University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Studies Institute on Metropolitan Opportunity 1998 Washington, D.C., Metropolitics Myron Orfield University of Minnesota Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.umn.edu/imo_studies Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Myron Orfield, Washington, D.C., Metropolitics (1998). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Studies collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington Metropolitics: A Regional Agenda for Community and Stability Myron Orfield Metropolitan Area Research Corporation A Report to the Brookings Institution July 1999 This report was a project of the Metropolitan Area Research Corporation (MARC). It was made possible with the support of the Prince Charitable Trusts, The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, The Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation, The Philip L. Graham Fund, Robert Kogod, and W. Russell Ramsey. The Metropolitan Area Research Corporation would like to thank the following people for their written comments which greatly improved the final report: Jennifer Bradley, The Brookings Institution; Lee Epstein, Chesapeake Bay Foundation; Bruce Katz, The Brookings Institution; Robert Lang, The Fannie Mae Foundation; and Amy Liu, The Brookings Institution. Input from the following people through meetings and personal interviews was also very helpful and much appreciated: Anne Allen, The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation; Mary Bellor, The Philip L. Graham Fund; Max Brown, Mayor Anthony Williams’ Office, District of Columbia; Tim Coughlin, Riggs Bank; Wayne Curry, County Executive, Prince Georges County, Maryland; Phil Dearborn, Greater Washington Research Center; Doug Duncan, County Executive, Montgomery County, Maryland; Al Eisenberg, Board of Supervisors, Arlington County, Virginia; Stephen Fuller, Institute of Public Policy, George Mason University; James Gibson, D.C. Agenda; Hope Gleicher, Trellis Fund; Kate Hanley, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Fairfax County, Virginia; John Hechinger, Hechinger Co.; Sandy Hillyer, Metropolitan Strategies; Thelma Jones, World Bank; Dave King, Mayor Anthony Williams’ Office, District of Columbia; Ron Kirby, National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments; Wendy Klancher, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments; Robert P. Kogod; Charlotte Kroll, The Brookings Institution; Joyce Ladner, The Brookings Institution and The D.C Control Board; Matt Lambert, The Brookings Institution; Irene Lee and other staff members from The Annie E. Casey Foundation; Bob McNamara; Kristin Pauly, Prince Charitable Trusts; Nancy Perkins, The Brookings Institution; Cynthia Robbins, The Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation; Julie Rogers, The Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation; Michael Rogers, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments; Mark Rubin, The Urban Institute; Stewart Schwartz, Coalition for Smarter Growth/Washington Regional Network; Tom Shellabarger, U.S. Catholic Conference; Marge Turner, The Urban Institute; Lisa Williams, The Fannie Mae Foundation; and representatives from the Community Development Support Collaborative, the Council of Latino Agencies, the Downtown Cluster of Congregations, the Enterprise Foundation, Local Initiative Support Corporation, Partners for Livable Communities, the Sierra Club, and 1000 Friends of Maryland. Lisa Bigaouette, Emily Greenwald, Mary Hagerman, Scott Laursen, and Andrea Swansby of MARC made the maps and assisted in the production of the report. Myron Orfield is the Director of MARC. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 A. Context ................................................................................................................................. 1 B. The Washington Region and Who Should Read this Report ................................................ 3 C. A Regional Agenda ............................................................................................................... 4 II. Problems Associated with Regional Polarization & Sprawl ....................................................... 7 A. Concentrated Poverty ........................................................................................................... 7 B. Racial Segregation .............................................................................................................. 13 C. Fiscal Stress & High Development Costs on the Region's Fringe ...................................... 15 D. Environmental & Transportation Impacts .......................................................................... 17 III. Demographic Findings ............................................................................................................. 19 A. Poverty ................................................................................................................................ 19 B. Poor Children ...................................................................................................................... 21 C. Female-Headed Households ............................................................................................... 23 D. Median Household Income ................................................................................................. 24 E. Schools ................................................................................................................................ 25 1. Students Eligible for Free and Reduced-Cost Meals .................................................... 26 2. Non-Asian Minority Students ....................................................................................... 27 3. The Flight of White Preschool Children ....................................................................... 29 F. Crime ................................................................................................................................... 30 G. Infrastructure ...................................................................................................................... 32 H. Regional Sprawl ................................................................................................................. 36 I. Fiscal Disparities .................................................................................................................. 37 1. Overview ....................................................................................................................... 37 2. Cities and Counties ....................................................................................................... 38 3. School Districts ............................................................................................................. 39 J. Jobs ..................................................................................................................................... 39 1. The Spatial Mismatch Hypothesis ................................................................................ 39 2. Jobs per Capita ............................................................................................................. 40 3. Fair Share of the Region’s Job Growth ......................................................................... 41 4. Commuting Patterns and Proximity to Jobs .................................................................. 42 5. Total Number of Jobs and Types of Jobs ...................................................................... 43 IV. Metropolitan Solutions ............................................................................................................ 44 A. Equity ................................................................................................................................. 44 1. Fairness ......................................................................................................................... 45 2. Competition for Tax Base and Fiscal Zoning ............................................................... 46 3. Land Use Planning ........................................................................................................ 46 4. Reinvestment in the Core .............................................................................................. 47 B. Smart Growth ...................................................................................................................... 47 C. Metropolitan Structural Reform .......................................................................................... 49 1. Overview ....................................................................................................................... 49 2. Transportation and Transit Planning ............................................................................. 49 V. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 51 Washington Metropolitics I. Introduction The mission of the Metropolitan Area Research Corporation (MARC)1 is to study growing social separation and wasteful, sprawling development patterns in U.S. metropolitan areas and to assist individuals and groups seeking to create and implement local responses to these trends. Since