What is the Downtown Development Authority, and who is on it?
Anyway, what is the DDA? According to the description on their own webpage it is a branch of the Detroit Economic Growth Corporation (DEGC), and they "support private investments and business growth through loans, sponsorships and grants, capital improvements to public infrastructure and additional programs designed to increase economic activity."
Sounds great so far, huh? Except that, in a sense, the very existence of the DDA and DEGC as quasi-governmental agencies is itself a form of privatization—developers and other real estate tycoons are put in a position of decision-making power over the for-profit industries that they originate from and draw their profit from. Put another way, the foxes are put in charge of the henhouse.
The DDA's funding comes from "a number of sources such as grants, contracts, interest on loans and captured tax increments—increases in property taxes that result from new investments—on approved developments. Property owners within the DDA district pay a 1 mill property tax to fund the basic operation of the DDA."
In other words they can take money that you voted to spend on one thing, and move it to use on something else, without ever holding another public vote on it. Worse yet, they can take it from something that benefits the public, and move it to something that benefits only private investors. Sure, sure—we've all heard that "Trickle-Down" theory of Reaganomics, which says if we give more money to the rich they will give it back to us in the form of "creating jobs" or...something. They've been telling us that since the 1980s. When is it supposed to start trickling? Reagan's dead so I guess we should start calling it "Dugganomics" now, eh?
If Trickle-Down theory or "Dugganomics" actually worked like they say, then all this revenue that is being rerouted from taxpayers and showered on downtown development should result in the neighborhoods beginning to prosper. The DDA has been doing this since 1975, and downtown is doing well, but the neighborhoods have continued to slide...unless you only look at historically wealthy "neighborhoods" like Indian Village, or re-gentrified neighborhoods like Corktown. In the real neighborhoods, poverty has steadily increased over the past 20 years. On average, Detroit has been the most impoverished major American city almost every year for two decades. Jobs are coming here, but they are going to educated white newcomers and suburban contractors, not impoverished Detroiters. The kinds of jobs Detroiters are getting are service industry jobs, with low wages—the kinds of jobs that keep them in poverty rather than lifting them out of it.
The DDA also gets more money the more property values rise, which means tax captures snowball with gentrification. As if that wasn't bad enough, the DDA's Board of Directors are appointed entirely by the mayor. City Council has the power to approve or reject his appointees, but there doesn't seem to be much traction there.
Another answer that begs for a question is this: If the DDA's mission was to help revitalize downtown, and downtown has in fact been undeniably revitalized, do they still need to exist? The truth is that tax captures do not have a sunset when they have fulfilled their objective, nor is there any such trigger for dissolving the DDA...they can just keep taking our money regardless of whether times are good or bad. [There is a provision in PA 57 that says "An authority that has completed the purposes for which it was organized SHALL be dissolved by ordinance of the governing body," but there doesn't seem to be any apparent mechanism or standard for determining when the DDA has in fact accomplished its objective].
Another answer that begs for a question is this: If the DDA's mission was to help revitalize downtown, and downtown has in fact been undeniably revitalized, do they still need to exist? The truth is that tax captures do not have a sunset when they have fulfilled their objective, nor is there any such trigger for dissolving the DDA...they can just keep taking our money regardless of whether times are good or bad. [There is a provision in PA 57 that says "An authority that has completed the purposes for which it was organized SHALL be dissolved by ordinance of the governing body," but there doesn't seem to be any apparent mechanism or standard for determining when the DDA has in fact accomplished its objective].
Here is another great explanation of what the DDA really is, from the Detroit People's Platform:
As of July 14, 2022, this was the DDA's roster, according to their page on the DEGC's website:
However, as of November 27, 2022, the city's own webpage for the DDA showed a slightly different list of names, with no date attached:
Michael Duggan
Marvin Beatty
Austin Black
David Blaszkiewicz
Ehrlich Crain
Sonya Delley
Melvin Hollowell
Richard Hosey
James Jenkins
John Naglick Jr
Stephen Ogden
Charlie Beckham
Kim Rustem
...So which one is the up-to-date list? Who is actually on the DDA right now?
And when are the appointments made to this board? When does City Council review and vote on the mayor's appointments? What are their criteria for doing so? What was the reasoning behind recodifying Public Act 197 in 2018 (during Duggan's second term)? Does anyone know this stuff outside of the proverbial "smokey back room"? Has anyone ever gone to a DDA board meeting to weigh in on their decision making process? These are important questions that we should be asking.
As far as I can tell only about half of the DDA members listed on these rosters live in the city—John Naglick Jr., Nicole Sherard-Freeman, David Blaszkiewicz, Sonya Delley, and Stephen Ogden, either live in a suburb and/or do not appear in the City Assessor's taxpayer database. And of course it is still very debatable as to whether Mayor Duggan himself actually lives here, but that's another story.
The DDA would say that they can justify their capture of library and school tax money because they in turn use that money to help developers offset the cost of including "affordable" housing in their luxury units for low-income people (although that claim is dubious, since even 50% AMI is not actually affordable to the average Detroiter). This argument can be invalidated using what I call the "Robin Hood Analogy"...
Let's say I break in your house and steal a bunch of cash, an amount you can't really afford to part with. Then I go and donate it to the poor. When you find out and get mad at me, I say "Hey, you can't call the cops because it was for a good cause!" That's basically what DDA is doing to us, they are taking money without our permission or even our full knowledge. Except that they aren't giving it to the poor, they're taking it FROM the poor and giving it to the rich developers! The voters have a right to expect that their money will go to the library and school millages they voted for it to go into.
Also, I can't understand the logic in the DDA holding the public comment session at the end of their meetings, after their votes have already been cast on the current business? How can the DDA's decision-making ostensibly be influenced by the public if the public are not allowed to speak until after they have voted on the current business? Even City Council holds public comment at the beginning of their sessions. Worse yet, the only reason the public is even allowed to attend their meetings now is because they had to be sued in 2017 for violating the Open Meetings Act. The DDA is a rogue body playing with the public's money, with no real oversight.
