Regionalism is all the rage. The Obama Administration is betting big on regional planning as a way to make smarter decisions on transportation, climate, the economy—all those things that don’t respect political boundaries. The Administration plans to reward communities that work together across jurisdictions toward common goals and, by implication, punish those that do not.
Who can argue with that? I certainly can’t.
But as I sit here in a brand name suburban motel room situated on a highway that could be anywhere, all my doubts about the wisdom of regionalism resurface. I can walk to the Shell station for some Fig Newtons, and I see a Checkers across the street, but there’s too much pavement between here and there to make the trip.
I happen to be in this motel in City A because I landed today in City B for a meeting tomorrow morning in City C. Got that?
All three cities, plus two others, happen to share a single region. On their own, all of these cities have distinct charm. But string them together with the highway sprawl so familiar all over the country, and it sucks all the charm out of the idea of regionalism—fast. In this case, the sum is decidedly less than its parts.
These are the opening paragraphs from today's blog post by our colleague, Carol Coletta, at www.good.is. To read more of her post, click here.
Showing posts with label regionalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label regionalism. Show all posts
Monday, November 23, 2009
Sunday, October 04, 2009
Getting The Focus Right: It's About Cities
This may surprise you but we’ve got to say it: we’re tired of hearing about the paramount importance of regions and how regionalism is the road to a successful future for Memphis.
And we admit that we were some of the earliest people who talked about regionalism and the need for every one in the Memphis region to pull together and to establish a collaborative agenda.
It was about 20 years ago when we introduced the concept to our community, and a part of us has regretted it ever since. It’s not that we feel that we were wrong; it’s just that it seems more and more that the application of the concept has come at the expense of the city that lies at the heart of the region.
Yes, we know – and we’ve frequently said – that regions are the economic unit of competition in the global economy. There is no argument about that.
Boxed In
We know that solutions to some issues – say, water and air quality and greenways – are best served up in a regional context.
We know there are advantages – like Memphis International Airport – that are supported by and serve the entire region.
We also know that often solutions dressed in the cloak of regionalism are anything but sensitive to the urban core that is the beating heart for the area. The poster child to prove this point is seen in transportation decisions that are more motivated by moving packages through the region than keeping people in our city.
Because our corner of the world focuses more on creating high-quality roads for trucks and new corridors for development, there is always one more unnecessary project (think I-269) and the plethora of road expansion plans so traffic moves faster from 7:30 to 9 a.m. and 4:30 to 6 p.m. each workday.
Flowing Out But Not So Much In
In this way, regionalism can become the basis for so many faulty equations as more and more asphalt is laid as the answer to “economic development” and to transportation plans that define themselves as highways only. It’s the infrastructure equivalent of not only giving up on the city but firing a bullet into its prospects for the future.
Here’s the thing: regionalism across the U.S. is often more outward-focused than inward-directed. As a result, programs supported by the major city that focus on a stronger region are rarely reciprocated by the region’s suburban cities.
For example, it’s not unusual to hear Memphis and Shelby County officials call for regional progress and to urge regional strategies that embraces the best interest of area’s cities. And yet, there’s little of that kind of commitment flowing from the fringes back to the center.
That’s why in some regions, there have been complaints that regionalism is really just racism with a new face. And while we’re unprepared to embrace this level of cynicism, we are prepared to join in complaints that too little of regionalism is aimed at strengthening the urban core.
Getting The Focus Right
We’ve seen it most prominently here in the slow understanding that sprawl is a cancer that threatens our financial and social health. If we are serious about sustainability and becoming the kind of green city that can succeed in the new economy, we’ve got to get serious – not to mention, honest – about the forces (and the public policies that set them in motion) that put us in the condition we’re in today.
So, forgive us if in the midst of the euphoria about the creation of the much-needed and long overdue White House Office of Urban Affairs, we urge it to resist the siren’s call of regionalism for awhile and focus solely on cities themselves.
We know there are a lot of think tanks that hail the metro as the platform for White House actions, but for us, it’s the city that counts most and after a decade of being ignored by the federal bureaucracy, it’s time to give them targeted, concentrated attention.
In the past seven years, in the midst of a period of disinterest in cities, the troubling trends in Memphis quickened – children in poverty dramatically increased, more young professional talent left, economic segregation deepened and middle income families moved.
Regionalism Hasn’t Helped
Today, about 35% of Memphis workers are either unemployed or have not looked for a job in so long that they are no longer included in the unemployment rate.
The poverty rate in Memphis has risen 27.2% since 2000, and the poverty rate for adolescents has climbed 45%. Memphis is losing an average of three families a day that earn $35,000 to $75,000.
Meanwhile, Memphis is losing five people a day with college degrees. Inside the 1970 city limits of Memphis, population is down 28% and density is cut in half.
