Good morning everybody
welcome to this week's episode
of The County Seat, I'm your
host Chad Booth. We are
bringing you this episode from
the Rural Summit from Southern
Utah University 30th annual and
every year we have managed to
come down here in the time we
been doing County Seat and find
some very interesting topics.
We have been giving a lot of
attention to this summer into
the rural opportunity the
Governor's challenge to find
25,000 new jobs in the 25 off
Wasatch Front counties and we
are continuing that series and
one of the presenters here is our
guest here on the show Natalie
Gochnour who is the director of
the Kem Gardner Policy Institute
Univ of Utah and you made a
great presentation today and I
love the analogy of the Marshal
Plan for Utah. What triggered
you to make that connection
when you were thinking about
what needed to happen?
The Marshal Plan has a very
storied and successful history as
I think most of the viewers will
know Marshall Plan after World
War 2 George Marshal was a
very successful general Truman
taps him to be the Secretary of
State and he is really charged
with the responsibility of
rebuilding a western and central
Europe that was in the United
States interest for that to
happen and he marshalled a pun
of words the energy the money
the time the leadership to invest
a lot of money over a four year
period to help those war torn
economies so in public policy
you will often hear we need a
marshal plan for the United
States now or we need a marshal
plan for this that and the other
so at one time in my office a
group of us were talking and we
said when you look at the data
there are parts of Utah that are
not sharing in this broad
prosperity we need a marshal
plan for them and so one thing
lead to another and I was asked
to come down here and explain
what a marshal plan might look
four key elements obviously to
try and make something work
and you have leadership and you
have particularly money
involved.
Yes, investment.
Investment with all the talk that
is going on and all the planning I
would like to have you take that
comparison and break that down
and say how does a European
marshal plan apply to rural Utah,
obviously it's not war torn but it
might feel like it to some people
who live in Junction for example.
I think a marshal plan is not a
perfect metaphor western and
central Europe were decimated
that is not the case in almost
every place I am thinking about
in our great state but it is a great
metaphor when it comes to few
things the marshal plan was big
and bold it was very well lead it
was focused on investment or
putting money into projects that
build and grow an economy and
it was very narrow in its time
frame it was only a four year
endeavor and so essentially we
passed this act in the US
congress that spent money in
western and central Europe to
rebuild dams and infrastructure
manufacturing facilities and give
them a jump start.
Why is that timing so important?
I kind of get this sense that this
entire project there are those
across rural Utah that feel this is
going to get lost in the slogan
and not really get anywhere
because it will get lost in the
planning section and nobody will
ever agree on anything. Is that
short time window critical to
making this a success to make
sure that something happens?
I think it's wise for two reasons.
One it really focuses your energy
so you basically are saying let's
roll up our sleeves and go find
the most disadvantaged areas in
terms of their economy and lets
pump them up and serve them
and sacrifice for them. That is
one reason it creates this
intensity and this urgency that
you cannot sustain over 2o, 30,
40 years. The other reason I
think it's important is that I'm a
big believer in markets and once
you do that investment maybe
some of that initial priming of
the pump if you will I think
markets can take over and do
great things.
I can hear the arguments right
off the bat you are picking
winners and losers if you hone in
on a couple of projects, how do
you answer that criticism?
Well here's what's happening,
we have I'm going to say 11
counties in this state that have
contracted since before the
great recession so 2007
economies are doing well we
were at a certain level then we
had the great recession all things
it was really awful but then now
we have been in the second
longest expansion in our state's
history we have a 11 counties
that have declined since before
the great recession so in that
case I don't think it's about
picking winners and losers there
are losers out there right now
there are counties struggling
that have not been part of this
expansion and I think we are a
prosperous enough state to
invest in these communities and
give them more opportunities. I
do not about picking winners I
think it's about serving some
communities that have been left
behind.
Great place to take a break, I'll
ask you about that when we
come back you are watching the
County Seat with Natalie
Gochnour and we will be right
back.
