RhodeMap – RI Future

Scott Wolf, the executive director of Grow Smart Rhode Island, said there were some big wins for sustainable and equitable development in the last legislative session. RhodeMapRI was not one of them, he acknowledged.

Grow Smart RI’s logo, courtesy of http://www.growsmartri.org/

“A lot of the economic development proposals that we thought were good for smart growth passed,” Wolf said. “Those are embodied primarily in Governor Raimondo’s economic development package.”

He mentioned funding to incentivize development on the I-195 land, a fund for streetscape improvements on main streets of cities and towns, special incentives towards transit development, and others.

But the Rebuild RI tax credit could be the most impactful piece of the governor’s economic development package, he said. In its final form, there are opportunities for small historic rehabilitation projects, something that Grow Smart advocated for, and spoke to the Raimondo administration about.

“If the Rebuild RI tax credit does provide significant opportunities for large and small historic rehab projects, then that could be the single most important item,” Wolf said. “It provides continuing state incentives for redeveloping some of our tremendous collection of historic buildings, most of which are located in urban areas, many in distressed urban areas.”

Wolf added that the tax credit program also provides funding for the redevelopment of vacant lots in cities and towns. These lots could be turned into a number of things for public use, but Grow Smart is advocating for some to be converted into grocery stores, as many urbanites have difficulties accessing one.

“As a group that wants to see development occur primarily in cities versus rural areas, we think that this Rebuild RI tax credit is going to stimulate that kind of development,” Wolf said.

Looking toward the future, Grow Smart has plans for the short and long term. For the rest of the year, they’ll be focusing on educating towns and municipalities about the new tools they have, such as the Rebuild RI tax credit, to implement smart growth standards in their public centers.

“Our focus for the next four or five months is going to be to try to make sure that municipalities and developers, both for profit and nonprofit, that are interested in rehabilitating specific historic structures, fully understand how they can facilitate that through the Rebuild RI program,” Wolf said.

During this time, Grow Smart will become a resource for these groups to ensure that their process goes smoothly, but also to get as many historic rehab projects approved as possible. They’ll also be providing assistance for some of the bond issues that were passed last November, especially an environmental bond that includes $5 million for the redevelopment of contaminated sites, or brown fields. Wolf said that this bond is a big step forward, since it’s the first time that state money has gone toward such a project.

Wolf added that Grow Smart also plans to work with the governor’s administration to develop a technical assistance for local governments so they can better use the new tools that have been given to them for redevelopment, such as tax increment financing, which can be used to put the funds together for brownfield development.

In the long term, Wolf said they have several goals, but they all boil down to building a stronger economy, while maintaining Rhode Island’s personality. This all includes employment for city residents, strengthening farms and locally produced agriculture, and a more user-friendly transportation system.

“In a broad sense, our in Rhode Island, and the work nationally in the smart growth movement, is about changing the predominant development pattern in America, which has existed for the past 70 years or so, which has been a very auto dependent, suburban oriented development pattern,” he said. “We’re not anti suburban, and we’re not anti auto, but we think that we need a more balanced approach than what we’ve had in the state and in the country for decades.”

A successful year can’t happen without some marked failures, though. Grow Smart was a staunch supporter of Governor Raimondo’s RhodeWorks legislation, which tore a rift between the House and Senate last session. While the revised bill passed in the Senate, it didn’t even reach the floor in the House, with Speaker Mattiello urging for further study. The bill would use tolls on tractor-trailer trucks to cover the costs of rebuilding deficient bridges, as well as support a more modern transit system.

“We’re disappointed it didn’t pass both houses, but we think there’s a good chance it’s going to be approved either later this year or early next year. We’re working with the Raimondo administration, especially the state department of transportation, on that proposal,” Wolf said.

He was also disappointed that there was not a specific and significant commitment to multi-year funding for historical rehabilitation projects added to the state historic tax credit program.

RhodeMap RI was presented another sticky situation for Grow Smart. While it did pass as legislation, Wolf explained that there was so much controversy around the bill that it became hard to use it as the basis for any policy decisions. The bill included expansions for affordable housing, which conservative activists called “socialist,” fearing the takeover of municipal zoning regulations.

Although the plan was ultimately approved, Grow Smart’s main concern after the public uproar it caused was that it would sit on a shelf and have no policy effect whatsoever. However, Governor Raimondo’s economic development package includes many of the basic priorities that Rhode Map sought to achieve, and which Grow Smart supports.

“Our main commitment was to the goals and the proposed policies of RhodeMap, not to RhodeMap, the name or the brand,” Wolf said. “Our goal this sessions was to get as many of the initiatives that are in the spirit of Rhode Map approved as possible, and a lot of the governor’s economic development package is in that spirit.”

“If decoupling these ideas from RhodeMap is what’s necessary, politically, to have them enacted, then that’s a small price to pay,” Wolf added.

Even with the stigma surrounding RhodeMap, and the limbo that RhodeWorks currently lies in, Wolf said he is still very comfortable calling this legislative session a success for Grow Smart. As far as next year is concerned, their goals are still in the planning stage. For now, Grow Smart celebrates what they’ve already won, and not the battle ahead.

