the city and citizenship 1. what are the key functions of municipal governments? do...

The City and Citizenship

1

What are the key functions of municipal governments? Do “functions” = “services”? Does scale make any difference (big city v. small municipality)?

Approaches Practical: look at what they actually do (what they spend on) Theoretical: how does governance relate to the nature of

cities? Historical: how have municipal responsibilities evolved? Relational: division of responsibilities between government,

society, economy What is the “public realm?”

What should the government’s role be? How does this relate to the private sector and to civil society? How is this role determined? How central are economic factors?

April 18, 2023The City and Citizenship

2

Cities are limited Not nations – e.g. cannot control immigration or (often) borders Political expectations – cannot refuse services

What is the city’s interest? Can consider political and cultural factors, but economic

concerns primary "cities, like private firms, compete with one another so as to

maximize their economic position. To achieve this objective, the city must use the resources its land area provides by attracting as much capital and as high a quality labor force as is possible.“

How do cities compete economically? Major focus is on land-use policy (e.g. planning, zoning, eminent

domain, building regulations, provision of public services) Little control over labor – cities often try to attract white collar

workers (e.g. thru residential zoning, parks, etc.) Little control over capital, but can minimize taxes on capital and

profits, offer low-cost public utilities, free public land, lax regulation, and discourage unionization


3

Thompson: Apply economic analysis to municipal policy Consider costs of goods and services (and incentives arising from

their provision and method of paying) Does this substitute for considering political choices?

Collectively-consumed goods Provided in one big lump (cannot exclude anyone, so all must

pay) E.g. air pollution control, justice

Merit goods “good” for everyone but priced at zero (city, i.e. taxpayers, bear

cost) E.g. education, museums

Redistribution of income Perform a service for one group while making another group pay E.g. welfare payments

Need to consider price of for each of these to rationally consider incentives and priorities


4

Porter: urban problems rooted in lack of “sustainable economic base” i.e. not enough employment opportunities, wealth creation, role

models Cf. Wilson on “jobless ghettos” Solution not to provide more services or to redistribute wealth,

but to create wealth Social model v. economic model of development

Social model tries to meet needs of individuals, e.g. by income assistance, housing subsidies Specific development efforts focused on business subsidies and

preference programs Solution not in “perpetually increasing social investment and hoping for

economic activity to follow” (LeGates, p. 276) Economic model focuses on trying to create wealth by creating

favorable business climate Identify real advantages of inner cities and address real weaknesses Consider proper role of city government and community organizations


5

Advantages Strategic location: near business centers, transportation and

communication nodes Local market demand: low-wage, but high-density = high

spending power per acre Integration with regional clusters (cf. Sassen) Human resources: high unemployment, entrepreneurs

Disadvantages Land may not be usable Building costs high (b/c of restrictive zoning, architectural codes,

union contracts, set asides, etc.) Other costs (insurance, permits, regulation, neighborhood hiring,

etc.) Security costs high – deter businesses locating Low employee and management skills Limited access to debt and equity capital Anti-business attitudes (on part of workers, community activists)


6

Private sector Basic goal to “create and support economically viable businesses built on true competitive

advantage” (LeGates, 282) Do business in city, e.g. franchises and other business relationships Target corporate philanthropy to business-to-business efforts, e.g. job training

Urban governments Direct investments according to need, not political considerations (e.g. preferences based

on need, not race or gender; neighborhood hiring as criterion) Reduce “artificial and outdated government-induced costs” (284) prepare land for use (e.g. brownfield development); enhance infrastructure Deliver economic development programs and services through business (“mainstream,

private sector institutions”) not CBOs Community-based organizations

Useful in providing social services (e.g. low-income housing), not economic development - raises conflicts between economic goals and community accountability

Work to change workforce attitudes Work-readiness and job-referral programs

Overall, “businesspeople, entrepreneurs, and investors must assume a lead role” others (government officials, community activists) support them key to a “rational economy strategy” that controls intolerable costs


7

What is the role of municipal governments in a metropolitan region? “market-like set of local governments competing for

residents” (Orfield in LeGates, 289) Cf. Downs’ fourth pillar, Peterson’s “city interest” consider services as “costs” and taxes as “revenues”

Typical municipal budget priorities “core services” e.g. public safety, sanitation services Income maintenance, health services, courts Parks, recreation, housing, community development,

libraries Interest on debt

Two key tools of municipal government Tax policy (mix of property, income, sales, fees) Land-use regulations (zoning, subsidies, etc.)


