA, with a true collaborative process, would result in better decisions and better development.
 
This anti democratic thrust and fear of the people is actually written into the ordinance proposed by Benson. The one public meeting in the ordinance is orchestrated and designed to tell residents what will happen to them. These “impacts” are universally described in negative terms throughout the ordinance. Citizens are allowed to suggest ways to soften the blows. Nothing is binding.  The philosophy reflected in the Benson Ordinance cast people as complainers. Once we get a chance to grip a little, developers go ahead as planned. This is the track record of development, especially under emergency management and Mayor Duggan. Developers don’t live up to even minimal agreements.
 
In measured support for the Benson Ordinance, Crains says that a real CBA “opens the door to project management by people who may or may not have the subject matter expertise to give guidance and set the rules of play for developers.” The power of the community to “micro-manage specific investments may bring growth to a screeching halt,” they warn.
 
It does not occur to these folks that there is wisdom and creativity in the community. Community knowledge means better development. Community engagement need not be antagonistic.
 
The reality is that communities are complex and multi layered. Developers see only one small slice of that reality.  For example, last March, a Detroit icon, Faygo, faced a community picket over a closed road. The leadership of Faygo was stunned at being picketed, but wisely decided to engage with the community. They learned that in an effort to make their truck deliveries more efficient they had blocked off essential community pathways for children to get to buses and for emergency vehicles to enter the neighborhood quickly.  Before long a compromise was reached so kids could pass safely and emergency vehicles could reach distant streets.
 
Community Development is about more than jobs or limiting “negative impacts.” A true CBA rests on the belief that community wisdom makes for better decisions for everyone.
We owe thanks to Council President Jones and members Castaneda-Lopez and Sheffield for upholding the democratic wisdom of a CBA. Now we need to organize to win the November vote. Detroiters are not so easily fooled.

Update: Six Detroit City Council Members vote to move forward ordinance to compete with the People’s CBO

Council votes 6-3 to move Scott Benson’s Anti-Community Ordinance toward the ballot in November to compete with the People’s Community Benefits Ordinance.

On July 22, 2016, in a special session at 8am, Detroit City Council Members Benson, Leland, Tate, Spivey, Ayers and Council President Pro-Tempore Cushingberry Jr. voted move Benson’s ‘enhanced’ ordinance to the Elections Commission for placement on the ballot in November.

Council President Jones and Council Members Castañeda-Lopez and Sheffield voted against the move. Council President Jones withdrew her version of the ordinance after the passage of Council Member Benson’s.

Member Sheffield spoke to the fact that without a legally binding agreement Benson’s ordinance wasn’t actually a Community Benefit Ordinance. Member Leland clearly demonstrated his lack of understanding of Emergency Management and Community Benefits by connecting them in his statement. Council President Jones redressed him for comparing an effort organized by Detroiters on behalf of Detroiters and State imposed suspension of democracy.

On July 12, Member Benson introduced his ordinance, which has been recognized by many in the community as not being a Community Benefit Ordinance at all. Benson’s anti-community ordinance is merely an orchestrated engagement process that will keep all the development deals under control of Planning & Development. It expressly states that community cannot sign any deals and actually legislates ‘business as usual’ for development deals that use public funds and resources in Detroit.

Moving the People’s CBO toward the ballot has been a tremendous effort and an important act of citizen-led democracy on display. In the face of voter suppression and suspension of democracy, the right of community to organize around an issue and move it to the ballot has become one of the last vestiges of the democratic process accessible to everyday Detroiters. The fact that 6 Detroit Council Members have organized to block a community-led ballot initiative, one that over 5000 their constituents signed onto, by moving forward a competing ‘business as usual’ ordinance sends a strong message to Detroiters.

Next Steps: Both the People’s CBO and Benson’s Anti-Community Ordinance will be voted on by the Election Commission sometime in August.

Media Hits

Detroit Free Press
http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2016/07/22/council-oks-taking-2nd-community-benefits-plan-voters/87440756/
“The Detroit City Council today approved sending to the November ballot an alternative version of a proposal to give neighborhood residents a voice when developers seek tax breaks from the city, setting up a battle between competing versions of a community benefits ordinance this fall.”

