i found this facinating article, whats your opinion on the subject?
--------------------------------------------------
Regionalism is job 1
By Erik Spanberg
Charlotte Business Journal
Updated: 7:00 p.m. ET Dec. 25, 2005
From billionaire David Murdock's sprawling biotechnology development in Kannapolis to the whitewater park on the Gaston County line, the notion -- and reality -- of regionalism pervades nearly every conversation concerning economic development and business health. That emphasis seems likely to grow in 2006, signaling a new approach in various sectors and among companies and organizations.
Four executives from the area's most prominent business and development groups recently sat down for a roundtable discussion of regionalism and its importance in the coming year.
It was the first time the four men leading the organizations -- all newcomers to their jobs, hired during the past two years -- had met together. As the roundtable progressed, however, they spoke of the likelihood of scheduling monthly meetings in the future.
The executives, Tim ******, chief executive at the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority; Bob Morgan, president of the Charlotte Chamber; Michael Smith, president at Charlotte Center City Partners; and Ronnie Bryant, president and chief executive of the Charlotte Regional Partnership, all agreed on one thing: Regionalism is a key component of their jobs.
During a 90-minute discussion, the executives explored a number of issues and challenges while displaying a playful sense of camaraderie. Following are excerpts from their conversation:
Regionalism seems to be a theme for all metropolitan areas these days. Why is it so important for the Charlotte region now, and what does it mean to each of your organizations?
Bob Morgan: I'm on the payroll now at the Charlotte Chamber, but my Gaston experience (running the Gaston Chamber of Commerce) is still fresh. In June, the Gaston Chamber brought together the CEOs of four companies that had, in the last 12 months, brought major operations to Gaston County. Every one of those CEOs started by saying how glad they are to be in Charlotte. In the mind of those companies, it's one place, it's an airport, it's an interstate, it's a place to live, which may be different from where one works. And the clients out there from an economic-development term, to them these county lines are not relevant. It's a marketplace.
Tim ******: Ronnie (Bryant) and I both have regional in our organizational names whereas our (CRVA) specific boundary statutorily is Mecklenburg County. But we think about racing and how closely we work with Cabarrus County. We can't do amateur sports (events) without York County. As we talk about the hospitality and tourism, it's the region we're selling, not just Charlotte. What Bob says about those geographical and technical boundaries, (that they) really don't matter in the overall business that we're all trying to attract (is correct).
Michael Smith: The same applies to us, too. The assets that are placed in the center city, it is the center of the region. They would not be here -- they would not have the draw, the jobs, the attendance and the hospitality -- if they didn't pull from the entire marketplace. You know, retailers don't care whether you're here or there as long as you shop.
Ronnie Bryant: I don't want the concept of regionalism in Charlotte to be perceived as a new concept. The partnership was created with the geographical boundaries of 16 counties in 1989, so somebody sat around the table and thought, "Hey, there is some benefit to us being together."
From the partnership's economic-development perspective, our decision-makers could care less about the lines that we draw that separate us into municipalities or counties or, in some cases, states.
I truly believe the concept of regionalism has got to get to the point where when we look at our 16-county region, we draw the outline boundaries and erase all the lines on the inside. We've got to get to the point where we take the intra-regional competition out and look at ways of revenue-sharing and multi-jurisdictional tax districts and so on and maximize your resources.
It does seem that the emphasis on regionalism has grown. Any particular reason for that?
Morgan: I think that the record, going back to 1989, is we've been relatively successful at putting together a regional economic-development program. I think the Charlotte Regional Partnership is tied to the developers throughout the region -- there may not be a better model of regionalism in the day-to-day business of economic development.
I think what we're seeing now is there is a growing hunger for more of a regional agenda. And I don't think we've spoken yet to a regional agenda.
I think we in Charlotte make a real good case for why the region should support some of the things we want to do here in Charlotte, but it's a two-way street. If we think that the region has something to gain by something that's happening outside this window, in the center city of Charlotte, it's just as important for us to think about things like the Monroe bypass or the Garden Parkway (in Gaston County), pieces of transportation infrastructure that will help serve the region that we can be equally interested in.
Everyone has stakeholders to answer to in your organizations. So how do you avoid turf battles?
******: You first meet your core discipline. I think in terms of, OK, Cabarrus County has their convention facility connected to the hotel there. Now, there are pieces of business that are going to go there instead of (the Charlotte) Convention Center. Does that create a competitive disadvantage? Really no, because you get to a certain size and (Charlotte's convention center) is the only game in town. That's what we need to maximize. We need to focus (on bigger conventions). We all can be most effective as we do our core business. (Morgan) is doing development within Charlotte-Mecklenburg, (Bryant) is setting the regional tone, (Smith) is taking care of the urban core, we're speaking to the visitor population. And then we have the platform for collaboration.
Each of us has our own constituency to take care of and then where we have the opportunity for common ground is on things like branding, on things like advertising, where we can maximize finite dollars.
But there have been turf battles in the past. It seems like the economic developers are more on board. Is that because of the changes in leadership?
Bryant: I think the role the partnership played was very driven toward finding someone with economic development experience. That led them to the direction of hiring someone who understood what an economic developer goes through on a day-to-day basis. That's not a knock on my predecessor, but that was not his background. So that really has brought a degree of consensus and a greater appreciation for the direction of the partnership. With my background at three organizations (in economic development in other cities) and understanding the internal struggles of keeping a core issue together in an arena where there is always suspicion around the major city, there is probably not an issue I have not heard. So they can reach trust.