It’s a vicious cycle: people leave, property values shrink, taxes go up, low jobs growth, talent leaves, well, you get the picture. It’s a vicious cycle that, if not interrupted, escalates and at this exact moment, that’s where we find ourselves. And so do dozens of other cities.
Rationale: Regional Profits
And yet, there are still people and organizations calling for a blind allegiance to regionalism that treats cities as after-thoughts in problem-solving. That’s why we admire the work of CEOs for Cities so much (headed up by our colleague Carol Coletta).
It has an unflinching bias: nothing matters more than cities.
We agree wholeheartedly, because so often in the rush to “regional solutions,” the urban cores are frequently not even mentioned at all. As we said, it’s the dirty little secret of regionalism: generally cities give much more than they get.
That’s partly because so often the language of regionalism is co-opted by business forces, particularly real estate and logistics, that have only a passing acquaintance with the spirit of regionalism. More to the point, regionalism was often used as the rationale for political contributions and influence that chewed up $1 billion in tax money for roads and schools that opened up more and more greenfields for development.
From Rhetoric To Results
Mysteriously, there’s always more money for highways, and despite all the hyperbole about new roads as economic engines, there’s precious little evidence of it here, particularly with our jobs growth lagging behind levels of a decade ago. And yet, any suggestion that we should go slow with new roads is greeted with predictions of economic doom.
But back to our main point. It’s past time that we ease up on the rhetoric of regionalism and concentrate single-mindedly on addressing the challenges of Memphis, beginning with development of a manageable number of transformative strategies that can create neighborhoods of choice for middle income families and young families.
At the same time, our elected officials in Washington, D.C., should urge the Obama Administration to set the hearts of the nation’s regions – their major cities – as their first priority, rather than blindly chasing plans filed under the heading of regionalism.
In truth, there are no silos like the ones of the federal government. We applaud the administration’s discussion about increasing cooperation of its agencies to increase their impact, but if indeed the past is the best predictor of the future, it’s likely that the federal bureaucratic culture will relegate cities to the back burner.
Getting It Right
The officials may mean well, but the gritty problems of cities require innovation, a product that the no-risk environment of federal agencies fails regularly to deliver. That too is something that our federal representatives, notably Congressman Steve Cohen, need to advocate for.
As long as federal agencies are discouraged from the kinds of experiments that are demanded by these trying times (and experiments by their very nature often involve failure), the payoff at the local level will always be incremental and marginal.
Memphis, on the other hand, needs much more than incremental progress. And so do other American cities.
What makes Memphis special is that we have the gritty problems that confront cities much larger, and this makes us the right size to be a national laboratory for the federal government. Our size allows for experiments and for the results to be scaled up for serious measurements of their impact.
Until that is done, cities and the federal government will continue to have much in common. Both will be chasing the wrong goals faster.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Can Memphis Have A Storied Mayor?
Kip Bergstrom, former executive director of the Rhode Island Economic Policy Council and now head of Stamford, Connecticut, Urban Redevelopment Commission, is one of the smartest people we know, and always bears listening to.
But his words resonate especially in today's politically charged environment.
“Leadership is about telling stories,” he said. We were reminded of his advice in light of our posts about great mayors, because in his former job, Mr. Bergstrom worked with one of them, Providence Mayor David Cicilline.
Turn-around
In recent years, Providence has made impressive strides in turning around, reducing crime, reforming government, using technology to track public services and more. The Rhode Island Economic Policy Council helped set the agenda for the city because it was an honest broker of economic development data and as a think tank identifying emerging trends affecting Providence.
“We tell stories using data,” said Mr. Bergstrom, who has an uncanny ability to find just the right data to modulate economic strategy. “The right kind of story at the right time can make organizations – and cities – vulnerable to new ideas. Story telling is one of the best ways to change a city.”
He once said that he concentrates on three priorities: 1) improving the business climate, 2) enhancing quality of place, and 3) increasing innovation.
Play To Win
But he acknowledges that every city should be working on these same priorities. “But, these days too many cities play not to lose, rather than playing to win,” he said. "It's about figuring out what we need to play and then we figure out what we need to do to win.”
Cities need to take a Wayne Gretzky approach to its economic growth. He said when the ice hockey legend was asked the secret to his success, his answer was, “‘Some skate to where the puck is. I skate to where the puck will be.’ Cities that succeed are skating to where the puck is, and today, that means they are creating an ethos of innovation.”
Like Memphis, Providence faced challenges with the performance of its public schools. “In K-12, schools are doing exactly what they were designed to do – creating an industrial workforce. The only problem: there is no industrial economy, but we’re still educating graduates for jobs that don’t exist any more.”
