On Wednesday I posted that Councilmember Rick Talbert wanted to expand Tacoma's borders toward 512. I went on to suggest:
Fircrest, Ruston, and UP would also join Tacoma, but I believe that requires a vote of the State Legislature and I'm not sure those residents would be totally down with it.
One UP-ite wasn't. S/he commented on my blog anonymously:
Nothing against Tacoma, but why in the world would anyone in UP believe they would have anything to gain by being annexed by Tacoma? Is it Tacoma's stellar school system? Or perhaps its professional and world famous police force? Or maybe because UP residents are just dying to help pay for Tacoma's amazing municipal computer system...
Why indeed would someone in UP want to be part of Tacoma?
I have a couple ideas, which I mentioned in the comments of that post. The easiest reason to point out is that in a state where cities need sales tax to thrive, highly residential communities like UP are forced to try to increase sales tax revenue by creating a new urban center (a la, the UP Town Center). If UP were a part of Tacoma, they wouldn't need to do that (note that Federal Way and Fircrest have run into similar funding issues as UP).
I threw some others out that were kind of lame individually, but the truth is that they are all part of a bigger whole. And while I'm probably not going to sway my UP commenter, I'll lay it down on the line anyway. UP's success is dependent on Tacoma's.
Can I back that up?
Let me try. There was an interesting
article this week about St. Louis in the New York Times. Like Tacoma, St. Louis is looking for a renaissance. Like Tacoma it has a rough and tumble image it would like to shed.
But unlike Tacoma, St. Louis has collapsed inward. At its peak population in 1950, St. Louis had 860,000 residents. By 2000, the city had dropped
500,000 of them.
What is interesting is that in 1876 the City of St. Louis (stupidly, it turns out) separated itself from St. Louis County, which now entirely surrounds the city in Missouri (Illinois is the other border for the city across the river). This created a dramatic city / suburbs division that has held until this day.
When the automobile and the freeway created new suburbs in the 50s and 60s, St. Louis lost all of its wealthy residents when they moved to the County. And it couldn't expand to get them back.
Flash forward a few decades now. At the time of the 2000 census, St. Louis residents made 2/3 of what those in the suburbs made. St. Louis is 51% black and 43% white while St. Louis County is 19% black and 77% white. A sharp line now separates the city from its suburbs, separating rich from poor, and white from black.
And it's not like everyone is just moving out of the area. From 1990 - 2000 Greater St. Louis (all the suburbs and the city) grew 4.5%. But St. Louis City lost 12.2%. A rich, white, populous donut of a city is growing around a poor, black, abandoned inner city.
That leads us to the question, are the residents in St. Louis County hurt by what is going on in the City of St. Louis? Things going on like:
In the past few months, the public schools were stripped of accreditation and taken over by the state; the city was designated the most dangerous in the country in a national crime survey ...
That's from the Times article.
So if you live in St. Louis County right now, the most dangerous city in the US is across an artificial border from you. Its residents are poorer, its students badly educated, and the cities are segregated by race. This is bad for you.
There are a million reasons why it is bad for the residents of St. Louis, but it is also bad for you. If you were part of St. Louis, it would only take a very very small portion of your money to solve what is a very bad problem. And it's not like it's someone else's problem. It's your problem, because it's just right across the freeway and social problems don't respect city lines.
Now, obviously, Tacoma and its suburbs are not at this point yet. But it's worth pointing out that Tacoma's problems are the problems of the entire metro area. A family can move to UP because they want to send their children to Curtis instead of Foss, but everyone would be doing better if they were both Curtis and Foss were in the same school system.
And if you think that merging UP, Fife, Fircrest, Lakewood, and Ruston into Tacoma would be impossible, witness Indianapolis.
Surrounded by suburb towns and a victim of white flight and urban blight, in the 1970 Indianapolis and its suburbs created
Unigov, which united the governments of Indianpolis, the towns, and the county. The city has since grown by leaps and bounds. It has a lot more room to grow. It is not segregated. And its household median income is 43% larger than that of St. Louis. Everyone wins.
Annexation holds big potential for our region. If you're interested in the problem, I highly recommend the book
Cities Without Suburbs by the former Mayor of Albuquerque, David Rusk, which lays out the case surprisingly well. Stephen Goldsmith, the former Indianapolis mayor, also has a
book about his experience. Together the books make a compelling case, one from a Democrat and one from a Republican, one with Census statistics and one with anecdotes.