The PRCUD Long Beach Report

A report of the PRCUD Roundtable ForumLong Beach, California, USA; 3-6 October 1999

Session Chapter prepared bySession One: The Long Beach Strategic Plan Kenneth E. CoreySession Two: Tourism and Retail Development Akihiko TaniSession Three: Trade and Transportation Yiu-Kwan FanSession Four: Health and Human Welfare Gina X. MengSession Five: Economic Empowerment Elwyn Wyeth

Executive Editor: Eric J. HeikkilaManaging/ Copy Editor: Jeanette BarbieriProduction Editor: N. Emel YucekusPublisher: Pacific Rim Council for Urban Development

Long Beach Local Organizing Committee

Chairman: Richard Watson, President; Richard Watson and Associates LLC

Organizing Committee: Manuel Perez; Urban Art, Design, and Development Consultants, Inc.Robert Spence; New Era Development

PRCUD Roundtable Participants

From Long Beach:

Participant Affiliation

O’NEILL, Beverly Mayor, City of Long Beach--- ---

ARIAS, Ronald R. Manager, Bureau of Public Health, Dept. of Health and Human Services, City of Long Beach

CHESSER, Steve Senior Manager, Community Relations, Douglas Product Division, Boeing Commercial Airplane Group

CONLIN, Andrew P. Senior Vice Resident, DDR Oliver McMillan CORDERO, Gloria Region Manager, Public Affairs, Southern California

EdisonDIMARIO, Linda Howell President & CEO, Long Beach Area Convention and

Visitors BureauGUTIERREZ, Gladys Member, Recreation Commission, City of Long BeachHERNANDEZ, Manuel External Affairs Manager, Alameda Corridor Engineering

TeamHICKS, Gil V. General Manager, Alameda Corridor Transportation

AuthorityHILLIARD, Harold J. Marketing Manager, the Port of Long BeachHUMPHREY, Jack Advance Planning Officer, City of Long BeachLOWENTHAL, Bonnie Member, Board of Education, Long Beach Unified School

DistrictO’KEEFE, Stephen Commercial and Retail Development Officer, Business

Development Center, City of Long BeachOTTO, Douglas W. Esq., Attorney at Law OTTO, Freda Hinsche Vice President, St. Mary’s Medical Center FoundationPATERNOSTER, Robert Director, Queensway Bay Project, City of Long BeachPEREZ, Manuel AIA, Urban Art, Design, and Development Consultants,

Inc.PERKOVITZ, Sy President & CEO, Perkovitz + Ruth ArchitectsRODDY, Michael President, Green Framing SystemsROOSEVELT, H. DelanoSALTZGAVER, Harry

Council Member, Fourth District, City of Long BeachAssociate Publisher, Gazette Newspapers

SMITH, Jean Bixby Chairman, Bixby Land CompanyTEOFILO, Tom President, World Trade Center AssociationVANGORDER, Chris CEO, Long Beach Memorial Medical CenterVENABLE, Phyllis Moore Business Assistance Officer, Business Development

Center, City of Long BeachWILLIAMS, Lance President and CEO, Long Beach Community Services

Development CorporationWYLIE, Don Managing Director, Maritime Services, the Port of Long

Beach

2

Visiting Members or Associates of the Pacific Rim Council on Urban Development:

PRCUD Member Chapter AffiliationBARBIERI, Jeanette S. California University of Southern CaliforniaCOREY, Kenneth At Large Michigan State UniversityCOURTNEY, John M. At Large Urban Development FoundationFAN, Yiu-Kwan Hong Kong Hong Kong Baptist UniversityHAHN, Yeong-Joo Seoul Seoul Development InstituteHARCOURT, Michael (Honorary Chairman)

Vancouver Sustainable Development Research Institute

HEIKKILA, Eric (Exec. Sec.) S. California University of Southern CaliforniaMENG, Gina X. Beijing Peking UniversityMOUCHLY, Ehud S. California READI, LLCOGURI, Yukio Tokyo Urban Plan NetSPENCE, Robert (Treasurer) S. California New Era Development CorporationSUNG, Ki-Tae Seoul FL CorporationTANI, Akihito Tokyo Kanazawa Institute of TechnologyTANIMURA, Paul (President) Tokyo Tsukuba UniversityWILLIAMS, Jack At Large Michigan State UniversityWYETH, Elwyn Brisbane Elwyn Wyeth Management

ArchitectureYUCEKUS, Emel S. California University of Southern California

3

Agenda of Events

October 3 (Sunday), 1999 The Queen Mary, Long Beach12:00pm-18:00pm Registration 18:30pm-20:30pm Welcoming Reception (Remarks by Michael

Harcourt, Honorary Chairman, PRCUD)20:30pm-10:00pm PRCUD Board MeetingOctober 4 (Monday), 1999 The Queen Mary, Long Beach09:00am-10:15am Opening and Introduction to Long Beach

(Welcome by Honorable Beverly O’Neill, Mayor, City of Long Beach)

