Chuck Marohn's "Strong Towns" philosophy has been a huge influence on our thinking. StrongTowns.org has grown from a personal blog into one of the most influential urbanist movements in America, with thousands of members and millions of readers worldwide.
Strong Towns is common sense, yet iconoclastic: Cities and towns need to manage their finances responsibly, and develop their infrastructure accordingly.
While Chuck's prognoses may sound pessimistic, he believes that positive changes must happen at the level of the local community, rather than chasing easy money from Wall Street and Washington. This is an approach that we can get behind.
Chuck's forthcoming book "Strong Towns: A Bottom-Up Revolution to Rebuild American Prosperity" is available for pre-order, and will be released on October 1st, 2019.
Use hashtag #ana023 to reference this episode in a tweet, post, or comment
View full show notes and links at http://anarchitecturepodcast.com/ana023
Intro
- Tim met Chuck at an event in Portsmouth NH
Joe's urbanism crash courseGrowth Ponzi SchemeRothbard defines "Capital Goods" as goods which require maintenanceConsumer goods are quickly used upCities treat capital goods as consumer goodsStrong Towns puts the meat on the bonesStrong Towns has members from across the political spectrumHope for libertarians"Stroad" - the "taint" of the built environment- 'tain't a street, 'tain't a road
...or is it a foot fungus?Not just about financial resiliency; it's also about safetyDiscussion
- A place that can take care of itself
Maintain basic infrastructure"Most cities today... are insolvent"What makes towns fragile?- Post-WWII development pattern - horizontal expansion
Infrastructure capital costs wrapped into debtShort term sugar rush for local governmentsRepair/replacement costs come due in later generationsCities chase more growth and take on more debt to cover repair costsGrowth Ponzi Scheme - eventually the math breaks downTradeoff between growth and stabilityThis sounds a lot like the Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT)We don't have any options that aren't painfulWhat solutions does Strong Towns propose?- "We have categorically rejected the idea of a solution"
Cities are complex adaptive systems - simple cause/effect doesn't workSolutions must emerge through feedback - can be very painfulLoans, Federal Grants put off the consequencesGood decisions can reinforce each otherWhat are the roles of different actors in developing solutions?- "What two policies can we enact that would build Strong Towns"
Stop funding the local cul-de-sac from Washington DCSB50 - forces expansion on certain areasLibertarian at the federal/state levelCommunal organization at the local levelCities need to become competent at basic maintenanceFinancially productive neighborhoods tend to be the most neglected, older, traditional development patternCities need to orient themselves away from looking up the government food chainSmall quality of life investments have a huge payoff - street trees, crosswalks, walkabilityWhat if there was no city government? Does a city government have an inherent bias towards big projects?- Incentives are all messed up
When you institutionalize something, it tends to serve itselfDebate with Randall O'Toole - the holdout problem on a private streetThe transaction cost problem - coercive social pressure vs. coercive governmentLocal government works best when it's focused on the people, but has become the tool for implementing federal policyGovernment has taken the mantle of communityThe Red Button Libertarian Purity TestSmall bets- Strong Towns has everyone from hardcore socialists to hardcore libertarians
There isn't one path to building a Strong TownGovernmental localismIt's the best we have at this pointThe problem is the assumption that the government is the only approachWhy do cities take on responsibility for new developments?- The price of your home should have factored in the maintenance costs
User fees - low density development should pay more- Study in Lafayette, LA - how many times is your poop pumped?
