This is the third and final part of a three part series analyzing the preliminary "Economic Sustainability Workgroup" report.
As noted in the first two parts of this series, the preliminary report of the Mayor's "Economic Sustainability Work Force" places nearly total emphasis on creating and revitalizing a traditional economic base to sustain Alexandria's future. The operative word being "traditional."
It delves at great length into such things as bringing the tax base back into a 50/50 alignment between commercial and residential taxes, making better use of the City's Metro stations, capitalizing on the looming National Harbor, and luring new businesses to the city. However, in one very vital perspective, what the report does not discuss may say more about the city's future than what it does discuss.
There is very little mention of Alexandria's historic heritage — either as an asset or as something that needs as much, if not more consideration, than bringing in more businesses and how to keep up with the surrounding "commercial Joneses." History is Alexandria's singular, most viable, marketable asset — both from a commercial and residency perspective.
The report notes, "The city has major tourism assets." Among those it emphasizes "Over 6,000 18th and 19th century properties, on the way to Mount Vernon, and 15 minutes from The National Mall." Yet it also notes "We are not taking full advantage of tourism."
In laying out a plan of action to capitalize on this history, the Workgroup appears to take a wholly monetary approach rather than one geared to encouraging tourists and residents alike to participate in and cherish the city's heritage. Here are five suggestions put forth by the Workgroup:
* Rethink the "Funside" brand — as noted by the incoming President and CEO of the Alexandria Convention and Visitors Association, "Funside" is not a brand. It is a slogan. The true brand needs to be defined.
* Revitalize the visitors center. This has been thoroughly studied with several plans put forth — none of which have gotten off the ground.
* Improve signage. This is a very valid suggestion but needs a detailed description of how, what, where and to accomplish what purposes.
* Expand marketing dollars. This has been done over the last six years particularly. However, once again, the questions need to be asked: To what purpose? and To what audiences?
* Target regional spending. Again, is this to keep up with our regional neighbors or to get them to come to Alexandria rather than shop and dine in their own backyards? What is the track record on spending in this vein thus far?
TWO POTENTIALLY CONTROVERSIAL suggestions made in the report call for selling or leasing "under performing assets" and "world-class redevelopment." What qualifies in each of these cases is truly in the eye of the beholder and should be viewed with reasonable suspicion. To quote the late President Ronald Reagan — "Trust but verify."
What is an under performing asset to the business mind can be an under appreciated historic treasure to another. And, when it comes to "redevelopment" that can be a nice way of saying "extinction" to some very treasured assets as was once pointed out by Alexandria's most preservation minded mayor — Charles Beatley.
Had he not taken some very aggressive actions, how to best preserve and market Alexandria's place in American history and architecture might well be a moot point as evidenced by some obvious, no longer existing, examples along lower King Street. The term "redevelopment" might better be replaced by "regeneration" or "revitalization" in this context.
Both the report's reference to "under performing assets" and "redevelopment" seem, by inference, to be tied to its two final recommendations:
* Expand retention and attraction efforts; and
* Repair the city's reputation within the regional business community.
In the first instance the Workgroup states, "We need to reach out aggressively" citing past efforts with the non-profit association community. They tie this to creating clusters of high tech, intellectual property, communications, arts, and education economic generators.
A prime example of such a cluster approach already existing within the city is the PTO complex. It is even pictured in the report. As many urban planners have noted over the years, one of the primary shortcomings of cluster development is the inability to create a sense of community and thus a cohesive social structure to support an economic engine.
But, even more disturbing is the call for repairing the City's reputation within the regional business community. Where is the proof it is broken? And, for the sake of argument, if it is somewhat cracked, what is the price to the City's historic preservation to accomplish that so-called repair.
The Workgroup states, "The City needs a positive reputation for business. Entrepreneurs need support. Roadblocks need to be addressed."
They further claim city government needs to improve the building and land use process, reform the Special Use Permit process, create "online integration" and get rid of "in-line frustration," and, finally, "make the system user-friendly." The final point begs the question — who is that user?
Each of these points goes directly to the two bodies that help guide Alexandria's elected officials in sustaining and preserving Alexandria as "Alexandria" — the historic seaport that pre-existed the American Revolution and withstood the nation's most devastating conflict — The Civil War.
Those two bodies are the Alexandria Planning Commission and the Board of Architectural Review. If their powers and mandates are sterilized there will be no more historic Alexandria there will be only Alexandria — another dot on the ever-expanding metropolitan map.
It goes without argument that the decision making process of those two bodies needs to function within the larger context of maintaining a viable, vibrant city. It also goes without argument that combined their decision making serves as the watchdog and intellectual architect of Alexandria yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
The final page of the report lays out the Workgroup's "Procedural Path to Implementation." Two elements of that path are critical to the City's future — both economically and as a high quality of life venue in which to reside. They are: (1) Disseminate the report to the public; and (2) Process public feedback.
These two actions are critical to every Alexandria resident throughout the city. It is the only way City Council has of knowing, not only what taxpayers think but also what they want.