Community Benefits/Neighborhood Advisory Committee Session 1

Communi t yBe ne ďŹ t s Agr e e me nt s Re s our c ePa c ke t Se s s i on1

Detroit CBO NAC OBJECTIVES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES Neighborhood Advisory Councils, also known as NACs, are created under Detroit’s Community Benefits Ordinance (CBO). The CBO only gives general guidelines for what a NAC can do, leaving a lot to the members to decide. However, NACs have been used across the country for years and the most effective NACs are the ones with agreed upon principles to guide them to defined objectives. There can be 1 or 10 or 20 principles, but they should accepted by all (or nearly all) of the members.

Below is a list of possible principles for your NAC. •

Impact of construction on the neighborhood should be mitigated to the fullest extent possible.

•

The safety of residents all areas of the public realm (e.g., streets, sidewalks, parks, etc.) is important before, during, and after development.

Development should maintain and encourage the existing community cultural diversity.

•

Proposed new land use development should primarily serve the needs of existing residents and businesses.

•

Local needs are more important than citywide or regional needs.

•

Development should maintain and promote diverse neighborhood land use (e.g., day/night, living/working, spectrum of uses, etc.).

•

The development should generally maintain the existing scale and density of the neighborhood.

•

The community should remain informed of plans for their community.

•

The developer should hear all community voices.

•

The development should not harm general environmental quality and health.

The principles you select should be able to guide you to specific objectives for the NAC. These are the concrete benefits the community you are part of and represents would like to see the developer contribute in return for the public resources it will use for the project. The objectives can be as simple as a new park or more complicated, like a walkable commercial corridor. The developer may ultimately agree to all – or none – or your objectives. However, your chances of obtaining benefits from the community go up dramatically if you have specific objectives in mind.

•

Promote environmental sensitivity in new development projects.

•

Mitigate to the fullest extent possible neighborhood impacts resulting from new development.

•

Stabilize the neighborhood against speculative land use proposals and developments.

•

Promote safety in all areas of the public realm (e.g., streets, sidewalks, parks, etc.).

•

Maintain and encourage the existing community cultural diversity.

•

Proposed new land use development shall primarily serve the needs of existing residents and businesses. Citywide and regional needs are subordinate to existing local needs.

•

Maintain and promote diversity (e.g., day/night, living/working, spectrum of uses, etc.) of neighborhood land uses.

•

Provide clear and simple community planning policies and zoning recommendations.

•

Generally maintain the existing scale and density of the neighborhood.

•

Encourage nurturing characteristics and maximize opportunities for seniors, families, youth and children.

•

Develop and maintain local accountability and monitoring mechanism.

•

Provide periodic reassessment of the community plan.

•

Maximize general environmental quality and health.

N eighbQrhQQ,ld,AØvisory

'en èiiBest Practices

Seth Newsome Derek Perr

Nick Tagas OS/21/08

Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Client Background 3. Literature Review 4. Research Approach 5. Case Studies •

Los Angeles

•

New York

•

Portland

•

Vancouver

•

Seattle

6. Taskforce Survey 7. Recommendations 8. Appendix •

A - Client proposal

•

B - Scope of work

•

C - Gantt Chart

•

D - Survey Instrument

•

E - Programs in other cities

9. Resource CD

Page | 1

Introduction Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force was established in 2004 by the City and County of San Francisco Board of Supervisors. The Task Force was established to draft a comprehensive community plan to address the concerns of the citizens of Western SoMa as well as provide a roadmap for growth for the neighborhood. This community plan will be reviewed and voted upon for adoption by the Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force June of 2008.

Issue Once the community plan is adopted the task force will be dissolved as the task force was intended only to elicit public participation to create a sustainable and equitable community plan.

However, how can the citizens of Western SoMa maintain a clear and constant advisory role in their neighborhood? How can the citizens of Western SoMa make sure that the community plan they have adopted is followed through? More importantly, how can the citizens of Western SoMa maintain an open public forum that addresses specific issues or problems facing their neighborhood now and well into the future?

Needs We have been tasked with researching best practices of citizen led Neighborhood Advisory Councils (NAC) in other cities within the United States. We were also tasked with analyzing the data collected from other NAC’s, and forming recommendations for the Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force. We were asked to produce a report containing at least five case studies of other cities along with a set of recommendation for a potential Western SoMa neighborhood plan implementation board.

Research approach In researching the client’s issue we used three distinct approaches. First we performed a literature review on community participation and the shortcomings of traditional models of public hearings. Using our findings from the literature we developed a set of criteria to be used in analyzing our case studies. Our case study criteria included: the purpose of the organization, Page | 2

their scope of work and specific powers, the size of the board, the structure of the board, the methods used to appoint board members, the source of funding for the boards, their meeting schedule, their age, and the size of the neighborhood which they represent. We then applied these criteria to a matrix of five cities, including New York, Los Angeles, Portland, Vancouver and Seattle. In addition to our case studies we also developed a survey to receive input from current Western SoMa Taskforce members on their ideal structure for the potential future plan implementation board. We used all of the above tools in creating this report and our recommendations. We hope that this report gives the members of the Western SoMa Citizens Planning Taskforce a good foundation upon which to build their own future research and final restructuring decision.

Page | 3

Client Background Values Statement of Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force The Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force shall promote neighborhood qualities and scale that maintain and enhance, rather than destroy, today’s living, historic and sustainable neighborhood character of social, cultural and economic diversity, while integrating appropriate land use, transportation and design opportunities into equitable, evolving and complete neighborhoods. Throughout the life of this Task Force, the membership shall respect one another, be responsive to the constituencies they represent and foster a citizen based democratic decision-making process. Planning Principles (adopted August 23, 2006)

History The Citywide Policy Planning unit of the San Francisco Planning Department began the Eastern Neighborhoods Community. The planning process started in January 2002. The primary goal at that time was to develop new zoning controls for the industrially zoned land in the neighborhoods of Mission, SoMa, Showplace Square/Potrero Hill, and Bayview/Hunters Point.

A series of workshops were conducted in each area where stakeholders articulated goals for their neighborhood, considered how new zoning might promote these goals, and created several rezoning proposals, Options A, B, and C, representing variations in the amount of industrial land to retain for employment and business activity. These proposed zoning alternatives were presented to the City Planning Commission (CPC) on March 3, 2003 in the report titled, “Planning in the Eastern Neighborhoods: Rezoning Options Workbook.”

In February 2004, the CPC established interim policies patterned after Option B for East SoMa, the Mission, and Showplace Square/Potrero (Resolution 16727). These policies did not apply to the entire Eastern Neighborhoods for two reasons: 1) Bayview/ Hunters Point is covered by existing special use district and significant portions of this area are under the auspices of the Redevelopment Agency; and 2) the community within the western South of Market (Western SoMa) expressed a desire for a separate planning process that resulted in the CPC removing that Page | 4

area from the Eastern Neighborhoods effort in October 2003. The concerned citizens went so far as to convince their local Supervisor that as a group they could bring additional credibility and sensitivity to Planning Department rezoning efforts. It began with a relatively simple concept of “citizen planners” developing a plan for their neighborhood. The formalization by the Board of Supervisors and the evolution of a participatory democratic decision making model built around 23 appointed citizen planners working alongside three different City Department representatives has been characterized by insiders and observers as a process that could become “messy.”

Membership The Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force consists of 26 members: 20 members appointed by the Board of Supervisors; three members appointed by the District 6 Supervisor; one appointed by the Planning Director; and one appointed by the Director of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority; and one appointed by the Director of the Department of Public Health.

Task force membership •

Jim Meko, Chair, Residents

•

Paul Lord Planning Department

•

Toby Levy, Vice Chair Supervisor

•

Lili Farhang Department of Public

Daly’s appointee • •

Health

Charles Breidinger For-profit

•

Tom Radulovich Transportation

Developers

•

Marc Salomon Bicycle Advocacy

MC Canlas Supervisor Daly’s

•

Antoinetta Stadlman Single Room

appointee •

Skot Kuiper Arts

•

Jazzie Collins Supervisor Daly’s

• • •

Occupancy Hotel Residents •

April Veneracion Community-based Organizations

appointee

•

Dan Becco Labor

John Elberling Non-profit

•

Henry Karnilowicz Business

Developers

•

Anthony Faber Preservation

Chester Fung SF County

•

Lynn Valente SoMa West

Transportation Authority

•

Kaye Griffin Disabled

Susan Hagen Contreras Open Space

•

Luke Lightning Recent Resident Page | 5

• •

Dennis Juarez Entertainment

•

Vacant Seniors

Industry

•

Vacant Youth

•

Vacant Homeless

Vacant Families

Principles At the heart of the mess is the very complex set of interrelated decisions necessary to guide the development opportunities in this neighborhood for the first few decades of the 21st Century. The appointed Task Force of citizen planners was clear and unified on a couple of points. First, they wanted to start their planning process from an explicit articulation of their collective values. Second, they deeply appreciate the extremely nuanced character of their neighborhood. For the first six months they worked to get to know one another and craft their collective values statement that they further detailed in supporting Planning Principles •

Promote environmental sensitivity in new development projects.

•

Mitigate to the fullest extent possible neighborhood impacts resulting from new development.

•

Stabilize the neighborhood against speculative land use proposals and developments.

•

Promote safety in all areas of the public realm (e.g., streets, sidewalks, parks, etc.).

•

Maintain and encourage the existing community cultural diversity.

•

Proposed new land use development shall primarily serve the needs of existing residents and businesses. Citywide and regional needs are subordinate to existing local needs.

•

Maintain and promote diversity (e.g., day/night, living/working, spectrum of uses, etc.) of neighborhood land uses.

•

Provide clear and simple community planning policies and zoning recommendations.

•

Generally maintain the existing scale and density of the neighborhood.

Page | 6

•

Encourage nurturing characteristics and maximize opportunities for seniors, families, youth and children.

•

Develop and maintain local accountability and monitoring mechanism.

•

Provide periodic reassessment of the community plan.

•

Maximize general environmental quality and health.

Planning Goals The Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force was established to advise the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission on any planning that would affect land use, safety, and future development for Western SoMa and to carry out the following duties: (a) using existing zoning as the starting point for an analysis of land use decisions that will shape the future of the entire community; (b) map and evaluate existing Residential Enclave Districts (REDs) and consider modifications to existing RED zoning map boundaries; (c) recommend basic RED preservation policies including height, density and design guidelines; (d) map and evaluate land uses proximate to existing and proposed REDs and develop basic height, density and design guidelines in order to provide a buffer between REDs and areas where more intense development might be allowed; (e) map Western SoMa’s overall existing land use conditions; (f) recommend policies for the preservation of service and light industrial jobs, residential uses, and arts and entertainment opportunities; (g) consider policies to guide increased heights and density along the major arterial streets where appropriate; (h) recommend policies that promote more communityserving retail and commercial uses and that encourage improvements to transportation, open space, street safety, bicycle circulation, and mass transit; and (i) develop recommendations to ensure that the creation of a future Folsom Boulevard be developed in such a manner as to complement all of the above referenced goals

Neighborhood Economy The Task Force, through the guidance and assistance of numerous consultant and student studies, analyzed opportunities and formulated a vision for future non-residential activities that are both locationally appropriate and responsive to local and regional for Page | 7

the 21st Century economic needs. In addition to the economic consultant studies, the Western SoMa Task Force prepared neighborhood economy recommendations that pay special attention to the Citywide Economic Strategy, and the Bio-Science, Back Streets and Arts Task Force recommendations.

Simply put, the Task Force recommendations seek to relax current office regulations throughout the neighborhood, encourage residential serving business north of Harrison Street, foster opportunities for a creative and innovation driven job base south of Harrison Street, and develop a continuous high technology business office corridor along Townsend Street, while judiciously allowing the expanded neighborhood introductions of formula and big box retail uses. The objectives and policies that follow articulate the Task Force recommendations for early 21st Century business activities in the Western SoMa SUD. More recently, high technology internet and multimedia arts businesses have all been important business activities in the Western SoMa 20th Century landscape.

When last rezoned in the late 1980s, the neighborhood faced eminent office development pressures spilling over from a robust and expanding downtown area. Today, the neighborhood is viewed by many as an ideal location for fulfilling citywide housing needs. The Task Force seeks solutions that balance the competing needs of housing production with the long standing diverse neighborhood commercial vitality.

Commercial traditions in the Western SoMa SUD can largely be characterized by one word – innovation. To this day, the neighborhood has been one of the preferred San Francisco locations for new start up business that define new and emerging market opportunities. In part led by the gay and artist communities that located in the area during the last few decades of the 20th Century, the neighborhood continues to provide a cornucopia of business types. More often than not, the neighborhood businesses are small employing less than 10 people and occupying less than 5,000 square feet.

A recent increase in the residential population is now giving rise to the demand for businesses that serve the new and existing residents. Two decades ago the existing residents were clamoring for a grocery store. Today, there are four new grocery stores serving the neighborhood as well as discount grocery outlet stores nearby. The neighborhood building stock retains numerous buildings that served the early 20th Century warehousing and manufacturing activities. Some of these building have Page | 8

undergone creative adaptive reuse to reconfigure them for more contemporary business needs. Yet, elements of the more historic building stock remain underutilized and face uncertain futures in the 21st Century economy.

Page | 9

Literature Review Why do we even need neighborhood advisory councils? What are they used for, and why are they a better tool to use then current legally required modes of public participation? Legally required methods for public participation in the United States: (1) do not meet the most basic needs for public participation, and (2) are counter productive causing anger and mistrust from the public towards the governing rule. (Innes et al. 2004) Furthermore disillusionment with government bureaucracy can be summed in this statement "participation through normal institutionalized channels has little impact on the substance on government policies." Scholars have observed that since the 60's-70's and well into the 21st century, public disillusionment has led to a , "society wide uprising against bureaucracy and a desire for participation." (Crosby 1986) This desire for public participation led to the 1964 Federal Equal Opportunity Act's call for "maximum feasible participation". Since then many studies have been conducted to examine the affects of current legally required means of participation. The findings are a bit discouraging.

1.

Lack of representativeness of participants is a very real shortcoming especially in projects that were considered successes.

2.

The most successful citizen outputs tend to be those which require the least amount of expertise.

3.

Overall the impact of citizen led groups has been limited.

4.

Most participatory programs have been geared for reactionary purposes leaving a void in agenda setting, and policy creation.

Failures of Public Participation There is not much literature written on the failings of current participation laws and practices. Some argue that there is nothing wrong with the rules but that we are just not doing it the right way. Others argue a more elite stance that planning should be left to the policy makers and the planners only, and that only representative democracy not direct democracy works best today. Yet there are others who are arguing for a more deliberative democracy. They argue for more allowance of public deliberation. What they leave blank is just what should come of those deliberations and what role should Page | 10

those deliberations play in decision making. Most public administrator scholars slip between one of two schools of thought: (1) arguing for indirect participation, and (2) the rest arguing that more direct participation is needed.

Perhaps due to the fiscalization of planning most cities have adopted a "business managerial" model running the government like a business. With that construct in place if the government is run like a grocery store should the citizens be employees working at the store or should they be the stock holders invested in that store? The former being that the city provides benefits and security to its employees when needed, but with the "investor method" citizens would be stockholders of a company sometimes guiding future decisions but with a hands off approach.

Regardless of what side scholars are on no one is talking about real, sustainable, and working best practices to better engage the public and utilize direct democracy for public participation in government decisions.

Most literature on public participation merely addresses the problems, paradoxes, and the ambivalence of planers and or the public regarding participation. Should the citizen look after the interest of the group over the needs of the individual? Should the planner be swayed by public opinion or should they be ruled by special interests?

Citizens participate through voting by electing representatives so why do they need to participate any further? Anyone can participate but the powerful few routinely dominate the decisions made in current governance. The more open the process is, the more contentious the issue can become with the broad shallow view of the public pitted against the narrow deep view of special interest groups. Courting public participation may also lead to the wrong decisions being made with the planner or administrator out of touch with the public’s needs and wants or the public is out of touch with the political and economic realities affecting their cities.

The trap we all fall into as citizens and policy makers/planners is of the government on one side making decisions and the public on the other side reacting to those decisions. After addressing the problems with current legally required participation laws this article poses new best practices and models which encourage more broad public participation. The argument here is that collaboration should not only Page | 11

include citizens but also organized groups like non-profits and for-profit organizations as well as planners and administrators in a common framework. Ultimately current legally required forms of public participation can evolve into a more engaging and participatory model. Citizens’ need to feel like they made a difference and planners’ need to feel professionally responsible for their decisions or recommendations made. Both sides need to feel that participation is fair, transparent, inclusive, and representative. Collaborative planning can satisfy all of these qualities. (Innes et al. 2004) For 40 years there has been a clear and steady decline in public trust of democratically elected representatives. There has also been a steady decline in the publics trust towards trained "expert's" opinions due to the severe failings of 20th century planners and engineers. Where democracy once reflected elected representatives along with trained administrators and planners making decisions, now it is thought that public problems require an active citizenry to generate solutions. Moreover public participation is now increasingly thought of as a right and not a privilege. (Briggs 2003) A more collaborative approach to governance, which relies not just on the expertise of the government but also the real perspective of the public at large is needed.

This dynamic cooperation can solve many complex problems such as budget constraints, contentious development projects, or other actions taken which might cause public dissent. (Innes et al. 2004) Real, authentic dialogue is needed as well as working networks for cross communication and city capacity to ensure such open lines of input and output is also needed. Further encouraging signs are showing a more bottom up verses a top down approach to local governance is increasing in popularity due to the publics changed perception of interaction between the local Governments. (Briggs 2003) There are three important reasons for including stakeholder participation: 1.

(Psychological) Consultation is appreciated and rewarded. Human beings are more apt to approve of projects or proposals, accept decisions being made, and believe them to be fair if they first have been openly consulted and asked to review the merits and make recommendations based on their perspective and experience.

Page | 12

2.

(Political) Democracy demands a popular mandate. Making democracy work requires actively soliciting ideas and building support between many stakeholders.

3.

(Practical) Two heads are better than one. There is a very practical need to address societal problems as a collective using coordination and team work. (Briggs 2003)

Below is a comparative chart explaining the differences between the status quo of current models of public participation and models employing citizens more aggressively to participate in the decision making process. (Briggs 2003) Conventional Groups

Participatory Groups

The fastest thinkers and most articulate speakers often get the most "air time".

Everyone participates, not just the vocal few.

Differences of opinion are usually seen as conflict needing to be either stifled or "resolved".

Opposing viewpoints are allowed to coexist.

The minority perspective is commonly discouraged from speaking out.

Even in the face of opposition, everyone is encouraged to voice their opinion and to be heard and stand up for their beliefs.

Listening to and communicating with a large community advisory board may be a daunting task but has the promise of creating sustainable and equitable policy. Policy approved in an open forum benefits the wants of the city while balancing the needs of the citizenry. Moreover the diversity of viewpoints, life experiences, and impressions of citizens help pinpoint ideas and answers to problems not seen by administrators and other city staff. As well, citizens become more vested in the process if they feel that their concerns have been genuinely heard and that they have visibly affected the outcome of the process. (Chrislip 2002) Below is a chart created to help planners and policy makers better understand the importance of broad public participation in setting agendas, advising on projects, or deliberating proposals set fourth by the city.

Page | 13

Strategic Questions

Decision Issues

Caveats

1.

Why should we engage stakeholders in planning? To serve a variety of purposes such as creating a wider democratic mandate to act upon, better ideas to drive action, and to foster feelings of "ownership" and investment in collaborative work.

Is a broad issue or agenda being defined by a group or a community to plan or act on?

Do strategies need to be set in order to respond to a predefined set of issues?

Does a certain project or program need to be designed given that strategies are already in place?

Institutions often send confusing signals about what the planning project is at that moment, why it is important, why now, what are the likely benefits and impacts, and what the limitations on participation will be.

2.

Who should be involved and in what roles? Effective participation requires setting boundaries to define all participants roles and responsibilities to each other not as a means of imposing control but to foster trust and coordination in place of chaos and "process paralysis".

Who are the primary stakeholders who must decide on the issue, project, or design?

Who else should be consulted, or educated in a broader "public"? Who should organize and sponsor planning events? Who should facilitate the meetings? Who should observe them and who should ultimately be making recommendations and who should make decisions?

Failure to set up clear roles can lead to the thought that more players, ideas or events is assumed to be better. Creating systematic process designs and clear roles and linear steps can help create order and establish efficient modes of participation and deliberation.

3.

What is the proper scope of the planning process? Setting boundaries around the targets of participation are key. Clearly define the issues. What are the decisions being made, and who has the authority to decide?

Does the work require broad boundaries so that new interests or projects can be included in future discussion or deliberation? Should the neighborhood planning council be advisory to the decision makers or should they decide for themselves?

How should the neighborhood relate to the agency that makes everyday (routine) decisions?

The planning process can be quickly undermined and lose its legitimacy and effectiveness without a clear and transparent scope of participation. Without a clear scope of participation conflicts emerge as the stakeholders might have different and unstated assumptions about what the scope should be?

4.

How to put a participatory strategy

How should stakeholders be convened, identified, and

Beware of getting bogged down with too much Page | 14

to work? Smart, well implemented tactics which encompass a variety of planning phases and dimensions while constantly evolving as the project evolves are vital.

organized? Are the stakeholders being tasked to build a base of common knowledge around a project or issue? Are they tasked with providing feedback and receiving a response regarding an issue or project? Are they trying to improve the deliberation process and the decision making itself?

information and too few useful ideas or recommendations or decisions.

There are six criterions that make public participation most successful no matter what the project or issue is being deliberated or considered. (Crosby et al. 1986) 1.

The participants should be selected from a wide swath of the broader public and they should be appointed in a way that is not easily manipulated.

2.

The proceedings should reflect and promote effective decision making.

3.

The proceedings should be fair.

4.

The process should be cost effective.

5.

The process should be flexible, and easily adaptable to future changes in project scope or changes to participation.

6.

The likelihood that recommendations will be followed should be high.

Participant Selection: Participants must represent the broader public and must be selected in an open, transparent way that is equitable, fair, and not susceptible to manipulation. A common practice used to ensure a fair and equitable selection is for elected officials to appoint the participants to ensure that all groups are represented.

One problem with this is who exactly needs representation, and just how much representation do they perhaps need? What if one group is twice the size of another group, does that mean they should have twice the representation? What happens if some participants belong to multiple groups?

Page | 15

Effective Decision Making: Two aspects of decision-making can be evaluated for its rate of effectiveness: the way in which the decision was structured for the citizens advisory council and the way they performed within that structure.

A common criticism is that the general public does not have the expertise to come up with solutions to problems or draft policy to address specific issues. This criticism can be dissolved as long as the public hearings are designed in a way that best suits their needs.

Fair Procedures No perfect solution exists to balancing and maintaining a fair and open procedure yet there are a few actions to be taken that can best help maintain a perceived fairness by the public at large. A combination of staff input, advocacy presentations and an open agenda are three clear ways to foster a fair and open procedure. These actions will help decision makers steer projects or programs while at the same time give the public participants a forum to that gives them a fair stake in the decision making process.

Cost Effectiveness The immediate cost of having a small group of "insiders" making policy decisions might be lower than having a large group deliberate and decide upon an issue. Were a larger group involved in the decision making process the immediate costs would be higher due to more people being involved, the time it would take to inform the general public about the issue(s), and the staff required. However the long run cost savings would be much higher with a larger group if the right policy has been crafted that reflects the will of the agency and the needs of the public.

Flexibility The method for citizen participation must be flexible enough to adapt to constant changes in the scope of the program or project as well as the role the citizens’ play.

Page | 16

Recommendations should be followed Recommendations made by public advisory committees should be headed by elected officials, yet this routinely is not the case. "There is a critical difference between going through the empty ritual of participation and having real power."

For Community Leaders and Citizen Advisory Committees Community Needs and Strengths Assessment This provides for a deeper understanding into what the neighborhood feels are the most important issues affecting them by asking the questions: "What is important to our neighborhood?"

"How is the quality of life perceived in our neighborhood?"

"What assets do we have in our neighborhood to improve community health?"

Local Public Health Assessment This assessment focuses on the entities and organizations which help contribute to the overall health and well being of the neighborhood and community at large. This assessment asks the questions: "What are the components, capacities, competencies, and activities of the local public health system?"

"How are these essential services being provided to the neighborhood?"

Community Health Status Assessment This identifies quality of life and health issues affecting the citizens of the neighborhood or community at large.

"How healthy are our residents?"

"What does the health status of the neighborhood or community look like?"

Forces of Change Assessment This focuses in on identifying forces such as legislation, zoning ordinances, technology, or other impending changes that could affect the neighborhoods overall perceived health and well being. Ask: Page | 17

•

"What occurrences or development projects might affect the neighborhood's health and well being?"

•

"What might be specific threats or opportunities generated by such developments?"

Guidance for Implementing a Community Plan •

Plan how assessments be should be implemented. Finding that some assessments need to be studied further might show that other assessments need to be fleshed out in more detail as well. Conversely some completed assessments might show their relative connection to other assessments.

•

Establish subcommittees for each assessment. Subcommittees should determine who will be responsible for each assessment. This will ensure that assessments move through the process smoothly. Membership of these subcommittees should reflect the diversity of the neighborhood, the expertise, and the experiences of the citizens.

Overlapping membership with other subcommittees has the added benefit of sharing knowledge between them.

•

Promote linkages among assessments. Although each subcommittee is created to address one specific issue, wherever possible find the linkages between multiple assessments. This holistic approach to understanding assessments and their interrelatedness to each other will provide a much clearer picture to the issues facing the neighborhood and the solutions needed.

•

Celebrate Successes. As each assessment is being conducted, identify and recognize achievements. The assessment may be daunting and very time consuming but recognition for the work completed can go a long way. Celebrating and recognizing achievements not only bolsters community support but also widens support from the broader community.

Page | 18

Case Studies This section presents our case studies of 5 cities, in order: New York, Los Angeles, Portland, Vancouver, Seattle. Each section will begin with a short review of the case study, including the unique features of each city’s program. Next will be a review of the citywide program which will cover the program’s mission statement, history, legal origins, structure, and purpose. After this there will be a discussion of how individual neighborhood councils within each program organize themselves, and what specific powers they have.

New York: New York City’s neighborhood level agencies are by far the most integrated with the central city government; being appointed by city officials, operated by city staff, and integrated into the city power structure. Of all the case studies, New York is the only city with appointed board members and a tightly limited scope of work, covering only land use and budget advice. It does not offer many lessons for citizen participation, but some of the structural elements may be useful in terms of establishing a planning review board.

Citywide System Mission - “To consider the needs of the districts which it serves.” (New York City) History New York City actually has two levels of subdivision – the borough, and the community district. New York City is split into 5 boroughs – Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, and Staten Island, all of which were formed from neighboring counties when New York City was consolidated in 1898. In each Page | 19

borough there is a borough president, who is elected by the citizens of the borough.

Borough presidents were once powerful in city government, but over time their power has been cut and today they are mostly advisory, acting as advocates to the mayor for issues within their borough. Authorized by chapters 69 and 70 of the New York City Charter, and organized within boroughs, the city is also split into 59 Community Districts, which are used for planning purposes. A Community Board represents each community district, acting as an advocate for local issues on the level of both the borough and the city (Queens, District 3) Purpose The main purpose of the community boards is to monitor conditions within their district, report on those conditions to the mayor, city council and borough president, and also act as communication channels between the city and its citizens on the local level.

Although they often report on a variety of issues, Community Boards have three clear areas of focus that date back to their creation: advising on land use issues, advising on the city budget, and administering city services on the local level. The first role dates back to 1951 when Mayor Wagner formed 12 “Community Planning Councils” covering the borough of Manhattan to advise him on planning issues. The system was later expanded to the rest of the boroughs in 1963, and the councils were renamed “Community Planning Boards,” advising the mayor on both planning and budget issues. Finally, in 1975 Mayor John Lindsay expanded their role again under his “Little City Halls” program, which made each board responsible for administering city services within their district (Queens, District 3). Now for a look at how individual boards are formed and operate.

Individual Community Boards Membership Each community board represents the interests of all stakeholders present within the boundaries of its respective district. There is no explicit stakeholder definition for which applies to community boards; rater, the boards can be thought of as the most local branch of city government, interacting with all parties as necessary.

Page | 20

Board Structure Each Community Board can have up to 50 voting members, all of which are appointed by the borough president. Boards represent anywhere from 30,000 – 200,000+ residents. Any person who lives, owns a business or can demonstrate a ‘significant interest’ in the community qualifies to serve on the board. All members serve as volunteers for two-year terms at the pleasure of the borough president with no term limits, with half of the members being appointed each year. At least half of the voting members must be nominated by city council members whose electoral districts overlap the community district; the rest may be nominated by the community board itself or by any citizen in the community. The borough president is also mandated to use their appointments to represent all geographic and social segments of the community district, though in practice appointments are not carefully monitored (Quenns, District 3).

Community boards typically organize themselves using a comprehensive set of committees; some boards organize these committees by functional focus such as land use and education, while others assign committees to review specific city agencies, and still others organize based on geographic subdivisions of the district. No matter how a Board is organized, all official statements by the Board must be voted on by a simple majority quorum of members. The board must meet at least once every month except in July and August, not counting public hearings to review specific projects (Queens, District 3) Funding Each year the city allocates roughly $12 million for community boards that covers everything except rent and utilities for Board offices, which are covered by special city appropriations. Aside from their offices, each community board has nearly $200,000 in expenses each year, most of which covers salary for a professional district manager and several staff; the rest covering the generation of reports, mass mailings to citizens, community meetings and website operations, among other day-to-day costs (BerkeyGirard). All voting members of the board serve as volunteers with no compensation, except small allowances given for their personal expenses attending the board meetings and other functions. Community board members tend to feel that their operations are Page | 21

under-funded, and recent citywide budget cuts have hit community boards hard, with each of them being asked to reduce their expenses by $10,000 - $15,000 per year (Not Quite Passing the Hat). When necessary, Boards can also raise funds in creative ways – for example Community Board 3, covering the Lower East Side, has made some money by renting its offices out for on-site filming of TV shows that require a community office setting. On a more practical level, Community Board 6 representing the Park Slope district has founded a separate non-profit entity, “Friends of the Community Board” dedicated to raising funds for the board (Community Board Reform).

Scope of work The power of Community Boards is almost entirely advisory; though they do exercise some limited power over land use. Their primary advisory duties fall into three categories: land use review, comprehensive planning, and budget review.

Land use review Their primary land use power comes in the form of the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), which allows Boards to exercise initial review of all changes to the city’s map, zoning, special permits, selection of sites for capital projects, and granting of local franchises. Community boards can exercise their power of review over any project, public or private, that is not “as-of-right” within their community, with the exception of state and federal projects. When the Department of City Planning receives a development application subject to ULURP they must send it to the appropriate community board(s) and borough president within five days. The application is then analyzed by the community board and city planners in parallel, and if the planners identify a significant impact the project applicant must produce an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Community boards may then send a representative along with the city to define the scope of the EIS. After a draft EIS has been completed the Department of City Planning may “certify” the project, after which the Community Board has 60 days to notify the public of the project, conduct a public hearing, and submit written recommendations adopted at the public hearing by a quorum of members. The Board’s Page | 22

report is then sent to city planners for review and appropriate changes may be made before it is finally sent to the city council for approval (Queens, District 3) Planning Boards are also authorized to engage in comprehensive planning through a process called a 197-a plan. 197-a plans are comprehensive area plans that drive future development in a community or borough, and can be drafted by community boards, borough presidents, city planners, and the mayor. 197-a plans enter into force after being reviewed and edited by city planners and the City Council, as well as undergoing an environmental review (paid for by the city). However in practice only 6 community boards and one borough president have proposed 197-a plans; most plans are instead drafted by city planners and the mayor, however community boards also exercise the power to review and comment on these plans (Quens, District 3) Budget: The “Fair Share Process” Board’s final official advisory role is commenting on the budget process, known as the Fair Share Process. Each year the mayor publishes a “Citywide Statement of Needs” which describes all plans to open, close, or otherwise change city facilities and services. Once the statement is issued, community boards have 90 days to make the statement available to the people in their district, hold a public hearing, and submit comments to the Department of City Planning. Boards may comment on any part of the plan, however in practice they tend to focus on what facilities they feel would be best located in their community and what facilities should not be located in other communities, and then justify their reasoning. Boards give their comments to the borough president for further comments, and together the comments are submitted to the Department of City Planning, which then distributes the input to relevant city agencies for final decision-making. This process is considered to be one of the Board’s most important jobs because it allows the mayor, city planners, and city agencies to gather very fine-grained information about community needs and demands which would be otherwise difficult to collect (Queens, District 3) Page | 23

Accomplishments The success of community boards is quite varied. In one study of budget requests author John Mudd estimated that between 30 – 50% of district budget requests are approved (Froman). When it comes to planning there has been scattered success: several community boards have adopted very successful 197-a plans, including new housing development in the Bronx and a waterfront park on Manhattan’s east side. Community Board 4 also boasts one highly successful negotiation with a developer in which the board was able to negotiate 162 units of low and moderate income housing when the Zeckendorf Corporation purchased the former Madison square Gardens site. Other successes include the protection of family housing in district 10 and a cleanup of a toxic waste site in the Wakefield district, both in the Bronx (Forman).

Shortcomings There is concern that many developers do not take the authority of the Community Boards seriously. One way this disregard manifests itself is by developers partnering with agencies empowered by the state, which are immune to local planning law, such as the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Empire State Development Corporation, Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, and Bi-State Port Authority to evade ULURP and 197-a plan requirements (Angotti). Another problem is that although boards have the power to make influential statements, they do not always have the technical power to back up their analysis. Unlike neighborhood councils in other cities we have analyzed, the New York Community Boards lack strong support from the central city – volunteers are expected to train themselves on issues of city politics and planning code, and are expected to hire their own professional staff to assist them using whatever their budget allows for, which is often not enough. According to Thomas Angotti, chair of the Pratt Institute’s Planning Department the main reason why so few districts have prepared community plans if that most volunteer members have little background in planning. Furthermore, a study by David Rogers found that the success of community boards tends to be directly associated with the median household income of the community (Forman). However in the case of Manhattan the Borough president has made Page | 24

some attempt to provide Boards with some of the necessary planning tools. He has hired three urban planners to assist all the boards under his jurisdiction, and also set up an internship program for graduate planning students that assigns 12 interns to each community board in the borough (Berkey-Girard).

Page | 25

Los Angeles: With the greatest variety of council organizational styles, Los Angeles is a virtual laboratory of civic participation. On the one hand the program is highly organized, with the central city department having very defined goals and responsibilities. On the other hand, the individual neighborhood councils have been given very broad freedoms to determine their own structure, level of participation, and approach to problems. We will now look at how this system came into being and how it has developed.

Citywide System Mission Promoting public participation in government and making government more responsive to local needs by creating, nurturing and supporting a citywide system of grassroots, independent and participatory neighborhood councils (DONE – About) History This reform came at a time of deep discontent with the central city government.

Throughout its history various communities within Los Angeles have attempted to secede from the city and form their own local governments. The San Fernando Valley in particular has attempted to separate on multiple occasions, and in the mid 1990’s they joined with Hollywood to start a renewed campaign to break away from Los Angeles and create two separate cities. This campaign culminated in a 2002 citywide ballot initiative that, while enjoying success within the secessionism communities, failed elsewhere in the city. However even though the campaign was unsuccessful, it underscored deep problems in the Los Angeles and sparked renewed interest in making the central government more responsive to local communities (Sonenshein). The result was the creation of the Department of Neighborhood empowerment, authorized by the addition of Article IX to the city charter and put into law by the passage of Resolution# 172728 by the city council. This created a central department responsible for drafting a plan for a Page | 26

system of neighborhood councils. After 3 years of planning and community input, including more than 50 public hearings, DONE drafted a “Plan for a Citywide System of Neighborhood Councils” which was put into effect by Resolution# 176704, passed by the city council in May 2001 (DONE – Laws).

Structure DONE is under the control of a general manager appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the city council. DONE also consists of a seven-member council called the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners (BONC) who are also appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the city council (DONE).

Purpose DONE’s primary responsibilities include: •

Certifying, supervising, regulating and, if necessary, de-certifying neighborhood councils.

•

Assisting stakeholders with the certification process, including conducting outreach to communities with traditionally low levels of civic participation and educating them on the process of forming a neighborhood council.

•

Acting as a general resource center and information clearinghouse for councils, including distributing funds, assisting stakeholders with the technical details of forming a governing body, training council staff, helping coordinate meetings and meeting space, and mitigating barriers to participation such as the need for translation and childcare services.

•

Maintaining the “Early Notification System,” an electronic system for the city and councils to communicate with each other.

•

Holding a biannual meeting of councils called the Congress of Neighborhood Councils.

Page | 27

•

Provide the city with annual review and evaluation of the neighborhood council system, and provide quarterly reports on recommendations for outreach to areas with traditionally low rates of civic participation (DONE).

Funding To fund DONE the Los Angeles city council also created a special purpose fund, the Neighborhood Empowerment Fund, which in the 2007-2008 was allocated $7,861,997.

This includes department staff and general support expenses as well as a flat $50,000 distributed to all 88 registered neighborhood councils in blocks of $12,500 per quarter (City of Los Angeles – Budget)

Individual Neighborhood Councils Unique features To date 85 neighborhood councils have been certified, and more are forming all the time. Los Angeles has allowed each neighborhood council considerable freedom to determine their own boundaries, internal structure, and organizational priorities. This has led to the development of a virtual laboratory of community participation with every type of council imaginable representing different communities.

The size of neighborhoods ranges from 7,000 to 100,000+; the size of governing boards ranges from 9 – 51 members. Some neighborhood councils explicitly represent stakeholder groups in a style similar to Western SoMa and Page | 28

select board members by popular election, while others are appointed by neighborhood organizations including non-profits, schools, business groups, and homeowners associations, and still others use a mix of these and other organizational strategies. Some councils act in a strictly advisory capacity, while other councils take an active role in coordinating local projects. This diversity has made Los Angeles neighborhood councils difficult to analyze with the matrix developed for this report, but it provides a wealth of information that can be used to inform future creation of a Western SoMa neighborhood implementation board. For this reason each matrix category has been analyzed separately to allow for closer examination of the diverse organizational approaches (DONE).

Membership According to DONE, a stakeholder is any individual who lives, works, or owns property in the neighborhood and any individual who declares a stake in the neighborhood and affirms the factual basis for it. This is usually interpreted to include all residents, including the homeless, business owners and employees, and property owners of all types (DONE). Many neighborhoods have expanded this definition to further include any individual who participates in local organizations, such as schools, churches, and volunteer groups among others. Some require formal proof of participation, such as school enrollment documents or correspondence with an organization, while others allow anyone to approach the neighborhood council and make a case for membership even based upon informal participation in local organizations. Some councils have also expanded this definition to include institutional membership, allowing local organizations, public and private, to have representation and voting powers on the governing council (DONE - Roster) Governing Board Size The size of neighborhood councils varies from 9 – 51 members, with an average size of 17 members. There does not seem to be a direct relationship between the size of councils and number of neighborhood stakeholders – there are small neighborhoods of less than 10,000 residents that have more than 20 board members, and by contrast there are also neighborhoods of 60,000 – 100,000 residents that have less than 20 board Page | 29

members. The most important factor determining board size is how representative the neighborhood council members are of diverse populations. Many neighborhoods have chosen to further sub-divide themselves into smaller neighborhood areas, with representatives from each sub-area. Furthermore, many councils have chosen to have representatives from distinct stakeholder groups in a style similar to Western SoMa. Both of these strategies significantly increase the size of governing boards (DONE Roster).

Board selection process There are several methods used to select governing board members: popular election, geographic election, special interest group election, institutional appointment, and inherited legacy positions. Nearly all neighborhood councils observed included some number of popularly elected at-large positions, even if the bulk of the membership was selected though some other method. Geographic representation is a very popular method of electing board members – neighborhoods split themselves into smaller neighborhood areas, and only stakeholders within these sub-areas can vote on local representatives (DONE - Roster).

Another popular way to elect board members is to assign specific slots to specific community interests, ranging from renters, homeowners, business, non-profits, labor, environment, etc… in a style similar to Western SoMa. In some cases the representative for each group is elected by their constituents – in other words, only business owners may vote for business representatives, and only renters may vote for renters. However, much more commonly all registered stakeholders in the neighborhood elect the interest groups at-large. There is no apparent reason for the difference between communities methods, however it may reflect the relative difficulty in administering elections with multiple categories of voters that can only vote for certain positions when compared to simple atlarge elections. Another way in which special interest groups are represented is to have local institution appoint members, instead of relying on stakeholders to elect representatives. Commonly represented institutions include homeowners associations, labor unions, schools, cultural organizations, faith based organizations, community Page | 30

organizations, non-profits, business associations, etc… Typically the representative for these institutions is the president or an appointed special representative. The final method of selecting members is through inheritance – a number of neighborhood councils observed included the “immediate past president” or “immediate past executive council” as part of the board, as a means of maintaining continuity across ever-changing councils (DONE - Roster).

In addition to voting members, many councils also included non-voting advisory representatives. Advisors represent many types of organizations, but typically they are from city departments and agencies. Some examples of advisory organizations include: the planning department, the transportation department, the building and safety department, the police department, recreation and parks department, and local elected officials including LA city council members and congressional representatives (DONE Roster) Terms In general, council members tend to serve 2-4 year terms, with elections typically being staggered so that roughly half the council is up for election at any one time. Also, most councils observed only allowed members to serve as board members for a total of 8 years. Some also included further restriction, such as setting different term limits for elected and appointed officials, with elected members typically serving longer terms than appointed members, or in the case of at-large popular elections the most popular candidates serving longer terms than the less popular candidates. (DONE - Roster) Meetings Most neighborhood councils observed held regular board meetings on a monthly or quarterly basis. Some councils included formal means of citizen participation, including non-binding votes from members of the public attending the meetings, and other councils went further and organized special stakeholder meetings, similar to Western SoMa’s town-hall meetings (DONE - Roster) Scope of work Page | 31

The primary duty of all neighborhood councils in Los Angeles, as defined in the city charter, is to stay up-to-date on local issues, monitor local city services, review the city’s annual budget, and to issue advisory statements to any city department which has power over these issues of concern (Charter IX) (Sonenshein). Thus the central focus of all neighborhood councils is to draft and issue policy and planning statements. However many councils go beyond this power and also take a proactive role in shaping their communities by advocating for and supporting local improvement projects, providing input to local developers and non-profit organizations, and coordinating programs and resources with other neighborhood councils and city agencies such as the police department (DONE - Roster).

Accomplishments Changing city priorities Collectively, neighborhood councils have accomplished a lot. An early victory in 2004 saw a reduction in the water rates proposed by the Department of Water and Power after more than 30 neighborhood councils rallied against the proposal (LA Daily News).

In 2004 mayor James Hahn started a process, continued today by mayor Antonio Villaragosa, called “priority based budgeting” which asks neighborhood council members and all other city citizens to submit surveys that rank the city’s budget priorities, ensuring that the most important priorities are guaranteed funding while the lowest priority issues receive the last cut of funds. This has been turned into an annual process, and evidence shows that neighborhood councils have had a powerful effect on the city’s priorities (Sonenshein).

Early notification system One of the more effective civic tools created along with DONE is the Early Notification System (ENS). The ENS is an electronic, email-based service which allows stakeholders at all levels, from individual residents and businesses to neighborhood council officials and central cit department heads to communicate about city issues. The website allows users to subscribe to email notices which inform them of any meeting Page | 32

agenda, project proposal, or other action taken by the City Council, city departments, or other city agency. It also allows representatives from neighborhood councils to post official advisory notices to proposed city actions. This system allows fast, detailed dialogue between city agencies and neighborhood councils, and it also allows interested individuals to monitor these dialogues (City of Los Angeles).

Interacting with developers An outstanding example of neighborhood councils interacting with private developers can be found in the Sherman Oaks neighborhood. The Sherman Oaks neighborhood council has established a Land Use and Planning Committee capable of working with current and potential developers in the area. The committee is composed of a broad, representative sample of the neighborhood’s different interest groups and also includes professionals that are familiar with land use issues. This committee is now able to monitor and give recommendations on all new development proposed within the neighborhood (DONE – Best Practices).

Problems Elections Popular election of board members, despite being a centerpiece of most neighborhood councils in Los Angeles, have been a source of never ending problems for individual councils and DONE. When the council system was first started, it was the responsibility of each individual council to manage their own selection of board members, which was backed up by the advice, but not the organizational strength, or DONE. The lack of experience of local neighborhood organizers and the typical low turnout of local elections (less than 1000 votes cast in almost all neighborhoods) (status report) allowed relatively small groups to exert overwhelming influence in certain elections. Furthermore there has been considerable confusion over elections standards with inconsistent standards for voter status between different councils, different election dates that doesn’t match traditional election dates, and many other logistic problems. A 2007 review of DONE written by the Neighborhood Council Review Commission, Page | 33

ordered by the Los Angeles City Council recommended that the City Clerk should take control of all neighborhood council elections (NCRC). This recommendation was followed, and in December 2007 the City Clerk began the process of integrating neighborhood council elections into the larger city election process. This includes drafting standards for election procedures, providing resources for administering elections, and including information on neighborhood elections in the voter pamphlets mailed to residents (City of Los Angeles) Bureaucracy Another problem faced by many neighborhood councils has been complying with the multitude of bureaucratic local and state requirements, including The Brown Act, the California Public Records Act, and financial accountability for handling city funds.

Average citizens not educated in civics and law find it difficult to interpret these regulations, even after going through training sessions with staff from DONE (NCRC).

Page | 34

Portland: Together Portland and Vancouver represent a very different model from both New York and Los Angeles. Whereas the previous cities analyzed have chose to incorporate their neighborhood boards as branches of government, Portland and Vancouver have purposefully allowed their structured their system so that neighborhood councils have maximum independence – rather than being founded by the city the boards are recognized by the city, as long as they comply with certain legal minimum standards (Portland ONI). Now we will take a look at how this system has developed in Portland.

Citywide System Mission Portland’s Office of Neighborhood Involvement (ONI) mission is to provide the people of Portland with a framework to “effectively participate in civic affairs and work to improve the livability and character of their neighborhoods and city (League of Women Voters).”

History The ONI was founded in the 1970’s as a way to channel the newly heightened interest in local civic involvement brought about by political campaigns surrounding redevelopment. It was also seen as a way to satisfy emerging state and federal requirements for public participation in planning. In 1972 the Portland city council ordered a task force to design a citywide structure for neighborhood citizen participation.

The task force recommendations were adopted in full and the plan was realized with the passage of Ordinance# 137816, which amended Portland’s City Code Title 3.96 to create an Office of Neighborhood Associations (League of Women Voters)

Page | 35

Structure Today the system of neighborhood associations is a two-tiered structure. At the base are the local, grassroots neighborhood associations, which directly engage the public in civic issues.

Their goal is to give advice to city agencies on any issue affecting livability within the city, though in practice they tend to focus on land use, transportation, and crime prevention. The organizations were founded as strong, proactive groups, but over time dwindling city resources and cultural changes have made them into more reactive organizations. Above neighborhood organizations are District Coalitions – district coalitions have the same civic goals as neighborhood associations, but a single District Coalition represents many neighborhood associations. The primary goal of District Coalitions is to serve as a source of funding and provide technical and organizational assistance to their constituent Neighborhood Associations. Today there are 95 Neighborhood Associations and 7 District Coalitions.

Among the Neighborhood Associations, 90 are affiliated with District Coalitions, while 5 remain independent. Among the District Coalitions only two are city agencies, the other five have become non-profit organizations, which enter into annual contracts with the central ONI to fund their member association’s outreach and planning (League of Women Voters) Duties of ONI The duties of the ONI central office include the following •

Assist Neighborhood Associations, District Coalitions and others in planning and developing programs for public involvement, crime prevention, dispute resolution and budget review

•

Act as an information clearinghouse and resource to Neighborhood and Business Page | 36

Associations, other groups and the public •

Enter into, monitor, and administer contracts, and memorandums of understanding for Neighborhood Associations through District Coalitions.

•

Promote and facilitate communication amongst City agencies about public involvement best practices and policy

•

Support and promote public involvement within the Neighborhood Association framework.

•

Adopt and revise standards for recognizing neighborhood Associations and District Coalitions.

•

Pursuant to the adopted Standards, formally recognize a Neighborhood Association and/or acknowledge a Business District Associations (City of Portland - Auditor)

Funding In the 2006-2007 budget the total direct funding for the 7 District Coalitions was $1.4 Million. The non-profit status of most District Coalitions allows them to engage in independent fundraising including donations, special events, and grant funding to supplement their contracts with the city (City of Portland - ONI)

Individual Neighborhood Associations Neighborhood organizations have two primary roles: to act as liaisons between citizens and the city, and to issue official statements on any subject to any city agency regarding issues that, in the view of their members, affect the livability of their neighborhood. The bylaws observed for this analysis are available both on the city of Portland website and on the Resource CD. Membership It is a requirement of the ONI that recognized neighborhood associations work to attract a diverse membership, not only members from all areas and social groups within the neighborhood, but also resident, business, and community interests. Typically associations recognize any person who lives, works, owns property or runs a business in Page | 37

the neighborhood. Though some associations have also made allowances for outsiders to become members if they can make a compelling case to the board that they have an interest in the neighborhood, at which time the board can take a vote to accept or reject them as a member (City of Portland - ONI) Board Structure Neighborhood Associations are free to structure themselves in any manner, but most recognized associations have chosen to organize themselves under an executive board model, with at least four core officers: Chairman, Vice Chair, Treasurer, and Secretary. These officers are then usually accompanied by committee chairs of both standing and ad-hoc committees. Almost all associations elect their executive board members by popular vote, though some associations have space for representatives appointed by outside agencies, such as a representative from their district association.

Elected officials typically serve 1 year terms, and are put up for election at an annual general membership meeting. Typically any stakeholder defined by a neighborhood association is eligible to become a board member, through some associations have further requirements: for example candidates may have to have been stakeholders for a certain length of time, say six month, or candidates may have to have a history of ‘actively’ participating in association meetings (City of Portland - ONI) Funding Neighborhood Associations are completely independent agencies, and as such they can organize fundraising to support their activities. Most collect voluntary dues from members, but they are forbidden from collecting mandatory dues if they are officially recognized by the city of Portland. Each association’s most important resource, by far, is their district coalition. District coalitions pay for many of the daily expenses of their associations including; mass mailings, meeting space, outreach events, training both association leaders and the public in political issues, among other expenses. They also offer their associations expertise, as they are able to hire experienced community organizers and planning consultants to assist community leaders, and they are able to help coordinate multiple agencies when issues of mutual interest arise (City of Portland - ONI) Page | 38

Meetings Many, but not all, of the neighborhood associations observed in Portland have a unique feature, which is that the executive board does not have the final vote on issues; rather it is the individual members of an association that have the final vote, the job of the executive board is to act as a steering committee and offer issues for the general membership to vote on. For this reason there are two types of meetings in most neighborhood associations: board meetings and general membership meetings. Board meetings occur more often than membership meetings, typically monthly, or in the case of very active associations, weekly. The purpose of board meetings is for the board to develop an agenda to place before the membership at the next general meeting as well as to organize the daily operations of the associations, including member outreach, fundraising, and special events. Membership meetings are usually held quarterly or annually, though some very active associations hold monthly member meetings. The purpose of member meetings is for the members in attendance to vote on issues presented by the board in order to craft official statements on city plans and policies. Associations that operate in this fashion usually set a quorum of voting members based on historical attendance of member meetings, requiring half to two-thirds of an average sized audience to cast votes on issues. It is a requirement of the ONI that recognized neighborhood associations must give public notice and keep records of their meetings in accordance with state law.

Vancouver In most aspects, Vancouver’s system of Neighborhood Associations is very similar to Portland’s. They have similar history, philosophy, goals and methods.

However, Vancouver lack’s Portland’s two-tiered structure, meaning that rather than using independent district coalitions to support and coordinate neighborhood associations, the central Department of Neighborhoods is left to manage the system citywide. This case study will examine how this difference affects the quality and effectiveness of the organizations. The primary resource is the City of Vancouver’s Page | 39

website – the bylaws of all Neighborhood Associations observed are available both on this website and on the Resource CD in the back of this report.

Citywide System Mission The Office of Neighborhoods provides City residents, City Council and staff with responsive, coordinated services that promote and support collaboration and communication among residents and City government through recognized neighborhood associations (City of Vancouver).

History Formed only one year after neighboring Portland’s system, Vancouver’s system of Neighborhood Associations has many similarities to Portland’s and has similar roots in the heightened civic participation movements of the 1970’s. Neighborhood Associations were first recognized and brought into the system of city planning and policy with the passage of Vancouver Municipal Code 2.75 in 1975. This code created the Office of Neighborhoods, responsible for nominating Neighborhood Associations to the Vancouver city council for official recognition (City of Vancouver) Purpose There are 62 recognized Neighborhood Associations in Vancouver today.

Recognized Neighborhood Associations are considered to be: self-sustaining, independent civic organizations which recruit diverse representatives from neighborhoods with a defined geographic area; provide community input on the efficiency and effectiveness of the city's delivery of services; Establishing and following clear processes for reporting the association's position on matters affecting their respective neighborhoods; Undertake and manage projects to benefit the neighborhood association as may be agreed upon by the neighborhood association membership or contracted with…public agencies (City of Vancouver).

Page | 40

The purpose of the Office of Neighborhoods is to provide technical assistance to recognized Neighborhood Association, including: neighborhood action planning, outreach and communication with members, grant opportunities, leadership training, and communication with public agencies. Associations are completely independent organizations, which are responsible for their own day-to-day operations and funding with little support from the city. The city of Vancouver may occasionally give grants or make contracts with the Associations; most Association activities are funded through voluntary dues and donations (the city does not recognize Associations that charge mandatory dues), event fundraising and grant funding (City of Vancouver). Now let’s look at how individual associations are formed.

