For the second time in as many months, regional economic development group Greater MSP has come under a city council's scrutiny. This time it's St. Paul, where some council members are questioning whether the city's annual $125,000 contribution to the public-private partnership is paying off.
Unlike the Minneapolis City Council, which slashed the $125,000 contribution Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges had budgeted down to $10,000, funding has not been cut in St. Paul.
Greater MSP's public-private model is mostly funded by businesses — only about 20 percent of the annual $6 million budget comes from public funding. But any cut betrays the very idea of regionalism itself and compounds a persistent image that the metro area — and indeed the state — are riven with divisions.
Based on their rhetoric, some council members in each city fail to see the necessity and benefits of unifying Twin Cities-area development efforts for the benefit of all regardless of borders.
Given the keen competition presented by the 11 peer regions that Greater MSP has identified (Atlanta, Austin, Boston, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Portland, San Francisco and Seattle), as well as the international competition, it's obvious that regional coordination of economic development efforts isn't a luxury.
Just as Minneapolis gains when economic growth occurs within the broader metropolitan area, St. Paul is boosted by development in the region and by regional residents spending time — and money — at venues such as the Xcel Energy Center, CHS Field and soon a gleaming new soccer stadium that's being built in the city's Midway area. City residents benefit from the resulting expanded tax base that can fund public safety, social services and educational efforts.
As is the case with Minneapolis, many of the sought-after knowledge workers who will power the next generation of economic and cultural growth tend to favor living in urban environments like Minnesota's capital city. And Greater MSP is making a positive contribution to efforts to attract and retrain them.
City Council concerns over tepid job growth within St. Paul for projects Greater MSP has been involved in are legitimate. Those concerns are shared by Greater MSP leaders, too, who know that the organization's success is mostly measured by meaningful gains in new jobs.
But the solution isn't reverting to the counterproductive, go-it-alone approach that was all too often the method in previous years. The better strategy is to continue a commitment to regionalism that will benefit the entire metropolitan area, including St. Paul.
In a meeting with the Star Tribune Editorial Board earlier this month, St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman said he would fight efforts to defund Greater MSP. Coleman said he understood the council's role in questioning the city's return on investment, but that he had no doubt the organization has put the Twin Cities region on the map of business site selectors around the country. "I find great value in the organization," Coleman said.
The St. Paul City Council should find great value in Greater MSP, too, and work with its leaders to maximize the city's wise investment in a strategic regional approach to growing the Twin Cities-area economy.
