STL Develops

Last month I attended a community forum at the Old Post Office hosted by FOCUS St. Louis and Metropolis St. Louis. The forum was about how a global economy affects the Midwest. Panelists were Richard Longworth, senior fellow at The Chicago Council on Global Affairs and author of Caught in the Middle: America’s Heartland in the Age of Globalism and Rob Paral, principal at the consulting firm Rob Paral and Associates and author of The Chicago Council on Global Affairs’ inaugural Heartland Paper, “Mexican Immigration in the Midwest: Meaning and Implications.”　The discussion was moderated by former Governor Bob Holden. The panelists explained that the Midwest was once the center of progress for the country and Industrialization occurred largely in the Midwest and was a major reason that the quality of life increased so much in the country. However, this region in general has tended to focus on this successful past and cling to it tightly as a person would a ship in the ocean. The problem is the ship has been sinking and it’s time to build a new one. Rob Paral explained that Mexican Immigration has been increasing greatly in the Midwest and will continue to do so as long as there are available low skill jobs. In order to build a better future the panelists recommend two general frameworks.

First, The Midwest needs to work as a region to gain political influence and increase innovation. For example, we have several of the top universities in the country, but often they compete with each other rather than collaborate. Furthermore, we fight for federal resources rather than work together to demand more. Second, we need to embrace Mexican Immigration. As long as there are low-skill jobs available and a shortage of Americans willing to work in them, there will be immigration. Therefore, we must work to incorporate and naturalize these immigrants. The first step would be to have a legal immigration process that is realistic and allows low-skilled workers access to the US. One striking example from Longworth’s book about the reality of Mexican Immigration is a factory in rural Illinois. The factory workers have transformed from predominantly white to predominantly Mexican workers earning far less than the white workers used to. Many workers recent these Mexicans for taking there jobs. However, the reality of the situation is that factory would not operate in that location paying the high wages the white workers earned, it would simple leave the country. The way I see it is the option is not white workers earning a large salary versus Mexicans earning a low salary. The real options are Mexicans earning a low salary and an open plant in town or no plant at all and thus no income coming into the community from it.

Midwesterners are proud people who were the backbone of the country for a couple of generations. People could earn a good living with little education, but those days are over. We can continue to pretend that the government or Mexicans or any other excuse we want to make is what has changed this. However, the reality is globalization has been occurring, is occurring and will continue to occur. We have to compete against countries that have the ability to create many products at similar or better quality levels and have a work force willing to work for far less than the typical American. In order to regenerate our economy we need to work to innovate and create new products and services that are better than what the rest of the world can. Furthermore, we need to embrace immigrants who can help us compete including low-skilled Mexican workers.

A quote I recently read in the December 2008 issue of Urban Land which is published by the Urban Land Institute, made me think about St. Louis.  The author Patrick Hanlon, a community branding expert, wrote “The strength of community lies in spirit-shared values, trust in one’s neighbors, and a vision filled with hope and dreams.” Do we have these elements of spirit Hanlon outlines?

He later outlines 7 elements that are strands of a community’s culture: creation story, creed, icons, rituals, lexicon, non-believers, and leaders and claims cities with a rich cultural heritage relish all of them.  Do we have these elements?

I think we are stronger in the elements of community culture than the strengthening elements of spirit Hanlon outlines.  I would like to know how you feel. Where are we strong? Where are we lacking? What is our creation story, icons, lexicon? Who are our leaders?

I recently attended the holiday luncheon for the St. Louis Section of the American Planning Association (APA). In the beginning of the luncheon, Dr. Mark Abbott of Harris Stowe and the current President of the APA St. Louis chapter mentioned that he thought St. Louis was the most important city in the United States for planners for a variety of reasons. I didn’t write down his exact quote, but I think I’ve accurately written his point. Since he mentioned this, I’ve been wondering, why would St. Louis be the most important city for Urban Planners? I came to the conclusion that if St. Louis becomes a great city once again many extremely important and difficult problems will have been solved.

First, Industrial cities in the Midwest and Northeast continue to struggle. How to replace the jobs and economic power of heavy industry, as well as make use of the land that was formerly occupied by these uses, is a major problem for cities. If St. Louis succeeds, there will need to be a replacement for these industries.