Baltimore - people have become accustomed to low fees that haven't capitalized the cost of replacement- Utilities are local monopolies
Privatizing a system - closes a short term budget gap"Privitazation merely runs the system the way that a competently run system should be"Privatization vs Privateering - from public to private monopoly- Private Public Partnership
Arizona State Capital - sold the building and rented it backWe should be leery of these deals - there's not a lot of good decision making being madeAre there any examples of successful divestiture of government responsibilities?- Memphis annexation to close budget gaps
Memphis is twice the size of Detroit, and 2/3 the peopleDe-annexation, shrinking the size of the cityThe people being de-annexed want to be de-annexedReversion to county or unincorporated townshipTax revenue as a proxy for successAn inherent disconnect between tax revenue and user costsCity council as a buyer's group- Alignment between libertarians and advocates for the poor
Older lots - narrow, deep lots - require minimal infrastructureNewer developments - more infrastructure per lotThe poorest neighborhoods subsidize the wealthier onesHow do you quantify a productive area?- Wealth creation is the proxy for success
Value per acre correlates with successThis holds true regardless of the specific tax regimeEmpire State building vs. trailer home1800's planning books obsessed about value per acreIs density an oversimplification?Planners love simple metrics"Urban renewal is a poster child for people who thought density was the answer"Correlation between public investment and private investmentDensity is a side effectChuck's family homestead - productive, didn't require servicesCore downtowns have more infrastructure, but more wealthBig box stores - public investment almost as much as the private investmentMinimum 20:1 - 40:1 ratio of private to public investmentShould a local small business owner (movie theater) be given a monopoly to keep out the big box chain?- Knee-jerk libertarian reaction - no special privileges
AMC benefits from the stroad subsidy"People think, when we talk about the free market, that we're talking about something that actually exists"First, do no harm - take away the financial and infrastructure subsidies that prop up the big box modelChuck would recommend the monopoly protection - they can always revoke it later"The more things can be localized, the more our better angels tend to govern things"If government can pick winners and losers - in many cases they'll pick the corporate big boxThe local ability to adapt and change is paramountWe should trust the community to support good local businessesStrong Towns: the bookNo editing changesIt's the Strong Towns storyBook tourStrong Towns has become a movement- "Back when I started, it was me writing a blog instead of going to a therapist"
Pre-2008, over 100 years of undeveloped lot supply- "Either I'm crazy, or the world's crazy. I was open to either possibility."
Almost 3,000 dues paying members, millions of readersWhere's the best place to start?Links/Resources
- Pre-order Strong Towns, the book
- Connect with local Strong Towns groups
Strong Towns Articles discussed- Sprawl is Not the Problem
Chuck's Debate with Randal O'Toole Lafayette - Poor Neighborhoods Make the Best InvestmentsArizona State Capitol Building - Desperate Times... Desperate (Insane) Measures?Memphis's U-Turn: How the City is Commiting to a Stronger Future - (blog and podcast episode)On the Value per Acre metric: We measure car value based on miles per gallon, not miles per tank. Why don't we do the same for our cities' developments? Other people/websites mentionedRandal O'Toole's "Antiplanner" blogAnarchitecture Podcast episodes mentioned:- ana020: The Power of Place-Based Community | Tim’s Freecoast 2018 Speech
Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT) resource page (Bob Murphy)- Mark Thornton's "The Skyscraper Curse" is a great explanation of ABCT and shows the effects of the business cycle on city development
Baltimore Votes to Become First Large U.S. City to Ban Water Privatization - ReutersRothbard: Capital goods require maintenance (Man, Economy, and State, p. 484):
We can, instead, reformulate the concept of “land.” Up to this point we have simply assumed land to be the original, nature-given factors. Now we must modify this, in keeping with our focus on the present and the future rather than the past. Whether or not a piece of land is “originally” pure land is in fact economically immaterial, so long as whatever alterations have been made are permanent—or rather, so long as these alterations do not have to be reproduced or replaced. Land that has been irrigated by canals or altered through the chopping down of forests has become a present, permanent given. Because it is a present given, not worn out in the process of production, and not needing to be replaced, it becomes a land factor under our definition. In the ERE (evenly rotating economy), this factor will continue to give forth its natural powers unstinted and without further investment; it is therefore land in our analysis. Once this occurs, and the permanent are separated from the nonpermanent alterations, we see that the structure of production no longer stretches back infinitely in time, but comes to a close within a relatively brief span of time. The capital goods are those which are continually wearing out in the process of production and which labor and land factors must work to replace. When we consider physical wearing out and replacement, then, it becomes evident that it would not take many years for the whole capital-goods structure to collapse, if no work were done on maintenance and replacement, and this is true even in the modern, highly capitalist economy. Of course, the higher the degree of “capitalist” development and the more stages in production, the longer will it take for all the capital goods to wear out.