NewGeography.com blogs

Long Beach Freeway Saga

The Los Angeles Times reports progress toward completion of the Long Beach Freeway (I-710) gap between Valley Boulevard in East Los Angeles and Pasadena, with a geologic study finding a tunnel alignment to be feasible. Real progress is overdue. My great aunt and great uncle were forced out of their house in the early 1960s in South Pasadena by the California Highway Department, in anticipation of building the freeway. I suspect the house is still there.

For nearly one-half century, South Pasadena residents have opposed building the “Meridian” route that would have dissected the city. They were not against the freeway per se, but rather preferred the “Westerly” route, which would have skirted the city. The state had selected the Meridian route. In the middle 1980s, while a member of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, I served on a special route selection committee chaired by former county supervisor Peter F. Schabarum. Under our legislative authority, we also selected the Meridian route. Nothing came of it.

It is to be hoped that serious efforts to close the gap will be underway soon.

China’s Love Affair with Mobility

China Daily reports that car (light vehicle) sales reached 10.9 million units in the first 10 months of 2009, surpassing sales in the United States by 2.2 million. This was a 38% increase over the same period last year. Part of the increase is attributed to government programs to stimulate automobile sales.

China’s leading manufacturer is General Motors (GM), which experienced a 60% increase in sales compared to last year. By contrast, GM’s sales in the United States fell 33% in the first 10 months of the year on an annual basis. GM sold nearly 1.5 million cars in China, somewhat less than its 1.7 million sales over the same period in the United States.

Texas Dominates Milken's New Best Performing Cities Index

Texas metropolitan regions hold down four of the top five and nine of the top 16 places in Milken's new Best Performing Cities Index, released this morning. The rankings were authored by previous New Geography Contributor Ross DeVol, director of Regional Economics at Milken.

It's refreshing to see a set of rankings attempting to take an objective, hard data-based look at comparative analysis. The Milken Rankings are a combination of job growth, wage and salary growth, high-tech GDP growth, and high-tech location quotients (see page 8 of the report).

A region's industry mix plays a big role in its ranking; you can see energy-centric regions scoring well. But remember that these rankings also explicitly factor in high tech growth and high tech concentration.

Regions that avoided real estate inflation and those maintaining what they have or simply avoiding rapid decline tend to score better.

“‘Best performing’ sometimes means retaining what you have,” said DeVol. “In a period of recession, the index highlights metros that have adapted to weather the storm. As we move forward in a recovery that still lacks jobs, metros will be further tested in their ability to sustain themselves.”

The rankings include 324 regions, breaking them into two groups based on region size.

You can view the full lists at Milken's interactive rankings website, and the full report includes analyses of the top large and small places.

Here's the top and bottom 25 Large places:




Top 25 Large Regions Bottom 25 Large Regions
2009 rank 2008 rank Metropolitan area 2009 rank 2008 rank Metropolitan area
1 4 Austin-Round Rock, TX MSA 176 97 Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL MSA
2 13 Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood, TX MSA 177 150 Birmingham-Hoover, AL MSA
3 3 Salt Lake City, UT MSA 178 144 Memphis, TN-MS-AR MSA
4 7 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX MSA 179 117 Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL MD
5 16 Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX MSA 180 120 Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL MSA
6 21 Durham, NC MSA 181 183 Spartanburg, SC MSA
7 9 Olympia, WA MSA 182 178 Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ MD
8 5 Huntsville, AL MSA 183 189 Dayton, OH MSA
9 14 Lafayette, LA MSA 184 73 Merced, CA MSA
10 2 Raleigh-Cary, NC MSA 185 191 Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC MSA
11 15 San Antonio, TX MSA 186 193 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH MSA
12 29 Fort Worth-Arlington, TX MD 187 170 Providence-New Bed.-Fall Riv., RI-MA MSA
13 23 Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX MD 188 186 South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI MSA
14 37 El Paso, TX MSA 189 185 Kalamazoo-Portage, MI MSA
15 45 Wichita, KS MSA 190 197 Canton-Massillon, OH MSA
16 88 Corpus Christi, TX MSA 191 192 Ann Arbor, MI MSA
17 17 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA MD 192 187 Atlantic City, NJ MSA
18 40 Baton Rouge, LA MSA 193 188 Youngstown-Warren-Board., OH-PA MSA
19 72 Tulsa, OK MSA 194 190 Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI MSA
20 20 Greeley, CO MSA 195 196 Lansing-East Lansing, MI MSA
21 8 Tacoma, WA MD 196 199 Holland-Grand Haven, MI MSA
22 48 Fort Collins-Loveland, CO MSA 197 198 Warren-Troy-Farmington Hills, MI MD
23 54 Little Rock-N. Little Rock-Conway, AR MSA 198 194 Toledo, OH MSA
24 67 Shreveport-Bossier City, LA MSA 199 200 Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, MI MD
25 41 Wash.-Arl.-Alex., DC-VA-MD-WV MD 200 195 Flint, MI MSA




And the top and bottom 25 Small regions:






