Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Tim Kaine’s Urban Policy: Spend Mo’ Money

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

The Kaine administration has quietly made public its “Urban Policy Report” by posting it on the website of the Secretariat of Commerce and Trade. The report, which results from the labors of a task force appointed by Gov. Timothy M. Kaine a year ago, never got much publicity. I don’t recall any articles written about in the Mainstream Media, and I couldn’t even find a notice of it among the Governor’s press releases for the past three months. Furthermore, no one seems willing to claim the report: Although the task force participants are listed, the authorship is anonymous.

The purpose of the report was to outline achievable goals, actions and measurable benchmarks to track the progress of Virginia’s “urban” areas, defined as areas with population over 50,000 and density exceeding 1,000 per square mile. It encompasses both older cities and urbanizing counties.

The report cites five broad goals:

  1. Promote economic integration in urban jurisdications and surrounding region (as a means of combatting inner city poverty).

  2. Improve the educational attainment and workforce readiness of urban populations.

  3. Strengthen the economic competitiveness of urban jurisdictions and surrounding areas.

  4. Ensure a high quality of life in urban areas.

  5. Ensure that urban infrastructure, transportation systems and the environment will support a prosperous future for current citizens.

All worthy goals, to be sure. But in recommendation after recommendation, the report calls for more vigorous action by state and local government. The common theme can be summarized succinctly: Spend mo’ money. By contrast, nowhere does the report hint that perhaps reducing taxes to stimulate economic activity might exercise a palliative effect.

Unfortunately for the Kaniacs, with state economic growth slowing, two rounds of tax increases since 2004, and the end of double-digit increases in state revenues, “mo’ money” is not likely to materialize. Just guessing: Budgetary realities may explain why the Governor never cranked up his spin machine for this report.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

7 responses to “Tim Kaine’s Urban Policy: Spend Mo’ Money”

  1. Spank That Donkey Avatar
    Spank That Donkey

    Maybe they should try Sim-City.. the video game.. When you lower taxes you get more economic growth, and gain population..

    at least the older versions, I haven’t played the newer versions…

    I gravitated to Caesar III where you build a city using the same tools, but get to raise an army also to kill anyone who wants to destroy your city or province…

    In other words it incorporates a ‘defense industry’, and a means to project power… but most importantly if your city is not making money… and paying a tribute to Caesar (Rome), he sends his own legions to destroy you…

    Armed IRS agents, more or less.

  2. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    I played an early version of Caesar some 8-9 years ago. I kept taxes low and built lots of theaters, colliseums, wells and marketplaces to keep the people happy, but they kept burning my city down. The Roman legions were the least of my problems.

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Dr. Earl H. McClenney, of Virginia State University, was the report’s author.

  4. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Anon 11:09 is in error. McClenney was not the author; it was a project of the Department Housing and Community Development.

  5. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    “The purpose of the report was to outline achievable goals, actions and measurable benchmarks to track the progress of Virginia’s “urban” areas, defined as areas with population over 50,000 and density exceeding 1,000 per square mile. It encompasses both older cities and urbanizing counties.”

    This sort of definition is a sure to result in data that is garbage in and garbage out. At l.56 pn / .78 du ac it covers the whole universe unless “area” means a municipality if which case it is meaningless.

    When it prints our and we can read it we will add more but at first glance it just stands in the way of doing something useful because it will be said “we already looked at that issue.”

    EMR

  6. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    What a sameful waste of paper — Yes, I printed it out.

    Turn to page 29 as see why the report is meaningless.

    The task force had 28 members, 6 state agency secretaries, 19 reps for cities and three reps of “urban” counties.

    Thumb through the text and what you see is “city” data.

    Garbage in – garbage out.

    As the definition Jim quoted suggests they confused urban with “city.”

    Never, ever use the word “city” in data collection if you hope to have a meaningful result for the reasons we have spelled out in columns of 28 Nov and 12 Dec 2005 and 3 Jan and 20 Mar 2006.

    There is not a single thing about making Fundamental Change in governance structure and thus this report is a demonstration of the working definition of insanity:

    Do the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

    Jim Bacon is right — laudable goals, no concievable way that they will be reached.

    EMR

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Anon 12:46 leaves an interesting note. McClenney was given an office on the third floor with the single mission of writing this report? If he did not write it, what individual did? And if he did not write it, why was/is he on the third floor?

    Strange questions indeed…

Leave a Reply

Read More