Technical & Research Reports: Housing | Planning | Presentations | Public Policy

line Policy Reports Center for Community and Economic Development logo
Urban Policy Research Series
Fall 2008

Michigan's economic recovery will be closely related to our central cities' ability to overcome continuing social and economic challenges. To support local and state policy development for cities, the Michigan State University Center for Community and Economic Development, in partnership with the MSU Land Policy Institute's MI-HELP consortium, connected Michigan's core city mayors and legislative leaders with its finest urban scholars to address the critical urban policy issues facing our State. In 2007, policy research was commissioned on priority topics identified by the Urban Core Mayors.

by David Arsen and Thomas David
Kiran Cunningham and Hannah McKinney
Nina David, Elsie Harper-Anderson, and Elisabeth Gerber
Mark I. Wilson and Kenneth E. Corey
Roger Hamlin, Ric Hula, Bianca Cobarzan, Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore, and Cristina Leuca

Download Report (108 pages) line
Brief Number One: Building Opportunity in Low-Wealth Communities: State Policies to Fund School Capital Facilities
Fall 2008

Stark disparities in the condition of public school facilities were highlighted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education challenge to segregation and the landmark 1971 Serrano v. Priest challenge to school funding inequality. Over the last decade, an extraordinary generation of fabulous school facilities has been built in suburban areas, while low-income children in central cities are left behind in outdated and often dilapidated structures. There is growing policy interest, nationally and within Michigan, regarding inadequate school facilities as an important education quality issue. Moreover, there is increasing awareness of the important role that high-quality school buildings play in neighborhood and community revitalization.

by Thomas Davis and David Arsen
Download Brief (6 pages) line
Brief Number Two: Lifting Families Out of Poverty: Maximizing the Capacities of City Hall
Fall 2008

A recent report, State of Michigan's Cities: An Index of Urban Prosperity,1 claims that Michigan cities, whether they are benchmarked against other cities in the U.S. or in their own counties, are not doing well, and that this situation hurts the entire state's ability to rebound economically. High poverty rates in Michigan's core cities are one of the key reasons why the state finds it difficult to attract new business and investment.

by Kiran Cunningham and Hannah McKinney

Download brief (6 pages) line
Brief Number Three: Why Cooperate and For What Results? An Analysis of Local Cooperative Efforts to Manage Regional Growth in Michigan
Fall 2008

In the early 1990s, several state reports identified the lack of integrated and coordinated planning as the greatest threat to Michigan's environment and economy. These reports revived conversations on regionalism and cooperation in Michigan, which coupled with the current state of Michigan's economy have resulted in clarion calls for local governments to share services and work cooperatively to increase fiscal efficiencies.

by Nina David, Elsie Harper-Anderson, and Elisabeth Gerber

Download brief (6 pages) line
Brief Number Four: Global Positioning
Fall 2008

Michigan's economic future must incorporate three major elements: the knowledge economy, globalization, and network society. The knowledge economy captures the significance of science and technology as a driver of the economy, and the need for an educated workforce to facilitate economic growth. As structural change progresses in terms of what is made and how products and services are delivered, there is also a geographical restructuring with production systems fragmented to locate in the lowest cost and most advantageous areas. This globalization of production affects people and places as they now compete across the world rather than locally. The third phenomenon, network society, reflects the impact of information and communication technologies (ICT) on how people live, work, and interact. To be successful, cities must reach out internationally to attract the business enterprises of the 21st Century.

by Mark I. Wilson and Kenneth E. Corey

Download brief (6 pages) line
Brief Number Five: Brownfields: Making Programs Work for Michigan Communities
Fall 2008

In the last 50 years, suburban sprawl contributed to the destabilization of core cities. New highways, low-cost mortgages, and a long list of documented factors pushed some residents and businesses out of Michigan's industrial cities, leaving behind vacant factories, warehouses and lots, including tax-delinquent and contaminated parcels.1,2,3 For thirty years, governments have attempted to reverse trends and stimulate local development using their powers and resources, providing incentives to investors, developers, and industries. Core cities realize that incentives are necessary to overcome greenfield competition, and that developers respond if incentives create acceptable risk/reward balances. Available strategies include grants, low-interest loans, loan guarantees, second-position loans, secondary mortgage markets, loan insurance, tax deductions, tax abatements, tax credits, land assembly, land write-downs, land leases, and transfer of property rights.

by Roger Hamlin, Ric Hula, Bianca Cobarzan, Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore, and Cristina Leuca

Download brief (6 pages) line
Brief Number Six: Michigan's Local Finance Structural Deficit: Analysis of Proposed Solutions
Fall 2008

In the past thirty years, local units of government in Michigan have experienced a triple convergence of significant limitations on their ability to finance municipal services. With the passage of the Headlee Amendment in 1978, local unit taxing jurisdictions were compelled to roll back property tax rates when existing property tax revenue increases exceeded the rate of inflation. In 1994, local units were limited further by Proposal A, which effectively capped tax increases on homestead properties at the rate of inflation. Other limitations on local units' ability to raise revenue include the prohibition against new local income taxes (1967), and reductions in state and federal revenue sharing. Finally, the 1980 U.S. Census was the first in history to result in the loss of a Congressional seat for Michigan, a trend that has continued in every subsequent Census, sound evidence that Michigan is no longer robust in population (and tax base) growth. Collectively, these Constitutional and demographic limitations on local unit tax revenues have compromised municipal services in Michigan.

by Jeff Horner
Download Brief (6 pages)
line