 |
| City State - Old Model |
Who would have thought the newest and most remarkable
innovation in city planning may come from Honduras. There, the Honduran
president, Porfirio Lobo has given his full backing to an idea to build new
cities that are outside the laws, tax system, judiciary and police of the
country. The goal is to turn around their disastrous economy by allowing less
restrictive growth and development in new areas of the country outside the specific
control of the government. Millions have been pledged by an investor group. (GO HERE for the Guardian article)
Much of this is based on the ideas of Paul Romer, a
professor at the Stern School of Business at New York University. He calls
these “Charter Cities” and cites examples such as Dubai, Hong Kong, and
Singapore. Good company if you can make it work. There are no scratch recipes
available to make these experiments work. But there are some things going for
it – but now after a lot of negative reactions, Romer has issues with much of
what is planned – or he’s lost control, not sure which. A lot of this sounds
strange and interesting at the same time. Who are the developers, why give up
such control, and how will you employ (as the developer says) 45,000 people in
less than three years?
As a planner, I know that the greatest difficulty many
new communities face is integrating new neighborhoods into the existing urban
framework. And this means both physically and politically. Every city I have
worked in sees these new neighborhoods as sources of revenue to fix existing
infrastructure, schools, and transit problems. From the start these new
residents are saddled with a disproportionate amount of fees to covers bonds to
build the community itself, fix adjacent roads, and repair old and tired sewer
and water systems. The new community’s success is often marginal, and during
bad times, like the last five years, disastrous. This Honduran model is new and
dangerous, bold ideas are always a threat to someone.
Already declared elitist and for the rich, the usual
forces are mustering to fight these attempts to bring some better level of
housing and business growth to one of the most unsafe countries in the world (its
murder rate is one of the highest). And if there is one thing that scares off
businesses and developers is murder and kidnapping. But businesses do employ
people who may then begin to have a better standard of living. Sometimes you
have to do things that are remarkably different to be successful – witness the threatened
entrepreneur in America and their fight for deregulation and creative freedom.
The usual canards are thrown out about forests and
agricultural frontiers (read subsistence farming). Indigenous peoples are
threatened, cultures will be lost. Possibly. But then again poverty and social
collapse have significant impacts on these people and cultures as well – maybe
more so.
The Socialist Party, a Marxist blog/news site (it calls itself Marxist), claims that it is just
another attempt by the Honduran elite to crush worker’s rights. (GO HERE) They even mention Bain and Company as a
consultant to the group (and they throw in Mitt Romney’s name for spite). It is
better to be a citizen of a failed country, living in fear, than an employee in
a safe environment, I guess.
The primary developer is MKG and its idealistic
libertarian Michael Strong. The government/management structure, as noted in
the New York Daily News.Com is:
Daily operations
will be administered by a board of governors.
Those governors
will establish the rules and laws of the city, and future legislation will be
subject to popular vote, said Michael Strong, CEO of MKG.
Hondurans will be
allowed to live and work in the cities — which Strong says will be home to
textile manufacturing, product assembly and outsourced businesses, like call
centers.
"Once we have
jobs, then we will need affordable housing, schools, clinics, churches, stores,
restaurants, all the businesses that create a real community," he told the
AP. (GO HERE)
Here is a blog that may have more information – but I am
not sure of its validity, (GO HERE) One my favorite magazines Fast Company, has this interesting take
on the story (GO HERE).
Notwithstanding the controversial aspects of something
like this, this is a concept and something to ponder. How would such an entity
survive in the Californian structure of urban plans, general plans, statewide
development studies, urban boundaries, and urban limit lines? It is virtually
impossible to start a “new” city almost anywhere in the United States. It would
be seen as a threat to any existing city, county or state. Laws of your own?
Management of employees outside the current labor accords? Schools run by
private organizations? And most probably non-union? I find it fascinating – so Galt’s
Gulch (for the Rand insider only).
Italy was such a land of city states until the end of the
19th Century; it took a civil war to bring Italy together. I will keep an eye
out on the goings on down south, a land not unknown to civil wars.
Stay Tuned . . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment