For Release Sunday, August 9, 2009
© 2009 Washington Post Writers Group
A funny thing happened since the inauguration as city-watchers waited for the Obama White House’s Office of Urban Affairs to take shape.
In effect, the office became less necessary. And for urban and metropolitan America, that’s good news.
Even as he campaigned for president, Barack Obama declared that Washington needed to end its indifference to urban America, to “promote strong cities as a backbone of regional growth” and a competitive national economy.
But most observers–myself included–thought a White House urban office wouldn’t help cities much unless it could wield a big stick, directing federal departments long stuck on their own policy “silos” to start, for a change, working together in field operations to help grassroots America.
It seemed that would be a Herculean task–and one not made easier by Obama’s appointment of Adolfo Carrion, a successful president of New York’s Bronx borough but a man without prior federal government experience, to head the new urban affairs office.
But then an amazing thing happened. From Obama’s Week One, a kind of spontaneous combustion of voluntary cooperation erupted at the top level of departments–especially Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, Education, and Environmental Protection.
The quickly approved Recovery Act, spanning multiple departments, was one catalyst. And the newly appointed Cabinet and sub-Cabinet officials, many veterans of years of work in cutting-edge city and state governments, moved quickly to identify joint approaches–synchronizing, for example, aid for new transit stops and affordable housing, or energy-saving weatherization and revitalizing low-income neighborhoods.
The process wasn’t–and isn’t–perfect. But in an odd way, you can credit Ronald Reagan. By declaring government “the problem,” deauthorizing and/or defunding all the federal programs to aid cities and communities he could, Reagan created an urban policy vacuum. Neither George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton or George W. Bush did much to correct it. Increasingly, creative leaders in cities and metro regions realized they had to cope with their challenges, on their own, including innovative cross-border, metro-wide alliances.
Now the Obama Cabinet, including such seasoned urban veterans as Shaun Donovan (HUD) and Arne Duncan (Education), instinctively looks for collaborative ways to address city-region challenges. Like the activist brain trust President Franklin Roosevelt brought to Washington after the Roaring Twenties era of Republican tax-little, do-little administrations, the Obama crew represents a new cycle of activist American governance.
Carrion explains that the new White House Urban Affairs office will jump start a working group including officials from a broad range of departments–even Treasury, Justice, Small Business, Commerce and Labor–whose missions impact cities. And Derek Douglas, a member of Carrion’s team, has been made a member of the Domestic Policy Council, positioned to represent urban issues at the highest White House level.
The big immediate task Obama has handed Carrion’s office is to arrange a series of listening tours to pull Cabinet officials out of the “bubble” of official Washington and into cities and metro areas as they face real challenges. Philadelphia was first, July 23, with Kansas City, Denver and possibly Atlanta upcoming. The idea, says Carrion, is based on the president’s “bottom up approach,” identifying creative local solutions that Washington, in one form or another, can support.
Obama has also ordered–for the first time in 30 years, since 1979 under President Jimmy Carter–a serious interagency review of all federal programs that impact cities. Urban observers anticipate it will be a quality effort because the man in charge will be a top administration intellect, urban analyst and author Xavier de Souza Briggs, Obama’s appointee as director of general government programs at the Office of Management and Budget.
It’s hard to find a mayor or city activist who doesn’t believe these steps, plus the new administration’s collegial, open attitudes, represent an extraordinarily positive turnaround.
Still, stumbling blocks are evident.
First–nomenclature, choosing the name “White House Office of Urban Affairs” rather than “Urban and Metropolitan Affairs,” or simply “Metropolitan Affairs.” The word “urban” suggests to many–especially suburbanites–declining cities to be shunned. But America can’t succeed without supporting the economic engine of its cities and suburbs combined–the metro-wide message that Obama repeatedly underscores in speeches, but somehow bypassed in naming the new office.
A second caveat: Years of denigrating government forced out many talented, committed employees across the departmental landscape. It may take years to repair a hollowed out federal service.
Last: The ground is shifting, with global recession, massive housing foreclosures, growing pockets of suburban poverty, and more immigrants heading to suburbs. And the federal government faces huge, immediate decisions on economic policy, coping with explosive budgets, climate protection, health care and more. It’s likely to be a bumpy ride.
