Talk:Mount Clemens, Michigan

	Michigan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Detroit task force.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Last Bath House May Meet Wrecking Ball[edit]

Regarding the paragraph about the "only remaining bathhouse from the bath era of Mount Clemens is St. Joseph's Sanitarium and Bath House, which has been recently renamed Select Specialty Hospital and owned by Select Medical Corporation. This last bath house is in danger of being demolished while the Friends of Historic Preservation [1] are working with the city to preserve it." My great-great uncle spent time as one of the construction workers on the building. The long, porch with pillars -- dating back to 1899 -- was demolished at the end of this August (2010). I went to city hall and they told me [falsely] that the porch was being restored. I asked where they took the old pillars and all the old oak and other wood, and why would they tear it down if the intent was to perform historical preservation. Their reply -- "Well, I wasn't working that day, so I don't know." I asked to speak with someone who did know, but she said that such "people" would not know either. I asked her who WOULD know, and she told me to call the demolition company or Select Medical (the new owners of the building). I asked to see the permit and there was NO restrictions or requirements regarding preservation or care of the historic materials. Later that afternoon, in speaking with local business owners, I learned that the permit was - from the start - to demolish the porch. Restoration was NOT the intent. The mayor (Barb Dempsey) made an excuse, and I quote, "People have to remember that it's a private property. It's owned by a private enterprise. ... I just can't see how we can force it upon them," she said. "How would an individual person like it if a group imposed restrictions on their home? You can't force people into preserving." That statement, at best, is short-sighted. At worst it shows an agenda that favors political gain or out-of-state business interests over the quality of the local neighborhoods. Since the 1950's, the decisions made by the Mount Clemens city government has been one of total disregard for the significance tied to historical buildings and parks. Long-term social AND financial benefits come from preserving our history. I grew up in Mount Clemens. I remember the last five Bath Houses being demolished. Even when some investors existed and wanted to restore them, the City Commission and Mayor's Office refused. Instead, these historic gems were demolished and replaced with "Dollar-store" strip-mall, many of which now sit vacant. Since the 1970s, many regions have come to their senses. Although we are well into the 21st Century, the politicians of Mount Clemens, along with many S.E. Michigan governments, retain the vision akin to "put up a parking lot" or "anything to get their quick-fix, short-lived tax revenue". Getting cut-backs and re-election funding from corporations profiting from such demolitions should be considered a CONFLICT OF INTEREST, but our local news papers do little to expose any that may exist. Regarding the story of the historic St. Joseph Hospital -- the excuse (smoke screen) being given is that the porch was unsafe. First of all, it is the city that allowed the porch to deteriorate over the past decades; they neither sought historical-protection grants nor demanded repairs from the business owners. Second -- the porch was NOT in as bad shape as some have claimed. Although the upper framing of the porch was becoming dilapidated, most of the main structure was still quite sound. The pillars were still quite sound. They might have been something like 16-feet-tall, if not taller -- and still almost completely [structurally] intact (possibly hardwood - oak or something similar). The porch was still VERY MUCH in a condition that any GOOD, HONEST restoration organization could have addressed. From the action, it appears that the Mayor's office was more interested in appeasing the interests of the out-of-state owners (Select Medical Corporation) instead of any real commitment towards restoration or historical preservation. Instead of being true leaders, responsible for protecting the history and long term quality of their town, the city government made the wrong choice -- yet again, and again, and again. Select Medical Corporation is based in Pennsylvania; they have no roots in Mount Clemens, MI. As such, it is unlikely that they have any emotional interest or commitment to our town's historical significance. In addition, Henry Ford Hospital, who bought the property years-ago (and operates on the facility), sold it to Select Medical Group just a couple-years-ago (I believe in 2008). Both corporations knew the condition of the building, as did city hall. All these players have agendas that put - at the very bottom of their lists -- the preservation of the 1899 structure. The town of Mount Clemens used to be amazing -- full of historic buildings, brick streets, etc. Almost all of it has been torn down (or "mysteriously" burnt down) -- the results of which profited a few ["follow the money'] at the expense of the neighborhood community. In almost every scenario, these historic sights were replaced with cheap, low-quality, and downright ugly buildings (cinder-block warehouses, parking lots, post-modern box-frames). This type of political, short-sighted, quick-revenue mentality had done nothing but continue the downward spiral (culturally AND fiscally) that faces the whole state of Michigan. The destruction of the historic porch may - as have past demolitions - drive what away the few remaining creative and forward-thinking businesses and individuals. Our local city and county governments may fail to realize that a town needs historic and artistic buildings, businesses, and parks. Without such, they will be unable to attract viable, long-term, committed residents and businesses. Property values -- and the quality of neighborhoods and city life -- will continue to decline. Despite all this -- Mayor Dempsey feels she has no responsibility to "force" preservation or create historical districts that require communities to protect and and maintain the town in which they live -- and the historical sights that, due to their significance and context, that belong to our Nation as a whole (not just the decision makers at City Hall). Although St. Joseph Hospital -- this VERY LAST historic bath house -- is listed as a Michigan State historic landmark, it appears such designation means little as far as any real protection. The State Historical Society did not step in to prevent the demolition. Neither did the Michigan Governor's Office. In fact, there is a real possibility that Select Medical, with the blessing of the City Commission and Mayor Dempsey's Office, may demolish the whole building in the near future. It is something for which "certain interests" have been pushing. The local historical societies requested that the building (St. Joseph) be registered as a single historic district (opening it up to receiving grant money). The City Commission and Mayor Dempsey's office refused. Their policy OPPOSES any - what they call "imposed restrictions" on business or individual owners to preserve and maintain any historic sights. Once again, it seems our local politicians favor the interests of out-of-state mega-corps instead of the Mount Clemens citizenry. No surprise there -- they have been doing the same thing for fifty years. Case-in-point -- it took decades to make a few blocks on one of our city streets (Lincoln) a historic district. Within a year, the Mayor's office and City Commission reversed the decision! SHORT SIGHTED! BACKWARDS! Just business as usual in Mount Clemens. Why worry about neighborhood quality and long term viability when they can make quick tax revenue by bulldozing a Victorian house and replacing it with a chain-store, liquor store, or yet one-more government office?! That way, they can point to more tax revenue (if only until the business goes under the following year, and the neighbors put their homes up for sale and search for cities that still care). Tesseract501 (talk) 02:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They completed the so-called restoration of the 1899 St. Joseph Hospital building. Instead of replacing the actual brickwork damaged by the porch demolition, they painted over it. It looks very tacky - not only because they painted over nice-looking old brick, but because it is clearly a "patch job" when you have parts of the building painted and other parts not. In addition, they use some sort of cheap fiberboard as a type of "trim" to cover the horizontal line of brick damage caused by the demolition. Lastly, they put up a cheap-looking type of fiberglass or composite plastic or light-metal fence along the edge of the long porch. Therefore, instead of the beautiful, solid hardwood pillars that were original to the old building, now we have a post-modern "picket fence". The underlying question remains unanswered -- the approvers of the porch demolition said it was because the porch foundation was unstable. More specifically, that is just one of the different answers I have been given. At first I was told by City Hall (on the day after the demolition) that the construction company was going to restore the pillars. Then they told me that City Hall can not require restoration. That "answer" was "confusing" in itself, because they do have the authority to approve or deny permits for demolition. The third thing they told me was that the porch foundation was unstable and that is way it was demolished. In truth, the porch foundation was NOT demolished -- it apparently was sound enough to support the construction team and the new "picket fence". Now the front of the historic building looks shameful -- as though they put cheap makeup on someone in their old age. Now we have an 1899 historic building with painted fiberboard trims and a composite picket fence on its old, brick, porch foundation. And the city wonders why the property values keep going down. Their short-sighted decisions send any community-conscious residents shopping for cities that care. Tesseract501 (talk) 16:23, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two years after the demoltion of the hospital's fornt porch -- and the result has been more vacancies and an increase in blight and litter on the blocks adjacent to the building. This comes as no suprise to residents with longer-term vision. Protecting our historical buildings improves the neighborhoods and - ultimately - the tax base. Despite these facts, another vote to save the building from destruction failed (Feb 6, 2012). The City Commissioners and Mayor Dempsey thumbed their noses - yet again - at the Mount Clemens Historical Commission. The Historical socieity's attempt to save the last bath house of 'Bath City' (a nickname for the city of Mount Clemens) lost by a vote of 5-2. In doing so, the City Commissioners denied an ordinance to designate the 1899 portion of the hospital as the St. Joseph Sanitarium, Bath House and Hospital Historic District (although it is the last standing bath house dating from our Mineral Bath Days -- over the past decades, the more-than-a-dozen others burned or were demolished under the watches of commissioners.