Detroit News
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2016/07/22/council-oks-putting-community-benefits-nov-ballot/87435978/
“On Friday, the City Council approved putting a community benefits agreement measure before voters. Another proposal, backed by a grassroots petition with more than 5,400 signatures, will also be on the ballot.”

Please visit http://risetogetherdetroit.com/ for more information and updates on the efforts to gain a Community Benefits Ordinance for all Detroiters.

Recent Timeline:

On July 12, 2016 Detroit City Council voted unanimously NOT to vote on the People’s Community Benefits Ordinance and to send it to the Election Committee. The Council also heard public comments on a counter ordinance brought forward by District 3 Council Member Scott Benson. Benson’s ordinance, referred to as the anti-community benefits ordinance by many residents was moved to Council Member Gabe Leland’s Planning and Economic Development Standing Committee that meets on Thursday. In a surprise move, Council President Brenda Jones re-introduced a revised version of her Community Benefits Ordinance that was also moved to Leland’s committee.

On July 7, 2016 Rise Together Detroit received word from the Department of Elections. After a review by their office, the challenge to the Community Benefit ballot initiative  signatures has been denied. The petition certification STANDS! This means enough signatures have been gathered and certified to move the Community Benefits Ordinance forward toward placement on the November ballot.

On July 5, 2016 Detroit City Council members heard public comments about the Community Benefits Ordinance. Though the Community Benefit Ordinance was not on the agenda of the meeting, many came out to speak in support of the ordinance due to a challenge to the ballot initiative petition signatures. Videos below.

On Monday June 27, 2016, the City of Detroit Department of Elections certified the Community benefits Agreement Coalition had collected enough signatures to place the long-sought Community Benefits Ordinance on the ballot in November. As required by law, a letter was sent to City Council thereby giving them 60 days to pass the ordinance as written or refer it to the Election Commission for placement on the ballot in November. Within 48 hours efforts to challenge the Community Benefit Ordinance were underway.  On Wednesday June 29, 2016 CBA Coalition members learned of a legal challenge filed against the ballot initiative. One of Detroit’s leading corporate law firms, working on behalf of an unidentified, anonymous client, has challenged the validity of signatures collected.

Please visit http://risetogetherdetroit.com/ for more information and updates on the efforts to gain a Community Benefits Ordinance for all Detroiters.

“If we have to pay, we get a say!”

Join the conversation: #RiseTogetherDetroit #CBO
Learn more and help spread the word!

#RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO Angy Webb “People want this. They wouldn’t have filled out petitions if they didn’t” https://youtu.be/tBmWt-_YAqo

#RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO Lila Cabil “we’ve given a lot, but we’ve lost a lot” https://youtu.be/bMbwt6472sA

#RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO Ron Turner: “Detroiters are capable of working with developers for a win/win situation.” https://youtu.be/itIQ3kl6Tuw

#RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO Bro J Smith @CapSoupKitchen “people served by the kitchen don’t benefit from development” https://youtu.be/mea29FE-uiI

Detroiters deserve a seat at the table when large projects use public $$$ #RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO https://youtu.be/15PGJ1xljQE

Update: The People’s Community Benefit Ordinance moves to Election Commission for vote on ballot placement

Detroit City Council votes to NOT VOTE on People’s Community Benefits Ordinance as two other CBOs move to committee.

On July 12, 2016 Detroit City Council voted unanimously NOT to vote on the People’s Community Benefits Ordinance and to send it to the Election Committee. The Council also heard public comments on a counter ordinance brought forward by District 3 Council Member Scott Benson. Benson’s ordinance, referred to as the anti-community benefits ordinance by many residents was moved to Council Member Gabe Leland’s Planning and Economic Development Standing Committee that meets on Thursday. In a surprise move, Council President Brenda Jones re-introduced a revised version of her Community Benefits Ordinance that was also moved to Leland’s committee.

