Rust Belt

Many people view Detroit these days as some kind of urban hellhole. Yet, countering this myth, The New York Times published an article today that explores the revitalization of Detroit, led by young entrepreneurs and a community supportive of these efforts.

The scene might have been run of the mill in Seattle or Williamsburg, Brooklyn, or other urban enclaves that draw the young, the entrepreneurial and the hip. But this was downtown Detroit, far better known in recent years for crime, blight and economic decline.

Recent census figures show that Detroit’s overall population shrank by 25 percent in the last 10 years. But another figure tells a different and more intriguing story: During the same time period, downtown Detroit experienced a 59 percent increase in the number of college-educated residents under the age of 35, nearly 30 percent more than two-thirds of the nation’s 51 largest cities.

These days the word “movement” is often heard to describe the influx of socially aware hipsters and artists now roaming the streets of Detroit. Not unlike Berlin, which was revitalized in the 1990s by young artists migrating there for the cheap studio space, Detroit may have this new generation of what city leaders are calling “creatives” to thank if it comes through its transition from a one-industry.

Emphasis mine.

Thankfully, these young people aren't just there to hang out and have fun. Rather, those "creative" types, who have already settled in the city, are establishing efforts like Move Detroit 11/11/11, which aims to get 1,100 people to move to Detroit by November. Recognizing that they need to do more to make the city more attractive to outsiders, a number of shops and restaurants have established themselves in the last several years.

With these new residents have come the trappings of a thriving youth culture: trendy bars and restaurants that have brought pedestrians back to once-empty streets. Places like the Grand Trunk pub, Raw Cafe, Le Petit Zinc and Avalon Bakery mingle with shops with names like City Bird, Sole Sisters and the Bureau of Urban Living.

Those familiar with past neighborhoods-of-the-moment recognize the mood. “It feels like TriBeCa back in the early days, before double strollers, sidewalk cafes and Whole Foods,” said Amy Moore, 50, a film producer working on three Detroit projects. “There is a buzz here that is real, and the kids drip with talent and commitment, and aren’t spoiled.”

But while these residents have built some infrastructure to support themselves, the city of Detroit and the region has welcomed this influx of young people, providing supportive services aimed to nourish this growth.

Part of the allure of Detroit lies in simple economics. Real estate is cheap by urban standards (Ms. Myles lives in a $900-a-month one-bedroom apartment with a garage), and the city is so eager to draw educated young residents that it is offering numerous subsidies to new arrivals. Ms. Myles, for instance, received $3,500 from her employer, which, like many companies in the city, is offering rent or purchasing subsidies to staff members who choose to live in the city.

Detroit Venture Partners is offering start-up financing to early-stage technology companies; Techtown, a business incubator, research and technology park associated with Wayne State University in Detroit, is providing support to entrepreneurs and emerging companies through its “Thrive” program. And Bizdom U, an “entrepreneurial boot camp” started by Dan Gilbert, the founder and chairman of Quicken Loans, is offering graduates of its four-month-long course financing opportunities of up to $100,000 if they base their start-up in Detroit.

[...]

In addition, Green Garage Detroit, an incubator for environmentally friendly companies, plans to open its doors in August to lend support to at least a dozen start-ups. And there’s the Detroit Creative Corridor Center, which supplies infrastructure, strategic counseling, consulting and resources for those wanting to start businesses in film, fashion, digital media, production or architecture. With all this help, the city seems like a giant candy store for young college graduates wanting to be their own bosses.

In addition, many urban farms have sprouted throughout the city, providing its residents with opportunities to directly support the local economy and live more sustainable lives.

Perhaps most importantly, the city already has a vision and initiative in place -- similar to the more short-term Move Detroit 11/11/11 -- that hopes to create "young talented households" in the city.

Detroit’s revival is also being attributed to the city’s “15 by 15” initiative, started in 2008. With a goal of getting 15,000 young talented households to downtown by 2015, government workers, entrepreneurs, philanthropists, business leaders and individuals, along with nonprofit groups, have been working to entice the 94 percent of college graduates who initially migrate to cities, according to recent census figures.

“Our goal is to attract and retain this young talent pool,” said David Egner, president and chief executive of the nonprofit Hudson Webber Foundation, spearheading the “15 by 15” initiative. “We want to give them affordable housing, interesting jobs and business opportunities they cannot find in other cities.” His biggest obstacle, he added, is still the city’s reputation of being a dangerous place to live. “Crime in downtown Detroit is actually 37 percent less than the national average, but few people know that,” he said.