Once again, the ideological views of the City Commissioners and Mayor hold that 'private property rights' (specifically when it concerns global conglomerates like Select Medical) trumps the community interests and attachment to our historic buildings. Funny how these same commissioners do not quote 'private property rights' when they consider zoning restrictions on private-citizen residents. This same year, the commissioners passed laws that restricted residents from doing certain things with their front porches (e.g., putting out inside furniture, etc.) -- while allowing Select Medical to demolish the hospital's block-long, pillared porch that dated back over 100 years.

It is possible that the commissioners feared losing the $150,000 tax revenue received by SEM (if SEM closes up shop if the local residents DARE to put our quality of city living above their "private property rights"). Unfortunately, the commissioners short-term anxiety - once again - failed to consider the continued, long-term loss of revenue that is EXACERBATED by such actions as the 5-2 vote.

Although the building is already on the State Register of Historic Sites, the State of Michigan did not prevent the porch demolition of August 16, 2010. Likewise, it may not step in to prevent any further demolitions (including complete destruction of the building). That is one reason why the attempt by the Mount Clemens Historical Commission was so important in its attempt to protect the last building tied to the mineral-bath era.

A preservationist in Mount Clemens can be likened to Don Quixote. It has been a 50-year-history of failed attempts, but it is good to see that the historical society hasn't given up hope. FIFTY YEARS and only TWO major buildings were protected by the city government (the train depot that has ties to Thomas Edison, and the Crocker House museum). And this was decades-ago, with no major victories but many demolitions before and since. Only 2 wins in 50 years is a record that the past and current commissioners and mayors own. Future generations will remember this record, along with the decline in property values and increase in blight, and see how the short-term devaluation in our historical riches is one of the major reasons for the long-term decay, decline in property values, increase in blight, and mass exodus by residents who want to live in quality neighborhoods. Tesseract501 (talk) 22:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics[edit]

Here are some of the current 2010 population figures and a comparison to 2000 for Mount Clemens from SEMCOG (Southeast Michigan Council of Governments:

SEMCOG Quick Facts - Data by Community

Community Percent Percent 2000 2010 change 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 change 2000 2010 White Black Asian Hispanic Age Under 18 Vacancy Rate Population Percent Population By Race Percent Percent Households Housing

Mount Clemens city 1 7 , 3 1 2 1 6 , 3 1 4 -5.8% 74.5% 68.3% 19.5% 24.5% 0.5% 0.5% 2.3% 2.9% 21.6% 20.6% 7,073 6,714 -5.1% 6.3% 11.4%

The demographic figures are all just wrong. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I put back the 2000 census figures. Somebody needs to update this. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:54, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brick Road of Main Street and Gratiot Torn Up[edit]

Another historic site bites the dust in Mount Clemens. They just "resurfaced" the stretch of road (where Main Street joints Gratiot Avenue) on the north side of Mount Clemens. Back in the 60s and 70s, asphalt and concrete were put over top of the bricks and railroad tracks that ran from downtown to the river. They are in the middle of resurfacing the concrete -- hence, the old brick pavement and tracks were exposed after decades. The city and mayor's office responded in their usual manner: they allowed the construction crew to tear up and dismantle the old bricks and railroad tracks before resurfacing the coverning of concrete. The bricks and tracks dated to the 1800s. Some sections may even predate the Civil War. The pattern of the last 50 years continues; the city hall and mayor of Mount Clemens fail to protect what little remains of our town's historical sites. As with the defacing of the state historic landmark (the porch of the former St. Joseph bathhouse), the Michigan govenor's office did not step in to protect the destruction of this historic section of road. To whom can we - the SE citizens of Michigan turn to to protect what little remains of our history? It seem that preservationists in Michigan are rare and endangered as well. The demolition that continued in the 1950s and continue to this day continues to show no signs of stopping. Short-sighted politics and pandering to out-of-state "redevelopment" interests remains the one common thread that defines our decision makers. Tesseract501 (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very sad and depressing. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Mount Clemens, Michigan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:57, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indian mounds in "Mt. Clemens"[edit]

This source and fact belongs there. Indeed, what other "Mount" is in the city name? Sources talk about "Clemens".
Indian mounds were in the vicinity, more specifically just north of the Clinton River near the present location of Selfridge Air National Guard Base.^[1]
WP:Verifiability, which this easily satisfies. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:55, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Pilling, Arnold R. (December 18, 2007). "A Use of Historical Sources in Archeology: An Indian Earthworks Near Mt. Clemens, Michigan" (PDF). Wayne State University. http://www.jstor.org. Retrieved March 11, 2023.

Mount Clemens Police[edit]

Hello, I am new to Wikipedia editing but I noticed that while the article initially mentioned that "the city already disbanded the 113-year-old police department in 2005 to cut costs" it did not say what police department had jurisdiction over policing duties. So, I added that the Macomb County Sheriff's Office now provides primary policing services in Mount Clemens. I cited macomb.gov as my source. Please provide any feedback as to whether this change is informative or appropriate. Thank you! U53427 (talk) 20:33, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Pilling, Arnold R. (December 18, 2007). "A Use of Historical Sources in Archeology: An Indian Earthworks Near Mt. Clemens, Michigan" (PDF). Wayne State University. http://www.jstor.org. Retrieved March 11, 2023.

[1]