Now, I've said the right things, but they're watching. We've still got work to do. It's not over, believe me.
Morgan: It's less about turf and more about organizational clutter. We share a lot of the same investors and a lot of them -- it's not the amount of the four different checks that they may be writing -- it's they're unsure, where does the chamber stop and the partnership pick up?
Part of our job is to clarify the mission where we get out of the partnership's way and they get out of our way, where it makes sense. We've been thoughtful about where the line is. And we're sitting around the table talking.
Smith: The key to it is communication. And we as a group have said we're going to circle up and get together regularly and make sure we understand what each is working on. If you lay our missions on the table, it's clear who should be working on what.
Through a quick conversation, it shouldn't take long to say, "Yeah, you're right, you should probably take this one on." This is a good opportunity because we've got four relatively new faces.
******: One thing that helps is Ronnie's a quick study, so he's gotten up to speed on this. Michael having been in the marketplace, Bob having been in the marketplace, me having been in the marketplace -- we've heard enough about some of these legendary turf issues.
Let's just call it what it is a lot of times -- a lot of times it is personality (clashes). We have a good working rapport already that will only continue to grow over time.
Bryant: A lot of the activities are driven by egos. That could be the ego of an executive director or the egos of different constituencies in an organization.
This chairman wants to out-do that chairman or take the lead on this project. You have four people here in the room; I've not seen any sense of being constrained (in working together) by ego or superficial internal drive or external pressure to be out front.
I told my board, "You might not ever see our name in the paper." That's not how I get paid. If I can help Bob (Morgan) look good, that's fine. I don't need to be listed as a leader on a project to show that I'm engaged. So if you can get that off the table, that sense of competition for ego satisfaction, life is easy (laughs).
Are there specific issues in 2006 that you see tied to regionalism?
Morgan: We're working on a concept of regional chamber membership. The idea is if somebody is already a member of one of the chambers around us, are we willing to offer them a discounted rate to be a member of the Charlotte Chamber? That brings strength in numbers. We've already begun preliminary discussions on that.
******: The one that is a continuing effort from (2005) is the NASCAR Hall of Fame. And when we're successful, God willing, the real pulling together in terms of promotion will come together. What happened for the hall of fame effort wouldn't have happened in 1989. I can dare say it wouldn't have happened in 1999. But having worked together on the Nextel All-Star Challenge and on a lot of other efforts, these things are bearing fruit.
Bryant: One of the opportunities for us is to understand the significance of being bi-state. I think there is a little misunderstanding and confusion as to the significance (of being on the border). The four (S.C.) counties in the region bring us to some very significant benchmark numbers that are important to competition: 2 million and 1 million. Over 2 million population and 1 million work force -- if you fall below those benchmarks, there will be projects you don't have a chance to land. We have to appreciate the importance of that. The (S.C.) counties also bring us some very significant real estate options for attracting businesses. There is only one certified supersite -- pad ready, 1,000-plus-acre site -- and that site is in Chester County, in South Carolina, not North Carolina. That's important. We also need to work to understand the importance of multi-jurisdictional industrial parks in some of these contiguous counties.
Could the Charlotte Chamber get behind things like that?
Morgan: Alabama and Mississippi are together on a site, and they're probably going to land the next automotive plant in the southeastern United States. The site's in Mississippi and Alabama is going to put money into the incentive package (because it's near the border). And we're not even in the game because we're fighting over stealing jobs from each other between North and South Carolina.
What if we could get over that and get to this site in Chester County, and what if the marketing of this entire region could be brought to bear to bringing a huge auto plant to this region? Yet we're down here with these competitive details -- we've got to figure a way to rise above that.
I want to go back to another issue for 2006 -- the opening of the whitewater park. There's an asset funded by four governments on the other side of the Mecklenburg County line. They're joining with the city of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County and private dollars to build a park that's going to open up the Catawba River, something that's not been done beyond it being a place to take water from and put sewage back into it.
This puts us into the eco-tourism game, which also puts us into the creative class. Imagine being in the admissions office at Belmont Abbey College. You take a student down to the whitewater park and they're sold on the region.
Will the CRVA use the park to market the region?
******: We have already begun to talk about it. It'll absolutely be one of those things we talk about. And having those Olympic rings out on the highway will be huge (as the park conducts training sessions for Olympic athletes). You look at the opportunities for hotel operators and all the restaurants and people spending money here.
But they won't be spending money uptown, will they?
Smith: I don't believe that. Because I believe if we do tourism right, people come to town and they have a plethora of options. So they could easily stay at The Westin, take their boat to the whitewater park for the day and then come into the city for dinner and cultural events. I also think there could be multi-city opportunities. But whenever the region grows, we all benefit.
Public education impacts business retention and recruiting. What do you think of the current situation?
Morgan: I think the perception is a whole lot worse than the reality, and there is a role for all of us in the business community to play in telling the balance of the story.
From an economic-development perspective, we can't lose sight of the fact that the regions of the country that generate the greatest economic growth are those that form the highest level of research in higher education. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools is very important, but we're still far behind other regions in higher education.
Anything we can do to harness political support in the research area at UNC Charlotte, we should do.
Bryant: We've got to get to the point where we can separate the academic side and the business side of education. Where we're failing is on the business side of education.
I like to go back to what Daley did in Chicago -- he had a CEO business guy running the business side and an academic on the academic system.
Having enough buildings is a business decision, not an academic one. We have a good school system, we can compete. You want to see a bad system? I can show you some bad systems in this country.
© 2005 Charlotte Business Journal> |
0 comments:
Post a Comment