13 Comments

1. STEEL says:

   April 23, 2007 at 9:42 pm

   He seems so removed from Buffalo, as if it is in a different state or something. The government officials of WNY really don’t get it. The other metros that they are competing against for jobs don’t think of themselves as this town doing one thing and that one doing another. They work as one entity and they are crushing WNY. Amherst’s paltry successes pale in comparison to what is being done in places like Atlanta and Charlotte.

   He just does not get it that Buffalo is not a different place than Amherst it is just a place that has been force fed a different set of rules to follow. Some of them self inflicted, most of them inflicted by the state and social demographic trends. Until Amherst (and other towns) starts thinking of its self as part of a unified region WNY will remain stagnant.

   Everyone should remember that there is no real growth in WNY. What appears as growth in one place is just the same money being moved around
2. Jim Allen says:

   April 24, 2007 at 8:37 am

   If you knew me you’d realize that I am a strong proponent of regionalism, in particular as it relates to planning. I have been advocating a regional approach to economic development for the past 25 years but we have always gotten bogged down by those that insist that it can only happen if everyone agrees to a centralized, top-down approach. In other words, many of our political leaders (and some in the private sector as well) are not comfortable with a collaborative, cooperative approach to regionalism but rather insist on consolidation. And it is this philosophical difference, which is significant, which keeps us from working together for the good of the region.
   We can and must plan and develop regionally. And it can happen immediately if we commit to a collaborative approach and stop worrying about who should be in charge of the effort.
   And by the way, don’t tell me what I “get” or don’t “get!” I reside in Amherst but I live in the Buffalo Nagara region. What about you?
3. cj says:

   April 24, 2007 at 8:46 am

   Steel,

   I think it is you who needs to be corrected. While I can not speak to Atlanta, as a former resident of both WNY and Charlotte, you are way off base.

   First point – Charlotte does faces the same type of competition with towns outside of the area. Not only does it have communities to the north that act independently but it also faces competition from South Carolina. The communities of Rock Hill SC, Fort Mill SC, Huntersville NC, Cornelius NC and the like all compete with Charlotte. To simply say Charlotte did not face competition is naive. Charlotte just was able to beat the burbs because it leveraged what it had and what the burbs did not and did not try to go after the business that it knew the burbs would win. It had a plan and stuck to it.

   Second point – Charlotte was not intended to be the lead horse in North Carolina. 30 years ago planners placed Raleigh at the top of the list. Infrastructure was built up in the triangle to accommodate the intended growth. Instead of waiting for the state to bring in the money, Charlotte courted private business. Many believe that Charlotte’s “rebirth” was driven by Hugh McColl who at the time headed Nations Bank, now Bank of America. The city of Charlotte made it very easy for private money to come in a shape the new city. The “uptown” section of Charlotte was cleared. Housing projects were cleared in the 1st and 2nd wards. Developers were encouraged to build, without much “interaction” from government officials.

   Third point is the “mindset” of government. Long time mayor Patrick McCrory (R) is pro business. I remember an interview in that he said something to the effect that his job was coach. Private companies are the players. His job is to make sure the offense is aware of the defense and vice versa. His skill set was not on the field. Because of this mindset during his time in office, the population of Charlotte has grown 20% and 155k jobs have been created. HE DID NOT GET THE PEOPLE TO MOVE AND HIS GOVERNMENT DID NOT CREATE THE JOBS. He simply followed a plan to make it easy for companies to locate in Charlotte and attract the people and thus provide the jobs.

   Lastly, to compare Buffalo and WNY to any region in GA or NC is silly. The contrast in variables is staggering. First and foremost, NC is a right to work state. NY is anything but. The ability to not factor in union influence to the extent that WNY is a HUGE advantage in everything from development, construction, staffing and operations standpoint. Next, Charlotte always had a lower tax base. Items like schools, police and city services are of the same caliber, POOR, in both areas but in Charlotte you paid in proportion to services. In WNY you paid for a level of service that has never been delivered. It is just in the last 5 years that property values and the taxes they bring in are covering.

   The success of Charlotte did not happen overnight. It took close to 30 years and it is still going. Think of the mindset of Buffalo in 1977. Not only did Buffalo NOT have a plan to be reborn, it was still in denial that it needed to. As long as WNY is run by the few who are elected time and time again by the less who are on the government payroll, why should things change? After all the checks still clear, even with a control board.

   You talk about how Amherst should change it’s mindset. How it should think about being a part of WNY instead of an independent. This is a nice thought. But please define for all of us what WNY is. You can not align yourself with someone or something that has an identity crisis. Until Buffalo can come to terms with what is no longer is, what it can and CAN NOT become, I do not see any reason why the surrounding towns like Amherst should follow the leader. Amherst can walk in circles all by itself thank you! It just chooses not to.
4. STEEL says:

   April 24, 2007 at 10:11 am

   Mr. Allen,

   You are correct that I should not assign any motives to you as a person I have never met. I appologize for that. My comments are based on my impressions from text written here. You certainly know more than I about the pitfalls and assets of WNY politics and government. I can only give my opinions looking in from the outside.

   That being said I suggest the following. It is not Buffalo that needs to come to terms with its status. It is WNY that needs to do that. This is the point I am trying to make.

   Until WNY realizes that Buffalo’s problems are not that of the city alone there will be no progress toward ending the drastic downward spiral of the metro area. Wake up WNY! The regional population is aging and shrinking. In the mean time WNY continues to expand infrastructure and government. The poverty and abandonment inside the city of Buffalo is not caused by policies of the city of Buffalo. It is caused by society and the region in ngeneral. It is a problem that needs to be solved by the region. What is Amherst doing as its part to solve this problem? I could pretty much guaranty that most residents of Buffalo’s suburbs have no interest in solving the porblem of poverty inside Buffalo as long as it stays inside the city.

   If Amherst is thinking regionally what is its contribution to solving this problem? When a corporation comes to Amherst IDA do they show that corporation all the possibilities in WNY or just those inside Amherst? Dose Amherst contribute funding to WNY cultural institutions? Does Amherst open its schools to impoverished inner city children? Is Amherst building homeless shelters and public housing? Building a new office park is the easy work. Building a sustainable competitive region takes more effort. It means sharing the burdens and eliminating wasteful government duplication. I am using Amherst as an example here but,you could substitute any WNY town for Amherst in the above questions. Amherst is the biggest and wealthiest, however. It needs to step up to the plate. In my humble out of town opinion Amherst is not carrying its weight as a regional player.
5. Jefferson says:

   April 24, 2007 at 11:49 am

   NC is a right to work state?
6. cj says:

   April 24, 2007 at 12:39 pm

   Jefferson,

   Take a look at this site

   http://www.nrtw.org/rtws.htm

   A Right to Work law secures the right of employees to decide for themselves whether or not to join or financially support a union. However, employees who work in the railway or airline industries are not protected by a Right to Work law, and employees who work on a federal enclave may not be.

   Steel,

   Your comment that “The poverty and abandonment inside the city of Buffalo is not caused by policies of the city of Buffalo” clearly illustrates the divide that is place in WNY. Just as Jim pointed that leaders can not take “cooperative approach to regionalism but rather insist on consolidation”, shows the two main obstacles that WNY faces.

   The first is who is to blame. Or more accurately WHAT is to blame for the demise of WNY. It is only after we take a hard look in the mirror and identify what caused the problem, that we can work on the fix. People in Buffalo have a different viewpoint then people in Amherst have on what caused the demise.
   Simply saying that the failed policies, administrations and mindset of Buffalo over the last 50 years is not the major reason for the decline is illogical. Sure the region could have been more supportive but the blunders were all done by the leadership of the city. Here is a simple question. When was the last time, any leadership organization in Buffalo has asked for assistance or included the suburbs in any decision making process? If you want to talk about a “regional” effort, you must acknowledge that until things started to slip, the city had no interest in “working” with the towns. Now that the city is seeing the effects of these failures, it wants to have a group effort. This is not fair.

   In regards to Amherst stepping up to the plate, I would like to see how you define that. Is it taking a leadership role in policy? Is it lessening the power of the common council and the mayor?

   How exactly should Amherst contribute? Do you think they should just share the tax revenue from a tax base that took decades to build up? Should they open the access to the schools that have been built on decades of tax dollars? Should they stop efforts to grow so Buffalo can catch up?

   I would really like to move the discussion, if possible, to what the regional WNY should look like. Who would run it? What levels of government could be eliminated? What levels of public service workers could be consolidated? What about all of the contracts, what happens to those? Should residents of Amherst be obligated to pay for decisions that they had no voice in? Should Buffalo be forced to give up power to Amherst in exchange?
7. STEEL says:

   April 24, 2007 at 1:03 pm

   I suggested some of the efforts Amherst could follow in my questions. Your comments about Buffalo seem very Naive. you keep focusing on the mayor and common council as if they can control white flight or that fact that the vast majority of subsidized housing is concentrated in the city. The vast vast vast majority of government in WNY is in the towns and cities outside of Buffalo. As a percentage WNY has the or one of the highest number of elected officials in the country! The city has reduced the size of its government as the towns have increased theirs. The growing towns build new schools as the shrinking town close schools. Where does that money come from.

