View Single Post
  #33  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2012, 8:54 PM
wburg's Avatar
wburg wburg is offline
Hindrance to Development
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,402
Considering that most people in the US live in a suburb of one sort or another, they're going to be part of the equation. Personally I'd rather see an approach that lures suburbanites who are sick of the suburbs. In fact, that's who Midtown already largely attracts--heck, that's why I moved here. That's why trying to win over people who already dislike Sacramento is just wasted effort--and there are just as many people who dislike the central city because they think it's crowded, dirty, crime-ridden etc. as those who think we're a dusty cow town. They're both wrong, and their minds won't be changed--so why waste time and effort on them? Go for the people who are interested in what we have to offer, and concentrate on offering more of it. But all of that has to start with efforts to make the central city a more attractive place to live, not just a place to spend money and go home to the suburbs (although, properly managed, there is no reason why it can't do both.)

We were the "sin city" of the valley in some ways, but we were also the industrial city of the valley, and the administrative city of the valley. People came here for other reasons, to deliver farm goods to canneries or buy things in big department stores or to petition state government or film movies--and they generally patronized bars, restaurants, theaters, etc. while doing so, to the benefit of the local economy.

Sure, California government was a lot smaller 100 years ago, but that was because the Southern Pacific Railroad basically ran the state, and guess who was Sacramento's biggest employer? And when the state got bigger and the railroad got smaller, a lot of the people who went into state government were former railroad employees--a large, complex and bureaucratic organization. Now, I'm all for having a wider economic base and new industries, but California is unlikely to become a less complex state anytime soon, and we can expand our economic base while not giving up our current status as the administrative heart of a $2 trillion economy. State employees get a bad rap because they get paid less than the private sector, but generally they are more highly educated--so they may drive less flashy cars, but perhaps they read better books?
Reply With Quote