Innovate Or Die
That’s why the mantra for cities today is “innovate or face precipitous decline.” He said that Memphis Bioworks Foundation’s success in marrying medical devices with logistics is a well-known national model of innovation and a lesson in the importance of a city identifying its unique niche.
“Cities that have innovation-ready workers will succeed,” Mr. Bergstrom said. “The end game is for our workers to develop skills so they can offload rules work to free up pattern recognition skills.”
In advice particularly relevant to Memphis, he said that the frontline workers on which the service economy is built must be the focus of innovation strategies. “After all, they are delivering the experience for our customers,” he said.
Immigrants
Because growth of the national economy is being driven by immigration, he said that “the first city to figure out the ways to turn immigrants into knowledge workers wins the game. Is there any reason this shouldn’t be Memphis?”
Another issue of importance is regionalism, because regional answers are needed for the toughest problems facing urban areas. However, he cautions that regionalism is not the magic cure for all that ails cities.
“The beginning of regionalism is not the end of rivalry,” he said. “Rivalry can be good for a region. Regions gain consciousness from outside in. In other words, Boston will not ‘get’ the region first. Providence will.”
Questions
So, if the theme of Mr. Bergstrom’s message is that leaders tell stories and innovation is the key to whether cities succeed, it leaves us with some deafening questions:
Why are our stories so often about personality-driven politics and racial conflict?
Who is best able to tell the kinds of story that can inspire Memphians and promise the best hope of success for Memphis?
Who understands and is prepared to lead a city of innovation as its mayor?
But his words resonate especially in today's politically charged environment.
“Leadership is about telling stories,” he said. We were reminded of his advice in light of our posts about great mayors, because in his former job, Mr. Bergstrom worked with one of them, Providence Mayor David Cicilline.
Turn-around
In recent years, Providence has made impressive strides in turning around, reducing crime, reforming government, using technology to track public services and more. The Rhode Island Economic Policy Council helped set the agenda for the city because it was an honest broker of economic development data and as a think tank identifying emerging trends affecting Providence.
“We tell stories using data,” said Mr. Bergstrom, who has an uncanny ability to find just the right data to modulate economic strategy. “The right kind of story at the right time can make organizations – and cities – vulnerable to new ideas. Story telling is one of the best ways to change a city.”
He once said that he concentrates on three priorities: 1) improving the business climate, 2) enhancing quality of place, and 3) increasing innovation.
Play To Win
But he acknowledges that every city should be working on these same priorities. “But, these days too many cities play not to lose, rather than playing to win,” he said. "It's about figuring out what we need to play and then we figure out what we need to do to win.”
Cities need to take a Wayne Gretzky approach to its economic growth. He said when the ice hockey legend was asked the secret to his success, his answer was, “‘Some skate to where the puck is. I skate to where the puck will be.’ Cities that succeed are skating to where the puck is, and today, that means they are creating an ethos of innovation.”
Like Memphis, Providence faced challenges with the performance of its public schools. “In K-12, schools are doing exactly what they were designed to do – creating an industrial workforce. The only problem: there is no industrial economy, but we’re still educating graduates for jobs that don’t exist any more.”
Innovate Or Die
That’s why the mantra for cities today is “innovate or face precipitous decline.” He said that Memphis Bioworks Foundation’s success in marrying medical devices with logistics is a well-known national model of innovation and a lesson in the importance of a city identifying its unique niche.
“Cities that have innovation-ready workers will succeed,” Mr. Bergstrom said. “The end game is for our workers to develop skills so they can offload rules work to free up pattern recognition skills.”
In advice particularly relevant to Memphis, he said that the frontline workers on which the service economy is built must be the focus of innovation strategies. “After all, they are delivering the experience for our customers,” he said.
Immigrants
Because growth of the national economy is being driven by immigration, he said that “the first city to figure out the ways to turn immigrants into knowledge workers wins the game. Is there any reason this shouldn’t be Memphis?”
Another issue of importance is regionalism, because regional answers are needed for the toughest problems facing urban areas. However, he cautions that regionalism is not the magic cure for all that ails cities.
“The beginning of regionalism is not the end of rivalry,” he said. “Rivalry can be good for a region. Regions gain consciousness from outside in. In other words, Boston will not ‘get’ the region first. Providence will.”
Questions
So, if the theme of Mr. Bergstrom’s message is that leaders tell stories and innovation is the key to whether cities succeed, it leaves us with some deafening questions:
Why are our stories so often about personality-driven politics and racial conflict?
Who is best able to tell the kinds of story that can inspire Memphians and promise the best hope of success for Memphis?
Who understands and is prepared to lead a city of innovation as its mayor?
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Another Way Memphis Is Different
It's a tale of two cities, and only a short drive is needed to come face-to-face with the telling.