Secondly, St. Louis is racially polarized, and has historically been a city with harsh racial oppression and segregation. I’m convinced if St. Louis is to succeed there will need to be a unified city and not two separate and distinct communities, largely divided by North and St. Louis. This is a problem not unique to St. Louis, but in many ways heightened. There are no other large minority communities, so it is largely a black and white issue. Also, the city is one of the most segregated in the country. If black and white St. Louis were able to largely work together for the region it would be an enormous accomplishment as well as an extremely powerful national force.

The third reason St. Louis could be the most important American city for planners is the fact that it has fallen so far. It is the poster child for urban decline. While other cities may be in worse shape, none were ever as prominent and successful as St. Louis once was. Detroit is the only other city in St. Louis’s league in terms of the amount of decline an American city has endured. If St. Louis successfully turned around it would be a shining example and undoubtedly have tremendous influence on the success of other industrial American cities.

MetroLink is at a crossroads. Faced with budget restraints Metro is either going to have to reduce services if funding levels remain the same or expand service if St. Louis County voters approve a 1/2 cent sales tax increase to along with an already approved city increase. In my view the debate of whether the tax should be approved comes down to the question is Metro responsibly managing public money or are taxpayers in essence wasting their money on Metro funding. Of course beyond this issue are ideological arguments running to extremes. There are those on the far right that think there should be little or no taxes and everybody can use their money as they see fit and all will be utopia. On the far left are people who think few if any people should use cars and if we all spent our auto-related money on public transit all would be utopia. Most of us realize that we need a strong public transportation system in order to: allow those who can’t afford a car, to work and go about their lives, reduce pollution, reduce congestion on the roads for drivers. At the same time most of us realize it is far too expensive for St. Louis to build a transportation system heavily reliant on rail travel like Chicago or new York, and realistically it is not going to happen anytime soon. If we tried to do it we would bankrupt the region. So if we throw the extreme vies out the window, what is the debate on this proposition about?

It comes down to question what the tax payers will get for their money? Will they get a more efficient transportation system that better meets the public transportation need in the region, or will Metro squander their hard earned money? The state recently completed an audit of Metro focusing on its handling of the cross county extension. The Audit finds that metro mismanaged the recently completed cross county expansion and questions several additional compensations that were paid to staff members. You can read the full report in order to see what the state auditor found as well as Metro’s response to the findings. It is important to note that the report is critical of some of metro’s spending and the management of the cross county extension, but not Metro’s overall handling of the regions public transportation system.

I am willing to forgive a company for making a mistake, and clearly management of the cross county expansion was mistake. I believe partially because it was an extremely large project for Metro to take on with little experience. Also, they were allegedly pressured to use local companies when larger companies from out state, with more experience could have been used. The fact remains that demand for public transportation is up and Metro is losing a significant amount of funds unrelated to cost overruns and wasted spending. According to Metro’s website the reduced revenue includes:

• Federal subsidies, peaking at $22 million annually, were phased out by 1999.

• State of Missouri subsidies were reduced from $3.5 million in 2001 to $1.4 million today.

• Regional leaders elected to build the Shrewsbury I-44 MetroLink Branch with local funds to speed construction. Metro must commit $37 million annually in Prop M funds to pay back the bonds.

• St. Louis County reduced its appropriation to Metro by nearly $10 million to meet non-transit obligations in 2009.

• $10 million in federal startup funds for the Shrewsbury I-44 MetroLink Branch will expire in Fiscal Year 2010.

• Municipal TIF projects have diverted up to $8 million annually from 1/2 cent transportation fund

If we are going to be a progressive region, we simply need a strong transportation system. If we want to just stick with the old and continue to spend money on roads and reduce spending on public transportation, we are going to be left behind once again. This attitude of ignoring population trends, which suggest the future population increase will be in urban areas as urban sprawl is beginning to reverse, is akin to those who decided St. Louis should stick to reliance on the river and not paying to lay railroad tracks that would have linked us with New York. You may remember Chicago decided to try the new technology and lay the rail road tracks. St. Louis needs to begin to think progressively and fund public transportation, while making sure to keep pressure on Metro to perform.