Individual Neighborhood Associations Membership According to the DON, recognized neighborhood associations must include all residents, property owners, business licensees, and representatives of non-profit organizations within the neighborhood boundaries as members. However some associations have decided that members who do not reside within the boundaries of the Page | 41

association, while still allowed to participate in association debates, should not have a binding vote on officers or issues brought before the membership (City of Vancouver) Board structure and selection Most associations observed followed an executive board model, with at least 4 officers: chair, vice chair, treasurer, and secretary accompanied by several at-large members or committee chairs. In Vancouver, all recognized association board members must be elected. There are two popular methods of electing these officials. First, members may vote officers into defined positions as executive board members, at large members or committee chairs. Second, members may vote on the entire board as at-large members and allow the board members to hold an internal election to select the executive officers. Board members typically serve 1-year terms, and most observed associations set term limits between 2 and 4 consecutive terms (City of Vancouver).

Funding Unlike Portland, Vancouver’s neighborhood associations are not allocated regular city funds. The city may at times make grants to associations for special projects, but the daily finances of the association are generated through voluntary donations, fundraising and grants. However the city will help associations locate proper funding sources to complete specific projects. One of the few restrictions Vancouver does place on associations, however, is that member dues cannot be mandatory, in that non-payment of dues cannot bar members from regular participation in association events or deny them voting rights (City of Vancouver) Scope of work Like Portland, the purpose of Neighborhood Associations in Vancouver is to act as liaisons between citizens and city agencies, and to issue advisory statements on any subject to any agency with regards to issues that affect the livability of their neighborhood (City of Vancouver).

Planning Page | 42

Neighborhood Associations participate in the city’s planning process in two ways.

First, they exercise review of changes made by the planning department; any changes made to the city’s comprehensive plan require that affected neighborhoods be notified and their input sought. Second, they can develop a “neighborhood action plan,” a document that, while not equal to the city’s comprehensive plan, establishes the priorities for the city and planning department to focus on in each neighborhood. Neighborhood action plans are the product of specially formed neighborhood planning committees organized in each neighborhood association. Forty-one neighborhoods of the total sixtytwo have completed neighborhood action plans (City of Vancouver) Meetings and decisions making Most associations observed hold meetings in a similar fashion to Portland’s neighborhood associations, with monthly or quarterly board meetings and quarterly biannual or annual general member meetings. Most associations also voted on issues in a similar manner to Portland’s neighborhood associations, with board members acting as a steering committee to set meeting agendas and members voting on issues. However some associations included another layer in the decision making process by allowing both board officers and general members to make binding votes, with the board members making the first vote which must be confirmed by the members before an issue is agreed upon. (City of Vancouver)

Page | 43

Seattle: Seattle’s system of neighborhood involvement is unlike any of the others previously reviewed. The heart of the difference is that instead of imposing a citydesigned system on the citizens, they allowed existing citizens groups to create it themselves from the bottom-up. In this way it is somewhat similar to Los Angeles, which allows local communities to draw their own boarders, name their own issues and form councils on their own terms, except that Seattle started its system based on a system of neighborhood organizations which existed decades before the creation of the program (Diers, 28). Seattle’s Department of Neighborhoods is also different because it is a much less formal and much more patchwork organization than the programs observed in other cities. For our analysis it is crucial to realize that in Seattle the neighborhood and district boards do not dominate the department, but rather they are only part of the process under the larger umbrella of the Department of Neighborhoods. For this reason the case study of Seattle will be a bit different – the district boards organized by the city will be briefly discussed, but much more attention must be paid to the citywide system and process as a whole. Seattle does not offer lessons in how to organize neighborhood boards, but it does offer insight into community outreach methods that have been essential to its success.

Citywide System Mission The Department of Neighborhoods works to bring government closer to the residents of Seattle by engaging them in civic participation; helping them become empowered to make positive contributions to their communities; and by involving more of Seattle's underrepresented residents, including communities of color and immigrants, in civic discourse, processes, and opportunities. (City of Seattle) History The Department of Neighborhoods has its roots in the community activism of the 1970’s and 1980’s when Seattle was full of active neighborhood organizations. The problem was that most of these groups limited themselves to reactionary politics and developed an adversarial relationship with the city and with each other. The resident Page | 44

groups were mostly organized to oppose increased growth and density measures, measures that were supported by business organizations and the city government (Diers, 28). To try and calm the community organizations and use the massive amount of public energy more productively, the city allocated $40,000 to research and design a neighborhood-planning program. The consultants hired for this process issued a report titled “Recommendations on Neighborhood Planning and Assistance” (Diers, 30). The city began to adopt the recommendations the following year by Seattle city council Resolution# 27709, and modified by subsequent Resolutions# 28115 in 1989; Resolution# 28948 and 29015 in 1994 (City of Seattle). Between its creation in 1987 and the late 1990’s, the Department of neighborhoods gradually absorbed other existing neighborhood related city programs, including: the Citizen’s Service Bureau, the Office of Urban Conservation, the P-Patch Program (a community gardening program), and the Neighborhood Planning Office. The mix-and-match nature of the department has contributed to its vitality, allowing it to offer a wide variety of services and programs that ultimately complement each other (Diers, 31).

Neighborhood Organizations Like Portland and Vancouver, Seattle has a two-tiered system, with individual neighborhood councils forming the foundation, followed by district councils on a higher level. However the philosophy of neighborhood council formation is very different in Seattle than in other cities examined. The Department of Neighborhoods does not actively form or formally recognize individual neighborhood organizations, and thus sets no limits or requirements on their composition, structure or purpose. Instead the DON works to connect with existing neighborhood organizations that have developed organically over time, and provides training and consultation to individuals who wish to start their own organizations in neighborhoods that are traditionally not organized (Diers, 30). Because of this there are hundreds of individual neighborhood councils, ranging from general resident organization and business organizations to ethnic immigrant organizations and faith-based groups, all of which interact with the department of neighborhoods. It is therefore pointless to discuss the structure and composition of these

Page | 45

groups because they have a very different function from general neighborhood organizations.

Districts District on the other hand are not an organic outgrowth of citizen action but a creation of the Department of Neighborhoods. There are a total of 12 districts, each formed around one of the city’s 12 Neighborhood Service Centers.

Initially the creation of the districts and district councils to represent them was a highly controversial issue among neighborhood organizations. The city desired a simpler way to interface with the many neighborhood organizations, but the neighborhood organizations feared that the districts might eventually overshadow them as the center of political attention, and maybe even compete with them for scarce public resources. To dispel these fears the Department of Neighborhoods made the District Councils very weak entities and gave the neighborhood organizations tremendous freedom to shape the councils as they saw fit. The DON primarily envisioned the councils as a place to gather all community groups in a district under one roof, allowing them to share ideas with each other and present a unified voice to the city. The city’s only requirement was that councils include a mix of different interest groups, with at least some representatives from both resident and business organizations (Diers, 44).

The key difference between Seattle’s District Councils and the neighborhood councils observed in many other cities is that the constituent members of each council are Page | 46

not individuals, but rather organizations – in effect they are councils of councils. District councils have no set number of board members, but rather consist of one representative from each resident group, business group, and community group within the districts boundaries. Some districts have gone further and include such organizations as school boards, parent-teacher associations, and large social organizations. There are no term limits and no official selection process. Representatives are typically either the president of the member organization or a special delegate of the organization who volunteers to sit on the district council. Each district manages its own funding, as many of the member organizations are non-profits or are otherwise experienced in fundraising, though they do receive certain resources through the Neighborhood Service Center assigned to them, including meeting space, outreach assistance and consulting services. Districts cannot apply for the city’s Neighborhood Matching Funds, though the member organizations may use the district as a platform to coordinate their applications for matching funds to launch joint projects (Diers, 44).

Neighborhood Service Centers Neighborhood services centers are one of the most important aspects of Seattle’s outreach appoach. There are12 centrers around the city, one in each district, and they act as a one-stop-shop for access to nearly all city services, a sort of physical 311 program.

At services centers citizens can find information about all neighborhood organizations in the city, request city services, and lodge complaints. Citizens may also pay public utility bills, apply for passports, licenses, buy transportation passes, and even have minor court cases, including parking and traffic tickets, heard by a magistrate. This wide variety of services attracts people from all parts of the community – rich and poor, politically involved and politically apathetic, people of all races, immigrants and citizens. Staff then use this opportunity to acquaint people with the city’s neighborhood programs and direct encourage them to get involved by directingthem to appriate organizations (Diers, 44).

Neighborhood Matching Fund The Neighborhood Matching Fund is an integral part of the neighborhoods system. The fund is sets aside special money from the city for grants to neighborhood Page | 47

associations, which associations may use for specific neighborhood improvement projects. By giving neighborhoods these resources, the Department of Neighborhoods enables associations to take a proactive role in realizing their neighborhood plans. But associations don’t just receive the money automatically; first members must do fundraising on their own and build up a reserve of cash or a obtain commitment of goods and services to be donated by members, only then can they apply for a grant from the fund, which will match whatever resources members were able to gather on their own.

The fund currently has 4.5 million dollars in it, and is a central tool used in implementing neighborhood plans (Diers, 55).

The Neighborhood Planning Process With regard to neighborhood planning, this process culminated in 1995 with the creation of the Neighborhood Planning Office (NPO), later absorbed by the Department of Neighborhoods. The NPO was a limited entity that set out to create a comprehensive 20-year plan for Seattle. It empowered neighborhoods by creating a 4.5 million dollar fund, which neighborhoods could use to hire professional planners and create their own neighborhood plan. According to Jim Diers, founding director of the Department of Neighborhoods, the Seattle neighborhood planning process differed from other cities community planning efforts in several important ways •

Neighborhoods voluntarily initiated the planning process, thus avoiding the usual suspicions over city planner’s motives and ensuring that only the most dedicated communities drafted plans.

•

Neighborhoods defined their own planning area – instead of being confined by census tracts or other artificial divisions, neighborhoods drew the borders of their plans according to their own sensibilities.

•

Neighborhoods set the scope of the plan, including only issues of central importance to their community.

•

Neighborhoods selected and hired their own city planners, allowing them to work with individual that shared their personal vision and goals (Diers, 128).

Page | 48

It is important to note that the outcome of these plans was beneficial both to neighborhoods and to the city government. All 37 neighborhoods offered the opportunity to create a plan participated; 30,000 people in all participated in the planning process; their plans passed review by the city with minimal argument; and despite the fact that many of the constituent resident organizations were originally formed in opposition to growth and density, none of the neighborhoods made an attempt to reduce city growth targets, and in fact some neighborhoods voluntarily accepted more growth than originally planned. However, in practice these stewards have very little control over plan implementation, which is carried out either by the city, the Department of Neighborhoods, or neighborhood organizations through the matching funds program (Diers, 128).

Implementation of Neighborhood Plans A new mayor, Paul Schell, took power just as the neighborhood planning process was coming to and end, and he made the implementation of the plans a key part of his administration. Citywide implementation of neighborhood plans has been a three-step process: 1. Decentralize city departments – The mayor was very committed to the success of the plans, and was willing to restructure all major city agencies to accommodate the plans. He split each agency into six separate, geographically defined service areas, each of which worked to incorporate aspects of the neighborhood plans within their service area into their work 2. Use ballot initiatives – When the mayor took office there were a total of 4,277 plan recommendations identified by neighborhoods, and only 1.85 million dollars (~$50,000 per plan) to implement them. To overcome this the Department of Neighborhoods identified common themes across neighborhood plans and worked with the mayor and city council to make these issues into ballot initiatives to raise funds through bonds. An example of this was the expansion and renovation of branch libraries across the city, or the creation of nine community centers. In all

Page | 49

this process has raised over $470 million in bonds, the vast majority of which directly funded neighborhood-planning goals.

3. Increase the Neighborhood Matching Fund – Seattle’s neighborhood organizations are highly involved in implementing plan goals through the initiation of local projects, and by increasing the Neighborhood Matching Fund from $1.5 million to $4.5 million hundreds of plan recommendations have been implemented (Diers, 128) Local responsibility for neighborhood plans is not a simple matter. It is not only districts or neighborhood councils that have responsibility for implementing plans on the local level. Each of the 38 neighborhood plans has an identified “neighborhood steward,” an individual responsible for overseeing the implementation of each plan. In some cases stewards are representatives from district councils, but in other cases they can be from community groups, chambers of commerce, homeowners associations, or even land use sub-committees of neighborhood or district councils (City of Seattle).

Page | 50

Taskforce Survey Purpose While not part of the original scope of work, we decided that in order to make recommendations to the task force we first required an idea of their expectations. The task force members have a more intimate knowledge of Western SoMa than any other group, and thus their input is essential. The survey was designed to give taskforce members the chance to choose their ideal structure for the future implementation board.

Methods It was administered while at a “town hall meeting” held on April 23rd from 7-9pm, which was hosted by the taskforce for community members to review the draft community plan.

Interviewers approached as many members of the taskforce as possible at the meeting, and with the exception of two members who left the meeting early, all task force members in attendance were surveyed. Out of the 22 member task force in place at the time of the survey, we received a total of 13 responses. A copy of the survey instrument and the raw data collected can be referenced in Appendix D and E of this report.

Survey design The survey consisted of eight questions in total: The first question established a member’s length of residency within Western SoMa, if applicable; two more questions asked members to rank their satisfaction with the current taskforce on a scale of 1 (Satisfied) to 5 (Unsatisfied); three closed ended questions sought feedback on specific structural elements of members ideal implementation boards, these included board size , the selection process for board members, and the potential for introducing term limits on board members; the final two questions were open ended and allowed members to list their personal suggestions for what could be done to improve upon current conditions of the taskforce, and what the ideal relationship for the implementation board and the city would be, following the adoption of the community plan.

Analysis Page | 51

Of the members surveyed, four members did not live within the western SoMa area; six members had lived within the area for 4-10 years; and four members had lived within the area for more than ten years. The responses for the rating of the current taskforce have been excluded from this report because some of the responses were suspected of being mismarked – in the course of conducting interviews it seems some members misinterpreted the 1-5 scale and may have marked that they were satisfied instead of unsatisfied, or unsatisfied instead of satisfied. For this reason we did not feel it was responsible to report the results of this report.

Structural Questions

Members were split on how large a future neighborhood plan implementation board should be. Five of thirteen members stated that the board should consist of at least ten members – some of these respondents also stated that they were satisfied with the taskforce’s current structure, and did not want to see it changed substantially going forward. The majority of members, seven of thirteen, favored a slightly smaller, but still large and diverse 6-10 member board. Only one member favored a much smaller board of five or fewer members.

Page | 52

Respondents were very split about how board members should be selected.

Nearly half the respondents, six of thirteen, want to see the process stay the same as the current taskforce, with all the membership being appointed by city officials. However an equal number of members also favor introducing some elected positions. Only one respondent favored popular election of the entire board.

The term limits for individual board members was the final structural question we addressed in the survey. Of those surveyed, no respondents favored 1 year terms, five favored 2-3 year terms, four favored term of 4 years or more, and three favored no term limits. One member also commented that while not desiring any specific term limits, they would like to see board members make a minimum commitment of at least 2 years.

Other members stated that continuity of board members was very important to them, and expressed concern that term limits would be an unnecessary and artificial restriction.

Page | 53

Open-ended questions The final questions addressed a broad spectrum of issues, the full list can be referenced in Appendix E of this report. In general the suggestions fell into several categories: first, even though the Board of Supervisors has been very politically supportive of the taskforce, members would like to see a greater budget commitment for their work. Second, although a representative of the planning department already sits on the taskforce, members would like to see more substantive support from the rest of the planning department. Third, members would like meetings to be better organized, including encouraging members to attend more meetings and arrive on time, more thorough background preparation for meetings, and tighter control of time limits on agenda items. Finally, some members stated that there needed to be more of a focus on working class families, especially affordable housing as well as youth and senior issues.

When asked what they envisioned as the implementation board’s relationship with the city, some members stated a desire for a purely advisory role, while others stated an interest in active policy implementation. Other suggestions included staff support from the planning department to work on neighborhood issues, increasing accountability of board members, and engaging in active review and advising on specific development projects and proposals from the city and developers.

Page | 54

Recommendations Building on our findings from our case studies, we have put together a set of recommendations for the Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force. These recommendations are purely advisory and are intended only as a guide for members of the taskforce to consider as they plan how to move forward.

Scope of work While not a direct question on the survey, we received multiple comments from task force members warning that a future implementation board’s scope of work and power should be purely advisory. Based on our case studies we agree with this assessment. None of the cities profiled give their neighborhood councils more than advisory powers. A neighborhood advisory council’s real power should not be derived from power given to it by the city, but rather from its own legitimacy. What Western SoMa offers the city of San Francisco is a chance for more efficient and more effective public hearings on local issues, which by itself is enough power.

The first role we envision for a future Western SoMa plan implementation board has two parts. First, they should be involved with a case-by-case review of projects from both the private and public sector. This means that they should issue official advisory statements on any change in policy or land use in the neighborhood that the people of the neighborhood feel affects their standard of living. Of course it is not practical to expect the council to review every single project in a neighborhood as dynamic and ever changing as Western SoMa; rather the neighborhood council should establish a framework that prioritizes certain projects over others. We suggest that two the first criteria should be the impact of the project; projects which have an obvious impact on important community issues such as health and safety of the neighborhood should be reviewed before projects where the impact is small. The second criteria should be size of the project. It would not be practical appropriate for the implementation board to involve itself with every small change which individual landowners may choose to make to their property; we feel that large projects, such as new apartment complexes or major transportation projects should take priority over much smaller proposals. Ultimately, Page | 55

however, it will be up to the current task force and future implementation board to determine exactly how to prioritize issues.

The community plan already drafted by the taskforce is a powerful reflection of the values of the people of Western SoMa, however as the neighborhood grows and changes a future implementation board should have the flexibility to grow outside of the confines of the plan. For this reason the second role we envision for a future implementation board is as a community forum where the concerns of local people may be collected, reported on, and if necessary acted upon proactively.

Board Size We envision the future plan implementation board being much smaller than the current taskforce. In our survey most members agreed, with eight out of the thirteen respondents desiring a board of 10 members or less. We recommend that the permanent board should in fact be somewhat small that than that. We propose a permanent board of 5 executive officers, identified as the chair, vice chair, treasurer, secretary, and communications liaison. To clarify, the communications liaison would interact with both the public and city officials, acting as the ‘voice’ of the board. This 5-member board could efficiently carry out the day-to-day business of the body. To supplement the executive officials the board could, as necessary, create ad-hoc committees to address specific issues, with a committee chairperson that would have a temporary position on the council. Committee members and committee chairpersons could be selected to represent a variety of community stakeholders. We feel that the large and very broad membership of the current task force, while essential to creating a community plan, could be a problem for a future implementation board that might be expected to issue advice in a more timely manner. Under our proposal the task force would retain the ability to represent a broad section of the neighborhood by appointing stakeholder representatives as necessary, but also benefit from the efficiency of a much smaller board.

Board selection

Page | 56

We envision all executive board members as being appointed by the Board of Supervisors. In our survey taskforce members overwhelmingly supported appointment as a means of selecting board members. We briefly considered popular election of members, however after our case study analysis we decided this would pose many problems within the Western SoMa context. Although most of the cities observed feature popular election of their councils, we felt that this would not be a practical option for a single neighborhood council without the support of a citywide system to assist the council in maintaining election integrity. Los Angeles allowed their neighborhood councils to run their own elections, and although some neighborhoods were able to run them successfully, many neighborhoods became divided by election issues and plagued by corruption and uneven voter turnout. We feel there is a serious danger of an election system for a Western SoMa council being abused unless the city was willing to devote much greater resources to establishing a reliable method of polling. We think the executive officials should serve for two-year terms before they are up for re-appointment.

We envision the committees and committee chairs to be appointed by the permanent executive officials. These committee members could be appointed on an asneeded basis for limited terms, perhaps one year, before their appointment is put up for review by the executive officers. The task force would also need to establish a system of accountability for both types of board member. This was not reviewed in our case studies, however we recommend that board members should at minimum be subject to removal for continued on-attendance, as under current task-force bylaws. We also feel that board members should be able to initiate a vote of no confidence in the case of a fellow member who is not adequately representing the interests of the neighborhood.

This vote of no confidence could then be conveyed to the board of supervisors for their consideration.

Meetings and Decision Making We feel that the primary responsibility of the executive board members should be to act as a steering committee, prioritizing the issues to be focused on at meetings. We feel that some aspects of the decision making structure from Portland and Vancouver Page | 57

should be incorporated into this body. The board could hold monthly meetings where it would select the most important projects to review and the most important community issues to address. During these board meetings board members could take a vote and establish their own position on the selected agenda items. The board members would then present the issue at regularly scheduled or specially convened community meetings – at the end of the meeting a vote of community members in attendance could be taken.

Both the board vote and community vote could be incorporated as part of the board’s official advisory statements to city officials and developers. Specially arranged community charrettes organized around particular projects – as many community charrettes as are necessary to establish a community consensus - could also supplement regularly scheduled meetings. These charrettes would act as a replacement for the public hearings typically organized by the planning department.

Funding sources It is unclear what the source of funding for this board should be, as the source and level of funding available from the city depends on the political will of the supervisors.

Most cities reviewed allocate money directly from the general fund. Many councils also raise money independently, however this ability is limited by their legal affiliation with the city. In Los Angeles neighborhood councils have run into problems fundraising due to their status as city agencies, which means that all donations or other financial assistance must be directed through and accepted by the city council; they are still working on a legal solution to this issue. It is unclear if the same problem would be faced in San Francisco, and the issue requires further research. However, even if legal limitations exist councils in both Los Angeles and New York have been able to work around this problem by partnering with outside non-profits in order to establish an independent channel for fundraising.

Other Another useful tool to copy from other cities would be the establishment of an early notification system, similar to that of Los Angeles or New York’s ULURP. The implementation board could work with the planning department to develop a method of Page | 58

automatically identifying projects, which fall within their jurisdiction and are eligible for review.

This also speaks to a larger issue, which is the essential nature of city support. All of the cities reviewed have large city support structure, which give them financial backing as well as technical and organizational assistance. We realize this may not be possible within Western SoMa since the organization is an isolated group rather than part of a citywide system, however we recommend that they current taskforce may use its good relationship with the Board of Supervisors and planning department to leverage additional resources as it makes the shift from a planning body to implementation board.

In exchange for these resources the future board can offer the city a much more efficient and legitimate venue for public hearings on proposed projects and developments, as well as a clear communication channel to the people of Western SoMa.

Page | 59

Works Cited Literature Chrislip, D.D. (2002) The Collaborative Leadership Fieldbook: A Guide for Citizens and Leaders (San Francisco, Jossey Bass). 10 May 2008 http://www.collaborativeleadership.org/pages/curriculum/manual_sections/AE_participan ts_guide.pdf Crosby, N., Kelly, J.M. & Schaefer, P. (1986) Citizen panels: a new approach to citizen participation, Public Administration Review, March/April, pp. 170–178. JSTOR De Souza Briggs, Xavier. Planning Together: How (and How Not) to Engage Stakeholders in Charting a Course. Diss. MIT, 2003.

Innes, Judith E., and David E. Booher. "Reframing Public Participation: Strategies for the 21st Century." Planning Theory & Practice 5 (2004): 419-436. JSTOR. J. Paul Leonard Library SFSU, San Francisco. 19 May 2008.

Workplan Committee. Letter to Strong Neighborhoods Initiative Project Advisory Committee. 20 Aug. 2006. Future of the PAC. San Jose.

Background "Draft Community Plan." www.sfgov.org 7 Apr. 2004. Western Citizens Planning Task Force. 19 May 2008 <http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/westernsoma/CommunityPlan/Community_Pla n_4_2008_v3.pdf>.

"Request for Proposals for: Eastern Neighborhoods and Western SoMa Historic Resources Surveys." www.sfgov.org. 26 Jan. 2007. City and County of San Francisco Planning Department. 19 May 2008 <http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/planning/EN%20RFP.pdf>.

Case Studies New York Netzer, Bellush. Urban Politics: New York Style.

New York University. New York, NY. 1990 Berg, Bruce F. New York City Politics: Governing Gotham.

Rutgers University Press. Piscataway, NJ. 2007 “About community Boards.” Queens Community Board 3.

Last Updated 01-30-2008. Queens Community Board 3.

Page | 60

Last Accessed 02-20-2008 http://www.cb3qn.nyc.gov/page/About/ New York City. “New York City Charter” Last Updated: 2004 Last Accessed: May 20, 2008 http://www.nyc.gov/html/charter/downloads/pdf/citycharter2004.pdf Forman, Seth. “Community Boards” Gotham Gazzette. Septemeber 20, 2000 Berkey-Gerard, Mark. “Community Board Reform” Gotham Gazzette. March 6, 2006.

Angotti, Tom. “New York’s Big Planning Projects: Avoiding the Public?”

Gotham Gazzette. March 2003.

Los Angeles Sonenshein, Raphael J. The City at Stake: Secession, Reform, and the Battle for Los Angeles. Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ. 2004 "Department of Neighborhood Empowerment." Department of Neighborhood Empowerment.

Last Updated: 20 May 2008. City of Los Angeles.

Last Accessed: 20 May 200 • • • • • •

Homepage - http://www.lacityneighborhoods.com/ “Laws” - lacityneighborhoods.com/laws.htm “About” - lacityneighborhoods.com/about_us.html “Accomplishments” – www.lacityneighborhoods.com/page2.cfm?doc=nc_best_practices “Best Practices – Monitoring Development” lacityneighborhoods.com/bestpractices/donebestpractices204443204_02082007.pdf “Neighborhoods Roster” - http://www.lacityneighborhoods.com/nc_database.htm

“The Neighborhood Council System” - Neighborhood Council Review Commission, City of Los Angeles. September 27, 2007 http://www.lacityneighborhoods.com/documents/finalReport.pdf City of Los Angeles “Early Notification System”- http://www.lacity.org/lacity161.htm “Budget” - www.lacity.org/mayor/budget/pdf/2008%20Adopted%20Budget%20.pdf) Page | 61

Los Angeles Daily News – “DWP rescinds 18% hike, decides on 11% instead.”

April 21, 2004. Los Angeles Daily News. http://www.lacity.org/done/articles/donearticles54719092_04212004.pdf).

Portland "What is the Office of Neighborhood Involvement (ONI)?" Office of Neighborhood Involvement.

Last Updated: 20 May 2008. City of Portland Last Accessed: 20 May 200 http://www.portlandonline.com/ONI/index.cfm?c=25967 Auditor’s Office, City of Portland – “Chapter 3.96 – Office of Neighborhood Involvement” http://www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.cfm?&c=28460 League of Women. “Portland Neighborhood Associations History” October 2005 Last Accessed: May 20, 2008 http://www.portlandonline.com/shared/cfm/image.cfm?id=111268 Vancouver “Neighborhoods.” Department of Neighborhoods.

Last Updated: 20 May 2008. City of Vancouver Last Accessed: 20 May 200 http://www.cityofvancouver.us/page.asp?menuid=10461&submenuid=10467 Seattle Diers, Jim. Neighbor Power: Building Community The Seattle Way. University of Washington Press. Seattle, WA. 2004 “Neighborhoods.” Department of Neighborhoods.

Last Updated: 20 May 2008. City of Seattle Last Accessed: 20 May 200 http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/

Page | 62

Appendix A

Page | 63

Appendix B – Scope of work agreement Team: Nick Tagas Derek Perry Seth Newsome Scope of Work Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force Best Practices Analysis and Recommendations

Client: Paul Lord, Senior Planner, SF Planning Department Western SoMa Citizen’s Task Force

Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task­Force ­ Values Statement

The Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task‐force shall promote neighborhood qualities and scale that maintain and enhance, rather than destroy, today's living, historic and sustainable neighborhood character of social, cultural and economic diversity, while integrating appropriate land use, transportation and design opportunities into equitable, evolving and complete neighborhoods. Throughout the live of this Task‐Force, the membership shall respect one another, be responsive to the constituencies they represent and foster a citizen‐based democratic decision‐making process.

Project Background

The Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task‐force has been given a unique opportunity to lead one of the first local efforts at democratic, community‐based planning in San Francisco. In 2004 Urban Studies students in the senior seminar class worked as consultants on the creation of database and maps as part of an inventory of existing land use within the neighborhood; in 2006 student consultants continued to update this inventory, as well as offering specific land use and design recommendations.

The Task‐Force is now nearing the completion of a Community Plan and is ready to move into a new phase of implementation rather than planning. The Task‐Force is now in need of specific recommendations for how to politically structure themselves to better accomplish this new mission. They have proposed this as a project for the Senior Seminar students of 2008, and our team has taken on the job of consulting the Task‐Force by providing a best‐practices survey of other American cities Neighborhood Boards, Neighborhood Councils and other participatory, democratic planning bodies.

Scope of Work Phase I Start­up ­ 02/18/08 ­ 03/06/08 ‐ Meet client and become familiar with the project background ‐ Create and agree to contractual scope‐of‐work for the project

Phase II Research Best Management Practices ­ 02/21/08 ­ 03/21/08 ‐ Look for examples of other metropolitan cities and how they facilitate BMP’s for citizen plan implementation boards and councils.

Phase III ‐ Analyze data collected, draft recommendations ­ 03/17/08 ­ 04/18/08

Page | 64

‐ Compare and contrast other cities BMP’s and find what works best for the city of San Francisco. ‐ Create five case studies of programs in other cities applicable to SoMa ‐ Prepare a Best Management Practices program or template. which can be adopted by the Western SoMa Citizen’s Task Force and to other neighborhoods within San Francisco.

Phase IV ­ Present Findings ­ 04/16/08 ­ 05/21/08 ‐ Deliver a powerpoint presentation of our findings to a jury of Urban Studies Faculty, invited professionals and classmates. ‐ Possibly present our findings with Paul Lord to the Western SoMa Citizen’s Task Force at the end of May. ‐ Submit a written report with specific recommendations for restructuring the task‐force as an advisory neighborhood council/board.

Deliverables ‐ Written report, consisting of best practices analysis of neighborhood planning programs and specific recommendations or a model program for use in Western SoMa and the city at large.

Nick Tagas

Derek Perry

Seth Newsome

Page | 65

Appendix C – Gantt Chart

Page | 66

Appendix D – Taskforce Survey

Page | 67

Appendix D – Taskforce Survey

Page | 68

Appendix E – Programs in other cities

http://www.lacityneighborhoods.com/documents/finalReport.pdf Page | 69

PUSHING

COMMUNITY BENEFITS

UPSTREAM A DETROIT CONTEXT AND CASE STUDY With Contributions from the Sugar Law Center for Economic and Social Justice NOVEMBER 2018

Authors Alexsandr Kanevskiy Doing Development Differently in Metro Detroit Sam Butler Doing Development Differently in Metro Detroit John Philo The Sugar Law Center for Economic and Social Justice

Acknowledgements This report was made possible by the generous support of the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Brademas Fellowship Program through The A. Alfred Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning at the University of Michigan.

D4 would like to offer a special thanks to the following organizations and people for sharing their expertise and knowledge with us during the formation of this report: Ben Beach Partnership for Working Families Luke Forrest Michigan Municipal League Aaron Hertzberg Milwaukee County, Wisconsin Richard Hosey Hosey Development LLC Rex Lamore Michigan State University Corey Leon National Development Council

Graphic Design by Bethany Desmond Designs Copyright Doing Development Differently in Metro Detroit, 2018 For more information, visit www.metrodetroitd4.org

Brad Lutz Detroit Brownfield Redevelopment Authority Community Advisory Committee Richard Murphy Michigan Municipal League David B. Reynolds Center for Labor and Community Studies, University of Michigan Dearborn Heather Seyfarth City of Ann Arbor Sandra Yu Stahl Detroit Brownfield Redevelopment Authority Community Advisory Committee

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

Introduction

2

Section I A Primer on Community Benefits & Detroit

6

Section II Authority, Potential Preemption by State Law, & Takings Issues

11 Summary of Recommendations 13 Section III Insertion Points 24 Section IV Cross-cutting Concepts 30 Appendix

INTRODUCTION The City of Detroit is experiencing a real-estate investment boom unlike anything seen in the last half century. As of this writing, there is nearly $5.1 billion dollars of investment in the Downtown, Midtown, and New Center corridors, alone. To some, the emergence of new businesses and the restoration of historic structures signals the return of economic vitality and growth. But to many others - those whose homes and livelihoods are in the path of this development - it feels more like an occupation than an opportunity. The primary question Detroit must confront is, how do we make sure that the much-needed investment in the City does not simply benefit a privileged few, but also those who have lived here through the days of disinvestment and decline?

The inclusion of explicit physical and economic benefits in the development process offers a solution, in part, to this dilemma. And it is not without precedent; the movement for community benefits has seen a growing momentum since the turn of the century. In cities across the country, communities and real estate developers have shown a willingness to communicate, negotiate, and achieve more equitable outcomes for vulnerable populations. Here in Detroit, we have even memorialized these ideals in a first-of-its-kind Community Benefits Ordinance (CBO). Yet, community benefits are still often hamstrung in cities like Detroit because of limited or last-minute coordination with the rest of the development process.

The following report considers, first, the admissibility of community benefits in the legal context of Michigan. It then explores various Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs) across the country - examples are drawn from Milwaukee, Atlanta, and New Rochelle - including their adoption and enforcement mechanisms, in order to propose new approaches to community benefits in Detroit. Our aim is to propose ways to move the community benefits process earlier in the chain of development, so that community members are assured a piece of the economic pie, and developers are assured a building process without unexpected hiccups. The hope is that by institutionalizing the expectation of community benefits through a variety of avenues, a larger swath of developments across the city will be included in the process, rather than only the largest and most expensive.

The report concludes by describing several cross-cutting approaches that are applicable to many different CBA scenarios and can be dovetailed with the potential insertion points found throughout the document. Taken together, these measures can evolve Detroitâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s burgeoning community benefits movement and ensure an effective way for communities to advocate their preferences and encourage Detroit to be a more prosperous and equitable city in the future.

1

SECTION I

A PRIMER ON COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND DETROIT 5 2

A PRIMER ON COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND DETROIT

Q: What are community Benefits?

its public-relations efforts and its dealings with regulating government bodies.

In the real-estate development context, community benefits describe a wide range of returns that a developer might provide for a community surrounding a new development.

These go beyond the classic â&#x20AC;&#x153;trickle-downâ&#x20AC;? model of job creation and increased economic activity; these benefits are designed to expressly represent the needs and wants of the community, as established through robust public participation in the planning process. While the scale and type of benefits achieved depends on the size of the development and the bargaining power of the community, among other things, it is common for large-scale developments to provide the following community benefits:

The drafting of concrete language is both an advantage and essential part of any successful CBA. Rather than vague commitments to community engagement and neighborhood revitalization, strong contracts provide a menu of benefits with explicit thresholds and timetables. In setting all the expectations forward, community members and developers alike can be promised transparency in the progress of the development. Economic development organizations, meanwhile, can use the clear-cut language of CBAs to measure the success of benefits like job creation, minority business ownership, or living wage requirements.

Refurbishment of public green space

Ideally, CBAs are negotiated ahead of the development process, before a development agreement is officially reached between the municipal government and a developer. Inside of a CBA, the coalition of community groups and the developer draft the language together, and this language is enforceable by either the coalition or, in the case of a CBA contained within a development agreement, by the municipality. If the stipulations of an agreement are breached, the CBA may provide for a number of responses, including clawbacks of public monies spent on the project and the withholding of building permits or rezoning.

Creation of an escrow account or trust fund for future community projects

Q: Does Detroit do CBAs?

Minority business growth and retention

To date, CBAs in Detroit have taken varied forms and shapes, with varied results for community members. Some have been privately negotiated between the community and the developer, as in the case of the West Grand Boulevard Collaborative (WGBC) signing an agreement with Henry Ford Health Systems and Cardinal Health. Others have been negotiated with government actors, as in the cases of Flex-N-Gate and the Gordie Howe International Bridge. Whether public or private, these agreements have historically been ad hoc, one-off deals.

Affordable housing minimum requirements or set-asides The provision of a living wage for temporary and permanent workers Environmentally-friendly design and construction Preferential hiring and renting policies for local residents

Dedicated arts or community space Some of these benefits are built into the design and construction of the physical part of the development, while others are meant to support the broader interests of social and economic revitalization of the surrounding area.

In many cases the developer bears the responsibility of providing these benefits, yet it is possible that businesses renting space in a new development may instead be asked to achieve these benefits.

Q: What are community Benefits Agreements (CBAs)?

When a community is solidly organized - often through a coalition of community-based organizations, organized labor, and faith-based groups - and has gained bargaining power, it may pursue a legally-binding contract with a developer in order to realize community benefits. These contracts, Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs), are negotiated between an elected or appointed body of community representatives and a developer. The exchange is meant to be mutually beneficial, as the developer receives the full-throated support of the community in

Detroit is the first and only large city in America to have a Community Benefits Ordinance (CBO). The ordinance, passed in 2016, requires projects costing $75 million or more and receiving $1 million or more in public incentives to complete a community benefits report. This report advises City Council while they negotiate and reach an agreement with the developer. The community benefits report is influenced by a nine-member Neighborhood Advisory Committee (NAC). The passage of the current CBO meant forgoing another ordinance proposal, which would have included lower project cost thresholds and agreements directly between developers and community representatives. Projects that have fallen under the scope of the current CBO include the Herman Kiefer Development, Midtown West, and the former Hudsonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site, among others.

3

A PRIMER ON COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND DETROIT

Q: Does the CBO mean equitable development in Detroit?

Q: WHY PUSH COMMUNITY BENEFITS UPSTREAM?

The CBO is an important step in ensuring that development in Detroit benefits the existing residents, while continuing to pave the way for economic growth and diversification by attracting new residents. Perhaps more importantly, the passage of the CBO is a message to residents that the City is committed to equitable development and making certain that public monies donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t simply accrue in the pockets of large developers.

The purpose of this report is not to criticize any existing community benefits agreements or ordinances, but rather to propose a new and complimentary way forward. Both the private CBA and CBO processes in Detroit aim to realize important benefits for communities; they are integral to Detroit becoming a leader in the equitable development movement. But there is more that we can do.

As stated above, the CBO is not triggered until certain thresholds for development or public subsidy are met.

When a project falls below the tier one trigger threshold of $75 million, it means that it may be left to tier two status and thus excluded from the same community engagement requirements, despite possibly having just as important consequences for surrounding neighborhoods. When developments do meet the tier one threshold, the resulting contracts are entered into by the developer and the City, rather than community coalitions. Community groups have pushed for amendments to the CBO to address these issues, including lowering the trigger threshold, ratifying contracts between developers and NACs, and more rigorous penalties for developer non-compliance.

A challenge we have seen thus far is that these processes can elicit confrontation between developers and communities.

Communities may feel frustrated at being shut out of the development process until the â&#x20AC;&#x153;eleventh hour,â&#x20AC;? while developers may view certain community benefits as stifling and impractical to the success of their project. Under the current CBO framework, by the time developers and community groups meet to discuss community benefits, the developer has often already begun site design and acquiring financing. Moving community benefits upstream can potentially bridge this disconnect, setting forth clear standards and limiting unexpected misalignments in project development.

4

A PRIMER ON COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND DETROIT

Pushing community benefits upstream offers a host of advantages in the development process: Developers can more easily include community benefits of greater significance The earlier community benefits are inserted into the language of development, the more effectively developers can deliver on these benefits. This means including benefits in their site plans and pro forma, reaching out to labor unions, and hiring consultants or contractors to fulfill provisions mitigating environmental impact. Admittedly, much of the work ahead of the community benefits movement is changing the culture of real-estate development; as benefits are moved upstream, they become a natural fact of doing business, and so developers will be prepared to commit to them or even propose their own where competition exists between developers for a given parcel.

Community benefits can be implemented with more projects Varying development standards, zoning overlays, RFP/RFQ requirements, and TIF requirements can all be applied to projects that vary greatly in size from large to small, without extra burden to developer. Rather than requiring community benefits from only the largest or most-publicly-funded development projects, this variety of channels means that any project with a significant impact on the surrounding area can be asked to provide benefits. This includes parcel development standards, which can deliver more benefits on an ongoing basis without continually struggling to gain cooperation and consensus among community groups and developers for each new development project.

Development projects can have greater accountability and transparency Establishing community benefits early in the process creates transparent benchmarks for the developer to follow. It also allows the community to hold the developer and government accountable when final site designs donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t align with original project specifications. By creating these standards early on, developers cannot claim that they were not aware of them, while communities cannot create new standards so late in the process that it inhibits the work of the developer. It also allows community members a chance at meaningful and productive contributions to a proposed development project.

Development Projects can happen more quickly Working with community and city officials in the beginning can streamline the development process. It can make community engagement less contentious and the process more predictable. Communities can throw their full support behind development projects before paperwork is submitted to regulating bodies, which means speedier approval of zoning changes, necessary permits, and variances. Governments can even go a step further and offer speedier approval processes for developers that enter into CBAs early on in the development process.

Community coalitions can build greater capacity and readiness When community benefits must be agreed upon early and more often, community coalitions are more likely to stay in constant contact, rather than getting together for one-off CBAs and afterwards allowing established relationships to atrophy.

This means expanding their reach and interconnectedness, while always being ready to represent their communities in new benefits agreements. Greater communication between community groups facilitates greater rewards for the communities they represent.

5

SECTION II

AUTHORITY, POTENTIAL PREEMPTION BY STATE LAW, & TAKINGS ISSUES 6

AUTHORITY, POTENTIAL PREEMPTION BY STATE LAW, & TAKINGS ISSUES

AUTHORITY, POTENTIAL PREEMPTION BY STATE LAW, & TAKINGS ISSUES When a local government looks to adopt an ordinance, administrative rule, or policy that requires community benefits, legal questions often arise. First, is the question whether a local government has the power to adopt community benefits requirements. Second, is the question whether an existing state law blocks the local government from exercising their power in the area of community benefits. Finally, community benefits requirements that impose a certain use or otherwise limit the use of an owner’s property raise the question whether the requirements amount to a taking of the owner’s property under the United States and Michigan constitutions. l. Michigan Cities Have the Power to Adopt Community Benefits Requirements Under Michigan’s constitution and state laws such as the Home Rule Cities Act1, local governments have broad general powers to adopt ordinances, administrative rules, and policies to promote the health, safety, and welfare of their communities. Michigan courts have found that cities are granted general police powers that are as broad as the police powers possessed by the state. ‘Police power’ is a legal phrase describing the power of a governmental unit to regulate for the health, safety, and welfare of the community. It is the basis upon which regulatory ordinances, administrative rules, and policies are adopted.

Additionally, when local governments act as a market participant, local governments have additional independent powers. A local government is commonly found to be acting as a ‘market participant’ whenever the local government itself engages in commercial activity such as contracting for services or goods, buying or selling property, or subsidizing private business. When the local government acts as a market participant, it generally can set the terms under which it will enter into contracts, transfer property, and transact with developers and private contractors. These powers can be even broader than the general grant of police powers.

Local governments in Michigan have broad general powers to regulate for the health, safety and welfare of their communities and to set the terms of development agreements and property transfers. Possessing these general powers alone, however does end the inquiry.

States such as Michigan often grant broad regulatory powers to local governments, but then may take back those powers in specific subject areas, often for the purpose of maintaining uniform practices throughout the state. As a result, an examination is also required to determine whether existing state law has pulled back

local governments’ power to regulate in the area of community benefits. This is a question of preemption. ll. Potential Preemption Issues Preemption is sometimes raised when community benefits requirements are proposed in a local ordinance, administrative rule, or policy. Preemption is a legal term describing the effect that laws passed by a higher governmental authority can have on the laws, regulations, and policies of lower governmental units.

Preemption occurs when the regulation of a lower government authority conflicts with an existing law of a higher governmental authority. When that occurs, the lower governments’ regulation is found to be preempted by the other law and the regulation would be found invalid.

Preemption occurs in two ways. Local government regulations are preempted by state law when the regulation either: 1) directly conflicts with a provision of state law; or 2) concerns a field entirely occupied by a state statutory scheme of regulation.

A direct conflict arises when a local regulation prohibits an act which state law permits, or permits an act which a state law prohibits. In other words, local governments cannot forbid what the state legislature has expressly allowed and cannot authorize what they have forbidden.

The mere fact that a local government imposes additional requirements beyond minimal requirements imposed by state law does not typically create a conflict giving rise to a question of preemption.

Preemption by a state regulatory scheme requires an examination of the scheme’s express language, legislative history, its pervasiveness, and the nature of the subject matter regulated. Courts will examine and weigh these factors to determine whether the state’s regulations were intended to occupy the entire field that is the subject of the local regulation. The mere existence of a state statute concerning the same subject matter as a local regulation does not give rise to preemption.

Rather, there must be evidence that the state intended to occupy the entire field of regulation on that subject matter to create uniformity throughout the state.

In the context of community benefits, preemption concerns may arise in the context of state zoning laws.

State zoning laws have not generally been found to preempt community benefits requirements.

A. Michigan’s Zoning Enabling Act. Michigan’s Zoning Enabling Act is a state law that seeks to establish the ability of local governments to regulate the development and use of land within their boundaries. Among other subjects, the Act

7

AUTHORITY, POTENTIAL PREEMPTION BY STATE LAW, & TAKINGS ISSUES

allows for the adoption of zoning ordinances; the establishment of zoning districts; sets forth the duties and powers of certain officials; and provides for the assessment and collection of fees.

The Zoning Enabling Act specifically permits local governments to establish zoning ordinances that regulate the development of land within its jurisdiction to ensure that use of the land promotes the health, safety and welfare of the public.

The Zoning Enabling Act itself does not give rise to preemption issues. If community benefits requirements are incorporated into a zoning ordinance however, various legal issues may arise. Most notably, in relation to fees charged to developers. The Act expressly permits local governments to charge reasonable fees as a condition of granting authority to use, erect, alter, or locate buildings within a zoning district. The scope of permissible fees that may be assessed as part of a community’s zoning regulations is uncertain, however they are likely to be reviewed in light of the costs to the local government that are associated with the permitting process and the project. Local government zoning regulations that impose direct fees unrelated to such local government costs may be found preempted by the Zoning Enabling Act. Local government fees however are not limited to zoning regulations. Local governments’ fees can impact developers in a wide variety of ways. In the context of community benefits, local government requirements that impose fees upon developers will be analyzed to determine whether the charge is a permissible fee for services or whether the charge is a disguised tax.

B. Fees vs. Taxes Distinguishing between permissible regulatory fees and improper taxes involves weighing of specific facts related to the fees charged. Regulatory fees are generally characterized as a charge exchanged for a service provided by the local government or for another benefit conferred by the local government.

There must be a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the value of the service or benefit provided. Taxes are generally characterized as an exaction (i.e. charge, assessment, etc.) imposed for the purpose of raising revenue for the local government. Taxes inure to the benefit of all – including the persons taxed. In contrast, regulatory fees inure to the benefit of the persons or groups who pay the fee.

Michigan courts will look to three factors to determine whether a charge is a permissible regulatory fee or a potentially impermissible tax. Under the first factor,

courts will look to the primary purpose of the charge.

Courts will ask whether it primarily serves a regulatory purpose or a general revenue raising purpose. The second factor requires courts to examine whether the fee is proportionate to services or benefits provided by the local government. Finally, the court will examine voluntariness, analyzing whether the charged party is able to refuse or limit their use of local government’s service or benefit.

Under these factors, permissible fees will primarily serve a regulatory purpose. The fee will be proportionate to the services or benefit conferred by the local government and the fee is paid voluntarily.

Taxes on the other hand will serve a general revenue raising purpose; will be assessed without regard to specific services or benefits provided; and cannot be avoided or limited by the actions of the charged party.

Whether local government fees that are charged to developers in the context of community benefits requirements are permissible regulatory fees or impermissible taxes is highly dependent on the facts. The language of any such local ordinance, administrative rule, or policy should be crafted to explicitly show the government’s regulatory purpose and the benefits conferred to developers.

Notably, otherwise valid local government regulations that have the effect of increasing costs to developers will generally not be analyzed under a regulatory fee versus impermissible tax analysis. Rather, such indirect costs will be analyzed to determine whether the regulation amounts to an unconstitutional taking of private property.

C. Regulations & Unconstitutional Takings Provisions found in the United States and Michigan constitutions bar local governments from taking private property without just compensation. On a development project, the property owner may claim that their property has effectively been taken when zoning permits or other regulations limit the use of the property or otherwise impose restrictive conditions on their use of the property. The issue commonly arises when the government directly regulates the permissible uses of an owner’s land and when, as a condition of granting a permit, a local government requires easements across the property for public use or a set aside of part of the property for specific uses that benefit the public.

Generally, a regulation restricting the permissible uses of an owner’s land is permissible unless the regulation does not advance legitimate state interests or denies an owner the economic use of the land.

A reduction in the value of property alone generally

8

AUTHORITY, POTENTIAL PREEMPTION BY STATE LAW, & TAKINGS ISSUES

does not amount to a regulatory taking. Likewise, requiring a property owner to obtain a permit or license to alter the use of their land is generally permissible. When a permit imposes conditions on an owner’s use of the land, additional issues arise.

A local government can condition the granting of a permit upon the property owner’s agreement to a public easement or set aside when two conditions are met. First there must be a sufficient nexus (i.e. relationship/connection) between a legitimate governmental interest and the condition imposed by the local government. Second, the imposed condition must be roughly proportional to the impacts of the owner’s proposed use of the property. Court rulings make clear that the rule permits local governments to insist that landowners bear the full costs of the impacts of proposed development, while preventing local governments from leveraging their legitimate interests to obtain ends that are unrelated to a development’s impacts.

As a result, community benefits restrictions that are imposed as a condition of granting a permit to an existing landowner must be drafted with these principles in mind. The purposes served by community benefits requirements will be found to be a legitimate governmental interest and, in most instances, there is likely to be a sufficient nexus to the required community benefits required. However, there must also be rough proportionality between the requirements imposed and the impacts of the development. This need to demonstrate rough proportionality and an essential nexus is often referred to as the “Nolan/Dollan test.” In other words, the impacts of the project should be analyzed and the community benefits that are required as part of the approval process must be developed with the intent to mitigate those impacts.

As stated, in order for community benefits provisions to be implemented as a condition for specific project approval, the provisions must meet the Nolan/Dollan test. However, a local government can avoid a Nolan/ Dollan legal challenge if it is acting as a marketplace actor. As the Partnership for Working Families explains: The [Nolan/Dollan] requirement does not apply to situations in which the government is in a contractual relationship with the developer, as when the local government leases land or provides subsidy for the project and wants to include community benefits measures in the lease or subsidy agreement.2

lll. Some Strategies to Overcome Legal Barriers Raised by Specific Requirements A local government’s community benefits requirements can be crafted in numerous ways to avoid much of the analysis described above. Most notably, local government requirements for a meaningful community engagement process whereby a voluntary community benefits agreement is reached between community representatives and the developer do not raise significant issues of state preemption, fees versus taxes, or unconstitutional takings under existing law.

Local permitting that strongly encourages, but does not require, such an agreement would likely avoid this type of legal analysis by a reviewing court. Private parties are free to enter into such agreements and preemption, fees versus taxes, and takings analysis simply do not apply to agreements voluntarily reached between private parties.

If a local government’s ordinance, administrative regulation, or policy required the privately negotiated agreement to be incorporated into the development agreement and permitted governmental enforcement of its terms, preemption and takings analysis, to the extent it would occur at all, would likely only occur at the time that the local government brought an enforcement action and, at that time, would likely be confined to the particular provisions that the government sought to enforce. In other words, the court would review whether the local government has the power to enforce the specific provisions that it sought to enforce. The court’s determination would not impact the enforceability of the agreement by the community itself.

Aside from the enforcement of private agreements, the local government has broad authority to enter into development agreements as a marketplace actor. In such circumstances, the local government is entering into a contract that confers benefits on a private party in exchange for the developer’s promise to build. The contract is a negotiated agreement conferring rights and imposing obligations on each of the parties.

A local ordinance, administrative regulation, or policy could require community benefits to be negotiated into development agreements. The specific benefits would then be negotiated and agreed to between the parties on a case-by-case basis, in tandem with a genuine community engagement process. Under this scenario, the specific terms of the development agreement would likely be subject to preemption analysis but there were be no issues with respect to fees versus taxes or unconstitutional takings. The fees versus taxes issue would be moot because any payments from the developer or contractors would be found to be in exchange for the benefits conferred by the local government. There would be no issue of an unconstitutional takings because the local government

9

AUTHORITY, POTENTIAL PREEMPTION BY STATE LAW, & TAKINGS ISSUES

would be found to have provided just compensation in the form of the incentives provided to the developer.

A local ordinance, administrative regulation, or policy that requires a genuine community engagement process leading to a private community benefits agreement or that takes advantage of the local government’s power to act in the marketplace are just two examples of various strategies that can be readily employed to mitigate perceived issues with preemption, fees versus taxes, and/or a takings issues, to extent such issues might exist with the requirements that a local government seeks to adopt.

1. While cities have the broadest powers among local governments, similar state laws exist that grant various powers to counties, townships, and villages.

2. Partnership for Working Families & Community Benefits Law Center. “Delivering Community Benefits Through Economic Development: A Guide for Elected and Appointed Officials.” http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/sites/pwf/files/1114%20 ITPI%20CBA%20Handout_print.2.pdf

10

Summary of Recommendations INSERTION POINTS Parcel Development Standards and RFPs We at D4 propose inserting comprehensive community benefits language into RFPs and passing stand-alone development standards for large publicly owned development sites. Detroit can do more than require strict land use and physical design requirements when requesting proposals from developers. This can be implemented by adding meaningful community benefit principles as an addendum to existing selection criteria or including them as guiding principles for all developments.

TIF Districts

Incentive Zoning

We at D4 propose exploring various ways TIF authorities, memorialized in the Michiganâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s TIF statutes, can be tied to community benefits. While Brownfield funds are unlikely to be vehicles for additional community benefits, a number of other statutes provide the possibility of infusing benefit standards parallel to the statutesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; intended purposes.

We at D4 propose exploring the feasibility of creating incentive zoning overlays that reward community benefits with additional tax abatement and/or regulatory relief. There are national examples for creating clear, predictable, and transparent systems for rewarding an array of community benefits based on volume and type. We further propose exploring the feasibility of inserting community benefit interests into the Planned Development District review and/or petitioning processes.

11

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

CROSS CUTTING CONCEPTS RFQs vs. RFPs We at D4 propose expanding the use of RFQs in place of RFPs, in order to create more flexible public-private partnerships with opportunity to co-create coherent visions for equitable development. By placing these expectations into initial development documents, Detroit can entrench these values into its planning ethos.

Social Impact Assessments and Community Impact Reports

Community Engagement Ordinances

We at D4 propose requiring developers to publicly disclose aspects of their project through Community Impact Reports.

We encourage inserting these reporting requirements into RFPs, development standards, City approval processes, and/or the existing Community Benefits Ordinance. We also propose exploring the creation of social impact criteria that can be used to perform Social Impact Assessments for development, even if that criteria is simply a“checklist” of considerations used when evaluating a project’s approval.

We at D4 propose that the CIty of Detroit enact policies requiring community engagement as part of the site review and/or any zoning petition process, in similar fashion to the Ann Arbor Citizen Participation Ordinance.

Community engagement triggers for “major projects” should be tied to project scale rather than total development cost. We also propose working with Detroit’s nonprofit community development sector to create City-sanctioned guidelines, standards, and methodology for community engagement.

12

SECTION III

INSERTION POINTS 13

INSERTION POINTS

INSERTION POINTS It is clear that pushing community benefits upstream delivers advantages to municipalities, developers, and community members. Less clear is exactly how and where to insert these potential changes into existing development processes.

Various progressive approaches from across the country offer examples for Detroit - ranging in scale and type - though it will be important to consider the city’s unique political and legal context when considering some of these changes.

D4 makes the following recommendations based on exhaustive case study research, interviews with policy experts and decision-makers, and a survey of Detroit’s development climate.

Parcel Development Standards and RFPs I. The Basics Parcel development standards refer to a set of community benefits standards that apply to every aspect of potential development in a given area. Rather than negotiating from scratch for a new community benefits agreement with every development, local governments can create a cohesive vision for development in multiple parcels by instituting a consistent protocol for new developers to follow; developers can build this expectation into their pro formas, minimizing the need to retroactively adjust their numbers based on separate individual review processes.

The institution of consistent standards across several contiguous parcels not only normalizes community benefits in the development process, but it also creates legal mechanisms by which communities and cities can enforce the completion of these benefits. This approach involves a government entity, such as a city or county, using its powers of land acquisition and then selling the land to a developer as a market actor.

Municipally owned land is often marketed to potential developers through a Request for Proposals (RFP), whereby a developer responds to a list of requested development criteria laid out by the government.

This is a procurement mechanism that helps cities in comparing similar projects based on approach and price. The design and development standards set by RFPs, including the regulation of architecture, open space, public space, and strategy, are general and transparent enough that many developers are able to meet them.

Community Benefit considerations can be inserted into municipal RFPs or simply passed outright through parcel development standards if an RFP process is not being used.

II. Best Practice: Milwaukee Park East Redevelopment Compact The Park East Freeway development in Milwaukee was the continuation of massive freeway builds in the

1960s that intended to encircle the City’s downtown core. By the mid-1970s, financing for the project had slowed to a crawl, leaving a one-mile long, elevated spur that remained underutilized, inviting blight and devaluing properties. In 1999, the State of Wisconsin, Milwaukee County, and the City approved the removal of the spur, opening up 64 acres of at-grade real-estate.

While the City Council voted against attaching a CBA to its land, the County decided to reach out to community groups to put together an agreement for its 16 acres of land. This result is known as the Milwaukee Park East Redevelopment Compact (PERC), and is one of the nation’s broadest multi-parcel development standards agreements.

The cornerstone development in the PERC area is the Wisconsin Entertainment and Sports Center, which will be home to the Milwaukee Bucks of the National Basketball Association. While only a portion of the development is on County land, the development will include progressive labor practices, which include raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2023, hiring at least 50% of workers from neighborhoods with high unemployment, and supporting workers in their right to unionize.

The PERC operates as an iterative addendum to land contracts for parcels on the land. Each compact is slightly different, depending on the needs of the residents and the area or the size of the development.

Common standards include: Competitive Development Agreements Cooperation with existing organizations Enhanced apprenticeship and training programs Local employment and coordination Prevailing wages and employment data disclosure Affordable housing Green space and green design

14

INSERTION POINTS

The Milwaukee Bucks Arena from the Northeast

Competitive development agreements guarantee that Milwaukee County will not simply sell the land for the highest price, but will instead seek proposals that offer the â&#x20AC;&#x153;greatest future benefit in jobs, tax base and image for the community, as well as, a fair price.3â&#x20AC;? Attached to this is the expectation that developers considered for contracts will fulfill the provisions of the PERC, so that only those developers with the organizational capacity to do so are considered.

Expectations for the fulfillment of the PERC ordinance are written into the Requests for Proposal (RFPs) that the County releases for available parcels of land. In writing these provisions into the RFP process, the County makes certain that developers are aware of the

direction that development is expected to take, and can work this into their pro forma calculations and timelines for development.

While the PERC runs parallel with the effective dates of the Tax Increment District (TID) that overlays the Park East Redevelopment area, it is not legally attached to it. That is, the TID is the creation of the municipal government and in no way does its tax authority support the provisions of the PERC. Officially, the requirements of the PERC are written into the land contract that the developer enters into with the County, and therefore makes legally enforceable the use of clawbacks, revocations of land, penalties and fees, and the withholding of development approvals.

The park east redevelopment compact The PERC Process is characterized by strong county level government leadership and support. Through the use of competitive development agreements, the County ensures that each parcel is developed according to the best interests of the community, rather than strictly according to the highest price.

COMMUNITY BENEFITS LANGUAGE IS REDEFINED WITH EACH NEW DEVELOPMENT

COUNTRY ACQUIRES LAND

COMMUNITY BENEFITS LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN INTO RFP PROCESS

Figure 1

THE CONDITION OF THE PERC ARE WRITTEN INTO THE LAND CONTRACT

CLAWBACKS AND PENALTIES ARE LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE THROUGH LAND CONTRACT MECHANISM

15

INSERTION POINTS

III. Parcel Development Standards & RFPs in Detroit The RFP process for land development in Detroit is largely handled by either the City’s Housing and Revitalization Department (HRD) or the Detroit Economic Growth Corporation (DEGC). These documents include points systems for the categories of development strategy, project design, and financial leverage; the projects are expected to be driven by Guiding Development Principles, which are “committed to advancing design excellence in all projects to produce an equitable, sustainable...living environment.4” City Council passes standards for how municipally-owned land can be developed. The planning department then negotiates with developers regarding potential features of a development project, some of which are ultimately memorialized in a development contract. It is important to note that these negotiations and agreements can happen with or without an official RFP process.

The most important ingredient in the creation of successful parcel development standards, as admitted by the Milwaukee County Director of Economic Development Aaron Hertzberg, is a supportive government body. In the case of the PERC, it was the County. At the time of this writing, the Detroit City government is currently in the process of finalizing its purchase of the largest contiguous property in the City: the 142 acre historic State Fairgrounds on Woodward and Eight Mile Road. There is a distinct possibility that this area is eventually divided into several parcels. But even if it isn’t subdivided, the former State Fairgrounds provides an opportunity to be an important precedent for broad development standards in Detroit. However, it requires an amenable and progressive City Council to set such a precedent.

We at D4 propose inserting comprehensive community benefits language into RFPs and passing stand-alone development standards for large publicly owned development sites. Detroit can do more than require strict land use and physical design requirements when requesting proposals from developers. This can be implemented by adding meaningful community benefit principles as an addendum to existing selection criteria or including them as guiding principles for all developments.

TIF Districts I. The Basics Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is an economic development tool used by municipalities to spur investment in neighborhoods that would otherwise be undeveloped. TIF legislation is often tailored to meet

certain site conditions, like encouraging the restoration of blighted properties or decontaminating brownfield sites. The “if not, but for” principle justifies this investment by arguing that if not for a given subsidy, an area would not grow economically. TIF districts use an initial public investment to bolster an area, including parcel assembly, demolitions, or environmental remediations, in the hopes that private developers will then continue building up the property.

The initial government investment is then recouped through the dedication of incremental tax revenue from properties within the TIF district, while the base tax revenue continues to be shared amongst various city functions. TIFs have become among the most popular of economic development tools because they offer dedicated revenue streams, flexibility in projects, and local control5. They are particularly useful in potentially delivering community benefits because of the latter. In most states, municipalities are uniquely gifted the power to establish TIF districts, which means that these are out of the scope of federal and state funding mandates, and thus likely to be out of the scope of federal and state preemptions.

II. Best Practice: The Atlanta Beltline The Atlanta Beltline, first envisioned in 1999 as a graduate thesis at Georgia Tech University, is “a planned loop of 22 miles of modern streetcar, 33 miles of multiuse trail, and 2,000 acres of parks.6” As of 2016 it has spurred over $3 billion dollars in private economic redevelopment, and offers a variety of recreational opportunities for residents, including free fitness classes, a linear arboretum, and an urban farm. With its anticipated completion, in 2030, the Beltline will connect 45 intown neighborhoods via a system of railroad corridors that formerly encircled the City.

Along with the establishment of a Beltline Redevelopment Area, the Atlanta City Council approved the creation of a Tax Allocation District (TAD). The TAD’s boundaries are coincidental with the boundaries of the Redevelopment Area, with its proceeds going to the reimbursement of improvements made within the area. Eligible uses for the funds include capital costs of public improvements like streets, bridges, utilities, parks, trails, and arts and cultural facilities. Unlike most tax-based redevelopment districts, the ordinance also includes provisions for specific community benefits: 15% of the proceeds of each TAD bond go to an affordable housing trust fund, which is used for the creation of affordable housing within the redevelopment area; the City hopes to build 5,600 units of affordable housing by project’s end, with a housing trust fund advisory board helping to guide the direction of this construction.

16

INSERTION POINTS

The establishment of an “Economic Incentives Fund,” which is collected through the issuance of each TAD bond and seeks to incentivize private development in portions of the Beltline Redevelopment Area that have historically “experienced unemployment, poverty, or little or no commercial, retail or residential growth or investment.7”

Sculptures along the Atlanta Beltline

A list of community benefit principles and policies agreed upon through community input and approved by the City Council; this list includes 12 “Guiding Principles,” including mixed-income housing, green space and environmental sustainability, business and economic development, and accessibility.

For the full document passed by the Atlanta City Council, please see Appendix B The attachment of community benefit language to a tax authority is a concept that is fairly unique, and even more unique on such a large development. While the concept is admittedly modeled after the Milwaukee Park East Redevelopment Compact discussed earlier in this report, it differs in the sense that money generated through the issuance of tax bonds is directly funneled to the fulfillment of specific benefits for the existing residents.

III. TIF Districts In Detroit Most TIF funding in the City is advanced through the Detroit Brownfield Redevelopment Authority (DBRA), which requires very specific eligible activities for the remediation of the land. The DBRA is funded through the Michigan Strategic Fund (MSF), which complicates further any potential to insert community benefits into the tax authority, since a change in the provisions of Brownfield Redevelopment in the City would mean a change across the entire state. After extensive conversations with leaders and policymakers in Detroit,

we found that the replication of an Atlanta Beltline benefits model would be logistically and politically infeasible through Brownfield TIFs. It is, however, possible that the City add community benefit language to a tax authority independent of the strictures of Brownfield redevelopment. The following table lists 10 acts that provide for the use of TIF.

TIF Statutes in Michigan 197 of 1975

Downtown Development Authority Act

Central business district improvement

450 of 1980

Tax Increment Finance Authority Act

Economic growth and increase in property values in municipality

281 of 1986

Local Development Financing Authority Act

Job creation & unemployment reduction

Brownfield Redevelopment Financing Act

Redevelopment of unused buildings or blighted areas

280 of 2005

Corridor Improvement Authority Act

Redevelopment of commercial corridors

94 of 2008

Water Resource Improvement Tax Increase Finance Authority Act

Water resource improvement

486 of 2008

Nonprofit Street Railway Act amendment

Promotion & financing of operations in a transit operations finance zone for a street railway system

250 of 2010

Private Investment Infrastructure Funding Act

Economic development & public infrastructure improvement

530 of 2004

Historical Neighborhood Tax Increment Finance Authority Act

Preservation of residential property values in a historic district

61 of 2007

Neighborhood Improvement Authority Act

Promotion of residential growth in a residential neighborood

381 of 1996

17

INSERTION POINTS

Attached to the stated purpose of each of these TIFs is the provision that allows a municipality to establish a plan with the “broad purpose of promoting economic growth.8” Cities like Atlanta and Milwaukee have shown that the inclusion of explicit community benefits beyond physical design can produce economic growth: projects advance through approval processes quicker, newly-employed local workers provide benefit to the surrounding businesses, more diverse neighborhoods attract continued investment, etc.. The open language of these statutes provides room for interpretation and can provide a vehicle for a broad range of community benefits.

We at D4 propose exploring various ways TIF authorities, memorialized in the Michigan’s TIF statutes, can be tied to community benefits. While Brownfield funds are unlikely to be vehicles for additional community benefits, a number of other statutes provide the possibility of infusing benefit standards parallel to the statutes’ intended purposes.

INCENTIVE ZONING

benefits being asked of them. In fact, many studies involving the impact of incentive zoning on affordable housing have returned lackluster results9. To help ensure the success of such programs, municipalities should consider a few important concepts: Targeting areas with higher relative densities, so that developers are motivated to exchange public improvements for regulatory relief or additional tax abatement.

The menu of potential public improvements should reflect the needs of the community, specifically seeking to provide benefits that a city could not achieve on its own.

The type and design of incentives should reflect the local context; market conditions should factor into the going rate for a piece of development capacity.

Where possible, the incentives offered through these programs should be paired with other city and state incentives, so that the potential benefits for developers are great enough to induce them into a partnership.

I. The Basics

II. Best Practice: New Rochelle DOZ

In incentive zoning, the ‘sticks’ of traditional zoning are replaced with ‘carrots’ that are meant to produce win-win scenarios for cities and developers alike. Municipalities offer additional development capacity - often in the form of a relaxation of zoning restrictions - in exchange for public improvements or economic stimulus. Popular asks of the developer include the incorporation of public green space in design standards, affordable housing, and historic preservation. Because of its flexibility and voluntary nature, incentive zoning is among the most widely-used community benefit mechanisms.

The Downtown Overlay Zone (DOZ) plan of New Rochelle, New York, covers 279 acres of real estate and permits over 12 million sq. ft. of new construction and 6,370 new residential units10. The DOZ offers provisions for design standards that deal with assemblages of land, frontage, and building height, as well as, incentives for developers that opt-into the plan early. What is distinctive about the DOZ, though, is its emphasis on community benefits and affordable housing.

Incentive zoning offers a number of advantages in the development context. First and foremost, it cultivates public-private partnerships, wherein the two sides have parallel interests. These relationships can help municipalities make the most of limited resources, using instead their regulatory authority to enhance development. Second, incentive zoning offers developers of unpopular projects an opportunity to diminish opposition while, simultaneously, receiving a benefit. Incentive zoning also provides municipalities with a buffer to a potential Nollan/Dolan challenge, since the actions of the local government are not punitive, but instead are voluntary and therefore cannot be understood as an exaction.

In the DOZ, structures are designated into one of three Development Standard levels (figure 3) depending on their scale. Based on this designation, and the district in which they are located, these developments are then eligible for a certain amount of Community Benefit Bonuses (figure 4). A menu of community benefits is provided inside of the DOZ (figure 5), which can be applied at the developer’s discretion. Depending on the type of community benefit chosen by the developer, a number of municipal entities then decide how completely a developer has provided the benefit.

These entities range from the Historic Preservation Board to the Planning Board to the Commissioner of Development.

Because of its voluntary nature, there is no way to ensure the widespread efficacy of an incentive zoning program.

Developers may decide that the additional development capacity is not worth the additional investment in public

18

INSERTION POINTS

New Rochelle Development Standards for DOZ Districts Development Standard 1

Development Standard 2

Development Standard 3

Site and Building Height Requirements Total Site Frontage Min. 1 Site Area Minimum

50 feet

100 feet

30,000 feet

5,000 SF

10,000 SF

30,000 SF 4 (40,000 SF in D0-1 only)

2 stories min 8 stories max

2 stories min 24 stories max

2 stories min 40 stories max & 605 feet max

2 stories min 4 stories max

2 stories min 12 stories max

2 stories min 24 stories max & 245 feet max

2 stories min 2 stories max

2 stories min 4 stories max

2 stories min 8 stories max & 85 feet max

2 stories min 2 stories max

2 stories min 4 stories max

2 stories min 8 stories max & 85 feet max

2 stories min 2 stories max

2 stories min 4 stories max

2 stories min 8 stories max & 85 feet max

2 stories min 2 stories max

2 stories min 4 stories max & 55 feet max

Not available

Building Height 2,3

Street Wall Height & Stepback Parking

See Street Wall Height at Sec 175.11 E(3) and Stepbacks at Sec. 175.11 E(4) Standards- See Article XIV- Off-Street-Parking and Loading Placement- See DOZ minimum requirments in Sec 175.11

Min side yard from residential districts

No building may be constructed within 20 feet of a side yard adjoining a parcel in the R2-7.0 or RMF-0.4 Districts.

Rear yard setback at residential districts

Where any parcel is contiguous to a parcel within the R2-7.0 or RMF-0.4 district, the rear yard shall be a minimum of 30 feet.

Figure 3 Total sum of all Site Frontages facing Streets, excluding those Site Frontages along Pedestrian Ways.

Additional Bonus Heights may be achieved according to Community Benefit Bonuses Figure 175.11 C. See Section 175.11 G&H for building height standards, exceptions and permitted projections and encroachments.

3 Except: 6 story, 65â&#x20AC;&#x2122; maximum building height where shown on the DOZ Standards Map in Section 175.08 4 Except in D0-1 where minimum site area is 40,000 SF. 1 2

19

INSERTION POINTS

New Rochelle

New Rochelle DOZ Height Bonuses For developments that satisfy all of the requirements of a Development Standard as defined in Section 175.11 B(2), the following standards shall apply: Development Standard 1 Bonus

Development Standard 2 Bonus

Development Standard 3 Bonus

D0-1

The total building height with Community Benefit Bonuses shall be a maximum of 605 feet

up to 2 Bonus stories

up to 4 Bonus strories

up to 8 bonus stories

D0-2

The total building height with Community Benefit Bonuses shall be a maximum of 285 feet

up to 1 Bonus story

up to 2 Bonus stories

up to 4 Bonus stories

D0-3

The total building height with Community Benefit Bonuses shall be a maximum of 125 feet

No Bonus Available

up to 2 Bonus stories

up to 4 Bonus stories

D0-4

The total building height with Community Benefit Bonuses shall be a maximum of 125 feet

No Bonus Available

up to 2 Bonus stories

up to 4 Bonus stories

D0-5

The total building height with Community Benefit Bonuses shall be a maximum of 125 feet

No Bonus Available

up to 2 Bonus stories

up to 4 Bonus stories

D0-6

The total building height with Community Benefit Bonuses shall be a maximum of 65 feet

No Bonus Available

up to 2 Bonus stories

No Bonus Available

* Where a site has been designated on the DOZ Standard Map as a Six Story Maximum Buiding Height, the total building height including Community Benefit Bonuses shall be a maximum of 6 stories and 65 feet.

Figure 412

20

INSERTION POINTS

New Rochelle DOZ Community Benefit Bonuses Bonus Category

Bonus Eligibility

Historic Preservation

25%, 50% or 100% of potential bonus, base on significance of preservation at discretion of Commissioner or Development with approval by Historic Landmarks Review Board

Permanent preservation by developer, on- or off-site (or a combination therof), of all or a portion of an “historically significant structure” in an “historically appropriate way” (as determined by the Commissioner of Development and approved by the historic Landmarks Review Board)

Arts and Cultural Space

25%, 50% or 100% of potential bonus, based on significance of provision, at discretion of Commissioner of Development with approval by Planning Board

Provision by developer, on- or off-site, of a “meaningful space” for an arts and cultural organization at a “substantial discount” for a “substantial period of time” (as determined by the Commissioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board)

Community Facility

25%, 50% or 100% of potential bonus, based on significance of provision, at discretion of Commissioner of Development with approval by Planning Board

Provision by developer, on- or off-site, of a “meaningful space” for a civic or educational user at a “substantial discount” for a “substantial period of time” (as determined by the Commissioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board)

Up to 100% of potential bonus, pro rata based on contribution

Permanent provision by developer, on-or off-site, of a “substantial number” of parking spaces opento the public at costs per space consistent with public parking offered by the City, with operating terms and allocation of economics satisfactory the City (as determined by the Commissioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board)

25%, 50% or 100% of potential bonus, based on significance of provision, at discretion of Commissioner of Development with approval by Planning Board

Incorporation on-site of “meaningful green elements” (e.g., LEED certification, microgrid, etc.) beyond what is required by zoning or other regulations (as determined by the Commissioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board)

Transit and Parking

Green

Formula1

33 Lecount Place (“New Rock City”) Passage: 50% of potential bonus (which bonus may be taken on- or off-site) for permanent provision by developer of public passage (maintained by developer) between Lecount Place and Harrison Street, meeting guidelines set forth immediately following passage of Overlay Zone by Commisioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board

Pedestrian Passage

25%, or 50% of potential bonus, as per Formula

Master Developer Passages: 50% of potential bonus (which bonus may be taken on- or off-site) for permanent provision by developer of public passages (maintained by developer) between Lecount Place and Memorial Highway, meeting guidelines set forth immediately following passage Overlay Zone by the Commissioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board 40 Memorial Highway (“Halstead New Rochelle”) Passage: 25% of potential bonus (which bonus may be taken on- or off-site) for permanent provision by developer of piublic passage (maintained by developer between Memorial Highway and Davision Street, meeting guidelines set forth immediately following passage of Overlay Zone by the Commissioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board

Open Space

25%, 50% or 100% of potential bonus, based on significance of provision, at discretion of Commissioner of Development with approval by Planning Board

Permanent provision by developer, on- and off-site, of a “meaningful public open space” (maintained by developer) open (as determined by the Commissioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board), meeting guidelines set forth immediately following passage of Overlay Zone by Commissioner of Development and approved by the Planning Board

Housing

25%, 50% or 100% of potential bonus, based on significance of provision, at discretion of Commissioner of Development with approval by Planning Board

Permanent provision by developer of one of the following: • Up to 5% of units @ 60% of AMI/ 5% of units @ 80% of AMI • 11% - 20% of units @ 80% of AMI

Up to 100% of potential bonus, pro rata as per formula

Contributions by developer of applicable Community Benefits Fund Amount/gross bonus SF to Community Benefits Fund

Community Benefits Fund

Figure 5

21

INSERTION POINTS

New Rochelle is innovative in its nuanced approach to incentive zoning as well as providing an extremely predictable and transparent system of incentives.

Where other municipalities are fairly limited in their public improvement requests, New Rochelle is not.

As mentioned earlier, one of the primary drawbacks of incentive zoning is that it is voluntary at its core.

To relieve this tension, the DOZ chooses to be even more flexible, rather than more stringent. By allowing developers a greater variety of community benefit options, and then calculating the reward based on a gradation of completion within each of these options, the DOZ captures developers at all scales.

In addition to Community Benefit Bonuses, the DOZ also requires a one-time Fair Share Mitigation payment, which offsets the anticipated capital and infrastructure costs associated with new development.

III. Incentive Zoning In Detroit Incentive zoning has no significant obstacles in the Detroit context. It is simply overlay zoning, which means that a petition must be filed and approved by the City Council. The regulations and standards of this overlay zone are then memorialized in the zoning code. While other cities, such as Seattle and Boston, have had success offering additional building height in exchange for community benefits, this same tactic is unlikely to work in Detroit’s current market conditions. However, an incentive zoning overlay in Detroit could offer additional tax abatements or possibly streamlined approval similar to Detroit’s “Pink Zoning” concept.

“Pink Zoning Detroit” The “Pink Zoning” program, launched in 2016 with the help of a $75,000 grant from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, seeks “to transform complex land use regulations into a positive force for the revitalization of our city.”14 Three teams are currently developing three different commercial sites. Besides proposing unique placemaking and design ideas, these teams work alongside the Planning and Development department to recommend potential changes to the City’s zoning and development regulations. The aim is to find innovative solutions to the maze of archaic land use regulations and bureaucracy that often bogs down development.

For now, “Pink Zoning Detroit” is primarily concerned with lessening the burden of inflexible regulations and costly process inefficiencies for smaller revitalization projects. These include urban farms, creative projects, and small-scale rehabilitation and repurposing of disused buildings. If this first iteration proves worthwhile, “Pink Zoning” would like to eventually grow this concept to a ‘lean’ ordinance, one that would extend to many commercial corridors across the City.

Community benefits provisions could be included in the program, as long as they do not undermine the original purpose to empower non-traditional developers.

However, these provisions should be written into any future ‘lean’ ordinance, along with a legal mechanism for clawbacks or forfeiture of land contracts.

Planned Development (PD) District There are additional ways to include community benefits into Detroit’s zoning practices. The Planned Development (PD) district is a zoning classification that “permits flexibility in overall development while ensuring adequate safeguards and standards.”15 Parcels eligible for PD designation must be at least two acres and “capable of being planned and developed as one integral unit.”16 The application criteria currently include design criteria that seeks to provide a benefit to the user and to the City outside of, and beyond, what the City could achieve otherwise.

Development projects seeking PD classification must be aligned with Section 503 of the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, which means that they must perform the following functions, as according to Section 61-3-96 of the Detroit Zoning Ordinance:17 I. Permit flexibility in the regulation of land development; II. Encourage innovation in land use and variety in design, layout, and type of structures constructed; III. Achieve economy and efficiency in the use of land, natural resources, energy, and the providing of public services and utilities, encourage useful open space; and IV. Provide better housing, employment, and shopping opportunities that are particularly suited to the needs of residents Because PD projects are negotiated on a case-bycase basis, possible community benefits can be easily tailored to the character of the community in which they are based. In the case that a project is receiving public investment, any possible community benefits included under this clause would be free from the scrutiny of State preemptions. It is likely that PD projects are by definition more defensible from preemption because they are variances in the existing zoning code.

22

INSERTION POINTS

We at D4 propose exploring the feasibility of creating incentive zoning overlays that reward community benefits with additional tax abatement and/or regulatory relief. There are national examples for creating clear, predictable, and transparent systems for rewarding an array of community benefits based on volume and type. We further propose exploring the feasibility of inserting community benefit interests into the Planned Development District review and/or petitioning processes.

3. Milwaukee County. “Park East Redevelopment Compact.” http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/sites/pwf/files/documents/ PERC_0.pdf 4. City of Detroit. “Wigle Site Developemnt: Request for Proposals.” https://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/docs/ HousingAndRev/2016/WIGLE%20RFP%20Final.pdf 5. Greifer, Nicolas. “An Elected Official’s Guide to Tax Increment Financing.” https://www.gfoa.org/sites/default/files/EOGTIF. pdf 6. Atlanta Beltline. “Atlanta Beltline Overview.” https://beltline.org/about/the-atlanta-beltline-project/atlanta-beltlineoverview/ 7. City Council, Atlanta, Georgia. “Ordinance 05-O-1733.” http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/sites/pwf/files/documents/ Beltline_Ordinance_0.pdf 8. Krogulecki, Drew. “Tax Increment Financing in Michigan.” State Notes. http://www.senate.michigan.gov/SFA/Publications/ Notes/2016Notes/NotesWin16dk.pdf 9. Seattle Planning Commission. “Incentive Zoning in Seattle: Enhancing Livability and Housing Affordability.” https://www. seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/SeattlePlanningCommission/IncentiveZoning/SPC_Incentive%20Zoning.pdf 10. City of New Rochelle. “DEVELOPER’S GUIDE TO THE CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE’S DOWNTOWN OVERLAY ZONE (DOZ): A Step by Step Guide to Development in the DOZ” https://www.newrochelleny.com/DocumentCenter/View/6823/Step-by-StepGuide 11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.

13. Ibid.

14. Runyan, Ryan. “Could Pink Zones help Detroit businesses?.” https://detroit.curbed.com/2016/8/11/12440166/pink-zones-detroit-business-urban-planning 15. City of Detroit. “Detroit Zoning Ordinance (11 Jul 2015)” http://detroitmi.gov/portals/0/docs/cpc/Ch%2061%20Jul%20 11_%202015.pdf 16. Ibid 17. Ibid

23

SECTION IV

CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS 24

CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS

CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS There are certain progressive development concepts which can be applied across the spectrum of potential benefits insertion points we’ve discussed so far. These are designed to make the development process more transparent, entrench community benefits, and build a broader institutional awareness of what benefits are and who they affect. Regardless of what direction the installation of community benefits takes in Detroit - whether they are ultimately pushed upstream or not - the following concepts can serve as the first steps in making development more equitable at all levels.

RFQs vs. RFPs I. The Basics Requests for Qualifications (RFQ) are different from RFPs in that they are not bids. Whereas many RFP processes focus almost solely on soliciting the best offer according to predetermined dimensions, and also according to the greatest financial return, RFQs are, instead, qualifications-based selection processes. RFQs seek to find developers that fit best with the City’s vision for a development project and provide flexibility to work with community members to determine that vision. RFQs are less focused on the parameters of a parcel or project than on the organizational capacity and approach of a potential developer. Once a developer is chosen, the City may negotiate on the terms of the contract. If these are not met, the City can move on to the second or third choice without the rigorous justification that a competitive RFP would require.

While, sometimes, RFPs and RFQs may be used together, they are usually used in place of each other.

As municipalities become more and more concerned with the cohesive aesthetic or equitable development of their cities, RFQs are becoming more commonplace.

As RFPs and RFQs are often the first step in making public land available to private developers, they are the ideal place in which to insert community benefits language. The first step in securing these benefits is providing more information on proposed developments to the public. This can be legally challenging in the space of and RFP or RFQ because developers may claim that these documents contain trade secrets or other sensitive information. A possible solution to this problem is the inclusion and public distribution of an executive summary or Community Impact Report that includes some of the basic information regarding the project. At a minimum, such public disclosure could include the type of development, the anticipated public investment in the project, and the number and quality of jobs associated.18 It is important that the public is informed about developments as they are being conceived. A basic knowledge of proposals can inform the potential asks that a community includes in a community benefit

agreement. A mixed-use development can offer benefits in the form of affordable housing and commercial space set-asides, whereas a light industrial development can perhaps offer more in the way of workforce training. The West Oakland Army Base in Oakland, CA offers a good example of how this sort of transparency can happen through a Community Impact Report.

Besides notifying the public about a development, there is the question of how best to insert specific community benefits into an RFP or RFQ. The Milwaukee Park East Redevelopment Compact successfully integrated a community benefits agreement into its RFP process, which ensured a legal mechanism for the County if a developer did not follow through with their promises.

In Atlanta, developments on parcels in the beltline are required to abide by Community Benefit Guiding Principles that are included as addendum to other requirements of the TAD. II. RFPs, RFQs, and Community Benefits in Detroit In Detroit, the RFP process is still rather opaque. While the RFPs themselves are made public, the proposals submitted in response are not. There is essentially no public input until a proposal is chosen and site review is complete. Inside the RFP, a list of selection criteria is weighted and used to choose a suitable developer. This list includes development strategy, design standards, financial capacity, team experience, and local hiring and participation. The RFP is informed, on the whole, by the Planning and Development Department’s Guiding Development Principles, which are not unlike the Atlanta Beltline’s Community Benefit Guiding Principles.

The close analogy of these documents highlights the feasibility adding explicit community benefit language to the Detroit RFP/RFQ process.

We at D4 propose expanding the use of RFQs in place of RFPs, in order to create more flexible public-private partnerships with opportunity to co-create coherent visions for equitable development. By placing these expectations into initial development documents, Detroit can entrench these values into its planning ethos.

25

CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS

Social Impact Assessments and Community Impact Reports I. The Basics Social impacts are widely defined as anything associated with a planned project that affects or concerns people’s physical, cognitive, and emotional health at any level. This includes the health of individuals, families and households, social groups, and communities19.

Admittedly, the preceding definition is broad enough to potentially include nearly anything that is valued by a group of people. The following list provides a better understanding of what these impacts might feasibly include in the real estate development context:20

and management of social impacts.”21 While the name is evocative of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), SIAs are less a clear science, and more an iterative process with community members to determine what individuals and the community as a whole sees as important to their everyday lives, and how a potential development project might affect them.

SIA involves the active engagement of the regulatory body, e.g. municipal government, local NGOs, community development corporations, and the community from the very beginning of development, long before any governmental approval is required. The process of SIA potentially involves the following activities, although this is not an exhaustive list, and the combination of activities is decided on a case-by-case basis:

Changes to people’s way of life, including but not limited to their work, school, and general interaction

Interact and coordinate with any other assessment teams to ensure that cross-fertilization of impacts is considered in the separate assessments

Changes to the cohesion, stability, and character of a community

Create a community profile

Changes to people’s environment, including but not limited to the quality of air and water, the availability and quality of food, the level of hazard to which they are exposed, and access to existing resources Changes to their property rights or their economic livelihoods Changes to the extent to which people are able to participate in decisions that affect their lives Changes in the expected influence of a project versus the actual influence It is important to consider that not all changes associated with development are necessarily social impacts. Modest changes that occur over the long-term in association with a development are often beneficial to communities, as these communities can absorb the changes without adverse effects. Sudden, large-scale changes, on the other hand, which may affect anything from housing prices to employment opportunities, can rightly be counted among social impacts.

Social Impact Assessments Social Impact Assessments (SIAs) are designed to predict and counter these adverse social impacts. According to the International Association for Impact Assessment, “Social Impact Assessment is now conceived as being the process of identifying and managing the social issues of project development, and includes the effective engagement of affected communities in participatory processes of identification, assessment

Construct a baseline, against which to measure change Prepare a plan to compensate community members that may be affected by the development project Identify ways of enhancing the benefits of the development project Identify stakeholders and relationships Facilitate community engagement process Educate affected communities in how they might be affected by the planned development project After an SIA is completed, it is important to distribute the findings to both government officials and the public at large. This can be done through a Community Impact Report.

Community Impact Reports Community Impact Reports refer to prepared documents associated with a potential development that are made publicly available early in the development process.

Requirements for developers to provide Community Impact Reports can be embedded in an RFP or RFQ, or can be triggered by certain types of development (i.e. large-scale retail developments) during the siteapproval phase.22 Community Impact Reports vary in the type of information developers are required to disclose to the public. They can report on the type of development, the

26

CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS

anticipated public investment in the project, the number and quality of jobs associated, or housing impacts, as well as the project’s ability to meet certain neighborhood needs.23 If a community is able to review the Community Impact Report for a potential development early on, then it can work with the municipal government or developer to address any negative effects described in the report.

As stated earlier, developers may claim that such public disclosure contains trade secrets or other sensitive information. However, if the requirements for Community Impact Reports are clearly laid out in a transparent, universally-applied manner then this can mitigate developers’ complaints.

Additionally, when considered with other measures described in this report, it is easy to envision how Community Impact Reports could publicize the results of a Social Impact Assessment or community engagement process.

II. Social Impact Assessments and Community Impact Reports in Detroit The development context in Detroit, as noted, is often at odds with the needs and interest of the communities in which the development is happening. Community engagement efforts at the end of the development process are problematic because they do not leave adequate opportunity for developers and the City to address the real concerns of community residents.

The difficulty addressing community concerns is exacerbated by no consistent format by which to assess and intervene. Just as EIAs play an important role in ensuring that a development project does not cause undue or excessive environmental damage to its physical context, the use of SIAs could similarly create a consistent framework for measuring and mitigating the social impacts of a development project.

Community Impact Reports embedded in the RFP, RFQ, or zoning petition process would provide information about new development projects far and above the requirements of the current planning practices and the CBO. As mentioned earlier, the current form of the CBO does not place an emphasis on making public the details of a project development until late in the development process. The CBO is also silent on the amount and type of information a developer is required to disclose to the Neighborhood Advisory Council (NAC), causing confusion for both the NAC and developer. Codifying a requirement for Community Impact Reports in both the CBO and throughout the planning review process would make the process more consistent, predictable, and effective.

We at D4 propose requiring developers to publicly disclose aspects of their project through Community Impact Reports. We encourage inserting these reporting requirements into RFPs, development standards, City approval processes, and/or the existing Community Benefits Ordinance. We also propose exploring the creation of social impact criteria that can be used to perform Social Impact Assessments for development, even if that criteria is simply a“checklist” of considerations used when evaluating a project’s approval.

Community Engagement Ordinances I. The Basics At the heart of any community benefits measure is interaction and engagement with community members.

Indeed, if community benefits are generally meant to address needs within the citizenry, then public engagement is necessary to understand those needs.

Most municipal land use regulation processes have some sort of democratic or public comment mechanism.

The entire development process has insertion points for public input, from initial community meetings leading to a City’s master plan, to a public hearing associated with a particular parcel’s rezoning. However, by and large, these public insertion points are not equipped to comment on community benefits or further equitable development unless explicitly set up to do so.

Neighborhood planning or master planning processes examine larger community needs, but have a broad scale of analysis, and therefore don’t directly impact specific developments. Many public hearings associated with particular sites (i.e. rezoning or zoning variances) have a granular lens, but often relegate themselves to mitigating negative effects of the individual site rather than addressing larger community need. To be effective, policy leaders must strive to identify ways for larger community needs to be discussed at the granular scale of a particular development project.

Community Engagement Ordinances are part of the solution. They can require developers to gain input from the community as they design their project, therefore enabling greater opportunity to provide community benefits. They are a possible vehicle for larger community needs to be addressed at the granular scale. There are various triggers within the development process where such an engagement process could take effect as well as various forms of engagement that could be required. It is advisable for these triggers to be

27

CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS

placed as early in the development process as possible.

Community Engagement Ordinances can be tied to the site approval process, rezoning or variance approval, and even subsidy or tax abatement approval.

II. Best Practice: Ann Arbor Citizen Participation Ordinance The Ann Arbor Citizen Participation Ordinance applies to any development project that would require public hearing, including “major projects,” planned development projects, or projects seeking amendments to the City’s zoning map. The developer must host at least one “citizen participation meeting” prior to submitting their petition and include a summary of that meeting with the petition.

The ordinance ensures that community members learn about and have a chance to comment on a development before the developer submits their petition for City approval. This is mutually advantageous to the developer, the community, and the City. The ordinance benefits the developer because they are able to make any adjustments to their project before submitting their paperwork; the community gets greater opportunity to express its opinion; and City officials can begin to ascertain the public’s opinion before the public hearing, making that hearing more effective in the end.

Ann Arbor’s Citizen Participation Ordinance is a model engagement ordinance for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that it is thorough in assisting a developer through the complicated process of community engagement. The ordinance sets the project up for success by stipulating that the developer must meet with the Planning Department before engaging the community. Impressively, the ordinance also stipulates that the developer be given City-created guidelines for engagement.

The engagement guidelines are comprehensive and offer advice on a number of components related to engagement including notice requirements, meeting location, format, and logistics. The guidelines also offer assistance around what content to put in the meeting notice and how to properly cancel the meeting if needed.

Lastly, the Ann Arbor Citizen Participation Ordinance requires that the developer must submit a summary of community engagement activities with the City petition.

The engagement summary must contain the nature of the engagement, a list of community concerns, as well as how the developer plans to address any concerns brought up.

III. Community Engagement Ordinances in Detroit There is nothing preventing Detroit from passing

a Community Engagement Ordinance similar to Ann Arbor’s. At the time of this writing, it has been suggested that the title of the existing Community Benefits Ordinance (CBO) be changed to “Community Engagement Ordinance,” some feeling that is a better reflection of what it is.

While the CBO is a mechanism for community members to provide input into large development projects, a separate community engagement ordinance, modeled after Ann Arbor’s, would be more effective. The CBO currently takes place toward the end of the development cycle, whereas a community engagement ordinance tied to plan review or petition submission would take effect at the beginning, thereby providing greater opportunity for community influence.

A separate community engagement ordinance would also have greater applicability over a greater number of projects than the current CBO. Even if the trigger threshold for tier one projects under the CBO is reduced from $75 million to $50 million, it still will only be applicable to large projects costing tens of millions of dollars. Ann Arbor’s ordinance sets community engagement requirements and standards for any project requiring public hearing.

Furthermore, Ann Arbor’s ordinance defines “major projects” by the scale of the project (i.e. number of residential units, square footage, and/or height) rather than the total expenditure as done in the current CBO. Tying engagement requirements to project scale more effectively captures projects that will have significant impact on surrounding communities, rather than simply targeting developers making large capital investments. As an example, a project investing heavily in environmental sustainability or historic preservation may have a higher total expenditure than other projects, but have far fewer negative community impacts. Tying the engagement requirement to project scale also prevents a developer from potentially aschewing engagement requirements by breaking their project into phases costing less than the trigger threshold.

A community engagement ordinance modeled after Ann Arbor would allow a variety of community members to participate in direct discourse with the developer rather than a select body of 9 individuals, most of whom are appointed. It also would put the onus for organizing and paying for engagement on the developer rather than the City government. Some have complained that the current iteration of the CBO puts an unwieldy burden on City staff and taxpayers for organizing the various Neighborhood Advisory Council meetings. If Detroit is going to enact policies requiring additional community engagements, it would be beneficial to put that cost burden onto developers.

28

CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS

Finally, it is worth noting that community engagement is only valuable if carried out effectively. Especially in low-income communities of color, where the memories of neighborhood destruction under the guise of urban renewal are all too fresh, engagement must be done with sincerity, accountability, and transparency.

Engagement done poorly can be more damaging than no engagement at all.

Therefore, the creation of engagement guidelines and standards similar to Ann Arbor’s would be crucial to its success in Detroit. Such standards could be created in conjunction with various nonprofit and place-based organizations, some of whom could even be certified as official engagement facilitators available to consult with private developers. Detroit is fortunate to have an active nonprofit community development sector with a vast array of community engagement and facilitation experience to be tapped. Certifying and professionalising engagement methods can be mutually beneficial for the community, developers, and City government.

We at D4 propose that the CIty of Detroit enact policies requiring community engagement as part of the site review and/or any zoning petition process, in similar fashion to the Ann Arbor Citizen Participation Ordinance. Community engagement triggers for “major projects” should be tied to project scale rather than total development cost. We also propose working with Detroit’s nonprofit community development sector to create City-sanctioned guidelines, standards, and methodology for community engagement.

18. Partnership for Working Families. “Improving the Development Process.” http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/cblc/ improving-development-process 19. Vanclay, Frank et. al., International Association for Impact Assessment. “Social Impact Assessment: Guidance for assessing and managing the social impacts of projects.” http://iaia.org/uploads/pdf/SIA_Guidance_Document_IAIA.pdf 20. Ibid.

21. Ibid.

22. Partnership for Working Families. “Policy & Tools: Community Impact Reports.” http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/resources/policy-tools-community-impact-reports 23. Partnership for Working Families. “Improving the Development Process.” http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/cblc/ improving-development-process

29

APPENDIX A 30

Park East Redevelopment Compact (PERC)

By Milwaukee County, Wisconsin Supervisors Johnson, Coggs-Jones, Broderick, Dimitrijevic, Clark, West, White, Holloway, Weishan, Quindel, DeBruin A RESOLUTION To create the Community and Economic Development (CED) Fund and adopt the Park East Redevelopment Compact (PERC) in order to provide additional sustainable community benefits for the development of the County Park East land.

WHEREAS, Milwaukee County will seek the sale of significant real estate assets, including approximately 16 acres of land in the Park East freeway corridor and these lands represent tremendous assets held in trust by Milwaukee County for the benefit of the citizens of this County. This revenue has been used in various ways, but often it has been used to offset basic operating expense or tax levy; and WHEREAS, while offsetting tax levy to fund operating expense is a tool that is sometimes necessary, such major sales should provide a longer-term and sustainable benefit to the community. True stewardship of these major public resources requires that their sale provide a benefit for the citizens; and WHEREAS, the redevelopment of the Park East land, by itself, using private development, will not take advantage of unique opportunities to provide sustainable community benefits especially to those in most need of jobs; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Park East Redevelopment Compact (PERC), as provided in this resolution, will provide the best opportunity to provide increased jobs and tax base not only on this land, but also for the entire community; and WHEREAS, this resolution also provides for the creation of a Community and Economic Development (CED) Fund, The CED (pronounced 'seed') Fund would be comprised of a series of programs designed to address 'gap' needs in the marketplace and it is not intended to reproduce resources that are available either in the commercial marketplace or through other public resources; and WHEREAS, the CED Fund recognizes that there are areas where the market does not make available the resources required for sustainable development and by providing those resources, the Fund seeks to be a catalyst that will enable businesses to develop and grow, communities to prosper, and the lives of all of our citizens to be enriched; and WHEREAS, this Fund would be endowed with all net revenue generated by the sale of land in the Park East Corridor and be used to carry out this resolution for the Park East Redevelopment Compact (PERC); and WHEREAS, in the future, with the exception of revenue allocated to other purposes by statute, ordinance, resolution, or budget action, revenue produced by the sale of real estate assets (except park land sales) may be allocated to the CED Fund by the County Board at the time of each sale; and The following are some possible uses of the CED Fund: â&#x20AC;˘ Minority Business Working Capital â&#x20AC;˘ Small & Minority Business Contract Financing

• Housing Development • Neighborhood Business Development • Economic Development • Environmental Mitigation/Brownfields • Carry out Park East Redevelopment Compact (PERC); now therefore BE IT RESOLVED that this resolution adopts the principle and creation of the Community Economic Development (CED) Fund and adopts the Park East Redevelopment Compact (PERC) with the specifics of the policies and procedures to implement this resolution to be adopted separately by the County Board; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the following Park East Redevelopment Compact (PERC) establishes the policies for the sale of the County's Park East land to achieve the goal of providing additional sustainable community benefits for the development of this land: 1. Competitive Development Agreements Each parcel of Park East land will be sold through a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) which shall be reviewed and approved by the County Board. Milwaukee County should not just sell the land for the highest price offered but rather should seek development proposals which will provide the greatest future benefit in jobs, tax base and image for the community, as well as, a fair price. The policies to carry out the PERC will be contained in the RFP and the final legal requirements will be included in each development contract. These contracts will be for 27 years or until the Tax Incremental District (TID) is terminated. (A parcel may be all or part of one or more blocks as contained in the each RFP.) 2. Cooperation with Existing Organizations Milwaukee County will cooperate with and use existing governmental and private organizations, programs and funding sources whenever possible to carry out these PERC policies.

3. Community and Economic Development Fund (CED) The County CED fund may be used to carry out these PERC policies whenever other funding is not available. The CED fund is described in other parts of this resolution.

4. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Milwaukee County will include their current DBE policies, as they apply to county construction contracts,in all RFP's and development contracts. The Office of Community Business Development Partners shall assist in administering this provision.

5. Enhanced Apprenticeship and Training All RFP's and development contracts shall contain additional apprenticeship and training requirements, using existing agencies whenever possible. Participation in County sponsored training shall meet county established income and residency requirements.

6. Local Employment and Coordination Milwaukee County will hire one or more non-profit community economic development agencies to assist in coordinating the DBE, training and local employment requirements. All employment vacancies for developers, contractors, trainees, owners and tenants, who will work on the County Park East land, will be required to be provided to the County and the County's designated coordinating agencies, so that they may assist local applicants to apply for these

vacancies. This requirement will end with the TID. Milwaukee County and many in the community have as a goal that the workforce on the Park East property reflect the racial diversity of Milwaukee County. The Milwaukee County Board and the community asks and expects businesses and contractors to make a good faith effort to employ racial minorities consistent with their numbers in the County's workforce (The 2000 county census population (over age 18) was 68.7% White, 20.4% Black, 7.2% Hispanic and 3.7% other). Reports will be required to determine whether this goal is being achieved.

7. Prevailing Wages and Employment Data All RFP's and development agreements will require the payment of prevailing wages for construction employees as is now required for most public works projects. Developers, owners and tenants will be required to provide an annual report to Milwaukee County with the number of non-construction full and part time employees working on the Park East project. Milwaukee County will develop the required report which will include the wage ranges and whether employees have health or retirement benefits. This report will be designed to help measure the job impact of the PERC. This requirement will end with the TID. 8. Affordable Housing Milwaukee County will sponsor the construction of new affordable housing of not less than 20% of the total housing units built on the County's Park East lands but they may be built on other infill sites in the city of Milwaukee. The County, in each RFP for any given parcel, may require a different percentage of affordable housing or have no requirement at all. The County may use funds from existing housing programs along with County funds to meet this requirement.

9. Green Space and Green Design Milwaukee County will require that green space and green design be specifically included in all proposals submitted in response to an RFP. The County will consider this information when evaluating and selecting a final developer for each parcel.

10. Community Advisory Committee and Administration A Community Advisory Committee will be appointed by the Chairman of the County Board, after the adoption of the PERC, which shall advise the County Board on implementing the PERC policies. This committee shall continue until the Tax Incremental District is completed for the PERC area. The Director of Economic and Community Development shall assist this committee in preparing an annual report to the County Board on the effects of the PERC policies. The Director of Economic and Community Development shall administer the PERC agreements with the primary goal to achieve the desired community benefits.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Milwaukee County should seek the input of business and community leaders to assist in carrying out the PERC and CED Fund policies.

Adopted by the Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors December 16, 2004

APPENDIX B 34

APPENDIX C 37

City of Ann Arbor

Citizen Participation Ordinance Guide for PUDs, Planned Projects, Rezonings & Major Site Plans

A guide for petitioners who intend on submitting a project for the City of Ann Arborâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s review The City of Ann Arbor has adopted a Citizen Participation Ordinance (CPO) for three reasons:

ONE: To ensure that petitioners seeking approval of certain

types of projects pursue early and effective citizen participation in conjunction with their proposed developments, giving citizens an early opportunity to learn about, understand and comment upon proposals, and providing an opportunity for citizens to be involved in the development of their neighborhood and community.

TWO: To provide clear expectations and formal guidance

for petitioners to gather citizen comments regarding their proposals so that they may respond and attempt to mitigate any real or perceived impacts their proposed development may have on the community.

What types of projects are required to comply with the CPO? Any proposed project that requires a public hearing needs to comply with the ordinance. This guide is for the following types of projects:

Planned Unit Development (PUD) Site Plan

Planned Project Site Plan

Rezoning

THREE:

To facilitate ongoing communication between petitioners and interested or potentially affected citizens throughout the application review process.

An added benefit for petitionersâ&#x20AC;Ś The Citizen Participation Ordinance (CPO) formalizes a procedure for surfacing issues related to a petition early in the process before significant time is spent on detailed drawings.

Requiring petitioners to meet with staff and citizens prior to the petition submittal could alleviate complications from receiving comments and concerns from citizens for the first time at a public hearing.

This ordinance will provide many benefits, including minimizing the costly and time-consuming reworking of plans that often results from getting feedback late in the design development process.

Major Site Plan

Defined as a proposed project: a. Containing over 80 residential units b. Over 65 feet in height c. Over 50,000 square feet of non-residential usable floor area d. That may require citizen participation depending on the scope, nature or any unique or unusual characteristics as determined by the Planning & Development Services Unit Manager.

Four Step Process:

Citizen Participation Ordinance requirements Step ONE

Meet with Planning & Development Services Unit Staff

Make sure you know and understand the responsibilities and requirements to satisfy the ordinance.

Call a planner (734.794.6265) to schedule an appointment well before you anticipate submitting a petition. Please note: Petitions will not be accepted for review if the requirements in the ordinance are not met.

Step TWO

Prepare to Notify Citizens

Before submitting a petition there are several tasks to accomplish to meet the requirements of the citizen participation ordinance.

Careful planning and scheduling will be important so your submittal is not delayed.

A) Set a Date and Place

Decide when and where you would like to hold a meeting with your site neighbors. Allow at least 10 business days between sending notices and the meeting date and 10 business days between the meeting date and the petition submission date. Make sure the location is accessible to everyone in attendance.

The following public meeting planning considerations may help ensure your meeting(s) are accessible and informative: What: • Determine meeting format — informationproviding; information/feedback-gathering; Q&A; decision-making, etc.

• Equipment needed — projector, laptop, screen; Internet connection; microphone/speakers; easels; paper; writing utensils; handouts; business cards; sign-in sheet; directional signs to post on doors at the meeting location.

When: Day of the week • Consult a calendar to avoid scheduling a meeting on national or religious holidays.

• Meetings scheduled on Monday through Thursday

are best. Sundays or Friday at sundown are not appropriate for meetings.

Time of day • For general audiences, weekday early evenings are preferred.

Time of year • In general, summer months should be avoided when possible for two main reasons: residents may be out of town and university population is sparse.

• Avoid times when downtown travel is difficult, e.g, Art Fair.

Where: Is the venue a on a bus line a accessible to those with a physical challenge (barrier free parking, facility/room entrance, seating) a adjacent to available parking a a logical location for the meeting, based on the proposed project area a a generally recognized “public” gathering place a centrally located a spacious enough for anticipated crowd volume a equipped with seating (or will you need to bring chairs?) a equipped with electrical outlets (if necessary) Sample locations (partial list): a Parks & Recreation facilities (Cobblestone, Gallup, etc.) a Schools (University of Michigan facilities, Ann Arbor Public Schools) a Library

B) Request Mailing Labels

Provide City staff with your site location and your e-mail address. City staff will provide you with a Word document of mailing labels that you can print and affix to postcards or envelopes.

The mailing labels will include all property owners, addresses and registered neighborhood groups within 1,000 feet of the proposed petition site. Per the new

City of Ann Arbor - Planning & Development Services

www.a2gov.org

ordinance, you are responsible for the cost of mailing the notices. You can save quite a bit of money by using a postcard format rather than a first class letter format.

C) Make Sure Your Notice Conveys the Following Information:

• A statement explaining the citizen participation

requirements, including an explanation of why and to whom such information is being sent, the opportunities for participation, and how the information gathered through the citizen participation process will be used by the petitioner.

• A statement that a petition is being prepared for submittal along with a written description of the proposal and a conceptual sketch of the development.

• The petitioner’s schedule for citizen participation meeting(s), the anticipated petition submittal date, and the anticipated City review and approval schedule.

• How those individuals who receive notices will be

provided an opportunity to discuss the application with the petitioner and express any concerns, issues, or problems they may have with the proposed project.

