The Arizona Daily Star recently published an op-ed by Pima County Supervisor Matt Heinz, who wants metro Tucson to use metro Houston as a model for regional planning.
Yes, that would the same Houston that is one of the ugliest metropolises in the nation, a metropolis with massive traffic jams and, due to a lack of zoning, forests of ugly billboards and miles and miles of ugly strip malls and convenience stores, made even uglier by tacky signage in front.
It’s hard to believe, but Houston has a higher concentration of ugly strip malls than even Tucson.
At least Houston isn’t an economic backwater like Tucson. It actually welcomes industry instead of shunning it.
Supervisor Heinz wants the Pima Association of Governments (PAG) to adopt a voting structure similar to what the regional planning council for metro Houston has enacted as the result of a voter initiative. Under the new arrangement, the council will consider the population of the various jurisdictions in metro Houston in its decisions, meaning that more weight will be given to the jurisdictions with the most population. The result will be that the City of Houston and the surrounding Harris County will have more clout than smaller, less populated jurisdictions in the region.
That sounds so reasonable and so democratic. Not so fast, however. Consider a question and then the downsides of what Heinz wants.
Question: Why didn’t Heinz use as a model of regional planning a metropolis 100 miles up Interstate 10 instead of one 1,068 miles away on Interstate 10? Tucsonans may dislike the size, pace, dynamism, and freeway network of metro Phoenix, but it has those characteristics because a lot of people prefer to live there, a lot of companies prefer to locate there, and a preponderance of the graduates of the University of Arizona prefer to move there (or a similar city) for opportunities instead of staying in provincial Tucson.
Metro Phoenix’s huge size isn’t the result of poor planning. To the contrary, good planning has enabled it to handle its phenomenal growth. Imagine the nightmare if metro Phoenix were to have the transportation network and road conditions of metro Tucson—or if it had PAG instead of MAG.
MAG is the Maricopa Association of Governments. Formed 58 years ago, it encompasses 27 cities and towns, three Native nations, Maricopa County, and parts of Pinal County. It also has a unique power-sharing structure between these jurisdictions that facilitates region-wide cooperation and coordination for the benefit of everyone while allowing jurisdictions with larger populations to have a bigger say under certain circumstances. Basically, each jurisdiction gets one vote on proposed plans regardless of population, but the governing charter also permits a weighted vote based on population if a majority of members approve this at a regular meeting.
PAG is a pipsqueak compared to MAG. The Pima Association of Governments encompasses two Native nations, Pima County, and five cities and towns, with the City of Tucson being the largest by far. Yet even with this small size, PAG hasn’t been able to get its act together. It struggles with funding and is ridden with jurisdictional disputes.
The websites of the two regional planning organizations reflect the marked differences between them. MAG’s website is much more professional, explanatory, detailed, and user-friendly than PAG’s. (If you want to see how votes are taken at MAG meetings, go here and then to “Agency Overview” and then to “How Votes Are Taken.”)
Let’s turn now to the downsides of what Heinz wants.
The biggest downside is that the City of Tucson and Pima County are a de facto one-party monopoly that has control over 89% of the population of metro Tucson, a monopoly that stays in power due mostly to the city’s partisan elections and its charter governing voting (i.e., ward primaries and city-wide general elections). The metropolis certainly doesn’t need this monopoly extended to regional planning. It needs political diversity and the checks and balances and innovations that come with political competition.
A related downside is that the city and county have shown over many decades how bad they are at planning and governing. The metropolis is an economic laggard; roads are crumbled, littered and poorly landscaped; building codes, property maintenance ordinances, and sign regulations are either inadequate or unenforced; and the city in particular has a high poverty rate and all that comes with poverty, including widespread blight, high crime, and under-performing K-12 schools.
Moreover, because a staggering 36% of the metropolis is unincorporated county, much of the metro area doesn’t have the service levels, amenities and upkeep that incorporated municipalities can provide. For example, although the unincorporated area known as the Foothills is the wealthiest part of the metro area, there is not one park, community center, or public ball field within its roughly 30 square miles. How’s that for planning?
Unfortunately for Tucson, Supervisor Heinz is probably like most Tucsonans: He hates Phoenix so much that he thinks it can’t teach him anything about regional planning.
Mr. Cantoni is an author, activist and retired business executive. Contact: ccan2@aol.com or craigcantoni@gmail.com.