Welcome back to The County
Seat we are talking today about
25,000 jobs and 25 counties and
we are honing in on maybe how
you make that plan a success
and make it happen quickly so
the people can see the fruits of
your labor Natalie Gochnour is
our guest today an I want to
continue where we were and
just ask the question how do you
get this started because you can
get lost in the planning and
nothing will ever happen and
that's what a lot of people worry
about.
I am a big believer in planning so
I have to really kind of wrestle
with this a bit I will say that
Governor Herbert and Lt.
Governor Cox are very well
positioned in how they think
about these things so when
Governor Herbert was a county
commissioner in Utah county he
worked a lot with rural counties
obviously Lt. Governor Cox
comes from rural Utah still lives
in rural Utah so I think we have
people who are committed to
rural Utah and know how to do
something that can be very
positive. The challenge is you
have to do a reset here because I
would argue that we have been
putting all this effort into rural
Utah and we talk about it a lot
and we have had a prosperous
economy for 8 years in the state
leading among states yet we still
have in my estimation ten to
eleven counties that really are
not keeping pace. You have to
do a lot of things I think the
Governor needs to have a leader
on this that is probably Val Hale
who directs economic
development for them there are
others that could be but you
need a designated leader you
need an advisory board that
helps that leader make great
decisions I think the Governors
rural partnership board is ideal
for that you also needs a
technical team that surrounds
that group and gives them the
data they need to make smart
investments decisions. Now,
you asked about planning and
mostly just design the process,
you cannot spend money
without great information that is
another way of thinking of
planning. I just think you need
too really focus it expedite it
shorten the time frame draw
from the plans the multitude of
plans that are out there and
then just let the best ideas
compete.
to me that for this to succeed it
cannot be a mindset of Salt Lake
City saying that these are the
kind of things we need to
consider in the plan because
quite often something that looks
really good on paper and
function on the Wasatch front
falls flat when you get to the
community of 800 people. Look
at Daggett county 1000 jobs in
Daggett county would drown
them but 50 would just be
marvelous, so if you are thinking
in terms of success in
quantitative numbers that mean
something in a city planning and
local planning doesn't that
leadership really need to have a
component of local
understanding to it?
Yes that is imperative and I
completely agree with you there.
In other words there used to be
the saying once you have seen
one rural community you have
seen one rural community. So
people that don't live in that
community are not going to
know their needs I would
suggest something really simple
that would be where is the area
of greatest need? IT does not
have to be a county, it could be a
community or a city but
something that gives us what
are the areas of the greatest
need and then I would go
engage with those communities
and I would look at overarching
trends whether it's the growth
of the tech sector in our state or
outdoor recreation what it is
doing or some opportunity for
agriculture and potentially inland
port but I would try to find those
ideas and those most
disadvantaged communities that
tie into a larger megatrend that
could produce value and bring in
money to that community.
community where does that
seed money come from where
does that start up come from is
that a sales pitch or a state
program?
That is a good question. We have
incredible needs on our both
state and local governments
budgets so it is hard to
contemplate where does a
marshal plan of investment
come from but I would suggest
that there is a lot of money that
goes to a lot of things in this
state and many was just
redirecting existing monies and
also to do some help in Daggett
County as you mentioned
because of the scale it's not a lot
of money you got to really
prosperous urban economic
engine a small small fraction of
that could do really great things
in Daggett County so I think it's
really about people coming
together and saying this is a
statewide priority and we want
to do this and we are going to
redirect existing monies and we
might even free up some new
monies as long as we know we
are spending them well.
So you have to get Box Elder
county on board to bail out
Daggett County to start the ball
rolling.
I'm okay with that because I
think we are all in this together.
And I would say mineral lease
royalties I would say revenue
from the motor fuel tax I would
say sales income property taxes
these are the funds that are out
there the severance tax we have
sources of funds that can help in
a major initiative like this.