8

Downs and the Metropolitan Ideal Based on four pillars – widely-held aspirations rooted in

“unconstrained individualism” (LeGates, 247) 1: “ownership of detached, single-family homes on spacious

lots” 2: “ownership and use of a personal, private automotive

vehicle” 3: suburban workplaces should be low-rise, park settings, with

lots of close-by parking 4: “small communities with strong local self-governments”

The 4 pillars generate significant flaws The problems (and struggles) resulting from these are much of

the “content” of suburban/metropolitan politics Redistribution of power to have-nots not the most appropriate

framework for discussing suburban politics Are Arnstein’s criteria for distinguishing levels of participation

useful in looking at citizen involvement in suburban politics?


9

Flaw 1: Excessive Travel i.e. sprawl “makes cars happy” Traffic congestion typically blamed on newest arrivals and on real estate

developers Typical political response is to resist new housing developments (cf. chap. 1 in

Duany) Flaw 2: Little housing for low-wage workers

Single-family detached too expensive for service workers Multi-family affordable housing often resisted Difficult for workers to get to these low-wage jobs spread out across suburbs

(look at all the “now hiring” signs) Flaw 3: Difficult to finance new/expanded infrastructure

E.g. roads, water systems, utilities, parks In cities, issue typically maintaining and updating infrastructure Pits established against new residents

Flaw 4: Difficult to accommodate LULUs i.e. locally undesirable land uses such as landfills, runway extensions Fragmentation of metropolitan governments means few looking at, and fewer

willing to incur political costs of fixing broad problems Typical political response is NIMBY


10

What are the basic causes of metropolitan problems? Orfield: political economy as shaped by municipal

powers and constraints Downs: dominant ideal and its implications Jackson: utopian ideal (“crabgrass frontier”)

Possible solutions Orfield: weaken link between tax policy and land-use

regulations Downs: several options, geared toward affecting

incentives of metropolitan residents Both economistic in trying to adjust to “consumer”

choices, market externalities, etc


11

Competing municipalities try to reap fiscal dividend Focus on net effect of specific land uses on revenues

and expenditures Accomplished by regulating (limiting) land uses

Fiscal zoning: “deliberate attempt by a local government to reap the best fiscal dividend by limiting the types of land uses within its jurisdiction (LeGates, 290) Positive dividend: office parks, industrial development,

high-value single-family homes Negative dividend: larger townhouses, inexpensive

single-family homes, larger apartments, mobile homes These political decisions affect housing,

employment, municipal services


12

Competition for tax base among municipalities Wasteful: zero-sum game Biased: those with early advantages can more easily attract

“positive dividend” uses Stratification of metropolitan areas

“core” communities may not be able to expand or attract higher-value uses (e.g. expensive homes) and may have higher social expenditures

Edge communities may suffer from massive short-term extension of infrastructures (cf. Downs’ third flaw)

Very few are clear winners Consider this in looking at specific suburbs in Northwest (e.g. Des

Plaines, South Barrington) and also challenges faced by central city Contributes to sprawl

Municipalities have incentive to promote growth to pay for current expenses and debt

Heightens competition for new housing, commercial (and leapfrogging)


13

Downs European-style comprehensive metropolitan planning unlikely, so

what then…? Cannot abandon the four pillars – need “individualism sensitive

to collective behavior problems, not unconstrained individualism” (252)

Specific suggestions: sizable areas of high-density development “Balanced blend” of different types and prices of housing State governments impose constraints on local governments to

“act responsibly to meet area-wide needs” More realistic accounting of collective costs of individual(istic)

behavior E.g. congestion pricing Fees on “exclusive zoning” to subsidize affordable housing elsewhere

Flexible (not fixed) mass transit


14

the city and citizenship 1. what are the key functions of municipal governments? do...

Documents

economic factors

economic analysis

economic activity

economic position

labor cities

proper role of city

wealth social model

difference big city