   Buffalo’s policies did not cause bank red lining of whole sections of the city. Buffalo’s policies can not change the fact that a majority of its students are form impoverished families and that many of those children get little love and attention form families. Even as Buffalo is charged with educating a difficult population of children the state provides a greater operating subsidy increase to wealthy districts. Buffalo’s policies did not move the University to Amherst, Buffalo’s policies did not create the white flight block busting of the 60’s and 70’s (Amherst being a beneficiary of that by the way) Buffalo can not stop a state government that insist on spend and tax policies, Buffalo’s policies do not cause low tax value in places of massive disinvestment. Buffalo’s policies do not cause a lack of money available for infrastructure maintenance at the same time that Erie county continues to expand its infrastructure responsibilities. How could you possibly say that all the blunders of Buffalo’s decline are at the hands of the city government? Did the government create racism, suburban malls, global industrial competition? property flippers, High state taxes?
8. Mike In WNY says:

   April 24, 2007 at 2:12 pm

   A centralized, top-down government structure is responsible for the problems we have today. That, combined, with a bloated government, at all levels, and state agencies with little or no accountability, bleeds the private economy dry.

   What we need is decentralized planning, without the support (I use that word loosely) of IDA’s and corporate welfare schemes that benefit the bureaucrats at the expense of progress.

   One of the most important issues Buffalo should address is education. School choice, using vouchers and/or tax credits, would vastly improve the quality of education and could be a strong magnet to attract families back to the city.

   We don’t need central planning, we just need to give people reasons to move back – voluntarily!
9. STEEL says:

   April 24, 2007 at 5:58 pm

   Sounds great Mike. Where can the city kids use their vouchers. Which schools will be open to them?
10. Mike In WNY says:

    April 26, 2007 at 1:16 pm

    Steel, a system of school choice would help city kids, the poor, more than other students. A free-market approach produces competition and innovation and supplies solutions in relation to the demand for services. The key is offering real choice. Any parent should be able to allocate their share of tax dollars to any school they choose for their children.

    School choice would do more to provide a good education for poor students than Brown v. Board of Education or any legislation ever has. It is a simple matter of economics.
11. cj says:

    April 26, 2007 at 7:21 pm

    Steel,

    I really think it is you who is naive about the realities facing Buffalo and more importantly WHY Buffalo is facing them. Make no mistake the Amherst has thrived on Buffalo’s demise. But Amherst did not cause that demise, IT JUST CAPITALIZED on it. Please do not try and move the discussion to the size of government when it should stay at the effectiveness of it, regardless of size.

    Buffalo policies DID cause the demise of many sections of the city. The east side was killed by the 33. The upper west side was hurt by the 190. Hell they were even going to run an expressway smack down the middle of Allentown. Yep, blame all of those moves on the burbs or the state if it makes you feel better.

    Buffalo’s policies CAN change the family structure. It can stand up to the teachers union, who run the schools, and go to year round classes. It can fully fund art and music programs and other things to HELP with the family. But it does not because the teachers union, who run the schools, want to make sure the perks and hard won concessions are saved.

    Buffalo’s INABILITY to move on UB forced UB to move to Amherst. You just fail to accept it. First option was the golf course across the street. Buffalo was unable to get that done. Next was the waterfront. Buffalo was unable to get that done. After 2 strikes Amherst went yard. Not the fault of Amherst that the leadership at the time could not pull their head out of their arse.

    Buffalo may not have created all of the factors for white flight, but is sure as hell built up the infrastructure to make it easy on those who were leaving. Yep that sound like great policy. People are leaving so let’s make it easier for them to go.

    Buffalo policies do cause the disinvestment. The BMHA and the cities inability to enforce anything other then a parking ticket has cause the demise of housing stock and value.

    As far as your last comment, you are stretching. Which is a sign of….

    racism – is everywhere NON ISSUE
    suburban malls – were a reaction to the people leaving the city. Time line the expressways and about 5-10 years later you will see the start of these. Maybe shopping will return to Buffalo when the Galleria puts a bus stop in the middle of the mall.

    global industrial competition – COME ON
    property flippers- ARE EVERYWHERE but most places do something unlike the BMHA
    High state taxes-Gee who do you think vote for high taxes. Those who pay them -AMHERST or those who benefit from them-EAST SIDE.
12. Steel says:

    April 28, 2007 at 12:26 pm

    Mike,
    If you think that the people of Amherst will allow inner city kids to attend their schools with vouchers then you live in a dream world. I assume when you say “any” you actually mean “any”

    CJ,
    You need a history lesson
13. cj says:

    April 28, 2007 at 1:02 pm

    Bitter = Blind.