Next question line up for you we
are going to take another break
we will be right back here on The
County Seat.
Welcome back to the County
Seat we are talking today about
the Marshal Plan for Utah and
how to get the rural part of the
state in on the prosperity that
we have enjoyed over the last
decade or so. Natalie I want to
ask a question about resistance
is a part of this plan and I see
that there are two areas of
resistance, there may be some
rural counties who say let's
change the face of your county
and lets bring in something that
helps you can they don't want to
change anything because they
are afraid that their existing
structure their existing economy
let's take cattle ranching is going
to get pushed out by somebody
else and that their traditional
values will suffer. The other
areas of resistance I see is that
people in the Wasatch Front
where most of the legislators are
where most of the decisions of
where the money comes from
are going to say why should we
invest in rural Utah. I'm
throwing both of those two
questions out to you.
Okay keep me straight and
make sure I get to both of them.
Governor Herbert in putting out
this 25,000 job goal he has laid
out the gauntlet he is saying I am
the CEO of the state and I am all
in I am committing my time and
energy to help rural Utah and so
now we are in the process of
how do we do that and job
creation does not just happen
because you set a goal. The goal
is really good but it requires
investment requires public and
private interaction to say hey we
are going to put a manufacturing
plant there or we are going to
invest a road there and that will
enable the market to do other
great things and alike and so I
think what is likely to happen is
that as these plans develop to
create the 25,000 jobs to the
extent that they use the marshal
plan for inspiration that
communities will be asked to
compete. We have a limited
amount of money to fund some
projects to help rural Utah
where are the best ones and
those counties that are very
tradition bound who do not
want to change that is a choice
and a lifestyle choice but it may
not be the best economic choice.
So I think that rural leaders will
be in a situation in saying what
do we want to be? Do we want
to tie in and go where the
economy is going whether it is in
tech or let's say something with
broadband or something with
outdoor recreation they will
have to make some choices
here?
But in reality it seems to me that
a traditional economy that is
failing that tradition is more
threatened by it failing than it is
by complimenting with
something else. In other words
the Governor says this all the
time, it's not always an either or
situation you can put new
technologies and new industries
in and protect the older ones if
you do proper planning would
you agree with that?
I would I think that planning and
investment are really key to
these decisions and if you are a
rural county commissioner and
you love your lifestyle and your
traditions and you are nervous
about outside interests coming
in you have to sit back and think
to yourself can I have it both
ways. Can I keep some of the
things that I like here and invite
new economic opportunities to
my county and I think in most of
the cases you have to find that
you can?
Okay, so let's go to the other
part of the buy in we are talking
about. The question is if you
have to have the whole state
buy in how do you get the guy in
Weber County that says I don't
want my tax dollars going to
Daggett County. I don't mean to
pick on Daggett county you guys
are are great up there we'll pick
on Piute.
Well one of the first things it is
already happening in a very big
way we share income tax in this
state to fund the schools we
share gas taxes to fund the roads
sales taxes from the general
fund are spent all around the
state we are citizens and
residents of the state its
understood that we care about
our brothers and sisters in the
state. So I am not as trouble by
that I think where I get more
troubled is not that you are
taking someone's money and
going here but just the
competition of these projects.
What are the merits of this verse
that one I think that is a trickier
conversation? But I do again
think that is why it is so
important to focus, because
when you focus it you are not
taking peers, peer economies,
you are taking economy that is
thriving and an economy that is
not and saying we are going to
help that economy and the good
news is that when you help the
economy it does grow the pie.
I would not argue that all but
people are saying we want a
new city park here in Syracuse
and that money is now going to
help a business come into a
county that I have not even
driven through in 10 years.
Let me tell you something else
that Syracuse wants Syracuse
want clean air they want less
congestion on the roads they
want some of them come from
rural Utah they want
opportunities to go back to rural
Utah I think it's really true there
is a lot of interconnection we
have problem in urban Utah that
rural Utah can help solve. Those
problems tend to do with
pollution, congestion and even
the availability of labor, we have
a labor shortage on the Wasatch
front we also have rising costs it
is very expensive in urban Utah
right now and increasingly so.
