THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, June 24, 1995 TAG: 9506210010
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A10 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Opinion
SOURCE: By DAVID R. GOODE
LENGTH: Long : 135 lines
Excerpts from the keynote address at the June 15 Urban Issues Forum held at Norfolk's Waterside Marriott.
The competition among states for new and expanding businesses is red-hot. Norfolk Southern has an aggressive industrial-development department that works to locate industries on our lines. From this perspective I know that in the competition among states, no quarter is given. We see just how intense that competition is, and I can tell you, Virginia has a tough assignment just to be in the running.
And the competition doesn't stop at our national borders and coastlines. Virginia also competes with Korea, Mexico, Australia, Singapore, Canada, Brazil - just to name a few. The businesses we court are shopping worldwide.
We can't afford to forget that our rival states and nations are working every advantage they have - and are creating new advantages for themselves constantly - to lure not only new prospects but to entice our industries away from us.
How does Virginia stack up in the competition? . . .
Many factors go into competitiveness. Some you're just blessed with, like geography. We've got geography: A port that is the envy of the world. A pleasant climate. Proximity to the nation's major population centers. Beautiful landscapes and boundless recreational opportunities. And, of course, wonderful transportation.
We've got culture, from country to cosmopolitan. We've got symphonies and bluegrass. We've got friendly, well-educated people with a strong work ethic. We've got lifestyle. We've got a moderate cost of living and correspondingly moderate labor costs - and much more. And we can - and do - win industries and business locations. Witness Motorola.
But what we don't have is regional cohesion. We don't have what places like Charlotte, Jacksonville and San Antonio have - a regional identity, based on a strong urban core, that we can rally behind and market to the world.
Nowhere is that more evident than here in Hampton Roads, and at no time has it ever been clearer than right now. The state's largest metropolitan area has a weak regional identity. . . .
Few people outside the state have any idea what or where Hampton Roads is. a kind of demilitarized zone.
Regionalism is much discussed, however, - increasingly so. That's encouraging. To compete effectively, each region in the state must harness its unique positive attributes and exploit them in a coordinated fashion. We do see real regional cooperation with such efforts as Forward Hampton Roads. But it's piecemeal.
Two years ago, the Hampton Roads Chamber of Commerce brought together community leaders - public and private - to discuss the region's future. They assessed the health of its industries, its prospects for economic growth and all the elements that make a metropolitan region competitive. The result was Plan 2007, a broad, strategic outline for regional economic growth.
The plan is visionary. Starting from the premise that the region is a single economic entity, it incorporates each locality's strengths in terms of how they contribute to the whole. It focuses on industry clusters, such as shipbuilding and high technology, that have a strong presence in the region, and aims at leveraging these clusters in a coordinated fashion into competitive advantages. It seeks to bring together the strengths of our educational institutions to market the region as a source of research, expertise and innovation.
It recognizes that the entire region can benefit when a new company locates in any city within the region. It also recognizes that the region's infrastructure and the basics of life here are not local but are interwoven.
The plan was conceived in response to a growing recognition of a grim reality: that Hampton Roads - all of Hampton Roads - faces certain economic stagnation and rising unemployment unless it becomes more competitive. . . .
What is needed in addition is fundamental change in the way city governments work together: in the way they are willing to work together and in the way they are allowed to work together. . . . Yes, it's also difficult to find the right balance between the varying needs, interests and agendas of the cities within the region. And that brings us to the central issue of the Urban Partnership: the health of our core cities.
This is a critical issue to all Virginians no matter where they live. There is no region anywhere in the world that is competitive without a strong core city. Job-creating businesses that locate in the outskirts of urban areas will not do so unless they see a thriving urban core.
When Norfolk Southern sought a location for its headquarters in 1982, we could just as well have chosen Virginia Beach, Chesapeake, Newport News, Hampton or some other outlying city. We could have built a shady campus in a greenfield location, offering easy commuting and plenty of parking to our employees . . . but to locate in this region at all, there still had to be a Norfolk - a thriving magnet for the urban amenities that any major corporation must have to attract and retain talented people.
As CEO of one corporation, I'll just tell you that without a thriving core city - and the symphony orchestra, the art museum, the downtown center of a real urban area - you're not in the game where locating offices is concerned.
We chose Norfolk for a number of reasons. And it was the right decision - certainly from the standpoint of the regional economy. Our downtown location strengthens the urban core, while our well-paid employees have bought homes in all the cities of the area, pay local taxes, patronize community businesses and provide good citizens for all. Our people live and contribute everywhere in the area - but we're here only because Norfolk provides a viable urban core.
The problems of the inner city threaten all of us, however - not just those, like myself, who live in the core city, but those who live in the outlying cities and counties, as well. You can avoid inner-city problems for a time by fleeing to the suburbs, but unless you address them effectively at their root, they will follow you. and we see that happening now.
Urban decay does not recognize city limits. Likewise, urban healing must transcend city limits. And I submit that Virginia Beach, in worrying about its future, must think not only about water but about how to keep Norfolk healthy and strong. Otherwise, both will be just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
Virginia, and for that matter, the rest of the country, has a history of attempting a policy of containment. Keep urban problems out of suburbia by isolating the core city economically and politically. This may have indeed slowed the outward spread of poverty and crime. It has enabled the outlying cities and counties to avoid - for a time - the double whammy of a dwindling tax base and growing demand for social services. But it has also made it increasingly difficult for the core cities to bear that burden. And isolating the problems has made them worse. . . .
Regional cohesion can be attained in many different ways. It doesn't have to mean mergers and annexations. It will require closer partnerships among municipalities than now exist. It will require more recognition of common interests. It will require more willingness to share losses as well as wins - to yield some measure of independence, of relative competitive advantage, to enhance the competitive advantages of all the partners as a whole. . . .
If Hampton Roads is weak, the whole state suffers. Richmond, Roanoke, Fairfax and beyond will not get the full benefit of having a world-class port feed commerce to them. Similarly, having a strong financial center in Richmond, or a thriving high-tech industry in Roanoke, strengthens the competitive stature of each of the other regions. Once we're thinking and acting regionally, we can focus more effectively on the state as a whole. MEMO: Mr. Goode is chief executive officer of Norfolk Southern Corp.
KEYWORDS: REGIONALISM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT by CNB