Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, November 14, 1993 TAG: 9311160256
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: EDITORIAL EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: David Rusk
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Lack of good job opportunities is the biggest gripe for 70 percent of valley residents polled recently. Fifty-seven percent are "very concerned" about the valley's economic decline; 54 percent think that as a place to work the valley's getting worse; and 65 percent are convinced their children will have to move away to find good jobs.
On the other hand, most Roanoke Valley residents don't want more people.
Two-thirds think that the Roanoke Valley's population is the perfect size right now. For them, the Roanoke Valley's 2 percent rate of growth during the 1980s - in effect, no growth - is "about right" or even "too fast."
"Let's have more and better jobs ... but just for us and our kids." That's what the typical Roanoke Valley resident wants.
And that's probably the desire of most residents in neighboring New River Valley. Or, for that matter, of most American communities anywhere.
Can a community have strong economic growth without adding substantially more population?
The answer is "no," according to the evidence of what actually has happened over the past 40 years.
For The New Century Council, I analyzed economic- and population-growth rates of 269 urban areas from 1950 to 1990. All had fewer than 500,000 residents in 1950. (The Roanoke Valley had 177,000 residents then, compared with 268,000 today. The New River Valley was about half the Roanoke Valley's size then, and is now.)
In the top quarter of urban areas in economic growth, median family incomes improved 195 percent (after adjusting for inflation). In other words, the average family almost tripled its own standard of living. But these communities also more than tripled in population (a 229 percent growth).
In the next most successful group, the average family's income more than doubled (135 percent). Local population also doubled (118 percent).
In the below-average group, the average family's income barely doubled (105 percent), while the average population increased 90 percent. The Roanoke Valley was at the top of this group, with a 117 percent increase in family income, while population increased 44 percent.
Finally, in the least successful group of communities, average family income improved just 79 percent over 40 years, while population was growing only 72 percent as well.
The fastest-growing communities started with the lowest family-income levels ($2,394 per family in 1950). They finished with the highest family incomes ($35,685). By contrast, the slowest-growing communities started with the highest family incomes ($3,371 in 1950) and finished with the lowest ($30,952).
If residents of the valleys want higher-than-average improvement in income levels, local residents will have to be prepared to accept new neighbors. Outsiders move to regions of higher economic opportunity. You cannot wall them out. A larger population and new talent are key components of the critical mass needed for sustained, high-quality economic growth.
Greater population growth does not inevitably mean sacrificing what residents feel is most special about life in the valleys: your mountains. You don't have to have new subdivisions filling the valleys and climbing the mountainsides. You can provide your local governments with the planning and zoning powers necessary to guide where growth occurs. That may require changing some of that traditional anti-government, personal independence treasured by mountain dwellers.
Managing growth can cost the taxpayer's pocketbook, too. Albuquerque, N.M., (where I was mayor) is framed by the Sandia Mountains and a ridge of extinct volcanoes. Development threatened our scenic vistas. With the public's support, city government spent almost $40 million to buy the threatened landmarks. The purchases were backed by bond issues and a special sales tax. As a result, Albuquerque is America's only city that has a national wilderness beginning literally at the city limits.
Quality costs. Local residents may wish for better, higher-paying jobs. Getting better jobs will require greater regional cooperation and a willingness to set aside the valleys' traditional- and comfortable- sense of isolation.
David Ruskf, former mayor of Albuquerque, N.M., is an urban consultant based in Washington, D.C. He adapted this from remarks Oct. 12 to The New Century Council.
by CNB