Progress For New Orleans

Ok, so I got a little irritated.

Apparently a magazine voted New Orleans people “America’s strangest people”  http://www.travelandleisure.com/articles/americas-strangest-people/1

I don’t get it. Or maybe they are just slow.

For me it’s just simple. New Orleans people like doing what they want to do, are friendly (mostly), don’t have a problem if you have a good time (mostly), likes a bargain, wants you to ask nicely, works hard, plays harder, and will generally tell you just what’s on their mind whether you asked them or not.

You didn’t ask me about who I think are stranger people than New Orleanians but I’m gonna tell you anyway.  And I present this a little carefully cause people I know and love are living in some of these cities, and are some of these people. But it’s strange to me.

So, here we go: The Top 5 Places with the Strangest People In America.

5) Philadelphia – They got a jail at the football stadium. They pelted Santa Claus with snowballs. There is clearly an anger management issue here. Or even if it was all alcohol induced then no one should be getting that violent just cause they’re drinking. Hell, fighting cause you’re drinking is just crazy.

4) Utah – Maybe it’s them, maybe it’s me. Utah has always seemed to me like something out of a David Lynch movie where everything seems hyper-normal but there is a horrible secret that no one is talking about.

3) New York City – Seriously, I love New Yorkers, LOVE THEM. But New Yorkers walk around as two people every day. Outside New Yorkers and Inside New Yorkers. Outside New Yorkers, there on the streets of the city are rude, gruff, focused and ready to run you over. Once you get them inside and they become Inside New Yorkers they transform into friendly, nice, helpful and funny people. It’s strange to me and makes me think they are all sort of suffering under some bipolar disease they get from eating pizza & riding in the subway.

2) San Fransisco – OK. I know there are a lot of different San Franciscans. And I’m not talking about Mission taqueria employees or Chinatown dumpling cooks. And I know a LOT of San Franciscans and I like the ones I know but I still think, as a group, they are a little strange.  There is a certain mix of self-righteousness and naivete that can be either charming, amusing, irritating or infuriating depending upon whether you are a target of their wrath or just a bystander. My initial takes on the people from my visits were that 1)Half the folks were working a scam and the other half were naively hoping the first half weren’t working a scam (ok so I exited the BART in the Tenderloin) And 2) They would stand in the longer line just to prove that they were somehow “better” than you. (I wasn’t sure what they thought this proved, that they were more patient, willing to endure more suffering? so altruistic that  they were willing to forgo ANY advantage? )  And there also seems to be a lot of working very hard to try to “be unique” and a level of busy-bodyness that would make Ms. Kravitz from “Bewitched” seem laid back.

1) The bible -belt south.  OK. This is gonna be a laundry list of strangeness to me. Dry Counties when you know most folks drink (Hello Lynchburg Tennessee, home of Jack Daniels), Criteria for dating that includes mandatory church attendance. Saying “Bless your heart” when what you really mean “My god, are you an idiot?” A sense of entitlement based upon church attendance (or even in some cases a passing familiarity with the Bible). It’s all very strange to me.

Now, this isn’t intended to hurt anyone’s feelings. This is all stranger to me than anything I see in New Orleans.

Oh, and the runners up are:

San Diego – Cause even the homeless people look like they came out of a Land’s End Catalog so you don’t know they are crazy until they are right there on top of you.  And

Portland – This is based mostly on the folks who have come to New Orleans from Portland who seem to try to project all the “do good” spirit they can but also seem to have a lot of contempt for the folks they think they are “doing good” for. I suspect this is also how it operates in Portland itself.  And hearing about their zoning code I tend to think they just like making things difficult for themselves.

Well, that’s about it. 5 places that a New Orleanian thinks have the strangest people in the country.

Prior to Katrina New Orleans had a housing crisis.

It may not have seemed like a housing crisis but it was. And it all related to our population numbers and our economy.

At the peak of our population we were close to 650,000 people. This was prior to most of New Orleans East being developed. Since those times in the early 1960s we have continually lost population and in the meantime we built probably a third more houses and apartments in the 1970s and 80s.

Add to this a form of housing, the shotgun, that dominates many older neighborhoods, that has proven itself extremely unpopular with a modern American family that wants bedroom doors that close. Finally moving out of a shotgun house was for many lower middle class New Orleans families proof that you could sustain yourself in some fairly comfortable manner.

The rents, pre-Katrina, were fairly cheap and based upon two things:  An owner who didn’t need to pay off a mortgage but didn’t really spend that much on upkeep and tenants who couldn’t afford much working in the low wage, tourism based economy.

