Governing Magazine/December 1994

COMMENTARY

WE NEED NEW WAYS TO GOVERN NEW KINDS OF CITIES

By Camille Cates Barnett

Former Austin, Texas, City Manager Camille Cates Barnett consults,
speaks and writes on urban issues.

Everybody's throwing up their hands about cities. What we need is a
strong mayor. No, we need less politics. Run government like a
business.
 In government circles, the debate gets focused on which structure of
government is better: Strong mayor ("mayor/council" form) or city
manager ("council/manager" form)? We are debating the wrong question.
What is broken in cities is something much bigger than this debate.
The problem is that the governmental structures we have now were
designed for another time.
 These structures were created when the typical city existed pretty
much by itself in a largely unpopulated county with one school
district. Now, however, "cities" are actually metropolitan regions
witha mind-numbing proliferation of juris-dictions: municipal and
county governments, school districts, transit authorities, special
districts, state and federal regional offices, and on and on--
"citistates," in Neal Peirce's term.
 Say "region," and many hear the politically charged term
"metropolitan government." That's why efforts to think bigger must not
begin by consolidating and abolishing governments. That does not work;
all of the energy is spent in turf wars, and nothing gets done.
Instead, we must start by identifying "communities of interest." Start
with problems people care about and find ways to use regional
resources to make measurable progress.
 In some places, that process has already begun:
 --In Ohio, the city of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County have been
cooperating in rebuilding the region's infrastructure. They have
established a separate institution, known as Build Up Greater
Cleveland, that has raised nearly $700 million in non-programmed
capital funds from foundations and other sources.
 --In Oregon, the state, the city of Portland and Multnomah County are
working together to achieve certain benchmarks, such as reducing teen
pregnancy and developing a well-educated work force. It's part of the
Oregon Benchmarks program, which encourages cooperative efforts
between governments across geographic boundaries, and also engages the
private and nonprofit sectors.
 --In New York State, the Rockefeller Institute has been sponsoring a
series of conferences to encourage a regional approach to issues in
the eight-county region around Albany--encompassing some 990
jurisdictions! The effort has led to the introduction of state
legislation to rethink the region's governance.
 These experiments hold the seeds of new structures. What is needed is
to learn from these experiments and create a new model for regional
governance.
 To do so, we will have to begin finding answers to a host of
questions: How do we structure ourselves so all of the incentives--tax
policies, environmental policies, land use policies--support
sustainable cities instead of urban sprawl and social isolation? How
can we create a seamless intergovernmental system that delivers
results focused on community-identified goals? How do we structure
ourselves to reduce dropout rates, teen pregnancy rates, crime rates?
To enhance youth, family and neighborhood vitality? To build workforce
competence? To be competitive in the global economy?
 What might this new structure look like? One scenario might be that
it initially would resemble an expanded version of the interlocal
agreements and contracts for service that are already becoming more
common around the country. Regional players might hold forums to
discuss communities of interest, bringing together people who may
never have met before. Chambers of Commerce, health providers, school
districts, universities, cities, counties, citizen leagues, social
service providers, information-gathering organizations and other
entities might form cooperatives, partnerships and alliances.
 State laws would begin to change, facilitating combinations of
jurisdictions, re-sorting of responsibilities among jurisdictions, and
tax-base sharing. Political leadership would be judged on its ability
to form regional partnerships.
 Whatever these new structures look like, the regions that are first
in developing them will be more desirable, sustainable and
economically competitive. Regions live or die together. A metropolitan
area is one economic, social and physical unit. Communities must find
ways to work together. If they don't, their vitality, force and
freshness will wither.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 1994, Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Reproduction in any form
without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited.
Governing, City & State and Governing.com are registered trademarks of
Congressional Quarterly, Inc.
http://governing.com