In the end, Detroit's example is a great one to learn about. While not finished, it's a great example of how Millennial entrepreneurs can generate the momentum needed to revive a once foundering community, while being supported by the local government.

About a year ago, I wrote about the difference between Cleveland's and Pittsburgh's responses to brain drain, a rough economy, and their impotent positions within the economy. The "Brain Drain" is one of the large elements of this discussion, given its ability to steal away a community's future.

In a recent essay in 2007, Harvard economics professor Edward Glaeser argued that funneling resources into "place-based strategies" to reinvigorate worn-down cities is wasteful and ineffective. Instead, Glaeser argues that any redevelopment effort should incorporate "people-based strategies," investing in the people living in a community -- acknowledging that these new skills could be put to use in places like Buffalo (the focus of his essay) or Las Vegas. Yes, Glaeser accepts the notion that people might leave.

Glaeser's point is that communities need to begin looking long-term as opposed to short term. Jim Russell's blog at Burgh Disapora takes a shot at what this might look like in a place like Erie, PA, a community definitely suffering from Brain Drain:

I propose starting a boomerang migrant incubator in downtown Erie. Boomerang migrants are natives who left and then returned. As you probably know, moving back home is almost an impossible task. Employment is scarce and relocation logistics can be a nightmare, particularly during a deep recession. Yet people find a way to pull it off. More might do the same if they knew how and had some help. The key is motivation and the willingness to overcome any obstacle. These are the traits of entrepreneurs and Erie could use more of them.

The idea is that whether or not youth leave (they actually probably would if given the education necessary in a people-based approach), we should be investing in everything possible to prepare to welcome them back in ten or fifteen years. That is what Pittsburgh did when it went through its own hard times in the 1980s, and it has paid off beautifully now.

It is unconventional, and it might hollow out a community before making it better, but eventually it could work. The question is do we have the patience?

I've written a few times now about larger cities in the Rust Belt (largely the Detroit to Buffalo corridor, with Pittsburgh included), what they're lacking, and how they can bounce back. I'll continue to write about this because of my relative familiarity with the region and because I am genuinely interested in revitalizing these cities with youth in mind.

Yesterday I came across a piece in the Cleveland Plain Dealer, published a week ago, that glowingly describes the successful renaissance neighboring city Pittsburgh has undertaken. The article frames Pittsburgh as a good example of what can be done to weather the recession. Pittsburgh, which faced its own economic turmoil 25 years ago with the closing of the steel mills, has since diversified its economy, investing in higher education (Pitt, Carnegie Mellon) and healthcare (UPMC hospitals), but also developing tech and green industries as well. As the article describes, this approach has attracted Millennials to the city, taking the place of the Boomers who fled the area over the last few decades.

The bust also caused a seemingly disastrous -- but ultimately beneficial -- shift in demographics. When the jobs left Pittsburgh, so did a generation of baby boomers. Today, that void has been filled by "millennials" -- those 27 years old and younger. It's no accident that Pittsburgh is one of the few cities to offer free Wi-Fi within its borders.

Meanwhile, the city's substantial elderly population, living on the safety net of Social Security, pensions and Medicare, is less affected by a recession than younger working folks.

"The city has done a remarkable job of reinventing itself because it had to," said Michael Edwards, president and CEO of the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, a nonprofit group that works with businesses, civic organizations, foundations and elected leaders on developing the city's 100-block downtown. "We're trying to build a city for the future."

Much of that future is moored in the past. The Pittsburgh Technology Center, an office park on the site of a former Jones & Laughlin steel mill, is a research hub employing 1,000 people and one of the best examples of brownfield redevelopment in the nation.

Of course, I'd do well to point out that the mayor of Pittsburgh is a Millennial himself. 28 years old, Luke Ravenstahl is a Pittsburgh native who was elected to Pittsburgh's City Council (youngest ever) in 2003. Two years later, Ravenstahl was elected City Council President, and when Mayor Bob O'Connor passed away in office, Ravenstahl succeeded him. Ravenstahl was officially elected mayor in November of 2007 by a 64 to 35 percent margin.

