National Audubon Society of New York State

Pre-Conference Dinner on May 3, 2000 Remarks given by: William E. Davis, Chairman of the Board/CEO Niagara Mohawk Holdings, Inc. 2nd Annual Smart Growth Conference May 4, 2000, Albany, New York

They came together under the umbrella topic of "smart growth" to talk about two major issues:

• How do we revitalize downtown areas and older urban centers to make the most of hundreds of years of capital and social investment, and
• How do we conserve and protect open spaces, both large and small, so that suburban growth doesn't overwhelm our farms, our parks, our living ecosystems.

The impetus for the conference came from several directions - from a national movement spearheaded by the US Environmental Protection Agency and the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, from smart growth programs in other states, and from proposed legislation here in New York.

On the table at that time was a bill jointly authored and sponsored by Assemblyman Sam Hoyt and Senator Mary Lou Rath. This bill expressed a need to stimulate economic development, sustainable economic development, while recognizing the concurrent need to revitalize our urban centers and conserve our open spaces.

These are not incompatible goals, but they do require different thinking about land use, about local government planning and budgeting, and about private business decisions.

Step one in the Hoyt-Rath bill was a proposal to create a statewide task force, consisting mainly of state agency heads, with an advisory group playing a key role with the task force. They would examine existing federal and state programs for their impact on land use decisions and make recommendations for appropriate and practical changes.

Well, we didn't get the legislation in 1999, but the conference, which was organized by a broad coalition of interest brought together by the National Audubon Society of New York State, helped deliver the next best thing - an executive order from Governor Pataki to create a quality communities task force, and an appropriation of over a million dollars from the legislature to stimulate smart growth pilot projects at the community level.

This conference also produced two other products:

• a broadly based statewide working group, which brings together a host of interests, more than 30 so far, including planners, home builders, conservationists, academic institutions, historic preservationists, farm interests, as well as city, village and town officials, many of whom are here tonight and here for the conference tomorrow; and it also produced
• a list of smart growth principles for New York, which will provide some philosophical underpinnings for the executive task force and for the pilot projects program administered by the Department of State.

It's this list of eight principles that I want to talk about for a few minutes tonight and try to relate them to business decisions many of us have to make on a daily basis. They have to be considered, of course, in the context of some basic realities.

• New York is a home rule state and local governments, in general, don't take kindly to state and federal mandates;
• Incentives usually achieve better results than regulations;
• Funding is at the heart of most decisions;
• Most things would be easier to accomplish if agencies operated in a consistent and coordinated manner, but that doesn't always happen;
• In general, greater buy-in and support is associated with bottom up, community based planning approaches; and
• To achieve successful implementation, there needs to be clear accountability and relentless follow-through.

With these as some of the ground rules for operating in New York, let me review the smart growth principles:

• At the local government level, there should be a comprehensive land use plan produced as the result of a collaborative community based process. This certainly makes sense in the business world. A failure to plan is a plan for failure. Why should we expect anything less of our community decision-making efforts? What developers and builders want is predictability, fair rules, and general agreement on what's best for the community. What conservationists want is agreement on critical natural resources and a plan to protect them. The art is in making these interests compatible and a comprehensive plan is a great tool for achieving this.
• The plans should include a number of elements that help to make development and conservation interests compatible. For instance,
  • In older urban centers we should encourage mixed land uses and infill development. We should maximize the use of existing infrastructure, and encourage locally designated development areas within and adjoining urban and suburban areas;
  • New development should be encouraged where infrastructure and public services exist and are adequate to serve the needs of development, thereby making development more compact;
  • To protect natural resources we should designate and then preserve open spaces and parklands, with due regard for wildlife habitat, water resources and air resources.
• The plan should encourage retention of farms, farm services and the farming infrastructure. Locally provided farm products are an advantage for any society.
• Regulations govern all the actions and land use decisions we make and reform of many of these rules and regulations is needed. We need expedited permitting, and we need generic environmental impact statements under SEQRA. As a step in the right direction, we have just seen major revisions to the state building code, and those revisions should, I'm told, have a positive impact on development decisions.
• While multiple layers of government are a reality in New York, we need greater consistency, cooperation and coordination of federal, state and local government decisions when it comes to infrastructure and facility siting.
• When it comes to housing specifically, we need to encourage a diversity of housing types and prices, built closer to employment, recreation and commercial centers, with a variety of transport choices, which will reduce dependency on the automobile, reduce traffic congestion and reduce commuter time. We need to broaden access to the job market and community facilities for families of all economic circumstances.

Two conclusions can be gathered from these principles. First, they address 'quality of life' issues which affect all of us. And second, they reflect a focus on the bottom line - how can we do more, at lower cost.

Following a well-thought-out plan saves money. Making optimum use of existing capital resources saves money. Expediting permitting saves money. Encouraging compact development and reducing traffic congestion saves money. Preserving local farms certainly saves us money, by cutting local service costs - I'm reminded of the old adage that cows don't ride school buses - But saving farms does more than save dollars - it ensures a wholesome supply of locally grown produce and keeps family business enterprises healthy. Making government more efficient certainly saves money.

Achieving greater consistency, coordination and cooperation is absolutely essential. You can't run a business without it. You can't make a profit without it. And you can't hold the line or cut taxes without it.

The last principle I mentioned - the one about promoting diversity of housing types and affordability, is simply a recognition of the demographic changes that are underway across the country. The on-going Year 2000 Census is likely to underscore changes in the structure of our society and in family and community life. We know we are getting older, we are having fewer children and we are having them later in life. Our racial mix is changing and we also have more single-parent families. Electronic commerce is also changing the ways we behave and communicate and will certainly impact our shopping and travel patterns.

Many of the linkages between quality of life issues and land use planning have been explored in an excellent publication prepared by the National Association of Local Government Environmental Professionals in their Smart Growth Business Partnership Project. They compiled 19 profiles of business leaders who have done practical work to demonstrate the economic benefits of reducing sprawl. It's good reading for anyone concerned about these issues.

So what should we, as business leaders, be doing about all this? There are a lot of thoughts that come to mind.

We can increase awareness within our businesses of the economic impacts of sprawl and take a look at our internal policies and practices in an effort to mitigate those impacts.

We can support studies and analyses of smart growth proposals and get more involved in land use and transportation planning activities at the local and regional levels.

We can foster business to business education on smart growth development practices.

We can support downtown revitalization initiatives, including upgrades of existing infrastructure. And

We can support the redevelopment of brown fields and other smart growth development practices. This includes infill and mixed use developments as alternatives to single-use development on greenfield sites.

Many of America's business leaders are now recognizing that suburban sprawl can raise the cost of doing business and reduce long-term profitability. It's worth a few minutes of your time to see what other businesses are saying and doing on this complex issue. The report from the local government's smart growth advisory council - like all publications today - is available on the internet (at http://www.nalgep.org.sg.html).

The term smart growth is now being used almost synonymously with the term "sustainable development." We know that to turn the words "sustainable development" into a meaningful reality we have to develop differently in the 21st Century. That's what smart growth is all about. In business and in government, we can't afford to ignore the fundamental changes taking place in our society. We, at Niagara Mohawk, certainly can't and aren't ignoring these changes as they affect the energy supply and distribution business.

Strategic thinking and planning are at the heart of smart growth. We should expect nothing less of our government institutions. We certainly can't survive sustainably, build quality communities and be more efficient in terms of resource use without smart growth thinking at the federal, state and community levels. businesses must be part of this thinking and part of the community planning process. This is what the second annual smart growth conference which starts tomorrow is all about. I encourage you to attend, to listen, to contribute and to learn.

Thank you.