Top 25 Small Regions Bottom 25 Small Regions
2009 rank 2008 rank Metropolitan area 2009 rank 2008 rank Metropolitan area
1 1 Midland, TX MSA 100 110 Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ MSA
2 7 Longview, TX MSA 101 94 Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna, WV-OH MSA
3 5 Grand Junction, CO MSA 102 114 Williamsport, PA MSA
4 26 Tyler, TX MSA 103 117 Mansfield, OH MSA
5 10 Odessa, TX MSA 104 85 Jackson, TN MSA
6 29 Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, WA MSA 105 115 Muncie, IN MSA
7 15 Bismarck, ND MSA 106 63 Flagstaff, AZ MSA
8 6 Warner Robins, GA MSA 107 112 Racine, WI MSA
9 11 Las Cruces, NM MSA 108 70 Dothan, AL MSA
10 17 Fargo, ND-MN MSA 109 105 Sheboygan, WI MSA
11 45 Pascagoula, MS MSA 110 97 Niles-Benton Harbor, MI MSA
12 23 Sioux Falls, SD MSA 111 100 Altoona, PA MSA
13 8 Bellingham, WA MSA 112 95 Terre Haute, IN MSA
14 38 College Station-Bryan, TX MSA 113 59 Redding, CA MSA
15 2 Coeur d'Alene, ID MSA 114 122 Lima, OH MSA
16 12 Cheyenne, WY MSA 115 75 Janesville, WI MSA
17 81 Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR MSA 116 96 Elkhart-Goshen, IN MSA
18 27 Waco, TX MSA 117 119 Anderson, SC MSA
19 16 Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA MSA 118 113 Dalton, GA MSA
20 44 Laredo, TX MSA 119 120 Springfield, OH MSA
21 40 Abilene, TX MSA 120 84 Lewiston-Auburn, ME MSA
22 25 Iowa City, IA MSA 121 116 Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI MSA
23 72 Glens Falls, NY MSA 122 121 Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, MI MSA
24 24 Billings, MT MSA 123 123 Battle Creek, MI MSA
25 64 Ithaca, NY MSA 124 124 Jackson, MI MSA

High Speed Rail: Not One Big Happy Family

California High Speed Rail Commission member Rod Diridon is chafing at all of the competition that has been created by the billions committed by the federal government to high speed rail. According to a New York Times report, he called many of the proposed systems around the country “vultures” and told an American Public Transportation Association meeting “If I can borrow a term from our good friends in labor, they are a 'Do not patronize… And I cannot say it any stronger”. Consistent with that view, Diridon urged that the federal government be asked to commit all of its current $8 billion in funds to the California project.

There may be even more disturbing news for Diridon: new competition has appeared on the horizon. A report (page 23) by the David Suzuki Foundation and the Pembina Institute (both of Canada) suggests that:

“Using the Edmonton – Calgary example as a template, judgmentally adjusted for distance, geography and relative land values, we estimate that a full high-speed link would cost about $4 billion. If the cost were shared equally between Canada and the United States, the Canadian total would be about $2 billion.”

Why stop at that? How about getting a quarter each from Zimbabwe and the Honduras? It would certainly make it less expensive for Canadian taxpayers. Perhaps our friends to the North simply made a typographical error, but perhaps not. Stranger things have been proposed.

Urban Youth Deserve Chance to Hear About Service Academies

Here’s a disturbing thought as Veterans Day approaches: Some teachers and administrators of the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) refuse to allow visits to high school campuses by representatives of the service academies that train young officers.

The service academies have all earned reputations as fine academic institutions that go further on training future officers. There is the U.S. Military Academy; the U.S. Naval Academy; the U.S. Air Force Academy; the U.S. Coast Guard Academy; and the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. They all offer full scholarships and require five years of service after graduation.

Candidates must meet demanding standards on academics, physical fitness, and extra-curricular activity. They are generally required to secure a nomination from a member of the U.S. Congress, the president, or the vice president.

The merit involved in gaining a nomination, along with the geographic apportionment by Congressional districts, offers the chance to draw candidates from across the socio-economic spectrum. Graduation from a service academy offers young officers from every corner of society the chance to reach significant rank.

Measure that against the LAUSD teachers and administrators who deem a career as a military officer to be unworthy of a hearing at high school campuses. Some will tell you that they object because our wars are fought by too many young persons of color. Others view the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military as contemptible prejudice.

These objections are absurd. Our civilian leadership decides the actions and policies of the military. War or peace? That’s in the hands of the president and Congress. Gays in the military? Same story.

It’s true that our military stands ready for war if so directed by the civilian leadership of our democracy. It’s also notable that never in the course of history has any institution possessed the war-making might of the U.S. military. And never has an institution in such a position yielded so loyally to the will of unarmed leadership. This sense of duty has lasted through good and bad, gallant victories and horrific mishaps. Never has there been a serious challenge to civilian oversight.

All of that is overlooked by LAUSD teachers and administrators—and their boycotts have an effect. Some members of Congress who represent Los Angeles have chronic difficulty in filling the number of nominations they are allowed to make to the service academies each year. They aren’t coming up short on qualified candidates. They can’t even get that far—not enough young achievers know about the possibilities of the service academies.

It’s time that someone gave these alleged educators who forbid any discussion of service academies a lesson on the honorable history of our military. They should also be reminded that it will require representatives from throughout our society—rich and poor, all colors and creeds, town and country—to keep this line of honorable service intact.

Keeping knowledge of the service academies away from youngsters in our city is nothing short of demographic censorship. It is time for LAUSD to put an end to the practice.