A new report from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) by Richard Rothstein titled The Making of Ferguson: Public Policies at the Root of its Troubles puts some of the recent brouhaha over RhodeMap RI into keen perspective. We all know the story of the police murder of Mike Brown in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, MO, the high profile demonstrations from the black community in response, and the heavy handed, militarized police reaction. The US Department of Justice released a shocking report of systemic racism and economic exploitation of the black citizens of Ferguson, but the report from the EPI provides insight into how a racially segregated, predominantly low income African-American community like Ferguson can develop in the first place.

Rothstein begins by blaming racial prejudice and racist public policy. “No doubt, private prejudice and suburbanites’ desire for homogenous affluent environments contributed to segregation in St. Louis and other metropolitan areas. But these explanations are too partial, and too conveniently excuse public policy from responsibility. A more powerful cause of metropolitan segregation in St. Louis and nationwide has been the explicit intents of federal, state, and local governments to create racially segregated metropolises.”

It’s important to understand that the policies Rothstein exposes in his report are not located only in the immediate area of St. Louis, these policies existed across the nation, and even where such policies no longer officially exist, their effects can still be felt today. These policies, according to Rothstein, include:

Government subsidies for white suburban developments that excluded blacks, depriving African Americans of the 20th century home-equity driven wealth gains reaped by whites;
Denial of adequate municipal services in ghettos, leading to slum conditions in black neighborhoods that reinforced whites’ conviction that “blacks” and “slums” were synonymous;
Boundary, annexation, spot zoning, and municipal incorporation policies designed to remove African Americans from residence near white neighborhoods, or to prevent them from establishing residence near white neighborhoods;
Urban renewal and redevelopment programs to shift ghetto locations, in the guise of cleaning up those slums.

RhodeMap RI was developed with an understanding of many of the problems Rothstein cites. The public review draft of RhodeMap has a section at the end concentrating on social equity that explicitly called on the plan to “implement a new economic model based on equity, fairness, and opportunity.” It is this part of the plan, the part that seeks to undo the kind of problems that plague communities of color like Ferguson, that seems to most bother RhodeMap opponents.

Rothstein takes a shot at offering possible solutions towards the end of his report, writing, “Many practical programs and regulatory strategies can address problems of Ferguson and similar communities nationwide.” For instance, governments might “require even outer-ring suburbs to repeal zoning ordinances that prohibit construction of housing that lower- or moderate-income residents – white or black – can afford. Going further, we could require every community to permit development of housing to accommodate a ‘fair share’ of its region’s low-income and minority populations…”

Rhode Island has something of a fair share law (as part of the Rhode Island Comprehensive Housing Production and Rehabilitation Act of 2004 and Rhode Island Low and Moderate Income Housing Act (Rhode Island General Laws 45-53)) which sets a 10% goal for each of the state’s cities and town to meet—the goal being that 10% of the units in a town are “affordable.”

Most of the pushback against RhodeMap comes from communities that have very little affordable rental housing and are predominantly White. Legislation to undermine existing laws requiring cities and towns to plan for affordable housing is part of that pushback , such as House Bill 5643, which would “eliminate the mandate requiring cities and towns to include an affordable housing program in their comprehensive plans” or House Bill 5644 which “would remove the mandate requiring cities and towns to include an affordable housing program in their comprehensive plans and would provide an opt-out provision regarding any provision in the state guide plan regarding affordable housing and any related land use provisions” are naked attempts to keep affordable housing, and those who need it, out of their communities.

The legislators who are introducing and supporting the bills are all Republicans, or in one case an “Independent” representing primarily suburban and rural communities like Richmond (Note: part of Rep. Justin Price’s district), West Greenwich (part of Rep. Sherry Robert’s district) Coventry, Hopkinton, Charlestown, Portsmouth, Exeter and East Greenwich. Note that Richmond and West Greenwich have made “no progress” and East Greenwich has made “no significant progress” in meeting the 10% goal.

Undoing the damage of decades of racist housing policy and preventing future Fergusons requires a plan. RhodeMap RI isn’t quite that plan, it’s more a collection of guidelines to help communities develop a plan, but it’s a good step in the right direction. Those opposed to RhodeMap like to put on their “free market” hats and declare that any government intervention into housing is some sort of fascist violation of property rights. However, racially segregated housing is the product of just the kind of government sponsored social engineering that RhodeMap opponents complain of, and many of those opponents have also waged fights to prevent construction of affordable rental units in places such as Barrington and East Greenwich.

To be consistent these defenders of the free market should be calling for a repeal of all zoning restrictions in their communities, but of course they will not. Instead, they will zealously guard the status quo by defending zoning laws that the prevent construction of low income housing too close to their safe suburban enclaves. Opponents of RhodeMap object to being called racists, but when their claims of defending property rights are not equally applied to property owners who want to build affordable housing on their land, what else are we to think?

Tag: RhodeMap

A good year for Grow Smart?