Suburbs Spawn Federal-Size Problems

The next President, whether Vice President George Bush or Massachusetts Gov. Michael S. Dukakis, will have to confront the reality that there has been no federal urban policy over the past eight years. Either the new President can ignore this, as the Reagan Administration did, or tackle a set of issues that has recently been rushing into the headlines, particularly in Southern California.

Of course, what urban policy now includes is much broader than in the 1960s, when this palette of issues was first lumped together and the cabinet-level Department of Housing and Urban Development was created. In fact, the term “urban” is now basically obsolete, since the issues of the 1980s and 1990s are regional in nature, affecting the entire metropolitan area.

The lack of a regional metropolitan policy has resulted in the proliferation of anti-growth movements. Fed up with the lack of political will or governmental mechanisms to handle problems such as overloaded sewers dumping raw waste material, air pollution spreading well beyond traditional industrial zones, and pervasive traffic congestion, citizens are revolting against residential and commercial growth. Both are seen as the cause of many of our metropolitan ills.

On the other hand, there is an increasing number of people, particularly minorities and the working class, who believe that economic development is just as critical now as in the 1960s. Day care, affordable housing and job training are very relevant to them, while concern for traffic congestion and air pollution appear to be of less immediate concern.

Compounding the problems of minority groups and the working class is that employment has exploded over the last 10 years in many high-income suburban areas. This has made it far more convenient and productive for the well-to-do who can afford to live close to their work. Yet outmoded and discriminatory government regulations, generally in the form of exclusionary zoning (low-density housing, which precludes moderate-income dwellings), refuse to let the market provide convenient housing. Such housing would be not only for entry-level workers like janitors, food-service workers and maids, but also for middle-income workers like police officers, schoolteachers, clerks and middle management in these new, rapidly growing employment cores.

The major component to the solution of many pollution problems, as well as the economic ills of minorities and the working class, is quite simple: Get jobs closer to the workers and workers closer to jobs. Better employment/housing balance would cut down on commutes and traffic congestion, increase employment opportunities for minorities and the working class, increase the shrinking labor pool available for business, reduce the amount of money required to upgrade metropolitan transportation systems and cut down on air pollution by reducing the number of cars releasing hydrocarbons in bumper-to-bumper traffic.

The marketplace, left to its own, would eventually balance employment and housing. The average commute time in the Greater Los Angeles area did not increase between 1960 and 1980, in spite of a population increase of 3.7 million, because workers have simply moved their homes closer to work or their work closer to their homes. However, this process is now being frustrated by the combination of inadequate new or crumbling old transportation systems and obsolete local government land-use regulations. Thus commutes have begun to lengthen in the 1980s in the Los Angeles area.

Enforcement of existing housing discrimination laws will help balance housing and employment. Since the work force has become more and more racially integrated over the last 20 years, more housing opportunities for minorities must be opened up, particularly in the high-employment growth suburban cores, such as Newport Beach/Irvine/Costa Mesa, to reduce traffic congestion. Striking down exclusionary zoning near the new suburban employment centers will help all working and middle-class workers willing to trade high-density housing for a shorter commute. By backing the enforcement of this policy, the business community can “do well while doing good,” especially considering the projected labor shortages in the 1990s.

Public-private partnerships are also critical to bring housing and employment closer together. For instance, developers and major employers in the major metro employment cores have been organizing over the last few years to provide transportation improvements, shuttle service, security and even day care. In the future these quasi-public organizations should pool resources to provide land “write downs” or loan guarantees to private developments for affordable housing close to the core. Public agencies can assist with additional funding, land assemblage and zoning assistance.

Public agencies, starting at the federal level, should also consider diverting gas-tax money to guarantee loans and to write down land for private projects that promote employment/housing balance. Better balance is a much cheaper solution than building more freeway capacity.

Balancing employment and housing must be the foundation of the new President’s regional metro policy. However, it will take a recommitment to fighting housing discrimination, both racial and economic, as well as increased support for public-private partnerships.