In Nashville, the drive takes you to Williamson County, the 11th wealthiest county in the U.S., with a median family income that's a staggering $95,470. Four nearby counties shatter the $55,000 mark.
Outside of Fulton County, Atlanta has five counties with median family incomes of more than $60,000, peaking with Fayette County's $85,794 and Cobb County's $77,447. In Indianapolis, Marion County gives way to Hamilton County and its $90,119 median family income. Three others top $55,000.
A Red Flag
Here, things are different. The other counties in the Memphis metro do nothing to improve income and education levels, raising a red flag for companies evaluating the region for new operations and investments.
Shelby County is ranked 200th in median family income, and in its Metropolitan Statistical Area, only DeSoto County manages to eke out over $50,000.
Meanwhile, 19.2 percent of Shelby Countians do not have a high-school degree and 25.3 percent have at least 16 years of education. That compares to 26.3 percent and 12.4 percent respectively for the other metro counties.
More Talk Than Walk
It's a troubling reality, particularly in light of a decade's worth of talk - and little walk - about the importance of the region.
Five years have passed since the Memphis Regional Chamber released the Memphis Region Sourcebook, the product of more than two years of work and costing almost $500,000. Intended to give form to the Governors' Alliance on Regional Excellence, the unique tri-state organization cheerleading the report, its 27 oversized pages of gripping graphics, key facts, an inventory of assets, and recommendations are artifacts of a flirtation with regional thinking.
That's too bad, because the report went to great lengths to identify opportunities for the region to learn how to work together on issues every one should care about: air and water quality, farmland preservation, heritage tourism, transportation, and workforce development. It was always hoped that the experience on these issues would inspire confidence to tackle the really tough ones -- think taxes.
Smart Taxes
More and more, some kind of regional tax pooling makes sense here. Without it, Memphis and Shelby County will inevitably be forced to take unilateral action like a payroll tax on the 88,000 people who commute into Shelby County.
Despite all conventional wisdom to the contrary, cities like Portland, Minneapolis, and Denver have actually used regional taxes as a way to unify their regions, and here, it could delight commuters by taking the payroll tax off the table as an option for city and county governments' ailing finances.
The existing tax structure is outdated and unfair, treating each jurisdiction as if it's self-contained and its interests are walled off from its neighbors. There's no connection between who uses roads, arenas, and museums, and who pays for them.
A Better Way
With no rationality and no imperative for regional cooperation, multiple jurisdictions claw for more of a finite tax pie, as Collierville did in pursuing a huge shopping center to get the huge sales taxes that came with it, and in the process, fueling sprawl and commercial zoning designed to create optimal taxes, rather than the optimal community.
In Minneapolis, where the suburbs subsidized the central cities 30 years ago, that situation was reversed when older suburbs were in decline and needed help. Governments put 40 percent of the growth of their commercial and industrial property tax base into a regional pool, and from it, several hundred million dollars a year are redistributed on regionwide priorities like public transit and light rail, parkland, water quality, and smart growth.
In Portland, a three-county, 24-city regional agency makes land use and trans-portation decisions and helps pay for regional services like the convention center, performing arts center, stadium, exposition center, and regional parks. In Denver, seven counties and 31 cities agreed to a regionwide sales tax to pay for light rail.
Future-Sharing
The Mid-South has the muscle to get it done. The Sourcebook called for creation of the Regional Congressional Caucus, which would take advantage of the Mid-South's six U.S. senators and six congressmen inside the Beltway, and the Mid-South Legislative Caucus to fight for shared priorities in the capitals of Tennessee, Arkansas, and Mississippi.
Challenges to the Memphis region are no respecters of state or county lines -- an aging workforce, too few 25- to 34-year-old workers, low educational attainment, racial divisions, and unsustainable sprawl. Sadly, there's a sense in the region outside Memphis that if the future of the city is about a middle-class exodus, entrenched poverty, and hollowed out, deteriorating neighborhoods, that is Memphis' problem, not theirs.
It's what psychiatrists call "magical thinking" with little connection to reality. There's nothing magical about the fact that regions are the competitive units for the new economy, and without a stronger regional platform, any economic growth plans for any part of the region are in jeopardy before they even begin.
But it's often forgotten here that there is no strong regional platform without an equally strong urban core. Too often, regionalism ends up being an olive branch held out by the largest city to the rest of the region, but sadly, it is often unreciprocated. The region can talk the talk of regionalism, but there's little change in behavior (think North Mississippi's recruitment of Memphis companies across the state line and the sprawl-inducing I-269 interstate).
Future Shock
In other words, it's time to understand that there is no such thing as a bright future for Germantown if Memphis doesn't have one. There is no such thing as DeSoto County's succeeding if Memphis fails.
That's why the economic stimulus package for our region is so important. It needs to be less about the region and much more about the city. It's a historic chance to strengthen the urban engine of our economy and to make sure that the rising tide most of all rises our urban boat.
In Nashville, the drive takes you to Williamson County, the 11th wealthiest county in the U.S., with a median family income that's a staggering $95,470. Four nearby counties shatter the $55,000 mark.
Outside of Fulton County, Atlanta has five counties with median family incomes of more than $60,000, peaking with Fayette County's $85,794 and Cobb County's $77,447. In Indianapolis, Marion County gives way to Hamilton County and its $90,119 median family income. Three others top $55,000.
A Red Flag
Here, things are different. The other counties in the Memphis metro do nothing to improve income and education levels, raising a red flag for companies evaluating the region for new operations and investments.
Shelby County is ranked 200th in median family income, and in its Metropolitan Statistical Area, only DeSoto County manages to eke out over $50,000.
Meanwhile, 19.2 percent of Shelby Countians do not have a high-school degree and 25.3 percent have at least 16 years of education. That compares to 26.3 percent and 12.4 percent respectively for the other metro counties.
More Talk Than Walk
It's a troubling reality, particularly in light of a decade's worth of talk - and little walk - about the importance of the region.
Five years have passed since the Memphis Regional Chamber released the Memphis Region Sourcebook, the product of more than two years of work and costing almost $500,000. Intended to give form to the Governors' Alliance on Regional Excellence, the unique tri-state organization cheerleading the report, its 27 oversized pages of gripping graphics, key facts, an inventory of assets, and recommendations are artifacts of a flirtation with regional thinking.
That's too bad, because the report went to great lengths to identify opportunities for the region to learn how to work together on issues every one should care about: air and water quality, farmland preservation, heritage tourism, transportation, and workforce development. It was always hoped that the experience on these issues would inspire confidence to tackle the really tough ones -- think taxes.
Smart Taxes
More and more, some kind of regional tax pooling makes sense here. Without it, Memphis and Shelby County will inevitably be forced to take unilateral action like a payroll tax on the 88,000 people who commute into Shelby County.
Despite all conventional wisdom to the contrary, cities like Portland, Minneapolis, and Denver have actually used regional taxes as a way to unify their regions, and here, it could delight commuters by taking the payroll tax off the table as an option for city and county governments' ailing finances.
The existing tax structure is outdated and unfair, treating each jurisdiction as if it's self-contained and its interests are walled off from its neighbors. There's no connection between who uses roads, arenas, and museums, and who pays for them.
A Better Way
With no rationality and no imperative for regional cooperation, multiple jurisdictions claw for more of a finite tax pie, as Collierville did in pursuing a huge shopping center to get the huge sales taxes that came with it, and in the process, fueling sprawl and commercial zoning designed to create optimal taxes, rather than the optimal community.
In Minneapolis, where the suburbs subsidized the central cities 30 years ago, that situation was reversed when older suburbs were in decline and needed help. Governments put 40 percent of the growth of their commercial and industrial property tax base into a regional pool, and from it, several hundred million dollars a year are redistributed on regionwide priorities like public transit and light rail, parkland, water quality, and smart growth.
In Portland, a three-county, 24-city regional agency makes land use and trans-portation decisions and helps pay for regional services like the convention center, performing arts center, stadium, exposition center, and regional parks. In Denver, seven counties and 31 cities agreed to a regionwide sales tax to pay for light rail.
Future-Sharing
The Mid-South has the muscle to get it done. The Sourcebook called for creation of the Regional Congressional Caucus, which would take advantage of the Mid-South's six U.S. senators and six congressmen inside the Beltway, and the Mid-South Legislative Caucus to fight for shared priorities in the capitals of Tennessee, Arkansas, and Mississippi.
Challenges to the Memphis region are no respecters of state or county lines -- an aging workforce, too few 25- to 34-year-old workers, low educational attainment, racial divisions, and unsustainable sprawl. Sadly, there's a sense in the region outside Memphis that if the future of the city is about a middle-class exodus, entrenched poverty, and hollowed out, deteriorating neighborhoods, that is Memphis' problem, not theirs.
It's what psychiatrists call "magical thinking" with little connection to reality. There's nothing magical about the fact that regions are the competitive units for the new economy, and without a stronger regional platform, any economic growth plans for any part of the region are in jeopardy before they even begin.
But it's often forgotten here that there is no strong regional platform without an equally strong urban core. Too often, regionalism ends up being an olive branch held out by the largest city to the rest of the region, but sadly, it is often unreciprocated. The region can talk the talk of regionalism, but there's little change in behavior (think North Mississippi's recruitment of Memphis companies across the state line and the sprawl-inducing I-269 interstate).
Future Shock
In other words, it's time to understand that there is no such thing as a bright future for Germantown if Memphis doesn't have one. There is no such thing as DeSoto County's succeeding if Memphis fails.
That's why the economic stimulus package for our region is so important. It needs to be less about the region and much more about the city. It's a historic chance to strengthen the urban engine of our economy and to make sure that the rising tide most of all rises our urban boat.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Communications Needed To Cross City, County And State Lines
Now that the chief administrative officers have fired off letters claiming that the other one’s government owes his government money, let’s hope they now schedule a time to get in the same room and talk seriously about the tax equity issues that bedevil Memphis taxpayers.
In fact, it’s been a good week to remember that there’s just no substitute for good, old-fashioned communications, which has seemed so often to be a missing part of our civic culture.
First, there was the letter from Shelby CAO Jim Huntzicker to Memphis’ finance director claiming that city government has shortchanged county government by $125 million in the payment-in-lieu-of-tax payments that Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division makes to Shelby County Government. It seemed most of all to be the return volley for Memphis CAO Keith McGee’s letter a couple of months ago suggesting that city government would no longer provide $14 million in funding to the Memphis and Shelby County Health Department.
Answering The Right Question
While all of this makes for interesting political theater, it makes for little else. Now that each government has staked out its territory, it’s past time for city and county governments to meet and begin the long overdue discussions to answer the fundamental question that has eluded us for 30 years: what is a city service that should be funded by taxpayers of Memphis and what is a regional, or county, service that should be funded by taxpayers of Shelby County?
The present problem is not of either CAO’s making. Long before either of them took up their posts, Memphis and Shelby County governments, with the best of intentions, tried to consolidate many of its services and its programs. Unfortunately, its byproduct was that both governments funded these services, producing an inequitable tax burden for the citizens of Memphis.
For example, for a project like The Pyramid, where the Memphis and Shelby County halved the cost of the building, Memphians at the time actually didn’t pay half. Because they paid 100% of the city’s half and 80% of the county’s half, they were in truth paying 90% of the building’s cost. The same goes for the other departments, agencies, programs and projects in which the governments were (and are) full partners.
It’s Tax Equity, Stupid
That’s why we hope the recent letter-writing doesn’t degenerate into one of those political battles about who looks best or one of those legal battles about whose contractual rights are strongest. If it is, the majority of Shelby Countians – the people living inside Memphis – will have been ill-served by their elected officials in both governments.
Some Shelby Countians like Bartlett Mayor Keith McDonald will undoubtedly continue to contend that Memphians should pay twice because so many of the social, health and judicial services are frequented by Memphians more than non-Memphians. But that misses the point. This isn’t about who uses the services most and it’s not about where the services are located.
No, more to the point, it’s about tax equity. It’s a fundamental principle of American democracy that taxes are redistributed in a way that results in affluent areas supporting services needed by less affluent areas. It’s the same in Shelby County. This isn’t about who uses services the most. It’s about regional services – such as health, planning, arenas and museums – being placed on the largest tax base, the regional county one, so that Memphians pay an equitable tax burden.
Twice Burned
As long as the playing field is so uneven for Memphians, who pay twice for services like schools and health while taxpayers in Germantown pay for them once, our city has a barrier to any programs to attract and retain the middle class and talent. There’s just no logic to the proposition that a family can move from Memphis to the unincorporated area or any other city in Shelby County and receive a tax break of several thousand dollars.
It’s not that these cities and county government are more efficient. Their lower tax rates are simply the result of Memphians paying for services that are in truth more regional than municipal.
Memphis and Shelby County have talked and talked and talked for two decades about negotiating a tax structure that is fairer and a tax burden that is equitable for all Shelby Countians. The idea surfaced again a few months ago after the city’s letter about Health Department funding and it was suggested that city and county decision-makers would begin discussions on this issue.
West Memphis Goes East
Hopefully, it wasn’t the same sort of idle talk that has characterized this question for so long, and that soon, someone will pick up the phone and dial the other and Mr. McGee and Mr. Huntzicker will have the kind of serious, deliberative conversations that can mean so much to the future of our city. In fact, that alone should be reason enough to put it at the top of the priority list for Shelby County.
While we have made no secret of our belief that a number of services should be moved to the county’s tax base, we suspect that most people in our city are like us – open-minded but hopeful that something substantive will take place to help Memphians.
Speaking of communications, we were intrigued by a news report that the West Memphis economic development director has been touring China to build business ties with the emerging Asian economic power house. Our first thought was that the Greater Memphis Chamber and our local government have made the same trek, and we suspect that officials from Northern Mississippi have been part of a similar mission.
Sinking Or Swimming Together
It seems reasonable that all economic development officials should join hands and work together to tout the benefits of doing business with and in our region. As long as we operate on the principle that Memphis and Shelby County have to compete with DeSoto County (mentioned recently as the basis for loosening up the policy for tax freezes here) or that West Memphis operates on the theory that they somehow can sell their city without selling ours as well, we’re not engaging more in wishful thinking than economic development.
