How localism's rationales limit new urbanism's success and what new regionalism can do about it.

• Author: Polmateer, Timothy
• Position: II. Localism A. The Theory of Localism 3. Localism's Arguments Dissected for Flaws through Conclusion, with footnotes, p. 1111-1139

3. Localism's Arguments Dissected for Flaws

   Proponents of localism argue that it provides for greater economic efficiency, political empowerment, and community education of civic life. (261) But arguments for localism collapse when examining the regional consequences of local government action. (262) Localism opponents argue that any marginal benefits of localism generated for local participants are outweighed by the collective harm at the greater region. (263) In fact, as Briffault mentions, and this Note contends in Part III, these arguments suggest a need for a version of regional government, rather than local autonomy. (264) Localism's critics suggest that localism creates "isolated, self-interested entities that ignore or exploit the plight of their neighbors, particularly central cities." (265) One reason for this exploitation might be what Cheryl Cashin labels as "the tyranny of the favored quarter." (266) Those with resources create externalities that are then shifted to those without resources. (267) Weaker neighbors are burdened by their more powerful neighbors' ability to capture valuable assets and push out waste or unwelcome types of people and entities.

   As a result of the mobility of modern society and the ability to independently produce sufficient amounts of revenue, (268) high-growth, developing suburbs further isolate themselves from the minority poor. (269) If you cannot afford to live in the suburbs, then you cannot afford to work in the suburbs, much less absorb the costs of driving back and forth to the suburbs for employment each day. (270) The less fortunate are left with no other option but to occupy the poverty ridden, inner city locations. (271) William Julius Wilson comments that "[a]s the world of corporate employment has relocated to America's suburban communities ... many of the residents of our inner-city ghettos have become physically isolated from places of employment ... [and] the commute ... becomes a Herculean effort." (272) Therefore, in contrast to suburbs, many inner cities are burdened with social and infrastructure externalities, which create greater economic demands on local resources. (273) Inner cities are forced to provide a bigger safety net for their poor constituents while receiving less revenue from their tax base. (274) These areas must, therefore, "look beyond the city limits to outside public and private actions," to support their needs. (275) Dependency on outsiders limits the cities' autonomy and subjects them to state influence. (276)

   The reality of this dichotomy and fear of becoming responsible for these burdensome populations entrenches the isolation of smaller localities and creates intense interlocal political and economic conflicts. (277) Due to localism's legal prowess, local entities perpetuate economic advantages through exclusionary zoning systems or by providing incentives to attract commerce and boost tax bases. (278) Lisa Alexander writes, "The decisions of a particular locality to exclude or include certain land uses, or to provide public subsidies for housing construction or economic development, will inevitably generate externalities or have spillover effects on neighboring localities." (279) This competitive practice ensures that no locality is actually isolated because what happens in one area has a direct effect on its neighbors.

   The Tieboutian efficiency argument for localism is also challenged because it is premised on a world with no spillover effects, or externalities, between the localities. (280) In reality, localities affect one another through policy decisions and actions. (281) Pollution is a clear example of an externality that transcends the artificial borders of a municipality. (282) In modern metropolitan areas, externalities are nearly guaranteed given the proximity of jurisdictional borders as well as the overlapping routines of the citizens in different jurisdictions. (283) Briffault further elaborates, "As the example of sprawl indicates, [externalities] may not involve simply the impact of one particular locality on its neighbor, but may instead be the consequence of the aggregate of local policies across the region." (284) According to Briffault's reasoning, the efficiency argument is best served through the lens of regional cooperation, rather than localism. (285)

   Additionally, the Tieboutian theory operates within a vacuum of cost and relies on the equal ability of each citizen to move between localities. (286) But, not every participant is equally mobile, and exit costs may be prohibitive for certain classes of citizens. (287) There are out of pocket costs associated with mobility, people can only live where they have access to employment, and people must be able to afford the costs of living in a locality. (288) Poorer members of the community may have fewer options of mobility and, therefore, bear a disproportionate amount of the cost associated with this theory. (289) These inhibitors suggest that Tiebout's theory is only applicable to the affluent. (290)

   Tiebout's public choice theory also fails to consider interlocal inequalities, which further undermine localism's democratic and community-based arguments. (291) The theory assumes that the differences between localities are a product of taste rather than the result of external decisions that the locality has little control over. (292) A premise of the theory is that local governments have complete control over how they provide services, to whom they provide the services, and how much each service costs. (293) In reality, localities make policy decisions based on their fiscal capacity to implement those decisions. (294)

   Another reason people may not move is because they are emotionally and sentimentally attached to their locality, despite their disapproval of municipal policies. (295) One's community provides a stable environment filled with interpersonal support and physical security. (296) Movement to another location would result in the loss of these benefits and the severing of sentimental attachments. (297) Uprooting this support structure has potential psychological costs that many people are unwilling to bear. (298)

   Effective democracy requires equal political voice. (299) Proponents of localism argue that the nature of localism's form generates greater democratic participation, but Briffault reasons that the inability of localities to actually address interlocal issues undermines this benefit. (300) The political voice is muted by the fact that issues may have unsatisfactory resolutions in the local perspective. (301) Briffault suggests that given the reality of an existence of inequality between localities, political powers concern themselves chiefly with expanding their tax base. (302) This prioritization manifests as pandering to constituents with greater economic prowess--primarily corporations and the affluent--instead of small businesses and the poor. (303) Finally, in the contemporary metropolitan area, where commuters spend significant time in multiple localities, the decisions of each locality are likely to neglect commuters' concerns because they have no local voice in the political processes. (304) Therefore, in the context of the metropolis, the argument concerning democratic benefits requires that there be a regional avenue to voice political concerns. (305)

   Localism's community argument hinges on the fact that people share a single common space and live their daily lives interacting with one another. (306) But in the metropolis people spend their days in many different locations and communities. (307) Additionally, contemporary metropolitan areas lack a distinct city center as a gathering place for citizens. (308) Harvard University Professor Gerald Frug explained that city life is "the being together of strangers." (309) In contrast, localities emerging as a result of sprawling suburbs usually are communities of similar individuals, and, as a result, segregate communities based on social, economic, and racial stratifications. (310) Homogeneity limits interactions with other types of people, and individuals retreat from forming diverse relationships. (311) This system creates a cycle, as "[a] child growing up in such a homogenous environment is less likely to develop a sense of empathy for people from other walks of life and is ill prepared to live in a diverse society." (312) In other words, "fragmented local autonomy tends to encourage a highly parochial perspective among citizens." (313) Therefore, localism seems to create isolated communities weary of other people and other municipalities.

   2. Localism's Connection to New Urbanism

   The failures of new urbanism can be associated with the pitfalls of localism that this Note discussed in Part II.A.3. Local efforts to exclude low-income populations, competition between localities, the tyranny of the favored quarter, and isolationist tendencies are all disincentives for local governments to incorporate new urbanist principles in their land use plans. (314) The next section of this Note explores many of new urbanism's weaknesses and their symmetry with localism. For instance, outskirt development and the high costs of housing in new urbanist communities create a mobility problem for populations lacking financial means and further isolates and homogenizes localities. (315) Also, localism's contempt of externalities discourages local governments from creating a regional system of corridors through which commerce and people could move and participate in new urbanist communities. (316)

1. Local Land Use Autonomy Leads to a Void in Comprehensive Approaches

   One of the major impediments to new urbanism communities is that traditional zoning regulations are rigid and do not provide the flexibility or scope for utilizing new urbanism's design principles. (317) Deciphering a way to work within these restrictive systems demands creative thinking. (318) Variances are too small of a tool...