Perry vetoes smart growth bill
Did anyone know that the Texas Legislature passed a “smart growth” bill? I first heard about it when Perry vetoed it.
The legislation merely established a working group to study and recommend a smart-growth policy, so it would have had no immediate impact on growth patterns in Texas. But it was charged with developing a “comprehensive smart growth plan for the state to prepare for the projected population growth in the state” and addressing things like the quality of community life, the design of municipalities, counties and regions, health issues and “the encouragement of community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions.”
It’s hard to get too worked up over legislation that merely would have established an advisory committee, but I think the veto was probably a wise decision.
As framed, the working group would have been charged with creating a statewide growth policy. Bad, bad idea. Most of our problems today stem from vesting TxDOT, a state agency, with unfettered control over major infrastructure projects. It is TxDOT that decides whether to build this highway or that, to direct growth in this direction rather than that, and to toll or not toll. (I admit TxDOT’s policies on the latter match my preferences better than most of its others.) And it is TxDOT that soaks up dollars that could be used to fund rail or other modes of transportation.
Infrastructure is destiny. Choosing which and what kind of infrastructure to build is never a value-free choice. And, today, the most important infrastructure projects reflect the values of a state agency rather than of the local communities most affected by them. Local communities should be able to shape their own environments.
We don’t need a working group to give cities more powers. Cities already have all the authority they need to regulate growth. I think they mostly abuse it: they impose minimum lot size requirements, rigid density limitations and strict separation of uses. If a city can enact an ordinance like Austin’s McMansion Ordinance, then it can do anything.
Counties lack some of these powers. Counties can regulate platting and subdivisions, which allows them to dictate things like connectivity and minimum lot sizes, should they choose to do so. But it’s true they can’t enact zoning.
Still, the problem for counties is not that they lack zoning, but that they can’t regulate “commons” depleted by uncoordinated development. Wells, for example. Homeowners who lack connections to water utilities sink their own wells. No individual homeowner has an incentive to ration his individual use; as a result, they cumulatively drain aquifers, especially in drought conditions. Counties need the power to protect the aquifers for everyone.
But there is no reason to believe that a working group composed of state officials charged with implementing a statewide smart growth plan would have paid particular attention to county problems. Much better to pass legislation tailored to counties rather than an open-ended mandate for statewide regulation.
