The Urbanitarian

Highlighting the how's and why's of practical innovation and adaptive reuse of urban environments.
Yesterday, Next American City published an article outlining “The Problem With Public-Private Partnerships.” Author Christopher Weber explains that public-private partnership equates to “getting corporate America to pay for something once funded by tax dollars alone.” He asks, “What company is going to invest in building affordable housing and livable communities here? These honorable causes stand to be big losers in the era of the public-private partnership.” As the champion of public-private partnership, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, closes six of the city’s mental health clinics, Weber’s point is not taken lightly.
The article is well-timed, just a week after Stephen King published his Daily Beast article, “Tax Me, for F@%&’s Sake!,” in which he calls the wealthy to tax-paying action. He says:

Mitt Romney has said, in effect, ‘I’m rich and I don’t apologize for it.’ Nobody wants you to, Mitt. What some of us want… is for you to acknowledge that you couldn’t have made it in America without America. That you were fortunate enough to be born in a country where upward mobility is possible (a subject upon which Barack Obama can speak with the authority of experience), but where the channels making such upward mobility possible are being increasingly clogged. That it’s not fair to ask the middle class to assume a disproportionate amount of the tax burden… I want you to acknowledge that in America, we all should have to pay our fair share. That our civics classes never taught us that being American means that—sorry, kiddies—you’re on your own. That those who have received much must be obligated to pay—not to give, not to “cut a check and shut up,” in Governor Christie’s words, but to pay—in the same proportion. That’s called stepping up and not whining about it. That’s called patriotism, a word the Tea Partiers love to throw around as long as it doesn’t cost their beloved rich folks any money.

If everyone payed their “same proportion,” would public-private partnership be necessary? Or, how long can public-private partnership carry America before inequitable taxation drives it under? Where’s the price point between the two?

Yesterday, Next American City published an article outlining “The Problem With Public-Private Partnerships.” Author Christopher Weber explains that public-private partnership equates to “getting corporate America to pay for something once funded by tax dollars alone.” He asks, “What company is going to invest in building affordable housing and livable communities here? These honorable causes stand to be big losers in the era of the public-private partnership.” As the champion of public-private partnership, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, closes six of the city’s mental health clinics, Weber’s point is not taken lightly.

The article is well-timed, just a week after Stephen King published his Daily Beast article, “Tax Me, for F@%&’s Sake!,” in which he calls the wealthy to tax-paying action. He says:

Mitt Romney has said, in effect, ‘I’m rich and I don’t apologize for it.’ Nobody wants you to, Mitt. What some of us want… is for you to acknowledge that you couldn’t have made it in America without America. That you were fortunate enough to be born in a country where upward mobility is possible (a subject upon which Barack Obama can speak with the authority of experience), but where the channels making such upward mobility possible are being increasingly clogged. That it’s not fair to ask the middle class to assume a disproportionate amount of the tax burden… I want you to acknowledge that in America, we all should have to pay our fair share. That our civics classes never taught us that being American means that—sorry, kiddies—you’re on your own. That those who have received much must be obligated to pay—not to give, not to “cut a check and shut up,” in Governor Christie’s words, but to pay—in the same proportion. That’s called stepping up and not whining about it. That’s called patriotism, a word the Tea Partiers love to throw around as long as it doesn’t cost their beloved rich folks any money.

If everyone payed their “same proportion,” would public-private partnership be necessary? Or, how long can public-private partnership carry America before inequitable taxation drives it under? Where’s the price point between the two?

The Code for America Brigade

Aside from the other awesome things Code for America does, its Brigade program publicizes applications that can be deployed in your city — apps like the Vacant and Abandoned Building Finder and the Public Art Mapper. It only takes citizen agency to expand the app to another city.

1 year ago
The Gray Area Foundation for the Arts supported Seaquence, a project that puts electronica in the context of a digital ecosystem.
Hear and see a couple of the user-created tracks here:
    http://s.gaffta.org/s
    http://s.gaffta.org/3

The Gray Area Foundation for the Arts supported Seaquence, a project that puts electronica in the context of a digital ecosystem.

Hear and see a couple of the user-created tracks here:

    http://s.gaffta.org/s

    http://s.gaffta.org/3

She saw the city not as a mass of buildings, but as a vessel of empty spaces, in which people interacted with other people.

— Jonah Lehrer on Jane Jacobs, via Richard Florida in The Atlantic Cities

Lehrer continues, “I just find it slightly ironic that even the researchers inventing all these wonderful tools that allow us to interact remotely, such as email and Skype and Facetime, still organize themselves into local clusters. They know that they need to constantly interact in person, which is why they pay the exorbitant rents of Mountain View or San Francisco or Brooklyn. The city, it turns out, isn’t obsolete. Not even close… Absolutely [will the growing expense of living in cities affect their ability to spur creativity]. If I might quote Jacobs one last time: ’Old ideas can sometimes use new buildings. New ideas must use old buildings.’”