Yet the way those mega-issues get resolved could have a greater impact on cities than any initiatives that are officially labeled “urban” or even “metro.”
The good news: at least we’ve begun to open our eyes to the possibilities of smarter, connected strategies.
Neal Peirce’s e-mail is npeirce@citistates.com.
For reprints of Neal Peirce’s column, please contact Washington Post Permissions, c/o PARS International Corp., WPPermissions@parsintl.com, fax 212-221-9195. For newspaper syndication sales, Washington Post Writers Group, 202-334-5375, wpwgsales@washpost.com.
6 Comments
Message received from United Neighborhoods of America:
Great post. You may be interested in our blog, which covers many of these same issues:
http://unca-acf.org/
and our report on Promise Neighborhoods:
http://www.alliance1.org/Public_Policy/Neighborhoods/Tipping_neighborhoods.pdf
Patrick Lester
Sr. Vice President for Public Policy
Alliance for Children and Families
United Neighborhood Centers of America
I find the urban debate in USA so interesting and so far from the almost absent debate here in Spain on the impact of recession on cities. I have been following Obama’ urban agenda since the election campaign and I was starting to feel the promising Office was starting to be a failure, but your column makes it clear that there is some work on the way.
Individual collaborative efforts need a platform . In Europe whereas, the INTEREG program is relatively recent, there were pioneering efforts in the cross border regions of The Netherlands and Germany; and the borders of France, Germany and Switzerland in the ’50s and 60s.
In the example of British Columbia, it is provincial support that has powered the system’s evolution. What is needed is a platform and consistent support. Will America see that happen?
There maybe more smoke here than a fire.
On regional city building exercises, check this article from City Mayors.
Read this article about the new system Seattle is unveiling:
See:
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/reader_feedback/public/display.php?thread=164082&offset=120#post_696029
Comments: Link’s ticket system confounds light-rail riders
You will see it mentions Vancouver and Portland as having similar systems Seattle residents are beginning to eperience what regionalism can bring on the ground.
A comment wondered why Seatle couldn’t have simple system like Tokyo? Well there is no system like Tokyo in US., which seems to miss this layperson.
Meanwhile, there is more advanced version announced by an urban community in France. Urban Community’s are the most integrated version of interlocal cooperation mechanisms in France.
Please see what modes of transport are included there:
http://www.agglo-larochelle.fr/gestion/actualites/documents/doc_317.pdf
La Rochelle Invents a world of à la carte mobility
I read an article today, which I thought you and your readers might find of interest. Seattle is in the process of using a regional transportation ticketing system.
You will see the article mentions Vancouver and Portland as having similar systems Seattle residents, it seems are the second region in American to experience this type of convenience
A commentator of this article wondered why Seattle couldn’t have a simple system like Tokyo. It seems like this individual, and perhaps others like him, do not realize that Tokyo is a system with a general purpose metro government, which makes service delivery across the region a simpler task.
I should also mention that one urban community in France, La Rochelle, prides itself in applying the sort of ticketing convenience across a wider range of services.. For those who are unfamiliar, an urban community is the most integrated version of interlocal cooperation mechanisms types in France.
For the example fo La Rochelle, please see the article: La Rochelle Invents a World of a la Carte Mobility.
La Rochelle Invents a world of à la carte mobility
I am in the process of writing an article on interlocal cooperation. It ’s focus is the regional districts of British Columbia with comparative discussion of U.S.,Europe and Australia.
I will also discuss La Rochelle, as it is a community of small towns. As I have mentioned earlier in a comment on another article, interlocal cooperation also helps small units to punt above their weight. La Rochelle exemplifies that to the benefit of itself as a whole. Please see:
http://www.agglo-larochelle.fr/anglais/cda/index.php
Unity makes us stronger!
18 towns join hands to build the future of an entire area together.
18 towns, side-by-side, form a community of 147,000 people, open to the Atlantic … and to the world beyond.
18 towns, each withparticular assets and projects, pool their resources to realize that potential.
http://www.agglo-larochelle.fr/gestion/actualites/documents/doc_317.pdf
La Rochelle Invents a world of à la carte mobility