MEDIA HITS! For more details visit:
Detroit News http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2016/07/12/detroit-community-benefits-initiative-moves-forward/87006218/

Free Press
http://www.freep.com/story/news/2016/07/12/detroit-official-eyes-alternative-development-ordinance/87001626/

VIDEO POSTS to SHARE:
#RiseTogetherDetroit #CBO VIDEO Benson’s Anti-Community Benefits Ordinance – Lila Cabil, Pub Comment July 12, 2016 https://youtu.be/2e9bQCZydpM

#RiseTogetherDetroit #CBO Benson’s Anti-Community Benefits Ordinance – @RashidaTlaib, Pub Comment July 12, 2016 https://youtu.be/QW4-Z9ypDyI

Detroiters deserve a seat at the table when large projects use public $$$ #RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO https://youtu.be/15PGJ1xljQE

NEXT STEPS: The People’s Community Benefit Ordinance, the one with 5400 certified signatures from voters city-wide, moves to the Elections Committee next. The three person committee of Corporation Counsel Butch Hallowell, City Clerk Janice Winfrey and Council President Brenda Jones will vote as to whether the ordinance will be on the ballot in November. We anticipate that Council Member Benson’s Anti-Community Benefit Ordinance and Council President Jones’ revised ordinance will be discussed and possibly acted upon in this Thursday’s 10am Planning and Economic Development Committee.

Know your CBO History: The original Community Benefit Ordinance presented by Council President Brenda Jones was held in Council Member Gabe Leland’s Planning and Economic Development Committee for nearly 2 years. This delay along with other obstructions lead community members to organize around a Community Benefits ballot initiative. What To Watch: It will be informative to witness how quickly committee members Leeland, Sheffield and Benson act on the two ordinances introduced yesterday.

Again, this has been a tremendous effort and an important act of citizen-led democracy on display. The CBA Coalition partners want to thank the members who have supported and made this all-volunteer grassroots effort possible. Detroiters from every corner of the city have stepped up to help move the CBA Ordinance to a vote by the people.

Please visit http://risetogetherdetroit.com/ for more information and updates on the efforts to gain a Community Benefits Ordinance for all Detroiters.

Recent Timeline

On July 7, 2016 Rise Together Detroit received word from the Department of Elections. After a review by their office, the challenge to the Community Benefit ballot initiative  signatures has been denied. The petition certification STANDS! This means enough signatures have been gathered and certified to move the Community Benefits Ordinance forward toward placement on the November ballot.

On July 5, 2016 Detroit City Council members heard public comments about the Community Benefits Ordinance. Though the Community Benefit Ordinance was not on the agenda of the meeting, many came out to speak in support of the ordinance due to a challenge to the ballot initiative petition signatures. Videos below.

On Monday June 27, 2016, the City of Detroit Department of Elections certified the Community benefits Agreement Coalition had collected enough signatures to place the long-sought Community Benefits Ordinance on the ballot in November. As required by law, a letter was sent to City Council thereby giving them 60 days to pass the ordinance as written or refer it to the Election Commission for placement on the ballot in November.

Within 48 hours efforts to challenge the Community Benefit Ordinance were underway.  On Wednesday June 29, 2016 CBA Coalition members learned of a legal challenge filed against the ballot initiative. One of Detroit’s leading corporate law firms, working on behalf of an unidentified, anonymous client, has challenged the validity of signatures collected.

Please visit http://risetogetherdetroit.com/ for more information and updates on the efforts to gain a Community Benefits Ordinance for all Detroiters.

“If we have to pay, we get a say!”
Join the conversation: #RiseTogetherDetroit #CBO

Learn more, spread the word!

#RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO Angy Webb “People want this. They wouldn’t have filled out petitions if they didn’t” https://youtu.be/tBmWt-_YAqo

#RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO Lila Cabil “we’ve given a lot, but we’ve lost a lot” https://youtu.be/bMbwt6472sA

#RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO Ron Turner: “Detroiters are capable of working with developers for a win/win situation.” https://youtu.be/itIQ3kl6Tu

#RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO Bro J Smith @CapSoupKitchen “people served by the kitchen don’t benefit from development” https://youtu.be/mea29FE-uiI

#RiseTogetherDetroit 7 VIDEOS of Public Comments on Community Benefits from #DetroitCityCouncil’s July 5th Meeting
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLy5aqxoFbwK1t5-eMBGFeQ7cD0PaxuLxC

Detroiters deserve a seat at the table when large projects use public $$$ #RiseTogetherDetroit VIDEO https://youtu.be/15PGJ1xljQE