Detroit residents urge action on zoning fees, housing shortages and neighborhood safety during committee public comment

Public comment at the Detroit City Council Neighborhood and Community Service Standing Committee on March 13 opened with callers and in-person speakers pressing the committee on zoning appeal costs, the city’s housing shortage and several neighborhood safety and development concerns.

Several callers objected to a recent policy change that would charge people for Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) transcripts. Tyson Gersh, a resident, said the BZA “asked to prepare transcripts for all of its proceedings” and warned that charging appellants could obstruct appeals. He said, “this idea of just imposing nearly $5,000 in transcript fees to me would appear to either be retaliatory, or purely for the purpose of obstructing my right to appeal.” Another caller said bluntly, “$6.75 per page is outrageous,” calling the cost “obstructionist.”

The transcript-fee comments followed multiple public-safety and neighborhood reports. Mitch Shelton, a resident, called for the city to declare an “emergency housing crisis,” saying Detroit “has about 24,000 fewer housing units than what is needed for its population” and that prior bond and federal relief funds have not prevented widespread housing loss. Shelton urged the council to convene an emergency response and use available funding sources, referencing UTGO bond proceeds and other streams he said should support rehabs and acquisitions.

Other callers described neighborhood organizing and local meetings. William M. Davis invited residents in the Barton apartment area to a community meeting the next day to hear candidates and local leaders. Betty A. Varner, identifying herself as president of the DeSoto Ellsworth Black Association, announced a Board of Police Commissioners meeting at the 10th precinct and a March 18 Fenkle (Finkle) Avenue Corridor action-plan meeting; she also requested assistance—landscaping boulders—for a park and said her group had purchased five vacant lots from the land bank to address dumping.

Several callers raised property and occupancy-permit issues. A caller who identified themself as “Black Bag” said lots behind their home had been moved in city records while they tried to buy them, and asked staff assistance to secure an occupancy permit for a transitional housing project. The caller referenced a Detroit Police Department case number (DPD case 20-11112) while alleging a federal investigation; those allegations were raised in public comment and not adjudicated during the meeting.

Rado Foster, a caller who described himself as an advocate for change, said he had no ill will toward Council staff but asked staff and counsel to avoid acting on assumptions or hearsay when dealing with residents. Several callers expressed general frustration that development and city spending sometimes felt unevenly distributed across council districts.

Why it matters: the public-comments segment connected several recurring policy questions—how the city sets administrative fees for appeals, where bond and grant funds are spent, and how the city handles occupancy and nuisance issues—matters that bear directly on residents’ access to due process, housing stability and neighborhood safety.

The committee did not take substantive policy action on these comments during the public-comment period; speakers’ remarks were recorded for the public record and several callers asked for follow-up or staff assistance.

Ending: Committee staff accepted public comment and then moved the meeting into the committee’s unfinished and new-business agenda, where multiple petitions, contracts and grant applications were introduced for later formal action by the City Council.