• Meeting logistics: date, time, place, map and parking instructions if necessary.

• Contact name, phone number and e-mail.

• Statement regarding availability of special accom-

modations/instructions and how to request them.

A suggested text might be: Persons with disabilities are encouraged to participate in public meetings. Accommodations, including sign language interpreters, may be arranged by contacting the (insert petitioner’s name here). Requests need to be received at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting.

D) Mail Postcards or Letters

Choose the format which works best for you and drop the cards or letters in the mail at least 10 business days before the meeting date. At the same time, provide a digital PDF copy of the card or letter so City staff can distribute it through the official City of Ann Arbor email notification program (GovDelivery system).

Step THREE

The Citizen Participation Meeting

• Ten business days before your petition is submitted, you must hold at least one public meeting. City staff will not attend the meeting.

Meeting Cancellation Process Please be considerate and post a note at the entrance of the meeting location if the meeting is being cancelled. If available, include the rescheduled meeting information and a contact name and number.

• Weather-related cancellations: As a general guideline, it is recommended for public meetings to be cancelled when the Ann Arbor Public School District cancels classes.

Step FOUR

Final Citizen Participation Report

Prepare a final report documenting your citizen participation efforts. Include the final report in a digital, PDF format with your planned project, PUD, rezoning or major site plan petition submittal package. The final report should also be mailed or e-mailed to all meeting attendees prior to submitting your petition. The report should include the following: • Date(s) and location(s) of meeting(s), copies of all written materials prepared and provided to the public (letters, meeting notices, e-mails, newsletters, etc.).

• Number of citizens sent notices by mail, e-mail or other; number of citizens attending; and copies of attendance or sign-in sheets. Sign in sheets should include attendees’ e-mail and postal addresses.

• Summary of comments, concerns, issues or prob-

lems expressed by citizen participants; statement of how you, the petitioner, have addressed or intend to address those concerns, issues or problems, or why a concern, issue or problem cannot or will not be addressed.

City of Ann Arbor - Planning & Development Services

www.a2gov.org

Citizen Participation Ordinance Check-list PETITIONER CHECKLIST: Have you...

Met with the Planning & Development Services Unit staff?

Notified citizens of the public meeting at least 20 business days in advance of the petition submittal date?

Held a Citizen Participation Meeting at least 10 business days in advance of the petition submittal date?

Prepared a final Citizen Participation Report?

Submitted the report with your petition submittal?

Thank you...

Thank you for your participation - we hope this process will improve communications between you and the citizens who may be affected by your plans.

For questions about these requirements, please call the City of Ann Arbor Planning & Development Services Unit staff at 734.794.6265.

The Citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Participation Ordinance can be downloaded from the Planning page of the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Web site: www.a2gov.org.

City of Ann Arbor - Planning & Development Services

www.a2gov.org

SU

L AW CEN T

ER

R A G

FOR ECONOMIC & SOCIAL JUSTICE DETROIT, MICHIGAN

â&#x2014;&#x2020;

EST. 1991

This report was made possible by the generous support of the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Brademas Fellowship Program through The A. Alfred Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning at the University of Michigan.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.METRODETROITD4.ORG

Gilbert seals $618M tax incentive package for 4 Detroit projects Louis Aguilar Updated 1:46 p.m. ET May 22, 2018

Next Slide 15 Photos Four Bedrock developments in Detroit A $618 million tax incentive deal was approved by Michigan on Tuesday for a $2.2 billion development plan aimed at reviving three of the largest vacant spaces in downtown Detroit as well as help pay for a major expansion of the building that's headquarters to Quicken Loans Inc. The four projects that will benefit from the deal are properties owned by an entity linked to Dan Gilbert, founder of Quicken Loans and Bedrock Detroit,

which controls more than 90 downtown area properties.

The developments include creating the tallest building in the city on the empty historic Hudsonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site on Woodward Avenue; developing three acres of mainly empty space in the Monroe Block; renovating the equivalent of 7.2 football fields of interior space at the long-dormant Book Tower and Building on Washington Boulevard; and adding an 11-story annex to the One Campus Martius building.

In total, about 3.1 million square feet of new office, retail, residential and hotel space will be developed. When completed in 2022, the developments are estimated to create 7,738 jobs, paying on-average $34 per hour.

The approval by the board of the Michigan Strategic Fund in Lansing was the final bureaucratic body needed for the tax incentive package. The $618 million amount "is a new height for us," Greg Tedder, an executive vice president of the Michigan Economic Development Corp., said at a press conference Tuesday. The strategic fund is part of the MEDC.

Buy Photo The tallest building in the city will be created on the empty historic HudsonĘźs site, bordered

by Gratiot (left), Grand River (right), Woodward (top) and Farmer (bottom). (Photo: Todd McInturf, The Detroit News)

The deal means that for every $1 dollar spent on building the developments, about 28 cents will come from some form of taxpayer money that would have ordinarily gone to schools, fixing roads and generally supporting state government departments.

The payoff for the deal will be even bigger, state officials said Tuesday. Even with the tax incentive package, an economic impact study done by the University of Michigan says the state will get $596 million in new tax revenues over 30 years, state officials said. Another way to measure that is a little over $3 of new tax revenue will be created for each dollar of revenue that will go toward the tax incentive package, state officials said.

The purpose of the tax incentives is to make southeast Michigan "more competitive" in its ability to attract new business, said RJ Wolney, Vice President of Finance for Bedrock, during a media conference call Tuesday afternoon. Gilbert led the city's recent attempt to convince Amazon to build its second headquarters in Detroit. The city didn't make the finalist list.

The incentives are needed to create catalytic developments to help fill the funding gap of building such projects that can't be made up with current rents for downtown commercial projects, Wolney said.

"Rents have a long way to go," in Detroit, Wolney said. Bedrock is aiming to charge a rent "in the high 30s and low 40s per square foot" at the developments, he said. The average rent for "Class A" office space downtown is currently $23.69 per square foot, according to the most recent report by the commercial real estate firm JLL. The multi-layered incentives come from different sources:

$256.3 million will come from the state income taxes from workers expected to be employed in the new properties. $229.6 million from the increase in property tax value expected to be caused as a result of the new developments. $60.6 million in state sales taxes from the construction materials used to build the developments. $51.7 million in state income taxes from residents living in the new buildings. $18.2 million in state income taxes from the construction workers building the projects. $1.7 million in city income taxes from the Hudson's site project. That money will be given back to Detroit through a community-benefits agreement approved by City Council.

All but the construction materials taxes will be used to pay off $250 million in bond proceeds over 35 years at a rate of about $15.9 million per year.

An estimated $300 million of the tax package comes from the new transformational brownfield plan, which was created last year by the state legislature after Gilbert played a high-profile role in a statewide coalition that lobbied for the breaks. The deal approved Tuesday takes up about 38 percent of the $800 million that could be awarded to brownfield developments. The legislation sunsets in 2022.

It was too soon to tell whether Bedrock or any other Gilbert affiliate may pursue the transformational brownfield incentive for any upcoming Detroit projects, a Quicken Loan executive said Tuesday during a media conference call.

“The transformational brownfield plan continues the momentum of Michigan’s reinvention by expanding opportunities to create modern and vibrant communities throughout the state,” Gov. Rick Snyder said in a written statement. “As the first transformational brownfield project, Bedrock’s visionary development in Detroit will serve as a model for how

private and public entities can work together to transform brownfield sites into drivers of economic revival and growth.â&#x20AC;?

The transformational brownfield plan uses a public financing method called tax increment financing, commonly called TIF. Through the use of TIF, municipalities typically divert future property tax revenue increases from a defined area or district toward a development or public improvement project in the community. TIF subsidies are not taken directly from a city's budget, but the city incurs loss through foregone tax revenue.

Charter of the City of Detroit January 1, 2012 (Adopted by Vote of the People on November 8, 2011)

1|Page

Preamble Declaration of Rights

ARTICLE 1.

ESTABLISHMENT OF CITY GOVERNMENT. § 1-101.

City Government § 1-102.

General Powers § 1-103.

Liberal Construction § 1-104.

Boundaries ARTICLE 2.

GENERAL PROVISIONS. § 2-101. § 2-102. § 2-103. § 2-104. § 2-105. § 2-106.1. § 2-106.2. § 2-106.3. § 2-106.4. § 2-106.5. § 2-106.6. § 2-106.7. § 2-106.8. § 2-106.9. § 2-106.10. § 2-106.11. § 2-106.12. § 2-106.13. § 2-106.14. § 2-107. § 2-108. § 2-109. § 2-110. § 2-111. § 2-112. § 2-113.

Qualifications for Elective Officers and Appointive Officers Term of Office Oath of Office Severability Definitions and Rules of Construction Ethical Standards of Conduct Disclosures Lobbying Registration and Reporting Gifts and Gratuities One Year Post-Employment Prohibition Contracts Voidable and Rescindable Campaign Activities Using City Property or During Working Hours Board of Ethics, Application, Appointment, Qualifications and Terms Powers and Duties Cooperation in Investigations; Obstruction Violations and Penalties Meetings Funding Campaign Finance Reports Dismissal Proceedings Pay Plans Reimbursement General Provisions for Multi-Member Bodies Promulgation of Administrative Rules Public Records Prohibition Against Entering Into Contracts or Giving Position to Those in Default

ARTICLE 3.

ELECTIONS. § 3-101. § 3-102. § 3-103. § 3-104.

2|Page

Department of Elections Elections Commission Powers and Duties of Election Commission Director and Deputy Director

§ 3-105. § 3-106. § 3-107. § 3-108. § 3-109. § 3-110. § 3-111.

City Elections and City Council Initiated Ballot Proposals State Law to Apply Elective Officers of the City Geographical Basis for Electing Council Members Nominating Petitions Nominees Residency Requirement for Elective Officers

ARTICLE 3.5.

OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. § 3.5-101. § 3.5-102. § 3.5-103. § 3.5-104.

Office of City Clerk Duties and Powers of City Clerk Deputy City Clerk Vacancy in Office of City Clerk

ARTICLE 4.

THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. CHAPTER 1. CITY COUNCIL. § 4-101.

City Council § 4-102.

Meetings § 4-103.

Selection of Council President and President Pro-Tempore § 4-104.

Duties of the Council President § 4-105.

Rules and Journal § 4-106.

Standing Committee Structure § 4-107.

Quorum § 4-108.

Voting § 4-109.

Investigations § 4-110.

Investigative Powers § 4-111.

Confirmation Authority § 4-112.

Control of Property § 4-113.

Prohibition on Interference in Administration § 4-114.

Ordinances and Resolutions in General § 4-115.

Ordinance Procedure § 4-116.

Emergency Ordinances § 4-117.

Procedure for Approval or Veto by Mayor and City Council’s Override of Veto § 4-118.

Publication of Ordinances and Effective Date § 4-119.

Ordinances After Enactment and Resolutions After Adoption § 4-120.

Council Personnel § 4-121.

Special Counsel § 4-122.

Approval Of Contracts and Disclosure CHAPTER 2. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS. § 4-201.

Establishment of Board of Zoning Appeals § 4-202.

Board of Zoning Appeals Ordinance CHAPTER 3. § 4-301. § 4-302. § 4-303.

3|Page

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. City Planning Commission Powers and Duties Staff Assistance

ARTICLE 5.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: THE MAYOR AND GENERAL PROVISIONS. § 5-101.

Mayor § 5-102.

The Executive Branch § 5-103.

Mayoral Appointments § 5-104.

Other Mayoral Powers § 5-105.

Appointment of Deputies § 5-106.

Powers and Duties of Department Directors § 5-107.

Powers of a Departmental Deputy § 5-108.

Deputy Mayor § 5-109.

Succession to Office § 5-110.

Community Meetings ARTICLE 6.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: STAFF DEPARTMENTS.

4|Page

CHAPTER 1. § 6-101. § 6-102. § 6-103.

BUDGET DEPARTMENT. Budget Department Powers and Duties Management Audits

CHAPTER 2. § 6-201. § 6-202. § 6-203. § 6-204. § 6-205.

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Planning and Development Department Advance Planning Current Planning Definition Public Hearings

CHAPTER 3. § 6-301. § 6-302. § 6-303. § 6-304. § 6-305. § 6-306. § 6-307. § 6-308.

FINANCE DEPARTMENT. Finance Department Departmental Divisions Accounts Division Assessments Division Treasury Division Purchasing Division Privatization of City Services Debarment

CHAPTER 4. § 6-401. § 6-402. § 6-403. § 6-404. § 6-405. § 6-406. § 6-407. § 6-408. § 6-409. § 6-410.

HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. General Purpose Human Resources Department Human Resources Director and Deputy Qualifications Civil Service Commission Non-Discrimination Employee Organization Labor Relations Classification of Positions Examinations

§ 6-411. § 6-412. § 6-413. § 6-414. § 6-415. § 6-416. § 6-417. § 6-418. § 6-419.

Validation Recruitment and Advancement Employee Grievances Jurisdiction Payrolls Residence Classified Service Transfers and Promotions to Exempt Positions Consolidation of Entities

CHAPTER 5. BUILDINGS, SAFETY ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT. § 6-501.

Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environmental Department § 6-502.

General Purpose § 6-503.

Powers and Duties § 6-504.

Conservation § 6-505.

Environmental Legislation § 6-506.

Applications Filed Under Zoning Law § 6-507.

Duty Under Other Regulatory Laws § 6-508.

One-Stop Service § 6-509.

Green Initiatives and Technologies

ARTICLE 7 THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES AND ACTIVITIES. CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS. § 7-101.

Existing Programs, Services and Activities § 7-102.

Assignment of Authorized Function § 7-103.

Advisory Commissions § 7-104.

Change in Number of Authorized Functions CHAPTER 2. RESPONSIBILITIES IN HEALTH AND SANITATION. § 7-201.

Health § 7-202.

Sanitation CHAPTER 3. ARTS. § 7-301.

Department

5|Page

CHAPTER 4. § 7-401. § 7-402. § 7-403.

PUBLIC WORKS. Department Sidewalk Maintenance Recycling

CHAPTER 5. § 7-501. § 7-502. § 7-503. § 7-504. § 7-505. § 7-506.

FIRE. Department Fire Department Divisions Duties Fire Marshal Advisory Commission Promotions

CHAPTER 6. HISTORICAL. § 7-601.

Department CHAPTER 7. § 7-701. § 7-702. § 7-703. § 7-704. § 7-705. § 7-706. § 7-707.

HUMAN RIGHTS. Department Human Rights Commission Budget Duties Powers Appeals Remedies Cumulative

CHAPTER 8. § 7-801. § 7-802. § 7-803. § 7-804. § 7-805. § 7-806. § 7-807. § 7-808. § 7-809. § 7-810. § 7-811. § 7-812. § 7-813. § 7-814. § 7-815. § 7-816. § 7-817. § 7-818.

POLICE. Police Department Board of Police Commissioners Duties of the Board of Police Commissioners Staff Chief of Police Duties of the Chief of Police Discipline Complaints Resolution of Complaints Division of Police Personnel Deputy Director Recruitment and Entry into Service Powers and Duties Promotions Examinations Employees Police Officers Employed by Governmental and Educational Institutions Police Reserves

CHAPTER 9. § 7-901. § 7-902. § 7-903. § 7-904. § 7-905.

PUBLIC LIGHTING. Department Qualifications Commission Powers and Duties Limitations on Sale of Assets

CHAPTER 10. RECREATION. § 7-1001.

Department § 7-1002.

Advisory Commission CHAPTER 11. § 7-1101. § 7-1102. § 7-1103. § 7-1104.

6|Page

TRANSPORTATION. Department Advisory Commission Intelligence Division Limitations

CHAPTER 12. § 7-1201. § 7-1202. § 7-1203. § 7-1204.

WATER AND SEWERAGE. Department Powers Limitation on Funds Limitation on Sale of Assets

CHAPTER 14. ZOOLOGICAL PARK. § 7-1301.

Department § 7-1302.

Commission CHAPTER 14. § 7-1401. § 7-1402. § 7-1403. § 7-1404.

TELEVISION CHANNELS. Cable Television Channels Executive Oversight, Operation and Management Channel Use Limitations

ARTICLE 7.5.

INDEPENDENT DEPARTMENTS AND OFFICES. CHAPTER 1. AUDITOR GENERAL. § 7.5-102.

Deputy Auditor General § 7.5-103.

Term of Office § 7.5-104.

Employees § 7.5-105.

Powers and Duties § 7.5-106.

Limitations

7|Page

CHAPTER 2. § 7.5-201. § 7.5-202. § 7.5-203. § 7.5-204. § 7.5-205. § 7.5-206. § 7.5-207. § 7.5-208. § 7.5-209. § 7.5-210. § 7.5-211.

LAW DEPARTMENT. Law Department Qualifications Civil Litigation Penal Matters Advice and Opinions Form of Documents Drafting Intra-Government Dispute Resolution Enforcement of Charter Claim Reduction Other Duties

CHAPTER 3. § 7.5-301. § 7.5-302. § 7.5-303. § 7.5-304. § 7.5-305. § 7.5-306. § 7.5-307. § 7.5-308. § 7.5-309.

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL. Establishment Appointment, Removal, Term of Office and Vacancy Minimum Qualifications Limitations; Prohibited Activities Jurisdiction Powers and Duties Subpoena Powers Duty to Report Illegal Acts Employees

§ 7.5-310. § 7.5-311. § 7.5-312. § 7.5-313. § 7.5-314. § 7.5-315. § 7.5-316.

CHAPTER 4. § 7.5-401. § 7.5-402. § 7.5-403. § 7.5-404. § 7.5-405. § 7.5-406. § 7.5-407. § 7.5-408. § 7.5-409. § 7.5-410. § 7.5-411. § 7.5-412. § 7.5-413. § 7.5-414. § 7.5-415. § 7.5-416. § 7.5-417.

Cooperation in Investigations; Obstruction Consultation Required Conflict of Interest; Special Counsel Confidentiality Immunity Retaliation Prohibited; Penalty Funding OMBUDSPERSON. Ombudsperson Term of Office Vacancy Salary Staff Definition Jurisdiction Powers of Investigation Delegation of Powers Correspondence From Person Detained Consultation Required Reports Duty to Report Illegal Acts Obstruction Immunity Limitations Remedies Cumulative

ARTICLE 8.

PLANNING AND FINANCIAL PROCEDURES. CHAPTER 1. PLANNING PROCEDURE. § 8-101.

Comprehensive Plan § 8-102.

Periodic Review § 8-103.

Council Procedure § 8-104.

Purpose of the Plan CHAPTER 2. § 8-201. § 8-202. § 8-203. § 8-204. § 8-205. § 8-206. § 8-207. § 8-208. § 8-209. § 8-210. § 8-211. § 8-212.

8|Page

BUDGETS. Fiscal Year Capital Agenda Annual Budget The Budget Form of Appropriation Public Hearing Amendment Before Adoption Budget Adoption Effect of Budget Adoption Amendments After Adoption Transfer of Appropriations Report of Budget Deficit

§ 8-213. § 8-214.

Revenue Estimating Conference Proportional Funding for Oversight Agencies

CHAPTER 3. § 8-301. § 8-302. § 8-303. § 8-304.

ADMINISTRATION OF BUDGETS. Work Programs and Allotments Limit on Obligations and Payments Penalties for Violation Obligations to be Met by Subsequent Appropriation

CHAPTER 4. § 8-401. § 8-402. § 8-403.

PROPERTY TAXATION. Power Assessors’ Duties Collection of Property Taxes

CHAPTER 5. § 8-501. § 8-502. § 8-503. § 8-504. § 8-505. § 8-506.

BORROWING. General Power Limitations on Borrowing Specific Kinds of Borrowing Use of Borrowed Funds Execution of Obligation Tax Exempt

CHAPTER 6. § 8-601. § 8-602. § 8-603. § 8-604. § 8-605.

SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Power to Assess Special Assessments to Finance Transit Facilities Procedure Ordinance Assessment Lien Contest of Assessment

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. CHAPTER 1. § 9-101. § 9-102. § 9-103.

COMMUNITY ADVISORY COUNCILS. Definition and Purpose Creation and Composition of Advisory Councils Powers, Duties and Limitations

CHAPTER 2. COUNCIL OF THE ARTS. § 9-201.

Council of the Arts CHAPTER 3. § 9-301. § 9-302. § 9-303. § 9-304.

REGULATORY POWER AND REVIEW. Regulatory Power Appellate Review Limitations on a Franchise Standard Provisions of a Public Utility Franchise

CHAPTER 4. SPECIFIC RESPONSIBILITIES. § 9-401.

The Board of Review § 9-402.

Hospitals

9|Page

§ 9-403. § 9-404. § 9-405.

CHAPTER 5. § 9-501. § 9-502. § 9-503. § 9-504. § 9-505. § 9-506. § 9-507. § 9-508. § 9-509. § 9-510.

Revision Question Schools Elimination of Redundancy in Government SPECIFIC POWERS. Eminent Domain Enabling Legislation Historic Areas and Landmarks Library Penalties Rents, Tolls, Excises and Taxes Service Fees Utilities Parking Fines Incentives for City-Based Businesses

CHAPTER 6. RETIREES’ REPRESENTATION. § 9-601.

Retirees’ Representation CHAPTER 7. RISK MANAGEMENT. § 9-701.

Risk Management Council § 9-702.

Duties CHAPTER 8. INSURANCE ASSISTANCE. § 9-801.

City Sponsored Insurance Assistance

ARTICLE 10.

COURTS. § 10-101.

Courts

ARTICLE 11.

RETIREMENT PLANS. § 11-101.

City’s Duties § 11-102.

Continuation of Existing Plans § 11-103.

Principles Applicable in Administering Plans § 11-104.

Information Required Before Benefit Increase § 11-105.

Audits

ARTICLE 12.

INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM. § 12-101.

Initiative and Referendum § 12-102.

Petitions § 12-103.

Time of Filing § 12-104.

Filing and Canvass of Petitions § 12-105.

Insufficient Petitions

10 | P a g e

§ 12-106. § 12-107. § 12-108. § 12-109. § 12-110. § 12-111. § 12-112.

Suspension of Ordinance Time Limit for Enactment or Repeal of Ordinance Submission to Election Commission and Voters Amendment, Repeal and Re-Enactment Submission by Council Similar or Conflicting Measures Repeal or Amendment of Ordinance in Effect

ARTICLE 13.

SCHEDULE. § 13-101. § 13-102. § 13-103. § 13-104. § 13-105. § 13-106. § 13-107. § 13-108. § 13-109. § 13-110. § 13-111.

11 | P a g e

Effect on Existing City Legislation Continuation of Public and Private Rights Rights of Officers and Employees Effective Date Employees Benefit Plan Condemnation Fire and Police Pension Committees Police Fund Initial Appointments General Provisions Submission of the Charter

Home Rule Charter

CHARTER OF THE CITY OF DETROIT PREAMBLE AND DECLARATION OF RIGHTS PREAMBLE We, the people of Detroit, do ordain and establish this Charter for the governance of our City, as it addresses the needs of all citizens and affirms our commitment to the development and welfare of our youth, our most precious treasure; instituting programs, services and activities addressing the needs of our community; fostering an environment and government structure whereby sound public policy objectives and decisions reflect citizen participation and collective desires; pledging that all our officials, elected and appointed, will be held accountable to fulfill the intent of this Charter and hold sacred the public trust; acknowledging our blessings from God, we pray our efforts will be accepted.

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS 1. Detroit City government is a service institution that recognizes its subordination to the people of Detroit.

The City shall provide for the public peace, health and safety of persons and property within its jurisdictional limits.

The people have a right to expect aggressive action by the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s officers in seeking to advance, conserve, maintain and protect the integrity of the human, physical and natural resources of this city from encroachment and/or dismantlement.

The people have a right to expect city government to provide for its residents, decent housing; job opportunities; reliable, convenient and comfortable transportation; recreational facilities and activities; cultural enrichment, including libraries and art and historical museums; clean air and waterways, safe drinking water and a sanitary, environmentally sound city.

2. The City has an affirmative duty to secure the equal protection of the law for each person and to insure equality of opportunity for all persons. No person shall be denied the enjoyment of civil or political rights or be discriminated against in the exercise thereof because of race, color, creed, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender

12 | P a g e

expression or gender identity.

3. A person shall have reasonable access to all files and records of the City in accordance with applicable laws.

4. The people have a right to know the rules and regulations governing dealings between the City and the public and to a means for the review of administrative decisions.

5. The Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s police forces are in all cases and at all times in strict subordination to the civil power.

6. The City shall endeavor to require application of the principle of one person-one vote to the policymaking body of any regional or other multi-jurisdictional organization which taxes or provides any service to City residents or takes any action affecting the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interests.

7. The enumeration of certain rights in this Charter shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

8. The City may enforce this declaration of rights and other rights retained by the people.

13 | P a g e

ARTICLE 1.

ESTABLISHMENT of CITY GOVERNMENT Sec. 1-101 City Government.

The people of Detroit, by adoption of this Home Rule Charter, create and provide for their continuing control of the municipal government of the City of Detroit.

Sec. 1-102. General Powers.

The City has the comprehensive home rule power conferred upon it by the Michigan Constitution, subject only to the limitations on the exercise of that power contained in the Constitution or this Charter or imposed by statute. The City also has all other powers which a city may possess under the Constitution and laws of this state.

Sec. 1-103. Liberal Construction.

The powers of the City under this Charter shall be construed liberally in favor of the City. The specific mention of particular powers in the Charter shall not be construed as limiting in any way the general power stated in this article.

Sec. 1-104. Boundaries.

The boundaries of the City existing when this Charter takes effect continue in force until changed in accordance with law.

14 | P a g e

ARTICLE 2.

GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 2-101. Qualifications for Elective Officers and Appointive Officers.

A person seeking elective office must be a citizen of the United States, a resident and a qualified and registered voter of the City of Detroit for one (1) year at the time of filing for office, and retain that status throughout their tenure in any such elective office. In addition, any person seeking office from a non atlarge district must be a resident and qualified, registered voter in such district for one (1) year at the time of filing for office, and retain such status throughout their tenure.

For any appointive city office, a person must be qualified to perform the duties of the office at the time of assuming the office and at all times while holding the office. The person’s citizenship, residence and voter registration status shall be as required or permitted by this Charter or applicable law.

Sec. 2-102. Term of Office.

The term of every elective city officer is four (4) years and commences at noon on the first (1st) day of January after the regular city general election.

Sec. 2-103. Oath of Office.

Every elective officer and every appointee before entering on official duties shall take and subscribe the following oath before the Detroit City Clerk: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this state and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of office to the best of my ability.” The original of the oath shall be filed in the Office of the City Clerk and a copy provided to the elective officer or the appointee.

Sec. 2-104. Severability.

If any provision of this Charter or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Charter.

Sec. 2-105. Definitions and Rules of Construction.

A. As used in this Charter: 1.

Agency means, where appropriate and unless indicated otherwise, one or all of the following: any department, office, multi-member body, subdivision of the Legislative branch of City government or other organization of city government and includes any elective officer, appointee, employee, or person acting or purporting to act in the exercise of official duties.

2.

Appoint means being named to a position in the exempt service.

3.

Appointee means a person holding either a compensated or uncompensated position.

4.

Appointive office or appointive officer means compensated positions and appointees holding compensated positions.

5.

City means the City of Detroit.

15 | P a g e

6.

City Clerk means the City Clerk of the City of Detroit.

7.

City Council means the legislative body of the City of Detroit.

8.

Confidential Information means information obtained by a Public Servant by reason of his or her official position concerning the property, government or affairs of the City or any office, department or agency thereof, not available to members of the public pursuant to the Michigan Freedom of Information Act or other applicable laws, regulations or procedures.

9.

Contractor means a party who, or which, seeks to enter, or enters, into a contract with the City of Detroit for the delivery of goods or services, but does not mean one who seeks to enter, or enters, into a personal services contract, as defined in this section, with the City.

10.

Corrupt Conduct means the conduct of a Public Servant, in carrying out his duties, that violates applicable laws or the Standards of Conduct articulated in this Charter.

11.

Director means the administrative head of any department or agency regardless of the title of a particular director.

12.

District or ward means a district drawn on a geographical basis, which constitutes a political unit from which members of the City Council, Board of Police Commissioners and Community Advisory Councils are elected.

13.

Elective officers means the Mayor, each member of the City Council, elected Board of Police Commissioners and the City Clerk.

14.

Employee means a person employed by the City of Detroit, whether on a full-time or part-time basis.

15.

Exempt service means both compensated and uncompensated positions.

16.

Exercises significant authority means having the ability to influence the outcome of a decision on behalf of the City of Detroit government in the course of the performance of a Public Servant’s duties and responsibilities.

17.

Filling of vacancies means, except as otherwise provided by this Charter, whenever a vacancy occurs in any appointive position, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment (for the unexpired term, if any) in the manner provided for the original appointment.

18.

General election in the city (distinguished from ‘city general election’) means a city-wide general election regardless of whether its purpose is to fill national, state, county or City offices.

19.

Hire means being employed for a position in the classified service as defined in section 6-417 of this Charter.

20.

Immediate family member means a Public Servant’s spouse, domestic partner, individual who lives in the Public Servant’s household or an individual claimed by a Public Servant or a Public Servant’s spouse as a dependent under the United States Internal Revenue Code at 26 USC 1, et seq.

21.

Lobbying means all communications with a Public Servant for the purpose of influencing legislative or executive action.

22.

Lobbyist means with respect to lobbying city government: (a) a person whose expenditures for lobbying are more than $1,000.00 in value in any 12-month period; (b) a person whose expenditures for lobbying are more than $250.00 in value in any 12-month period, if the amount is expended on lobbying a single public official; or (c) a registered lobbyist under applicable laws, who lobbies Detroit city government.

16 | P a g e

23.

Multi-Member Body means any board, commission, or other organization of City government.

24.

Official Act means any action, omission, decision, recommendation, practice or procedure of any agency.

25.

Personal services contract means a contract for the retention of an individual to perform services on behalf of the City of Detroit for a fixed period and for fixed compensation.

26.

Proceedings means, with respect to City Council, any gathering of that body for purposes of conducting the legislative affairs of the City of Detroit. It includes, but is not limited to, hearings, council meetings, committee meetings and other council related activities where the body is required to convene by law or Charter to execute its legislative function, as dictated by law, Charter or ordinance.

27.

Public Servant means the Mayor, members of City Council, City Clerk, appointive officers, any member of a board, commission or other voting body established by either branch of City government or this Charter and any appointee, employee or individual who provides services to the City within or outside of its offices or facilities pursuant to a personal services contract.

28.

Resident(s) or residence means, in reference to qualification for elective office, service on a multimember body or other Charter residency requirement, a person’s principal, permanent place of residence. It shall be that place at which a person habitually sleeps, keeps their personal effects, and regularly lodges. If someone has more than one (1) residence, or a residence separate from that of their spouse, the place where the person resides the greater part of the time will be considered their official residence. Any relevant judicial interpretation of these terms shall be applicable.

29.

Retain (distinguishing legal representation other than the Corporation Counsel) means the temporary hiring of outside legal counsel.

30.

Serving and present means, when calculating an ordinary or extraordinary majority of: a. City Council members serving, vacant City Council seats are not included: and b. City Council members present, neither vacant City Council seats nor those of absent members are included.

31.

Vacancy means that the position of any elective officer or appointee is deemed vacant upon death, resignation, permanent disability or dismissal from the position in any manner authorized by law or this Charter.

32.

Voter of the city or city voter means a person who has the qualifications of and is registered as an elector of the City of Detroit under state law.

33.

Willful Neglect of Duty means the intentional failure of a Public Servant to perform the duties of his office.

B. Rules of Construction For purposes of this Charter, the following rules of construction apply: Including or included. Unless the contrary is expressly stated, these are not words of limitation, but mean “including but not by way of limitation” or “included but not by way of limitation.”

Number and gender. The singular number includes the plural, the plural number includes the singular, and the masculine gender includes the feminine gender and the neuter.

Tense. This Charter is to be regarded as speaking in the present and continuously. For example, the phrase “as provided by law” will incorporate the provisions of law as they change from time-to-time.

17 | P a g e

Sec. 2-106.1. Ethical Standards of Conduct.

1.

These standards of conduct apply to Public Servants including the Mayor, City Council members, City Clerk, appointive officers, appointees, employees and contractors as defined in this Charter.

The purpose of applying and enforcing these standards is to ensure that governmental decisions are made in the publicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s best interest by prohibiting city officials and employees from participating in matters that affect their personal or financial interests.

All City ordinances not inconsistent with these sections and that effectuate its operation may be retained.

Ordinances may be enacted which are necessary to effectuate the operation of these sections. No ordinance shall be enacted which limits, contradicts or otherwise conflicts with the intent and purpose of these sections.

2.

Except as otherwise provided by applicable law, a Public Servant shall not knowingly: a.

Willfully or grossly neglect the discharge of his or her duties;

b.

Use or disclose Confidential Information concerning the property, government or affairs of the City or any office, department or agency thereof, not available to members of the public and gained by reason of his or her official position;

c.

Use property of the City except in accordance with policies and procedures of the City;

d.

Engage in or accept private employment or render services when such employment or service is in conflict or incompatible with the proper discharge of his or her official duties or would tend to impair his or her independence of judgment or action in the performance of official duties;

e.

Represent a private person, business or organization in any action or proceeding pending before the City or any office, department or agency thereof, except:

f.

g.

i. A Public Servant may represent another person, business or organization before a City agency where such representation is a required part of his or her official duties; ii. A Public Servant who is an uncompensated member of a City board, commission or other voting body may act as an agent, attorney or representative for another person, business or organization in a matter that is pending before a City agency, other than the board, commission or other voting body on which he or she is a member; or iii. A Public Servant who is compensated by the City may act as an agent, attorney or representative for another person, business or organization in a matter that is pending before a City board, commission or other voting body, other than the board, commission or other voting body on which he or she serves as an appointee or as an employee or under a personal services contract, as long as he or she does so without compensation and on his or her leave time.

Vote or otherwise participate in the negotiation or the making of any city contract, or any other type of transaction, with any business entity in which he or she or an immediate family member has a financial interest; or Use his or her official position, in violation of applicable law, to improperly influence a decision of the Mayor, City Council members, Clerk, appointees or employees.

A Public Servant who, in the course of his or her duties, exercises significant authority shall not: a.

Solicit or accept a loan or payment from an individual who is providing service to, receiving tax abatements, credits or exemptions from the City; or

b.

Unduly influence any decision to fill a position in City government with an immediate family member.

18 | P a g e

Sec. 2-106.2. Disclosures.

1.

Except as otherwise provided by applicable law, a Public Servant who exercises significant authority shall disclose: a.

Any financial interest, direct or indirect, that he or she or an immediate family member has in any contract or matter pending before City Council.

b.

Any financial interest, direct or indirect, that he or she or an immediate family member has in any contract or matter pending before or within any office, department or agency of the City.

c.

Any interest that he or she, or an immediate family member has in real and personal property that is subject to a decision by the City regarding purchase, sale, lease, zoning, improvement, special designation tax assessment or abatement or a development agreement.

d.

Campaign contributions and expenditures, in accordance with applicable laws.

e.

The identity of any immediate family member employed by the City or who is making application to the City.

2.

In addition to compliance with subsection (1) above, contractors and vendors shall disclose: a.

The identity of all entities and persons with any financial interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or matter the vendor or contractor has pending before City Council.

b.

The identity of all entities and persons with any financial interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or matter the vendor or contractor has pending before or within any office, department, or agency of the City.

3.

The above disclosures shall be made in writing and be made by sworn, notarized affidavit, in accordance with City ordinance and applicable laws.

Sec. 2-106.3. Lobbying Registration and Reporting.

A lobbyist who lobbies within the city government shall be required to register with the City and file a report of his or her lobbying activity. All documents filed by lobbyists shall be filed with the City Clerk, be a public record and additionally published electronically on the World Wide Web or other format as to provide remote or on-line access to the reports. A fee shall be assessed to each lobbyist.

Sec. 2-106.4. Gifts and Gratuities.

A Public Servant shall not accept gifts, gratuities, honoraria, or other things of value from any person or company doing business or seeking to do business with the City, is seeking official action from the City, has interests that could be substantially affected by the performance of the Public Servantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s official duties, or is registered as a lobbyist under applicable laws.

This prohibition shall not apply to: 1.

An award publicly presented to a Public Servant by an individual, governmental body or nongovernmental entity or organization in recognition of public service.

2.

Complimentary copies of trade publications, books, reports, pamphlets, calendars, periodicals or other informational materials.

19 | P a g e

3.

A gift received from a Public Servant’s relative or immediate family member, provided that the relative or immediate family member is not acting as a third party’s intermediary or an agent in an attempt to circumvent this article.

4.

Admission or registration fee, travel expenses, entertainment, meals or refreshments that are furnished to the Public Servant: (i) by the sponsor(s) of an event, appearance or ceremony which is related to official City business in connection with such an event, appearance or ceremony and to which one (1) or more of the public are invited; or (ii) in connection with teaching, a speaking engagement or the provision of assistance to an organization or another governmental entity as long as the City does not compensate the Public Servant for admission or registration fees, travel expenses, entertainment, meals or refreshments for the same activity.

Sec. 2-106.5. One Year Post-Employment Prohibition.

Subject to state law, for one (1) year after employment with the City, a Public Servant shall not lobby or appear before the City Council or any City department, agency, board, commission or body or receive compensation for any services in connection with any matter in which he or she was directly concerned, personally participated, actively considered or acquired knowledge while working for the City.

Subject to state law, for a period of one (1) year after employment with the City, a Public Servant shall not accept employment with any person or company that did business with the City during the former Public Servant’s tenure if that Public Servant was in any way involved in the award or management of that contract or the employment would require the sharing of confidential information.

Sec. 2-106.6. Contracts Voidable and Rescindable.

The City’s Purchasing Department shall amend its standard contract form to include language which provides that City contracts shall be voidable or rescindable at the discretion of the Mayor or Inspector General at any time if a Public Servant who is a party to the contract has an interest in such contract and fails to disclose such interest. Such contract shall also be voidable or rescindable if a lobbyist or employee of the contracting party offers a prohibited gift, gratuity, honoraria or payment to a Public Servant in relation to the contract. A fine shall be assessed to the contractor in the event of a violation of this section of the Charter. If applicable, the actions of the contractor, and its representative lobbyist or employee, shall be referred to the appropriate prosecuting authorities.

Sec. 2-106.7. Campaign Activities Using City Property Or During Working Hours.

Appointees, appointive officers and employees are prohibited from engaging in campaign activities using City property or engaging in such activity during working hours.

The Mayor, City Council members and City Clerk are prohibited from soliciting appointees, appointive officers and employees to work on political campaign activities using City property or during working hours.

Sec. 2-106.8. Board of Ethics, Application, Appointment, Qualifications and Terms.

The independent Board of Ethics shall consist of seven (7) members who are City residents and not elective officers, appointees or employees of the City at any time during their board membership.

The members of the Board of Ethics shall be selected as follows:

20 | P a g e

1.

Three (3) who shall be appointed by the City Council;

2.

Three (3) who shall be appointed by the Mayor; and

3.

One (1) who shall be jointly appointed by the Mayor and City Council.

Such appointments shall be made after applications are received, reviewed and interviews conducted.

Members shall serve for a term of five (5) years, up to two (2) consecutive terms not to exceed 10 years.

Such terms shall be staggered. Members of the Board of Ethics are subject to removal for cause.

Sec. 2-106.9. Powers and Duties.

The Board of Ethics shall: 1.

Issue advisory opinions regarding the meaning and application of provisions of the Charter, city ordinances or other laws or regulations establishing standards of conduct for Public Servants. Advisory opinions shall be rendered upon written request by a Public Servant regarding his or her own actions. The advisory opinions shall not disclose the identity of the Public Servant concerned.

2.

Receive and resolve complaints arising under the Ethics Ordinance. The Board of Ethics shall be authorized by ordinance to conduct investigations on its own initiative, subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, require the production of evidence relevant to a matter under investigation, appoint independent counsel when necessary, and to perform other functions essential to ensure the integrity of City government.

3.

Prepare an annual report for submission to the Mayor and City Council. Consistent with state law, the Board of Ethics may recommend improvements in the standards of conduct to ensure the ethical behavior of City elective officers, appointees and employees, or in the organization and procedures related to the administration and enforcement of those standards.

4.

Provide mandatory training for the Mayor, City Council, Clerk, appointive officers and appointees and employees who exercise significant authority in the execution of his or her official duties.

5.

Provide training for all other appointees and employees including those subject to Article 6, Chapter 4 of this Charter.

6.

Issue penalties for violations of this section of the Charter, as consistent with state law.

Sec. 2-106.10. Cooperation in Investigations; Obstruction.

It shall be the duty of every Public Servant, contractor and subcontractor and licensee of the City, and every applicant for certification of eligibility for a City contract or program, to cooperate with the Board of Ethics in any investigation pursuant to this article.

Any Public Servant who willfully and without justification or excuse obstructs an investigation of the Board of Ethics by withholding documents or testimony is subject to forfeiture of office, discipline, debarment or any other applicable penalty.

The requirements under this section shall be incorporated into all City contracts, where legally necessary for application and enforcement.

21 | P a g e

Sec. 2-106.11. Violations and Penalties.

1.

Any intentional, willfully negligent or grossly negligent violation of sections 2-106.1 through 2106.10 and 2-106.14 of the Charter shall subject the violator to any one or more of the following: a. b. c. d. e.

Public admonishment issued by Board of Ethics; If an employee, a recommendation that he or she be reviewed for disciplinary action; If an elective or appointive officer, a recommendation to the City Council for removal or forfeiture proceedings; Administrative sanction assessed by the Board of Ethics in an amount and to the extent allowed by law; and Prosecution by the City’s Law Department in a court of jurisdiction and, upon conviction, to a fine and/or imprisonment up to the maximum allowed by law, whether the official or employee is elected or appointed, paid or unpaid. Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to conflict with state law.

2.

With regard to violations by contractors, in addition to the remedies in paragraph (1), the Board of Ethics may recommend to the City’s Purchasing Director one or more of the following: a. b. c.

d.

Suspension of a contractor; Disqualification or debarment from contracting or subcontracting with the City; Administrative sanction assessed by the Board of Ethics. Subject to any relevant state law, such fine shall be determined by considering the amount of damages incurred by the City as a result of the subject violation; and/or Prosecution by the City’s Law Department in a court of jurisdiction and, upon conviction, a fine for each violation and imprisonment up to the amount and time allowed by law, respectively. Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to conflict with state law.

All penalties associated with this section of the Charter are in addition to the civil and criminal penalties available to the City under applicable law.

Sec. 2-106.12. Meetings.

All meetings of the Board of Ethics shall be subject to the Michigan Open Meetings Act MCL 15.261, et al., and open to the public unless an individual involved in the matter to be addressed requests in writing that the meeting be closed, or unless otherwise provided by ordinance and consistent with state law.

Sec. 2-106.13. Funding.

The City shall annually appropriate funds sufficient to enable the Board of Ethics to perform its duties.

Funding shall be in accordance with section 8-214 (Proportional Funding for Oversight Agencies).

Sec. 2-106.14. Campaign Finance Reports.

Every elective officer or candidate for election shall make public their campaign contributions and expenditures by filing a report or reports thereof as required by state law.

Sec. 2-107. Dismissal Proceedings.

A. Recall of Elective City Officers.

Any of the elective City officers provided for in section 3-107 of this Charter may be recalled by the voters of the City in the manner provided for by law.

22 | P a g e

B. Forfeiture of Office Held by Elective City Officers.

1.

Grounds for Mandatory Forfeiture.

The office of an elective city officer shall be forfeited for the following: a. b. c. d. e. f.

2.

Lacks at any time any qualifications required by law or by section 2-101 of this Charter; Plead to, or is convicted of, a felony while holding the office; Engages in official misconduct; Willful or gross neglect of duty; Corrupt conduct in office; or Any other misfeasance or malfeasance.

Grounds for Permissive Forfeiture.

The City Council may determine that the office of an elective city officer should be forfeited where the officer: a. Based on a recommendation of the Board of Ethics to the City Council, is determined by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of City Council members serving to have violated the Ethics Ordinance or ethics provisions of this Charter; b. Refuses to cooperate in an investigation of the Inspector General, Board of Ethics or Ombudsperson; c. Neglects or refuses to comply with the provisions of this Charter after being provided an opportunity to comply pursuant to section 7.5-209 (Enforcement of Charter); or d. Violates any provision of this Charter punishable by forfeiture.

3.

Procedure.

Where the City Council determines that forfeiture under subsections (B)(1) or (B)(2) of this section, or both, is proper, the officer shall be charged through adoption of a resolution, which provides the factual basis for each charge, by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of members serving. Upon adoption of the resolution, the City Clerk shall forward a certified copy of the resolution to the officer by registered mail.

An elective city officer charged with conduct constituting grounds for forfeiture is entitled to a public hearing before the City Council and to outside legal representation, as permitted by law, which shall be paid by the City of Detroit at rates commensurate with the hourly rate normally paid by the City. A City Council member charged with conduct constituting grounds for forfeiture may not participate in the resolution of the charge.

Notice of the hearing and the charging resolution shall be published in a daily newspaper of general circulation in the City, and by electronic posting available to the public, at least fourteen (14) days in advance of the hearing. A decision by the City Council for forfeiture of the office of an elective city officer is subject to judicial review in accordance with Michigan law.

4.

Hearing Rules.

In accordance with section 2-111 of this Charter, the City Council shall promulgate rules for the Bodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s forfeiture hearings. Such rules shall comport with procedural due process and shall be in effect prior to any resolution charging the elective city officer. The City Council may request that Corporation Counsel retain an outside legal advisor to assist it regarding the interpretation, application and enforcement of the rules for the hearing, admissibility of evidence, objections and other legal issues arising in connection with the proceedings.

C. Removal of City Appointees.

1.

Grounds.

A city appointee who serves at the pleasure of his or her appointing authority may be removed by the appointing authority without cause. A city appointee who is subject to removal for cause may be removed by the appointing authority for:

23 | P a g e

a. Lack of qualifications; b.

Incompetence; c.

Neglect of duties; d.

Misconduct; e.

Pleading to or conviction of a felony; f.

Violation of this Charter; g.

Violation of federal or state law; h.

Violation of any city ordinance, rule, or regulation; or i. Any reason under subsections (B)(1) and (B)(2) of this section.

In addition, where a person is appointed to a multi-member body, the appointee is subject to removal for cause for habitual non-attendance of meetings as defined in the Body’s rules, or as established by review of the minutes from the Body’s meetings.

2.

Procedure.

A city appointee who is removable for cause may not be removed under this subsection without an opportunity for a hearing before the appointing authority. A copy of the charges shall be furnished at least fourteen (14) days in advance of the hearing.

3.

Hearing Rules.

In accordance with section 2-111 of this Charter, each appointing authority shall promulgate procedural rules for removal hearings. Such rules shall comport with procedural due process and shall be in effect prior to any notice or resolution charging the city appointee.

Sec. 2-108. Pay Plans.

All city appointive officers and employees, except elective officers and those whose compensation is stated in collective bargaining contracts made effective under section 6-408, employed by the City and paid either in part or in whole from city appropriations shall be compensated in accordance with pay plans which have been initiated by the Mayor and approved by the City Council through adoption of a resolution.

Where applicable, the salaries of all city elective officers shall be determined by an Elected Officials Compensation Commission, which shall be created by an ordinance containing provisions as required by state law.

Sec. 2-109. Reimbursement.

Except as otherwise expressly provided, the members of every multi-member body created by this Charter or under section 7-103 of this Charter shall serve without compensation but may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their duties.

Sec. 2-110. General Provisions for Multi-Member Bodies.

Any multi-member body created in this Charter or under section 7-103 may select its officers and adopt rules of procedure. A majority of its members constitutes a quorum. The Body’s meetings shall be conducted in compliance with the Michigan Open Meetings Act, MCL 15.261, et seq., including making a record of its proceedings. The record shall be made available to the public in accordance with the Michigan Freedom of Information Act, MCL 15.231, et seq. Unless otherwise provided for in this Charter or in the Detroit City Code, each term begins on the fifteenth (15th) day of February and ends on the final February fourteenth (14th) of the term.

24 | P a g e

Sec. 2-111. Promulgation of Administrative Rules.

(1) Where a city ordinance permits or requires a city department director, agency head or multimember body to promulgate a rule governing dealings between the City and the public, or establishing hearing procedures for resolving matters in dispute, the city department director, agency head or multimember body shall comply with this section.

(2) Before adopting any rule governing dealings between the City and the public, or establishing hearing procedures for resolving matters in dispute, a city department director, agency head or multimember body shall give notice of a hearing by publication in a daily newspaper of general circulation and by electronic posting available to the public, at least four (4) weeks in advance of the scheduled hearing.

The notice of hearing shall: a.

Contain the proposed rule or procedure, or a statement of its substance;

b.

Specify the department director or agency head or his or her designee, from whom additional information can be obtained;

c.

Specify the location, date, and time for oral presentation of views by interested persons; and

d.

Specify that any written comments and recommendations intended to be considered prior to adopting the rule shall be submitted no later than the conclusion of the public hearing.

(3) No person shall be precluded from submitting written recommendations and comments subsequent to adoption of the administrative rule. All written comments and recommendations shall be kept on file and made available for public inspection by the promulgating department director, agency head, or multi-member body. Written comments and recommendations received up to the date of the hearing or during the hearing shall be read into the hearing record.

(4) After the conclusion of the public hearing and consideration of all comments and recommendations, the proposed rule shall become effective upon publication in a daily newspaper of general circulation. All effective rules and procedures shall be codified to correspond to the chapter of the City Code which authorized adoption of the rules or procedures, and included in the Detroit City Code after city ordinances in a separate part titled â&#x20AC;&#x153;Administrative Rules.â&#x20AC;?

(5) Notwithstanding the preceding subsections, in the case of an emergency declared in writing by the Mayor or the City Council concerning the public health, safety or welfare, a proposed rule may be given effect for a period not to exceed seven (7) days.

(6) When promulgating a rule or procedure under this section, a city department director, agency head, or multi-member body is limited to proposing rules which establish procedures, and is precluded from promulgating rules or procedures which are substantive in nature and required to be enacted through an ordinance.

(7) Where rules governing hearing procedures for resolving matters in dispute are adopted, those rules shall be consistent with due process of law.

Sec. 2-112. Public Records.

All records of the City shall be made available to the general public in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, MCL 15.231, et. seq.; MSA 4.1801(1), et. seq.

Sec. 2-113. Prohibition Against Entering Into Contracts or Giving Position to Those in Default.

The City of Detroit, through its executive branch departments and legislative branch agencies, is prohibited from making a contract with, or giving an official position to, one who is in default to the City.

25 | P a g e

ARTICLE 3.

ELECTIONS Sec. 3-101. Department of Elections.

A Department of Elections shall plan, monitor and administer all elections in the City of Detroit.

Sec. 3-102. Election Commission.

The Department of Elections is headed by the Election Commission composed of: 1.

The City Clerk, who is Chairperson;

2.

The President of the City Council; and

3.

The Corporation Counsel.

Sec. 3-103. Powers and Duties of Election Commission.

The Election Commission has general supervision of all elections in the City and may hire assistants, inspectors, and other election personnel. Precinct election officers and temporary employees required from time to time for periods not to exceed thirty (30) business days may be appointed, exempt from Article 6, Chapter 4, of this Charter.

Except as otherwise provided by this Charter or ordinance, the Election Commission shall perform all duties required of election commissions by law. The Commission may subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony and require the production of evidence. To enforce a subpoena or order for production of evidence or to impose any penalty prescribed for the failure to obey a subpoena or order, the Commission shall apply to the appropriate court.

All meetings of the Commission shall be conducted in compliance with the Michigan Open Meetings Act, MCL 15.261, et seq., including making a record of its proceedings.

In case of any doubt concerning election procedure, the Commission shall prescribe the procedure to be followed.

Sec. 3-104. Director and Deputy Director.

The City Clerk shall appoint a Director and Deputy Director of the Department of Elections, who are skilled and experienced in municipal election administration. Under the direction of the City Clerk and in accordance with general policies of the Election Commission, the Director shall supervise, plan and monitor all activities and operations incidental to the conduct of elections and voter registration. The Director or Deputy Director of Elections may be removed by the Clerk for cause.

Sec. 3-105. City Elections and City Council Initiated Ballot Proposals.

A regular city general election to fill the elective offices of the City shall be held on the Tuesday after the first Monday of November of 2013 and every fourth year thereafter.

A regular city primary election to nominate candidates for city offices shall be held on the Tuesday after the first Monday of August before the general election.

26 | P a g e

If a vacancy occurs in the office of Mayor it shall be filled by succession under section 5-109. The unexpired term shall be filled at the next general election in the City held not sooner than one hundred eighty (180) days after occurrence of the vacancy.

If a vacancy occurs on City Council it shall be filled by appointment, based on a two-thirds (2/3) vote of members. The person appointed shall serve until an elected member takes office. The election to fill the vacant position shall occur at the next general election to be held not sooner than one hundred eighty (180) days after occurrence of the vacancy.

If a vacancy occurs in an elective office of the Board of Police Commissioners it shall be filled by the Mayor with a resident from the relevant district, subject to City Council approval. If City Council does not disapprove the appointment within thirty (30) days of the appointment it will be deemed confirmed. The appointed person shall serve until an elected member takes office. The election to fill the vacant position shall occur at the next general election to be held not sooner than one hundred eighty (180) days after occurrence of the vacancy.

The City Council may submit, by resolution adopted not less than seventy (70) days before any election or special election, any proposal to the voters of the city.

Sec. 3-106. State Law to Apply.

Except as otherwise provided by this Charter or ordinance, state law applies to the qualifications and registration of voters, the filing for office by candidates, the filing of petitions for initiative and referendum, and the conduct and canvass of city elections.

Sec. 3-107. Elective Officers of the City.

The elective officers of the city are the Mayor, the nine (9) members comprising the City Council, the City Clerk and seven (7) elected Board of Police Commissioners.

Sec. 3-108. Geographical Basis for Electing Council Members.