While many of the students from Pittsburgh who I work with in Erie don't say much about the mayor, they quite clearly are proud of their hometown. Of course it doesn't hurt that the sports teams attract a following, but they seem to identify with the region. It's interesting that when I hear someone that is a native of a Cleveland suburb introduce themselves, they always say the name of that town. When I hear someone from Pittsburgh tell others where they're from, they always say "Pittsburgh," and only provide the smaller hamlet upon request.

So the pertinent question, then, is what happened with Pittsburgh? How do Cleveland and other Rust Belt cities get to the point where the brain drain's impact is negligible and we create some positive energy in and about these communities?

Not surprisingly, I'd argue that much of it has to do with targeting the younger Millennials -- those who will be going to colleges in these cities in the next couple years and those who already live in these areas. And whether these are explicit appeals -- like the Pittsburgh wi-fi network mentioned above, or the hiring of a "bike-pedestrian coordinator" to make the city more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly -- or implicit -- like the collaboration-heavy route Pittsburgh took to climb out of its own mess -- they seem to be successful.

The Plain Dealer published a sidebar to its article examining what Pittsburgh did to revive its city in order to extrapolate some of the strategy for Cleveland. Check out the Millennial-friendly values buried in these steps:

1. Regionalize. Pittsburgh has lost population, but regional ties give it as much -- or more -- clout in Harrisburg as Philadelphia. Cuyahoga County could streamline county government and forge a regional coalition for more power in Columbus.
2. Develop and use the waterfront. From Pittsburgh's old convention center, there wasn't a window that allowed a glimpse of the river. The new waterfront convention center has a boat dock from which visitors can catch a pleasure cruise.
3. Develop educational leadership. Carnegie Mellon University was once a good regional school. Now it's a great university of international renown. Plagued by abrupt changes in leadership and budget woes, Case Western Reserve University has not grabbed that mantle.
4. Cooperate. Recognizing that their fates are entwined, corporate and labor leaders in Pittsburgh have been successful at setting aside many of their differences to work for a common good.
5. Strategize. Like Cleveland, Pittsburgh's philanthropic and business communities have had open checkbooks. Pittsburgh often has had a sharper vision of how the money should be spent.

Finally, not only should our local governments be targeting Millennial values when developing and reinvigorating communities; we should also be doing all that we can to include Millennials, even recruiting the most passionate of them to run for office. We can see Ravenstahl's impact on Pittsburgh. Getting Millennials involved automatically forces the discussion off of ego-based controversies in the present and pushes it toward the future, answering questions like what the population will look like 25 or 30 years down the road, and what do we need to do to meet that population's needs.

It seems that collaboration, technology, and big ideas go a long way toward rebuilding our cities. Who better to be involved in this effort than Millennials?

Peter Panepento, a blogger at Outside Erie, has a post up about Erie's biggest enemy being its past. Simply put, Erie can't move forward because it's always looking backward.

When I think about my experiences in Erie and also the smaller cities of Meadville, Pennsylvania and Salem, Ohio, I think the same thing could be said of them. It's a cliche anymore to discount local politics as too bitter and nasty to accomplish anything, and I think in each place I've been over my 24 years, this has held true. People can't separate the common good from the personal, and so they go to the mud, taking the public with them (there are too many who go willingly).

Yes, I said the word "bitter." And maybe this is what Barack Obama was trying to say when he famously slipped up last spring in San Francisco. People are too scared to change; they're paralyzed by fear, because, as Panepento notes, the last memory these people have of success is too far gone.

I’ve heard many people over the years talk about how we can get Erie back to where it used to be — back in the days when the factories were booming and people were flocking to the region in search of family-sustaining blue-collar jobs. The days when men with calloused hands could put in a honest 8 hours at the plant, head to the corner bar for an after-work beer, then get home for dinner.

Older citizens of these northern cities and small towns are in this thirty-year depression, and they just can't snap out of it.

Now that change is on the way, it's our responsibility to grab these people by the shoulders and shake them. Change relies on these people. Panepento concludes his post with a rallying cry to pressure government like they haven't been pressured before. I'd certainly agree with this. Contrary to what these "Yes We Did" people think, our job isn't over. Elections aren't the be-all, end-all of our political system. As citizens of these communities, we young people have a duty to push those representing us to lead in the right direction -- forward. And until a significant number of citizens living in the Great Lakes region realize this, these communities will continue to sulk and become pathetic shells of their former selves -- at the expense of the common good.