Talking Economic Development at an Environmental Summit

I was pleased to be asked to participate in a panel at the recent League of Conservation Voters (LCV) Environmental Summit.  The conference title this year was Linking the Environment, Economic Development & Investment in Connecticut.  I want to congratulate LCV for choosing this theme and for their willingness to play an important role in the dialogue on sustainability.  The three other panelists were Commissioner Joan MacDonald from the Department of Economic and Community Development and Deputy Commissioners Amey Marrella and Al Martin from the Department of Environmental Protection and Department Of Transportation, respectively. 

We do, of course have to link the environment and economic development if we are to continue sustainable development in Connecticut.  But, too often we revert back to our more comfortable positions of being either pro-environment or pro-development and assuming that sustainability is not possible.

The subtitle of this year’s summit was: The need to make sustainability the cornerstone of our economic renewal, yet I sensed some discomfort as our panel began and the emphasis was on development and growth – I surmise this is not typically the theme of most LCV meetings.

One of my major thrusts was to suggest that we all need to look at issues through the sustainability screen, not the environmental or development screen.  This means recognizing that some development may have to occur in environmentally sensitive areas and some preservation may need to occur in what might seem to be the perfect place for development. In other words we need to balance environmental and development considerations.

Because we do not have a strong responsible growth plan for that state that ensures sustainability yet, we find it hard to yield our more traditional positions.  I used the example of Tweed Airport – an existing transportation asset that was built 80 years ago in tidal wetlands.   I happen to believe that we need a second commercial airport that complements service at Bradley serving the southern part of Connecticut. But, in the absence of a process to determine whether development of Tweed, in the context of other strategic transportation development in the state and environmental impacts makes sense, the default decision is based on the environmental regulations not sustainability.

If we had a strong smart growth plan and established goals that balanced the need for transportation infrastructure with environmental considerations, then it might be easier to agree on a plan for Tweed development in the broader context as well as other developments that main aid Connecticut’s economic growth in the future.

Bob Santy
President and CEO

State Budget Priorities in Tough Times

This is the time of year when a variety of advocacy groups plan their legislative strategy for the next session. In the last two weeks, I have been part of discussions around smart growth, early childhood, economic development and community development issues.

The critical defining factor this year is current economic conditions and their impact on state revenues and expenditures. There are both cyclical and structural issues here that drive state revenues. We are facing at least two years of lower state spending – particularly if there is no appetite for revenue enhancements. CERC will be looking in more depth at this issue at our research and policy conference in November.

Recognizing these fiscal issues, it seems that many advocates are looking at “low growth, no growth” options for maintaining state priorities in key policy areas. From a competitiveness standpoint, this may be a time to concentrate on regulatory changes that will make it easier to invest and develop here, rather than to look to the state for capital investments.

I wonder and would be interested in hearing if others are seeing the same approaches to the next two years or whether my emphasis on fiscal constraints is overstated.

 

 

Bob Santy
President and CEO