There shall be seven (7) non at-large districts and one (1) at-large district established in the City and one (1) member shall be elected from each non at-large district and two (2) members shall be elected from the at-large district.

New district boundaries created within one hundred twenty (120) days of a City Primary Election shall become effective after the General Election.

City Council shall establish district wards that are as nearly of equal population as practicable, contiguous, compact and in accordance with any other criteria permitted by law.

District wards shall be apportioned in subsequent years as required by, and in accordance with, the Home Rule City Act, MCL 117.27a, and other applicable law.

Sec. 3-109. Nominating Petitions.

A candidate for nomination to an elective city office shall file with the City Clerk a non-partisan nominating petition consisting of one (1) or more petition forms.

27 | P a g e

The candidate’s petition shall be signed by a number of voters of the City equal to not more than one percent (1%) nor less than one-fourth percent (1/4%) of the total number of votes cast in the preceding Regular City General Election for the office which the candidate seeks.

Where a candidate is seeking nomination to the office of City Council at-large member, the candidate’s petition shall be signed by a number of voters of the City equal to not more than one percent (1%) nor less than one-fourth percent (1/4%) of the number resulting when the total number of votes cast at the preceding Regular City General Election for all offices of City Council members is divided by nine (9).

Where a candidate is seeking nomination to the office of City Council non at-large district member, the candidate’s petition shall be signed by a number of voters of the district equal to not more than one percent (1%) nor less than one-fourth percent (1/4%) of the number resulting when the total number of votes cast at the preceding Regular City General Election for all offices of the City Council members is divided by nine (9).

In the initial election, where a candidate is seeking nomination to the office of district elected Police Commissioner, the candidate’s petition shall be signed by a number of voters of the district equal to not more than one percent (1%) nor less than one-fourth percent (1/4%) of the number resulting when the total number of votes cast at the preceding Regular City General Election for all offices of the City Council members is divided by nine (9). In succeeding elections the candidate’s petitions shall be signed by a number of voters of the district equal to not more than one percent (1%) nor less than one-fourth percent (1/4%) of the number resulting when the total number of votes cast at the preceding Regular City General Election for all offices of elected Board of Police Commissioners is divided by seven (7).

Sec. 3-110. Nominees.

The number of nominees for each elective city office selected at each primary election may not exceed twice the number of openings in the office to be filled. The nominees are entitled to have their names printed on the general election ballot.

Sec. 3-111. Residency Requirement for Elective Officers.

1.

Elected Officials Generally.

All candidates for elective office and elected officials shall be bona fide residents of the City of Detroit and must maintain their principal residence in the City of Detroit for one (1) year at the time of filing for office or appointment to office, and throughout their tenure in office.

2.

City Council and Board of Police Commissioners.

In addition to being a resident for one (1) year, as required above, candidates for City Council and the Board of Police Commissioners shall be bona fide residents of their districts and must maintain their principal residence in their districts for one (1) year immediately preceding election or appointment and throughout their tenure in that office.

28 | P a g e

ARTICLE 3.5.

OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK Sec. 3.5-101. Office of City Clerk.

There shall be an Office of the City Clerk, which is headed by the City Clerk.

Sec. 3.5-102. Duties and Powers of City Clerk.

The City Clerk shall: 1.

Keep all papers filed in or pertaining to the Office of the City Clerk;

2.

Keep the Corporation seal of the City;

3.

When requested, certify, under the corporate seal, copies of all papers and records for the office;

4.

Administer oaths;

5.

Take affidavits;

6.

Maintain reasonably accessible voter registration sites throughout the City on a year-round basis;

7.

Serve as City Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s clerk and keep a record of all its ordinances, resolutions, and other proceedings and perform other such duties as it may provide; and

8.

Exercise other powers and duties as provided by law, this Charter, or ordinance.

Sec. 3.5-103. Deputy City Clerk.

The City Clerk shall appoint a Deputy City Clerk who shall serve at the pleasure of the City Clerk. In the absence or disability of the City Clerk, or while the position is vacant, the Deputy City Clerk shall exercise all the powers and perform all the duties of the City Clerk to the full extent permitted by law.

Sec. 3.5-104. Vacancy in Office of City Clerk.

Where a vacancy occurs in the Office of City Clerk, the City Council shall appoint a successor who shall serve until an elected City Clerk takes office. A City Clerk shall be elected for the unexpired term, if any, at the next general election in the City held not sooner than one hundred eighty (180) days after the occurrence of the vacancy.

29 | P a g e

ARTICLE 4.

THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH CHAPTER 1. CITY COUNCIL Sec. 4-101. City Council.

The City Council is the City’s legislative body. It has the powers and duties provided by law or this Charter.

Sec. 4-102. Meetings.

The City Council shall hold its first (1st) meeting in the first (1st) week of January after the regular city general election and, during ten (10) months of the year, shall meet every business day unless otherwise provided by resolution at such times and places as it may provide.

On at least eight (8) occasions during each calendar year, the City Council shall hold meetings in areas of the city, to be determined by the City Council. Those meetings shall begin between the hours of seven (7) o’clock P.M. and eight (8) o’clock P.M. Special meetings may be held at the call of the Mayor or four (4) or more City Council members and, whenever practicable, upon no less than twenty-four (24) hours notice to each member and to the public.

All business which the City Council may perform shall be conducted at a public meeting held in compliance with the Michigan Open Meetings Act, 1976 PA267, MCL 15.261, et. seq.; MSA 4.1800, et. seq.

Sec. 4-103. Selection of Council President and President Pro-Tempore.

City Council shall select its President and President Pro-Tempore from among its members by majority vote of the members serving at its first regular session in 2014. The term for City Council President and President Pro-Tempore shall be four (4) years. Selection of the President and President Pro-Tempore shall be every four years.

Members serving in the offices of President or President Pro-Tempore may be removed from their office by a unanimous vote of all members serving, exclusive of the officer being removed. If an officer is removed, the basis and vote for removal shall be publicly recorded in the minutes of City Council at a public meeting.

In the event of a vacancy in the office of President, including by removal or temporary absence, the President Pro-Tempore shall serve as President for the unexpired term in the case of vacancy or removal, or until the return of the President in the case of absence due to succession under section 5-109 or otherwise. Any vacancy in the office of President Pro-Tempore shall be filled by majority vote of members serving on the City Council for the unexpired term. However, if the office of President Pro-Tempore becomes available because of succession under section 5-109, City Council shall select a President ProTempore to serve until the return of the President and resulting resumption of the office by the President Pro-Tempore.

Sec. 4-104. Duties of the Council President.

The president of the City Council shall preside at all regular session meetings of the City Council. The president shall have administrative responsibility on behalf of the City Council.

30 | P a g e

The City Council shall provide in its rules for the duties and responsibilities of the council president.

Sec. 4-105. Rules and Journal.

The City Council shall determine its own rules and order of business and shall provide for keeping a journal of its proceedings in the English language. The journal shall be a public record.

Sec. 4-106. Standing Committee Structure.

The City Council shall provide for a standing committee structure by its rules which committees may include, but not be limited to the following areas: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Budget and Finance; Neighborhood and Community Services; Human Resources; Law and Public Safety; Planning and Economic Development; and Such committees as it deems necessary.

The president of the council shall appoint the chairpersons of such standing committees, with the approval of a majority of the City Council. However, the number of committees and the number of members per committee may be set by the City Council. Only members of committees may vote on matters before the committee. The president shall be an ex-officio member of all committees, but shall be a voting member only as provided for any other council person.

Sec. 4-107. Quorum.

A majority of City Council members serving constitutes a quorum, but a smaller number may adjourn from time to time and may compel attendance of absent members in the manner and subject to the penalties provided by rule of the City Council.

Sec. 4-108. Voting.

Except as otherwise provided by this Charter, no action of the City Council shall be effective unless adopted by at least a majority of City Council members present.

Every City Council member present shall vote on all questions, except as provided by state law, a City Council member must promptly disclose any pecuniary interest in a contract which the City Council has the power to approve, and no City Council member may vote upon any matter related to the approval of the contract in which the City Council member has a pecuniary interest.

On all ordnances, and in all other matters on the demand of one (1) or more members of the City Council, the yeas and nays shall be taken and entered in its journal.

Sec. 4-109. Investigations.

The City Council may make investigations into the affairs of the City and the conduct of any city agency.

31 | P a g e

Sec. 4-110. Investigative Powers.

The City Council may subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony and require the production of evidence in any matter pending before it or any of its committees. To enforce a subpoena or order for production of evidence or to impose any penalty prescribed for failure to obey a subpoena or order, the City Council shall apply to the appropriate court.

Sec. 4-111. Confirmation Authority.

Except as otherwise provided in this Charter or as may be required by law, Mayoral appointment of the Chief of Police, Fire Commissioner, Director of Planning and Development, Director of Human Resources and Corporation Counsel, is subject to approval by City Council. However, if the City Council does not disapprove the appointment within thirty (30) days after submission by the Mayor, the appointment is confirmed.

Sec. 4-112. Control of Property.

Except as otherwise provided by this Charter, the City may not sell or in any way dispose of any property without the approval by resolution of the City Council.

The City Council shall adopt an ordinance within one-hundred and eighty (180) days after the effective date of this Charter to provide for the acceptance of gifts or real and personal property and services to the City of Detroit.

Sec. 4-113. Prohibition on Interference in Administration.

Except for the purposes of inquiries and investigations, the City Council or its members shall deal with city officers and employees who are subject to the direction and supervision of the Mayor solely through the Mayor, and neither City Council or its members shall give orders to such officer or employee, either publicly or privately.

Sec. 4-114. Ordinances and Resolutions in General.

In accordance with state law, an ordinance shall be enacted to provide a permanent rule for the conduct of government, while a resolution shall be adopted to express a determination, to direct a particular action, or to approve a singular event. In addition to other acts required by law or by specific provision of this Charter to be done by ordinance, those acts of the City shall be by ordinance which: 1.

Amend or repeal any language in, or add any language to, the Detroit City Code;

2.

Establish a prohibition for violation of which a penalty is imposed based upon a finding that a person committed a misdemeanor, civil infraction, or blight violation; or

3.

Provide for the laying and collecting of rents, tolls, excises and taxes, except as otherwise provided in section 8-209 of this Charter concerning property taxes levied by the budget.

Sec. 4-115. Ordinance Procedure.

1.

Every proposed ordinance shall be in writing. No ordinance may contain more than one (1) subject, and the ordinance’s title must clearly express this subject. The enacting clause shall be “It is Hereby Ordained by the People of the City of Detroit ...”

32 | P a g e

Any ordinance which repeals or amends an existing chapter, article, division, or section of the Detroit City Code shall set out in full the chapter, article, or division, or section to be repealed or amended, and shall clearly indicate language to be omitted and language to be added.

2.

Upon the filing of any ordinance, the City Clerk shall distribute a copy to each City Council member and to the Mayor, shall file a reasonable number of copies in the Office of the City Clerk and such other public places as the City Council may designate, and shall publish a summary of the proposed ordinance in a daily newspaper of general circulation in the City together with a notice establishing the time and place for a public hearing thereon and for its consideration by the City Council.

The public hearing may not be held earlier than five (5) days after the publication. The public hearing may be held separately or with a regular or special City Council meeting and may be adjourned from time to time. All interested persons shall have an opportunity to be heard.

After the public hearing, the City Council shall vote on the proposed ordinance in accordance with section 4-108 of this Charter.

Sec. 4-116. Emergency Ordinances.

To meet a public emergency affecting life, health, property or the public peace, one (1) or more emergency ordinances may be enacted. However, an emergency ordinance may not levy taxes; grant, renew or extend a franchise; or regulate the rate charged by any public utility for its service.

An emergency ordinance shall be introduced in the form and manner required for ordinances under section 4-115 of this Charter, except that the ordinance shall contain, after the enacting clause, a declaration stating that an emergency exists and describing the emergency in clear and specific terms.

An emergency ordinance may be passed and given immediate effect at the meeting at which the ordinance is introduced, by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council Members present.

An emergency ordinance shall become effective upon publication or at any later date specified therein.

Every emergency ordinance is repealed automatically on the sixty-first (61st) day after its enactment, unless re-enacted as an emergency ordinance.

Sec. 4-117. Procedure for Approval or Veto by Mayor and City Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Override of Veto.

Every ordinance or resolution of the City Council, except quasi-judicial acts of the City Council, including any under section 9-302, appointments by the City Council or action taken under sections 2-107(B) and (C), 4-102, 4-105, 4-108, 4-109, 4-120, 4-121, 7-706, or 12-110 of this Charter, shall be presented by the City Clerk to the Mayor within four (4) business days after adjournment of the meeting at which the ordinance is passed or the resolution is adopted.

Within seven (7) days of its receipt, the Mayor shall return the ordinance or resolution to the City Clerk with or without approval, or with a veto and a written statement explaining the veto. However, with respect to an emergency ordinance, the Mayor shall notify the City Clerk of a veto in any reasonable manner within twenty-four (24) hours after the Mayorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office receives written notice from the City Clerk that the emergency ordinance has been passed.

An ordinance approved by the Mayor shall be deemed enacted thereupon. An ordinance returned to the City Clerk neither approved nor vetoed by the Mayor shall be deemed enacted upon receipt by the City Clerk. The Mayor shall return any resolution neither approved nor vetoed to the City Clerk with a written

33 | P a g e

statement explaining the reason that the resolution was neither approved nor vetoed. An ordinance or resolution not returned to the City Clerk within seven (7) days of receipt by the Mayor shall be deemed enacted upon expiration of the seven (7) day period, provided, that, where the Mayor fails to notify the City Clerk of a veto within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt by the Mayor’s Office of notice that an emergency ordinance has been passed, the emergency ordinance shall be deemed enacted upon expiration of the twenty-four (24) hour period.

An ordinance or resolution vetoed by the Mayor can be reconsidered by the City Council only at a regular or special meeting within one (1) week after receipt of the Mayor’s veto. A two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council Members serving may pass the ordinance or adopt the resolution over the Mayor’s veto.

Sec. 4-118. Publication of Ordinances and Effective Date.

An ordinance shall become effective only upon publication by the City Clerk. The effective date of an ordinance shall be determined as specified in this section.

As soon as practicable after enactment of any ordinance in accordance with section 4-117, the City Clerk shall have the law published in a daily newspaper of general circulation in the City together with a notice of its enactment, which shall include the effective date. After publication, each ordinance shall be printed in a form for codification within the Detroit City Code.

Except as provided by law, the effective date of the ordinance shall be determined as follows: 1.

2.

3.

Where the ordinance is passed by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the City Council Members serving, it shall be given immediate effect and become effective upon publication; Where the ordinance is passed by less than two-thirds (2/3) majority of the City Council Members serving, it shall become effective no later than thirty (30) days after publication; or Where the ordinance specifies a certain date to become effective, it shall become effective in accordance with the date specified therein, subject to the publication requirement in this section.

Sec. 4-119. Ordinances After Enactment and Resolutions After Adoption.

1.

The City Clerk shall authenticate by signature and record all ordinances and resolutions in a properly indexed book kept for that purpose. After enactment, the City Clerk shall cause each ordinance to be printed in a loose-leaf format for distribution to the public prior to codification of the ordinance in the Detroit City Code. At the end of each calendar year, or more frequently if possible, the City Clerk shall cause loose-leaf ordinances to be codified within the Detroit City Code.

2.

Within ten (10) years after the effective date of this Charter and at least every ten (10) years thereafter, the City Council shall provide for the preparation of a general codification of all City ordinances.

The general codification shall be enacted by ordinance and shall be published promptly in bound or looseleaf form, together with this Charter and any amendments thereto, the 1963 Michigan Constitution, the Michigan Home Rule City Act and rules promulgated under section 2-111 of this Charter. This compilation shall be designated as the Detroit City Code with the designation preceded by the year that the Code became effective.

A copy of the Code shall be provided to City elective officers, appointees and necessary employees, placed in libraries and public offices for free public reference, and made available for purchase by the public at a reasonable price fixed by the City Council Clerk.

34 | P a g e

Each ordinance and each amendment to this Charter shall be printed promptly after enactment, and the printed ordinances and Charter amendments shall be distributed or sold to the public at reasonable prices to be fixed by the City Council Clerk.

Sec. 4-120. Council Personnel.

The City Council may appoint a staff, exempt from Article 6, Chapter 4 of this Charter.

Sec. 4-121. Special Counsel.

The City Council may obtain the opinion or advice of an outside law firm or outside attorney in any matter pending before it. Where there exists a conflict of interest between the City Council and another branch of government, the City Council has the authority to retain an outside law firm or outside attorney who shall represent the City Council in legal proceedings, in accordance with section 7.5-208 (Intra-Government Dispute Resolution). The attorney must be licensed to practice law in Michigan and shall not represent the city as a municipal corporation in any legal proceeding.

Sec. 4-122. Approval of Contracts and Disclosure.

The City may not purchase or in any way procure property or the services of independent contractors without approval by resolution of the City Council except as provided by ordinance.

Within one hundred eighty (180) days of the effective date of this Charter, the City Clerk shall post on the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s website a list of all contracts that have been approved by City Council and which are then in effect.

The list shall be updated upon the initial approval, amendment or renewal of a contract, as provided herein. The list shall contain: (1) the name of the contractor; (2) a brief description of the goods and/or services being provided; (3) the total dollar amount of the contract; (4) the amount and date of all amendments that result in a change in the contract amount, including change orders; and (5) the purchase order number.

For purposes of conflicts of interest, the City shall require in all of its contractual agreements, including, but not limited to, leases, service and equipment agreements and including contract renewals, that the contractor provide a statement listing all political contributions and expenditures (â&#x20AC;&#x153;Statement of Political Contributions and Expendituresâ&#x20AC;?), as defined by the Michigan Campaign Finance Act, MCL 169.201, et seq., made by the contractor, its affiliates, subsidiaries, principals, officers, owners, directors, agents or assigns to elective city officials within the previous four (4) years. Individuals shall also list any contributions or expenditures from their spouses.

The contract shall reflect that filing the Statement of Political Contributions and Expenditures shall be a yearly obligation of the contractor for the duration of the contract and shall be filed with all contract renewals and change orders. Each submitted Statement of Political Contributions and Expenditures shall be current up to and including the date of its filing.

The contractual agreement shall also state that the contract is not valid unless and until the Statement of Political Contributions and Expenditures is provided, which shall be attached as an exhibit to the contract and referenced as such in the contract. City Council is prohibited from approving any contract subject to this requirement, or change order related to such contract, unless it is accompanied by the Statement of Political Contributions and Expenditures from the contractor.

35 | P a g e

ARTICLE 4.

THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH CHAPTER 2. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Sec. 4-201. Establishment of Board of Zoning Appeals.

There shall be established, pursuant to the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, MCL 125.3101, et al., a Board of Zoning Appeals. The Board of Zoning Appeals shall be composed of at least seven (7) members, one (1) each from the non at-large districts.

Sec. 4-202. Board of Zoning Appeals Ordinance.

In accordance with the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, MCL 125.3601, the City of Detroit shall enact an ordinance that establishes one (1) appeal board with the powers and duties: (1) to hear appeals from administrative decisions either of the Buildings, Safety Engineering, and Environmental Department or Planning and Development Department; and (2) hold hearings on non-conforming uses and structures and requests for variances. In accordance with MCL 125.3601(1), the ordinance shall provide that the City Council appoints members to the Board of Zoning Appeals.

In addition, the ordinance shall provide: 1.

For rules governing the appeal and other matters properly before the Board, including the parties entitled to be heard in proceedings before the Board;

2.

In any review proceeding, that the Buildings, Safety Engineering, and Environmental Department or the Planning and Development Department shall file a written statement and may appear before the Board in support of its decision;

3.

The effect of a decision of the Board; and

4.

For compensation of Board members.

36 | P a g e

ARTICLE 4.

THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH CHAPTER 3. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Sec. 4-301. City Planning Commission.

A nine (9) member City Planning Commission shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City Council. Seven (7) of the members shall be appointed, one (1) each, from the non at-large districts. As far as possible, different professions and occupations shall be represented on the commission.

A member must be a resident of the City. The term of office is three (3) years and the terms of three (3) members expire each year. City Council members are eligible for appointment to the Commission as exofficio members.

Sec. 4-302. Powers and Duties.

The City Planning Commission shall advise the City Council on development matters as defined in section 6-204 and, to the extent consistent with this Charter and state law, perform other functions as directed by the City Council. Any resolution adopted by the Commission is advisory and shall not be binding until adoption by the City Council.

Sec. 4-303. Staff Assistance.

The Commission may request, and is entitled to, assistance from the staff of the Planning and Development Department in evaluating or preparing any proposal relating to planning or development. All elective and appointive officers shall furnish to the commission, within a reasonable time, available information required by the commission. The Commission may, within appropriations, appoint a staff, exempt from Article 6, Chapter 4 of this Charter.

37 | P a g e

ARTICLE 5 THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: THE MAYOR and GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec.5-101. Mayor.

The Mayor is the chief executive of the City and, as provided by this Charter, has control of and is accountable for the executive branch of City government. The Mayor is also directly accountable to the citizens of the City of Detroit.

Sec.5-102. The Executive Branch.

Except as otherwise provided by law or this Charter, executive and administrative authority for the implementation of programs, services and activities of city government is vested exclusively in the executive branch.

Sec.5-103. Mayoral Appointments.

The Mayor may appoint a secretary and other necessary assistants.

Except as otherwise provided by law or this Charter, the Mayor shall appoint for each department of the executive branch a director who serves at the pleasure of the Mayor as head of the department. As used in this chapter, â&#x20AC;&#x153;directorâ&#x20AC;? means the administrative head of each department regardless of the title of a particular director.

Sec.5-104. Other Mayoral Powers.

The Mayor is a conservator of the peace of the City and may administer oaths and take affidavits.

Sec.5-105. Appointment of Deputies.

Except as otherwise provided by law or this Charter, the Director of each department of the executive branch may, with the consent of the Mayor, appoint a Deputy. The appointment shall be made and may be revoked without cause by a writing filed with the City Clerk.

Sec.5-106. Powers and Duties of Department Directors.

Except as otherwise provided by law or this Charter, the Director of each department of the executive branch shall: 1. In accordance with Article 6, Chapter 4, hire, promote, supervise, discipline and remove all employees of the department.

2. Assign duties to the employees and supervise the performance of these duties.

3. Prescribe rules which are necessary for the organization and internal governance of the department. However, no rule may be inconsistent with any collective bargaining contract or any rule

38 | P a g e

or policy of the Human Resources Department.

4. Prepare reasonable rules governing dealings between the department and the public. A rule becomes effective in accordance with section 2-111.

5. Present annually in quantitatively measurable terms the department’s operational performance during the past year and the objective for planned improvement in the coming year. The report shall be submitted to the Mayor and City Council not later than the date established for the Mayor to submit to the City Council a proposed annual budget for the next fiscal year.

6. Respond to any inquiry or investigation of the Inspector General, Ombudsperson, Board of Ethics, Auditor General and City Council.

Sec.5-107. Powers of a Departmental Deputy.

The Deputy in each department of the executive branch shall, under the Director’s supervision, during the director’s absence or disability, or while the director’s position is vacant, exercise all the powers and perform all the duties of the director to the full extent permitted by law.

Sec.5-108. Deputy Mayor.

By a writing filed with the City Clerk, the Mayor shall designate a member of the Mayoral staff or the director of a department of the executive branch as the deputy Mayor. The Mayor may terminate the designation without cause by filing a notice of termination with the City Clerk.

During the absence or temporary disability of the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor shall be acting Mayor and shall exercise all the powers and perform all the duties of the Mayor to the full extent permitted by law, except that the Deputy Mayor may not: 1. Exercise any power of appointment to or removal from office, except in an emergency declared by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council members present; or 2. Approve or veto any ordinance or resolution within the first five (5) days of the seven (7) days allowed under section 4-117 for exercise of the Mayor’s veto power.

Sec.5-109. Succession to Office.

If a vacancy occurs in the office of Mayor, the City Council president shall succeed to the office until a new Mayor is elected.

If a dispute arises concerning whether a vacancy in the office of Mayor has occurred, the City Council president or any three (3) members of the City Council may petition the appropriate court for a determination of this fact question.

Sec. 5-110. Community Meetings.

Each calendar year the Mayor shall hold at least one community meeting in each of the non at-large districts. A city-wide community meeting shall be held not later than September 30 of each calendar year at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center auditorium or other location suited to accommodate at least

39 | P a g e

an equal number of citizens. Meetings shall begin between the hours of seven (7) o’clock P.M. and eight (8) o’clock P.M. and shall not conflict with an evening City Council meeting scheduled under section 4102.

The meetings shall be published and noticed in the manner set forth in the Michigan Open Meetings Act. Meetings shall be conspicuously posted on the City of Detroit’s website or then existing modes of electronic or non-print communication and on other forms of media owned or operated by the City of Detroit, including any television channels.

40 | P a g e

ARTICLE 6 THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: STAFF DEPARTMENTS CHAPTER 1. BUDGET DEPARTMENT Sec. 6-101. Budget Department.

The Budget Department is headed by the Budget Director.

Sec. 6-102. Powers and Duties.

The Budget Department shall assist other city agencies in the development of program and service objectives and in the conduct of financial planning to achieve those objectives.

The Budget Department shall obtain from city agencies all information required by the Mayor for the preparation of the capital agenda and the capital and annual budgets. That information shall be furnished in the manner prescribed by the Budget Director.

The Budget Director, with the assistance of the Planning and Development Director, shall assist the Mayor in the preparation of the capital agenda and the capital budget.

Sec. 6-103. Management Audits.

The Budget Department shall conduct management audits which analyze and evaluate the operations of all agencies.

41 | P a g e

ARTICLE 6.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: STAFF DEPARTMENTS CHAPTER 2. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Sec. 6-201. Planning and Development Department.

The Planning and Development Department is headed by the Planning and Development Director. In addition to the duties and functions in this chapter, the department shall: 1.

Establish a strategic plan that pursues, advocates and supports community development within the City, consistent with the Master Plan, including the creation and support of stable planned communities;

2.

Develop and implement a strategic plan to pursue and initiate programs, opportunities and create conditions supportive of global trade;

3.

Develop and implement a strategic plan to actively recruit businesses to the City and provide the support, assistance and conditions necessary to retain businesses; and

4.

Develop and implement a strategic plan and program focused on recruiting and supporting emerging industries.

The Department shall provide an annual report to City Council, on or before February 1, that incorporates the community and economic development strategies called for in this section, and which details the departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s actions, achievements and future plans in pursuit of these strategies and the duties and functions set forth herein. The report shall also identify the levels of funding necessary to pursue these strategies and achieve their objectives.

Sec. 6-202. Advance Planning.

The Planning and Development Department shall obtain all information and conduct all studies required by the Mayor and the heads of agencies in the preparation of proposals relative to development matters.

Sec. 6-203. Current Planning.

The Planning and Development Department shall have continuing liaison with all agencies of the executive branch. It may assign any relevant study to any agency. Any agency, with knowledge and consent of the Planning and Development Director, may undertake the study of any development matter within the scope of its duties. The Planning and Development Department shall receive all reports concerning development matters and other information which it requests. The Planning and Development Director shall, with the head of any agency involved, evaluate all reports and information received by the Planning and Development Department in light of the policies, programs and priorities of the Mayor, and the master plan.

Sec. 6-204. Definition.

The term â&#x20AC;&#x153;development mattersâ&#x20AC;? as used in the Charter includes: The master plan for social, economic and physical development and conservation; the annual capital agenda and capital budget; any development or renewal project on or affecting public real property or public interests in real property or requiring public assistance; proposed ordinances for the regulation of development or conservation; proposals for the demolition, disposition or relinquishment of, or encroachment upon, public real property or public interests in real property; and any other items added by ordinance.

42 | P a g e

Sec. 6-205. Public Hearings.

The people of the City of Detroit living in areas likely to be affected by proposals resulting from any study undertaken by the Planning and Development Department or an agency under sections 6-202 or 6-203 shall be given full opportunity in public hearings to present facts and arguments relative to the subject under study. The department is required to provide notification of the hearing to any Citizen District Council, Citizen Advisory Council or Community Development Corporation impacted by proposals contained in the study.

43 | P a g e

ARTICLE 6.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: STAFF DEPARTMENTS CHAPTER 3. FINANCE DEPARTMENT Sec. 6-301. Finance Department.

The Finance Department is headed by the Finance Director.

Sec. 6-302. Departmental Divisions.

The Finance Director shall direct and coordinate the financial activities of the accounts division, the assessments division, the treasury, and the purchasing division. The Finance Director shall also secure and maintain compliance with all laws pertaining to financial controls for the protection of public funds.

Sec. 6-303. Accounts Division.

The Accounts Division is headed by the Chief Accounting Officer. The Finance Director, with the consent of the Mayor, shall appoint the Chief Accounting Officer, who serves at the pleasure of the Finance Director.

The Chief Accounting Officer shall maintain records showing the financial condition of the city and perform such other duties as provided by law, this Charter or ordinance.

Sec. 6-304. Assessments Division.

The Assessments Division is headed by a three (3) member Board of Assessors. The term of membership on the Board is three (3) years. One (1) term expires each year. Compensation for Board members shall be established by ordinance.

The Mayor shall appoint the members of the Board and may remove a member for cause. Each member must possess the qualifications required by law for assessing officers.

Staff services required by the Division shall be provided as determined by the Finance Director.

A majority of the Board may review and correct any assessment made by an employee of the Division.

Except as otherwise provided by this Charter or ordinance, the powers, duties and procedures of the Board and the Division are those provided by law.

Sec. 6-305. Treasury Division.

The Treasury Division is headed by the Treasurer. The Finance Director, with the consent of the Mayor, shall appoint the Treasurer, who serves at the pleasure of the Finance Director.

The Treasurer shall: 1.

Collect all moneys of the city and receive from other officers and employees all moneys of the city collected by them.

44 | P a g e

2.

Have custody of all moneys, funds and securities of the city, keep accounts of them and deposit them as directed by law or ordinance.

3.

Disburse all city funds in accordance with law, this Charter or ordinance.

4.

Except as otherwise provided by this Charter or ordinance, have such powers and immunities for the collection of taxes as provided by law.

Sec. 6-306. Purchasing Division.

The Purchasing Division is headed by the Purchasing Director. The Finance Director, with the consent of the Mayor, shall appoint the Purchasing Director, who serves at the pleasure of the Finance Director.

The Purchasing Director shall, subject to the provisions of section 4-122: 1. Procure all property and all services of independent contractors to be paid for from appropriations made in the annual budget in accordance with section 8-302, except that an agency may be authorized by ordinance to procure specified kinds of property and services directly.

2. Follow all procedures established by ordinance to protect the interests of the city and to assure fairness in procuring property and services. Except in cases of emergency, those procedures shall require competitive bidding for purchases and contracts which are major as defined by ordinance.

However, for purposes of this requirement, the â&#x20AC;&#x153;lowest responsible bidderâ&#x20AC;? may be defined by ordinance in terms of lowest overall cost to the City.

3. Sell, lease or transfer in the ordinary course of city operations all personal property of the city which has become unsuitable for public use. Dispositions of personal property which are not in the ordinary course of city operations shall be defined by ordinance and are subject to City Council control.

4. Follow procedures established by ordinance to protect the interests of the city and to assure fairness in disposing of personal property. Except in cases of emergency, those procedures shall require competitive bidding for all sales, leases and transfers which are major as defined by ordinance.

Sec. 6-307. Privatization of City Services.

The City shall provide by ordinance for a process by which the City shall act prior to any determination or action to enter into any agreement, by which a non-governmental person or entity provides services to the city substantially similar in whole or in part, to services provided by a regular employee of an agency of the City. Such ordinance shall provide for the following: 1. The preparation of a comprehensive report which details the need for the privatization.

2. Comprehensive written estimates of the total current costs to the city of the agency providing the subject services in the most cost efficient manner, including all direct and indirect costs.

3. A requirement for approval of the legislative body to solicit bids for the privatization, after its review of the comprehensive report and cost analysis.

4. An opportunity for the affected employees to organize and prepare a bid to provide the subject services.

5. A process whereby the agency prepares a comprehensive written analysis of all bids of public employees and non-governmental entities, which would include, but not be limited to the cost of the bid to provide the services, contract performance; and unemployment, pension or other accrued benefits resulting from loss of agency employees.

6. Other factors to be included in the consideration, other than cost, which could affect the public interest including the effect of transfer of services from the public to the private sector on the access,

45 | P a g e

delivery or quality of services to be provided; the reduction in the employment level of city residents; the differences in work rules and management practices of the workers in the private sector, including those related to legal and constitutional protections and any loss of accountability to city residents which would result from the services being provided by a non-governmental person or entity.

7. The provision that any final recommendation for the privatization of services would require the two-thirds (2/3) approval of the legislative body, which would be required to certify that it was its determination that the availability and quality of the subject services would be likely to equal or exceed the quality of services which could be provided by regular agency employees.

8. Provisions which would require the annual evaluation of the privatized services and the providing of such evaluation to the City Council.

No provision of this section should be construed to abrogate or limit any legal rights afforded to the employees under the collective, bargaining process.

Nothing in this section shall supersede provisions of section 6-417 of this Charter.

In addition, nothing in the ordinance should be construed as prohibiting the city from obtaining contractual services which are an expansion or addition to services already provided by governmental employees, provided that the contractual services are not a replacement for existing governmental positions.

An ordinance implementing this section shall be adopted within one hundred eighty (180) days of the effective date of this Charter.

Sec. 6-308. Debarment.

The Corporation Counsel shall prepare, and City Council shall implement by ordinance, a comprehensive debarment policy and procedure for City vendors and contractors within one hundred twenty (120) days of the effective date of this Charter. The debarment policy shall, at a minimum, include the following: 1.

Debarment for a period commensurate with the seriousness of the offense, not to exceed twenty (20) years;

2.

Identify the Inspector General as the chief investigative agent for allegations or instances of illegal conduct or unethical contractual activity;

3.

Require, under penalty of debarment, that persons or entities with City contracts, or those seeking contracts with the City, report to the Inspector General any improper, unethical or illegal activity or requests from elected officials, those on their behalf or City employees in connection with the contract;

4.

Provide for no statute of limitations in connection with investigations, findings of violation of the debarment policy or initiation of debarment proceedings;

5.

Require that the City report actual or suspected illegal activity to the proper state or federal authorities;

6.

Invest the City Council, as a body, and the Mayor with the authority to request the Inspector General to investigate suspected improper activity related to City contracts; and

7.

Require that all City contracts and contractors be made subject to the debarment ordinance.

46 | P a g e

ARTICLE 6.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: STAFF DEPARTMENTS CHAPTER 4. HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Sec. 6-401. General Purpose.

The purpose of this chapter is to establish a system of personnel administration that meets the needs of the people of Detroit, assures that employment and promotion in Detroit government are on the basis of merit and in accordance with collective bargaining under law, and provides methods of redress when these provisions are violated.

Sec. 6-402. Human Resources Department.

Except as otherwise provided by law or this Charter the Human Resources Department shall perform all aspects of the human resources functions for all agencies of the City.

Sec. 6-403. Human Resources Director and Deputy.

The Human Resources Director shall be appointed by the Mayor. The Mayor may remove the director without cause. A Deputy Human Resources Director shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Human Resources Director.

Sec. 6-404. Qualifications.

The Human Resources Director shall have at least five (5) years experience in personnel administration.

Sec. 6-405. Civil Service Commission.

The Human Resources Department is headed by a five (5) member Civil Service Commission.

The Mayor shall appoint two (2) members to two (2) year terms beginning February fifteenth (15th) of each even numbered year and the City Council shall appoint two (2) members to two (2) year terms beginning February fifteenth (15th) of each odd numbered year. The Mayor and City Council shall jointly appoint one (1) member to a three (3) year term beginning February fifteenth after the expiration of the preceding term. A member may be removed only for cause by the appointing authority. A vacancy on the Commission shall be filled for the unexpired term, if any, by the authority making the original appointment.

A member must be a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of Detroit. The members of the Commission may hold no other public office or public employment with the City of Detroit except that of notary public. The Commission shall be representative of the total community and shall meet at least once each month.

The Commission may hold hearings, subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, and require the production of evidence. To enforce a subpoena or order for production of evidence or to impose any penalty prescribed for failure to obey a subpoena or order, the Commission shall apply to the appropriate court. The Commission may delegate the powers to hold hearings, administer oaths and take testimony.

47 | P a g e

Sec. 6-406. Non-Discrimination.

No city employee or applicant for employment may be discriminated against because of religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, height, weight, disability, familial status, marital status, or any status protected by the laws of the State of Michigan or the United States of America. The Human Resources Department shall take all action permitted by law to ensure fair and equitable treatment of all employees and applicants for employment.

Sec. 6-407. Employee Organization.

Employees of the City have the right to collective organization and collective bargaining.

Sec. 6-408. Labor Relations.

A Labor Relations Division is created within the Human Resources Department.

The Mayor may appoint either the Human Resources Director or another person as head of the Labor Relations Division.

The person named as head of the division shall hold the position at the pleasure of the Mayor.

In accordance with Article 6, Chapter 4, the head of the Labor Relations Division may hire, promote, supervise, discipline and remove employees of the division, assign duties to the employees and supervise the performance of those duties.

The Labor Relations Division shall act for the City under the direction of the Mayor, in the negotiation and administration of collective bargaining contracts.

The City Council must ratify any collective bargaining contract agreed to between the City and the respective union before it becomes effective.

The terms of any collective bargaining contract, and all rules and rulings made under it, shall take precedence over any inconsistent classifications, rules, or policies of the Human Resources Department.

Sec. 6-409. Classification of Positions.

The Human Resources Director shall prepare, maintain, and from time to time revise a classification plan for all positions in the classified service. The classification plan shall include an appropriate title for each class and a description of the duties and responsibilities of positions in the class. The Human Resources Director may consult with the heads of city agencies in the preparation of those descriptions.

The classification plan and any revision of it, shall be filed with the City Clerk and shall be a public record.

The plan or any revision shall become effective thirty (30) days after filing, except that, within the thirty (30) day period, the Civil Service Commission may, on its own initiative or at the request of any classified employee or the head of any agency affected, review the classification plan or any revision and, after giving the Human Resources Director a full hearing, may make changes if it finds upon clear and convincing evidence that the description or classification of any position or positions is improper.

48 | P a g e

Sec. 6-410. Examinations.

Entry into the classified service shall, as nearly as conditions of good administration warrant, be by open, competitive examination. However, any person applying to work for the City in a profession or occupation for which he or she has been licensed by the governments of Michigan or the United States may be excused from this requirement by the rule of the Civil Service Commission.

The head of each agency may make all promotions to classified positions within the agency. However, the head of an agency shall give the Commission written notice of any proposed promotion within the classified service not less than thirty (30) days before its effective date.

The Human Resources Department may require a person nominated for a promotion to take a qualifying examination for the new position and, if that person does not achieve a passing score on the examination, the promotion shall not take effect.

The Human Resources Director shall prepare, administer and grade all examinations, subject only to an examineeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s right to appeal under section 6-411.

The Human Resources Director shall consult with the head of the agency involved and other qualified individuals in the preparation of each of its examinations.

Other policies and rules governing entry into, and change of status within, the classified service shall be prepared by the Human Resources Director and shall become effective upon ratification by the Commission and upon the filing of a written copy with the City Clerk. However, no person seeking to enter the classified service who has taken an examination and been placed on a register of applicants eligible for employment may be passed over in favor of an applicant with a lower examination score unless the head of the agency involved files with the commission written reasons for that action, acceptable to the Commission.

Sec. 6-411. Validation.

To the maximum extent possible, the City shall use professionally developed examinations, supported by empirical data demonstrating that the examination is predictive of, or significantly related to, important elements of work behavior of the position or positions for which applicants are being evaluated.

An examinee may challenge any part of any examination on the grounds that it does not conform to the requirements of this chapter or departmental policies or rules, but the Civil Service Commission may grant relief only if it finds that there is no clear and convincing evidence of validity for the examination or part being challenged.

Sec. 6-412. Recruitment and Advancement.

The Human Resources Director shall prepare and carry out policies for the recruitment of capable persons for employment by the City and for employee advancement.

These policies shall be filed with the City Clerk and shall be a public record. They shall become effective thirty (30) days after filing, except that, within the thirty (30) day period, the commission may review those policies and, after giving the Human Resources Director a full hearing, may make changes if it finds upon clear and convincing evidence that the policies are contrary to the good of the service.

49 | P a g e

Sec. 6-413. Employee Grievances.

The Civil Service Commission shall, by rule, provide a procedure for the final resolution of any grievance brought by or against a classified employee of the city. Any grievances filed with the Commission under the procedure shall be finally determined within sixty (60) days after filing, unless the time is extended by agreement of the parties.

If a grievance is not settled, the aggrieved employee may file, within ten (10) calendar days, an appeal with the Commission. The employee and the Commission shall attempt to agree on a hearing officer from among not fewer than three (3) individuals proposed by the Commission. If the employee and the Commission are unable to agree, they shall request a recognized arbitration association as designated by ordinance to propose the names of five (5) persons who could act independently and impartially as hearing officer in the matter. In the presence of an officer authorized to take oaths, each side, acting in turn with the employee beginning, shall indicate a name to be struck with those proposed until both sides have struck two (2) names. The person whose name then remains shall be the hearing officer.

A hearing shall be held within thirty (30) calendar days after filing of an appeal. The hearing officer shall file a report of the decision, setting forth findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations, within thirty (30) calendar days of the hearing which is subject to review by the commission.

Any rule or policy under this section becomes effective in accordance with section 2-111.

Sec. 6-414. Jurisdiction.

The Commission procedure shall be exclusive for classified employees not covered by a collective bargaining contract.

A classified employee covered by a collective bargaining contract containing a procedure providing for a final and enforceable resolution of a grievance shall, unless the contract procedure is made exclusive, elect to use either the Commission procedure or the contract procedure, but may not use both.

A classified employee covered by a collective bargaining contract containing a grievance procedure that does not result in a final and enforceable resolution of the grievance may, if the collective bargaining contract so provides, pursue the contract procedure and then file under the Commission procedure.

Sec. 6-415. Payrolls.

The Human Resources Department shall certify that the classified employees named in payroll vouchers are employed in accordance with this chapter and departmental policies and rules.

No officer shall make or approve or take any part in making or approving any payment to any classified employee unless the payroll voucher bears the certification of the Human Resources Department.

Any sum knowingly or willfully paid contrary to this chapter or any departmental policy or rule may be recovered in an action brought by any person from any officer who made or approved the payment. All moneys recovered shall be paid into the city treasury. Any person may bring a suit to restrain an officer from making any payment contrary to this chapter, or any departmental rule, regulation or order.

If the Commission finds that the name of any classified employee has been omitted from any payroll, the agency involved shall correct the payroll and the classified employee shall be paid as directed by the Commission.

50 | P a g e

Sec. 6-416. Residence.

Except as otherwise provided by law, the City may, by ordinance, establish residency requirements for city employment.

Sec. 6-417. Classified Service.

The classified service of the City shall consist of all employments in the city service except: 1. Elective officers; 2. Persons holding appointments under this Charter; 3. Persons employed to make or conduct a temporary or special inquiry, investigation, or examination on behalf of the City; 4. Others exempted by this Charter.

Sec. 6-418. Transfers and Promotions to Exempt Positions.

A person holding a position in the classified service may enter the exempt service, but may not be discharged therefrom, except by restoration to a classified position in accordance with rules of the Commission.

Sec. 6-419. Consolidation of Entities.

If any City activity or agency is taken over by another unit of government, the commission shall prepare the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s payroll history record of all classified employees involved and send that record to the governmental unit. If, after the merger, the service of any such employee is discontinued for reasons other than misconduct or delinquency, the personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s name shall be placed on an appropriate reemployment list in accordance with departmental rules.

If an activity of another private or public organization is taken over by the City, an employee who has held a position in the activity continuously for three (3) years before its merger with the City may retain the position. An employee who has held a position in the activity for less than three (3) but more than one (1) year before its merger with the City must take a departmental qualifying examination for the position. If the employee does not pass a required qualifying examination or if an employee has held a position in the activity for less than one (1) year before its merger with the City and is not selected to retain the position under the procedure of section 6-410, the employee shall be dismissed within thirty (30) days after the establishment of a register of eligibles for the position.

51 | P a g e

ARTICLE 6.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: STAFF DEPARTMENTS CHAPTER 5. BUILDINGS, SAFETY ENGINEERING and ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT Sec. 6-501. Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environmental Department.

The Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environmental Department is headed by the Director of Building, Safety Engineering and Environmental.

Sec. 6-502. General Purpose.

The purpose of this chapter is to conserve and protect the natural resources of the City of Detroit in the interests of the health, safety and welfare of the people, to promote improved social and economic conditions in the city and to protect limited environmental resources for the future benefit of city inhabitants.

Sec. 6-503. Powers and Duties.

The Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environmental Department shall: 1.

Develop and implement a coordinated and comprehensive environmental policy for the City of Detroit;

2.

Administer, enforce, manage and coordinate compliance by the City of Detroit with federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations;

3.

Coordinate environmental programs for protection and conservation of land, water and air resources;

4.

Develop and implement programs for response to emergency conditions which pose an immediate danger to health and safety to the people of Detroit or to the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s environment;

5.

Advise, consult and cooperate with agencies of the federal, state and local governments in furtherance of the purposes of this chapter;

6.

Develop and coordinate policy, programs and procedures for remediation, redevelopment and reuse of contaminated land sites in the City of Detroit;

7.

Develop and coordinate policy, programs and procedures to encourage and promote innovative and competitively viable sustainable economic development in the City of Detroit consistent with protection of the environment;

8.

Provide technical support and assistance to other city departments in environmental matters, including response to federal, state and local governmental enforcement activities; qualification for eligible grant moneys, etc.;

9.

Develop plans and proposals for joint cooperative investigation and research with the public and with private agencies and organizations on methods for eliminating or reducing land, air and water pollution;

10.

Collect and disseminate appropriate educational literature and information, and otherwise promote educational programs for the purposes of advising the general public of the necessity and methods for pollution prevention, securing public cooperation in pollution prevention

52 | P a g e

measures and increasing public awareness of the importance of environmental protection and conservation of natural resources; 11.

Provide consultation with City departments regarding the implementation of any policies or programs concerning alternative and renewable energy;

12.

Administer and enforce all laws, ordinances and regulations relating to the use of land (“zoning”); and

13.

Except as otherwise provided by law or this Charter, grant, revoke, or approve transfers of all licenses and permits required by any law or ordinance for any business and collect fees for licenses and permits.

14.

Do any and all other acts which may be necessary for the implementation of the powers and duties conferred on the department under this chapter.

Sec. 6-504. Conservation.

The Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environmental Department shall develop programs for the protection and conservation of natural resources within the City of Detroit.

Sec. 6-505. Environmental Legislation.

The Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environmental Department shall propose new ordinances, laws and regulations to the Mayor, City Council and other governmental entities as appropriate for improvement of the quality of the environment and promotion of the mission of the Department.

Sec. 6-506. Applications Filed Under Zoning Law. All applications for permits, grants, variances, waivers or exceptions of any kind under zoning laws, ordinances and regulations shall be made to the Department.

Sec. 6-507. Duty Under Other Regulatory Laws.

To the extent practicable, the Department shall also administer and enforce all other laws and ordinances regulating the development, maintenance and use of real property in the city.

Sec. 6-508. One-Stop Service.

To the extent practicable, the Department shall, in cooperation with other agencies whose permission is required prior to development, establish a procedure and application form under which an applicant for development permission may obtain, through the Department, all necessary permission.

Sec. 6-509. Green Initiatives and Technologies.

1.

The Department shall study the matter and prepare and implement a long-term strategic plan (“Green Initiatives and Sustainable Technologies Plan” or “GIST Plan”) for the establishment, use and support of green initiatives, technologies and businesses, utilizing public and private partners. The Mayor shall commission a public study (“Study and Report on Green Initiatives and Sustainable Technologies” or “SRGIST”) to determine the feasibility and requirements for engaging in and supporting this activity in the City of Detroit and areas outside the City of Detroit for the benefit of residents. The SRGIST shall be initiated within three (3) months of the effective

53 | P a g e

date of this Charter, completed within one (1) year of its commencement and publicly disseminated upon its completion.

2.

Within six (6) months after completion of the SRGIST the Mayor shall prepare the GIST Plan and submit it to City Council for approval before it may be implemented. City Council may hold public hearings prior to taking formal action on the GIST Plan, and if approved shall create any ordinances required to achieve the GIST Planâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s objectives

3.

The GIST Plan shall be comprehensive and may include solar, wind, thermal and other forms of alternative and renewable energy production and uses; alternative fuels; or other sustainable technologies and endeavors; green public works, construction and building programs; and any other green initiative or technology considered feasible. The GIST Plan shall incorporate green initiatives and technologies within the workplace and for use with City owned vehicles and property, real and personal. The GIST Plan may include methods and support for citizen initiated green initiatives and sustainable technology uses.

4.

The GIST Plan shall be reviewed yearly by the department and revised as necessary. All revisions to the GIST Plan must be approved by City Council, who shall implement all ordinances necessary to achieve the objectives of the revised GIST Plan.

5.

The Mayor may create advisory commissions under section 7-103 to assist with the development, monitoring, implementation and revision of the GIST Plan.

54 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 7-101. Existing Programs, Services and Activities.

When this Charter takes effect, all executive and administrative agencies and functions existing under the 1997 Charter or by ordinance or resolution and not superseded by this Charter shall continue with the force and effect of ordinance until superseded by action taken under section 7-102 or 7-104.

Sec. 7-102. Assignment of Authorized Function.

The Mayor shall prepare an executive organization plan which, consistent with law and this Charter, sets forth all agencies of the executive branch and assigns authorized programs, services and activities to each agency.

The plan as proposed by the Mayor shall be filed with the City Council and made public. The City Council shall study and conduct hearings on the plan and may request the Mayor to make modifications in it. Sixty (60) business days after the filing of the plan with the City Council, it shall become effective, with such modifications as are accepted by the Mayor, unless disapproved by a resolution adopted by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council members serving. All amendments to the plan must originate with the Mayor and are subject to the same procedure in taking effect.

The plan shall include the office of Mayor, the five departments created by Article 6, and all departments or functions created by Article 7 or continued by section 7-101. However, the plan may not provide for more than thirty-six (36) departments, exclusive of any department organized under specific statutory authority, unless authority for a greater number is granted under section 7-104.

The Mayor may not reassign or combine the functions of staff departments, but may, except as to departments created under Chapters 3, 6, 7, 8, 12 and 13 of this Article, assign any of the functions of an operating department to a staff department, reassign the functions of one (1) operating department to another operating department or combine operating departments.

Sec. 7-103. Advisory Commissions.

The Mayor may establish by executive order, any commission of members of the public to advise the Mayor or any Director of an Executive Branch department, in the determination of its policies and budgets and the implementation of its programs, services or activities. Appointments to all advisory commissions shall be made by, and members serve at the pleasure of, the Mayor.

The Mayor shall endeavor to make City-wide commissions as representative of the entire City as possible and any commission established to advise the Mayor or any department Director shall be as representative of the People being served as possible. All members of advisory commissions shall be residents of the City of Detroit, unless the Mayor expressly states in the executive order reasons for allowing non-residents to serve.

55 | P a g e

The executive order may provide for the advisory commission to complete its work within a specific period of time. In the event that the executive order does not do so, the Mayor may terminate the advisory commission through rescission of the executive order that established the commission.

Sec. 7-104. Change In Number of Authorized Functions.

Subject to the general provisions of this Charter, the City may, by ordinance, increase the number of departments of the executive branch beyond the number contemplated by this Charter.

The City may, by ordinance, authorize additional programs, services, or activities; or discontinue authorized programs, services, or activities.

56 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 2. RESPONSIBILITIES in HEALTH and SANITATION Sec. 7-201. Health.

The City is responsible for providing an adequate level of health services, both physical and mental, to all its residents.

An advisory commission for health, composed of at least seven (7) members, shall be created under section 7-103. Seven (7) of the members shall be appointed, one (1) each from the non at-large districts.

The Executive branch shall prepare an annual comprehensive health report on the state of the health of the City (“Report on the State of the Health of the City of Detroit”), which shall be presented to City Council and published on the City of Detroit’s website. City Council shall hold public hearings on the report within thirty (30) days of its receipt. The Commission shall provide assistance in developing the contents of the report.

The annual report shall be completed by August 1 of each year.

Sec. 7-202. Sanitation.

The City is responsible for collecting and disposing of wastes in the manner least harmful to the environment.

57 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 3. ARTS Sec. 7-301. Department.

The Arts Department is headed by a seven (7) member Commission. The members of the Commission shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor.

The term of membership on the Commission is four (4) years, and not more than two (2) membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; terms expire each year.

The Commission shall appoint, with the approval of the Mayor, the Arts Director and a Deputy Arts Director. The Director and the Deputy Director serve at the pleasure of the commission.

The Arts Department shall maintain and operate the Detroit Institute of Arts directly or pursuant to an operating agreement.

58 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 4. PUBLIC WORKS Sec. 7-401. Department.

The Department of Public Works shall: 1.

Provide for the management and collection of garbage and debris.

2.

Except as otherwise provided by law or Charter, in cooperation with the Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environment Department, enforce the environmental ordinances of the city, relating to this chapter.

3.

Provide for the construction, maintenance, demolition and engineering design of streets, alleys and public buildings.

4.

Plan, establish and maintain systems and devices for safe and expeditious regulation and control of traffic within the City.

5.

As provided by law or ordinance, perform other functions necessary to improve the quality of the environment.

Sec. 7-402. Sidewalk Maintenance.

The Department of Public Works may repair sidewalks after first giving the owner, occupant, or party in interest of the premises in front of or adjacent to which such sidewalk or driveway is located notice and an opportunity to repair as prescribed by ordinance. Any such ordinance adopted shall provide for appropriate hardship protections for the abutting property owner.

