Tuesday, May 27, 2008

On the UDB: driving Miami Dade down, by gimleteye

The first purpose of government should be to protect the health, welfare and safety of all people through a sustainable and livable Miami-Dade County. On all counts, the Miami Dade County Commission is falling short.

By "holding the line" on the Urban Development Boundary, what citizens are saying is simple: take care of the needs of existing residents first, including massive infrastructure backlog and deficits that must first be funded and implemented: transportation, affordable housing, and environmental infrastructure before ANY movement of the UDB.

Isn't it clear enough, through the budget crises tied to crashing housing markets, that development is not paying its own way? Because of the costs imposed by development interests on taxpayers, Florida Hometown Democracy has a very good chance of passing when it makes the state-wide ballot.

The unreformable majority of the Miami Dade County Commission voted to override the mayoral veto of the two applications to move the UDB. Now the State of Florida has 45 days to determine whether or not the applications meet the requirements of growth management law.

On the one hand, the state agency in charge of such matters, the Florida Department of Community Affairs, has already written a strongly-worded and well reasoned opposition to the measures. On the other hand, forces hostile to Governor Crist in the Florida legislature, like Rep. Marco Rubio, have it in mind to eviscerate the Florida Department of Community Affairs.

Meanwhile, state-wide pressure is building from citizens in other communities and other counties who see in the manipulation of the UDB line here the same destructive equations in zoning decisions that harm the public interest in their own communities. They are also aware that the modest attempts by Florida DCA to reform growth management in the recent session of the legislature were torpedoed.

See for yourself, the online petition to Governor Crist in the new website: Progress Florida.

In the Washington Post, writer James Howard Kunstler has an editorial that helps to see our dilemmas in another way. Please read it:

Wake Up, America. We're Driving Toward Disaster.
By James Howard Kunstler
Washington Post, Sunday, May 25, 2008; B03

Everywhere I go these days, talking about the global energy predicament on the college lecture circuit or at environmental conferences, I hear an increasingly shrill cry for "solutions." This is just another symptom of the delusional thinking that now grips the nation, especially among the educated and well-intentioned.

I say this because I detect in this strident plea the desperate wish to keep our "Happy Motoring" utopia running by means other than oil and its byproducts. But the truth is that no combination of solar, wind and nuclear power, ethanol, biodiesel, tar sands and used French-fry oil will allow us to power Wal-Mart, Disney World and the interstate highway system — or even a fraction of these things — in the future. We have to make other arrangements.

The public, and especially the mainstream media, misunderstands the "peak oil" story. It's not about running out of oil. It's about the instabilities that will shake the complex systems of daily life as soon as the global demand for oil exceeds the global supply. These systems can be listed concisely:

• The way we produce food
• The way we conduct commerce and trade
• The way we travel
• The way we occupy the land
• The way we acquire and spend capital

And there are others: governance, health care, education and more.

As the world passes the all-time oil production high and watches as the price of a barrel of oil busts another record, as it did last week, these systems will run into trouble. Instability in one sector will bleed into another. Shocks to the oil markets will hurt trucking, which will slow commerce and food distribution, manufacturing and the tourist industry in a chain of cascading effects. Problems in finance will squeeze any enterprise that requires capital, including oil exploration and production, as well as government spending. These systems are all interrelated. They all face a crisis. What's more, the stress induced by the failure of these systems will only increase the wishful thinking across our nation.

And that's the worst part of our quandary: the American public's narrow focus on keeping all our cars running at any cost. Even the environmental community is hung up on this. The Rocky Mountain Institute has been pushing for the development of a "Hypercar" for years -- inadvertently promoting the idea that we really don't need to change.

Years ago, U.S. negotiators at a U.N. environmental conference told their interlocutors that the American lifestyle is "not up for negotiation." This stance is, unfortunately, related to two pernicious beliefs that have become common in the United States in recent decades. The first is the idea that when you wish upon a star, your dreams come true. (Oprah Winfrey advanced this notion last year with her promotion of a pop book called "The Secret," which said, in effect, that if you wish hard enough for something, it will come to you.) One of the basic differences between a child and an adult is the ability to know the difference between wishing for things and actually making them happen through earnest effort.

The companion belief to "wishing upon a star" is the idea that one can get something for nothing. This derives from America's new favorite religion: not evangelical Christianity but the worship of unearned riches. (The holy shrine to this tragic belief is Las Vegas.) When you combine these two beliefs, the result is the notion that when you wish upon a star, you'll get something for nothing. This is what underlies our current fantasy, as well as our inability to respond intelligently to the energy crisis.

