How can we set Baltimore apart from other cities?

Recently I've been thinking about quality of life in the city of Baltimore. Cynical people everywhere will assume that I am referring to how terrible it is, but I've actually been thinking about how it's been improving. I've been reading The Economist's special holiday double issue and they have a really depressing article on the city of Detroit and how it's basically disappearing back into the prairie from whence it came. It sounds terrible and depressing, but I can only imagine how depressing the city of Baltimore must have seemed circa 1994. I can only imagine because I didn't move here until 2000 and didn't really pay attention to the city until maybe 2005 or so. I've really only caught Baltimore on the upswing.

Baltimore is certainly not a world-renowned city, we are often overlooked for DC even in regional situations, but we've got a lot going for us. The Baltimore-Washington MSA is highly suburban and increasingly the suburbs are actually more expensive that the city (so there is actually reverse pressure on those who want a cheap house). Murders are down, even though 2009 will finish on par or slightly above 2008. Crime is down overall and although our mayor has been convicted of some crappy little crimes and is likely to be removed from office, I think we should see the bright side of this. Our mayor was convicted of SMALL crimes and will be removed from office. Cynics can say "well, that's all they were able to prove" - true, but it does send a bit of a message to all elected and appointed officials: "The mayor is going down over <$700 in gift cards, I'd better steer clear of gifts from developers this year." It's not much of a silver lining, but it shows that no one is above the law.

Anyway, on to improving quality of life. The Economist also had an article on America and why it's freaking awesome. Or something like that, because The Economist has a huge crush on America and the American way of life. The subtitle of the article was "The greatest strength of America is that people want to live." In the article they go on about how you can very much choose the life you want to live in the US. But it was this quote from the article that got me thinking:

If you like low taxes and the death penalty, try Texas. For good public schools and subsidised cycle paths, try Portland, Oregon. Even within states, the rules vary widely. Bath County, Kentucky is dry. Next-door Bourbon County, as the name implies, is not.

What is the quality of life factor that distinguishes Baltimore from other cities in the United States (much less the world)? There's what we're actually famous for (The Wire, eating crabs), what city government wishes we were famous for (the Inner Harbor, Harbor East, crime reduction, redevelopment successes), but what about the Baltimore way of life is really different?

For now, I'd say it's fairly typical urban, east-coast lifestyle without the cost. City school teachers can afford to access most of this city, afford to buy a reasonable home, etc (I know because I have a lot of friends who are or have been city school teachers - tough job, but reasonably well-paying for new graduates). But you can't effectively push that idea into the mainstream. People will instead point to the fact that there's no subway system like DC or New York. That crime is still too high. That the city government is corrupt.

We're a poor city, let's face it. We're making progress at green initiatives, but other cities are doing that too. The Circulator bus system is almost running (finally) and will provide great transit alternatives and the Red Line is looking like it might actually happen, but other, richer cities will always be ahead of us on transit. What we need is something that is not too expensive, does not rely on outsiders, and gives this city a sense of pride.

As you might have guessed, I've got an idea.

I think that Baltimore should start an amateur athletics league for the city. I would model it after Ireland's Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA), but maybe will a little less Irish nationalism. Basically the idea is that every little town in Ireland fields a team in Gaelic football and hurling (also Ladies' Gaelic football and Camogie). They play a regular season against other towns. What's great about this is that these are amateur athletes who live in the towns or counties that they're representing. What's crazy is just how successful this has been in Ireland - the number 1 and 2 sports by attendance are Gaelic football and hurling (per wikipedia)! The matches are covered in all the local papers and followed much the same way we follow college or professional sports in the US.

What if we founded something similar in Baltimore? This is a first cut idea, but what if we founded an amateur athletic league for adults with strict residency rules and played matches around the city? I'd set the boundaries as the city council districts because there are 14 of them and they are roughly in line with neighborhood boundaries. I'd say we start with popular, low-cost of entry sports that are popular with both genders and that would allow a lot of amateurs to try out. Here's what I'd start with:

1. Basketball - it's a no-brainer; most of the facilities needed already exist, a city-wide championship tournament would be pretty awesome
2. Soccer - low cost of entry, fairly popular, would get the yuppie's involved
3. Softball/Baseball - again, we already have most of the infrastructure available and it has a different traditional season from the other two

I'd say keep the rules simple:

• Must be 18 or older (to sign the legal release)
• Must be a Baltimore resident (BGE bill in your name at an address is good enough for the MVA then it's good enough for this league)
• Can not be a current or former professional athlete
• If you move to a new district, you can finish out the season on your old team or wait until next year to play
• Volunteer coaches get a guaranteed term of 2 years and are selected by city council person (this would definitely encourage interest in local politics)
• Open try-outs before each season (verify residency at try-outs)
• Players provide their own practice equipment, but districts can raise money to buy practice equipment
• City pays for referees and donates gym space for games (ideally we could get local colleges to donate gym space for championships, imagine the championship game held in Coppin State's new athletic center)
• Conviction on any drug crime means you must forfeit two seasons of all sports
• Lifetime ban for conviction of any handgun-related crime

If this works out, and I think that it might, you could expand to other sports with revenue generated from these sports (that's right, I think that this could have positive cash flow after a couple years). If you keep the cost inputs low (i.e. players pay for their practice equipment) and are able to get some sponsors for the championships and charge a dollar or two at the door, you could eventually afford to pay for more gym/field space and more referees for other sports. Eventually you could perhaps subsidize the cost of equipment for very costly (but popular) sports such as football or lacrosse. There's just no way you could ask players to front the cost of their football pads and expect east or west baltimore to be able to field safely-equipped teams.

Any extra revenue generated by these leagues should go towards the capital improvement budget of the Department of Parks and Recreation. The more popular that you make the amateur sports, the better the facilities around the city for children and adults to play sports.

I think you would also get a lot more of a city-wide sense of community. I bet the district 10 (Federal Hill) vs district 1 (Fells Point/Canton) soccer match-up would be a big draw. Probably the same for any east-side district versus west-side district in basketball. Better yet, the Fells Point/Canton team traveling to district 9 (solidly westside Baltimore) for a basketball game. Would the Hopkins undergrads be able to make the district 14 team or would they be unable to compete with home-grown talent?

Another thing that you could do with this is try to increase general health and athleticism. What if you added "Cross Country" to the sports and allowed each district to field a team of 100? Hold massive, city-wide 5k races every other week for a couple months leading up to the Baltimore Marathon?

Expansion plans:

• Start with men and women's divisions of the three sports listed. Seasons would not overlap.
• Do not need a junior division (we already have high school sports)
• Add a "master's" division to popular sports
• For very popular sports (such as basketball), consider expanding to a "junior varsity" team or even breaking districts into smaller geographic areas (I think the link to geography is very important)

Other thoughts

• Don't add too many competing sports seasons - we want to make this popular enough that you actually get coverage in the Sun, not so fragmented that no one can pay attention
• Have the men's and women's teams compete one right after the other. That was how we did it back in my high school and it helped to ensure a bigger crowd for the less popular team (often the women's team, but if the women's team is good and the men stink...)
• Get some of the professional sports figures involved as coaches if possible
• Get local bloggers and news outlets to cover at least the championships. You could probably get local TV broadcasters out to the try-outs for the first season as a novelty news story.
• Make sure that basketball is the first season, every district will field a basketball team; not sure every district will be able to find a soccer team.
• Play up cross-town rivalries, but provide adequate security

Sports to add

• Cross Country - I really like the idea of getting very large teams together (it would pull a lot of people into the competition and you'd get a big multiplier effect as they told their friend about it)
• Volleyball - could use the same equipment as basketball, but in a different season
• Ultimate Frisbee - just because I love the sport and it uses the same infrastructure as soccer, bonus: self-refereed so you save a little money there
• Golf - we have the infrastructure and it is fairly well spread out around the city; this would draw a different demographic as well
• Track and field - takes a little more in terms of infrastructure (i.e. pole vault), but a lot of it exists at high schools and could be borrowed?
• Duckpin bowling - we don't really have the infrastructure for this, but it's a Baltimore heritage thing - let's build some more alleys and really make it a city-wide passtime

Sports to avoid (at least initially)

• Football - too expensive for players to provide practice equipment; mostly only played by men
• Lacrosse - same as football, except for the gender thing
• Cycling - equipment costs are out of reach for most Baltimore residents
• Swimming - don't think we have the infrastructure (but I could be wrong?)
• Wrestling - too many referees, too few fans of real wrestling
• Hockey - not enough infrastructure, not popular here, expensive equipment
• Weight lighting - I'd be leery of this sport given the temptation of steroids and the cost of trying to drug test competitors
• Dodgeball, broomball, etc. - recreational leagues for these sports already exist and they are considered to be more about socializing and drinking than athletics; if this is to be a serious amateur sports league, steer clear of these sports

-----

Sports unite people and give everyone a great outlet for emotions. They give people a sense of pride in their community and can create community (I definitely saw this growing up in small town playing high school sports). Think about it, this is a pretty low-cost initiative that the city could start that could eventually result in a very real advantage to the city. Even if other cities eventually copied this model, I think that Baltimore, with it's long-time dedication to neighborhoods and local community could still have an advantage. Most importantly, I think it would succeed in the city better than the county, providing that extra incentive to bring people over the line and into the city's tax-base.

