It's For Time Localities to Stop Acting Like Nation-States

What will it take for cities and suburban counties in the Commonwealth of Virginia to make common cause, put aside their differences and petty jealousies, and work together to resolve major issues?

The answer won't be found in another study. In the space of 10 years, we've had seven studies of one kind or another by some state-level urban task force or special commission. The result? Cities still face the same problems. So do the fast-growing counties. State laws and regulations continue to strip both types of localities of any flexibility in resolving many of their problems.

Our efforts at regionalism have failed to address the huge challenges facing Virginia's metropolitan areas.

Oh, sure, we can point to a host of bi-lateral and multi-lateral agreements between cities and suburbs. But do they really make a difference in the quality of life in our regions? Do they pump life into areas bereft of life, provide equal educational opportunities for children of all backgrounds, and restore human dignity among those living on the margins?

To make matters worse, localities must contend with the worst recession in 70 years. Even before the meltdown, it made little sense for each city and county to operate as if it were a separate nation-state. It makes less sense now!

Why, for example, does each school district buy its own fleet of school buses when the combined school districts of metropolitan Richmond could place a single order and reduce the unit cost? Why can't state government, which is constitutionally responsible for all local government, demand a similar change in intergovernmental relationships as the national government is demanding of our financial markets and automobile industry?

If the state won't do it, then the task falls to the local governments themselves. But herein lies the problem.

The status quo has built up enormous inertia over the decades, particularly since the early 1950s when cars, highways, the Federal Housing Administration, and public housing tore our cities asunder, splitting wealth from poverty, black from white, public school from private school, and job demand from labor supply.

Virginia's metropolitan areas are beset with localism that jealously guards assets and walls off deficits. This small-scale nationalism blocks any measure deemed controversial. What will it take to get us unstuck?

We need a new and different approach to re gionalism, one that can break through the resistance and set us on a new course. Equally important is an approach that stands a reasonable chance of being launched and that can produce results in a reasonable amount of time.

I propose a new way, one based on the assumption that localities are largely on their own and will not get assistance from higher levels of government. This new way, however, is based on three important factors: What we know, what we have, and what will work.

First, we know that coalitions are more powerful than single parties. Cities and suburban counties must make common cause.

In the Richmond area, for example, there are now more people in poverty who reside in the suburbs than in the city. Problems long associated with the inner city are spilling over into the first-ring suburbs. Segregated schools exist in both the county and the city. Disparities abound within each of the regional localities. Some areas are overwhelmed by growth. Others are starved for it.

Second, this new way is based on what we already have: regional planning districts. Though risk-averse and captive to local self-interest, they constitute the only general assembly of regional localities and, for that reason, we need them. We also need them because their membership is composed largely of elected officials who possess legislative power not available to citizens.

Third, this new way is based on what will work. Whenever citizens press for change, they often prevail. The old maxim is true: When the people lead, the leaders will follow.

To enlist and organize citizens will require regional planning districts to draw on all sectors of the community: the business community for sure -- but all dimensions of the business community, not just large enterprises, but also small businesses, merchants, those in the trades, consumer services, and small-scale manufacturing.

Another key player is the nonprofit community. The people that nonprofit organizations serve, the people they employ, and the thousands of people who volunteer constitute a veritable army that can be mobilized. The religious community, civic associations, political organizations (partisan and non-partisan), the educational community -- every sector of the region needs to be included. Together, they can enlist a rich mix citizens from every locality and of every race, class, and national origin.

A good model for this process is the one used in the development of Richmond's Downtown Master Plan. Citizens were invited to participate in a series of planning charrettes. At least 800 people participated in at least one of these meetings.

The kick-off meeting was electric. The room was packed with citizens and community leaders. Excitement filled the air. The meeting began with a vision of what the downtown could look like.

Just as the Downtown Master Plan began with a concept -- namely, a pedestrian friendly, green, mixed-use, tight-grid community oriented around public life -- a meeting to kick off a regional planning process should begin with a concept of what constitutes a regional community.

Just as citizens were given free rein to plan a downtown that was inviting and beautiful, citizens need free rein to develop a compelling vision for the region. Regional forums attract citizens who care for the whole: the central city and its suburbs; the city and the surrounding counties.

Citizens drawn to a regional forum tend to be global in thinking and less "nationalistic." They are uniters, not dividers. They are much more inclined to seek a diverse, inclusive community that welcomes newcomers and transcends race, class, and political boundary.

Citizens can plan, but in Virginia, unlike some states, they are not empowered to make law. This is precisely why elected leaders and citizens need to work together in drafting a vision that culminates in a concrete plan of action and a timetable for its adoption and execution.

None of this -- calling citizens together, developing the plan, and executing it -- will occur without strong leadership, the kind of leadership that breaks through the logjams and refuses to give in to the naysayers.

Two exemplars of bold, imaginative leadership are Robert Schuman and Jean Monet. Neither was a member of a county board of supervisors or city council. They never resided in Virginia; they may never have even visited Virginia. But what they did should give hope to us who yearn for something better for our metropolitan areas.

They provided the foundation for what ultimately became the European Union. The foundation was laid when they persuaded France and Germany, plus four other European nations, to relinquish control of their own coal and steel industries and create the European Coal and Steel Community. What is stunning is when the agreement was made. It was five years after WWII, a war that cost the lives of approximately 72 million people. France lost half a million people, including 83,000 Holocaust deaths. Germany lost 7 and half million, including 160,000 Holocaust deaths. The number of dead in Germany constituted just over 10 percent of its entire population.

Neither man gave in to retribution. It would have been particularly easy for Schuman, since he had been imprisoned by the Gestapo and, were it not for the intervention of one German, would have been sent to the Dachau death camp. He eventually escaped, however, and fought for the French Resistance.

Instead, Schuman and Monet sought to produce an alliance between France and Germany whose purpose was to end war forever between France and Germany. The Treaty of Paris created multi-lateral control by six European nations over their coal and steel industries, the key industries necessary for the manufacture of armaments.

A nation without control over coal and steel would not be able to wage war. It was a brilliant move, born out of desire for peace, human rights, and the protection of fundamental freedoms.

Now if German and France, after such a devastating war, could agree to relinquish control of their coal and steel industries and place them under a multi-national organization, do you think cities and suburbs in Virginia could agree to regionalize affordable housing, develop public transit, preserve open space, and cooperate in land use planning?

In comparison to what Schuman and Monet confronted, developing real regionalism in Virginia is like a walk in the woods.

This column is an abbreviated version of a keynote address given to the May 2009 board meeting of Virginia First Cities, a coalition of the state's 15 core cities. John Moeser is senior fellow in the Bonner Center for Civic Engagement at the University of Richmond and professor emeritus of urban studies and planning at Virginia Commonwealth University. Contact him at jmoeser@richmond.edu.