The cost of any sidewalk repairs performed by the Department of Public Works, with interest, shall be collected from the owner, occupant, or party in interest of the premises in front of or adjacent to which such sidewalk or driveway is located through a special assessment or shall, not less than one (1) year following the date on which sidewalk repairs performed by the Department of Public Works were completed, at the election of the public works department, be a lien of the city upon the premises in front of or adjacent to which such sidewalk or driveway is located. The procedures for the recovery of the cost of sidewalk repairs performed by the Department of Public Works shall be prescribed by ordinance. The decision by the Department of Public Works to repair a defective sidewalk shall not release the owner from responsibility or liability for that condition.

Sec. 7-403. Recycling.

The Department of Public Works shall prepare, implement and update as necessary a comprehensive city-wide Recycling Plan (“Plan”) for the City of Detroit that provides for the capture of the City’s waste stream prior to disposal. The Plan shall be submitted to City Council for approval before implementation.

City Council shall enact any ordinances necessary to achieve the objectives of the Plan and this section.

The Plan shall provide for and encourage materials recovery, composting and other methods of recycling.

In determining any recycling methods for inclusion in the Plan, the Department shall consider all relevant factors, including cost. The recycling methods contained in the Plan shall be regularly assessed and evaluated for the purpose of continued inclusion in the Plan, and the Plan shall be periodically updated to reflect the growth and change in recycling methods. All Plan revisions must be approved by City Council

59 | P a g e

prior to implementation. The Department shall annually provide a comprehensive written update to City Council on the Planâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s activities, programs, accomplishments and challenges, the Departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s effectiveness in meeting the objectives of the Plan and any ordinances or resources required to effectuate the Plan.

Any recycling efforts or programs of the Department existing at the time of the adoption of this Charter may be incorporated into the Plan.

60 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 5. FIRE Sec. 7-501. Department.

The Fire Department is headed by the Fire Commissioner.

The Fire Commissioner and the Deputy Fire Commissioner shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure the Mayor.

Sec. 7-502. Fire Department Divisions.

Subject to the approval of the Mayor, the Fire Commissioner shall appoint a Chief of the Fire Department from the Board of Fire Chiefs of the Fire Fighting Division. The Chief serves at the pleasure of the Fire Commissioner .

The Chief shall serve as the Director of Operations for the Fire Fighting Division.

Two (2) Deputy Fire Chiefs shall be appointed by the Fire Commissioner from the ranks of the Assistant Chiefs and serve at the pleasure of the Fire Commissioner.

A Fire Marshal shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Fire Commissioner.

Sec. 7-503. Duties.

The Fire Department shall protect life and property from fire and other dangerous conditions requiring their expertise and, as required by Charter or ordinance, enforce all laws, ordinances and regulations relating to fire prevention and safety within the City of Detroit.

Sec. 7-504. Fire Marshal.

The Fire Marshal shall inquire into the origin of all fires resulting in property loss and shall make a written report concerning every such fire to the Fire Commissioner, the Chief of Police, the Wayne County prosecuting attorney, the Detroit Board of Underwriters and any person legitimately interested in the matter.

The Fire Marshal shall also make such inspection of buildings and other places as is necessary for enforcement of the fire prevention ordinances of the City.

Sec. 7-505. Advisory Commission.

A seven (7) member advisory commission may be appointed by the Mayor. Four (4) members shall be appointed by the Mayor and three (3) shall be appointed by the Mayor from a list of four (4) names submitted by the City Council. Commissioners shall serve staggered three (3) year terms and shall serve at the pleasure of the Mayor. The Mayor shall make every effort to appoint persons with a minimum of five

61 | P a g e

(5) years experience in one or more of the following areas: fire fighting, fire prevention, emergency medical response, homeland security, emergency crisis management, financial management, policy making and/or public administration. All meetings shall be public and held in compliance with applicable laws. Commissioners shall be residents of the City of Detroit.

Sec. 7-506. Promotions.

1. The Fire Commissioner shall make all promotions to non-supervisory positions within the classified service of the Department. The employee having served in the longest period in any position shall be advanced to fill any vacancy in the next highest position, if that person has, in the judgment of the Fire Commissioner, the qualifications for the higher position. Qualifications shall be reasonable and non-competitive.

2. Promotions within the classified service of the Department to the supervisory positions of sergeant and above shall be determined by qualifications based on length of service in the next lower position and reasonable and objective evaluation of such factors as ability, skill, experience, knowledge and training.

62 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 6. HISTORICAL Sec. 7-601. Department.

The Historical Department is headed by a thirteen (13) member commission. The members of the commission shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor. Seven (7) of the members shall be appointed, one (1) each, from the City Council election districts, exclusive of the at-large district.

The term of membership on the commission is four (4) years, and not more than three (3) membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; terms expire each year.

The commission shall appoint, with the approval of the Mayor, a Museums Director and a Deputy Museums Director. The Director and the Deputy Director serve at the pleasure of the commission.

The Historical Department shall maintain and operate the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s historical museums directly or pursuant to an operating agreement.

63 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 7. HUMAN RIGHTS Sec. 7-701. Department.

The Human Rights Department is headed by the Human Rights Director. The Director and a Deputy Director shall be appointed by the Mayor to four (4) year terms beginning on March first (1st) after the beginning of the Mayor’s term. The Mayor may remove the Director or Deputy Director for cause.

However, the Director and Deputy Director may not be appointed or removed without the approval of the Human Rights Commission.

Sec. 7-702. Human Rights Commission.

An eleven (11) member Human Rights Commission shall be appointed by the Mayor, with the approval of the City Council. A member must be a resident of the City. The Commission shall be representative of the total community. Seven (7) members shall be appointed from the non at-large districts. .

The term of membership on the Commission is three (3) years, and not more than four (4) member’s terms expire each year. The members of the Commission may be removed by the Mayor for cause.

Sec. 7-703. Budget.

The City shall make an annual appropriation for the effective operation of the department.

Sec. 7-704. Duties.

Subject

to

policies established

by the Commission,

the

Human

Rights

Department

shall:

1. Investigate complaints of unlawful discrimination against any person because of religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, height, weight, familial status, marital status, disability or any status protected by the laws of the State of Michigan or the United States of America, in violation of any ordinance or any law within the city’s jurisdiction, and secure equal protection of civil rights without discrimination. The city shall implement this section by ordinance. The Human Rights Department may cooperate with other civil rights and enforcement agencies in the resolution of complaints, where cooperation is requested or where jurisdiction is concurrent; 2. Secure the rights of citizens to service from city government without discrimination; and 3. Endeavor to increase mutual understanding among the residents of the community, to promote good will, and to work cooperatively with other agencies of government, community groups and organizations, and other persons to eliminate discrimination and the results of past discrimination.

Sec. 7-705. Powers.

The Department shall, with the consent of the commission, promulgate rules for its own procedures.

64 | P a g e

The Department Director may hold hearings, subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, require the production of evidence, and issue appropriate orders, including the dismissal of a complaint.

To enforce subpoena or order for production of evidence or other order to impose any penalty prescribed for failure to obey a subpoena or order, the Department Director shall apply to the appropriate court.

The Department Director may delegate the powers to hold hearings, administer oaths, and take testimony.

Sec. 7-706. Appeals.

Appeals from final orders of the Department in all matters, except decisions of ineligibility to do business with the city, shall be taken to the court having jurisdiction provided by law. Appeals by persons or firms aggrieved by decisions of ineligibility to do business with the city may be heard by the City Council or such other appellate body as may be provided by ordinance under section 9-302.

Sec. 7-707. Remedies Cumulative.

This chapter shall not be construed to diminish the right of any party to direct any immediate legal or equitable remedies in any court or other tribunal.

65 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 8. POLICE Sec. 7-801. Police Department.

The Police Department shall preserve the public peace, prevent crime, arrest offenders, protect the rights of persons and property, guard the public health, preserve order, and enforce laws of the State of Michigan and the United States and the ordinances of the City of Detroit.

Sec. 7-802. Board of Police Commissioners.

The Board of Police Commissioners has supervisory control and oversight of the Police Department as set forth in this Chapter. The Board of Police Commissioners is composed of eleven (11) members, seven of whom shall be elected from each non at-large district. Four (4) members of the Board shall be appointed by the Mayor, subject to the approval of the City Council. However, if the City Council does not disapprove an appointment within thirty (30) days, an appointment is confirmed. Appointed members shall serve a term of five (5) years, and not more than one (1) memberâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s term expires each year. The Mayor shall not remove appointed members of the Board except for cause. Vacancies in positions held by appointed members shall be filled by the Mayor for the unexpired term, in the same manner as the initial appointment. All members of the Board must be residents of the City.

The Board shall elect a chairperson annually. A member of the Board may not serve consecutive terms as chairman, nor may an appointed person serve more than five (5) years consecutively as a member of the Board. The Board shall meet at the call of its chairperson, but shall meet at least once each week and may recess during Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year holidays. All meetings shall be held in accordance with the Michigan Open Meetings Act. No appointed member of the Board shall have been an employee or elective or appointive officer of the city within three (3) years prior to appointment or while serving as a member of the Board. Unless required by state law, elected members shall not be entitled to salaries, retirement benefits, health benefits or other fringe benefits. Appointed members, and elected members not entitled to compensation by state law, may receive by ordinance reimbursement for parking, mileage and other reasonable expenses. All appointed Commissioners serving at the time of the effective date of this Charter shall continue in their office until their term expires or office becomes vacant.

Sec. 7-803. Duties of the Board of Police Commissioners.

The Board shall: 1. In consultation with the Chief of Police, and with the approval of the Mayor establish policies, rules and regulations; 2. Review and approve the departmental budget before its submission to the Mayor; 3. Receive and resolve, as provided in this chapter, any complaint concerning the operation of the Police Department and forward all allegations of criminality to the appropriate internal or external law enforcement agency for further investigation;

66 | P a g e

4. Act as final authority in imposing or reviewing discipline of employees of the department; 5. Make an annual report to the Mayor, the City Council, and the public of the departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s activities during the previous year, including the handling of crime and complaints, and of future plans.

The Board may subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, and require the production of evidence. To enforce a subpoena or order for production of evidence or to impose any penalty prescribed for failure to obey a subpoena or order, the Board shall apply to the appropriate court. The Board may delegate in writing to a member of its staff the powers to administer oaths and take testimony. A delegation is revocable at the will of the Board and does not prevent exercise of any power by the Board.

Sec. 7-804. Staff.

1.

Secretary to the Board.

The Board shall appoint a Board Secretary, who serves at its pleasure. The secretary shall not have been an employee or elective or appointive officer of the City within three (3) years prior to appointment. The secretary shall attend board meetings.

2.

Investigative Staff.

The Board shall also appoint a Chief Investigator and such additional staff of investigators as it deems necessary. The Chief Investigator shall not have been an employee or elective or appointive officer of the city within three (3) years prior to appointment. Investigators serve at the Boardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pleasure. They must possess skills and experience necessary to complete investigative work.

3.

Other Staff.

The Board may hire, in accordance with Article 6, Chapter 4, such additional staff as is necessary to carry out its duties. All members of the staff are under the direction of the Board, and the Chief of Police has no authority over any member of the staff.

Sec. 7-805. Chief of Police.

The Board of Police Commissioners shall conduct a professional search with a reputable and qualified executive search firm or other equally qualified entity to identify candidates for Chief of Police. The Mayor shall appoint, subject to approval by City Council, a Chief of Police from a list of qualified candidates provided by the Board of Police Commissioners. If City Council does not disapprove of the appointment within thirty (30) days, it is deemed confirmed. The Chief of Police serves at the pleasure of the Mayor.

The Chief of Police shall be skilled and experienced in police administration or law enforcement and as the head official in charge of the department, the Chief of Police shall be responsible for its day-to-day operations and administration.

Sec. 7-806. Duties of the Chief of Police.

1. The Chief of Police is the Chief Executive Officer of the police department and shall administer the department consistent with the policies, rules, and regulations established by the Board and shall organize the department with the approval of the Board; 2. Recommend rules, regulations, and procedures to the Board for its approval; 3. Prepare the annual budget for the police department; 4. Hire, promote, evaluate, commend, transfer, and discipline employees of the department; have authority to suspend and discharge employees of the department under section 7-807; file complaints against employees with the Board Secretary; and direct employees in the performance of their duties;

67 | P a g e

5. Except as otherwise provided by the Board, keep and control all property, books, records, and equipment belonging to the department or held by the department as evidence; 6. Submit to the Board an annual report of the operations of the department for forwarding to the Mayor, the City Council, and the public; 7. Present annually a police department operations improvement plan. The plan shall be filed with the City Clerk, distributed to the Mayor and City Council, and be a public record; 8. Exercise such other powers as conferred by the Board; 9. Attend all meetings of the Board of Police Commissioners, to the extent practicable, and speak on any issue, but may not vote.

The Chief, with the consent of the Board, may appoint necessary Deputy Chiefs.

Sec. 7-807. Discipline.

1.

Manual.

The Board, in consultation with the Chief of Police, shall adopt a manual of rules, regulations and procedures. The manual shall define categories of major and minor offenses and shall set forth the maximum and minimum penalties for each offense.

2.

Summary Discipline.

The Chief of Police may implement summary discipline for a minor offense. A disciplined employee may request the Board of Police Commissioners to set aside the summary discipline and reinstate any loss of pay.

3.

General Discipline.

The Chief of Police may discharge or indefinitely suspend any employee for a major offense. When an employee is discharged or indefinitely suspended or other serious charges are made and the employee contests the discharge, suspension or charge, the matter shall be referred to a trial board. The procedure for trial boards shall be established by the departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rules and regulations. A member of a trial board must hold at least the rank of inspector or equivalent grade. All trial board proceedings shall be public.

The decision of a trial board may be appealed to the Board of Police Commissioners.

Instead of hearing an appeal itself, the Board of Police Commissioners may appoint a fact finder as provided in section 7-809. The fact finder shall conduct a hearing and report findings of fact to the Board.

The Boardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s disposition of the matter following such a hearing shall be final.

An employee charged with a major offense is presumed innocent and shall not forfeit any pay or seniority rights pending final action by the Board of Police Commissioners except with the concurrence of a twothird (2/3) majority of members of the Board of Police Commissioners.

Sec. 7-808. Complaints.

Complaints concerning the Police Department filed anywhere in the Department shall be forwarded immediately to the Board Secretary. Copies of the complaint shall be made available to each member of the Board, the Chief Investigator, and the Chief of Police. The Chief Investigator for the Board shall investigate a complaint immediately and file a report of findings with the Board within sixty (60) days.

Within thirty (30) days of receipt of a complaint by the Board Secretary, the Board shall send written communication informing the complainant that their complaint has been received, the guidelines on how the complaint will be handled, and the timeline on when the complainant shall receive a disposition on their complaint.

68 | P a g e

The Board Secretary shall keep and post on-line, a public docket of complaints and the disposition of each complaint after investigation. The docket shall not contain information which identifies or that can reasonably lead to identification of the parties.

Sec. 7-809. Resolution of Complaints.

If a complaint is not resolved as a result of investigation to the satisfaction of the complainant, the respondent employee, or a member of the Board of Police Commissioners, either the complainant, the respondent employee, or the Board member may request the board to hear or review the matter. The Board may, at its option, when it determines that a hearing or review is warranted by the evidence, hear or review the matter itself or refer the matter to a fact finder.

When a matter is referred to fact finding, the secretary to the board and the respondent employee shall attempt to agree upon a person to act as a fact finder. The fact finder must be an attorney. If the parties fail to agree on a fact finder, they shall request a recognized arbitration association as designated by ordinance, to propose the names of five (5) attorneys who could act independently and impartially as a fact finder in the matter. In the presence of a person authorized to take oaths, each side, acting in turn with the employee beginning, shall indicate a name to be struck from those proposed until both sides have struck two (2) names. The person whose name then remains is the fact finder. The fact finder, in the conduct of the hearing, may subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, and require the production of evidence. To enforce a subpoena or order for production of evidence or to impose any penalty prescribed for failure to obey a subpoena or order, the fact finder shall apply to the appropriate court. The cost of the fact finder shall be borne by the city.

After a hearing, the fact finder shall, within thirty (30) days, submit findings of fact to the Board. The Board, upon receipt of the report of the fact finder shall, within thirty (30) days, determine any discipline to be imposed. It shall then make the report and its action public. The decision of the Board is final.

Any employee against whom a complaint is filed is presumed innocent and shall not forfeit any pay or seniority rights pending final action by the Board, except with the concurrence of a two-third (2/3) majority of members of the Board. All pleadings filed and all hearings before the Board and the fact finder shall be public. The parties to any hearing are the complainant and the respondent employee. Each has a right to counsel. The complainantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s case may be presented by the complainant or complainantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s counsel. Any probative evidence may be admitted.

Sec. 7-810. Division of Police Personnel.

The Division of Police Personnel is headed by a Director of Police Personnel appointed by the Board. The Director of Police Personnel must be a civilian and serves at the pleasure of the Board.

Sec. 7-811. Deputy Director.

The Director of Police Personnel shall appoint a Deputy who serves at the pleasure of the Director.

Sec. 7-812. Recruitment and Entry into Service.

Applicants for employment as police officers with the Department must enter the police service in accordance with section 7-813. Applicants for civilian employment with the department must enter the classified service as provided in Article 6, Chapter 4 of this Charter.

69 | P a g e

Sec. 7-813. Powers and Duties.

With the concurrence of the Chief of Police, the Director of Police Personnel shall recruit applicants for service as Police Officers with the Department, prepare and administer examinations for hiring police officers, and prepare and conduct examinations for promotion within the department.

Lateral entry into employment with the Department as a police officer is permitted in accordance with the rules, regulations, and procedures established by the Board.

Sec. 7-814. Promotions.

The Chief of Police shall make all promotions within the department. All promotions shall be with the approval of the Board.

Promotions shall be made on the basis of competitive examinations administered by the Director of Police Personnel except for positions above the rank of lieutenant or its equivalent. All examinations will be prepared by the Division of Police Personnel with the concurrence of the Board. No person who has taken an examination and has been placed on a register of employees eligible for promotion may be passed over in favor of an employee with a lower examination score.

Sec. 7-815. Examinations.

All examinations prepared and administered by the Director of Police Personnel must be validated as provided in section 6-411.

Sec. 7-816. Employees.

Employees of the Department shall receive equal pay for the same or similar work and have an equal opportunity for promotion.

Sec. 7-817. Police Officers Employed by Governmental and Educational Institutions.

The Chief of Police may, upon the annual application of governmental or educational institution showing a sufficient necessity, appoint police officers at the charge and expense of the institution making the application, to do duty at any place designated by the chief. These police officers hold office at the pleasure of the Chief and are subject to the policies, rules, regulation, and discipline of the department.

They shall wear such dress and emblems as the Chief prescribes. They possess, as conservators of the peace, all powers and privileges and may perform all duties of police officers.

Sec. 7-818. Police Reserves.

The Chief of Police may appoint persons to serve as Police Reserves and set qualifications for entry into the reserves. Police Reserves when called to duty shall possess such powers as designated by the chief, including the powers of peace officers. Training standards shall be set by the chief. Unless there exists an officially declared emergency, duty shall be voluntary. The use of reserves shall be in accordance with rules and regulations approved by the Board and the Mayor.

70 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 9. PUBLIC LIGHTING Sec. 7-901. Department.

The Public Lighting Department is headed by the Public Lighting Director.

Sec. 7-902. Qualifications.

No person shall head the Public Lighting Department nor serve as Deputy Director, unless that person is a licensed mechanical or electrical engineer.

Sec. 7-903. Commission.

A seven (7) member Public Lighting Commission shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor. The Commission shall consist of seven (7) members, one (1) each appointed from non at-large districts. A member must be a resident of the City. The term of membership is five (5) years. No more than two (2) terms expire each year. The Commission shall advise in the operation of the Public Lighting Department.

Sec. 7-904. Powers and Duties.

The Department shall supervise and control all public lighting and public lighting plants and may: Furnish and sell light, heat and power to any person, firm, division, or corporation within or outside of the city to the extent permitted by law; and Exercise other powers and perform other duties necessary to carry out its functions.

Sec. 7-905. Limitations on Sale of Assets.

The following limitations shall apply relative to public lighting: The City may not sell or in any way dispose of any property needed to continue the operation of any city owned public utility furnishing lighting, unless approved by a majority of city voters voting on the question at a regular or special election.

The City may not grant any public utility franchise for public lighting which is not subject to revocation at the will of the City Council unless the proposition is first approved by three-fifths (3/5) of city voters voting on the question at a regular or special election.

All contracts, franchises, grants, leases or other forms of transfer in violation of this section shall be void and of no effect against the city.

71 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 10. RECREATION Sec. 7-1001. Department.

The Recreation Department shall operate recreational facilities, offer and carry on organized programs of recreational activities in the city, and, to the extent possible, coordinate all recreational programs and facilities being offered in the City.

Sec. 7-1002. Advisory Commission.

An advisory commission for recreation, comprised of not fewer than eight (8) districts, shall be created under section 7-103. Seven (7) of the members shall be appointed, one (1) each, from the non at-large City Council districts.

72 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 11. TRANSPORTATION Sec. 7-1101. Department.

The Transportation Department shall: 1. Own, maintain, and operate a public transportation system above, on, or below the surface of the ground, or in any combination thereof, utilizing technology known or to be developed; 2. Operate the system within the city and to a distance outside the City as permitted by law; 3. Exercise or recommend the exercise of other functions and powers provided by law or ordinance, including the specific powers of the City to finance transportation under sections 8-401, 8-503(4), and 8-602 of the Charter.

Sec. 7-1102. Advisory Commission.

An advisory commission for transportation shall be created pursuant to section 7-103. The Commission shall be composed of at least seven (7) members, one selected from each non at-large district.

Sec. 7-1103. Intelligence Division.

The Director of the Transportation Department may appoint an Intelligence Division, exempt from Article 6, Chapter 4.

Sec. 7-1104. Limitations.

The following limitations shall apply relative to transportation: The City may not sell or in any way dispose of any property needed to continue the operation of any cityowned public utility furnishing transportation service, unless approved by a majority of city voters voting on the question at a regular or special election.

The City may not grant any public utility franchise for transportation services which is not subject to revocation at the will of the City Council unless the proposition is first approved by three-fifths (3/5) of city voters voting on the question at a regular or special election.

All contracts, franchises, grants, leases or other forms of transfer in violation of this section shall be void and of no effect against the City.

73 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 12. WATER and SEWERAGE Sec. 7-1201. Department.

The Water and Sewerage Department is headed by a seven (7) member board known as the Board of Water Commissioners. The members of the Board shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor. No member of the Board shall be a City official or employee, or a principal or employee of a contractor of the City. The term of membership on the Board is four (4) years and not more than two (2) terms expire each year.

A member must be a citizen of the United States and a resident of Michigan. At least four (4) members of the Board must be residents of Detroit.

The Board shall appoint, with the approval of the Mayor, a Director and a Deputy Director for the department. The Director and Deputy Director serve at the pleasure of the Board.

Sec. 7-1202. Powers.

Under the direction of the Board, the department shall supply water, drainage and sewerage services within and outside of the city.

The Board shall periodically establish equitable rates to be paid: 1. By the owner or occupant of each house or building using water, drainage, or sewerage services; and 2. By any person, municipality, or public or private agency making a wholesale purchase of water, drainage or sewerage services from the City.

Unless otherwise provided by contract or state law, the unpaid charges for water, drainage, and sewerage services, with interest, shall be a lien of the City upon the real property using or receiving them.

The Board may make all necessary adjustments in the collection of water, drainage or sewerage charges.

The Board may be given additional authority to establish rates by ordinance.

Upon the request of the Mayor the board shall advise the various agencies of the City on matters involving water resource management.

Sec. 7-1203. Limitation on Funds.

All moneys paid into the city treasury from fees collected for water, drainage or sewerage services shall be used exclusively for the payment of expenses incurred in the provision of these services, including the interest of principal of any obligations issued to finance the water supply and sewerage disposal facilities of the city, and shall be kept in separate funds.

74 | P a g e

Sec. 7-1204. Limitation on Sale of Assets.

The following limitations shall apply relative to water and sewerage: 1.

The City shall not sell or in any way dispose of any property needed to continue the operation of any city-owned public utility furnishing water and sewerage service, unless approved by a majority of city voters voting on the question at a regular or special election.

2.

The City shall not grant any public utility franchise for water and sewerage services which is not subject to revocation at the will of the City Council unless the proposition is first approved by three-fifths (3/5) of city voters voting on the question at a regular or special election.

3.

All contracts, franchises, grants, leases or other forms of transfer in violation of this section shall be void and of no effect against the city.

75 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES and ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 13. ZOOLOGICAL PARK Sec. 7-1301. Department.

The Zoological Parks department is headed by the Zoological Director. The Zoological Parks Department shall maintain and operate the City’s zoological parks directly or pursuant to an operating agreement.

Sec. 7-1302. Commission.

The Zoological Parks Commission shall advise the department on general program goals for the zoological parks. The Commission shall consist of five (5) members. The members of the Commission shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor. The term of membership on the Commission is four (4) years, and not more than two (2) members’ terms expire each year.

76 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: PROGRAMS, SERVICES AND ACTIVITIES CHAPTER 14. TELEVISION CHANNELS Sec. 7-1401. Cable Television Channels.

The City of Detroit shall operate and maintain its television channels for the benefit of the citizens of the City of Detroit. These cable television channels are public assets. Any ordinances related to the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cable television channels shall not be inconsistent with this chapter.

Sec. 7-1402. Executive Oversight, Operation and Management.

The Executive branch shall be responsible for the management, operation and oversight of the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s television channels.

Sec. 7-1403. Channel Use. At least one channel (Government Channel) shall be dedicated to the broadcast of the official affairs, programs and projects of the branches and units of City government, including the Legislative branch, Executive branch and Office of City Clerk. All official meetings of the City Council shall be broadcast in their entirety, and where feasible in a live format.

At least one channel shall be dedicated to educational, cultural and arts programming, which shall include programming received from the K-12 public school systems within the jurisdiction of the City of Detroit and may include programming from not-for profit organizations and public universities, community colleges or other institutions of higher learning, public or private.

Sec. 7-1404. Limitations The following limitations shall apply relative to television channels: 1.

The City of Detroit shall not sell or in any way dispose of any property needed to continue the operation of any television channel, unless approved by a majority of city voters voting on the question at a regular or special election.

2.

The City of Detroit shall not grant any franchise for its television channels which is not subject to revocation at the will of the City Council unless the proposition is first approved by three-fifths (3/5) of city voters voting on the question at a regular or special election.

All contracts, franchises, grants, leases or other forms of transfer in violation of this section shall be void and of no effect against the City of Detroit.

77 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.5.

INDEPENDENT DEPARTMENTS and OFFICES CHAPTER 1. AUDITOR GENERAL Sec. 7.5-101. Auditor General.

The Auditor General shall be appointed by a majority of City Council members serving. The Auditor General shall be a certified public accountant.

Sec. 7.5-102. Deputy Auditor General.

The Auditor General shall appoint a Deputy who during periods of the Auditor Generalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s absence or temporary disability or when the position is vacant shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Auditor General to the full extent permitted by law. The Deputy Auditor General shall be a certified public accountant. The Deputy Auditor General serves at the pleasure of the Auditor General.

Sec. 7.5-103. Term of Office.

The term of Auditor General is ten (10) years beginning with the taking of office. The Auditor General may be removed for cause by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council members serving. Any person who has held the position of Auditor General is not eligible for re-appointment.

Sec. 7.5-104. Employees.

In accordance with Article 6, Chapter 4, the Auditor General may hire, promote, discipline and remove employees of the agency, assign duties to the employees, and supervise the performance of those duties.

Sec. 7.5-105. Powers and Duties.

The Auditor General shall: 1.

Make audits of the financial transactions, performance and operations of City agencies based on an annual risk-based audit plan prepared by the Auditor General, or as otherwise directed by the City Council. Audits shall focus on high risk agencies and/or processes identified in the annual risk-based audit plan. The Auditor General shall make an annual financial analysis of all agencies not selected for audit in the current year. The Auditor General shall have access to all financial records, human resource records, and other records of city agencies necessary to perform his/her functions. Make a full report to the City Council of each individual audit and file a copy with the Mayor.

2.

As soon as possible after the close of each fiscal year, make a report of the financial position of the city. The report shall be a public record.

3.

Investigate the administration and operation of any city agency and report findings and recommendations to the City Council and the Mayor. The Auditor General may request and shall be given necessary assistance and information by each agency. The Auditor General may subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, require the production of evidence relevant to a matter under investigation, enter and inspect premises within the control of any agency during regular business hours.

78 | P a g e

To enforce a subpoena or order for production of evidence or to impose any penalty prescribed for failure to obey a subpoena or order, the Auditor General shall apply to the appropriate court.

4.

From time to time make reports to city agencies of irregularities of practice and erroneous accounting methods with recommendations for improving the accounting procedures and systems of the agencies.

Recommendations which are not put into effect by the agency shall be reviewed by the Finance Director, who shall advise the Auditor General and the City Council of action being taken with respect to the recommendations.

5.

Upon request of the Budget Director, make available to the Budget Director all information useful in the preparation of the capital agenda or annual budget.

6.

Settle all disputed claims in favor of or against the City to the extent and in the manner provided by ordinance. All appeals from determinations made by the Auditor General shall be brought in the court provided by law. However, no proceedings may be brought upon a claim within the jurisdiction of the Auditor General until the claim is rejected by the Auditor General or until six (6) months have elapsed from the time of filing the claim with the Auditor General.

Sec. 7.5-106. Limitations.

The Auditor General may hold no other City, County or State office.

Except as otherwise provided in this Charter, the Auditor General shall not have any connection with any city agency, nor be custodian of any cash or securities belonging to the City other than the appropriation to the office.

79 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.5.

INDEPENDENT DEPARTMENTS and OFFICES CHAPTER 2. LAW DEPARTMENT Sec. 7.5-201. Law Department.

The Law Department is headed by the Corporation Counsel who is the duly authorized and official legal counsel for the City of Detroit and its constituent branches, units and agencies of government. The Mayor shall appoint the Corporation Counsel subject to approval of the City Council. However, if the City Council does not disapprove the appointment within thirty (30) days, it is deemed confirmed.

The Mayor may remove the Corporation Counsel without cause, with a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of the membership of City Council. City Council may remove the Corporation Counsel, without cause, by a two-thirds (2/3) vote and concurrence of the Mayor. A Mayor occupying the Office of Mayor through succession under section 5-109 (Succession to Office) may only remove Corporation Counsel with cause and approval of one (1) less than the entire membership serving on City Council.

1.

Client and Representation.

The client of the Corporation Counsel is the City of Detroit as a body corporate. The agents and representatives of the City of Detroit, for purposes of receiving and directing legal services in a manner consistent with Corporation Counsel’s professional obligations to the City of Detroit, as herein provided in this Charter or allowed by law, shall be the Mayor, City Council and City Clerk.

Corporation Counsel represents the City of Detroit as a body corporate and may represent its branches of government, departments, agencies, elected officials and employees as required or allowed by law, Charter, ordinance, city policy or contract. For purposes of conducting city business and in the performance of their duties therein, no branch or unit of government, department, agency, elected official or employee required or allowed to receive legal services by law, Charter, ordinance, city policy or contract, may solicit or obtain formal legal advice, or retain services or representation from an outside law firm or attorney, in the execution of their duties, without requesting and receiving the approval of Corporation Counsel, unless expressly allowed by Charter. Upon request of an agency or officer, the Corporation Counsel may retain an outside law firm or attorney as Special Corporation Counsel for any particular matter or proceeding.

Nothing in this section is intended to prevent any branch, officer or employee of city government from consulting with legal experts or convening meetings or hearings for the purpose of obtaining information necessary to execute their duties. Further, nothing in this section is intended, nor shall it be construed, to limit the exercise of any constitutional rights, including those in Article I, §§ 13 and 20 of the State Constitution.

Sec. 7.5-202. Qualifications.

The Corporation Counsel and the Deputy Corporation Counsel must be attorneys licensed to practice in Michigan.

Sec. 7.5-203. Civil Litigation.

80 | P a g e

The Corporation Counsel shall defend all actions or proceedings against the City.

The Corporation Counsel shall prosecute all actions or proceedings to which the City is a party or in which the City has a legal interest, when directed to do so by the Mayor.

Upon request, the Corporation Counsel may represent any officer or employee of the city in any action or proceeding involving official duties.

No civil litigation of the city may be settled without the consent of the City Council.

Sec. 7.5-204. Penal Matters.

The Corporation Counsel is the city prosecutor and shall: 1. Institute and conduct, on behalf of the people, all cases arising from the provisions of this Charter or city ordinances and, when authorized to do so by law, cases arising under state law.

2. Prosecute all these cases, including all recognizance and bail forfeitures, in the court of original jurisdiction and on appeal.

3. Prosecute all actions for the recovery of fines, penalties, forfeitures and other money arising out of these cases.

Sec. 7.5-205. Advice and Opinions.

Each branch and unit of government shall receive the legal advice and opinion of Corporation Counsel on matters pertaining to the execution of their functions and duties as governmental bodies and officials.

Upon request, the Corporation Counsel shall give such legal advice or opinions to the Mayor, City Council, and members of the City Council, City Clerk or the head of any agency.

Sec. 7.5-206. Form of Documents.

The Corporation Counsel shall prepare or approve all contracts, bonds and other written instruments in which the city is concerned, shall approve all surety bonds required to be given for the protection of the City, and shall keep a proper registry of all contracts, bonds and instruments.

Sec. 7.5-207. Drafting.

Upon request of City Council, any City Council member, or the Mayor, the Corporation Counsel shall prepare or assist in preparing any ordinance or resolution for introduction before the City Council.

Sec. 7.5-208. Intra-Government Dispute Resolution.

In all disputes between branches or units of city government, before any branch or unit can institute legal proceedings, they shall have first requested and obtained from Corporation Counsel a legal opinion which details which partyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s position is consistent with the current state of the law. Corporation Counsel shall then instruct the branch or unit whose legal position is inconsistent with the current state of the law to

81 | P a g e

retain legal assistance and representation from an outside law firm or outside attorney if they intend to institute legal proceedings.

In cases of disputes between the branches of government, prior to filing a lawsuit or taking other legal action, the highest public official from the disputing branches of government shall first meet to resolve the matter. In the case of the Executive Branch the highest public official shall be the Mayor or designee; in the case of the Legislative Branch it shall be the Council President or designee; and in case of the Office of the City Clerk it shall be the City Clerk or designee. The parties shall engage in facilitation of the matter over a period of fourteen (14) business days, or more as agreed to by the parties, before taking legal action. The facilitation shall be conducted by a facilitator, mutually agreed to by the parties. Nothing in this section shall preclude a branch or unit of government from seeking a temporary restraining order, injunction or other emergency legal action based on irreparable harm, but this section shall be complied with if the court rules that no irreparable harm exists, in which case the facilitation period shall be twentyeight (28) business days from the date of the courtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s decision, or longer as agreed to by the parties.

Sec. 7.5-209. Enforcement of Charter.

The Corporation Counsel shall be responsible for enforcing compliance with the Charter. Corporation Counsel shall document in writing any violation of the Charter by the executive or legislative branches, Office of City Clerk, elected official or other persons subject to compliance with the Charter. This written notice shall contain the nature of the violation, including the Charter section(s) violated, direct the necessary action to be taken to remedy the violation, and date by which the remedial action must be taken. The time for taking the required remedial action shall not exceed fourteen (14) calendar days. The notice of Charter violation shall be presented to the offending body or individual, with a copy provided to the Mayor, City Council and City Clerk.

In the event the offending body or individual fails to remedy the Charter violation within the time frame and manner required in the written notice, Corporation Counsel shall take all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including, but not limited to, judicial action.

Nothing in this section is meant to waive any right to attorney-client privilege.

Sec. 7.5-210. Claim Reduction.

Corporation Counsel shall advise City departments, agencies and entities on risk reduction strategies that are necessary to limit or eliminate the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s exposure to liability.

Sec. 7.5-211. Other Duties.

The Corporation Counsel has such other duties as may be provided by law, this Charter, or ordinance.

82 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.5.

INDEPENDENT DEPARTMENTS and OFFICES CHAPTER 3. OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Sec. 7.5-301. Establishment.

An independent Office of Inspector General is hereby created. The Inspector General shall head the office. The purpose of the Office of Inspector General is to ensure honesty and integrity in City government by rooting out waste, abuse, fraud, and corruption.

Sec. 7.5-302. Appointment, Removal, Term of Office and Vacancy.

The Inspector General shall be appointed by the majority of City Council members serving. The Inspector General may be removed for cause by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of City Council members serving and shall be appointed for a term of six (6) years.

If a vacancy occurs in the Office of Inspector General, the City Council shall, within sixty (60) days, fill the office for a full term.

Sec. 7.5-303. Minimum Qualifications.

The Inspector General shall be a person who: 1.

Has a bachelorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s degree from an accredited institution of higher learning.

2.

Has at least ten (10) years of experience in any one, or combination of, the following fields: a. b. c. d.

As a federal, state or local law enforcement officer; As a federal, state or local government attorney, including a public defender; As a federal or state court judge; Progressive supervisory experience in an investigative public agency similar to an inspector generalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office; e. Has managed and completed complex investigations involving allegations of fraud, theft, deception and conspiracy; and f. Has demonstrated the ability to work with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies and the judiciary.

Sec. 7.5-304. Limitations; Prohibited Activities.

During his or her term, the Inspector General may not engage in an occupation for profit, except for teaching, or hold any other government office outside the duties of the Inspector General. Subject to applicable law, the Inspector General shall not solicit votes or raise monetary or in-kind contributions for any candidate for an elective office. Any person who has held the position of Inspector General is not eligible for re-appointment. Subject to applicable law, the Inspector General may not hold any elective city office until two (2) years after leaving the position.

Sec. 7.5-305. Jurisdiction.

The powers and duties of the Inspector General shall extend to the conduct of any Public Servant and City agency, program or official act, contractors and subcontractors providing goods and services to the

83 | P a g e

City, business entities seeking contracts or certification of eligibility for city contracts and persons seeking certification of eligibility for participation in any city program.

Sec. 7.5-306. Powers and Duties.

The Inspector General shall: 1. Investigate any Public Servant, city agency, program or official act, contractor and subcontractor providing goods and services to the City, business entity seeking contracts or certification of eligibility for City contracts and person seeking certification of eligibility for participation in any city program, either in response to a complaint or on the Inspector Generalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own initiative in order to detect and prevent waste, abuse, fraud and corruption.

2. Issue quarterly reports to the City Council and Mayor concerning results of investigations and audits undertaken by the Office of Inspector General. All reports shall be a public record and additionally published electronically on the World Wide Web or another format as to provide remote or on-line access to the reports.

Have access to the financial and other records of all city agencies at any time.

Sec. 7.5-307. Subpoena Powers.

1. The Inspector General may subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, require the production of evidence relevant to a matter under investigation, enter and inspect premises within the control of any city agency during regular business hours.

2. The Inspector General may enforce a subpoena or order for production of evidence. The Inspector General shall apply to the appropriate court to impose any penalty prescribed for failure to obey a subpoena or order.

Sec. 7.5-308. Duty to Report Illegal Acts.

If the Inspector General has probable cause to believe that any Public Servant or any person doing or seeking to do business with the City has committed or is committing an illegal act, then he or she shall promptly refer the matter to the appropriate prosecuting authorities.

Sec. 7.5-309. Employees.

The Office of Inspector General shall include an Inspector General and such deputies, assistants and other employees as deemed necessary by the Inspector General. The Office of Inspector General staff shall include, at a minimum, attorneys, investigators and auditors who are certified public accountants.

The Inspector General may hire, promote, discipline and remove employees of the office, assign duties to the employees and supervise the performance of those duties. The staff of the office may include persons who are both subject to, and exempt from, Article 6, Chapter 4 of this Charter.

Sec. 7.5-310. Cooperation in Investigations; Obstruction.

It shall be the duty of every Public Servant, contractor and subcontractor and licensee of the city, and every applicant for certification of eligibility for a city contract or program, to cooperate with the Inspector

84 | P a g e

General in any investigation pursuant to this Article.

Any Public Servant who willfully and without justification or excuse obstructs an investigation of the Inspector General by withholding documents or testimony is subject to forfeiture of office, discipline, debarment or any other applicable penalty.

This requirement and associated penalty shall be incorporated into all contracts and subcontracts to the extent necessary to make them effective against such entities or persons.

Sec. 7.5-311. Consultation Required.

1. No report or recommendation that criticizes an official act shall be announced until every agency or person affected is allowed a reasonable opportunity to be heard at a hearing with the aid of counsel. In accordance with section 2-111 of this Charter, the Inspector General will promulgate procedural rules for hearings.

2. After the hearing, if the Inspector General believes it necessary to make a formal report, a copy of any statement made by an agency or person affected shall accompany the report.

Sec. 7.5-312. Conflict of Interest; Special Counsel.

Where there exists a conflict of interest between the Inspector General and another branch of City government, the Inspector General has the authority to retain an attorney licensed to practice law in Michigan who shall represent the Inspector General in legal proceedings. Such attorney shall not represent the City as a municipal corporation in any legal proceeding.

Sec. 7.5-313. Confidentiality.

Subject to any applicable state law, all investigative files of the Office of Inspector General shall be confidential and shall not be divulged to any person or agency, except to the United States Attorney, the Michigan Attorney General or Wayne County Prosecutorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office, or as otherwise provided in this Charter.

Sec. 7.5-314. Immunity.

The Inspector General and the staff shall be, to the full extent permitted by law, immune from any suit based on any report or communication within the scope of official duties.

Sec. 7.5-315. Retaliation Prohibited; Penalty.

No person shall retaliate against, punish or penalize any other person for complaining to, cooperating with or assisting the Inspector General in the performance of his or her duties. Any person who violates this provision shall be subject to a fine of not less than $300 and not more than $500 for each violation and any other penalties under applicable law.

Sec. 7.5-316. Funding.

The City shall annually appropriate funds sufficient to enable the Office of Inspector General to perform its duties. Funding shall be in accordance with section 8-214 (Proportional Funding for Oversight Agencies.)

85 | P a g e

ARTICLE 7.5.

INDEPENDENT DEPARTMENTS and OFFICES CHAPTER 4. OMBUDSPERSON Sec. 7.5-401. Ombudsperson.

The Ombudsperson shall be appointed by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council members serving.

Sec. 7.5-402. Term of Office.

The Ombudsperson’s term is ten (10) years.

The Ombudsperson may be removed for cause by a two thirds (2/3) majority of City Council members serving.

Any person who has held the position of Ombudsperson is not eligible for re-appointment.

Sec. 7.5-403. Vacancy.

If a vacancy occurs in the office of Ombudsperson, the City Council shall, within sixty (60) days, fill the office for a full term.

Sec. 7.5-404. Salary.

The salary of the Ombudsperson is equal to the salary of the Auditor General.

Sec. 7.5-405. Staff.

To carry out the responsibilities of the office, the Ombudsperson may, within appropriations, appoint not more than six (6) employees who are exempt from Article 6, Chapter 4 of this Charter. The number of exempt positions on the Ombudsperson’s staff may be increased by a majority of City Council members serving.

Sec. 7.5-406. Definition.

In this chapter, “official act” means any action, omission, decision, recommendation, practice or procedure of any agency.

Sec. 7.5-407. Jurisdiction.

The Ombudsperson may investigate any official act of any agency except elective officers which aggrieves any person. The authority of the Ombudsperson extends equally to all agencies. However, with respect to any investigation authorized by this Charter to be made by an agency having subpoena power, the Ombudsperson may only investigate and report whether the agency’s investigation and hearing, if any, was conducted fully and fairly.

The Ombudsperson may establish procedures for receiving and processing complaints, conducting investigations and hearings, and reporting findings. No fee shall be levied for the filing or investigation of complaints.

86 | P a g e

Sec. 7.5-408. Powers of Investigation.

The Ombudsperson may request and shall be given necessary assistance and information by each agency. The Ombudsperson may subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, require the production of evidence relevant to a matter under investigation, enter and inspect premises within the control of any agency during regular business hours, and establish rules of procedure. To enforce a subpoena or order for production of evidence or to impose any penalty prescribed for failure to obey a subpoena or order, the Ombudsperson shall apply to the appropriate court.

Where there exists a conflict of interest between the Ombudsperson and another branch of government, the Ombudsperson has the authority to retain an attorney licensed to practice law in Michigan who shall represent the Ombudsperson in legal proceedings. Such attorney shall not represent the city as a municipal corporation in any legal proceeding.

Sec. 7.5-409. Delegation of Powers.

The Ombudsperson may delegate in writing to a member of the staff the powers to administer oaths and take testimony.

A delegation is revocable at will and does not prevent exercise of any power by the Ombudsperson.

Sec. 7.5-410. Correspondence From Person Detained.

Any letter to the Ombudsperson from a person in a place of detention, penal or otherwise, under the control of an agency shall immediately be forwarded, unopened, to the Ombudsperson.

Sec. 7.5-411. Consultation Required.

No report or recommendation that criticizes an official act shall be announced until every agency or person affected is allowed a reasonable opportunity to be heard with the aid of counsel.

After the hearing, if the Ombudsperson believes it necessary to make a formal report, a copy of any statement made by an agency or person affected shall accompany the report.

Sec. 7.5-412. Reports.

The Ombudsperson shall make periodic reports to the City Council of action taken under this chapter. All reports shall be made public.

Sec. 7.5-413. Duty to Report Illegal Acts.

If the Ombudsperson has probable cause to believe that any elective officer, appointee, employee or member of an agency or any person doing or seeking to do business with an agency has committed or is committing any illegal act, the Ombudsperson shall promptly refer the matter to the appropriate authorities.

Sec. 7.5-414. Obstruction.

87 | P a g e

The office or position of any elective officer or appointee who willfully and without justification or excuse obstructs any investigation of the Ombudsperson by withholding documents or testimony may be forfeited under section 2-107(B)(2) of this Charter.

Sec. 7.5-415. Immunity.

The Ombudsperson and the staff shall be, to the full extent permitted by law, immune from any suit based on any report or communication within the scope of official duties.

Sec. 7.5-416. Limitations.

The Ombudsperson may not hold any office of trust or profit other than the office of Ombudsperson, or engage in any occupation for profit outside the duties of this office. The Ombudsperson is not eligible to hold any city office until two (2) years after leaving the position.

Sec. 7.5-417. Remedies Cumulative.

The remedies of this chapter are additional to those provided under any other law.

88 | P a g e

ARTICLE 8.

PLANNING and FINANCIAL PROCEDURES CHAPTER 1. PLANNING PROCEDURE Sec.8-101. Comprehensive Plan.

The Mayor shall propose and the City Council shall approve, with the modifications it deems necessary, a Master Plan of policies for the social, economic and physical development and conservation of the city, and the full range of transportation, access and mobility options (“Plan” or “Master Plan”).

Sec.8-102. Periodic Review.

After approval of the Plan, the Mayor shall annually propose any amendments necessary to keep the Plan current and the City Council shall consider the Mayor’s proposed amendments and make the modifications in the Plan that it deems necessary.

Sec.8-103. Council Procedure.

The City Council shall conclude its action on the Plan annually by December 1. Interested persons and groups shall be given notice and an opportunity to be heard by either the City Council, the City Planning Commission, or other committee of the City Council, before approval of the Plan or any amendments to the Plan.

Sec.8-104. Purpose of the Plan.

The Master Plan shall be a set of guidelines to assist the Mayor and others in proposing, and the City Council in evaluating and implementing, specific proposals for the total development of the City and its residents.

89 | P a g e

ARTICLE 8.

PLANNING and FINANCIAL PROCEDURES CHAPTER 2. BUDGETS Sec. 8-201. Fiscal Year.

Except as otherwise provided by ordinance, the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fiscal year is July 1 through June 30. If the fiscal year is changed, related dates specified in the Charter shall change accordingly.

Sec. 8-202. Capital Agenda.

1.

On or before November 1 of each even numbered year, the Mayor shall submit a proposed Capital Agenda for the next five (5) fiscal years to the City Council.

2.

The Capital Agenda shall state: a. All physical improvements and related studies and surveys, all property of a permanent nature, and all equipment for any improvement when first erected or acquired, to be financed during the next five (5) fiscal years in whole or in part from funds subject to control or appropriation by the city, along with information as to the necessity for these facilities; b. Capital expenditures which are planned for each of the next five (5) fiscal years; c. The estimated annual cost of operating the facilities to be constructed or acquired; and d. Other information pertinent to the evaluation of the capital agenda.

For each separate purpose, project, facility, or other property there shall be shown the amount and the source of any money that has been spent or encumbered, or is intended to be spent or encumbered before the beginning of the next fiscal year and also the amount and the source of any money that is intended to be spent during each of the next five (5) years. This information may be revised and extended each year for capital improvements still pending or in process of construction or acquisition.

The City Council may delete projects from the capital agenda as submitted but it may not otherwise amend the capital agenda until it has requested the recommendations of the Planning and Development Director. The City Council shall not be bound by those recommendations and may act without them if they are not received within thirty (30) days from the date requested.

3.

The City Council shall publish in one (1) or more daily newspapers of general circulation in the city a general summary of the capital agenda and a notice stating: a. The time and places where copies of the proposed capital agenda are available for public inspection; and b. The time and places, not less than two (2) weeks after the publication, for a public hearing on the proposed capital agenda.

The head of any agency has the right, and it shall be a duty when requested by the City Council, to appear and be heard.

4.

At the conclusion of its deliberation, but not later than March 1 of the following year, the City Council shall approve a five (5) year capital agenda for the City. If the City Council fails to take action by March 1, the proposed Capital Agenda shall be deemed approved.

90 | P a g e

Sec. 8-203. Annual Budget.

In accordance with law, the City shall establish by ordinance, dates upon which the Mayor shall submit to the City Council a proposed annual budget for the next fiscal year, and City Council to complete consideration of the budget. Proposed capital appropriations shall be set forth in a separate section of the annual budget.

Before November 1 of each year and prior to submitting a proposed annual operating budget, the departments of police, fire, public works, water and sewerage, recreation, health and public lighting shall conduct a public meeting to review programs, services and activities to be included in the budget and receive public comment.

Departments shall publish a general summary of programs, services and activities funded in the current fiscal year, in one (1) or more daily newspapers of general circulation in the city. The summary shall include funds spent or encumbered in the current fiscal year. The notice shall be published not less than ten (10) days before the day on which the meeting is held, and shall state date, time and place of the meeting.

Sec. 8-204. Budget.

1.

The budget shall constitute a complete financial plan for the city for the next fiscal year.

2.

The budget shall set forth estimated revenues from all sources and all appropriations. Any surplus or deficit during the fiscal year preceding that covered by the budget shall be entered as an item in the budget.

3.

The total of proposed expenditures shall not exceed the total of estimated revenues.

Sec. 8-205. Form of Appropriation.

All appropriations to each agency shall be made in lump sums to the agencyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s specific programs, services or activities, or to additional classes as the Mayor may recommend in the proposed budget, subject to amendment by deletion, addition or substitution by the City Council. However, the accounts of each department and agency shall be maintained in such detail as required by generally accepted standards of financial reporting. A uniform system of accounts shall be established as required by state law.

Sec. 8-206. Public Hearing.

A public hearing in the manner provided by law or ordinance shall be held on the proposed budget before adoption.

Sec. 8-207. Amendment Before Adoption.

After the public hearing, the City Council may adopt the budget with or without amendment.

Sec. 8-208. Budget Adoption.

Consideration of the budget shall be completed by the City Council as provided by ordinance.

91 | P a g e

If the Mayor disapproves amendments made by the City Council, the Mayor shall within seven (7) days, submit to the City Council in writing the reasons for the disapproval.

The City Council shall proceed to reconsider any budget item so disapproved. If after reconsideration a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the City Council members serving agree to sustain any of the City Council’s amendments to the budget, those amendments so sustained shall be of full force and effect. The City Council’s reconsideration of the budget must be concluded within three (3) business days after receipt of the Mayor’s disapproval.

Sec. 8-209. Effect of Budget Adoption.

Adoption of the budget shall constitute: 1.

2.

3.

Appropriations of the amounts specified therein from the funds indicated; A levy of the property tax specified therein; and Authorization for the issuance of any bonds specified therein.

Sec. 8-210. Amendments After Adoption.

1.

If during the fiscal year the Mayor advises the City Council that there are available for appropriation revenues in excess of those estimated in the budget, the City Council may make supplemental appropriations for the year up to the amount of the excess.

2.

To meet a public emergency affecting life, health, property or the public peace, upon request of the Mayor, the City Council may make emergency appropriations. To the extent that there are no available unappropriated revenues to meet those appropriations, the City Council may authorize the issuance of emergency notes as provided by this Charter or ordinance, in a manner consistent with state law.

Sec. 8-211. Transfer of Appropriations.

At any time during the fiscal year upon written request by the Mayor, the City Council may, by resolution, transfer all or part of any unencumbered appropriation balance among the programs, services or activities within an agency or from one (1) agency to another.

Sec. 8-212. Report of Budget Deficit.

Where, during the Fiscal Year, the head of any agency, department or City funded entity determines that the budget is in deficit, the head shall immediately notify, in writing, the Mayor and Budget Director of the reason for, and circumstance surrounding, the deficit. Within ten (10) business days of notification, the Budget Director shall request a hearing with the City Council to apprise it of the deficit and outline actions to remedy the deficit.

Sec. 8-213. Revenue Estimating Conference.

The Directors of the Finance Department, Budget Department, Auditor General and City Council’s Fiscal Analysis Division shall hold a revenue estimating conference two times per year. The revenues under consideration shall include all general fund, solid waste fund, and risk-management fund revenues, and revenues of enterprise agencies that require a general fund subsidy. The parties shall also compile and consider any and all outstanding delinquent receivables in the possession of City agencies, departments and entities and, in conjunction with Corporation Counsel, recommend to the Mayor and City Council the most efficient means to collect this revenue, which may include collection procedures by the Law

92 | P a g e

Department.

Sec. 8-214. Proportional Funding for Oversight Agencies.

The Detroit City Council shall establish a proportional method to fund oversight agencies to insure the proper oversight of executive and legislative branches of government. City Council shall arrive at an equitable proportional method to fund oversight agencies in local government. City Council shall prepare and adopt a proportional funding system within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this Charter.

The funding system shall include a formula to distribute funds to each of the agencies contained in this section and any other agencies added by ordinance. The internal cost allocation plan shall determine the amount of funds to be appropriated to each agency for oversight functions. The proportional funding system shall be enacted by ordinance. The ordinance shall contain this mandate to establish a proportional method of funding for oversight agencies, the list of agencies included in this section and other agencies determined by City Council.

The oversight agencies referred to in this section shall include the Office of the Inspector General, Auditor General, Ombudsperson and Board of Ethics.

93 | P a g e

ARTICLE 8.

PLANNING and FINANCIAL PROCEDURES CHAPTER 3. ADMINISTRATION OF BUDGETS Sec. 8-301. Work Programs and Allotments.

When the Budget Director specifies, each agency shall submit work programs for the next fiscal year showing the requested allotments of its appropriation by periods within the year. The Budget Director shall review and authorize those allotments with or without revision as early as possible in the fiscal year.

The Budget Director may revise those allotments during the year if desirable and shall revise them to accord with any supplemental, emergency, or transferred appropriations.

Sec. 8-302. Limit on Obligations and Payments.

No obligations shall be incurred against, and no payments shall be made from, any allotment or appropriation except in accordance with appropriations duly made and unless the Chief Accounting Officer, or in absence of the Chief Accounting Officer, a designee of the Finance Director advises that there is a sufficient unencumbered balance in the allotment or appropriation and that sufficient funds will be or are available to meet the obligation.

When the Chief Accounting Officer or, in absence of the Chief Accounting Officer, a designee of the Finance Director so advises, the obligation may be incurred or payment made in accordance with any applicable procedure established under section 6-306.

Sec. 8-303. Penalties for Violation.

Any incurring of obligation or authorization of payment in violation of the provisions of this Charter shall be void and any payment so made illegal; the action shall be cause for removal of any officer who knowingly incurred the obligation or authorized or made the payment, and he or she shall also be liable to the City for any amount so paid and to any criminal sanctions imposed by law or ordinance.

Sec. 8-304. Obligations to be Met by Subsequent Appropriations.

As permitted by law, the City may by resolution of the City Council: 1.

Make contracts or make or authorize payments for capital improvements to be financed wholly or partly by the issuance of bonds; or 2.

Make any contract or lease (including installment contracts, lease-purchase contracts, or other forms of deferred payment contracts for the acquisition of real property or capital equipment) providing for payments beyond the end of the fiscal year.

94 | P a g e

ARTICLE 8.

PLANNING and FINANCIAL PROCEDURES CHAPTER 4. PROPERTY TAXATION Sec. 8-401. Power.

The City is authorized to levy property taxes at the rate of two percent (2%) of assessed value of all real and personal property in the City or to such other maximum limit as may be permitted by law.

Included is the power to levy property taxes for public transportation and transit services to the maximum rate permitted by law.

The subjects of taxation for municipal purposes shall be in accordance with state law.

Sec. 8-402. Assessors’ Duties.

1.

The Board of Assessors shall certify the assessment roll to the board of review on or before the date provided by ordinance 2.

The Assessors shall prepare the tax roll by spreading property taxes ratably on the assessment roll on or before the date provided by ordinance and shall deliver the tax roll to the Treasurer in the manner provided by law.

Sec. 8-403. Collection of Property Taxes.

1.

Except as otherwise provided by this Charter or ordinance, the rights, duties, powers, and immunities established by state law shall apply in the collection and enforcement of city property taxes.

2.

City property taxes shall become a debt of the persons liable for them on the date provided by state law and shall become payable, and a lien upon the property, on the first (1st) day of the city’s fiscal year or such other date as may be provided by ordinance.

3.

Property taxes shall become delinquent if they remain unpaid on September 1. However, when any person shall pay one-half (1/2) of the city taxes on any property on or before the fifteenth (15th) day of August, the remaining one-half (1/2) shall not become delinquent until the sixteenth (16th) day of January. The City may, by ordinance, provide interest and penalties for delinquent city property taxes.

4.

State, county and school taxes shall be collected and returned by the City Treasurer in accordance with state law. However, except as otherwise provided by law or ordinance, city property taxes shall not be returned to the Wayne County Treasurer under state law.

5.

Before the end of the City’s fiscal year, the Treasurer shall give reasonable notice to all persons who are liable for delinquent real property taxes that, on the last day of the fiscal year, the city’s lien on real property for delinquent city real property taxes shall be deemed “sold” to the Finance Director.

Thereafter, the Finance Director, with the concurrence of the Planning and Development Director or any other department director designated by the Mayor, may sell the lien in accordance with procedures provided for by ordinance adopted by the City Council. Any such ordinance adopted shall provide for appropriate hardship protections. The ordinance may also provide for public notice of the sale of the lien to a third party. The council may at any time review and revise the procedures and protections

95 | P a g e

established by any such ordinance adopted to determine their appropriateness and effectiveness.

However, two (2) years following the enactment of any such ordinance, the City Council shall review the procedures and protections established by that ordinance to determine their appropriateness and effectiveness.

6.

Two (2) years after such a sale of the lien on any real property to the Finance Director, the city or other holder of the lien may bring a civil action to foreclose its lien.

If the City or other holder of the lien prevails in the action, the judgment, which may not be entered before one hundred and twenty (120) days have expired from the filing of the complaint, shall provide that possession of the real property to which the lien attached shall be given to the City or other holder of the lien, unless the judgment, and all costs are paid within sixty (60) days. The judgment when final shall be conclusive evidence of the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s or other lienholderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s title in fee simple, subject only to unextinguished interests or encumbrances.

7.

In addition to the other remedies specified in this section, at the time unpaid city property taxes become delinquent or at any later time permitted by law, the city may maintain a personal action against the debtor for collection of the unpaid property taxes and may use any means permitted by law for collection of the debt. The City of Detroit tax roll shall be prima facie evidence of the amount of the indebtedness to the City of Detroit. The preceding sections of 8-403 are not the exclusive remedies of the City of Detroit.

8.

In addition to the procedures and remedies for the collection and enforcement of the property taxes set forth in the Charter, the city or other lienholder may use any procedure and remedy for the collection and enforcement of property taxes established by state law.

96 | P a g e

ARTICLE 8.

PLANNING and FINANCIAL PROCEDURES CHAPTER 5. BORROWING Sec. 8-501. General Power.

The City may borrow money for any purpose within the scope of its powers, may issue bonds or other evidence of indebtedness therefore and may, when permitted by law, pledge the full faith, credit, and resources of the city for the payment of those obligations.

Sec. 8-502. Limitations on Borrowing.

The net bonded indebtedness incurred annually by the City shall not exceed the limit permitted by law. No obligations shall be sold to obtain funds for any purpose or purposes other than that for which those obligations were specifically authorized.

Sec. 8-503. Specific Kinds of Borrowing.

Included within the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s general power are the following specific kinds of borrowing: 1.

Bonds to Finance Local Public Improvement.

The City may borrow money and issue bonds in anticipation of the payment of special assessments or any combination of special assessments levied under sections 8-601 and 8-602 of this Charter. Special assessment bonds may be an obligation of the special assessment district or districts or may be both an obligation of the special assessment district or districts and a general obligation of the City.

The City may also borrow money and issue bonds under section 8-501 for its share of the cost of any local public improvement or, where the cost of that improvement is to be defrayed in part from the payment of special assessments and in part from other city revenues, for the entire cost of that improvement.

All collections on each special assessment roll or combination of rolls to the extent that those collections are pledged for the payment of the principal and interest on any bonds issued in anticipation of the payment thereof, shall be set apart in a separate fund for the payment of the principal and interest and may be used for no other purpose.

2.

Emergency Bonds.

In case of fire, flood, or other calamity, the city may, subject to law, authorize the issuance of emergency bonds which shall be general obligations of the City for the relief of residents of the City and for the preservation of city property.

3.

Budget Bonds.

Any capital improvement items contained in the budget may be financed by the issuance of bonds as a part of the budget system. However, the amount of those bonds together with the city property taxes levied for the same year may not exceed the limit permitted by law.

97 | P a g e

4.

Bonds to Finance Transit Facilities.

The City may borrow money for public transportation and rapid transit facilities and may incur obligations and issue bonds therefore to the maximum extent permitted by law.

5.

Bonds to Finance Public Lighting Facilities.

The City may borrow money for public lighting facilities and may incur obligations and issue bonds therefore to the maximum extent permitted by law.

Sec. 8-504. Use of Borrowed Funds.

Each obligation shall contain on its face a statement of the purpose for which it is issued and no officer of the City may use the proceeds for any other purpose, except that, whenever all or any part of the proceeds of any issue remains unexpended and unencumbered for the purpose for which the issue was made, the City may use those unexpended and unencumbered funds in any manner permitted by law or for the retirement of the issue, or, if the issue shall have been fully retired or if any funds remain after retirement of the issue, then for the retirement of other obligations of the City.

Sec. 8-505. Execution of Obligation.

All obligations issued by the City shall be executed with the facsimile signature of the Mayor and signed by the Director of Finance and shall bear the seal of the city. Interest coupons shall be executed with the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the Director of Finance.

Sec. 8-506. Tax Exempt.

All obligations issued by the City shall be exempt from all city taxation.

98 | P a g e

ARTICLE 8.

PLANNING and FINANCIAL PROCEDURES CHAPTER 6. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Sec. 8-601. Power To Assess.

The City may determine that the whole or any part of the expense of any local public improvement or repair shall be defrayed by special assessments upon the property specially benefited and so declare by resolution.

Special assessments may be levied before, during, or after the making of the improvement. However, where special assessments are not levied until after commencement of a local public improvement, the resolution levying those assessments shall not be effective unless approved by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council members serving after all interested parties have been given an opportunity to be heard on all relevant issues, including necessity.

Sec. 8-602. Special Assessments to Finance Transit Facilities.

Included within section 8-601 is the power to finance any local improvements or repair for public transportation or rapid transit facilities through special assessments to the maximum extent permitted by law.

Sec. 8-603. Procedure Ordinance.

The complete special assessment procedure to be used, including the preparing of plans and specifications; estimated costs; the preparation, hearing and correction of the special assessment roll; the collection of special assessments; the assessment of single lots of parcels; and any other matters concerning the making of improvements by the special assessment method, shall be provided by ordinance. The ordinance shall authorize additional assessments, if the prior assessments prove insufficient to pay for the improvement or is determined to be invalid, in whole or in part, and shall also provide for the refund of excess assessments; however, if the excess is less than five percent (5%) of the total costs as defined by ordinance, it may be placed in the general fund of the City.

Sec. 8-604. Assessment Lien.

From the date of confirmation of any roll levying any special assessment, the full amount of the assessment and all interest thereon shall constitute a lien on the property subject thereto and that amount shall also be a debt of the person to whom assessed until paid and, in case of delinquency, may be collected as delinquent city property taxes.

Sec. 8-605. Contest of Assessments.

No action of any kind may be instituted for the purpose of contesting or enjoining the collection of any special assessment (a) unless, the special assessment is first protested at the hearing held for the purpose of confirming the special assessment roll; and (b) the action is commenced within thirty-five (35) days after the final decision, ruling, determination or order confirming the roll. If the Corporation Counsel submits a written opinion finding the roll illegal, in whole or in part, the City Council may revoke its confirmation, correct the illegality, if possible, and reconfirm it, provided that no property shall be assessed more than was imposed upon the original confirmation without further notice and hearing thereon.

99 | P a g e

City Council may by ordinance provide a process for contest of special assessments which is in accordance with state law and is not inconsistent with this section.

100 | P a g e

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 1. COMMUNITY ADVISORY COUNCILS Sec. 9-101. Definition and Purpose.

Community Advisory Councils as used in this chapter are advisory councils established by ordinance upon the petition of city residents. The purpose of these Councils is to improve citizen access to city government. The City Council shall create advisory council districts by ordinance that shall be the same as districts from which council members are elected, exclusive of the at-large district. The ordinance shall be adopted within ninety (90) days after the effective date of this Charter.

Sec. 9-102. Creation and Composition of Advisory Councils.

City Council shall by ordinance establish seven (7) Community Advisory Councils upon receipt of a petition from the residents of districts created under section 9-101. The petitions shall be signed by a number of qualified registered voters who are residents of a district equal to not less than ten (10) percent of the number of persons voting at the last municipal general election in the district.

Each Community Advisory Council shall consist of five (5) members elected from a single non at-large district, who shall be residents and qualified and registered voters of the district; one (1) youth member between the ages of thirteen (13) and seventeen (17); and one (1) member selected as a representative for senior issues. City Council shall establish by ordinance a procedure for the selection and appointment of the high school member and senior issues representative on Community Advisory Councils. After creation of a Community Advisory Council, elected members shall be elected at the next election occurring in the city, if permitted by law, and shall serve until January 1 of the year following the regular city municipal elections. Thereafter, elected Community Advisory Council members shall be elected to four (4) year terms at the regular city municipal elections. Notwithstanding election to an initial term of less than four (4) years, an elected member may not be elected to more than two (2) consecutive four (4) year terms. The senior issues representative selected in accordance with the City ordinance shall serve one (1) four (4) year term, and may be reappointed. The youth member selected in accordance with City ordinance shall serve a one (1) year term and may be reappointed for as long as the person meets the age requirement. Reappointment of the youth member shall be for one (1) year terms. All members shall serve without compensation.

The City Council member elected from the non at-large district in which a Community Advisory Council resides, or their designee, shall attend all official meetings of that Community Advisory Council.

Sec. 9-103. Powers, Duties and Limitations.

City Council shall, by ordinance, prescribe uniform procedures, for the exercise of the powers and duties for all Community Advisory Councils. Included in those powers and duties shall be the provision that a community council may require that the City Council representative receive prior consultation from the Community Advisory Council on all issues which relate exclusively to that district.

Community Advisory Councils shall receive no appropriations from city funds, but may accept donations or grants in accordance with state, federal or local law.

A particular Community Advisory Council shall be dissolved only by a petition signed by the same number of qualified voters residing in the Community Advisory Council district required above, and an ordinance adopted after public hearing by City Council with public notice to the Community Advisory Council district

101 | P a g e

in question.

Each Community Advisory Council shall hold public meetings not less than four (4) times each year. The meetings will be held within the respective districts and will be held in donated facilities with an attempt to provide as broad of a geographical distribution for the meetings as possible. The meetings shall be held in accordance with the Michigan Open Meetings Act and the Community Advisory Councils shall comply with the Michigan Freedom of Information Act. The powers and duties of each Community Advisory Council shall include: 1.

Communicating to City Council the concerns of groups, agencies, businesses and residents within its districts with respect to the delivery of programs and services.

2.

Assisting groups, agencies, businesses and residents in community problem solving by meeting with groups to: a. Clarify issues; and b. Demonstrate proper procedural approaches to accessing city government.

3.

Disseminating information to groups, agencies, businesses and residents on social and physical plans for the districts areas.

4.

Providing advice to community representatives and City Council on major issues within the council district which may include: a. b. c. d. e. f. g.

Housing development; Commercial blight; Safety and security; Economic and community development; Employment opportunities; Code enforcement; and Other concerns impacting social, economic, cultural and environmental conditions within the district.

5.

Familiarizing themselves with the City Charter, with the objective of assisting the community in understanding the intent and relevance of Charter provisions.

6.

Familiarizing themselves with the Master Plan for the City of Detroit in relationship to the City generally and the land area within their district generally.

7.

Meeting annually with the Mayor and annually with City Council to discuss the challenges confronting the district and the resources required to advance the interest and support the viability of the district.

102 | P a g e

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 2. COUNCIL OF THE ARTS Sec. 9-201. Council of the Arts.

The Council of the Arts, comprised of fifteen (15) members, shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor. Each memberâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s term is four (4) years. Not more than four (4) terms expire each year.

The Council shall act as an advisory body to the Mayor and the City Council and as advocate for the arts and aesthetics in all aspects of city life. It shall advise and support cultural institutions and groups interested in cultural activities. It shall encourage, develop and support a wide variety of programs which reflect the cultural needs and experiences of all citizens and shall encourage participation by all citizens in the cultural activities carried on in the city.

The Council of Arts may, within appropriations appoint an Executive Director, exempt from Article 6, Chapter 4 of this Charter. The Executive Director serves at the pleasure of the Council.

103 | P a g e

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 3. REGULATORY POWER and REVIEW Sec. 9-301. Regulatory Power.

The City may, in exercise of its police power: 1.

Regulate;

2.

Prohibit; or

3.

Prohibit except as authorized by permit, license or franchise any trade, occupation, amusement, business or other activity within the city.

Sec. 9-302. Appellate Review.

The City shall provide, by ordinance, for the review of administrative decisions of city agencies which are not within the appellate jurisdiction created by other sections of this Charter.

This section shall not be construed to diminish the right of any party to direct any immediate legal or equitable remedies in any court or other tribunal.

Sec. 9-303. Limitations on a Franchise.

An irrevocable franchise and all renewals, amendments and extensions of it, may be granted only by ordinance.

The City Council may approve such an ordinance only after a public hearing has been held on it and after the grantee named in it has filed with the City Clerk its unconditional acceptance of all the terms of the franchise.

The ordinance may not take effect unless it has been approved by the voters of the city, where state law so requires, or, unless it has been approved by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of City Council members serving, where approval of the voters is not required by state law.

When approval of the voters of the City is required, the ordinance as approved by the City Council shall be published in a daily newspaper of general circulation in the city not less than thirty (30) days before the election at which it is submitted to the voters The City Council may not call a special election unless the expense (as determined by the City Council) of holding the election has first been paid to the Treasurer by the grantee.

A franchise for the use of the streets or other public places of the city or for the transaction of a local business may not be sold or transferred in any manner, nor may a party other than the grantee use the franchise, unless the city gives its consent by ordinance.

Sec. 9-304. Standard Provisions of a Public Utility Franchise.

Public utility franchises shall include provisions for fixing and periodically readjusting rates and charges at the direction of the City.

104 | P a g e

The City may, with respect to any public utility franchise granted by it, whether or not so provided in the granting ordinance: 1.

Repeal the franchise for: a. Violation of or failure to comply with any of its provisions, b. Misuse or non-use, or c. Failure to comply with any regulation imposed under authority of this Charter;

2.

Require proper and adequate extension and maintenance of plant facilities at the highest practicable standard of efficiency;

3.

Establish reasonable standards of service and quality of products, and prevent unjust discrimination in service or rates;

4.

Require continuous and uninterrupted service to the public in accordance with the terms of the franchise throughout the entire period of the franchise;

5.

Impose other regulations determined by the City Council to be conducive to the health, safety, welfare, and convenience of the public; or

6.

Require the public utility to permit joint use of its property and equipment, located in the streets and public places of the City, by the City and other utilities, insofar as joint use may be reasonably practicable, and, in the absence of agreement, upon application by the public utility, provide for arbitration of the terms and conditions, for joint use.

105 | P a g e

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 4. SPECIFIC RESPONSIBILITIES Sec. 9-401. Board of Review.

The City Council may, by ordinance, sit as a Board of Review to the extent allowed by law, or appoint a Board of Review to hear and determine appeals from property tax assessments. The board shall possess the duties and powers provided by law, which may be exercised by the whole board or by committees thereof. An appointed board shall consist of at least seven (7) members appointed from each of the non at-large districts.

Appeals from decisions of the board shall be taken in the manner provided by law.

Sec. 9-402. Hospitals.

The City shall provide, by ordinance, for the operation of any city hospital by a division of a public health agency, by a department of hospitals, or by a non-profit public corporation.

Notwithstanding section 5-103, the ordinance may provide for the administration of a hospital by a commission which may appoint a director and deputy director, exempt from Article 6, Chapter 4. Such an ordinance and any amendment to it shall originate with the Mayor, except that an ordinance, providing for the operation of a city hospital by a non-profit public corporation, and any amendment thereto, may originate with either the Mayor or the City Council.

Sec. 9-403. Revision Question.

The question of whether there shall be a general revision of the City Charter shall be submitted to the voters of the City of Detroit at the gubernatorial primary of 2018, and at every fourth (4th) gubernatorial primary thereafter and may be submitted at other times in the manner provided by law. A primary election shall be held for the offices of Charter Revision Commissioners at the same election and shall be void if the proposition to revise is not adopted. If the proposition to revise is adopted, Charter Revision Commissioners shall be elected at the ensuing general election for governor.

Sec. 9-404. Schools.

Every resident of Detroit has a right to an education that will permit the full development of his or her potential. City government has a responsibility to cooperate with the school districts serving the people of Detroit in the achievement of this objective and to exercise such influence and to provide such ancillary or supplemental services to the people or to the school districts as may be necessary or helpful in the furtherance of this objective.

Sec. 9-405. Elimination of Redundancy in Government.

Every effort shall be made by city elective officers, employees, and branches and units of government to reduce duplication of efforts and increase and maintain efficiency in the operations of city government.

Within one hundred eighty (180) days of the effective date of this Charter, the Executive and Legislative branches, and City Clerk shall conduct a comprehensive evaluation of its programs, services, activities, policies and operations to identify and eliminate any redundancy. Thereafter, the evaluations shall be

106 | P a g e

made within the first quarter of the year following the regular city general election. Each evaluation shall result in a compiled report of the City of Detroit entitled â&#x20AC;&#x153;Report on Elimination of Redundancy,â&#x20AC;? which, at a minimum, outlines the efforts and means taken to identify redundancy, makes findings on redundancy and details methods implemented to eliminate, reduce or avoid redundancy. The report shall be published and presented to City Council and the Auditor General in April of the year of its completion.

As much as practicable attempts shall be made to realign service delivery systems and eliminate operational duplication and inefficiency, which may include cooperative agreements with other government entities as allowed by law.

107 | P a g e

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 5. SPECIFIC POWERS Sec. 9-501. Eminent Domain.

The City has the power of eminent domain and, to the extent permitted by law, may condemn private or public property, located within or outside the city, for any public purpose. This power may be exercised in accordance with any procedure authorized by law or ordinance.

Private property may not be taken without just compensation therefore being first paid or secured.

Further, the City may, by ordinance, provide supplemental compensation for property taken. Where the conduct of the City constitutes a taking of property under the law, any party injured by such a taking may institute an inverse condemnation action in a court of appropriate jurisdiction.

Sec. 9-502. Enabling Legislation.

The City may enact any ordinance authorized by law or necessary to carry out the provisions of any section of this Charter.

Sec. 9-503. Historic Areas and Landmarks.

The preservation of historic areas and landmarks is declared to be a public purpose.

The City may provide, by ordinance, for the preservation of historic areas and landmarks within the City.

When an area is designated an historic district, the designation may not be withdrawn without the consent of a majority of the property owners within the district and the requirements of the district applicable to private property may be enforced upon the complaint of any property owner or association of property owners within the district.

Sec. 9-504. Library.

The City may make appropriations to, and exercise its power in aid of, the Detroit Library Commission for the operation of libraries within the City.

Sec. 9-505. Penalties.

The City shall by ordinance, provide punishment, up to the extent permitted by law, for the violation of this Charter or any ordinance.

All persons prosecuted for the violation of this Charter or any ordinance shall be afforded all rights of due process required by federal and state law.

Sec. 9-506. Rents, Tolls, Excises and Taxes.

The City may provide for the laying and collecting of rents, tolls, excises and taxes in accordance with section 4-114.

108 | P a g e

Sec. 9-507. Service Fees.

Any agency of the City may, with the approval of the City Council, charge an admission or service fee to any facility operated, or for any service provided, by an agency.

The approval of the City Council shall also be required for any change in any such admission or service fee.

Sec. 9-508. Utilities.

1.

Acquiring and Financing of City-Owned Utilities.

The City may acquire, construct, own, operate, improve, enlarge, extend, repair, and maintain public utilities and borrow money, levy taxes, or make other arrangements for the financing of public utilities to the maximum extent permitted by law or this Charter. Included is authority to acquire and maintain or participate in the acquisition of maintenance of a bridge or tunnel across the Detroit River or to acquire, own and operate ferry boats on the Detroit River and surrounding water.

As used in the chapter, public utility means any business or service affected with the public interest as defined by general law.

2.

Rates.

Except as provided by section 7-1202, the City shall, by ordinance, fix just and reasonable rates and such other charges as may be necessary for supplying city utility services to the residents of the City and others.

3.

Enforcement.

The City shall provide, by ordinance, for the enforcement of city utility rates and charges.

Sec. 9-509. Parking Fines.

The City Council shall, by ordinance, adopt a schedule of fines and penalties for parking violations.

Sec. 9-510. Incentives for City-Based Businesses.

The City shall provide by ordinance for incentives to business entities located within the City of Detroit, to the extent permitted by law. The City may adopt a purchasing ordinance with a system of incentives for Detroit-based businesses. The incentives may provide for businesses located in economic zones of the City, or for community-based enterprises, as defined by ordinance. This ordinance shall be enacted no more than one hundred eighty (180) days after adoption of this Charter.

109 | P a g e

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 6. RETIREES’ REPRESENTATION Sec. 9-601. Retirees’ Representation.

Retired general city employees are entitled to be represented in the city legislative and budgetary proceedings on issues affecting their interest by persons elected by them.

110 | P a g e

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 7. RISK MANAGEMENT Sec. 9-701. Risk Management Council.

The Risk Management Council is an advisory body to the Mayor comprised of: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

A chairperson, appointed by the Mayor, who shall be an appropriately qualified Mayoral cabinetlevel official, which may not be any person identified in this section; The Corporation Counsel; The Chief of Police; The Finance Director; The Human Resources Director; The Auditor General; A City Council designee who is a city employee, other than a member of City Council; The Inspector General; and The Transportation Director.

Sec. 9-702. Duties.

In addition to their regular duties, members of the Risk Management Council shall have the following duties: 1.

The Risk Management Council shall make recommendations to the Mayor, and shall have authority to implement the Mayor’s directives concerning implementation of policies, programs and activities to minimize exposure or liability of the City to claims and damages.

2.

The Risk Management Council shall produce, with the assistance of the Finance Department, a quarterly report that summarizes its evaluation, monitoring and coordination of the City’s comprehensive risk management strategy.

3.

The Risk Management Council shall prepare for the Mayor and City Council an annual strategic risk management report, in conjunction with the Finance Department, which evaluates the effectiveness of risk management functions within the City. Included in the report shall be recommendations on, and identification of, city-wide and agency and department specific, risk reduction strategies and projected savings from implementation of these strategies.

4.

The Risk Management Council and Finance Department shall formulate a cost system to monitor, control and report on all potential risk and liability costs to the City of Detroit.

5.

Assisted by the Finance Department, the Risk Management Council shall provide an annual report to the Mayor and City Council summarizing claims that have been paid by the City on risk related matters including, but not limited to, the settlement of lawsuits, pre-litigation claims and worker’s compensation claims. The report shall provide recommendations for risk avoidance and liability exposure reduction measures related to these claims. Release of the report shall coincide with the Mayor’s annual submission of the proposed budget to City Council.

Annually the Risk Management Council shall assess the administration and effectiveness of safety, liability and risk reduction functions in each city agency, and report findings and recommendations to the Mayor and City Council. The City shall make an annual appropriation for the operation of the Risk Management Council that is adequate to perform its duties.

111 | P a g e

ARTICLE 9.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 8. INSURANCE ASSISTANCE Sec. 9-801. City Sponsored Insurance Assistance.

To the extent allowed by law, the City of Detroit may establish an insurance system to provide, support, supplement or otherwise assist in the provision of automobile and/or property insurance for City residents.

Within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this Charter, the Corporation Counsel shall advise the City Council and Mayor, in writing, on the legal requirements necessary to implement the insurance systems contemplated by this chapter and whether there exists any legal prohibition to implementing the insurance system.

No insurance system shall be implemented without the Mayor and City Council jointly commissioning a feasibility study that must demonstrate the ability of the City to fund, sustain and operate the insurance system in a fiscally responsible manner. Any insurance system implemented by the City shall be done pursuant to ordinance and in accordance with applicable laws.

City Council may, by majority vote, discontinue the operation of any insurance program implemented under this chapter.

112 | P a g e

ARTICLE 10.

COURTS Sec. 10-101. Courts.

The organization, powers, procedures and practices of the courts with jurisdiction for cases involving violations of this Charter or city penal ordinances shall be as provided by this Charter or ordinance, in accordance with state law.

The City may make appropriations for the operation of any court where it is in the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interest to do so and shall dispose of revenues resulting from the collection of fines in accordance with law.

113 | P a g e

ARTICLE 11.

RETIREMENT PLANS Sec. 11-101. Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Duties.

1.

The City shall provide, by ordinance, for the establishment and maintenance of retirement plan coverage for city employees.

2.

Financial benefits arising on account of service rendered in each fiscal year shall be funded during that year and that funding shall not be used for financing unfunded accrued liabilities.

3.

The accrued financial benefits of active and retired city employees, being contractual obligations of the city, shall in no event be diminished or impaired.

Sec. 11-102. Continuation of Existing Plans.

The retirement plans of the city existing when this Charter takes effect, including the existing governing bodies for administering those plans, the benefit schedules for those plans and the terms for accruing rights to and receiving benefits under those plans shall, in all respects, continue in existence exactly as before unless changed by this Charter or an ordinance adopted in accordance with this article.

Sec. 11-103. Principles Applicable In Administering Plans.

Not more than two (2) governing bodies for administering the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s retirement plans may be established, whose membership is set forth in this section, subject to applicable law.

1.

The Board of Trustees of the General Retirement System shall consist of: a. b. c. d.

The Mayor; A City Council member selected by that body; The City Treasurer; Five (5) members of the retirement system, to be elected by the members of the retirement system under rules and regulations as may be adopted by the Board; except that not more than one (1) trustee shall be elected from any department;

e. A citizen of the City who is neither an employee of the city nor eligible to receive benefits under the retirement system, appointed by the Mayor, subject to approval of the Board; and f. One (1) retirant, receiving benefits under the retirement system and elected by retired city employees under procedures established by ordinance.

2.

The Board of Trustees of the police and fire retirement system shall consist of: a. b. c. d. e. f.

The Mayor or in the absence of the Mayor, a designee; A City Council member selected by that body; The City Treasurer; The Chief of Police; The Fire Commissioner; Three (3) firefighters who are members of the retirement system elected by the firefighter members under the rules and regulations as may be adopted by the Board. Trustees shall be: (1) Two (2) to be elected by and from members holding the rank of lieutenant (or equivalent) and lower ranks.

114 | P a g e

(2) One (1) to be elected by and from members holding a rank above lieutenant (or equivalent); g. Three (3) police officers who are members of the retirement system elected by police officer members under the rules and regulations as may be adopted by the board. Trustees shall be: (1) Two (2) to be elected by and from members holding the rank of lieutenant (or equivalent) and lower ranks.

(2) One (1) to be elected by and from members holding a rank above lieutenant (or equivalent); and h. Two retirants, receiving benefits under the retirement system, who shall be residents of the city, one elected by retired firefighters and one elected by retired police officers under procedures established by ordinance.

Staff services required by a governing body shall be provided as determined by the Finance Director.

Sec. 11-104. Information Required Before Benefit Increase.

Before final action on any proposed change in future retirement benefits is taken, the City Council shall obtain a report as to the immediate and long-term costs of the change from an independent actuary of its choosing and may not take final action until at least three (3) months after the report of the actuary is made public at a meeting of the City Council.

Sec. 11-105. Audits.

The Board of Trustees for the city retirement plans shall contract for annual independent audits.

115 | P a g e

ARTICLE 12.

INITIATIVE and REFERENDUM Sec. 12-101. Initiative and Referendum.

The voters of the city reserve the power to enact city ordinances, call the “initiative”, and the power to nullify ordinances, enacted by the city, called the “referendum”. However, these powers do not extend to the budget or any ordinance for the appropriation of money; the referendum power does not extend to any emergency ordinance.

The initiative and the referendum may be invoked by petition as provided in this chapter.

Sec. 12-102. Petitions.

Initiative and referendum petitions must be signed by voters of the City, not less in number than three percent (3%) of all votes cast for the office of Mayor at the preceding regular city general election.

Petitions shall set forth in full, the measure to be initiated or referred, as well as a brief statement of its substance. If the measure is submitted to the voters, that brief statement shall appear on the official ballot.

Signers of the petitions shall be voters of the City. Each signer shall sign his or her name indelibly and shall indicate his or her residence and the date of signing. Each petition paper shall contain a sworn affidavit of the circulator stating the number of signers on each petition paper; that each signature is, to the knowledge of the circulator, the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be; and that it was affixed in the presence of the circulator.

Sec. 12-103. Time of Filing.

An initiative petition must be filed with the City Clerk not less than one hundred and forty (140) days before the election at which it is to be voted on.

A referendum petition must be filed with the City Clerk before the ordinance on which the referendum is sought, takes effect or, where the ordinance is given immediate effect, within thirty (30) days after its effective date.

Sec. 12-104. Filing and Canvass of Petitions.

Petitions to adopt or rescind an ordinance shall be filed with the Office of the City Clerk. The City Clerk shall verify the number of petitions that were filed and transmit petitions to the Department of Elections for a canvass of the petitions. Within ten (10) days of receipt, the Department of Elections shall canvass the signatures thereon to determine their sufficiency and make a report of the result to the City Council. Any signature on an initiative petition obtained more than six (6) months before the filing of the petition with the Office of the City Clerk shall not be counted.

Sec. 12-105. Insufficient Petitions.

If the Clerk’s canvass discloses that the number of signatures on petitions for any initiative or referendum is insufficient, additional petitions may be filed within fifteen (15) days after the Clerk’s determination.

116 | P a g e

When this fifteen (15) day period has expired, the Clerk shall again canvass the signatures on the petitions filed to determine their sufficiency and make a report of the result.

Sec. 12-106. Suspension of Ordinance.

Where a referendum on an ordinance has been invoked under section 12-103, the effect of the ordinance shall be delayed or suspended until the City Clerk has made a final report that the referendum petitions are insufficient or, if the referendum petitions are sufficient, until the voters of the City have expressed their support for the ordinance in the referendum election.

Sec. 12-107. Time Limit for Enactment or Repeal of Ordinance.

Upon the report of the Department of Elections that the initiative or referendum petitions are sufficient, and filed within the time limits provided by this Charter, the City may within sixty (60) days: 1.

In the case of an initiative petition, enact the ordinance, which is proposed by the petition, in accordance with Section 4-115, 4-117, 4-118 of this Charter; or

2.

In the case of referendum petition, repeal the ordinance, which is set out in the petition, in accordance with Section 4-115, 4-117, 4-118 of this Charter.

Sec. 12-108. Submission to Election Commission and Voters.

If the City fails to enact or repeal the ordinance in accordance with Section 12-107 of this Charter, the City Council shall forward the proposed initiative or referendum petition to the Election Commission. The Election Commission shall make a determination as to whether the question can lawfully be placed on the ballot and report their conclusions to the City Council. If there is no legal impediment to placing the measure on the ballot, the Election Commission shall place the question on the ballot and submit the measure to the voters in accordance with the applicable requirements of Michigan Election Law, MCL 168.1, et seq.

If a measure must be submitted to the voters, it shall be submitted: 1.

In the case of an initiative or referendum, at the next election in the city, or, in the discretion of the City Council, at a special election, subject to applicable provisions of the Michigan Election Law, MCL 168.1, et seq.

Except as otherwise required by law, the result of any initiative or referendum election shall be determined by a majority of the voters voting on the question.

Sec. 12-109. Amendment, Repeal and Re-Enactment.

An ordinance adopted by the voters through initiative proceedings may not be amended or repealed by the city for a period of twelve (12) months after the date of the election at which it was adopted, and an ordinance nullified by the voters through referendum proceedings may not be re-enacted by the city for a period of twelve (12) months after the election at which it was defeated.

Sec. 12-110. Submission by Council.

The City Council may, on its own motion, submit any proposed ordinance or any proposal for the repeal or amendment of any ordinance to the voters in the manner and with the effect provided in this chapter for submission of proposals initiated by petition.

117 | P a g e

Sec. 12-111. Similar or Conflicting Measures.

If two (2) or more initiative or referendum measures submitted to the voters of the City shall have conflicting provisions, or attempt to accomplish the same object, and more than one (1) of these measures is approved by the voters, the measure receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall prevail to the extent of their inconsistency.

Sec. 12-112. Repeal or Amendment of Ordinance in Effect.

The voters of the City may invoke the initiative power to repeal or amend an existing ordinance.

118 | P a g e

ARTICLE 13 SCHEDULE Sec. 13-101. Effect on Existing City Legislation.

All ordinances and resolutions of the City and all orders, rules and regulations made by any officer or agency of the City which are not inconsistent with this Charter shall remain in effect, until changed by action taken under this Charter.

The Corporation Counsel shall, within six (6) months after the effective date of this Charter, recommend to the City Council such changes as may be necessary to make the provisions of the 1997 Charter which have been continued in force as well as existing ordinances, resolutions, orders, rules, and regulations consistent with this Charter.

Sec. 13-102. Continuation of Public and Private Rights.

All writs, actions, suits, proceedings, civil or criminal liabilities, prosecutions, judgments, sentences, orders, decrees, appeals, causes of action, contracts, claims, demands, titles and rights existing when this Charter takes effect shall continue unaffected except as modified in accordance with this Charter.

Sec. 13-103. Rights of Officers and Employees.

No provision of this Charter shall affect or impair the rights or privileges of city officers or employees existing when this Charter takes effect with respect to appointment, ranks, grades, tenure of office, promotion, removal, pension and retirement rights, or the civil rights or privileges of city officers or employees.

Any person who, at the time this Charter takes effect, holds a position in city government from which he or she could have been removed only for cause or under the rules of the Civil Service Commission, may not be removed under this Charter unless: 1.

Cause for the removal is established in proceedings before the Civil Service Commission;

2.

The person is transferred to another position in city government and is assured of salary and benefits at least as favorable as would have been earned by service in the position from which transferred until mandatory retirement age is reached; or 3.

A mutually agreeable settlement is made by the City with the person discharging all rights against the City which the person may assert.

Sec. 13-104. Effective Date.

Except as otherwise provided, this Charter shall become effective on January 1, 2012.

Sec. 13-105. Employees Benefit Plan.

The governing provisions of the City of Detroit employees benefit plan may be changed by ordinance.

However, the benefits provided by the City of Detroit employees benefit plan may be amended by resolution of the Detroit City Council.

119 | P a g e

The governing body of the employees benefit plan shall be the General Retirement System Board of Trustees, except the civilian member.

Sec. 13-106. Condemnation.

The procedures for the exercise of the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s power of eminent domain existing when this Charter takes effect shall remain in effect until changed by ordinance.

Sec. 13-107. Fire and Police Pension Committees.

The provisions of the 1974 Charter relating to the Fire Department Pension Committee and the Police Department Pension Committee, existing when this Charter takes effect, shall in all respects continue in existence exactly as before until changed by ordinance.

Sec. 13-108. Police Fund.

The Police Commissionerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s power under the 1974 Charter shall in all respects continue in existence exactly as before until changed by ordinance.

Sec. 13-109. Initial Appointments.

Notwithstanding any provision of this Charter, the first appointments after the effective date of this Charter to the vacant positions on any multi-member body may be for varying terms less than the length prescribed by this Charter in order that thereafter not more than the specified number of terms will expire in any year.

The term of a member serving a fixed term of office on any multi-member body when this Charter takes effect shall expire at the end of the fixed term, unless otherwise indicated in this Charter. Appointments to vacancies arising on the multi-member bodies shall then be made in accordance with the provisions in this Charter.

Sec. 13-110. General Provision.

If any question concerning transition from the 1997 Charter to this Charter (for which this Charter has not provided) arises, the City may provide for a resolution of the question by ordinance.

Sec. 13-111. Submission of the Charter.

This Charter shall be submitted for adoption at the general election to be held November 8, 2011, in the manner and with the effect prescribed by state law as follows: Proposal C - Proposal to Adopt a New City Charter.

Shall the City of Detroit Home Rule Charter proposed by the Detroit Charter Revision Commission be adopted?

Yes No

120 | P a g e

Common Challenges in Negotiating Community Benefits Agreements — AND —

H O W TO AV O I D T H E M

JANUARY 2016

PARTNERSHIP for

Working Families

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

2

Introduction

P

ittsburgh’s Hill District was once home to a deeply rooted African-American community. A wave of publicly subsidized urban renewal projects in the 1950s promised jobs, housing, and a revitalized

community, but instead left the area with deep poverty, a dismantled community, and a lack of economic opportunity. When Mellon Arena, home to the Pittsburgh Penguins, opened in 1961 it became a symbol of this period of so-called renewal that displaced more than 400 businesses and 8,000 African-American residents.

In 2007, the Pittsburgh Penguins threatened to leave the city unless they received $750 million in public funds to support the construction of a new stadium. Hill District residents united in response to the city making a multi-million dollar investment in a private corporation while residents struggled to make ends meet. In 2008, the One Hill coalition, representing more than 100 organizations, negotiated the first community benefits agreement (CBA) in Pittsburgh’s history. The legally

 What Are CBAs? Community benefits agreements (CBA) are legally binding agreements between developers and coalitions of community organizations, addressing a broad range of community needs.

CBAs ensure that local residents share in the benefits of major developments in their communities. They elevate the voices of community residents and shift the balance of power in economic development from developers back toward the community.

They enable local residents to have a meaningful seat at the table with public agencies and developers, shaping large scale development projects in their neighborhoods, pressing for community benefits tailored to their needs, and holding developers accountable for their promises.

binding agreement provided $8.3 million in neighborhood improvements to address the lack of access to vital services and the need for real economic opportunity for local residents beyond the cost of constructing the new arena.

When the arena and hotel opened in 2011, 38% of the 522 employees were Hill District residents, attributable to the CBA’s local hire requirements. The coalition also negotiated living wage requirements for the development and a card check provision that protects workers’ right to organize. Funds provided by the CBA helped to establish a grocery store in 2012, which provided a source of fresh produce for local residents for the first time in more than three decades. The new grocery store created 120 new jobs, of which Hill District residents have filled 65%. The CBA also created significant opportunities to improve community health by assisting with the redevelopment of the YMCA recreation center. And the agreement creates meaningful roles for residents to engage in future development planning in the Hill District.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

3

Unfortunately, this is not how CBAs always work out. In some circumstances, ineffective (so-called) CBAs have provided a tool for co-optation of low-income communities and the broader public, generating support for large scale development projects without delivering actual community benefits.1 Worse still, in some circumstances, the community has been misled into thinking that it had won enforceable

î&#x201A;Šâ&#x20AC;&#x201A; The CBA Movement History The community benefits movement began in California in the early 2000s, where coalitions in Los Angeles, San Diego, San Jose, and the Bay Area used CBAs and other tools to realize the tremendous social justice potential of economic development and land use planning. Since then, organizations in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Indianapolis, Miami, Milwaukee, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Pittsburgh, New Orleans, New York City, Seattle, and Washington D.C. have pursued a community benefits approach to major economic development projects, often successfully. Today, as investment in real estate development returns with tremendous force to metropolitan regions, stakeholders across the country are demanding community benefits and pursuing campaigns for CBAs.

commitments when it had not. The fallout from ineffective CBAs has in few instances even undermined the legitimacy of CBAs as a platform for greater democracy and equitable development.

As more organizations embrace CBAs as a tool, we offer this guide to help avoid processes and outcomes that may disempower, rather than empower, local communities.

More than a decade of work in the community benefits movement has yielded a number of important lessons about common challenges

The community benefits movement is centered on the proposition that public and private sector investment in economic development should bring measurable, permanent improvements to the lives of affected residents, particularly low-income communities of color, through the creation of good jobs, affordable housing, and neighborhood services.

1

facing CBA coalitions and how they may be avoided. Absent strong, authentic, and diverse community representation and commitment to negotiating legally enforceable agreements that meet community needs, the community may not realize the full potential of the approach.

What Can Happen When CBAs Are Weak?

00 The developer co-opts and retains power and uses the CBA as a tool to

benefit itself.

00 The community is misled and under the assumption that the project will provide

benefits, but because of bad drafting or weak enforcement provisions, the benefits never materialize.

00 The CBA does not address the actual needs of the impacted community.

Kathleen Mulligan-Hansel, Community Benefits Movements and the Race to the Top.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

4

How to Use This Guide:

T

his guide includes case studies, checklists, charts, and resources for individuals and organizations interested in moving community benefits campaigns forward in their jurisdiction, and who want to

learn more about the pitfalls and indicators of potentially harmful CBAs. It provides: 00 Principles for Effective CBAs 00 Indicators of Potentially Weak CBAs 00 Case Studies on Ineffective and Harmful CBAs 00 Charts Breaking Down and Comparing the Elements of Strong and Weak CBAs

For individuals new to CBAs,

For those interested

For those seeking a quick

the following list of resources

in learning about the

reference guide on real-life

may be helpful for background

weaknesses of purely

examples of strong/effective

and guidance on the CBA

aspirational CBAs, the case

versus weak/ineffective CBAs,

process.

studies beginning on page 10

the grid on page 17 is helpful.

are most relevant.

Resources on CBAs 00 The Partnership for Working Families Policy and Tools on CBAs webpage includes summaries and

text of CBAs currently in effect: http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/resources/policy-tools-communitybenefits-agreements-and-policies 00 Paving the Path to Opportunity: How Revive Oakland Innovated a New Model for Inclusive

Economic Development: http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/resources/publications/paving-pathopportunity-how-revive-oakland-innovated-new-model-inclusive 00 Delivering Community Benefits Through Economic Development: A Guide for Elected and

Appointed Officials: http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/resources/publications/cba-elected-officials 00 Equitable Transit: Creating Healthy, Accessible and Affordable Communities:

http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/resources/publications/equitable-transit-creating-healthyaccessible-and-affordable-communities 00 Economic Development with Real Community Benefit: Land Development in the Public Interest:

http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/resources/publications/economic-development-real-communitybenefit-land-development-public-interest 00 The Community Benefits Law Center, a project of the Partnership for Working Families, provides legal

assistance to community-based efforts to transform local economies. The CBLC website includes numerous resources on CBAs, the development process, and responsible development standards: http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/cblc

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

5

What Makes an Effective CBA? Successful community benefits campaigns lead to meaningful benefits for communities impacted by economic development projects. A CBA is a legally binding contract (or set of related contracts), resulting from substantial community involvement, and signed by community groups and by a developer. The contract establishes a range of community benefits regarding a development project.

CBAs are not aspirational memorandums of understanding made up of issues to be resolved or negotiated on a future date. Instead, they feature concrete deliverables, timeframes, monitoring requirements, and enforcement mechanisms.

An effective CBA is grounded in four core principles: 1. It is negotiated by a coalition that effectively represents the interests of the impacted community; 2. The CBA process is transparent, inclusive, and accessible to the community; 3. The terms provide specific, concrete, meaningful benefits, and deliver what the community needs; and 4. There are clearly defined, formal means by which the community can hold the developer (and other parties) accountable to their obligations.

The following section explains these principles and their application, which may help protect against the misuse of the CBA tool.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

6

Elements of Effective CBAs 1. Community Interests are Well-Represented A community’s ability to win a strong CBA is directly related to how much power it organizes and the strength of its coalition infrastructure.

00 Coalition members have deep, active connections to the community, representing those most

threatened by project impacts and frequently excluded from participation in decisions about economic development, often low-income people of color.

00 The coalition aligns with networks that have experience with CBAs (e.g., regional or national actors)

to build connections, technical assistance, and resources.

00 There is strong capacity among coalition members participating in the CBA process in order to

effectively negotiate and secure an appropriate bargain.

00 Coalition members are not beholden to elected officials, developers, or others with potentially

conflicting interests in the project.

2. The CBA Process is Transparent, Inclusive, and Accessible A strong CBA results from a process – drafting, negotiating, and signing – which involves, and is accessible to, the community.

00 The community has a vehicle, e.g., regular coalition meeting, for news and information to be

distributed regarding the CBA process, including the negotiations.

00 The community has opportunities, e.g., public forums, to provide feedback and input throughout

the process in order to ensure that a broad range of concerns are heard and addressed prior to project approval.

00 There are effective mechanisms, e.g., processes for decision making, to ensure transparency

within the coalition, foster collaboration, and guard against conflicts of interest on the part of coalition members.

 Oakland Army Base CBA The Revive Oakland! coalition was led by a12-organization steering committee and represented over 30 entities, including community organizations, faith leaders, labor unions, and government agencies.

The coalition led extensive CBA negotiations between the city, coalition, and developers, which resulted in the Oakland Army Base CBA. The coalition’s multi-pronged strategy included creatively engaging its member organizations’ strengths through organizing, media outreach, research and policy development, legal support, leadership development, rallying interfaith congregations with the project, contacting voters to gauge support for key provisions of the agreement, and engaging political leaders. The city and coalition members entered into a co-operation agreement under which the groups agreed to support the project in exchange for assurances about the delivery of community benefits.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

7

3. Concrete, Meaningful Benefits Deliver What Community Needs A strong CBA delivers on the issues of greatest importance to the most vulnerable members of the impacted community.

00 The CBA terms are concrete and specific, detailing which party is responsible, for what and where,

and on what timeframe, and not deferring decisions for a future negotiation date when community leverage may be gone.

00 The core community benefits terms address all the important details that may arise in

implementation.

00 The CBA addresses issues of concern to the community, which may include:

44 creating higher quality jobs; 44 requiring targeted hiring programs that help connect individuals with barriers to employment to newly created jobs; 44 creating affordable housing to counter racial and economic segregation that may accompany development; 44 addressing environmental issues created or intensified by development; 44 supporting the principle of worker organizing; 44 providing access to grocery stores, community meeting space, public art, traffic mitigation, and parking.

î&#x201A;Šâ&#x20AC;&#x201A; Pittsburgh Hill District CBA Though the CBA contains a provision for the creation of a Master Plan for the Hill District at a future date, the process and timeframe were clearly outlined (down to the monthly meeting requirements between the steering committee and planning professional), as well as the parties responsible, community participation required, issues required to address, and funding requirements. The developers agreed to quarterly meetings with community members on the development and construction of the new arena.

The CBA included clearly defined local hire and living wage requirements for jobs at the arena and hotel. The city, county, and developers committed exact dollar amounts to specific projects within the CBA, including $1M towards securing a grocery store by a certain date, and $150,000 per year for at least two years to start a model first source referral center to provide and coordinate job preparation, training, and supportive services.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

8

4. Clearly Defined Enforcement Mechanisms Ensure Developer Accountability An effective CBA contains formal means to hold the parties accountable to their obligations, including a monitoring and compliance vehicle and avenues for community enforcement.

00 The CBA clearly identifies the parties, along with their obligations and which party is responsible

for implementing each provision.

00 The CBA clearly outlines timeframes and processes for each commitment to be fulfilled.

00 The CBA includes a monitoring and implementation system that requires the parties to engage

in future activities related to the CBA, and the community parties continue to hold developers accountable to its provisions over time.

00 The CBA includes enforcement measures with real consequences, i.e., remedies that give

community parties the ability to ensure that the obligations are delivered upon and contains no impediments to community parties seeking judicial enforcement.

00 The CBA provides for enforcement against commercial tenants and contractors as well as

successors in interest of the developer.

î&#x201A;Šâ&#x20AC;&#x201A; Kingsbridge Armory CBA This CBA created formal structures for community-based oversight and enforcement of each of the provisions with clear penalties and broad remedies. Defined reporting processes and recordkeeping requirements for each employer involved in the development must be provided to the Community Advisory Council, an entity established by the CBA to assist with and monitor implementation of the agreement.

Individuals not paid a living wage have a cause of action against the developer to enforce the terms and are entitled to interest and attorneysâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; fees if successful. If employers fail to meet the CBA requirements within a certain timeframe, the Community Advisory Council may seek various remedies, including monetary damages or injunctive relief in court.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

9

Key Indicators of Ineffective CBAs

E

fforts to pursue CBAs that did not adhere to the four principles outlined above have produced aspirational and unenforceable agreements that served to undermine local community power. These

weak agreements in some cases enabled co-optation and were used by developers and elected officials as a tool to facilitate approval of a development project. In some cases, the community representatives in the CBA negotiations were selected by politicians or the developers themselves and did not represent the local community or the array of community interests affected by the development. In other cases, developers employed “divide and conquer” techniques to appease some community groups that could be more easily swayed or negotiated with, while excluding and shutting out of the decision-making process groups that were more critical of the project or that represented residents most vulnerable to the consequences of the development. Additionally, the community in some cases lacked the institutional capacity to oversee the implementation of the CBA and hold developers accountable to its provisions.

Though there are practical difficulties for community organizations to ensure that those participating in the CBA process are part of a diverse, inclusive, well-organized coalition of local residents and organizations with political power, and properly equipped to effectively secure an appropriate bargain, there may be severe consequences and bad precedent created by coalitions that lack this capacity. In cases resulting in weak CBAs, developers that committed to minimal CBA obligations could still spin their projects through deceptive marketing as being community-supported.

The following chart summarizes key indicators of a weak CBA that is unlikely to represent the needs of diverse community interests or be effectively enforceable.

How to Spot a Weak CBA: 00 There is little real community participation: the signatories are handpicked by

the developer or politicians, there is no coalition presence at all, or the coalition lacks the broad based representation of the array of community interests affected by the development.

00 The negotiation process is secretive and exclusive: a small group is involved in the

process with little or no communication with local residents and organizations.

00 The commitments are vague, with no clear timeframes or measurements: parties

may easily opt out, provisions are voluntary, or compliance relies too heavily on good faith efforts; there are no processes outlining how provisions will be implemented to make the commitments real.

00 There are no effective formal means of holding parties accountable: there is no

clearly defined structure to monitor progress, an impeded avenue of recourse for the community parties should there be a breach of contract, or there is an inexpensive “buy out” provision under which developers can pay for their obligations instead of actually providing community benefits.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

10

Case Studies of Ineffective CBAs

T

he following development projects demonstrate the reality of these concerns. In each case, a large and controversial project was approved in conjunction with agreements that project proponents

called CBAs. But the negotiation process and resulting documents fell short of the four principles and did not follow through on achieving benefits to the local community. Instead, the community parties were unrepresentative of local residents, the ultimate agreement lacked strong terms to achieve benefits for the local community, and the process as a whole served to disempower, rather than empower, the community most impacted by the development projects.