The storm, and the subsequent housing shortage in the immediate aftermath, drove up rents, but we also saw wages rise to meet the new financial reality.

Now both wages and rents are falling.

More and more apartment complexes are coming online, many of them financed by disaster recovery funds.  This in turn is driving down rents for the small landlord.

The small landlord, in contrast, has new debt and new and prohibitively expensive insurance. If the rents reach pre-Katrina levels, and in many places they are approaching that, there will be no incentive to maintain these houses.

Meanwhile, the population has not kept pace with the growth in housing and the economy  is failing to produce the jobs for the citizens so that they can afford rent.

The growth in new housing development undercuts the need to save any marginal old houses that dot our city streets with blight.

But, even now we have two city agencies fighting over whether we keep blighted houses or remove them.  The New Orleans Redevelopment Authority (NORA) has been continually stymied by the Neighborhood Conservation District Committee (NCDC) in demolishing houses.

So, here’s the question? Just when can we get rid of houses that no one wants to live in, that have been empty for years, when it is likely we won’t have a population to fill all of the houses we have unless we significantly remake our economy into one where people have the resources to take on expensive projects like renovations of blighted property?

It’s clear to me that we are going to have to reimagine a New Orleans that perhaps doesn’t have the street density it once had. Or one that mixes new construction and design in with older buildings. But we can look at a block that in the future has 10 stellar houses with side yards rather than 15  half fixed/half blighted houses.

We have to adjust our thinking. Vibrant cities change constantly. But unless we attract more people on the basis of economic development, there will be little reason and fewer resources to address blight by any other mechanism except demolition.

Dear New New Orleans Resident,

We need to talk.

I am often treated by folks who just moved here about how New Orleans is so unique. I get to hear all about how New Orleans is the most European or the most Caribbean city. Some folks from elsewhere in America will exclaim to me, breathlessly, that “it’s not like being in America at all.”

But see, here’s the thing. It is like being in America. Our America. Our America is like most of the country in many ways and different in many ways. But this is the thing, it is still our America. Of course we have a lot of people who think there is some sort of homogeneous “American” experience, but of course that is a very narrow appreciation of the country and it’s basic diversity. The farm life in Kansas is very different than life in a New York City borough. There is a world of difference between the daily experience of someone in the Florida Panhandle and  streets of Chicago.  There are many Americas in this country. And even if there are things that are common to most of us it is very superficial to look at this as one culture.

And so we need to talk to you  about our America because there are things you need to know.

The big differences are the easiest. Mardi Gras is a given but everyone in New Orleans has their own Mardi Gras. It might be old line krewe, or masking Indian, or truck float riding, or French Quarter rambling, or escaping to the ski slopes. Every family has at least one local culinary specialty that they take some sort of pride in: red beans and rice, crawfish boil, gumbo, jambalaya, etouffee. In addition to that they have one family food specialty that reflects their own personal history; lasagna or meatballs, stuffed cabbage, mole.

We are not hung up on drinking. We are gamblers, as you would expect folks who lived in such a precarious place would be. We like our bargains. Before the collapse of our retail sector we shopped at both local and national chains. We have things that we will only buy from one specific store but for most purchases the bargain trumps any notions of loyalty.

We have watched for a long time the decline of our city as places like Houston took our jobs and Atlanta took our people. We recognize the folks in Metairie and St. Bernard and on the Westbank as our folks, even if we wonder why anyone would move to the country, by which we mean, the Northshore.

We are social people. As evidenced by the story a fire chief in Maryland who worked after the storm told me about people he came to rescue inviting him in for a drink.

But still, this is our America. It may have been different than the America you grew up in but it is still America. And as it is America, it still has all the need for things that the rest of America needs: good jobs, a stable population that can support themselves economically, a desire to progress and grow so that their people can maintain themselves. Well, the basic things that every thriving city all around the world needs.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking that New Orleans is so “unique” that we can afford to ignore the basics of modern life, to do so suggests that it’s best days are in the past and it has no future outside that of a museum and a playground. New Orleans is better than that.

Our America depends on being able to grow and have a future.

In the days following Hurricane Katrina, the levee failures and the subsequent flooding there was lots of talk amoungst the uneducated about abandoning New Orleans and not rebuilding. Unfortunately for the city one of these fools was the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert.

