ARTICLE
Local Political Answers Jobs, capital investment and the infrastructure that support them are the frontlines of Chamber advocacy. But today they must thrive in a remarkably uncertain economic environment. Not only are some trades and professions disappearing, so are entire industry segments, while jobs and industries unimagined a decade ago are becoming stalwarts. Underlying economic structures from community banking to international trade systems from the EU to the Transpacific Partnership are roiling. To those of us in the midst of this change it seems like one of those agonizing slow-motion replays of a car accident or an athletic injury, run over and over again. But in the context of the evolution of economic systems these changes are happening in an unprecedentedly short time frame. Two news stories this week highlighted this evolution. The first, a New York Times story today headlined More Jobs, but Not for Everyone, describes the ambiguous impacts of technology and free trade on international and domestic jobs. The positive effects of free trade on first-world and third-world economies is touted by most economists and its critical importance to emerging economies is unassailable. But these analysis are made on a predominantly-economic and nation-level context. Its impacts on individuals, communities, specific-industry-dependent regions, and the sociology and politics of countries are also clear and, as Brexit and American presidential politics demonstrate, much more problematic. The second story, in Tuesday’s S.F. Chronicle, NIMBYism is dragging down the whole country, frames the question from the point of view of those holding on to the structures and values that are reflected in U.S. neighborhoods and suburban living. Citing the White House Housing Development Toolkit the article points out that throughout the U.S. communities are resisting the densification of neighborhoods. This has been clearly demonstrated by “vociferous” resistance to Governor Brown’s proposal to streamline the approvals for multifamily housing. This resistance is closely tied to the treats and constraints of the evolving economy — uncertainties about employment, public services, and other potential threats to the quality of life in the U.S. At a local level there is no “solution” to an economic evolution over which we have virtually no control. Notwithstanding efforts by some labor, environmental, education, neighborhood, and industry groups, asking local governments to address macro economic forces with local policies, there is little hope of any lasting positive effects of measures such as a local minimum wage or increased inclusionary housing requirements. The best that local governments can do is to adopt and implement strategic plans that effectively address alternative likely scenarios such as changes in local population and its wealth and distribution of income. These plans must also be calibrated to respond forces such as increasing regional housing costs, transportation requirements, and public services that may or may not be necessary to this changing population. Will local jobs increase or decrease? Will they be well-paid or not? Will there continue to be significant out-commute to Silicon Valley, will tech and research companies grow here, or will fewer residents be employed in tech generally? How will our largest segments, education, agriculture and visitor services evolve? Whatever the answer to these questions, local government must be position to respond. What ever happens with these and many other economic vectors over which we have little control, we must create the environment necessary to sustain and develop jobs and to encourage and fund the public and private capital investments upon which those jobs and the community depend. This is the work of the Chamber, its members, and our economic community. Bill Tysseling Executive Director Santa Cruz Area Chamber of Commerce
Local Political Answers Jobs, capital investment and the infrastructure that support them are the frontlines of Chamber advocacy. But today they must thrive in a remarkably uncertain economic environment. Not only are some trades and professions disappearing, so are entire industry segments, while jobs and industries unimagined a decade ago are becoming stalwarts. Underlying economic structures from community banking to international trade systems from the EU to the Transpacific Partnership are roiling.
To those of us in the midst of this change it seems like one of those agonizing slow-motion replays of a car accident or an athletic injury, run over and over again. But in the context of the evolution of economic systems these changes are happening in an unprecedentedly short time frame.
Two news stories this week highlighted this evolution. The first, a New York Times story today headlined More Jobs, but Not for Everyone, describes the ambiguous impacts of technology and free trade on international and domestic jobs. The positive effects of free trade on first-world and third-world economies is touted by most economists and its critical importance to emerging economies is unassailable. But these analysis are made on a predominantly-economic and nation-level context. Its impacts on individuals, communities, specific-industry-dependent regions, and the sociology and politics of countries are also clear and, as Brexit and American presidential politics demonstrate, much more problematic.
The second story, in Tuesday’s S.F. Chronicle, NIMBYism is dragging down the whole country, frames the question from the point of view of those holding on to the structures and values that are reflected in U.S. neighborhoods and suburban living. Citing the White House Housing Development Toolkit the article points out that throughout the U.S. communities are resisting the densification of neighborhoods. This has been clearly demonstrated by “vociferous” resistance to Governor Brown’s proposal to streamline the approvals for multifamily housing. This resistance is closely tied to the treats and constraints of the evolving economy — uncertainties about employment, public services, and other potential threats to the quality of life in the U.S.
At a local level there is no “solution” to an economic evolution over which we have virtually no control. Notwithstanding efforts by some labor, environmental, education, neighborhood, and industry groups, asking local governments to address macro economic forces with local policies, there is little hope of any lasting positive effects of measures such as a local minimum wage or increased inclusionary housing requirements.
The best that local governments can do is to adopt and implement strategic plans that effectively address alternative likely scenarios such as changes in local population and its wealth and distribution of income. These plans must also be calibrated to respond forces such as increasing regional housing costs, transportation requirements, and public services that may or may not be necessary to this changing population.
Will local jobs increase or decrease? Will they be well-paid or not? Will there continue to be significant out-commute to Silicon Valley, will tech and research companies grow here, or will fewer residents be employed in tech generally? How will our largest segments, education, agriculture and visitor services evolve? Whatever the answer to these questions, local government must be position to respond.
What ever happens with these and many other economic vectors over which we have little control, we must create the environment necessary to sustain and develop jobs and to encourage and fund the public and private capital investments upon which those jobs and the community depend. This is the work of the Chamber, its members, and our economic community.
Bill Tysseling Executive Director Santa Cruz Area Chamber of Commerce