Detroit needs a strong Community Benefits Agreement. This is not a “shakedown tax.” Nor is it a “job quota” program. It would not “abruptly stop the economic momentum” built up over the last few years. These false claims fanned by Roderick Miller, the new head of the Detroit Economic Growth Corp., and the backward thinking Detroit News columnist Nolan Finley, are sheer nonsense. Worse, they are based on myths, disrespect of the people of the city, and a willful distortion of recent events.

The near hysterical attacks are directed against a sensible plan to direct resources to communities in a conscious, intentional, and thoughtful way. Such attacks speak to the knee jerk reaction of those who have a track record of backing development strategies that have failed to benefit the community. Clearly, the primary impact of the major projects championed by those in service to the corporate elite have done little more than spiral public resources and scare dollars out of the city.

The primary example of this bad business practice is the give away of 39 parcels of land to billionaire developer Mike Illitch for $1.

What is especially foolish about the attack on Community Benefits Agreements is that it directly contradicts one of the most forward-looking strategies developed within the Detroit Business Community in recent history. Creating systematic ways to encourage local purchasing, employment, and production is good business, builds strong communities and puts the force of law behind already recognized business practices.

We need only look to DTE, Wayne State University, Henry Ford Health Systems and the DMC to understand the importance of establishing a systematic, strong ordinance.

In March of 2011 Mr. Finleys’ newspaper published an article applauding the announcement that Henry Ford, WSU and the DMC were launching a systematic program to “Buy Detroit.” Recognizing that their economic power could be used to help revitalize the neighborhoods they share, the Detroit News reported, “Midtown's three largest employers, already offering financial incentives for employees to live in area neighborhoods, are focusing on a new "buy Detroit" strategy to help revitalize the city.” The article went on to say, “The move could mean millions of dollars for local businesses, helping them to grow and hire.”

These three businesses are anchor institutions, spending nearly $2 billion a year on everything from potato chips to paper towels. Consciously directing that purchasing power to local businesses stops the outward spiral of dollars. Realizing that less than 10 percent of these dollars are spent in the city, the leadership of these organizations agreed to redirect funds to local businesses.

In support of this effort, a more thoughtful member of the Detroit Economic Growth Corporation, Olga Stella, vice president of business development, said in support of this decision, "It's about doing good business and doing good business in Detroit." She added, "And that can be a beacon to other companies within the city or maybe even companies in the region, that there are really good, high-quality companies located in the city of Detroit that any business would be happy to have in their supply base."

Some of the inspiration for this decision was a long standing effort by DTE which consciously seeks local businesses, spending nearly 50% of its budget on Michigan based firms. Explaining this practice, David Meador, DTE’s Chief Financial officer said. "There's kind of a myth out there that I have to go to various parts of the world to get low cost and high quality," Meador said. "In many cases, Michigan and Detroit can compete, and we can drive some of DTE's spending into our local community."

Mr. Miller should look at his own recent history and Mr. Finley should read his own paper more carefully. There is nothing scary or fearful about a program that moves to give a systematic, legal basis to some of the best practices of our community.