A video clip of Bedrock’s CEO in a heated exchange with a Detroit council member has been circulating on social media after businessman Dan Gilbert pledged $1 billion to create a new nonprofit to redevelop and run the Renaissance Center and east riverfront.
Many of you may have seen this clip of a heated exchange from Bedrock CEO Jared Fleisher to District 7 Councilmember Denzel Anton McCampbell during a Planning and Development meeting on Thursday. We’ll be following up, but in the meantime, we thought we’d let you know what we knew.
WHY WERE BEDROCK AND MCCAMPBELL AT THE PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE ON THURSDAY?
Multiple items related to Bedrock and the Renaissance Center Development were on the committee agenda Thursday. McCampbell told me that he attended Thursday’s committee (even though he is not a regular member) because he has been actively involved in various discussions and meetings related to the development on behalf of his constituents. He said it was especially important, given that this agenda item is technically the first official order of business related to the RenCen development that has come before a council body.
WHAT WAS THE EXCHANGE?
The exchange happened during a public hearing for a request to establish a commercial rehabilitation district for Riverfront Holdings, Inc. at several addresses near the Detroit riverfront. This was line item 6 in the committee agenda.
About the two-and-a-half-hour mark into the meeting, following a presentation from Bedrock, McCampbell began asking about the overall need for public financing of the RenCen development, given the liquid assets the companies seemed to have, and the Renaissance zone PILOT also on the agenda.
“You can imagine my perspective when I go back to Dan — who’s giving a billion-dollar gift, who is in the middle of intensive physical therapy, who can’t walk, can’t use his left arm, lost his son — and he said, ‘How did it go? How was my billion-dollar gift received?’ And the answer was, ‘Well, Dan, it’s not enough.’” Fleisher said, then telling McCampbell that he found McCampbell’s “position” to be “indecent.”
McCampbell then attempted to interrupt, and Fleisher raised his voice. “Hold on. You asked a question. I’m going to answer your question. Okay? I’m going to answer your question, sir! So I found it to be indecent.”
District 4 Council Member Latisha Johnson yielded the floor back to McCampbell, asking him to wrap things up.
“I mentioned the gift, and I understand that I have a role here that my constituents put me in this role to ask questions, to gain answers on what is before us. If they are looking at this plan that we have to approve, it is my duty to ask these questions,” McCampbell said. “I think it is indecent to have this type of response to me when I’m asking questions — questions I’ve had asked from your team as well.”
McCampbell said he’d follow up with questions in writing. After Fleisher provided an answer on revenue sharing, he did apologize “for his animation.”
WHAT NOW?
This part of the meeting was only a public hearing, so no action was taken related to what was presented or discussed following public comment on the issue. I followed up with Fleisher and McCampbell on Friday afternoon.
Fleisher told me his response was primarily driven by his passion for the project and the implications in councilmembers’ questions that the “unprecedented” community benefits and investments from Gilbert and developers were “not enough.” However, Fleisher maintained that he regretted becoming “over-animated.”
McCampbell said while he was “surprised” and “taken aback” by Fleisher’s response, which he said he felt was out of line considering what was in front of the committee, ultimately, he said the exchange will not impact his actions or considerations moving forward.
“I’m going to continue to be focused on ensuring that we get all of the information to be both transparent as a governmental body, but also to make an informed decision about what the city is being asked for,” McCampbell told me. “I’m going to continue to do my job.”
Please don’t tell me anyone believes Fleisher’s “animation” was an unexpected passionate outburst. These folks don’t get where they are without careful planning and extensive media training. If the past is a predictor of the future, this is likely to be closer to a Trojan horse than a gift horse.
It was a calculated mantrum designed to shout down any woman, minority, or less wealthy person who might dare challenge his narrative. We have seen it all our lives, only now, these idiots feel even more entitled to do it because of Trump.
I agree with McCampbell. He is on the city council and he has the legitimate right to ask most any question he wants. I does raise eyebrows with so much money being donated by Dan Gilbert and to question Fleisher response that that amount is not enough, before the job even gets started and final amount needed, comes across that someone is trying to bilk money already before project even gets started. Big projects seemed to be always followed by individual with their hands out for money and to get their supposed share. Criminality at it’s finest.