These beliefs also explain why the presidential campaign is devoid of meaningful discussion about our energy predicament and its implications. The idea that we can become "energy independent" and maintain our current lifestyle is absurd. So is the gas-tax holiday. (Which politician wants to tell voters on Labor Day that the holiday is over?) The pie-in-the-sky plan to turn grain into fuel came to grief, too, when we saw its disruptive effect on global grain prices and the food shortages around the world, even in the United States. In recent weeks, the rice and cooking-oil shelves in my upstate New York supermarket have been stripped clean.

So what are intelligent responses to our predicament? First, we'll have to dramatically reorganize the everyday activities of American life. We'll have to grow our food closer to home, in a manner that will require more human attention. In fact, agriculture needs to return to the center of economic life. We'll have to restore local economic networks -- the very networks that the big-box stores systematically destroyed -- made of fine-grained layers of wholesalers, middlemen and retailers.
We'll also have to occupy the landscape differently, in traditional towns, villages and small cities. Our giant metroplexes are not going to make it, and the successful places will be ones that encourage local farming.

Fixing the U.S. passenger railroad system is probably the one project we could undertake right away that would have the greatest impact on the country's oil consumption. The fact that we're not talking about it -- especially in the presidential campaign -- shows how confused we are. The airline industry is disintegrating under the enormous pressure of fuel costs. Airlines cannot fire any more employees and have already offloaded their pension obligations and outsourced their repairs. At least five small airlines have filed for bankruptcy protection in the past two months. If we don't get the passenger trains running again, Americans will be going nowhere five years from now.

We don't have time to be crybabies about this. The talk on the presidential campaign trail about "hope" has its purpose. We cannot afford to remain befuddled and demoralized. But we must understand that hope is not something applied externally. Real hope resides within us. We generate it -- by proving that we are competent, earnest individuals who can discern between wishing and doing, who don't figure on getting something for nothing and who can be honest about the way the universe really works.

James Howard Kunstler is the author, most recently, of "World Made by Hand," a novel about America's post-oil future.

4 comments:

Mr. Sunshine said...

James Howard Kunstler is the author of a number of books on this subject. I recently read The Long Emergency, which I'd highly recommend for anyone interested in delving into the depths of our oil addiction. It will really set you back once you start to consider how interwoven all this fossil carbon is into everything in our lives. Then imagine a world where it isn't available to us any more.

We're going to need to re-engineer just about everything.

Think about the implications for life here without cheap (or any) fossil oil.

Geniusofdespair said...

Keep signing/getting signatures for Hometown Democracy....they still need you...

Tony Garcia said...

I'm not sure that supporting Hometown Democracy is the best idea. Clearly our elected officials don't always make the best decisions, but they are accountable for them. NIMBY-ism along with a mostly uneducated public (with regard to planning and development) make this a BAD idea. How are most people supposed to vote on issues when they don't really know the details. You and I might know, but I don't think most people take the time to care. That's why we have elected officials. The real fix to this problem is to support grassroots activism (aka blogging, going to civic meetings, talking to elected officials). Lets leave policy decisions to the people we elect to office.

Geniusofdespair said...

Thank you for writing. The people would only vote on comprehensive plan changes and nimby would not work -- as on UDB issues, the WHOLE county would have to vote. On City issues, the whole city would vote not just the area around the comp plan change.

The developer could not afford to influence the whole county for one development. The wheels would not stop turning, it would just mean we would see less comprehensive plan changes which would be good. Why have a plan if you are going to change it hundreds of times?

Second: We don't elect the people to office in the county. That is the point!!!! Our elected officials are beholden to developers and a small fraction of the population and they listen to lobbyists ---they don't represent our best interests as a county.

There is district voting...Here is my take: (it is on the Seth Gordon post above) I was referring to how County Commissioners get re-elected:

They are re-elected because they have legislated it impossible for anyone to run a viable campaign against them, they have a slush fund of $350,000 a year (which they can carry over to an election year) to dish out perks for votes, they raid the lunch programs they set-up for seniors and bus them to polling locations and finally, there are single member districts (we can only vote out/on one commissioner not 13). We haven't unseated a sitting County Commissioner in 14 years (Katy Sorenson did it). We only get them out with retirement or arrest.