Opinion: Let's put our local aid dollars where the local leadership is
Despite an enormous amount of commitment and energy from political, business and community leaders, major urban centers face what seems an almost insurmountable litany of challenges. A recently released Pioneer Institute white paper, Rehabbing Urban Redevelopment, outlines the challenges faced by leaders in 14 Middle Cities – cities outside of Boston with low per capita income and property wealth – and offers a blueprint for a state-local partnership to drive significant change in these communities.
Worcester, Fitchburg and Leominster were surveyed in the report, and like the other 11 cities, they struggle to provide high quality education, safe streets, and a strong fiscal position (through fiscal management and business growth). The failure rates for Worcester tenth-graders on the English Language Arts and math MCAS are more than double the state average. Fitchburg’s violent crime rate is higher than that of Lawrence. Per capita income in Leominster is $4,000 below the state average. The overall property wealth in each of these three communities has lagged the state average by 5 percent or worse over the past 12 years.
This performance comes notwithstanding the fact that, on an annual basis, the state provides the 14 Middle Cities with almost $1.5 billion in local aid, meaning that 38 percent of local aid goes to 18 percent of the Commonwealth’s population. Over the last eight years, Fitchburg, Leominster, and Worcester have received an annual average of $275 million in local aid.
In addition, in recent years, the state has annually spent an estimated $67+ million on or in Middle Cities through grant programs, large project ribbon cuttings, technical assistance and receivership or control board interventions.
The state of our Middle Cities is not a matter of local failure, but rather a failure of local and state policy, as well as changes in the national and global economy. To address the challenge, the state will need to rethink how it works with cities, and give up on micromanagement of local affairs. In exchange, the state would do well to focus on broad policy directions.
We can craft this new partnership by:
• Tying additional state aid to improvements in municipal performance benchmarks in four key areas - education, public safety, fiscal management, and economic development;
• Establishing a Middle Cities coordinator in the Governor’s Office to serve as the single point of contact for aid and problem-solving;
• Offering a strong state-city partnership to local leaders who commit to significant reforms, including an economic development plan and funding for investments in target neighborhoods.
By tying some portion of local aid to broad statewide objectives on educational outcomes, safer streets, and housing growth, the state can help support bold local leadership. By coordinating local and state interactions, the state can ensure that Middle City concerns are heard and that local officials can avoid getting lost in the labyrinth of state agencies.
The problems facing Middle Cities, like Worcester, Fitchburg, and Leominster, are years in the making. The state has tremendous resources to bring to the revitalization of our cities, but it will take a new partnership based on accountability and greater responsiveness to local needs.
Jim Stergios is the Executive Director of Pioneer Institute. Prior to joining Pioneer, he spearheaded urban revitalization strategies for the state’s Office of Commonwealth Development.
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments