Housing Market

[Gerald Neily]

I agree that fixing the city's out-of-whack economy is job #1 and the city's property tax system is absurd. But that's not exactly my topic here...

Charlie Duff hosted a series of seminars a few months ago on the lessons we can learn from the all-too-brief housing boom of a few years ago. I figured someone would come along and distill his wisdom for the rest of us, but so far I haven't heard anything. There were too many of the same old GBC/BDC/Downtown Partnership types involved in the series for me to actually become interested in getting involved in the whole thing. I don't need to hear any more from those guys than I already hear anyway.

But Charlie Duff's idea was interesting. What positive force can we distill from the boom years that we can apply to the current bust years that have followed? Back in the mid '00s, the city was actually growing, and it was at a faster pace than the suburbs. Was it just a temporary economic indulgence that had to end, feeding the short run at the expense of the long run? Was it just some fun while it lasted?

Inquiring minds want to know.

-- 

Gerald Neily
www.BaltimoreInnerSpace.blogspot.com

[James Hunt]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Gerald Neily <geral...@gmail.com> wrote:

... But Charlie Duff's idea was interesting. What positive force can we distill from the boom years that we can apply to the current bust years that have followed? Back in the mid '00s, the city was actually growing, and it was at a faster pace than the suburbs. Was it just a temporary economic indulgence that had to end, feeding the short run at the expense of the long run? Was it just some fun while it lasted?

Inquiring minds want to know.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well, yes, it was temporary and had to end. Even when there were more jobs to be had, year to year housing price increases were leaving income growth in the dust. The house I sold in Radnor-Winston in 2001 for $109K is now assessed for well over $250K. Wonderful house, but that's just madness.

So: lessons ... (1) Keep an eye on price/income ratios (2) It's unlikely we'll see 15 percent and up annual housing price appreciation ever again in our lifetimes. (3) Nothing wrong with renting.

[pto...@comcast.net]

That's of course the $ million question. What is happening to our wealth. Why it seems to not be replenishing. And what this is doing to our cities. I'm no expert but I know one thing, not enough people are concerned with building real wealth as opposed to paper wealth.  At some point our financial geniuses decided there was more money to be made in shuffling weath than making things. Manufacturing packed up and left in large numbers. Banking and finance proliferated.  Politicians were bought off by the thousands to pave the way for this makeover of America. But today, not enough people are asking how we can generate true wealth. The big banks have almost written off the US as a place for growth and optimism.  The real growth is expected to be in Asia and Africa. 

 

In any case cities like Baltimore need to find ways to build their real wealth. One of those ways is urban agriculture. Detroit is doing it. I heard Baltimore has some too. Other ways to build the local economy is to rehab a building, ride a bike, plant a garden, or give someone a job. Too bad fishing in the Chesapeake is no longer creating much local wealth.

 

I heard something very disturbing tonight. I was talking to someone who said that she was in Harborplace after 9:30 on a weekend night recently. Thousands of young people descended into the area all of a sudden, intimidating, brawling, and assuaulting people on the street. She was accompanied by a policeman who advised her that no matter what, hold onto his hand and do not let go as they walked to the car 8 blocks away. She witnessed rampant street brawling and the many policemen trying to deal with it, many of them volunteering, perhaps because the city couldn't afford to pay enough policemen to handle the situation. It was basically mayhem and anarchy. She couldn't believe that there was no mention in the news. It's apparently being suppressed, according to her. Is there any truth to this?  I had no idea this was going on. In that case, the city may be a lot sicker than I had thought.

 

Peter

 

www.baltimorphosis.com

[Gerald Neily]

"Thousands of young people descended..."? Peter, if that is literally true, then our biggest problem is the lack of willingness of people to speak up about what is happening. Baltimore has a strong insular mentality, so it is certainly true to some extent. People know that freedom of speech has a high cost.

The high level example of this right now is the intimidation that Police Commissioner Bealefeld is getting against his own freedom of speech. He and Pat Jessamy know better than anyone how important it is for people to be able to speak freely on the witness stand, and Baltimore is basically one big witness stand. Sheila Dixon is even weighing in against Bealefeld, and she was the top-dog beneficiary of the insider mentality.

On the other hand, I believe the "paper wealth" problem, although major on a national basis, is not a major problem in Baltimore, which is a city that is positioned to take full advantage of the paper wealth syndrome that has its sources nearby in Washington DC and New York.

Cities like Detroit are in a whole lot more trouble than Baltimore, based on its obsolete undiversified economy, although the "urban lobby" which calls for paper solutions that exacerbate urban problems instead of solving them, is based on a political coalition that lumps Detroit and Baltimore together.

Urban farming is no solution. Cities are situated to have strong competitive advantages, economic and environmental, based on their locations, density and infrastructure, and urban farming just squanders them away to allow for still more suburban sprawl.

But I believe you're on the right track, Peter. Thank you. (Just please use your spell check next time.)

Jamie, thanks for the excellent one sentence synopsis of what Charlie Duff and friends might have spent six weeks saying, or maybe not. I'd still like to know - especially from the standpoint of public policy, not just personal finance. 

--
Gerald Neily
www.BaltimoreInnerSpace.blogspot.com

[pto...@comcast.net]

Gerry, I don't see how Baltimore is "ready to take full advantage of the paper wealth syndrome." That's kind of a ridiculous statement.

 

Rule of law seems to be challenged from multiple directions in Baltimore, from the streets to City Hall.  It's getting to be a Gotham City, except Gotham City didn't have riots breaking out every Friday and Saturday night. Batman, where are you?

 

As for urban agriculture, you are not the first person to slight its importance. I worked 9 years in the ag Industry back in Indiana. There, agriculture was the backbone of the economy. And that's probably why, on my return visit there this summer, people didn't seem to be suffering quite so bad as I am in Maryland. CAD, illustration and websites for architects and planners just isn't viable anymore, for me at least. Agriculture is a great buffer for hard times.  People in Maryland don't look to the land quite like they do in Indiana. As for Detroit, I know for a fact they have some outstanding black loam right in the city, perfect for agriculture. Urban agriculture is one of those things that produces synergy in many areas at once. Everything about it pushes in the right direction. People are less in need of govt. handouts. It occupies their time, keeps them from getting depressed, puts food on their table, it may earn them some spending money. Gardening and farming have a powerful tug on people's motivation. I know a guy in Columbia who has a plot at the community garden and he's nuts about it.  Sure, there are plenty of nonbelievers.  But also many people who have never had a chance to discover their capacity to garden, and it could be anyone.  Let's face it, it puts vacant land to use. Maybe landowners could be given tax relief for it. Now, will it add to the local GDP?  Probably not in a big way. But there is a growing movement that says GDP is the wrong way to measure human development. We need to get away from measuring all progress with GDP.  It's like Greenspan and interest rates. For years he and others were obsessed with managing the economy by setting the interest rates, with little or no regard for credit default swaps and mortgage backed securities, and the horrendously bad gimmicks made legal by the Commodity Futures Modernization Act:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000

 

What a sham that was. Meanwhile, the fox were eating the chickens while American people slept.

 

I say bring on the urban farmers. Don't wait for Washington to throw some more paper wealth your way. 

 

Peter

[Gerald Neily]

Maryland is the #1 most affluent state in the United States. Yes, this is due to our proximity to the contrived wealth created in Washington DC, but it is still wealth.

Baltimore is suffering only because the "limousine liberals" who run our state seem to be clueless as to how to run a city.

Urban agriculture is an oxymoron, pure and simple. It is a land extensive activity in what should be a land intensive location. Yes, in a post-apocalyptic world (which Detroit and some other urban places have already entered) it is economically useful. In my opinion, Baltimore should not enter that world yet. Gardening is more of an avocation.

--
Gerald Neily
www.BaltimoreInnerSpace.blogspot.com

[Youssef Mahmoud]

I don't know whether urban agriculture, money shuffling, or circus acts are best suited to revitalizing Baltimore's economy.  What I do know is that until taxes are at least made comparable to those of the surrounding counties, we will lag behind.  Property tax needs to be lowered aggressively, and that can be achieved if we couple it with lifting the 4% cap on assessment increases.  The state limit is 10%, and for Baltimore city that may still be too low.  What I know is that if the tax rate goes down, development will shift from the suburbs to here, increasing total tax revenue, driving up property values, increasing the percentage of law abiding citizens, providing more jobs in the city, creating a better street life, and building a voter base that cares enough to start to undue some of the excessive corruption and incompetence in our government.

My generation (I'm 26) is abandoning suburbia for urban life in record numbers (I'm too lazy to find a citation but I will if there's someone on this list who doubts that statement).  They want to live, work, and play in a city.  But I personally know of 3 couples who were on the verge of buying a house in Baltimore and backed out because of the excessive tax burden.  I can also tell you that a solid majority of my city-dwelling friends commute out of the city to work, including myself.  We would rather work in the city, but businesses that don't get special tax deals from the government do the math and conclude that it doesn't make sense to set up shop in Baltimore (unless they're in one of the select few industries that benefits so immensely from an urban environment that the tax concerns are offset).

I would be willing to defund or severely underfund virtually ever city service outside of police, prosecution, and schools to reduce property taxes.  Why?  Because I am confident that within a very short time, the lost revenue would be made up by a swelling tax base and jacked up property assessment values.  This is not something that we can do gradually and expect real results.  No one cares if the city tax rate falls from 2.25 times the county rate to 2.17 times.  We need drastic cuts, and we need them NOW.

Ok, I'm ready for the onslaught of retorts.

[James Hunt]

Interesting back and forth. Lots to unpack. I'll take a stab at three issues: public policy for housing in the wake of the bust; mobs; and urban farming

Unfortunately, Gerry, I can't offer any public policy prescriptions in the wake of the housing bust except that maybe there shouldn't even _be_ a public policy if it's going to be led by pols such as Chris Dodd and Barney "Let 'er roll" Frank. I'm sure there are equally scurrilous souls on the right involved in the housing mess, and that underscores my point. I'm encouraged to read articles lately asking whether the Feds should be encouraging homeownership. Part of the success of our society is related to its physical mobility. Bring on the rentals.

Mobs. Horrible. Not specific to Baltimore, alas. Philly recently has had similar problems with "flash mobs" (Google or Bing it more info) on Broad Street. In the late summer of 1981 or 82, I had just gotten off a Trailways Bus in Pittsburgh around 11 on a Saturday evening when a mob just out of a Parliament Funkadelic concert at the Civic Arena came racing down Grant Street, smashing windows and making a general nuisance. Waiting at the bus stop to catch a ride to Oakland (a Pitts neighborhood), a young man attempted rob me, abandoning the effort only when a policeman appeared with a dog. So, the HP thing may be flash mobs, or the overflow from an event. Not good, but not a new thing in "Mobtown" and also a thing that the police and the city have a strong economic incentive to deal with.

Urban farming. It's already happening in greenhouses in Clifton Park, and there have been garden alotments along the RR right of way near the B&O Museum in SoWeBo for years. More can happen but I doubt Baltimore has the caliber of soil Detroit has. The Colonial Dames and their colleagues in Carroll Park have long discussed restoring the terraces in front of Mt. Clare to the way Charles Carroll the Barrister had them. I think they were both practical and decorative gardens, with fruit trees, etc. (It's sort of a shame that the a-rabber distribution system seems to be going by the wayside)

Anyway, Peter and Gerry, it's interesting that you are central to this back and forth. I've been thinking about you both in connection with a proposal I've been working on for a job in Baltimore. So far, the response I've been getting is not "no" but "not yet." If I can ever get to "yes" I'll be in touch. It'll be a miracle, but I'm open to those.

[James Hunt]

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Youssef Mahmoud <humana...@gmail.com> wrote:

Ok, I'm ready for the onslaught of retorts.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Can't help you with the retorts. Pretty much agree with what you wrote. Carry on.

[Gerald Neily]

Youssef, AMEN ON LOWER TAXES !!!!!!!!!!!

I just briefly mentioned taxes in my "Mental Maps" piece in The Brew, and got a response so I hope I can try to follow up on this in my broad brush sort of way. The two word key is LAND TAX. Of course, we need a lot more than two words.

Urban farming has sort of a "man bites dog" anomaly feel to it. Yes, an acre here or there is an interesting side effect. But we're constantly gobbling up thousands of acres of great rural farmland to create sprawl, so urban farming is a hill of beans by comparison.

Yes, farming may be good in places like Columbia to aid in suburban sprawl prevention.

All that sprawl is caused by our urban failures. Carroll Park shouldn't become a farm because it needs to become a great park to serve the thousands of people who should be moving to its edges but aren't because of dysfunctional urban policies.

--
Gerald Neily
www.BaltimoreInnerSpace.blogspot.com

[Fritz Ohrenschall]

I'll bite on the taxes issue.  Can anyone show me a comparison of rates (and house valuings) in the city with those in the county.  And taxes can't be all of it, either.  People still live in New Jersey.

[Youssef Mahmoud]

When I have a moment I'll have to go look up some more tax data, but I think that a macro look at taxes misses the point for Baltimore.  We have a relative tax problem here.  By that I mean our "relatives" out in the burbs have a relatively lower tax burden than do we.  Couple that with the relative lack of crime and quality of schools, and the city can't win.  Under these conditions, only people and businesses who have a special interest in being in the city will choose it over its neighbors.  New Jersey has high taxes across the board, so it's not as easy for people to move a few miles away to escape them.  It's entirely possible (I don't know because this idea just popped in my head and I haven't done the research to support it) that Camden is such a wasteland compared to Philly because taxes are substantially higher in NJ than PA.

[James Hunt]

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Gerald Neily <geral...@gmail.com> wrote:

All that sprawl is caused by our urban failures. Carroll Park shouldn't become a farm because it needs to become a great park to serve the thousands of people who should be moving to its edges but aren't because of dysfunctional urban policies.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well, to clarify, I'm not suggesting the entire Park become a farm; rather, re-install the gardens and fruit trees on the south-facing terraces, which are just grass now and generally unusable for anything else. The playing fields and playgrounds should remain as they are. Incidentally, Charles Carroll the Barrister used his property quite intensively in whatever ways he could make money. Won't go into it at length here, but could be lessons for the city economy. Lattterly, before it became a public park, German immigrants used it as a "scheutzen park" or "shooting park". Firing rifles and drinking (responsibly) was part of their recreation. Brilliant!

Won't argue that there have been many "urban failures" but it's also the case that there are a lot of people who leave cities because they want more space/fewer people (which, of course, tends to gobble up open spaces). I'm sick of more space/ fewer people, so, like Youseff's demographic cohort (which, alas, I'm no longer part of) I'm heading back to the city.

[Jed Weeks]

I would be willing to defund or severely underfund virtually ever city service outside of police, prosecution, and schools to reduce property taxes.

In a perfect world, this would work. The problem with Baltimore is that we have 1 in 10 people addicted to drugs, a near-billion dollar drug black market, and generation after generation of children with no parents to speak of.

Unless we could move ourselves to a year-round school system, we need to fully fund parks, pools, and rec centers, and we need to increase public funding for summer job programs for youth.

Then we need to dramatically increase available treatment. And, we need to figure out how to get the 9,000 people returning from prison to Baltimore every year employed and started on a new life. If that doesn't happen, they are just going to recidivate.

Add to this problem the continued reliance on foundations and philanthropists to provide money for necessary city services. I'm really happy they found private money to keep the pools open a few extra weeks, but that never should have been an issue to begin with.

All that sprawl is caused by our urban failures. Carroll Park shouldn't become a farm because it needs to become a great park to serve the thousands of people who should be moving to its edges but aren't because of dysfunctional urban policies.

I completely agree with this point, but I also agree with James that you can turn small areas of the park into farm-able ones. I don't think we need a Detroit style vision of urban farming in Baltimore. I think we are doing just fine as is. We have a TON of small pocket urban farms in neighborhoods, and a few larger standouts in various parts of the city. I'd like that trend to continue. If you care about the single lot sized farm on your block, maybe you'll start caring about the rest of the block too.

Jed

[Richard Chambers]

Jed - I'm not sure increasing our funding for social programs and pools, etc. in Baltimore will do us much good. We already shell out a lot - that's why our taxes are so high. And I doubt it accomplishes that much in the end. I used to be a financial counselor for people on the Section 8 wait list, as well as a community development attorney working in poor Baltimore neighborhoods, and I will simply say that our social problems are caused by a toxic combination of ingrained, multi-generational self-hate, horrid community peer pressures, and a lack of self-esteem that borders on being psychotic. If we paid for a psychiatrist for every person at or below the poverty level in this city we might get somewhere. But Summer jobs programs, open pools, investment zones, etc. are just baubles that look good for campaigning politicians but do nothing to deal with the underlying issues, in my opinion.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Weeks
Sent: Aug 12, 2010 11:28 AM
To: balto...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market

[Youssef Mahmoud]

As I said already, I don't advocate permanently eviscerating the city government.  It needs to go barebones long enough to attract people and businesses back into the city so that the tax base is big enough to support a fully functional government without absurdly high rates.  As that base is rebuilt, so to can government programs.  And let me be clear when I say that this is a battle between the city and its neighboring counties. We can't rely on the growth of the entire region to lift Baltimore out of its depression.  We need to take back the population and economic activity from places that for too long have profited from the City's failure (like Hunt Valley, White Marsh, Columbia, and Owings Mills).  Unless there is at least a 30% increase in the region's population over the next 10 years and it all goes to Baltimore City, the region as a whole cannot win.  It's us or them; the city or the burbs.  And if the city is going to win, it needs to take more drastic measures than it has thus far.

[Jed Weeks]

Richard,

our social problems are caused by a toxic combination of ingrained, multi-generational self-hate, horrid community peer pressures, and a lack of self-esteem that borders on being psychotic. If we paid for a psychiatrist for every person at or below the poverty level in this city we might get somewhere.

You are spot on with your assessment. That being said, we can't afford to or try to save everyone. What we can do is use practical steps that are statistically proven to reduce crime, increase community investment, and increase potential in youth. These programs might not be 100% successful, but they are data-backed solutions that improve our city.

I've attached the 2002 report "Steps to Success" from bSAS, which has a lot of statistical backing to a simple point: increased drug treatment makes our city safer and more productive.

Unfortunately, we've continued to see drug treatment cuts, and the philanthropic sector has had to step in to try and fill the gaps. It's ridiculous.

I know I'm veering rapidly off topic, so to bring it back--lower taxes aren't going to solve anything if the murder rate skyrockets and we are spending millions more on incarcerating people left and right because they've lapsed in treatment and are committing petty street crimes to get a fix. We'll end up having to increase taxes again just to pay for more police and prisons.

Statistically, the best way to save money is the same way as the most humane one: increase drug treatment and better the school system. And if we can't have summer school, we need to fund summer activities and jobs to keep kids stimulated. Otherwise they WILL fall into the drug trade and/or drop out of school.

Jed

[James Hunt]

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Jed Weeks <jedw...@gmail.com> wrote:

I would be willing to defund or severely underfund virtually ever city service outside of police, prosecution, and schools to reduce property taxes.

In a perfect world, this would work. The problem with Baltimore is that we have 1 in 10 people addicted to drugs, a near-billion dollar drug black market, and generation after generation of children with no parents to speak of.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

An excellent, succinct statement of the problem.

In the main, I suspect the problem will be most successfully addressed extra-governmentally. It is a fact (and this is _just an example_, not some clumsy attempt to proselytize in a secular forum) that Catholic religious (priests, brothers, sisters, etc.) were -- for all their faults -- very successful at bringing order to unruly Irish immigrant communities where alcoholism and abandonment and their accompanying ills were rampant (speaking here as a descendant of same).

It's unfortunate that there aren't more available today to staff excellent schools like St. Ignatius Middle School in Mt. Vernon, Cristo Rey High School in Fells Point (moving to Station North eventually), and Fr. Charles Hall in Johnston Square. However, vocations are booming in the Global South. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see African-born missionaries come to U.S. cities in our lifetimes.

Again: just one example of how the problem has been addressed extra-governmentally. Other faiths -- and those of no particular faith -- have made great contributions as well.

[Gerald Neily]

Great discussion !!!!!!!!! I agree with almost everything. Most people in the suburbs would be overjoyed to let the city absorb most or all of the region's growth. They don't want it near them in the suburbs. Only the politicians do. They're the ones who talk about of both sides of their mouth about the city. They only support stuff like the MTA's Red Line to pay off the city leaders and try to keep them from complaining.

Yes, many suburbanites moved out to get away from all that "excessive growth" in the first place. Most suburbanites would love to be "the last one out". Some call that hypocrisy but I don't think it is. It's rational.

The populist anti-urban sentiment is mostly because the consensus is that the city is a hopeless money pit that defies attempts at intelligent investment. I know that most non-urbanites definitely feel that way about the MTA, as an example.

But more city growth is the real answer, if only to dilute all the pathologies with an influx of "normal" people, and to keep the sane from moving out.

--
Gerald Neily
www.BaltimoreInnerSpace.blogspot.com

[pto...@comcast.net]

I agree this has been an interesting discussion.  I'm listening closely. I agree that there must be a bad dynamic going on with regard to taxes, driving people away from cities, with a double whammy so to speak because city resident face fewer jobs, more crime, and higher taxes. But urban redevelopment is where it's at, in my opinion.  At the core of this whole problem are federal policies that have weakened local economies in my opinion. That opens the door to a much larger discussion. I'll just say briefly that I've been swayed by Hamilton's Curse, a book by Thomas DiLorenzo, a local history professor who specializes in economics:

 

http://mises.org/store/Hamiltons-Curse-P534.aspx

 

The recent financial Shenanigans date back at least to Alexander Hamilton. This book explains our entire history in terms of this schism between Hamilton and Jefferson.  Hamilton's federalists pushed for ever greater federal control, and they won. Thomas Jefferson never wanted America to emulate European kingdoms, etc.  DiLorenzo's explanation of the Federal Reserve is crystal clear and makes a strong case for the feds as the cause of our boom/bust economy, with a priveleged group of insiders who are always ready to extract personal gain, often with backroom sweeheart deals.

 

I'm not satisfied with the response in this group to my friend's complaint about mayhem at the Inner harbor so I think I'll post my comment to the EB group just to see what they say. So please forgive the cross post, those who are in both groups. I just really want to know. I think my friend was probably over reacting.

 

Peter

 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gerald Neily" <geral...@gmail.com>
To: balto...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 3:36:54 PM
Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market

[Jed Weeks]

I'm not sure we've answered the post limit question on this listserv yet, but I'll keep this to my last for the day. 

I'm not satisfied with the response in this group to my friend's complaint about mayhem at the Inner harbor so I think I'll post my comment to the EB group just to see what they say. So please forgive the cross post, those who are in both groups. I just really want to know. I think my friend was probably over reacting.

I don't know what to say about these events. We've had some serious issues in other cities with these trends, and I think they've been more troublesome than the events in Baltimore. We've had a few "flash mob" (as the media is calling them) style incidents in the Inner Harbor, and it sounds like your friend might have been caught up in one. However, I don't think they are as prevalent as some other cities:

Philadelphia has had thousands of kids running around unchecked on South Street. One count was about 7,000 kids. Basically they just wandered around setting off car alarms and threatening people. There are youtube videos documenting most of it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMWT41Pu3tM

 And, just last week, DC had their own mini-riot on the Metro: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/07/AR2010080701992.html

I certainly can't begin to provide an explanation, but it's definitely not unique to Baltimore.

Jed

[James Hunt]

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 5:02 PM, <pto...@comcast.net> wrote:

 

... DiLorenzo's explanation of the Federal Reserve is crystal clear and makes a strong case for the feds as the cause of our boom/bust economy, with a priveleged group of insiders who are always ready to extract personal gain, often with backroom sweeheart deals. ...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Book sounds interesting and I'll try to check it out. Another book worth reading is Charles Evans Mackay's Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. Note especially the chapters on the South Seas Bubble and the Dutch Tulip mania. Both preceded the Fed, and the founding of America, for that matter. Both are similar to the housing bust in that they involved the choices of thousands upon thousands of erstwhile investors looking for get rich quick opportunities.

As far as the harbor goes, definitely see if you can get more information. But I think Jed has identified the source of the problem.

[Antero Pietila]

   Adding to the many strands that this discussion has generated: I have never understood why Baltimore City, the real estate and building industry and outside investors have never been interested in new housing in the city, aside from highrise condos.  With one exception, of course: Fells Point and Canton.
   Remarkably, such non-highrise newbuilts almost always follow Baltimore's rowhouse tradition. Remarkably, they also have narrow stairs to the second floor -- the main living level -- and third. Tastes vary, but those houses are not for me. I crave alternative designs in newbuilts that would attract well-to-do emptynesters to desirable areas other than the harbor.
   A group of such houses was built in Cross Keys roughly 15 years ago. A garage underneath; one or two (I forget) living levels in a wide configuration. They were hard to sell initially but their prices quickly doubled in resales because emptynesters loved them so much. Yet no other senior-friendly groups of new houses has been built to my knowledge.
   At 67, I am optimistic enough to expect some more miles but realistic enough to know my limitations. I live in a rancher. When I was scouting for a condo in an old building on Park Heights Avenue some time ago, I noticed that at least Park Towers East (maybe at West as well), the entry doors were double doors. I did not measure corridor widths but everything seemed pretty accessible for a wheelchair bound. I'm not there yet but these are among the things one takes into calculation in mapping the future.
   One other thing about the Baltimore market regarding rowhouses: Since most newbuilts do not have an elevator and only the top-tier includes it as an option, I just wonder about what is going on in the minds of my aging brothers and sisters buying such homes. You know who you are.

---

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:10:43 -0400

Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market

From: jamieh...@gmail.com
To: balto...@googlegroups.com

[Gerald Neily]

Antero brings our discussion back full circle to the question of housing choices, starting on Charles Street. Baltimore needs all the different housing designs we can get. Cities are supposed to be places of variety and diversity. Unfortunately, building anything new in Bmore is such a big deal that the ensuing protracted controversies seem to stifle all creativity.

We need tall buildings and short buildings and everything in between, with every feature and amenity that will appeal to any market. But no one housing type will appeal to everyone, just as no retail type will.

Instead, every new development is seen as the answer to everything - physical, social and economic. Every housing project is supposed to solve our low income housing shortage. Poor people are granted the inalienable right to live on the waterfront, as if we don't have vast areas inland we need to make viable. Walmart is supposed to singlehandedly regenerate Baltimore's middle class. Mary Pat Clarke essentially thinks the City can enforce this by banning Walmart from hiring any low wage workers.

This makes developers timid, especially the many who decide to just stay away from Baltimore as much as they can. We end up with cliche developments - the latest type seems to be the "housing veneer" where a narrow band of housing with units and windows on only one side is used to hide a massive parking garage. The Fitzgerald on Oliver Street is the latest. Parking garages seem to be the most popular development type.

Even our alleged innovations are derived from the status quo. I get the feeling that Patrick Turner retained the silos at Silo Point just to maintain a charade that he wasn't actually building a new building at all. Ha ha. The joke's on us.

Whew - maybe that's too much rant to glean from this discussion.

--
Gerald Neily
www.BaltimoreInnerSpace.blogspot.com

[James Hunt]

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Gerald Neily <geral...@gmail.com> wrote:

Even our alleged innovations are derived from the status quo. I get the feeling that Patrick Turner retained the silos at Silo Point just to maintain a charade that he wasn't actually building a new building at all. Ha ha. The joke's on us.

Whew - maybe that's too much rant to glean from this discussion.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Maybe, but the project, like this discussion, is fun nonetheless. Dry, emotionless developments and discussions are for the birds.

(Speaking of which, what's gotten into the Orioles lately?)

Anyway, if I recall correctly, Turner was intrigued by, among other things, the Quaker Square Hotel in Akron, which was carved out of an old silo.

Pic here: http://m.travelpn.com/images/akron/hotel/0/084284/Exterior_F_1.jpg

As work progressed, he and his architects and engineers realized that Baltimore's silo (the round parts, anyway) was not amenable to conversion for condos, so the corner elements were saved, and a new building was built within.

[jamiehunt]

On Aug 12, 9:45 pm, Antero Pietila <hap5...@hotmail.com> wrote:

... >    A group of such houses was built in Cross Keys roughly 15

years ago. A garage underneath; one or two (I forget) living levels in
a wide configuration. They were hard to sell initially but their
prices quickly doubled in resales because emptynesters loved them so
much. Yet no other senior-friendly groups of new houses has been built
to my knowledge.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

One of my cousins (who used to do rehabs in Fells Point) builds
"senior friendly" housing, but around Hanover, PA.

Some of the many things driving his decision-making:

(1) the cost of land
(2) the ability to assemble enough land to build enough units to be
able to offer the units at prices middle-class retirees can afford and
still make a profit for his effort
(3) the relative ease of building there v. Baltimore City
(4) the relative "tax friendliness" of PA v. MD from a retiree's
perspective
(5) perception on the part of retirees that the area is safer than the
city ... or the sense that there's nothing in the city that interests
them enough to want to live there, though they might visit from time
to time.

[jamiehunt]

For some reason, some posts list me as "James Hunt" and others as
"jamiehunt."

The vagaries of GoogleWorld, I guess.

[Richard Chambers]

A personal side note - my wife's grandparents moved to Hanover, Pa. for exactly the reasons that you stated below. Recently her grandfather passed away, leaving her grandmother (who doesn't drive) completely stranded in a subdivision of ranchers in the middle of nowhere. She now laments ever moving up there. She spends her days watching television and getting fatter. She calls Hanover - "the place old Baltimoreans go to die".

[James Hunt]

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Richard Chambers <richard...@earthlink.net> wrote:

A personal side note - my wife's grandparents moved to Hanover, Pa. for exactly the reasons that you stated below. Recently her grandfather passed away, leaving her grandmother (who doesn't drive) completely stranded in a subdivision of ranchers in the middle of nowhere. She now laments ever moving up there. She spends her days watching television and getting fatter. She calls Hanover - "the place old Baltimoreans go to die".

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ouch.

Yeah, as long as I have some say in where I'm living and can still ride an MTA bus, I'm going to take my chances in the city.

[Richard Chambers]

There were a couple of these incidents that apparently involved a lot of kids (I doubt thousands) back in the Spring or last Fall (can't remember exactly when - sorry), but I haven't heard of anything lately. But you are right - Baltimore is much sicker than we all think. Of course, there have been problems in the past. My mother lived on Mount Vernon Place back in 1968, after MLK was shot and rioting took over parts of the city. She still remembers tanks on Maryland Avenue and National Guardsmen patrolling Howard Street. We didn't get the nickname "Mobtown" for nothing.

-----Original Message-----
From: pto...@comcast.net
Sent: Aug 11, 2010 10:25 PM
To: balto...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market

That's of course the $ million question. What is happening to our wealth. Why it seems to not be replenishing. And what this is doing to our cities. I'm no expert but I know one thing, not enough people are concerned with building real wealth as opposed to paper wealth.  At some point our financial geniuses decided there was more money to be made in shuffling weath than making things. Manufacturing packed up and left in large numbers. Banking and finance proliferated.  Politicians were bought off by the thousands to pave the way for this makeover of America. But today, not enough people are asking how we can generate true wealth. The big banks have almost written off the US as a place for growth and optimism.  The real growth is expected to be in Asia and Africa. 

 

In any case cities like Baltimore need to find ways to build their real wealth. One of those ways is urban agriculture. Detroit is doing it. I heard Baltimore has some too. Other ways to build the local economy is to rehab a building, ride a bike, plant a garden, or give someone a job. Too bad fishing in the Chesapeake is no longer creating much local wealth.

 

I heard something very disturbing tonight. I was talking to someone who said that she was in Harborplace after 9:30 on a weekend night recently. Thousands of young people descended into the area all of a sudden, intimidating, brawling, and assuaulting people on the street. She was accompanied by a policeman who advised her that no matter what, hold onto his hand and do not let go as they walked to the car 8 blocks away. She witnessed rampant street brawling and the many policemen trying to deal with it, many of them volunteering, perhaps because the city couldn't afford to pay enough policemen to handle the situation. It was basically mayhem and anarchy. She couldn't believe that there was no mention in the news. It's apparently being suppressed, according to her. Is there any truth to this?  I had no idea this was going on. In that case, the city may be a lot sicker than I had thought.

 

Peter

 

www.baltimorphosis.com

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Gerald Neily" <geral...@gmail.com>
To: balto...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 5:53:42 PM
Subject: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market

I agree that fixing the city's out-of-whack economy is job #1 and the city's property tax system is absurd. But that's not exactly my topic here...

[PETER DUVALL]

I had in interesting discussion with the company in charge of the redevelopment of the Barclay neighborhood.  When I asked them why they weren't including any low rise apartment buildings in the project they said that they were trying to stick with the overwhelming rowhouse orientation of the historic neighborhood.  Fair enough, row houses, especially nice ones, worked pretty well for most people in 1890 and they can work pretty well for most folks today.  Still as we rebuild the city it is crucial to diversify our housing stock to meet the needs of people in all stages of life.  The developer has added a three story apartment building (presumably with an elevator) to their latest plans and I am very pleased. It is also interesting to look at the success and failure of the houses on the east and west sides of the 2300 block of Guilford Avenue.  The east side has modest two story, three room deep row houses which at all occupied and mostly in good condition.  The west side of the same block has three story, two room deep rowhouses with lots of vacancy.  My theory is that these tall, shallow, and narrow house on the west side of the street are a pain to live in because of their vertical floor plan.  These houses work for young people who can take advantage lots of exercise climbing stairs.  For everyone else - not so much... --- On Thu, 8/12/10, Antero Pietila <hap...@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Antero Pietila <hap...@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market To: balto...@googlegroups.com Date: Thursday, August 12, 2010, 6:45 PM

Adding to the many strands that this discussion has generated: I have never understood why Baltimore City, the real estate and building industry and outside investors have never been interested in new housing in the city, aside from highrise condos.  With one exception, of course: Fells Point and Canton.    Remarkably, such non-highrise newbuilts almost always follow Baltimore's rowhouse tradition. Remarkably, they also have narrow stairs to the second floor -- the main living level -- and third. Tastes vary, but those houses are not for me. I crave alternative designs in newbuilts that would attract well-to-do emptynesters to desirable areas other than the harbor.

A group of such houses was built in Cross Keys roughly 15 years ago. A garage underneath; one or two (I forget) living levels in a wide configuration. They were hard to sell initially but their prices quickly doubled in resales because emptynesters loved them so much. Yet no other senior-friendly groups of new houses has been built to my knowledge.

At 67, I am optimistic enough to expect some more miles but realistic enough to know my limitations. I live in a rancher. When I was scouting for a condo in an old building on Park Heights Avenue some time ago, I noticed that at least Park Towers East (maybe at West as well), the entry doors were double doors. I did not measure corridor widths but everything seemed pretty accessible for a wheelchair bound. I'm not there yet but these are among the things one takes into calculation in mapping the future.    One other thing about the Baltimore market regarding rowhouses: Since most newbuilts do not have an elevator and only the top-tier includes it as an option, I just wonder about what is going on in the minds of my aging brothers and sisters buying such homes. You know who you are. Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:10:43 -0400

Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market

[Nate]

Urban farming makes no sense as an economy. The very nature of cities
is that they are NOT agriculture. Urbanity implies specialization of
occupation and while agriculture requires large amounts of land
Perhaps Detroit could be some peculiar exception with structured
farming, but agriculture takes up far too much land to work in cities.
It takes many acres to feed simply one person for a year. There's no
problem with people using their backyards for growing vegetables, but
that's it. Frankly, agriculture is rather polluting if one intends to
garner a high yield with all the energy inputs and petrochemicals.

Also, I agree that Baltimore needs a real economy, not one like DC.
Only DC and state capitals can be like that. They don't make wealth;
they consume it. New York used to have a large real economy with its
huge industrial hinterland. But know that's dried up quite a bit, too.
They've still got a port, but mostly they're relying more on corporate
headquarters of financial institutions to get by. I'd say Baltimore is
still in a better position than many cities to regrow a real economy,
certainly more than many of those SunBelt towns.

On Aug 14, 9:48 am, PETER DUVALL <pwduv...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I had in interesting discussion with the company in charge of the redevelopment of the Barclay neighborhood.  When I asked them why they weren't including any low rise apartment buildings in the project they said that they were trying to stick with the overwhelming rowhouse orientation of the historic neighborhood. 
>
> Fair enough, row houses, especially nice ones, worked pretty well for most people in 1890 and they can work pretty well for most folks today.  Still as we rebuild the city it is crucial to diversify our housing stock to meet the needs of people in all stages of life.  The developer has added a three story apartment building (presumably with an elevator) to their latest plans and I am very pleased.
>
> It is also interesting to look at the success and failure of the houses on the east and west sides
>  of the 2300 block of Guilford Avenue.  The east side has modest two story, three room deep row houses which at all occupied and mostly in good condition.  The west side of the same block has three story, two room deep rowhouses with lots of vacancy.  My theory is that these tall, shallow, and narrow house on the west side of the street are a pain to live in because of their vertical floor plan.  These houses work for young people who can take advantage lots of exercise climbing stairs.  For everyone else - not so much...
>

> --- On Thu, 8/12/10, Antero Pietila <hap5...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> From: Antero Pietila <hap5...@hotmail.com>
> Subject: RE: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market
> To: balto...@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thursday, August 12, 2010, 6:45 PM
>
>    Adding to the many strands that this discussion has generated: I have never understood why Baltimore City, the real estate and building industry and outside investors have never been interested in new housing in the city, aside from highrise condos.  With one exception, of course: Fells Point and Canton.
>
>    Remarkably, such non-highrise newbuilts almost always follow Baltimore's rowhouse tradition. Remarkably, they also have narrow stairs to the second floor -- the main living level -- and third. Tastes vary, but those houses are not for me. I crave alternative designs in newbuilts that would attract well-to-do emptynesters to desirable areas other than the harbor.
>
>    A group of such houses was built in Cross Keys roughly 15 years ago. A garage underneath; one or two (I forget) living levels in a wide configuration. They were hard to sell initially but their prices quickly doubled in resales because emptynesters loved them so much. Yet no other senior-friendly groups of new houses has been built to my knowledge.
>
>    At 67, I am optimistic enough to expect some more miles but realistic enough to know my limitations. I live in a rancher. When I was scouting for a condo in an old building on Park Heights Avenue some time ago, I noticed that at least Park Towers East (maybe at West as well), the entry doors were double doors. I did not measure corridor widths but everything seemed pretty accessible for a wheelchair bound. I'm not there yet but these are among the things one takes into calculation in mapping the future.
>
>    One other thing about the Baltimore market regarding rowhouses: Since most newbuilts do not have an elevator and only the top-tier includes it as an option, I just wonder about what is going on in the minds of my aging brothers and sisters buying such homes. You know who you are.
>

> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:10:43 -0400
> Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Housing Market

> From: jamiehunt...@gmail.com
> To: balto...@googlegroups.com

[Richard Chambers]

Nate,

I'm glad you revived this discussion because its really at the heart of so many of our problems here. I also agree that agriculture on a large (or even moderate scale) is unlikely to work in Baltimore. But I am curious to see where Detroit goes with the idea. If we could get people in low income areas to eat some locally grown produce, that would not be a bad thing. But seeing farming as a solution for Baltimore's ills seems wrong headed. As to what sort of economy Baltimore should have, I would suggest we build on what is working right now - and that's the energy and investment being generated by our hospitals and universities. The days of Baltimoreans making steel or unloading cargo ships in large numbers is probably over (not sure that's a bad thing) but we may see more and more people developing pharmaceuticals and inventing new therapies for the sick and aged. We have the opportunity to build on the extraordinary investment that the Fed has put into Johns Hopkins (they get more federal funding for research than MIT)and the University of Maryland graduate campus. Baltimore is a growing mecca for medical research, bio-science, and all sorts of egghead stuff that I could never understand. FWIW, I think that's better than an industrial economy.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Nate <geto...@gmail.com>
>Sent: Aug 23, 2010 4:37 PM
>To: BALTOmorrow <balto...@googlegroups.com>
>Subject: [BALTOmorrow] Re: Housing Market
>

[Youssef Mahmoud]

The amount of medical research done here is staggering, and we should all be thankful for it.  But I don't want Baltimore to be an economic monoculture, or any type of monoculture for that matter.  The city is in such bad shape in part because it had an economy that was almost solely based on manufacturing.  When manufacturing went overseas, so did Baltimore's jobs.  What happens when the government stops handing out research grants, or when healthcare is nationalized and the profit incentive for new treatments goes away, or when India's universities and private sector start doing world-class medical research at 1/3 the cost?  Then we're right back where we started.

Baltimore City needs all types of industries: healthcare, manufacturing, info-tech, financial, marketing, tourism, even vice (hopefully legalized).  There is no magic bullet, and it's counterproductive to plan as if one exists.  We have a financial business hub downtown.  We have multiple medical research and treatment hubs in Hopkins and U of Md.  We have a great port with the infrastructure to ship to significant inland markets.  We have lots of abandoned [insert land-use type here] that can be restored or repurposed.  A good road to recovery will incentivize the development of all of these resources.

We must realize that there is no magic bullet to our housing market, either.  People move to Baltimore from the suburbs for all sorts of reasons.  People move to Baltimore from other cities for an overlapping, but not identical, set of reasons.  Some people (myself included) move in for one set of reasons, and over time discover a host of previously unknown benefits of city life.  And, of course, people move out for lots of reasons too.  We need to get a good understanding of what compels people to come, stay, and leave before we can improve the demand for city housing.

So, here's my attempt at a starter list of reasons (in no particular order) people move in and out:

In from the suburbs:

-to be closer to work

-to be closer to the party scene (aka, no more drunken driving home from bars)

-to live in a real neighborhood instead of a pod of housing units

-to have transportation options other than a car

In from another city:

-job or school brought them here

-cheaper than former city

Out:

-Crime

-Schools

-Property Tax (usually when renters decide they want to buy for the first time)

I'm sure there are many that I'm missing.  Point is, we know what makes our city great, and what still sucks about it.  The simple truth is, we have to grow the good and stamp out the bad to attract residents and businesses.  Which one drives the other?  I think they both drive each other, and more importantly, I don't think it matters.  If we make the city more attractive, both will come.

I have one final note on that list of reasons people move out.  Someone will probably mention that some people leave the city when it's time to "settle down," simply because you're supposed to do that in the suburbs.  I think that mentality is fading fast, and is not something Baltimore needs to worry about.  Right now, people flee the city for the suburbs when it's time to settle down because they don't want to send their kids to our crappy schools or let them play on our dangerous streets.  The McMansion next to a 3 car garage on a half-acre lot at the end of a cal-de-sac, while alluring to some, is no longer the paragon of success, at least among my generation.

[James Hunt]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Richard Chambers <richard...@earthlink.net> wrote:

Nate,

I'm glad you revived this discussion because its really at the heart of so many of our problems here. I also agree that agriculture on a large (or even moderate scale) is unlikely to work in Baltimore. But I am curious to see where Detroit goes with the idea. If we could get people in low income areas to eat some locally grown produce, that would not be a bad thing. But seeing farming as a solution for Baltimore's ills seems wrong headed. As to what sort of economy Baltimore should have, I would suggest we build on what is working right now - and that's the energy and investment being generated by our hospitals and universities. The days of Baltimoreans making steel or unloading cargo ships in large numbers is probably over (not sure that's a bad thing) but we may see more and more people developing pharmaceuticals and inventing new therapies for the sick and aged. We have the opportunity to build on the extraordinary investment that the Fed has put into Johns Hopkins (they get more federal funding for research than MIT)and the University of Maryland graduate campus. Baltimore is a growing mecca for medical research, bio-science, and all sorts of egghead stuff that I could never understand. FWIW, I think that's better than an industrial economy.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It's interesting that as much as some romanticize the "golden age" of industry in Baltimore, it was (and still can be) tough, harsh work. My father used to see patients at South Baltimore General Hospital (Now Harbor Hospital) on Light Street (the building is now Pat Turner condos) in the 50s when it was at the hub of local industry: Beth Steel, Revere, Chesapeake Paperboard, etc etc. SBG led the city in treating industrial accidents, and there were a lot. Unionization helped improve wages for some, but it's (apparently) discouraging new investment in places like Beth Steel. At any rate, that was the implicit reason Nucor didn't try to buy Sparrows Point:

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/business/hancock/blog/2010/08/nucor_would_have_been_a_good_o.html

Jay Hancock has a column on the revival of the "digital harbor" concept today, and a commenter astutely notes that Baltimore is also something of a hub for the spice industry.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-hancock-millenial0824,0,4223211.column

[Richard Chambers]

Youssef,

Great points. And you are right - we can't expect Hopkins to be the economic engine forever. I'll just touch on one of your comments that has always intrigued me - legalized vice and its connection to econ development. Am I the only one who thinks Baltimore should at least investigate the idea of having a casino district or two somewhere near the waterfront? Maybe I'm crazy, but I always thought that the old Western Maryland rail yards (now just an enormous parking lot south of the Penitentiary) would be a good place to have some high-end gambling establishments (table games, not just slots). I know the area south of downtown close to the bus station has already been "designated" for a casino, but why stop there? The site next to the penitentiary is off I-83, close-ish to the Harbor, and fairly isolated from residential areas. You already have a strip club there (Scores). And that's another thing - Baltimore has always been a mecca for strip clubs (and prostitution) since the days of DC politicos heading up here on the B&O for some "discreet" fun. Legalized prostitution, anyone? Would it really be wrong for Baltimore to embrace "vice" and try to make it a genuine part of its economic development strategy? Maybe I've just seen too many John Waters movies, but I see the city's seedier side as a potential gold mine.

-----Original Message-----
From: Youssef Mahmoud
Sent: Aug 24, 2010 10:08 AM
To: balto...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Re: Housing Market

The amount of medical research done here is staggering, and we should all be thankful for it.  But I don't want Baltimore to be an economic monoculture, or any type of monoculture for that matter.  The city is in such bad shape in part because it had an economy that was almost solely based on manufacturing.  When manufacturing went overseas, so did Baltimore's jobs.  What happens when the government stops handing out research grants, or when healthcare is nationalized and the profit incentive for new treatments goes away, or when India's universities and private sector start doing world-class medical research at 1/3 the cost?  Then we're right back where we started.

Baltimore City needs all types of industries: healthcare, manufacturing, info-tech, financial, marketing, tourism, even vice (hopefully legalized).  There is no magic bullet, and it's counterproductive to plan as if one exists.  We have a financial business hub downtown.  We have multiple medical research and treatment hubs in Hopkins and U of Md.  We have a great port with the infrastructure to ship to significant inland markets.  We have lots of abandoned [insert land-use type here] that can be restored or repurposed.  A good road to recovery will incentivize the development of all of these resources.

We must realize that there is no magic bullet to our housing market, either.  People move to Baltimore from the suburbs for all sorts of reasons.  People move to Baltimore from other cities for an overlapping, but not identical, set of reasons.  Some people (myself included) move in for one set of reasons, and over time discover a host of previously unknown benefits of city life.  And, of course, people move out for lots of reasons too.  We need to get a good understanding of what compels people to come, stay, and leave before we can improve the demand for city housing.

So, here's my attempt at a starter list of reasons (in no particular order) people move in and out:

In from the suburbs:

-to be closer to work

-to be closer to the party scene (aka, no more drunken driving home from bars)

-to live in a real neighborhood instead of a pod of housing units

-to have transportation options other than a car

In from another city:

-job or school brought them here

-cheaper than former city

Out:

-Crime

-Schools

-Property Tax (usually when renters decide they want to buy for the first time)

I'm sure there are many that I'm missing.  Point is, we know what makes our city great, and what still sucks about it.  The simple truth is, we have to grow the good and stamp out the bad to attract residents and businesses.  Which one drives the other?  I think they both drive each other, and more importantly, I don't think it matters.  If we make the city more attractive, both will come.

I have one final note on that list of reasons people move out.  Someone will probably mention that some people leave the city when it's time to "settle down," simply because you're supposed to do that in the suburbs.  I think that mentality is fading fast, and is not something Baltimore needs to worry about.  Right now, people flee the city for the suburbs when it's time to settle down because they don't want to send their kids to our crappy schools or let them play on our dangerous streets.  The McMansion next to a 3 car garage on a half-acre lot at the end of a cal-de-sac, while alluring to some, is no longer the paragon of success, at least among my generation.

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Richard Chambers <richard...@earthlink.net> wrote:

Nate,

I'm glad you revived this discussion because its really at the heart of so many of our problems here. I also agree that agriculture on a large (or even moderate scale) is unlikely to work in Baltimore. But I am curious to see where Detroit goes with the idea. If we could get people in low income areas to eat some locally grown produce, that would not be a bad thing. But seeing farming as a solution for Baltimore's ills seems wrong headed. As to what sort of economy Baltimore should have, I would suggest we build on what is working right now - and that's the energy and investment being generated by our hospitals and universities. The days of Baltimoreans making steel or unloading cargo ships in large numbers is probably over (not sure that's a bad thing) but we may see more and more people developing pharmaceuticals and inventing new therapies for the sick and aged. We have the opportunity to build on the extraordinary investment that the Fed has put into Johns Hopkins (they get more federal funding for research than MIT)and the University of Maryland graduate campus. Baltimore is a growing mecca for medical research, bio-science, and all sorts of egghead stuff that I could never understand. FWIW, I think that's better than an industrial economy.

[Jed Weeks]

I'm always torn on this. I hate the poor-tax that is legalized gambling, but at the same time, I know potential Maryland dollars are being spent in WV and DE. It is what it is.

Back when Delaware was looking into expanding from slots into table games and sports betting, there were tons of complaints. Gov. Markell said it best, "You can't be half pregnant."

IE we already have the vice here, we might as well expand and capitalize on it. I think it's fair argument. In MD we have a lottery, we have horse tracks, so how are slots or table games any worse?

Jed

[James Hunt]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Richard Chambers <richard...@earthlink.net> wrote:

.... Would it really be wrong for Baltimore to embrace "vice" and try to make it a genuine part of its economic development strategy? Maybe I've just seen too many John Waters movies, but I see the city's seedier side as a potential gold mine.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Morality aside (wrong forum for those sorts of discussions), "vice" doesn't work well as an economic development strategy since only those at the top of the pyramid make decent money. Own a club or a gambling license, you'll do fine. Tend bar, work as stripper or a prostitute and the money (for most) ain't that great, particularly compared to the working conditions. Look at the huge markets (NYC, Philly, Baltimore) Atlantic City is able to tap with its numerous casinos. What good has it done them? 

There is also a huge opportunity cost here, best exemplified by turning what was supposed to be waterfront offices and recreational facilities near Ravens Stadium into site for a warehouse with blinking lights that extract people's money. Yay.

Sorry, Jed, not buying the "half-pregnant" analogy here. It's possible  and completely reasonable to hold the line on the gambling options we have now.

[Youssef Mahmoud]

When I said vice, I wasn't just talking about gambling. In fact, I didn't even have gambling in mind.  I was thinking more about my recent trip to California and my observations (yes, just observations) of their budding marijuana industry.

That being said, I think there is more room for gambling, and I agree with the Delaware Governor about the false distinction between different types of gambling.  The danger comes again comes from economic monoculture.  A city whose sole industry is gambling will not thrive indefinitely.  Neither will a city whose sole industry is manufacturing, or medicinal research, or finance, or candied cockroach harvesting.  We need economic diversity.

[Richard Chambers]

Although I see your point, I don't think casinos and strip clubs, etc. do more harm than good. Cities from Sydney to Berlin to Antwerp have high-end casinos. None of those cities is really worse for it. And before the housing slump Vegas was America's boom town. Atlantic City poses an interesting counterpoint for sure, but it was always a resort town with few options for economic development. Its problems started before legalized gambling when Philly residents started driving to vacation destinations instead of taking the train to the Jersey Shore. If anything, the one armed bandits have provided a life line - pathetic though it may be. I think Baltimore is different and could become a place where high tech, green business, pharma, bio-science, tourism AND vice can live together.

-----Original Message-----
From: James Hunt
Sent: Aug 24, 2010 11:48 AM
To: balto...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Re: Housing Market

[PETER DUVALL]

I have never understood Baltimore's presumption that you need to give vice the best location in town.  That may be true for the highly competitive slots market but customers will easily find any legal houses of prostitution.  Tell any cab driver that you want to find a transgended hooker and he will drive you right up to my neighborhood. Perhaps the city could charge a reasonable $10 per $100 tax rate on the bordellos, then buy some land and issue a RFP.  I bet the high tax rate wouldn't discourage the entrepreneurial types that would surely respond. --- On Tue, 8/24/10, James Hunt <jamieh...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: James Hunt <jamieh...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Re: Housing Market

[James Hunt]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Youssef Mahmoud <humana...@gmail.com> wrote:

When I said vice, I wasn't just talking about gambling. In fact, I didn't even have gambling in mind.  I was thinking more about my recent trip to California and my observations (yes, just observations) of their budding marijuana industry....We need economic diversity.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Whoosh. For some reason, I just flashed on Sean Penn playing "Jeff Spicoli" in "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" ...

Anyhow, Baltimore is pretty economically diverse. We have serious trained workforce problems. Blue collar jobs at everything from direct mail houses to the Curtis Bay Coast Guard Yard have gone begging in the recent past due to a lack of trained workers, or even workers who can pass a drug test. Junkies don't pass muster: I worked in an electronic parts mfg facility in Bare Hills one summer, and between the drill press and toxic chemical baths, you needed to be clean and sober. Pay was good, though.

Re: Gambling ... guess it's also worth mentioning that Las Vegas is going through the big suq right now, which underscores Youssef's point.

[Youssef Mahmoud]

I think this vice discussion is important and should continue, but I was really hoping to get some feedback/discussion on the list of reasons that people come to and leave the city.  Should I start a separate thread for that?

[James Hunt]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Richard Chambers <richard...@earthlink.net> wrote:

... I think Baltimore is different and could become a place where high tech, green business, pharma, bio-science, tourism AND vice can live together.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I'd go you one further and suggest that it's already heading in that direction. Train that workforce!

At this point, I'm going to bail out of the conversation before I start sounding like John the Baptist (again, wrong forum for _that_), but I'll just observe that vice is enormously corrosive of the social fabric as it often puts humans, willingly or unwillingly, at the disposal of other humans. The results are seldom good.

Wet blanket, over and out!

[Richard Chambers]

The trained worker comment is a really good point. My brother worked in some of those "light industrial" factories, tool and dye companies, etc. in Northern Anne Arundel County for years and he said much the same thing - its hard to find people with the training to do those jobs who also can pass a drug test or who don't have lengthy criminal records. Could vocational education be one of the keys to Baltimore's future success?

-----Original Message-----
From: James Hunt

Sent: Aug 24, 2010 12:06 PM
To: balto...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Re: Housing Market

[Richard Chambers]

Youssef,

My fault for running with the vice issue. Yes, we should have a discussion on why people come to and leave the city. Maybe changing the thread is not a bad idea.

-----Original Message-----
From: Youssef Mahmoud

Sent: Aug 24, 2010 12:12 PM
To: balto...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [BALTOmorrow] Re: Housing Market

I think this vice discussion is important and should continue, but I was really hoping to get some feedback/discussion on the list of reasons that people come to and leave the city.  Should I start a separate thread for that?

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:06 PM, James Hunt <jamieh...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Youssef Mahmoud]

No problem Richard.  You've gotta run where your heart takes you :)

[Jed Weeks]

Exactly. We can't bet on an industry to save the city. We need diversity. Back to my favorite DE Governor:

As I travel around the state, I am often asked what I believe will be the “next big thing”— the industry or piece of legislation that will provide the same sort of jumpstart the Financial Center Development Act did more than two decades ago. I think that is the wrong question to ask. Delaware should not be in the business of picking new industries to bet on, although we should be working closely with the ones already here, to help make them stronger. Now why is that? What is wrong with picking industries? 

 

Even the best venture capitalists — those who make millions of dollars a year — make plenty of bad investments. Some people say that of every 10 investments made by good venture capitalists, seven will fail, two will do reasonably well, and one will be a grand slam. Those aren’t very good odds, especially if deciding who to fund is in the hands of government officials or others who are not highly trained and experienced.

 

There is another reason too: the dangers of the “follow the herd” mentality. Take biotech, for example. The biotechnology industry has huge potential. We have some terrific companies in Delaware that are likely to be very successful. Plus the state has done some good work to enhance their prospects of success — like creating the Delaware Biotech Institute and attracting groups like the Fraunhofer Center for Molecular Biotechnology. We should continue to nurture these types of enterprises.

 

But we need to be careful about placing too many eggs in the biotechnology basket, unless we find a unique niche where Delaware has a great chance of being more successful than other states. That is because other states also have biotech strategies and are pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into them. Some will be successful and some will not. The key for Delaware is to figure out our strengths, play aggressively to them, and avoid being a second-rate player in areas where others have a strong advantage.

from Blueprint for a Better Delaware

 

Basically he goes on to say that the best thing a state can do to foster a diverse business climate and to ensure small businesses will thrive is to invest in basic quality of life issues. Both employers and employees want to be located somewhere that's safe with good schools, an easy commute, healthcare options, and hopefully (but it's not a dealbreaker) low taxes. All common-sense stuff.

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:06 PM, James Hunt <jamieh...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Nate]

We still need Port activity. That is the geo-economic justification
for the City. Our direct rail access to the sea from the piedmont
keeps Baltimore a valuble location for shipping--which is why the CSX
freight tunnel is a great issue.

Health care and pharma is fine, but keep in mind: it's a sector of the
economy that no one has figured out a way for people to pay for yet!
The effects of our health system repairs will remain to be seen.

Gambling is a joke, because the people who do the most gambling to
make it profitable are those who think they can actually win. I don't
have anything against it, per se. I simply believe it is a waste of
time and resources to try to generate much of an economy around it.

> Delaware<http://www.scribd.com/doc/3912429/Markell-Blueprint-Book-Final1>

>
> Basically he goes on to say that the best thing a state can do to foster a
> diverse business climate and to ensure small businesses will thrive is to
> invest in basic quality of life issues. Both employers and employees want to
> be located somewhere that's safe with good schools, an easy commute,
> healthcare options, and hopefully (but it's not a dealbreaker) low taxes.
> All common-sense stuff.
>

> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:06 PM, James Hunt <jamiehunt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Youssef Mahmoud <humanameri...@gmail.com

> > > wrote:
>
> >> When I said vice, I wasn't just talking about gambling. In fact, I didn't
> >> even have gambling in mind.  I was thinking more about my recent trip to

> >> California and my observations (yes, just observations) of their *budding
> >> * marijuana industry....We need economic diversity.