Generation "Y" and the city
[Bozo alert: I screwed up the original post here, and tried to recover it, so if this differs from what you remember, that's what happened. BPB]
The 9/26/2008 Plain Dealer prints a letter to the editor from Rob Pitingolo of Euclid:
The news that Eaton Corp. has chosen Beachwood for its new headquarters comes as a major disappointment to young people in Greater Cleveland.
Generation Y is growing less interested in suburban culture. We want to live and work in the city core; we want the excitement of urban life; and we want to give Cleveland a chance. But in the spirit of "regionalism," Mayor Frank Jackson and city leaders seem almost indifferent to companies that move jobs to the
suburbs.In the next few years, thousands of students will graduate from Northeast Ohio's universities. For many of them, the decision to abandon the suburbs has already been made; the choice is no longer between Cleveland and its suburbs,
but rather between Cleveland and some other city. If Cleveland's leadership
continues to let companies and jobs slip from the city core, Generation Y will
become gradually less interested in both Cleveland and "the region."
I must say that I'm amused by Mr. Pitingolo 's idea that his "generation" represents a dramatic change from all the previous generations in its noble dislike of the suburbs. I don't think that all of these recent college graduates are really going to "abandon" the suburbs permanently, no matter how unattractive they might seem when one is young, single and childless. I think most people in our society, generation "Y" or not, still believe that the best environment for raising children is a single family home with a nontrivial yard, and that still means suburbs.
For that matter, I'd be very interested to know exactly what he means by generation "Y", other than "everyone who graduated from college around the same time I did".
Nevertheless, I can't argue with his basic point: if more people are desiring to live in actual central cities, then a region with a declining central city is at a disadvantage, and a transfer of economic strength from the central city to the suburbs is a net loss for the region, not just for the city.
I doubt that the Mayor and other city political figures were really "indifferent" to Eaton leaving the city. They certainly did more than nothing, although maybe they could have done more. It's hard to know whether they did "enough" without knowing all the details, and nobody seems to be spilling.
Maybe Mr. Pitingolo should be delivering his message to Eaton itself instead of to Cleveland. I'd be willing to bet that the commutes of everyone on the Eaton executive team are going to be shorter to Beachwood than they are to downtown, and I'd also bet that said team would find it difficult to believe that anyone would really find the downtown location superior to the suburban location.
Labels: cities, Cleveland, generation Y, suburbs
¶ 9/26/2008 08:30:00 PM
Generation Y (aka Millennials or Echo Boomers) is commonly defined as those born roughly between 1982 and 1994. I do not believe that I can speak for each and every person in my generation, as I know that the demographic group is huge and diverse. However, as I documented over at my blog, there are many reasons to believe that trends are changing and that the average Gen-Yer is much more likely to prefer the city to the suburbs than our parents.
As far as raising children, most would still probably agree that the suburbs provide a relatively better environment for young children; but again, my theory is based on shifting trends. Generation Y is likely to marry later in life, wait longer to start a family, and have fewer kids than our parents; more will also raise their children in the city – particularly, those who can afford private schools.
I acknowledged on my blog that Cleveland’s leaders probably did “everything they could” to keep Eaton in Cleveland, but for someone like Mayor Jackson, who has tried to define his administration by this concept of “regionalism”, there seems to be a conflict of interest when it comes to developments in Cleveland vs. the surrounding suburbs. I can only speculate about what goes on inside City Hall sometimes, but like I wrote, the stakes for Cleveland are too high at this point for it to give me comfort hearing that they “tried as hard as they could”.
I hope the Eaton executive team is aware of my disappointment in their decision to move to Beachwood. However, I fear that convincing Eaton (or any other company) that the city core is the place to be, is that if Cleveland’s leaders aren’t willing or able to accommodate the needs of these companies, they may decide (as so many others have done in recent years) to pack up and relocate to another city entirely.
If Beachwood means shorter commutes and other benefits for the Eaton executive team, then it is hard to argue with their decision on-face. However, if other companies continue to slip into the suburbs, I believe this tragedy of the commons will continue to weaken both Cleveland and the region. For a city that is already experiencing serious population decline and brain drain problems, that ultimately could turn into a problem for Eaton and for everyone else.
<< Home