Smarter people prevailed, but the persistent notion of not rebuilding found its way into conversations that continued into 2006. The Bring New Orleans Back Committee (BNOB) in conjunction with the Urban Land Institute floated this idea and it proved to be some of the most contentious meetings in the post-Katrina landscape. 2006 was simply too early to discuss the viability of neighborhoods.  This conversation needs to happen now, but that is a whole ‘nother topic.

I feel that the infamous “Green Dot” debate stalled the impetus towards recovery in many of our neighborhoods. And it also gave rise to the premise of New Orleans as a “boutique city”.

Green Dots over our neighborhoods

The “Boutique City” was the idea that New Orleans was going to have fewer people and be happy about it. That those fewer people would be richer, probably, and therefore, theoretically shop at boutiques.

The concept of the “boutique city” and the fight against the concept, probably led in part to Ray Nagin’s infamous and divisive  “Chocolate City” remarks. Ironic, since it was his BNOB committee that pushed the concept forward and gave it its audience.

Well, the “boutique city” is a mistake.

It ignores the geographic strength of our location and exchanges it for the concept that we can live on our “charm”.  It is a concept that says not only will New Orleans not work to it’s potential but will deliberately short circuit progress to ensure that it is unable to thrive.

It is a failed vision, and unfortunately it is something we have been heading towards with each development that puts parks over productivity, quaintness over commerce, preservation over progress.

We should aim for a city that has a million hard working people all with good jobs. A city that attracts people on the basis of economic opportunity and holds onto its college graduates. A city that uses it’s geographic advantage astride the Mississippi River to create the growth necessary to sustain the city and its institutions.

Cause here’s the story. The investments necessary to protect New Orleans from the hazards of water are so costly that they will only be feasible if there are good financial reasons to do it. Being a major port with a population that has great jobs that is a vital player in the national and global economy is a good financial reason. Spending that money to protect a bunch of old buildings and unproductive folks either living on government assistance or on the money of their great-grandfather’s labor, is not a good financial reason.

Put simply: The “Boutique City”, in addition to being an enourmous waste of our city’s potential, will surely fail to be able to protect itself because the resources will not be allocated simply because we are striving to make ourselves “quaint” and “charming”.

The “Boutique City” pretty much guarantees we end up the next Atlantis. Growth and demonstrated financial strength and a critical and vital population means that we can live on perpetually.

Like everyone in New Orleans, Hurricane Katrina and the subsequent flooding affected my thinking about my city and my relationship with it.

Prior to the storm I had very little interest in local politics and the policies and personalities which ran the city. I was more focused on national issues.

But you can’t see your city in ruins, your fellow citizens either suffering or running wild in the streets, on national television for a couple of weeks without thinking that we must have been doing something seriously wrong to get us to this point. So, while the levee failures were the engineering failure that wrecked havoc on the physical infrastructure, we had economic and social failures that stretched for years and decades prior that had wrecked havoc on the lives of the citizens..

I started to look at Katrina through the lens of our economic decline and how that played into the problems before, during and after the storm. How lack of economic opportunity left folks vulnerable because they lacked the resources to choose their own path, how the lack of good jobs slowed the recovery and still continues to slow the recovery.

It is a big change for a self-identified “art guy”. I’ve gone from writing screenplays to thinking about zoning policy. The drive towards making up stories has been supplanted by the need to attempt to do the things needed to ensure New Orleans’ economic sustainability. If you had told me 10 years ago I’d be this “pro-development” I would have laughed. But things change and it changes you.

Central to this is the idea that people need jobs, in general, and good jobs, in particular in order to put their lives back together. They need economic opportunity and a good shot at career advancement to meet their obligations to their families and have the resources to enhance their lives and their community. And if they don’t find it in New Orleans they will leave to find it somewhere else.

As a result of this I have become extraordinarily sensitive to anyone who stands in the way of our city’s economic development. It is a “jobs first” outlook. It has made me very sympathetic to those who are bringing jobs to the city and fairly hostile to those attempting to obstruct those who are bringing business and jobs to the city.

Put simply- I will generally support those who are doing something and oppose those who look to stop them. To borrow a baseball rule, the tie goes to the runner.

New Orleans can only survive in a meaningful way if we work diligently to make its economy strong. Not just for its own purpose but because it allows its the city to retain and attract its population, it allows it to access the resources from the nation it needs to protect itself from hazards when it can demonstrate it is economically important to the nation. It allows the citizens to maintain themselves and be in a position to make their own choices.

And this is why I am working towards a future for New Orleans. Not just one that is a whisper or pale reflection of the past, but one that finds us, once again a world economic center.