It’s counterintuitive to us that the various parts of our region can’t set aside jealousies and rivalries long enough to establish a shared plan and a mutual message to the world. Somehow, the notion that our neighbors across the river seriously believe that their motto, “Turn to West Memphis,” will identify the beleaguered city as a manufacturing and logistics dynamo seems as baseless as the idea that Memphis shouldn’t be selling the assets of our entire region to anyone who will listen.
Meanwhile, we were encouraged by an op-ed column in The Commercial Appeal by Robert L. Barber, Hernando planning director, who made a persuasive case for regional cooperation. It’s so rare for that kind of message to be coming from south of our border. Unfortunately, regionalism here (and in many other cities) results in the hub city reaching out to the region with little of the interest and commitment reciprocated on.
Smart Talk
But Mr. Barber makes the wise point that the current economic meltdown should be used as the impetus to think differently and to create a “common effort for the region’s advancement.” He suggested that perhaps the development of the I-269 corridor should be the vehicle for this new thinking so that it’s not just the vehicle for more unbridled sprawl and runaway development.
In particular, he said that we should think about regional assets like a continuous, interconnected network of greenways, and added that the “destructive nature of development sprawl, the enormous importance of environmental preservation to community health, and many of the ingredients and methods for developing technology-driven economic activity” should be regional priorities.
To this end, he wrote about the importance of “creating and preserving mixed use, pedestrian-friend neighborhoods with a variety of housing and transportation choices, preserved open spaces, and broad community collaboration, among others.”
Plan Now Or Pay Later
We can’t remember when a suburban voice has so eloquently defined the value of smart growth and sustainability. While it is unfortunate that I-269 – the poster child for wasteful spending and developer influence in public works decisions – is the trigger for this level of concern and commitment, Mr. Barber’s comments are welcome nonetheless.
Here’s the thing: anyone familiar with the political machinations that produced I-269 knows that there is little justification to it, except for the political payback by U.S. Senator Trent Lott to powerful political insiders. As we have said several times, the interstate should be our region’s first toll road, with revenues mitigating the negative financial impact on the urban health of our region.
That said, I-269 is a fact of life, and its impact can be profound and transformational. Apparently, because it is widely seen as the antithesis of smart growth and a vehicle for greater and more destructive sprawl, we have been in denial as a community. As a result, there has been no planning for the corridor and the development that it will attract.
To Mr. Barber’s point, it would be good if we do that sooner rather than later. After all, we already know what later looks like.
In fact, it’s been a good week to remember that there’s just no substitute for good, old-fashioned communications, which has seemed so often to be a missing part of our civic culture.
First, there was the letter from Shelby CAO Jim Huntzicker to Memphis’ finance director claiming that city government has shortchanged county government by $125 million in the payment-in-lieu-of-tax payments that Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division makes to Shelby County Government. It seemed most of all to be the return volley for Memphis CAO Keith McGee’s letter a couple of months ago suggesting that city government would no longer provide $14 million in funding to the Memphis and Shelby County Health Department.
Answering The Right Question
While all of this makes for interesting political theater, it makes for little else. Now that each government has staked out its territory, it’s past time for city and county governments to meet and begin the long overdue discussions to answer the fundamental question that has eluded us for 30 years: what is a city service that should be funded by taxpayers of Memphis and what is a regional, or county, service that should be funded by taxpayers of Shelby County?
The present problem is not of either CAO’s making. Long before either of them took up their posts, Memphis and Shelby County governments, with the best of intentions, tried to consolidate many of its services and its programs. Unfortunately, its byproduct was that both governments funded these services, producing an inequitable tax burden for the citizens of Memphis.
For example, for a project like The Pyramid, where the Memphis and Shelby County halved the cost of the building, Memphians at the time actually didn’t pay half. Because they paid 100% of the city’s half and 80% of the county’s half, they were in truth paying 90% of the building’s cost. The same goes for the other departments, agencies, programs and projects in which the governments were (and are) full partners.
It’s Tax Equity, Stupid
That’s why we hope the recent letter-writing doesn’t degenerate into one of those political battles about who looks best or one of those legal battles about whose contractual rights are strongest. If it is, the majority of Shelby Countians – the people living inside Memphis – will have been ill-served by their elected officials in both governments.
Some Shelby Countians like Bartlett Mayor Keith McDonald will undoubtedly continue to contend that Memphians should pay twice because so many of the social, health and judicial services are frequented by Memphians more than non-Memphians. But that misses the point. This isn’t about who uses the services most and it’s not about where the services are located.
