Summary
Metropolitan Initiative Forum
Atlanta Region
July 28, 1997
8:00 a.m. to 12 noon
The Carter Center

Atlanta has already laid a strong foundation for regional cooperation through planning initiatives such as Vision 2020 (the Atlanta Regional Commission-led regional visioning process), the Georgia Children's Initiative, United Way of Metropolitan Atlanta, and The Atlanta Project Strategic Planning. The best way to further regional cooperation in the Atlanta metropolitan area is to provide support to continue or "jumpstart" some of the projects which have already been identified through these regional initiatives.

This was the consensus of more than fifty community leaders attending the Metropolitan Initiative Forum in Atlanta, hosted by the Atlanta Regional Commission, the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, the Metropolitan Atlanta Community Foundation, the United Way of Metropolitan Atlanta, and The America Project of The Carter Center.

After self introductions, Harry West of the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) gave a brief overview of the purpose of the meeting: to identify new possibilities for regional cooperation, particularly to explore a demonstration project in partnership with the federal government that would prompt regional cooperation. In addition, this forum provided an opportunity to highlight current initiatives. Mark Weiss of the President's Council on Sustainable Development asked the group for guidance in how federal and state governments can be better partners in regional cooperation.

Scott Bernstein of the Center for Neighborhood Technology talked about initiatives in other metropolitan areas:

1. The 3M company is the biggest single source of air pollution in the Chicago area. The company began an air quality improvement program in which they 1) report all emissions on-line to provide fast, accurate information, 2) limit the sales of their available emission credits to companies that need them for economic expansion, and 3) donate the proceeds from the sale of credits to foundations to make area improvements.
2. The Chicago School System (with 410,000 students) emits as much greenhouse gases as a small steel mill. The Chicago School System set up a scorekeeping system that encourages schools to become more energy efficient, including their decisions on capital improvements. When a school does reduce its emissions through energy efficiency, it receives at least half of the cost savings in cash.
3. Neighborhoods in Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco were studied to learn the relationship between development density and car usage. The studies identified development patterns that allow a person to avoid owning a car. The $350-$400 per month "car-free" savings can be internalized in the formula that determines the size of the mortgage that a person can afford, allowing people to qualify for bigger mortgages -- up to $35,000 to $40,000 more.

Bernstein gave direction for the day's activities: first, the group would think about Atlanta's successes in regional cooperation, and then identify the areas where the region had not cooperated as well. He asked the group to next imagine what could be possible if Atlanta's constituencies cooperated in a regional approach. Bernstein asked the group to include environmental issues in their discussions, but not limit themselves to environmental issues. The final task of the day would be to find a way to continue the process of creating better cooperation in the Atlanta region.

Under the direction of a facilitator, the group looked first at what Atlanta has done well as a region in the past:

• Vision 2020 regional visioning process
• 1996 Olympics - especially Atlanta population transportation alternatives
• Georgia Homeowners Summit/Coordinated with ARC's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Regional Development Plan (RDP)
• Regional Food Bank
• Metropolitan Atlanta Community Foundation
• Water Reclamation Project in Gwinnett County
• Regional Leadership Institute
• Rockdale County Competition
• Me 'n U
• Chattahoochee River Project
• United Way #211
• Clean Air Campaign
• RTP, RDP - Regional Water Supply Plan
• Blueprints for Successful Communities
• Economic Development Information System
• Regional Business Coalition
• Big Haynes Watershed Agreement
• A Call for Great Ideas
• Center for Land Development and Mobility
• Project PACT

Forum participants gave Atlanta a median score of three (out of a possible 10) for its effectiveness in regional cooperation (scores ranged from two to seven). Barriers to effective cooperation (reasons why Atlanta didn't get a 10) were identified as:

• Cooperating is not a natural way of doing things here. The idea is still "me," not "us."
• Need more people involved. People are complacent, cynical, and have no ownership of the problem. There's no structure to involve the public.
• Rapid growth of the Atlanta region, resulting in a large number of recent arrivals who feel little connection to the region.
• Racial and ethnic prejudices and differences, which affect land development patterns and public transportation success.
• No bold leadership or vision. Lack leaders in state government and media. People with great ideas aren't the decisionmakers.
• Short political terms. Political careers thrive on finger-pointing, not cooperation. Territorial turf wars that come from the demands of different constituencies.
• People don't understand the benefits of regional cooperation, don't understand that the fate of the metropolitan area is linked to the fate of the inner city. No recognition that although we have different needs, we can still work together.
• Lack of political structure for regional action. Too many different governments in the region.
• Lack of common information/public awareness. No cohesive voice. We receive fragmented stories through different venues (not just the newspaper).
• No identification of priorities. No recognized crisis to unite us.

NOTE: A complete listing of all comments is attached in the appendix.

Strengths in regional cooperation (reasons why Atlanta didn't get a "1") were:

• We are waking up to the need to cooperate.
• Atlanta has had some small victories.
• Atlanta historically has been a community of vision. There are major institutions (United Way, Georgia Power, BellSouth) who provide support regionally.
• We see things working elsewhere that we know could work here.
• Soon it will be economically important to cooperate. Federal mandates require working together.
• Atlanta has a "we can" attitude.

There were many ideas on how Atlanta can cooperate better:

• Stop taking for granted that the Atlanta economy will grow ad infinitum. Find out what it takes to make our economy strong, then get the political cooperation necessary to do those things.
• Pick three to four high priorities as the focus.
• Build a regional perspective among the Atlanta region's elected officials at the state legislature. Change state laws as needed to support regionalism. State government must create new governmental structures and allow formation of regional authorities.
• Create some fundamental basis of understanding as a group. Build a philosophical understanding of what's important and where we want to go. Explain in bullets of information, keep it simple. Citizens don't understand complexities of regional issues, won't support politicians who make tough, right choices. Focus on the result of the problem in educating the public to make it real to people. Example: poor air quality results in more childhood asthma. Relating other issues to health concerns where appropriate is one idea. Involve school systems to get the word out. Tell it like it is. Define costs and benefits of regional cooperation. Let people know what they can do that will make a difference. Create an organization to get and keep citizens engaged.
• Integrated information systems that provide real-time data so that decisions and strategies can be based on current information. Create multi-media information network -- web site, email, phone tree, fax network -- to reach people. Make meetings accessible by MARTA, improve information about meetings.
• Deal with racism and crime.

What's unique about the way Atlanta sets goals and solves problems? Participants said:

• Lots of corporate and civic involvement. Strong volunteer sector.
• Atlanta mentality -- very strong self esteem -- believe we can do anything.
• Build strong networks and relationships.
• Strong tradition of individual leadership. We're waiting for the next knight to ride in and save us. Also means that the same people get things done over and over. Clique-ish -- shuts out inclusion and involvement. We don't look at the unofficial leadership.
• Strong ties to federal policy makers.
• Diversity in leadership -- history as the birth of the civil rights movement.
• Strong ties between academic institutions and the community.
• Fierce competition between cities and counties.
• Influence of President Jimmy Carter.

Atlanta could better solve its problems and cooperate by:

• Either allow an individual to lead us or learn how to deal with a pluralistic leadership.
• Put clear agendas on the table.
• Better communications to reach such a diverse population.
• Create a civic will and public mindset that the region exists, and we must solve problems regionally.
• Commitment from all sectors. No one is shut out.
• Recognize what is good or bad for the inner city is good or bad for the whole metropolitan area.
• Change people's lifestyle expectations.
• Fully involve young people in this process as they are making important decisions and so they will continue the process in the future.
• Demand excellence and integrity at all levels of government.
• Practice cooperating. Choose one project for all jurisdictions to solve together.

Atlanta could better use outside resources by:

• Create mechanisms to anticipate issues.
• Link knowledge-based resources.
• Form sister city relationships (within the region and outside the region) between communities in similar situations.
• Develop local information resources for citizens on the local level.

Involving the following:

• Universities
• Media, including public television and radio.
• Community-based organizations and faith communities. Some local non-profits are national leaders (example: Southface Energy).
• Alumni of community leadership programs.
• Chambers of commerce.
• Local departments of federal agencies.

The federal government helped regional cooperation in the past when it:

• Provided resources (especially transportation).
• Funded initiatives like Project PACT which forced us to work together.
• Funded projects which act as models -- example, DOE and HUD funded a project in Austin which provides great lessons in energy efficiency.
• Has different federal agencies working together.
• Focuses attention on a particular issue.
• Uses carrots and sticks (i.e. incentives and fines) to help us save ourselves. Examples, ISTEA; air and water quality regulations.

.

The federal government hindered regional cooperation in the past by:

• Dropping compliance with regional plans as a requirement to receive federal grants-in-aid.
• Size and complexity of federal bureaucracy. Red tape attached to help.
• Lack of flexibility/a cookie cutter mentality.
• Programs that mandate excessive costs (example, Davis Bacon Act). Federal guidelines. Unfunded mandates.
• Too much attention on documenting, not enough on effectiveness.
• Offer wrong subsidies, which encourage sprawl development.

The federal government can help regional collaboration with:

• Single point of contact for help in regional planning efforts -- interdepartmental approach for help.
• Help finance and create an information system for regions.
• Reduce regulations.
• An agreed-upon, multi-agency national urban policy.
• Federal grants based on agreement of projects with regional plans.
• Provide access to information available, example: the library of environmental technologies developed in the national labs.
• Give local jurisdictions flexibility to implement the solutions they devise.

Participants saw the role of the federal government in supporting regional collaborations as:

• Fund projects that fully engage the public.
• Set national strategy which reflects the link between the urban area and the metropolitan area.
• Ask for accountability after funding.
• Try to make regional planning easy.
• Establish true indicators of economic progress.
• Reward local governments and regions for good decision-making through subsidies and punish poor decisions through tax policy.
• Help regions make coalitions by creating models and collaborating with local government and businesses.

Next steps

Attendees were enthusiastic about continuing the effort to increase regional cooperation beyond the close of the meeting. Several members of the group volunteered to join with the host organizations and volunteers from the Regional Leadership Foundation to form the steering committee for continuing this effort and everyone at the forum indicated that they wanted to be involved in future meetings.

The steering committee will review representation at this first meeting to determine who else should be invited, sort through the ideas for demonstration projects, and reconvene the group to select a demonstration project. Topics to be considered include information access; linking welfare reform, transportation and jobs; and environmental improvement.

Before the next meeting, a roster of attendees and meeting summary will be sent out. Within a month, the steering committee will send letters to President Clinton and Vice-President Gore expressing interest in partnering with the federal government to create a model for developing regional solutions to problems.

People were excited about the possibility of working in closer partnership with the federal government to more quickly implement the needed regional projects already identified in earlier regional visioning and planning efforts. The group felt that there is no need to create a new organization or initiative. The steering committee will build upon the energy and momentum of the forum as the group works to accelerate regional cooperation in the Atlanta metropolitan area.