Atlantic Yards CBA (since renamed Pacific Park Brooklyn) 00 Small group of community signatories handpicked by developer.

00 Conflicts of interest between community signatories and broader community.

00 Terms of agreement aspirational, broad, with few details on execution and funding.

00 Lack of enforcement mechanisms and independent compliance monitor requirement never fulfilled.

The first New York CBA was completed in 2005 in connection with the multibillion dollar development of the Atlantic Yards arena for the NBA’s New Jersey Nets, and an attached residential and office high-rise complex.2 The developer embarked on a campaign to win support for the project, and as part of that campaign, raised the idea of a CBA.3 The developer initially convened a meeting of a small group of community organizations in July 2004 and continued to meet with these eight groups regularly to negotiate the CBA.4 Controversy arose over the process after community activists learned about the negotiations underway, and certain groups that had come out against the project did not participate in the negotiations (there is disagreement about whether they were excluded or refused to participate).5 In June 2005, the developer and eight community organizations signed the CBA.6 While the CBA’s provisions cover the broad range of issues that correspond with the missions of the eight signatories, the provisions are aspirational, vaguely described, and difficult to enforce.

Reaction to the agreement has been critical.

2 3

4

5

6

Patricia Salkin, Understanding Community Benefit Agreements: Opportunities and Traps for Developers, Municipalities and Community Organizations (October 29, 2007), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1025724 (last visited November 16, 2015).

Vicki Been, The Role of Community Benefit Agreements in New York City’s Land Use Process’ (March 8, 2010), available at http://www.nycbar.org/pdf/report/uploads/20071844-Th eRoleofCommunityBenefitAgreementsinNYCLandUseProcess.pdf (last visited November 16, 2015).

Id. at 7. The groups involved in the negotiations were the All-Faith Council of Brooklyn, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development (BUILD), the Downtown Brooklyn Educational Consortium, the Downtown Brooklyn Neighborhood Alliance, the First Atlantic Terminal Housing Committee, the New York State Association of Minority Contractors and the Public Housing Communities. Salkin, supra note 2.

Id. at 7.

Id. at 8.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

11

Representativeness

Parties Selected/Controlled by Developer 00

Eight organizations were selected by the developer before negotiations began. Though there were established organizations among them, others within the group were created just prior to or during the negotiations.7

No CBA Negotiating Experience 00

It has been suggested that some of the community groups were not experienced enough to properly negotiate and eventually administer the CBA’s provisions.8

Divided Community 00

Transparency, Inclusivity

Eight organizations signed the CBA but more than 50 community organizations representing Brooklyn residents signed a petition opposing the project due to the extensive impacts it would have on the local community.9

Broader Community Not Involved With Negotiations 00

Several representatives of local community boards protested statements made by the developer overstating their role in the negotiations.10 They contended that their involvement with the agreement ended very early in the process and well before a final draft was prepared.11

Negotiations Exclusive and Marked by Secrecy 00

As more community groups learned about negotiations underway, there is disagreement about whether they were excluded or refused to participate.12 Since little information was provided publicly about the negotiations, there was a fragmentation of community responses.13

Conflicts of Interest 00

Substance

Vague, Broad, Aspirational Goals with Few Details on Execution 00

00

7

One of the signatories, Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development, incorporated as a nonprofit days before it announced its support for the development and received $100,000, office space, overhead, computer equipment, and furniture from the developer shortly after the CBA was signed.14

The developer is required to “give preference” to firms with a demonstrated commitment to hiring minorities and women, with no clearly defined goals or benchmarks with vague language about funding (e.g., “Developers and BUILD will seek and secure adequate public and/or private funding for this initiative.”).15 The agreement mandates the creation of a high school for construction management with almost no details on how this is to be achieved; and this is similarly true for creation of a community health center.16

Salkin, supra note 2.

Ibid.

9 “Organizations that are Opposed to or Deeply Concerned About the Proposed Forest City Ratner Nets Arena, 16 Highrise Tower Proposal for Brooklyn,” available at http://dddb.net/php/opposition.php (last visited November 12, 2015).

10 Community Benefits Agreements, “Atlantic Yards CBA,” available at http://communitybenefits.blogspot.com/2008/01/atlantic-yards-cba.html (last visited November 12, 2015).

11 Ibid.

12 Been, supra note 3.

13 Salkin, supra note 2.

14 Been, supra note 3.

15 Atlantic Yards CBA, available at https://www.scribd.com/doc/31432536/atlantic-yards-community-benefits-agreement-cba (last visited November 16, 2015).

16 Ibid.

8

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

12

Accountability

No Enforcement Mechanism for Terms 00

The agreement requires the developer to fund the appointment of an “independent compliance monitor” to oversee the implementation of the agreement and investigate any complaints about its implementation.17 As of 2015, the developer had not fulfilled this obligation, making evaluation of the CBA’s progress difficult and limiting the public’s access to information about the project’s impact on the local community.18

Unclear Whether Community Benefits Delivered Upon 00

Media reports on the progress of the development reveal that amidst various construction delays due to litigation and the economic downturn, the developer’s compliance with the affordable housing requirements has fallen desperately short and there are questions as to whether the “affordable” units built are actually affordable.19 Moreover, only 26 percent of the construction jobs promised in the CBA by a certain period were fulfilled, with ambiguous and sparse data provided by the developer on the number of local/womenowned firms who have received contracts or the number of jobs provided to Brooklyn residents.20

Yankee Stadium 00 No community signatories.

00 Community opposition to project and no community involvement in CBA process.

00 Vague goals not responsive to community needs.

00 Unclear whether agreement is valid, enforceable contract.

In 2006, New York City approved construction of a controversial new stadium for the New York Yankees.21 Local parks advocates concerned that construction would require paving large sections of local parks and razing hundreds of oak trees, residents concerned about increased traffic and noise, and community organizations concerned about the public subsidies that would be used for the proposed stadium, opposed the project.22 In the weeks preceding project approval, in an effort to quell the opposition, several elected officials in New York signed a CBA with the Yankees, setting forth commitments exclusively by the Yankees with regard to construction and operation of a new stadium.23 The agreement committed the Yankees to contribute $800,000 per year for 40 years to Bronx nonprofits and community organizations, $100,000 in equipment to Bronx nonprofits and schools, and 15,000 tickets to Yankee baseball home games to Bronx nonprofits and residents, to be distributed by a Fund Advisory Panel.24 Unfortunately, there were clear issues of representativeness and transparency and serious questions of enforceability and accountability.

17

Ibid.

Newsday, “Nassau must be wary about plans for Coliseum,” available at http://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/nassau-must-be-wary-about-plans-for-coliseum-1.10458208 (last visited November 16, 2015).

19 Citylimits.org, “The Unfulfilled Promises of Atlantic Yards,” available at http://citylimits.org/2011/10/24/the-unfulfilled-promises-of-atlantic-yards/ (last visited November 16, 2015).

20 Ibid.

21 Julian Gross, Community Benefits Agreements, Definitions, Values, and Legal Enforceability, April 2008, available at http://juliangross.net/docs/CBA_Definitions_Values_ Enforceability.pdf (last visited November 16, 2015).

22 Been, supra note 3.

23 Ibid.

24 Yankee Stadium CBA, available at http://goodjobsny.org/sites/default/files/docs/yankees_deal.pdf (last visited November 16, 2015).

18

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

13

Representativeness

No Community Signatories 00

The agreement was made between the Yankees, the Bronx Borough President, and the Bronx Delegation of the New York City Council; it was not negotiated or signed by any community groups.25

Transparency, Inclusivity No Community Involvement in CBA Process and

Community Opposition to Overall Project 00

Community Benefits

The City Council and Bronx political officials moved the agreement forward and authorized construction of the stadium despite continued opposition from the community.26

Vague, Broad, Aspirational Goals with Few Details on Execution 00

The agreement requires the Yankees to provide the general contractor of the project with “sufficient resources” for technical assistance to local and minority or women-owned businesses, but does not clearly define “sufficient resources.”27

Conflicts of Interest 00

Accountability

One of the agreement’s most controversial provisions is the Fund Advisory Panel to be administered by “an individual of prominence” and provide distributions to local nonprofit groups.28 Because the fund’s trustee would be appointed by the same elected officials responsible for the agreement, it has been referred to as a “slush fund” by critics who feared that funding would not be distributed impartially.29

Lack of Consideration 00

Because the agreement’s obligations run only to the Yankees and no other party, there is a question about whether the agreement is supported by adequate consideration, a basic requirement of contract law.30

Unclear Whether Community Benefits Delivered Upon 00

25

Under the agreement, the fund was to be established the same day that construction started, Aug. 17, 2006, and monies from it distributed annually through 2046.31 The funds distribution and meeting of the group responsible for administering them were delayed for years.32 The panel has been plagued by accusations of mismanagement of funds and providing monetary support to organizations that lacked credibility in the local community.33

Salkin, supra note 2.

Been, supra note 3.

27 Yankee Stadium CBA, supra note 24.

28 Ibid.

29 Observer, “The Yankees’ $700,000 Play: ‘It Is Not A Shakedown,’” April 10, 2006, available at http://observer.com/2006/04/the-yankees-700000-play-it-is-not-a-shakedown/ (last visited November 16, 2015).

30 Gross, supra note 21.

31 New York Times, “Stadium Goes Up, but Bronx Still Seeks Benefits,” January 7, 2008, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/nyregion/07stadium.html?_r=0 (last visited November 16, 2015).

32 Ibid.; The New York Yankee Stadium Community Benefits Fund, available at http://bronxyankeefund.org/ (last visited November 16, 2015).

33 Field of Schemes, “Yankees Community Benefits List Include Dodgy Groups,” September 26, 2011, available at http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2011/09/26/3169/yankeescommunity-benefits-list-includes-dodgy-groups/ (last visited November 16, 2015).

26

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

14

Miami Worldcenter 00 No community signatories.

00 Community excluded from negotiations.

00 Narrow terms, not responsive and unlikely to meet community needs.

00 MOU terminates within five years and may be terminated at any time by any party.

In 2015, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed to accompany the Miami Worldcenter, one of the largest private master-planned development projects in the United States, including retail, hospitality, and residential space in a ten-block radius in downtown Miami.34 The development was approved in December 2014 by the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment Agency, which provided potentially more than $100 million in tax incentives to the developers of the project.35 Overtown, once known as “Colored Town,” is the second oldest neighborhood in Miami, built by African American laborers who helped build the Florida East Coast Railway when blacks were not allowed to live in the same neighborhoods as whites. According to one account;

‘‘

Overtown has faced continual declines since desegregation, as drugs, crime, and extreme poverty took hold. In the past 50 years, the historic neighborhood has seen its population dwindle from about 40,000 at its peak, to fewer than 7,000. Many of the poor and working class who have suffered from years of disinvestment see the Worldcenter deal as just another

’’

way to displace even more residents who have called the community home for generations.36 The Mayor, developer, and South Florida Workforce Investment Board signed the MOU to accompany the development project, which provides for job training services targeted to

residents in Overtown, as well as recitals of federal non-discrimination laws.37 The community remains concerned that local elected officials signed off on a deal that would force residents out and destroy Miami’s African American community.38 The MOU has been criticized as being unrepresentative and lacking the substance of a truly comprehensive CBA.

34

Miami Worldcenter Website, available at http://miamiworldcenter.com/ (last visited November 16, 2015).

The New Tropic, “Overtown’s past meets Overtown’s future,” available at https://thenewtropic.com/overtown-past-future/ (last visited November 16, 2015).

36 Ibid.

37 Memorandum of Understanding Among the South Florida Workforce Investment Board, The Office of the Mayor of Miami-Dade County and Miami Worldcenter Associates, LLC (July 14, 2015).

38 7 News, “Overtown residents protest over Miami Worldcenter development,” available at http://www.wsvn.com/story/29515226/overtown-residents-protest-over-miamiworldcenter-development (last visited November 16, 2015).

35

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

15

Representativeness

No Community Signatories 00

Only government entities were signatory; no community organizations.39

Transparency, Inclusivity Community Excluded From Negotiations 00

00

Community Benefits

The negotiations process was closed and did not involve community organizations.40 The elected officials involved in the negotiations allegedly refused to meet with community representatives, faith leaders, or labor organizers.41

Does Not Address Real Community Needs 00

Though there were provisions to train Overtown residents for project jobs and to eliminate questions regarding criminal history from initial employment applications, the MOU did not include many benefits sought by the local community, and local advocates argued that the agreement’s terms are unlikely to lead to gainful employment for Overtown residents.42

Vague Terms Unlikely to Benefit Impacted Residents 00

Accountability

In its job-related provisions, the MOU did not clearly define the geography for targeted hiring of individuals for construction jobs in a way that would ensure that the residents most affected by the project would actually benefit from the jobs.43

No Penalties 00

The MOU contains aspirational, general provisions with no clear means of enforcing them and no penalties to hold the parties accountable.44

Limited Term 00

The MOU terminates in five years with no avenue to extend or renegotiate terms.45

Termination Without Cause or Opt Out 00

39

The MOU may be terminated without cause by any party by providing 30 days written notice.46

Miami Worldcenter MOU, supra note 37. The South Florida Workforce Investment Board is a quasi-governmental agency with a service-specific function Miami Herald, “FIU Study: Worldcenter subsidy deal falls short,” available at http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article20038665.html (last visited November 16, 2015).

41 The Real Deal, South Florida Real Estate News, “Community activists push for better wages at Miami Worldcenter site,” available at http://therealdeal.com/miami/blog/2015/01/30/ community-activists-push-for-better-wages-at-miami-worldcenter-site/#sthash.uUdf6WGL.dpuf (last visited November 16, 2015).

42 The New Tropic, supra note 35.

43 Miami Worldcenter MOU, supra note 37; Alayne Unterberger, Who Benefits? An analysis of the Miami Worldcenter “Economic Incentive Agreement,” available at https://risep.fiu. edu/research-publications/equitable-urban-development/community-benefits-from-development/who-benefits-report-final50415.pdf (last visited November 16, 2015).

44 Miami Worldcenter MOU, supra note 37.

45 Ibid.

46 Ibid.

40

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

16

In each of the case studies, the processes and resulting agreements did not encompass the four principles of effective CBAs: 1. Community Interests are Well-Represented 2. CBA Process is Transparent, Inclusive, and Accessible 3. Concrete, Meaningful Benefits Deliver What Community Needs 4. Clearly Defined Enforcement Mechanisms Ensure Developer Accountability The benefits to the local community were limited, and these projects largely did not accurately and fully represent the interests of local residents, lacked strong terms to hold developers and elected officials accountable, and served to disempower, rather than empower, the community most impacted by the development projects.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

17

Chart: Pitfalls versus Best Practices for CBAs

T

he following chart serves as a guide for both the pitfalls and best practices in the CBA process.

It highlights shortcomings from the case studies and other purported CBAs. It contrasts these with

elements from effective CBAs, providing real life examples of strong agreements, representative of the local community, where there were transparent negotiations processes that resulted in substantive terms responsive to communities’ needs and formal mechanisms to hold the relevant parties accountable.

ELEMENTS OF BAD CBAS

ELEMENTS OF GOOD CBAS

Representativeness No community signatories Yankee Stadium: Only elected officials signatory.47

Parties selected by developer or politicians Atlantic Yards: Signatories selected by developer before negotiations began.48

Divided community Atlantic Yards: Eight organization signatories; over 50 organizations signed petition opposing project.49

No CBA negotiating experience Gateway Center at Bronx Terminal Market (“Gateway Center”):50 No signatory had CBA negotiating experience; no independent legal counsel to advise them through process.51

Community signatories independent, diverse, align with networks with CBA expertise Hill District: Coalition, led by two local community organizations, represented faith organizations, residents, labor unions, and local businesses, for a total of 100 organizations; worked with the Partnership for Working Families to develop CBA language.52

Well organized coalition, strong capacity among community signatories to secure appropriate bargain Oakland Army Base: Coalition led by 12-organization committee representing over 30 organizations in extensive CBA negotiations process; coalition engaged member organizations’ strengths, through organizing, media outreach, research and policy development, legal support, leadership development, rallying interfaith congregations, and contacting voters to gauge support for key provisions.53

Community signatories independent, diverse, represent those most threatened by project impacts Kingsbridge Armory: Coalition included 25 signatures of church leaders, business owners, labor 47

Salkin, supra note 2.

Ibid.

49 Been, supra note 3.

50 In 2006, the New York City Council approved a large, subsidized development called the Gateway Center, at the site of the Bronx Terminal Market. The community benefits agreement that accompanied the development was signed by the developer, a local community college, the local chapter of the chamber of commerce, and a nonprofit housing developer, and has been called “sweetheart deal” between Bronx politicians and the developer.

51 Neighborhood Retail Alliance, “CBA: Carrion’s Benefit Agreement,” February 6, 2006, available at http:// momandpopnyc.blogspot.com/2006/02/cba-carrionsbenefit-agreement.html.

48

52

Hill District CBA, available at http://www. forworkingfamilies.org/page/policy-tools-communitybenefits-agreements-and-policies-effect (last visited January 7, 2016).

53 Oakland Army Base CBA, available at http://www. forworkingfamilies.org/page/policy-tools-communitybenefits-agreements-and-policies-effect (last visited January 7, 2016).

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

18

ELEMENTS OF BAD CBAS

ELEMENTS OF GOOD CBAS

Transparency, Inclusivity Negotiations marked by secrecy Atlantic Yards: Secretive negotiations contributed to fragmentation of community responses.55

Negotiations exclusive Gateway Center: Taskforce never negotiated directly with developer; final negotiations occurred between elected officials and developer; resulted in watered down version of CBA.56

Conflicts of interest Atlantic Yards: One community signatory received funding from developer.57

Negotiations timeframe rushed Gateway Center: Taskforce members given one month to prepare draft CBA; copies of CBA distributed the morning of city council vote to approve development plans; few read CBA.58

Community has opportunities to provide input throughout process; effective mechanisms to ensure transparency within coalition Hill District: Coalition organized community members and testified at public hearings; established steering committee with representatives appointed by city officials and coalition to oversee implementation of agreement with clearly defined extensive community participation.59

Negotiations process transparent and inclusive Oakland Army Base: Extensive negotiations between city staff, city councilmembers, broad range of community stakeholders, and included as terms of the Lease Disposition and Development Agreement between city and project developers and made binding on project contractors and tenants; city and community groups also entered into cooperation agreement under which the groups agreed to support project in exchange for assurances about delivery of community benefits.60

Multi-year stakeholder engagement process Oakland Army Base: Coalition led a multi-year negotiations process that began with a city stakeholder engagement process.61

55

59

56

60

Salkin, supra note 2.

Ibid.

57 Been, supra note 3.

58 Neighborhood Retail Alliance, supra note 54.

Hill District CBA, supra note 48.

Oakland Army Base CBA, supra note 50.

61 Oakland Army Base CBA, supra note 50.

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

19

ELEMENTS OF BAD CBAS

ELEMENTS OF GOOD CBAS

Community Benefits Vague, aspirational terms with few details on execution

Issues addressed through detailed, concrete, measurable terms

Cleveland MOU:62 Parties required to use “good-faith efforts” to raise funds for demand driven workforce study; results on which most provisions are based; funding based on parties vaguely “mobilizing funding for these items” with no requirements of developer.63

Hill District: Clearly defined local hire and living wage requirements for jobs at the arena and hotel; city, county, and developers committed exact dollar amounts to specific projects within CBA, including $1,000,000 towards securing a grocery store within the Hill District by a certain date, and $150,000 per year for at least two years to start model first source referral center to provide and coordinate job preparation, training, and supportive services.67

Does not address real community needs and unlikely to benefit impacted residents Miami Worldcenter: As a result of there being only one quasi-governmental signatory, CBA scope limited to job training with minimal specifics on meaningful employment opportunities for impacted residents, e.g., job-related provisions do not define geography for targeted hiring; does not ensure residents most affected by project would benefit from jobs.64

Commitments voluntary Gateway Center: Voluntary retention of local minority- or woman-owned contractors, payment of living wages, and requires developer to “work with” coalition to develop programs to benefit the community.65

Conflicts of interest

Addresses real community needs, agreed upon by coalition consensus that affect most vulnerable members of impacted community Oakland Army: Based on coalition priorities, CBA established Four Jobs Policies, which included clearly defined deliverables, benchmarks, responsibilities for hiring locally (including maps, streets, and zip codes for priority hiring areas), project labor agreements, long-term construction career opportunities, living wage standards, establishment of a jobs resource center in West Oakland, and requirements for employers to not ask about criminal background on job applications.68

Yankee Stadium: Fund Advisory Panel to be administered by “an individual of prominence,” appointed by same elected officials responsible for agreement; does not guard against funding being distributed impartially.66

Specific, measurable commitments with dollar amounts attached

62

67

In 2013, the Cleveland Memorandum of Understanding was signed by the City of Cleveland and a group of organizations.

63 Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Community Benefits and Inclusion (Cleveland) (February 26, 2013).

64 Miami Worldcenter MOU, supra note 37.

65 Gross, supra note 21.

66 Observer, “The Yankees’ $700,000 Play: ‘It Is Not A Shakedown,’” April 10, 2006, available at http://observer. com/2006/04/the-yankees-700000-play-it-is-not-ashakedown/ (last visited November 16, 2015).

Kingsbridge Armory: Developer required to contribute $8M dollars initially for specific purposes, including establishing an annual $10,000 renewable energy scholarship fund for residents of Northwest Bronx to be trained to operate developer’s geothermal and/or solar power systems; establishes a “wall to wall” living wage payment requirement, covering all workers within the project.69

Hill District CBA, supra note 48.

Oakland Army Base CBA, supra note 50.

69 Kingsbridge Armory CBA, supra note 32.

68

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

20

ELEMENTS OF BAD CBAS

ELEMENTS OF GOOD CBAS

Accountability Limited remedies; injunctive relief unavailable

Monetary damages and injunctive relief explicitly available

Gateway Center: Coalition’s only remedy to obtain liquidated damages from developer, with amount capped at $600,000 for all violations over the life of project.70

Kingsbridge Armory: Individuals not paid a living wage have cause of action against the developer and employer to enforce terms; and entitled to interest and attorneys’ fees if successful; clearly defined process with deliverables and deadlines for employers that provide Community Advisory Council to seek various remedies, including monetary damages or injunctive relief in court.77

Overly burdensome enforcement and arbitration process Gateway Center: The parties must wait to seek remedies (arbitration or judicial) until the expiration of an onerously long period provided to the developer, who has “as long as necessary to resolve and cure the alleged failure.”71

Not enforceable against third parties Gateway Center: Local hiring and living wage provisions not enforceable against project’s contractors or retail tenants, who make up majority of those responsible for provisions.72

Lack of consideration Yankee Stadium: Enforceable only against Yankees; questionable whether there is a valid contract because of lack of consideration.73

Limited term Miami Worldcenter: Terminates in five years with no avenue to extend or renegotiate.74

Termination without cause or opt out Miami Worldcenter: May be terminated without cause by any party with 30 days written notice. 75

Concrete, specific, clearly defined oversight process Kingsbridge Armory: Created formal structures for community-based oversight and enforcement of each CBA provision that include clear penalties and broad remedies, e.g., clearly defined reporting processes and recordkeeping requirements for each employer involved in development to provide to a “Community Advisory Council,” established to monitor implementation of CBA.78

Enforceable against third parties and successors of each party Hill District: Binds the agents, assigns, and successors of each party to the agreement, so that if there is a new developer, the agreement would still be binding upon them. 79 Oakland Army Base: Jobs policy agreements were included as terms of the Lease Disposition and Development Agreement between city and developers and made binding on project contractors and tenants, as well as successors and assigns.80

Lack of integrity in provision of benefits Atlantic Yards: Requirement for developer to fund “independent compliance monitor” to oversee and investigate complaints is still unfulfilled ten years after agreement executed.76 77

Kingsbridge Armory CBA, supra note 32.

Kingsbridge Armory CBA, supra note 32.

79 Hill District CBA, supra note 48.

80 Oakland Army Base CBA, supra note 50.

78

70

Gross, supra note 21.

Gross, supra note 21.

72 Gross, supra note 21.

73 Gross, supra note 21.

74 Miami Worldcenter MOU, supra note 37.

75 Ibid.

76 Newsday, supra note 18.

71

CO M M O N C H A L L E N G E S I N N E G O T I AT I N G CO M M U N I T Y B E N E F I T S A G R E E M E N T S

21

Conclusion

I

f an agreement is not representative or a broad and inclusive coalition comprised of those most vulnerable to impacts of the development, if the negotiations process is not transparent, if the

substance of the agreement is narrow, vague, and does not address a comprehensive range of issues, and its provisions are difficult to enforce, then the agreement likely will not truly benefit the local community. Equitable economic development advocates must beware of the likelihood in such circumstances of community co-option by powerful developers and politicians in order to push through large scale, publicly subsidized projects. Those pursuing community benefits agreements can avoid this scenario by adhering to principles of representativeness, transparency, concrete and meaningful community benefits, and accountability.

ForWorkingFamilies.org PARTNERSHIP for

Working Families

Facebook.com/PartnershipforWorkingFamilies @P4WF

PARTNERSHIP for

Working Families

The Partnership disseminates a successful organizing model, shares a field of expert practitioners, and provides handson research and technical assistance to a growing and energized base of 17 affiliates, augmented by more than a dozen emerging organizations and coalitions. We are cultivating a new generation of leaders that connects strategic worker and community organizing with cutting edge public policy. These coalitions harness the power of cities while building an energized power base in key metropolitan areas nationwide.

ForWorkingFamilies.org/clbc PARTNERSHIP for

Working Families

The Community Benefits Law Center, a project of the Partnership for Working Families, provides legal assistance to community-based efforts to transform local economies. We work with organizations and entities of government, helping them navigate the complex array of legal and policy issues on the path to meaningful results. Our attorneys are recognized national experts in the areas of community benefits agreements, community workforce agreements and other measures that make economic development more accountable to community needs. Š2016 Partnership for Working Families

Fighting for Equity in Development The Story of Detroitâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Community Benefits Ordinance

The mission of the Equitable Detroit Coalition is to foster beneficial relationships between developers and the Detroit community by facilitating open and honest dialogue and to assist developers funded by public dollars to become corporate neighbors who are transparent in their relationship with the community. We believe that public investment entitles residents to be stakeholders.

The Detroit Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Platform (DPP) is a broad network of Detroit-based social justice organizations, activists, and residents committed to bringing about just transformation in economics and social dynamics through popular education, celebration, and organizing. We use data, analysis, advocacy, media and organizing to protect and increase participation in the democratic process and to demand that state and local decision makers consider racial equity and economic justice in their planning, funding, and policymaking decisions.

Acknowledgments This report was written by Daniel Kravetz, in consultation with the Detroit Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Platform and Equitable Detroit Coalition.

The Equitable Detroit Coalition (EDC) is grateful for the contributions of individual members including Angy Webb, Rashida Tlaib, Sister Gloria Rivera, Reverend Joan Ross, and Bill Hickey, who agreed to be interviewed for this report and who continue to dedicate their time and efforts, along with other members of the coalition, in support of equitable development in Detroit. In addition, the EDC thanks the Sugar Law Center, Damon Keith Center for Civil Rights, the Economic Justice Alliance of Michigan, and the many neighborhood allies who continue to work tirelessly in the fight for racial and economic justice in Detroit.

The Detroit Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Platform serves as the institutional anchor for the Equitable Detroit Coalition.

Photo Credits: Gregg Newsom

Contents 01

INTRODUCTION

03

THE PROMISE OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS AGREEMENTS

05

BRINGING THE CBA TO DETROIT

08

THE FIGHT FOR A COMMUNITY BENEFITS ORDINANCE

12

TEN LESSONS FROM DETROIT’S FIGHT FOR A CBO

› › › › › › › › › ›

Lesson 1: Prioritize Outreach and Education Lesson 2: Build on Neighborhood Organizations Lesson 3: Capitalize on Pivotal Moments Lesson 4: Nurture the Coalition Lesson 5: Control the Narrative Lesson 6: Redefine “Normal” Lesson 7: Cull Legal Support Lesson 8: Build Political Support and Accountability Lesson 9: Find New Ways to Raise Money Lesson 10: Be Holistic

17

CONCLUSION

19

ENDNOTES

Introduction In January 2014, a group of Detroit community leaders convened to discuss a vision for a new policy that no city had ever successfully pursued: a community benefits ordinance (CBO). The policy would require every developer or project in Detroit that received above a certain threshold of city tax breaks or public funds to sign a community benefits agreement (CBA): a legally binding agreement with an impacted community to define a set of needs and standards the developer would meet to earn local support.

In recent decades, city leaders have spent or conceded more and more public resources for ambitious projects to fulfill their economic agendas. In response, community groups across the nation have turned to CBAs to prevent such projects from benefiting new high-income residents at the expense of services and amenities for high-poverty communities that remain, often just blocks away. This sense of inequity is especially acute in Detroit, the city with the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s highest unemployment rate,1 highest poverty rate,2 and one its highest rates of inequality: in 2012, the 95th percentile of its earners ($101,620) made over 11 times more than the 20th percentile ($9,083).3 Yet as most of Detroit continues to face dire poverty and disinvestment, its downtown has begun a resurgence. In 2016, Detroitâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greater downtown was home to 110 development deals, with projects growing in scale.4 Many received public funds.

33% One in three Detroiters are members of households that make $20,070 or less each year.

1

Each of the leaders who met on that January day—the majority of whom were local women of color—had fought battles for CBAs or other agreements on a range of projects in Detroit, from supermarkets to streetcar lines. And most had faced the same roadblock: other than their voices, they had no leverage. They saw that a citywide CBO would not only provide this leverage, but would fundamentally alter expectations on how development is done in Detroit by normalizing a community-driven approach.

Their meeting marked the launch of the Equitable Detroit Coalition, which over the next three years advanced a CBO campaign from a stalled City Council bill to a ballot initiative in Detroit’s 2016 elections, propelling it into a bitter public battle. Ultimately, Equitable Detroit’s CBO—“Proposal A”—lost narrowly to a far less powerful alternative introduced by Detroit’s City Council—“Proposal B.” Nonetheless, Equitable Detroit members already regard their campaign as a success for several reasons. First, Proposal A garnered almost 100,000 votes, a major portion of Detroit’s population. Second, while Proposal B was not the CBO they wanted, their efforts still directly led to the passage of the nation’s first citywide community benefits legislation, a stepping stone to greater inclusion of community voices in development decisions. Third, the attention they generated—even in the form of backlash— increased awareness and dialogue around the concept of community benefits by leaps and bounds.

Most importantly, by relying on tireless grassroots organizing and community outreach, Equitable Detroit planted seeds for a broader movement for equitable development—one that they hope will extend beyond one policy and one city. “If we are as successful as we want to be,” says Angy Webb, an Equitable Detroit member and leader of Joy Community Association, “we will be a model for everyone.”

This report documents the national model on which Equitable Detroit is building, the inequalities that it aims to address, and the way in which the CBO can further propel the community benefits model. It details Equitable Detroit’s campaign and strategies to date and offers some lessons that its members have learned or reinforced in the process, which they will use to move forward and which community leaders in other cities may find useful in pursuing their own CBO campaigns.

2

“If we are as successful as we want to be, we will be a model for everyone.” ~ angy webb

The Promise of Community Benefits Agreements In a 2005 report, Julian Gross defines CBAs as “deals between developers and coalitions of community organizations, addressing a broad range of community needs.”

He continues: “[CBAs] allow community groups to have a voice in shaping a project, to press for community benefits that are tailored to their particular needs, and to enforce developer’s promises.” The underlying premise of community benefits, Gross explains, is that “the main purpose of economic development is to bring measurable, permanent improvements to the lives of affected residents, particularly those in low-income neighborhoods.”5 CBAs can include a range of benefits to fulfill this vision, but many focus on similar basic needs of low-income communities: local living-wage jobs; decent affordable housing; accessible public amenities; environmental safeguards. Many of these traits can be found in the CBAs that community coalitions have negotiated in at least 15 cities across the country over the last twenty years. For example: • In 2001, the Figueroa Corridor Coalition for Economic Justice negotiated the most prominent early CBA with the developers of the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District, which is adjacent to its Staples Center arena and received over $150 million in public subsidies. The CBA included a commitment that 70% of created jobs would pay a living wage; a first-source hiring program targeting low-income workers; increased affordable housing requirements and funding; and a $1 million commitment towards a community park.

• In 2008, Pittsburgh’s One Hill CBA Coalition signed a CBA with the City of Pittsburgh and the Pittsburgh Penguins to ensure that their new hockey arena and its surrounding development—which received over $47 million in public funding—would provide living wages for all permanent jobs; prohibition of development interference with union representations; a $2 million donation towards a full-service grocery store; and over $6 million in funding to meet needs of the surrounding community, including a multi-purpose youth center and health services.

• In 2016, Baltimoreans United in Leadership Development (BUILD) signed a CBA with Sagamore Development for the $5.5 billion Port Covington development, which received $660 million in tax-increment financing from the City of Baltimore. The CBA included the provision of $25 million towards a Workforce Development Training Center; $10 million towards small business loans and investments; a commitment to hire 12% of workers from local apprenticeship programs and a target to hire 30% from within the City of Baltimore; an enforceable living wage; and almost $15 million towards scholarships, recreation centers, after-school programs, and a farmer’s market.

3

These and other CBAs represent the result of months of negotiations, and no community group has received every community benefit that they believed to be justified. CBAs are also difficult to enforce and monitor over a long period of time, and developers can manipulate them by signing them with weak or compromised community groups, as was the case with the Atlantic Yards CBA in Brooklyn in 2009.6 Meanwhile, most developers continue to forcefully resist CBAs as unnecessary hurdles or threats to their projects, often using â&#x20AC;&#x153;divide-and-conquerâ&#x20AC;? techniques among community groups and persuading city leaders to reject a CBA out of fear that it will drive away economic development.

Still, CBAs have by-and-large had a positive impact. They have leveled the balance of power between developer and community; have resulted in substantial and tangible benefits for people facing poverty; have inched their public and private sectors toward a systemic elevation of equitable development; and have spawned strong community alliances. Finally, every development that has signed a CBA has come to fruition and become profitable, offering proof that strong CBAs are not antithetical to economic growth. These assets are why, despite their pitfalls, so many community groups see CBAs as such a promising tool in their toolbox for equitable development.

4

Bringing the CBA to Detroit Community leaders in Detroit first met to explore CBAs in 2010. Their conversation coincided with the growing national momentum around community benefits, but was chiefly driven by local changes. Most immediately, the city had proposed a new light rail line that would traverse the deeply under-served North End neighborhood on Woodward Avenue, and transit-dependent residents who had organized at the Storehouse of Hope Food Pantry sought to ensure that they and their neighbors would benefit equally from the service and related development. However, they knew they were not the only neighborhood in Detroit where community benefits were of imminent concern.

• In Southwest Detroit, Marathon Oil was employing a $175 million City of Detroit tax break to expand a refinery, and Sugar Law Center was working to address local concerns around environmental impacts and the physical displacement of homes and businesses.

• In Midtown, the City of Detroit was providing Henry Ford Health Systems with tax credits for a $28 million medical distribution center as the catalyst for future expansion, and residents were concerned how the development would reshape their part of town.

• In Delray, initial plans were being made for the Gordie Howe International Bridge, a massive publicly funded project that would require the relocation of neighborhood residents.

5

“All of these projects were happening at the same time,” says Rashida Tlaib, a former Michigan State Representative and an attorney at Sugar Law Center, “and there was an awakening that most of them were being done with public investment.”

The attendees were united by the belief that if tax dollars of Detroit residents were used to support a project, they should have a say in what benefits it offers them.

In the ensuing years, the community leaders began to work to put CBAs into practice. One opportunity emerged when Whole Foods Market made plans to build a store in the growing Midtown neighborhood using city tax benefits. With assistance from Building Movement Project, Midtown residents and supporters formed a community advisory group, engaged in internal discussions on their community benefits priorities, and arranged biweekly meetings with Whole Foods’ leadership to discuss their objectives and what support they would offer in return.

After 18 months of discussions and negotiations, Whole Foods committed to 50% local hiring at above-minimum wage salaries (they eventually hired 70% of their workers from local communities), to working with local small businesses and produce vendors, and to assuring that local artists had the opportunity to complete a mural on the building. However, although the effort produced positive outcomes, community members still had no means to compel Whole Foods to sign an enforceable CBA and to assure that it would fulfill its promises, because the company had already received its tax abatement.

Meanwhile, Detroit’s decades-long economic crisis reached a breaking point in July 2013, when the city filed for bankruptcy with over $18 billion in debt—the largest ever bankruptcy filing of a U.S. city—a result of declining revenues, cuts to state revenue sharing, and the expenditure of public subsidies for major projects. In response, Michigan’s governor appointed an emergency manager, who took control of Detroit’s governance for the next 18 months, a process that Detroit voters opposed. “It was devastating, and there was absolutely no democracy,” says Sister Gloria Rivera, a member of the Great Lakes Bioneers and of Equitable Detroit. “But the flip side was that it really mobilized people.”

While Detroit was reconciling its debt, other major publicly-funded projects had continued to move forward with minimal community input, including the International Bridge and a new hockey arena that received $250 million in local subsidies. The proposed Woodward Avenue Light Rail had been replaced by the M1 Trolley, which was scaled back to a new route that would serve more prosperous neighborhoods but no longer extend service to the more impoverished North End. And Marathon Oil was failing to meet its commitment to hiring Detroiters, as only 30 of 514 of its employees resided in Detroit as of 2014.7

6

Coalition members found a growing indignation among residents as Detroit dedicated public funds to large, concentrated economic developments while they continued to face a shortage of resources for their abandoned homes, struggling schools, and shuttered local health and recreation centers. “You can live and see two Detroits that are being created, one at the expense of the other,” says Reverend Joan Ross, a leader of the North End Woodward Community Coalition and an Equitable Detroit co-founder.

“Over 20 schools are being closed in Detroit,” adds Ms. Tlaib, “and so much lowincome housing is being converted to large-scale housing developments, and a lot of our Detroiters, especially our seniors, are being pushed out of the downtown area.”

Amidst the turmoil, Rev. Ross gathered a group of local activists to propose to Detroit’s leadership that, if the city was to continue spending on development, the people they represented should be able to secure benefits. In doing so, they learned that, in 1984, the Detroit had actually passed a resolution that communities should be involved in local developments. “Why can’t we broaden this?” Rev. Ross asked. “Why can’t we expound on this with the years of experience we have around the country?”

7

The Fight for a Community Benefits Ordinance Shortly after their meeting, the City Council passed a motion to create a Community Benefits Ordinance, and Rev. Ross called the citywide gathering that would create the Equitable Detroit Coalition and launch the grassroots campaign to support CBO legislation. Several leaders who had negotiated for community benefits with Whole Foods used their experience to compose an Equitable Development Toolkit, which they shared with fellow attendees as a tool for educating residents about CBAs and their potential role in economic development.

Over the course of 2014, Equitable Detroit worked among its members, with a work group convened by city council members, and with Sugar Law Center to build consensus on draft language for a CBO, which would mandate that developments receiving over a certain threshold of public funds negotiate a CBA with the surrounding community. In preparation for an eventual CBO, the coalition built its collective capacity to organize and negotiate for community benefits, engaging an instructor to lead negotiation trainings so that communities could act as soon as legislation was passed.

During the process, Equitable Detroit routinely engaged community groups around the city: together, they attended dozens of neighborhood meetings and knocked on thousands of doors. Their organizing work inspired new campaigns for local CBAs. For example, Brightmoor resident and Equitable Detroit member Bill Hickey helped form the Northwest Neighborhood Community Benefits Consortium, which sought a CBA with Meijer Corporation around local living wage jobs and historic preservation for a new local supermarket, and Angy Webb of Joy Community Association helped form a local coalition to seek community benefits from a DTE Energy project to build solar panels at a closed recreation center.

“The larger coalition supported the smaller local efforts,” says Mr. Hickey, “and the smaller local efforts realized that the struggles we were having in our own neighborhoods dearly needed the support of a CBO.” In this process, Equitable Detroit gathered continual community input and participation in crafting the evolving CBO legislation. Importantly, the majority of coalition leaders and community leaders were women of color, a population that is typically underrepresented and disempowered in economic development decisions.

After a year of working on the CBO, the campaign hit its first major roadblocks. Just as Detroit was exiting its bankruptcy and emergency management, the CBO bill moved to the City Council’s Planning and Economic Committee. “They would put [the bill] on the agenda, and we would go downtown to give public comments,” says Rev. Ross.

“We would sit there for four or five hours, and they would just send it back to the legal department. We were silenced.” At the same time, the state legislature passed a law preventing local governments from mandating CBAs, forcing the coalition to revise its language to avoid conflicts with new state rules.

8

Coalition members suspected that some council members did not want to advance the bill because of their allegiances to members of Detroit’s business and economic development sphere. “It became obvious they were going to just stall and stall,” says Rev. Ross, “and they could keep doing that for as long as we would let them.” In March 2016, after months of internal deliberation, Equitable Detroit decided to forego the frozen legislative process in favor of a ballot initiative for the upcoming election.

The CBO ballot referendum they put forward to their communities would require each developer of a project over $15 million—and one that received over $300,000 in public resources (whether subsidies or land)—to directly negotiate a binding CBA with a host community. The CBAs could include requirements for local employment opportunities and living wages, job training, affordable housing, environmental mitigations, neighborhood amenities or infrastructure, and community oversight of post-development performance. Equitable Detroit used their community networks across the city to collect over 6,000 signatures, exceeding the requirements.

The response was swift. First, an unidentified legal source challenged the validity of the signatures, delaying the process, but a city clerk verified them again, and the CBO legislation was placed on the ballot as Proposal A. Then, two days later, a Detroit council member introduced a second CBO to the ballot as Proposal B. Proposal B elevated the minimum project size for a CBA to $75 million and the minimum public funding to $1 million, a threshold that would have included just one project since 2014.

9

Proposal B also placed negotiating power in the hands of a city appointee and not an independent coalition, which Equitable Detroit members argued would strip the agreements of true accountability. “The fact that they would choose who is going to represent the community was an issue,” says Ms. Webb. “What if the community doesn’t want that person to represent them?” Each voter was required to vote “yes” or “no” on each proposal, with the proposal with more votes becoming law. “The confusion was deliberate,” says Linda Campbell of Building Movement Project.

10

Over the next three months, campaigns for “Prop A” and “Prop B” became centerpieces in Detroit’s public arenas. “We were badly outspent,” says Mr. Hickey. “We had $15,000 to put in our campaign, and the other side had something like $1.5 million, so they did lots of television ads and mailers, and we did lots of canvassing and speaking to groups.” The Detroit Economic Growth Corporation came out with a strong statement against Proposal A as a barrier to future investment and growth in Detroit, as did local papers such as Detroit News and Detroit Free Press. “There was a humungous media campaign to demonize Prop A,” says Ms. Campbell. “They said that Prop A was a threat to jobs.”

In November 2016, Proposal B passed by a margin of 53 to 47 percent, while Proposal A fell short by a margin of 54 to 46 percent. Equitable Detroit members were not discouraged. “Almost 100,000 voted for [Proposal A],” says Sister Rivera. “That in itself is pretty amazing.” Ms. Campbell adds, “Those folks who voted for Prop B also voted for community benefits agreements, so they want something different in terms of how development is done in this city.” Ms. Tlaib notes the momentum that the coalition has gained. “Everybody is still talking about community benefits,” she says.

“We’re feeling very motivated.”

Rev. Ross, meanwhile, is ready to begin the fight anew. “Let’s go back to the ballot,” she says. “We don’t get discouraged, because nothing was passed on the first try. Civil rights didn’t go through the first time, they had to last longer and fight longer than that.”

11

“Civil rights didn’t go through the first time, they had to last longer and fight longer than that.” ~ rev. joan ross

Ten Lessons from Detroit’s Fight for a CBO As Detroit completes its first year under the new legislation, Equitable Detroit is adopting several strategies and priorities to further advance the movement they have begun. Members are working to ensure that the city enforces and monitors Proposal B’s implementation for several new or proposed projects and are organizing surrounding communities to prepare them to push for the benefits they want to see.

The coalition also continues to push for independent CBAs for smaller developments that are below Proposal B’s threshold, and it is debating whether to petition to have Proposal B amended at the end of 2017 or to attempt to put Proposal A on the ballot again. Meanwhile, they continue to engage, educate, and increase awareness of community benefits among local communities, expanding their base.

As the coalition works to build on their momentum, they continue to incorporate the lessons they have learned into their ongoing efforts. Many of their lessons are applicable to any coalition that seeks to pursue a CBO in their own city.

Prioritize Outreach and Education From day one, Equitable Detroit prioritized grassroots community outreach above all else. “There are hundreds and hundreds of community meetings in Detroit,” says Rev. Ross. “Before we even talked about the next campaign move, we needed to start to attend those meetings.” Says Ms. Campbell: “We focused on educating Detroiters and deepening their understanding of what was happening with economic development.”

This education and outreach was how the coalition gained the signatures they needed, how they won votes for Proposal A, and how they prepared residents to lead CBA negotiations in their neighborhoods if a CBO was passed. “There’s no one-size-fits-all,” says Rev. Ross. “We want whoever is in the footprint of the development to have a say in what goes on in their community.”

2

Build on Neighborhood Organizations

To reach community members across the city, Equitable Detroit involved and aligned Detroit’s existing neighborhood organizations. “The coalition consisted of folks that were already leaders in their own communities,” says Ms. Campbell. “They already had their networks. Our job was to build capacity of the leaders and to train and educate them, and they were responsible for educating their own communities.” For Mr. Hickey, the Equitable Development Toolkit was key to this process: “it gave a helpful template for how you might go about working on a community benefits ordinance.”

12

3

Capitalize on Pivotal Moments

In every city, residents in poverty face moments where their disadvantage is especially pronounced. In Detroit, bankruptcy was such an occasion, and in particular, the fact that it coincided with several major public expenditures for downtown projects. “The ground was fertile,” says Sister Rivera. “People were looking at their communities and thinking, how can we take care of ourselves, because the government isn’t going to? We were fertilizing them.” Ms. Campbell says that, in talking with communities during emergency management, a theme emerged: “They would say it’s not fair what’s happening to us. Detroiters had concluded that what was happening was not fair.”

The coalition channeled this sentiment into community involvement and momentum towards a CBO.

4

Nurture the Coalition

Before a CBO campaign was even an idea, Equitable Detroit members had a strong foundation. “You have to have a shared vision, and that vision has to be supported by shared values,” says Ms. Campbell. “We had a set of trusting relationships that we had cultivated over the years working on a variety of issues in communities. When the time arrived to bring people together around this big citywide thing, there was already a history many of us shared with each other. That is what kept people at the table.” This process must continue beyond any campaign, says Mr. Hickey, both among Equitable Detroit members and in the communities they support. “The ordinance provides a framework and a structure,” he says, “but the community still has to come together in a way in which all voices are heard.”

5

Control the Narrative

One-on-one organizing was Equitable Detroit’s primary tool, but as the issue of a CBO became more prominent, the coalition also had to broaden its message and fight competing public narratives. First, it had to combat the story that Proposal A would thwart economic growth in Detroit, and as opposition mounted from special interests and other opponents, it also had to control its own story. “We were being positioned as the anti-development people,” says Ms. Campbell, “as the radical folks who were completely out of touch and unreasonable to deal with.” To counter opposing campaigns, Equitable Detroit consistently reinforced a message that resources were being diverted from neighborhoods where the majority of Detroiters live, and that residents were being denied basic services like affordable housing, recreation, and jobs, all so that developers could profit from public investment. “We built on the narrative of a ‘Tale of Two Detroits,’” says Ms. Campbell. “It started to catch on as the development in Downtown and Midtown Detroit become more obvious, and as other Detroiters

13

were being left out.” Finally, says, Sister Rivera, they needed to shape the narrative on Detroiters and their abilities. “Detroit is 80% African American, so there is the question of, ‘oh, well Detroiters would not be able to be part of a community benefits agreement.’” Rev. Ross expounds on this point: “Developers have sold our communities this notion that we aren’t intelligent enough to sit down and negotiate with them.”

6

Redefine "Normal"

One upshot of the CBO campaign is that it provided an opportunity to foster a new cognitive normal among those accustomed to the current economic framework in U.S. cities. “In the culture of corporate greed and corporate money,” says Rev. Ross, “developers are galvanized to think, ‘anybody that wants to talk to me must want something from me. And if they want something from me I’m not going to make the profit that I make.’ If I sit there with no power, when will you ever change your perspective of me or give me the respect that I’m due?” Ms. Tlaib adds, “We believe we need to set a culture in Detroit, where if you take our money, and if we have to pay, we should have a say.” Equitable Detroit, says Sister Rivera, also had to overcome a culture of defeatism among some residents. “We internalize things after years and years…of poison that the dynamic of oppression has put on us,” she says. “The community has to get rid of all the myths about them that they have believed.”

14

7

Cull Legal Support

From a practical standpoint, Equitable Detroit needed a partner who knew law and could provide it pro bono. “We wouldn’t have gotten this far in the process without Sugar Law,” says Ms. Campbell. “They worked with us every step of the way in drafting the original ordinance. They did a lot of education and coaching with community members about CBAs. And they had a wealth of information on various CBA agreements across the country.” “Many of these developers have their own legal teams,” says Ms. Tlaib, “so it’s important for us to be there to push back on some of the farce claims on their part. Sometimes just being in the room makes the other parties more respectable.”

8

Build Political Support and Accountability

Equitable Detroit was not able to pass a CBO through the legislative process, but members saw the importance of building political allies and to first trying to pass legislation through political support. “My advice is to go through the legislative process,” says Ms. Tlaib. “You see if you have any allies on city council, and if you hit a wall like we did, go to the city charter and look at how you could get around the local legislative body to get it done.” Conversely, members now see a need to hold leaders accountable. Ms. Tlaib notes that Proposal A won in some districts in which council members opposed the measure, and Ms. Webb is working to ensure her own council member knows it: “I have let people know that our councilman, who some of us voted for, did not support this the way we thought he should have.”

9

Find New Ways to Raise Money

Equitable Detroit could never compete with the financial resources of their opposition, but they still needed funding to carry out their campaign. “If everybody in the city donated a dollar,” says Ms. Webb, “it would give us enough to push ahead and combat what is going against us—the wealth train. If you have a little money behind you, you can do a lot of things.” Rev. Ross has her own frustrations with the accessibility of funds: “All of the money we operate with is strictly foundation money or program money, and they write the rules. If they don’t want us to have it, they take it away from us. When we push pack on them, they shut the fountain down.” Equitable Detroit has realized that, for future efforts, it must find new ways to find sources of financial support.

15

10

Be Holistic

By incorporating a range of unmet community needs into CBAs and into the CBO, Equitable Detroit not only demonstrated how many services communities were foregoing due to subsidies and tax breaks, but it also allowed the coalition to attract more leaders and community members with their own areas of knowledge and expertise. “We had at the table people who were interested in jobs, people who were interested in housing, people who were primarily focused on the environment,” says Rev. Ross. “Jobs, housing, displacement, environment, and safety had to be considered.”

Ms. Tlaib notes that being holistic also counters the jobs-centered messages of proponents of subsidizing development. “Jobs don’t fix cancer,” she says. “When we talk about community benefits, we think they should wrap around other issues: environmental justice, housing, and so many other things.”

16

Conclusion More and more communities around the country are pursuing CBAs because more of them are aware of how tax dollars are being spent in their cities and how decades of publicly-funded economic development projects have swallowed their tax revenues without improving their lives. While CBAs have gained traction and earned concessions in some communities, they have done little to fundamentally alter who has the power in cities like Detroit. Even groups who have been successful in pursuing CBAs must return to the drawing board each time the next major development comes along, with no guarantee that the next developer or city council will be as amenable as the last one.

District Map of Detroit: Each blue dot represents one platform member.

17

A CBO would be a major step in solving that problem. It would normalize the idea that developers and projects that receive public subsidies must directly provide something in return to communities, and it would prove to doubters that equity and development can coexist. This is why Ms. Campbell says that the ultimate lesson after three years with Equitable Detroit is that a CBO itself is crucial to the future of any CBA movement, in Detroit or elsewhere. “Every community should know you need an ordinance,” she says. “You need legally binding agreements, and you need a framework that compels the developers to come to the table and negotiate with community.”

Yet, while the nation’s first truly effective CBO did not become law in Detroit in 2016, coalition members are above all else united in the message that a CBO is not their ultimate destination. Indeed, while the Equitable Detroit Coalition and the CBO is in one sense a culmination of decades of Detroit-based social justice movements and twenty years of CBA campaigns around the nation, in another sense it may be a first step. “We used the community benefits agreement as a movement-building strategy,” says Ms. Campbell. “At a time when a lot of our basic city services and commitments to the common good are being completely undermined, it could be that this is the beginning of a movement where folks will push back and challenge the whole concept of corporate subsidy and corporate welfare.”

Sister Rivera concurs. “An ordinance is not an end in itself,” she says. “It’s a tool.

And however we learn to become better at creating development that benefits the developer, the workers, and the people in the neighborhood where the development takes place…then we have arrived only to start all over again. We start enhancing it, we start improving it, and it becomes a practice. We’re never really done.”

18

“An ordinance is not an end in itself. It’s a tool...

We start enhancing it, we start improving it, and it becomes a practice. We’re never really done.” ~ sister gloria rivera

Endnotes 1 www.bls.gov/lau/lacilg16.htm 2 www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/09/16/census-us-uninsured-drops-income-stagnates/32499231/ 3 www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Appendix.pdf 4 www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2017/01/12/detroits-development-deals-kept-booming/96523726/ 5 http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/sites/default/files/docs/pdf/cba2005final.pdf 6 www.law.tulane.edu/uploadedFiles/Institutes_and_Centers/Public_Law_Center/Summary%20and%20Index%20of%20%20Community%20 Benefit%20Agreements.pdf 7 www.freep.com/story/news/local/2014/03/14/175m-tax-break-for-marathon-refinery-buys-detroiters-o/28936095/

For more information, please visit The Detroit Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Platform at www.detroitpeoplesplatform.org or visit the Equitable Detroit Coalition at fb.me/equitabledetroit Contact us at info@buildingmovement.org

2017