No, more to the point, it’s about tax equity. It’s a fundamental principle of American democracy that taxes are redistributed in a way that results in affluent areas supporting services needed by less affluent areas. It’s the same in Shelby County. This isn’t about who uses services the most. It’s about regional services – such as health, planning, arenas and museums – being placed on the largest tax base, the regional county one, so that Memphians pay an equitable tax burden.
Twice Burned
As long as the playing field is so uneven for Memphians, who pay twice for services like schools and health while taxpayers in Germantown pay for them once, our city has a barrier to any programs to attract and retain the middle class and talent. There’s just no logic to the proposition that a family can move from Memphis to the unincorporated area or any other city in Shelby County and receive a tax break of several thousand dollars.
It’s not that these cities and county government are more efficient. Their lower tax rates are simply the result of Memphians paying for services that are in truth more regional than municipal.
Memphis and Shelby County have talked and talked and talked for two decades about negotiating a tax structure that is fairer and a tax burden that is equitable for all Shelby Countians. The idea surfaced again a few months ago after the city’s letter about Health Department funding and it was suggested that city and county decision-makers would begin discussions on this issue.
West Memphis Goes East
Hopefully, it wasn’t the same sort of idle talk that has characterized this question for so long, and that soon, someone will pick up the phone and dial the other and Mr. McGee and Mr. Huntzicker will have the kind of serious, deliberative conversations that can mean so much to the future of our city. In fact, that alone should be reason enough to put it at the top of the priority list for Shelby County.
While we have made no secret of our belief that a number of services should be moved to the county’s tax base, we suspect that most people in our city are like us – open-minded but hopeful that something substantive will take place to help Memphians.
Speaking of communications, we were intrigued by a news report that the West Memphis economic development director has been touring China to build business ties with the emerging Asian economic power house. Our first thought was that the Greater Memphis Chamber and our local government have made the same trek, and we suspect that officials from Northern Mississippi have been part of a similar mission.
Sinking Or Swimming Together
It seems reasonable that all economic development officials should join hands and work together to tout the benefits of doing business with and in our region. As long as we operate on the principle that Memphis and Shelby County have to compete with DeSoto County (mentioned recently as the basis for loosening up the policy for tax freezes here) or that West Memphis operates on the theory that they somehow can sell their city without selling ours as well, we’re not engaging more in wishful thinking than economic development.
It’s counterintuitive to us that the various parts of our region can’t set aside jealousies and rivalries long enough to establish a shared plan and a mutual message to the world. Somehow, the notion that our neighbors across the river seriously believe that their motto, “Turn to West Memphis,” will identify the beleaguered city as a manufacturing and logistics dynamo seems as baseless as the idea that Memphis shouldn’t be selling the assets of our entire region to anyone who will listen.
Meanwhile, we were encouraged by an op-ed column in The Commercial Appeal by Robert L. Barber, Hernando planning director, who made a persuasive case for regional cooperation. It’s so rare for that kind of message to be coming from south of our border. Unfortunately, regionalism here (and in many other cities) results in the hub city reaching out to the region with little of the interest and commitment reciprocated on.
Smart Talk
But Mr. Barber makes the wise point that the current economic meltdown should be used as the impetus to think differently and to create a “common effort for the region’s advancement.” He suggested that perhaps the development of the I-269 corridor should be the vehicle for this new thinking so that it’s not just the vehicle for more unbridled sprawl and runaway development.
In particular, he said that we should think about regional assets like a continuous, interconnected network of greenways, and added that the “destructive nature of development sprawl, the enormous importance of environmental preservation to community health, and many of the ingredients and methods for developing technology-driven economic activity” should be regional priorities.
To this end, he wrote about the importance of “creating and preserving mixed use, pedestrian-friend neighborhoods with a variety of housing and transportation choices, preserved open spaces, and broad community collaboration, among others.”
Plan Now Or Pay Later
We can’t remember when a suburban voice has so eloquently defined the value of smart growth and sustainability. While it is unfortunate that I-269 – the poster child for wasteful spending and developer influence in public works decisions – is the trigger for this level of concern and commitment, Mr. Barber’s comments are welcome nonetheless.
Here’s the thing: anyone familiar with the political machinations that produced I-269 knows that there is little justification to it, except for the political payback by U.S. Senator Trent Lott to powerful political insiders. As we have said several times, the interstate should be our region’s first toll road, with revenues mitigating the negative financial impact on the urban health of our region.
That said, I-269 is a fact of life, and its impact can be profound and transformational. Apparently, because it is widely seen as the antithesis of smart growth and a vehicle for greater and more destructive sprawl, we have been in denial as a community. As a result, there has been no planning for the corridor and the development that it will attract.
To Mr. Barber’s point, it would be good if we do that sooner rather than later. After all, we already know what later looks like.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
