Dayton Regionalism (Cleveland, Cincinnati, Lorain: 2013, neighborhood, buying)

[SWOH]

It seems now that the discussion of Regionalism is now coming back in a serious manner:

OneDayton pushes for one consolidated government | www.mydaytondailynews.com
(behind the paywall, sorry!)

Or Esrati wrote it up on his blog:
The secret group trying to do regionalism without telling anyone: One Dayton


A lot of big names behind it, including Mont. Co. commissioner Dan Foley. What was particularly interesting to me was in the interviews, Riverside's mayor was skeptical while Centerville's mayor seemed to only be slightly reserved from a whole-hearted endorsement.


I'm personally 100% for it. There is way too much in-county competition going on, and I think each city within Montgomery Co. has a distinct set of core competencies which sets it apart from every other city in the county. That way there could be a more concentrated effort behind building the north and west valley as a logistics hub, Austin Pike / I-75 as an IT / Data Analysis corridor, Riverside / Kettering into a defense support hub, etc. It could also help keep the mixed-use movement prospering downtown, throw more support behind low-cost pocket stores and offices throughout Dayton city limits, and eliminate a lot of the retail cannibalization from which this metro area has continually suffered for years now.

[Natural510]

It's definitely the way to go in a shrinking, globalized economy. Eventually states will have to consolidate (figuratively) into broader regions in order to remain viable. Otherwise they will be completely left behind California, the PNW & the Bos-Wash corridor.

[Dayton Sux]

"...distinct set of core competnencies"...hmmm....

@@@@

On a more serious note, the metro area that should be looked at for regional governance is Portland, Oregon. Portland gets a lot press for culutural things ('hipsters') and their transit system.

From a public policy/local govt. POV the interesting thing is that Portland managed to make regionalism, and regional growth control, work across three counties and multiple municipalities, via "Metro". Metro is a good example of evolutionary & incremental movement toward regionalism, sort of forced via a statewide growth control law back in the 1970s, though Metro was not originally set up to implement growth control)

The Dayton area would be in a similar situation in that there are multiple local govts and layers of government.. With Tri-Met there isnt a merger per-se, as local governments are not merged/absorbed into a large entity.

Here's the wiki: Metro

[hensleya1]

OHKID--

Although I like the idea in theory, I'm actually highly opposed to unifying the regional governments if it meant that the core city had a disproportionately large voice and say in regional matters. People leave the city proper for a reason, whether it be schools, jobs, political leanings, or simply the tax dollars voting with their feet and leaving. Extending the city's influence out to the suburban areas simply defeats the whole purpose of those people moving in the first place.

Dayton's leadership has made some really poor investments and choices over the years (as Esrati doesn't hesitate to point out - such as buying up empty buildings and playing various cockamamie games to shift liabilities such as street lights over to property owners). It doesn't take a genius to say that money from the suburbs would flow into the city, which the city would likely be liable to blow on other poor investments. And I doubt the suburban taxpayer would like to see that.

Plus, the core cities tend to have a habit of using regional councils as leverage over the suburbs. Example:

Obama's Plan for Ohio

Around 2006, Cleveland-area planners began floating proposals to grant the city access to taxes collected by surrounding suburbs. Their model was the Minneapolis–St. Paul region, where the Minnesota state legislature forces reluctant suburbanites to “share” their tax revenue with the cities. Cleveland’s regionalists also touted Portland, Ore., for its metropolitan planning agency...

In October 2007, Cleveland’s new regionalists sprang into action. The Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (NOACA), the five-county MPO that channels federal transportation funding to the region, took an unprecedented step. Using powers conferred by NOACA’s weighted voting system, members from Cleveland and its poorer, inner-ring suburbs threatened to veto the construction of a highway interchange in Avon, a fast-growing, affluent suburb in neighboring Lorain County, unless Avon agreed to “share” taxes from businesses that moved near the new road.

Outraged board members from outlying counties felt strong-armed by Cleveland and the inner-ring suburbs of Cuyahoga County. Avon mayor Jim Smith said his supposedly voluntary agreement to “share” the town’s taxes with Cleveland felt more like the action of a hostage with a gun at his head. Cleveland’s regionalists, on the other hand, were delighted. They saw the Avon deal as a first big step for their ambitious new agenda to seize effective political and economic control of area suburbs.

Because the city of Dayton is just as infected with the same provincial attitude as the suburbs is, no, I don't support regionalism, as it would just go down a road like this. It would just be a vehicle to channel suburban tax money into a city that won't spend it wisely. You saw this in James McGhee's virulent opposition to the construction of I-675 (which wound up in federal court) and you see this in the attitudes of the locals - few from Westwood go to Bellbrook, and visa versa.

The dog-eat-dog attitude needs to go, and at least one mayoral candidate (AJ Wagner) realizes this, and says that he doesn't care if the development comes to Dayton, to Austin Landing, or to Pentagon Park, because all of those areas are from "Dayton". Nobody in West Chester says they're from West Chester, they say they're from Cincinnati - because without the core city, the region wouldn't have its name - and a development, regardless of where it is, lifts the whole region up economically when it comes to town.

[Dayton Sux]

The dog-eat-dog attitude needs to go, and at least one mayoral candidate (AJ Wagner) realizes this, and says that he doesn't care if the development comes to Dayton, to Austin Landing, or to Pentagon Park, because all of those areas are from "Dayton

Bingo..AJ is right on target in this statement. The zero sum thinking has to go...and it comes from the city as much as the suburbs.

I think most suburbanites will via this as a "bail out Dayton" plan, unless there is some benefit to the suburbanites.

If you can sell this as a way to actually reduce local income taxes and property taxes in the suburbs, it may have a chance.

You'd have to sell it as an equalization + reduction of taxes coming from streamlined/reduced local government staffing and economies of scale in purchases and operations, etc.

Otherwise this will be a very tough sell.

[Dayton Sux]

Cleveland’s regionalists also touted Portland, Ore., for its metropolitan planning agency...

Metro has an elected board, so if the population of a metro area resides mostly outside the city limits, in suburbia, the board composition could reflect that.

Im not sure if this is also the case in Louisville. When the city & county merged some county areas actually got better representation as the new "wards" were smaller than the old county commissioner districts, so more like true neighborhood representation. In Louisville the opposition to merger came mostly from the city, since the feeling that there was that merged govt would dilute city representation.

The Louisville situation was a lot different than Dayton due to the differences in local government and culture, too. But that was one example on the issues of city vs suburban representation & control of a merged government..

[CarpathianPeasant]

Add to the mix for what it's worth:

Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission | One Region ... One Vision ... One Future

[SWOH]

^Yep, that's the sad thing about the proposal in the OP... MVRPC was completely bypassed by Foley and Friends.

I'm not sure why.

[CarpathianPeasant]

Originally Posted by OHKID

^Yep, that's the sad thing about the proposal in the OP... MVRPC was completely bypassed by Foley and Friends.

I'm not sure why.

Dayton (the city itself) is organized to the hilt. It isn't necessarily exceptionally streamlined in all respects and is quite often well outside of the understanding of even the residents, never mind any outsiders born and bred amid something else (including your nearest suburb).

The odds are excellent many people with grand plans never heard of the MVRPC.

[Dayton Sux]

These regional planning organizations are found througout the US.

The way it was explained to me by a former neighbor who worked for the Louisville one (called KIPDA, was they were set up to coordinate the expenditure of funds on a regional basis, so there wasn't duplication/waste of $$$.

For example, say, both Hooterville and Mayberry wanted fed funds to do a big beef-up of their local airports. But it would be a duplication of funding for both to get this, so the regional planning agency would make the call which airport would be the best investment, or something like that.


They also provided planning assistance for smaller local governemnts who couldnt afford local planning agencies (it was also a Fed requirment that a locality had a comprehensive land use plan to recieve Fed $$$, and a lot of smaller places didnt have this tech. capacity).

My neighbor called hers a "section 401a clearinghouse", essentially a clearninghouse for..mostly.... federal transportation but also other funding.

Section 401a was apparently the statutory or executive order or OMB ciruculatr that was the legal basis for these agencies.

And, as said, the intent for these agencies was more about coordinating and prioritizing vs land use planning (MVRPC does priorization of funding requests).

I know in our case transportation planning was at one time seperate, done by something called the TPC (?)(Transportation Planning Committee?), which predated MVRPC. TPC did the intitial transporation planning for our area, coordinating btw, mostly, Mont. & Greene counties.

Eventually the TPC was rolled in to the MVRP, back in the early 1980s.