During a recent conversation over coffee an acquaintance posed the question, “What does Spokane have going for it?”

My immediate and glib answer was, “Not much.”

No, I’m not a reluctantly relocated Seattleite, nor an exemplar of Spokane’s alleged inferiority complex. Spokane does have a number of significant assets, which Greater Spokane, Inc. and the Visitors Bureau regularly tout: affordable housing, minimal traffic congestion, decent schools, first-class medical services, outstanding outdoor recreational opportunities, and so on. The thrust of the question, though, was, “What does Spokane have to offer that other mid-sized Western cities don’t?”

The fact is that such cities as Anchorage, Albuquerque, Boise, Salt Lake City, Colorado Springs, Tucson, Reno, and other Western cities in Spokane’s size class also offer all of those same attractions. Like Spokane, they also offer a range of entertainment and cultural venues and events typical of cities of their size.

It should be noted, first, that being in that population class is itself an asset in the first decade of the 21st century, as more refugees flee the congestion, crime, high cost of living, and general stresses of the megacities. The Spokane area will continue to attract a share of those folks no matter what we do, though a disproportionate fraction will probably end up on the Idaho side of the state line. Spokane has seen growth over the last two decades, but all of the above cities have seen more.

Spokane does have one asset most of its peers lack — an urban texture found, in the West, only in San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Denver, and to a lesser degree, Salt Lake City. Spokane attained city-size early (104,000 by 1910) and thus has a rich legacy of urban architectural styles ranging from Chicago School to Greek Revival, Romanesque, Norman, and Gothic to Art Deco, and distinctive neighborhoods of Victorian, Queen Anne, Tudor, Prairie and Craftsman homes. The large downtown core developed during the city’s development heyday (1890-1930), with its numerous historic and
otherwise noteworthy buildings, remains mostly intact, attractive and healthy, despite the downsizing which occurred between 1950-80, when many older blocks were demolished and replaced with surface parking lots.

Offsetting this advantage, however, is one conspicuous disadvantage — the lack of a major research university, something each of the peer cities mentioned above can offer. Although WSU continues to expand offerings at its Riverpoint campus and Greater Spokane CEO Rich Hadley has recently declared that Spokane will have “a full 4-year medical school within 5 years,” those improvements, if they happen, will only bring Spokane up to par with its rivals; they will not give it an edge.

How might it gain that edge?

Spokane should perhaps consider the case of Charlotte, NC.

Like Spokane, Charlotte began life as a market town (cotton, in Charlotte’s case) and during the 19th century became a railroad hub. But by 1910, when Spokane’s population had already grown to 104,000, Charlotte’s had reached only 34,000. Charlotte grew more rapidly during the first half of the 20th century, but in 1950 was still smaller than Spokane (134,000 to Spokane’s 161,000).

Charlotte today has a population of 717,000 (2.3 million in the CSA), its median household income exceeds Spokane’s ($51,050 to Spokane’s $37,899), it has less poverty (12.7% to Spokane’s 18%), and it is the 2nd largest banking center in the US, after New York City. Despite its prosperity and rapid growth, it’s cost of living index is slightly lower than Spokane’s (90 to Spokane’s 91), and its housing is even more affordable. It consistently ranks among the top 10 on everyone’s “quality of life” indexes.

How did that happen?

Well, it occurred because the state of North Carolina had long had very liberal banking laws, allowing banks to operate statewide (when many states restricted banks to one county), to acquire banks and other assets outside the state, and to offer a range of financial services prohibited by banking laws in most other states. As a result N. Carolina banks acquired expertise in managing multiple branches in multiple markets, and in handling financial products off-limits to banks elsewhere. When federal laws on interstate banking were relaxed in the 1970s and other states began to relax their own laws, Charlotte’s two large banks were ready (both were managed by astute and aggressive CEOs). They began acquiring banks in other states left and right, including, eventually, the Bank of America, largest bank in the US. The rest, as they say, is history. Over 30,000 people are today employed in Charlotte’s two largest banks alone.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_199601/ai_n8737985/

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06176/701039-28.stm

What is the lesson here? Well, that thoughtless regulation inhibits economic activity, and repealing those regulations unleashes it. Most states have now followed N. Carolina’s example and relaxed their own banking laws, so Spokane would not be able to gain its edge in that field. But there are innumerable other fields in which government regulation stifles innovation and adds enormously to the cost of doing business in most states, particularly local land use and environmental regulations. Spokane could gain an edge similar to Charlotte’s in many other economic areas by immediately:

♦ Repealing all land use laws and development restrictions not directly related to preventing nuisances or protecting public health and safety, and

♦ Repealing all environmental laws not directly related to protecting human health or preserving the utility of “natural commons.”

Some of these are state laws, of course, especially the ill-conceived and burdensome Growth Management Act, which local officials could not change, at least not immediately. But there are numerous local legal impediments to economic development, notably the Comprehensive Plan, which could be repealed by a vote of the City Council.

The Comprensive Plan declares, “The overall purpose of the comprehensive plan is to provide Spokane residents with a high quality of life.” It then proceeds to ignore the most important components of a high quality of life, the two upon which all other factors depend: good incomes from interesting and challenging work, and a wide range of lifestyle options from which each person can freely choose. Instead, it erects impediments to economic opportunity and narrows options in an attempt to improve the quality of life of politicians, planners, and their more vocal political patrons.

Free Spokane would be the city in which if someone wants to build something or produce something, he would almost certainly be able to do it, and do it quickly, without the delays and costs (for attorneys, consultants, neighborhood schmoozing, hearings, lawsuits, and appeals) which he would likely be compelled to endure elsewhere.

It’s time for Spokane’s elected officials to get serious about economic development and come to grips with the factors which inhibit it.

Tags: individual freedom, Urban Planning

This entry was posted on Thursday, August 13th, 2009 at 2:34 pm and is filed under Urban Development. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.