Simpson refers to some of the local policies that direct resources away from the city center.
The effort to move the city further west has resulted in increased traffic congestion, public transportation access, the deterioration of core central neighborhoods, longer commutes and divisions among those desiring to live within the city and those who prefer the outskirts. Entities whose primary mission revolves around the city’s core residents are opting to move as far away as possible, with the blessing of the mayor and city council. District 186 desires to build a new multimillion-dollar high school that is so far from the center of the city that it comes precariously close to Pleasant Plains boundaries. While economic development is absolutely essential for the continued growth and prosperity of a city, that growth should be balanced, well-planned, beneficial to the great majority of its residents, not contribute to urban decay and should not result in urban sprawl.
She finishes by writing, "We must, without condemnation, deal with these issues to ensure that this city reflects both its history and its future as a stellar place to live, work and visit."
I would guess she means that we need to move forward without demonizing people who have driven sprawl in the past. That's fine, but it's also important for people to understand that things don't happen at random. One reason sprawl continues against the wishes of most residents is that the planning process is a mystery. When the average person learns the details of a major project it's already described as a "done deal."
It's important to understand that many citizen planning committees are stacked with people who have a financial interest in promoting sprawl. It's important to understand the implications when a Chamber of Commerce representative says they support a new Walmart, despite the damage it does to local businesses, because they support any project at any location it's zoned for.
It's especially important to recognize the implications of handing our economic development policy to a private partnership, which, once again, includes people who have an interest in promoting sprawl. It's disappointing to visit the Q5 website (Springfield's project to attract jobs) and see them focus on selling empty fields on the edge of town to developers. Depending on sprawl to drive economic development is short-sighted at any time, but especially in the current economic slump. Since this isn't an official governmental body, where's their accountability to the public?
I don't know if Simpson will address these specific issues in her presentation to the Sierra Club. But, the first step in changing the way Springfield grows is to bring the discussion out into the open. I applaud Gail Simpson for making that effort.