Matt Helms

Detroit Free Press

Opponents of Proposal A, a city ordinance on the ballot that would require community benefits when developers seek tax breaks from Detroit, said today that it would hurt the city’s economic recovery and push badly needed jobs out to the suburbs.

Representatives of 16 unions — representing Detroit teachers, police, firefighters, trades workers and others — are opposing Proposal A. It would require developers of projects costing $15 million or more with public subsidies of at least $300,000 to meet with community members and create a legally enforceable community benefits agreement. Developers who don’t meet terms of the agreements could be sued to have the terms enforced at the risk of losing tax breaks.

Mike Jackson, executive secretary and treasurer of the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters and Millwrights, said Detroit has gained 15,000 jobs in the last three years, and Proposal A’s unclear requirements could derail the city’s comeback.

“Proposal A is awful,” Jackson said at a news conference this morning against the backdrop of construction on the new Detroit Red Wings arena. “It’s a jobs killer that would hurt our community, and something we simply cannot afford.”

►Related:Detroit firms get 38% of Red Wings arena work

While many of the unions said they support the idea of community benefits agreements — in Detroit, that’s typically goals, not requirements, of hiring Detroiters for construction and other jobs and setting aside certain amounts of new housing for low-income people.

But opponents of Proposal A say it would force businesses to a standard of community benefits no other city in the U.S. has required.

“Businesses won’t want to deal with all this red tape,” said Michael Aaron, business manager for Laborers Local 1191 in Detroit. “Proposal A would create layers of negotiating committees with confusing rules and unclear guidelines.”

Aaron said the proposal fails to define who could participate in the negotiations, adding that the proposal is so poorly written that suburbanites in communities that border Detroit could have a seat at the table.

“Detroit’s comeback is defying all critics,” Aaron said. “We need to keep that going.”

Proposal A, a community-driven plan backed by Detroit City Council President Brenda Jones and a coalition of community groups called Rise Together Detroit is competing on the November ballot with Proposal B, drafted by Councilman Scott Benson and supported by Mayor Mike Duggan’s administration.

Proposal B would set the threshold for community benefits agreements at projects worth at least $75 million that see subsidies of $1 million or more. Neighborhood groups also would serve an advisory, not controlling, role in the negotiations, and city officials would continue to negotiate with developers, under the plan.

If more than 50% of voters support both proposals, the one with the most votes will take effect.

Critics of Proposal B say it represents the status quo of benefits agreements that provide too little to neighborhoods with no enforcement when developers don’t meet the terms of the deals.

Former state Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a southwest Detroit resident who is now community partnerships and development director for the Sugar Law Center, said for too long the city has given huge tax breaks to developers without holding them accountable for hiring goals and other negotiated terms.

Tlaib, also a member of Rise Together Detroit, noted that the UAW and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees have endorsed Proposal A.

“We need real accountability,” Tlaib said, adding that Proposal A would give neighborhood representatives a voice in how development takes shape and benefits the area, with legal standing to enforce the agreements.

But Proposal A opponents said it goes about community benefits in the wrong way.

“After many years of double-digit unemployment, Detroit is finally coming back,” said Terrence Martin, a Detroit school teacher and executive vice president of the Detroit Federation of Teachers. “Proposal A will hurt its comeback by driving investment and new jobs to the suburbs.”

The unions said they were mixed on supporting Proposal B. The carpenters and millwrights union support B, for one, but the DFT said it opposes B because it doesn’t make community benefits plans legally binding.

Contact Matt Helms: 313-222-1450 or mhelms@freepress.com. Follow him on Twitter @matthelms.