A Few Questions for the Graffiti Perpetrator

Dear graffiti perpetrator*,

What is this graffiti all about? A statement of black power? A request to the Baltimore PD to end any racial profiling that you believe to be occurring?

Or did you leave out a comma? Did you intend this to say "NO STOPPING, BLACK PEOPLE" to indicate that this area was off-limits to parked vehicles and African-Americans?

Or is it something more obtuse and abstract, such as "NO STOPPING BLACK, PEOPLE", by which you that the darkness is unstoppable and will overtake us all one day and you are addressing this message to all citizens?

Please be more specific when you deface public property!

Sincerely,

A Concern Citizen

* - Sorry, not going to legitimize this vandalism by calling it the work of an artist. Semi-clever? Yes. Art? No. Crime? Yes.

Thoughts on Funding Transportation Projects

The other day I was thinking about how difficult it is to fund transportation projects. There's probably an entire field of public policy research on this subject, but I'm going to go ahead and speculate that it has to due with it being such a large capital outlay over a short period of time and how that's tough to finance. Probably has something to do with the fact that it's easier to spend money that make money, even if you're a government. So usually these get funded by selling a lot of bonds and getting paid for over time from existing tax revenues.

But what if you could do it another way? I'm not arguing for higher taxes overall, those do suck for numerous reasons. Small, short-term taxes have a way of sticking around long after their original purpose (everyone's favorite example being the Federal Excise Tax on Long-Distance Telephone Calls). But what if it was a REALLY big, short-term tax? So big that no politician could dare continue it and so short-term that it would be over before outrage could really get going. Afterwards, it's a thing of the past and you've raised a lot of revenue.

So here's what I'm proposing: a one-week-long, $1.00 per gallon tax increase on gasoline sold in the state of Maryland with all revenue ear-marked for capital investment in the Red Line and Purple Line transportation projects.

Crazy, right? People would just not fill up on gas for a week, right? I'm not sure. Think about it though, not everyone can go a full week without filling up their cars with gas. Many people would probably dodge across state lines to Pennsylvania, Delaware, West Virginia, or DC to fill their tanks (Maryland is really poorly shaped for this idea - it'd work much better in a big square state like Colorado). And it's a little unfair to steal tax dollars from Eastern Shore residents to fund projects in the DC suburbs and Baltimore region. So maybe we have to come up with some way to split up the money so that Western Maryland and the Eastern Shore get some of the revenue. Those are details, most of the revenue will come from the Baltimore-Washington corridor and it will be spent there for building mass transit.

How much money could this tax raise? If you look at the numbers from 2007-2008 (latest data available from the state of Maryland), Marylanders sell something like 250 million gallons of gasoline every month. So given that people would probably really cut back on their driving/gas purchasing for that week, you'd probably raise around $50-75 million in revenue. To put that in perspective, that's equivalent to 6-10% of additional gasoline tax revenue. That's not a whole lot of money compared to the cost of the Red Line and Purple Line projects, but it's also a pretty painless cash grab. People might grumble, but it'd be over almost as quickly as it started.

The best time to run this would be over Memorial Day Weekend or Labor Day Weekend - lots of out-of-state drivers going up and down I-95 means lots of revenue from non-Maryland residents. Beggar-thy-neighbor? Just a bit, but states do this all the time (i.e. Delaware's I-95 tolls).

I'm not saying it's economically efficient - it probably falls too heavily on businesses and trucking. But it would do two things: cause a steep, one-week-long drop in emissions and raise money for desperately needed transportation projects (that would also reduce emissions).

Realistically, we ought to be increasing the tax on gasoline anyway (although not to endlessly expand I-270 as Montgomery County wants), Maryland hasn't touched it since 1992 and it's set as a price per gallon tax (that is, it is not indexed to inflation or the cost of a gallon of gasoline). Sure, taxes in Maryland are higher than nearby states, but the state also needs the revenue and for the sake of the environment we need to make gas-powered vehicles less attractive modes of transportation.

In the meantime, I'll keep trying to think of creative taxes that raise revenue without causing a lot of pain. I think this idea has some real merit. Maybe I'll be able to think of some others.