Michigan State University faculty and students are producing a documentary on a vision of Flint as a healthier, greener city. It will show the challenges of bringing fresh produce to a food desert, feeding schools, providing educational options and battling bureaucracy.
On Wednesdays through July, Great Lakes Echo will run a segment expected to become a building block of the finished story. You can help.
The Greening of Flint main page is where to post questions, suggest interviews, make comments or offer suggestions to help producers tell the story of a city trying to re-grow its roots literally and figuratively as a model for post-industrial revitalization. It also contains links to each of the published segments and tells which ones are coming up.
This week:
Flint thrived as an auto city in the 1970s. As the auto industry dwindled, many people lost their jobs and the city declined. Dayne Waillng, the mayor of Flint, says the city needs to change to move forward.
Related stories:
Urban pioneers turn vacant lots verdant in Detroit
Inmates harvest food, savings, education and jobs from jail gardens
Growing Power sprouts in Wisconsin
Farm to Spork: Kids see fruits of partnering schools with farms
Shifting carbon from roads to roofs
I’ve long been a critic of the mayor’s “vision” for making Flint a “sustainable 21st Century”. I would be curious to know how doing what other cities did 2-3 decades ago (in the 20th century) is moving our city forward. Or how clean air, water and good housing (the city’s definition of sustainability, and a 18/19th century objective) is moving this city forward. Under the best of circumstances, the city of Flint is looking at 75-100 years of development to get us back to being a vibrant, diverse, a viable city across the urban specturm (public safety, economy, development, finances, etc.) Maybe 50 years if every star in the heavens aligns together for Flint’s future. At that point, it will the 22nd century. What good is it going to do us if we’ve just become a 21st century city…?
Now I’m not saying the city doesn’t need these things. But copying what other cities did decades ago? That will never make us a model for anything but ‘how NOT to be a model of revitalization.’ It won’t attract new jobs. It won’t get the hard work this city desperately needs done. It won’t catch the eye of those controlling the vast pool of resources that are now being redirected to “sustainable” urbanism at the federal or state level.
A comparable analogy for this mentality is being down 5 points in the big championship football game, 4th and goal on the 5 yard line, 3 seconds on the clock and what’s the team do? Kicks a field goal!!