So I am a big believer that urban
and rural have common interests
if we can get the conversation
going and apply the leadership.
So if you were to write a time
line and they were to adopt your
thinking and we were to set
2019 as being done with this
project, what kind of deadlines
would you set?
The first thing I would do is
exactly what the Governor is
doing and that is I would be
unifying people behind a
common goal which he has done
with the 25,000. I would be very
focused not eh 2018 legislative
session because there is urgency
here and the legislature is where
a lot of this gets done and it's a
part time legislature and they
won't meet again for a year and
they have an interim but
sometimes they have a special
session but I would really
Marshall the energy to have
some proposed process and
projects in front of the
legislature in 2018.
Is that going to come from the
quote team leader that you
identify and the research
program or is that generated
through the legislature of the
local level up?
I think the Governor's Rural
Partnership Board is an ideal
place for that to happen. The
makeup of the board is quite
strategic and in terms of its mix
and rural background it has
stature in the state and the
Governor is our leader here and
that is his partnership board.
Okay we will take another break
and we will be right back in just a
minute with The County Seat.
Welcome back to The County
Seat we are discussing today the
marshal plan for Utah, I love the
name it makes me feel so
patriotic.
It's a beautiful time in world
history, honestly.
I would clean my plate just to
help all the kids in rural Utah,
like they used to do during the
Marshal Plan. I want to go back
and talk about the strategic plan
we have a short period of time
we rally our forces we target
them we have success we help
four projects and we have 11
counties that are suffering, so
how do you create 2.0?
Well I think you go into the
2018 Legislative session with
some ideas quad up. You know
that the legislative is a very
deliberative body they will
opinions about this they will take
away projects they add I don't
know but they have a track
record of making great decisions
and at the end of that you have
to reassess I am a big believer in
mid-course corrections and so I
think the challenge for people
leading the 25,000 jobs effort is
to be responsive to those needs
so I think you come right back in
the 2019 general legislative
session and you have your next
set of projects to fund. The
difference in what I am talking
about is that we are not talking
about plans we are talking about
projects.
That is important.
For me that is an important
distinction because the Marshall
Plan was not about going and
figuring out post world war
international relations it was
about no we are going to go in
an address these needs and we
address it we will all be better
and it helps.
Yes we are going to put
refrigerators back in houses.
Tractors to families in
agricultural France.
Right. So you see this as an
ongoing project its project
oriented very specific its short,
but you would not say we are
going to do this set of projects
for four years and then we will
come back and start another
four. You would start looking at
them each year?
I would I see this as a handful of
projects whatever we can afford
and what we are willing to
sacrifice for that we put forward
that we know we can get
maximum return on investment
and help our good state and
then finish it up and let the
market do its work.
So people are always worried
about the state giving money
that they never get back do the
communities get this back if we
do this right?
Yes, tell me what you mean?
You mean like the state paying
for something?
Does the state see the whole
economic growth throughout
the whole state?
I am not troubled by the state
putting out in the sense that
communities are all subsets of
the state the state certainly the
entity that has the greatest
resources and the ability to do a
lot of important things and so I
think this is really a state taking
care of its people.
Thank you so much for being
with us today, Natalie I
appreciate it.
Thank you, Chad.
Thank you for being with us on
the County Seat this is one of the
better programs of course all of
our programs are good but this
is an important one particularly
for people on the Wasatch with
your country cousins and have a
further dialogue about it
because this is a brave and bold
move and it's going to take a lot
of concerted effort to convince
the legislature to move forward.
We have a governor on board
we have a lot of the local leaders
on board but we need to make it
happen and you can be part of
that dialogue. So we invite you
to check it out go to our
Facebook page or website we
will have more additional
information share this with your
friends and family and we will
see you next week on The
County Seat.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét