WITHIN CITY LIMITS: Episode XII, How Do I Join the New Albany Planning Committee?

WITHIN CITY LIMITS: Episode XII, How Do I Join the New Albany Planning Committee?

By Nick Vaughn, Guest Columnist

For those of you who may not know, there is a new planning committee in New Albany tasked with developing a plan for what New Albany can look like in 20 years. Does this sound familiar? It should. When I was running for City Council I created my Vision Outline for New Albany. I dreamt of a land that had renter registration, anti-poverty initiatives, incentives to bring jobs back to New Albany, and a land where unelected boards did not will their power unchecked by elected officials. So, if I have a plan, how do I join this planning committee?

Does it surprise anyone, though? Not a single average, everyday New Albanian is represented on this new committee let alone a young person who might actually have a vested interest in steering the city in a direction that will allow young people to flourish. It is important for prominent New Albany businesses to be represented on this committee and I guess some outside businesses as well, however, it makes zero sense as to why there is no true resident representation on this committee. This is especially ironic because the 20 year plan will affect those who reside and own a home or rent here in New Albany most likely before it affects a business or commercial property owner.

Unsurprisingly, the means in which this committee was chosen is completely in the dark and kept away from the people of New Albany who have a right to know who will be making a 20 year plan for their city. Of course, this non-transparency just fits the narrative of the Gahan Administration as well as a go-along-to-get-along, Democratic Majority City Council. How were these people chosen? Who chose them? Why were they chosen? Why does the City Council have no oversight? Is the City Council going to be represented? In my experience, a committee or government entity that has more questions asked about it than can be answered is a committee or government entity that I don’t want representing my interests.

The largest question, though, might be how much power does this committee have over the people of New Albany? None of the members, to my knowledge, have been voted into their position by the people, the City Council did not confirm these committee members, so does this committee even hold any meaningful power?

Before anything else, this committee needs to appoint some citizens, young, old, and in between. If they do not I cannot see how they can possibly be able to effectively steer the community in a direction that will benefit the citizens. As of right now, the only benefit that could come from this committee would be more crony capitalism propagated by City Hall where unelected bureaucrats pick the winners and losers of the New Albany economy. That is not what New Albany needs, we need a citizen-oriented committee who will create a 20 year plan of not only economic prosperity but also community change where someone isn’t afraid to let their kids play in their front yard and where a near quarter of the population can’t afford to make ends meet.

Furthermore, this committee, since it is creating a plan for the future, should have young adult members. Young people are the future of New Albany and whether we can retain them or not will prove to be the crucial task for our community over the next 10 years. Young people don’t just want a place to play, they want a place to live and potentially raise a family. New Albany, unfortunately, only offers a playground for the upper middle to upper class people with money to spend. We do not currently have an effective climate for the up-and-coming young entrepreneur or young lawyer, etc.

If we do not get some young people on this committee then our 20 year plan will be for nothing. We will continue to lose young professionals to Indianapolis, Jeffersonville, and Louisville and continue to have a city seen as a playground by some but a socioeconomically segregated city by those not predisposed to success by means of birth. This is a sad truth that doesn't have to be.

Adam cringes: "What If We Reinvented Civic Infrastructure Around Placemaking?"

Think about the massively expensive "places" recently created by municipal government in New Albany: Bicentennial Park, River Run Family Water Park, Silver Street Park and the coming "upscale" apartments on the Coyle site.

Then think about the ongoing reign of the slumlord and the city's unwillingness to tackle sub-standard housing, the counter-productivity of one-way arterial streets and the incestuous non-transparency of city officials and Democratic Party functionaries.

The following article deals with placemaking, itself a notion as intimately familiar to Team Gahan's TIF ONE credit card drones as Mandarin Chinese is to your house pets. Think about the "fractured, siloed structure of contemporary government" not just as it pertains to placemaking failure, but to all of local government's activities.

Just think about it. Gahan, Dickey, Duggins -- they don't want you to think. That's the single best reason to do it.

Just an excerpt below.

---

Toward Place Governance: What If We Reinvented Civic Infrastructure Around Placemaking?, by Ethan Kent (PPS.org)

Refocusing Governance to Support Public Spaces

As we have experienced in all of these contexts, Placemaking identifies and draws out local leadership, partners and resources on all levels of community and government. When we ask: “What if a central focus of governance became the building of successful places?” there is general comfort and energy to make that happen–to work together in new ways.

The fractured, siloed structure of contemporary government, with its myriad departments and bureaucratic processes, often directly impedes the creation of successful public spaces. Transportation departments view their mission as moving traffic; parks departments are there to create and manage open green space; community development agencies are focused on development of projects, not the spaces in between them or the organic opportunities that arise from social interactions within them.

The Placemaking approach builds on the ability of place-based institutions to create great community places that bring people together and reflect community values and needs. In cities where Placemaking has taken hold, local government is often not directly involved in implementation, but relies on more localized community development organizations, business improvement districts, and/or neighborhood partnerships to take the lead in making community change happen.

How would moving toward a place-centered governance shift the effectiveness of government’s ability to work across departments and with the communities it is meant to serve?

If the ultimate goal of governance, public institutions, and development is to make places thrive, then governance culture and processes need to change to reflect that goal. Place certainly does not represent all of the public good and value in a community, but place as an organizing focus can best help that value be preserved, shared and leveraged.

A focus on place supports a culture of leadership to emerge from all levels, inside and outside of government. A Placemaking culture challenges everyone to compete to contribute to shared value. Bad ideas and privatizing forces are adeptly kept in check or pushed out. The open governance process and culture, enabled by a shared focus on place, is more accessible to all, and more compatible with constructive participation.