10:30am-12:00pm Round Table Discussion (1)12:15pm-13:15pm Lunch13:30pm-15:00pm Round Table Discussion (2)15:30pm-17:30pm Professional Visit (1. Aquabus Tour across

Queensway Bay, Long Beach, 2. Walking Tour of Queensway Bay Project, Long Beach)

19:00pm-21:00pm DinnerOctober 5 (Tuesday), 1999 The Port of Long Beach09:30am-10:15am Introduction to the Port of Long Beach10:30am-12:00pm Round Table Discussion (3)12:30pm-17:00pm Professional Visit (1. Tour of the Port of

Long Beach on board Pacific Sprit, 2. Bus Tour of Alameda Corridor)

October 6 (Wednesday), 1999 Long Beach Memorial Medical Center08:30am-10:00am Breakfast Meeting of the PRCUD Council10:00am-10:30pm Introduction to Long Beach Memorial

Hospital10:30am-12:00pm Round Table Discussion (4)12:15pm-13:15pm Lunch13:30pm-15:00pm Round Table Discussion (5)15:30pm-17:00pm Professional Visit (Neighborhood

Development Projects)17:00pm-18:30pm Reception at the Museum of Latin American

Art 18:30pm-20:30pm Closing Banquet at VIVA

4

Executive Editor's Introduction

The 1999 PRCUD Long Beach Report is the second in what promises to be a unique and highly informative series of reports published by the Pacific Rim Council on Urban Development based on its innovative Roundtable Forum. As with its predecessor, the 1998 PRCUD Kaohsiung Report, this document summarizes and expands upon three days of roundtable discussion that members of the PRCUD Council held with a broad based representation of civic leaders in the host city. In the case of Long Beach, our hosts included its vibrant Mayor, Dr. Beverly O'Neill, and other key local government officials, top port officials, business leaders, community activists, and academics. From PRCUD's side, Council members participating in the Long Beach Roundtable include a comparably distinguished set of urban development professionals from all corners of the Pacific Rim, including Japan, China, Korea, Australia, Canada, Hong Kong and the United States. This year's PRCUD Forum organizing committee was chaired and co-chaired most ably by Richard Watson and Manuel Perez, respectively, both of whom are members of the Southern California Chapter of PRCUD.

This Report's structure mirrors that of the PRCUD Roundtable Forum itself, with each of the five chapters corresponding to one of the Roundtable sessions, and with different PRCUD Council members taking lead responsibility for each section: (1) Overview of the Long Beach Strategic Plan, by Dr. Kenneth Corey, Dean from 1989-1999 of the College of Social Science at Michigan State University; (2) Tourism and Retail Development, by Dr. Akihiko Tani, Professor at the Kanazawa Institute of Technology and organizer of next year's PRCUD Forum in Japan; (3) Trade and Transportation, by Dr. Y.K. Fan, Dean of the School of Business at Hong Kong Baptist University and former PRCUD President; (4) Health and Human Welfare, by Dr. Gina Meng, Professor of Urban and Environmental Sciences at Peking University, and a newly elected member of the PRCUD Board of Directors; and (5) Economic Empowerment, by Mr. Elwyn Wyeth, Principal of Elywn Wyeth Management in Brisbane, and a member of the PRCUD Board of Directors. In each case presentations, responses and discussions are summarized in the corresponding chapters, and in each case the lead participants were aided mightily and extensively by the skillful and diligent efforts of Ms. Jeanette Barbieri, a doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California and a former PRCUD Administrative Assistant, in her capacity as Managing Editor.

Michael Harcourt, Honorary Chairman of PRCUD, congratulates Richard Watson, President of the Long Beach Forum Organizing Committee, for organizing a successful Forum.

5

Long Beach presents a fascinating case study of strategic planning for sustainable urban development. Its immediate concerns range from issues of global trade to local community empowerment, and its leaders are conscious of the many ways in which the global and local intersect. In some instances global issues such as the plight of the Cambodian people under the Khmer Rouge have a direct impact on local planning, as a large influx of Cambodian refugees alters the composition and character of local neighborhoods in Long Beach. In other instances, global interaction provides the key to achieving local goals such as economic development through tourism and trade. These global-local linkages are especially evident in the context of the PRCUD Roundtable Forum, where local and global perspectives are enjoined in dialogue.

Integration of the various elements of development is crucial importance to formulating a coherent strategy. A useful conceptual framework for doing so is illustrated in figure 1, which is adapted from the OECD's approach to sustainable development, which in turn is organized around "driving forces" or "pressures" (such as international trade flows) that act upon local "state variables" (such as local unemployment), and which in turn engender "responses" (such as port redevelopment projects). It is enlightening to view the five chapters of this report in the context of this integrated pressure-state-response perspective.

Figure 1: The Pressure-State-Response Framework

adapted from OECD, 1993. OECD Core Set of Indicators for Environmental Performance Reviews (Environment Monograph no. 83)

In the first chapter, corresponding to the first roundtable session, Long Beach Mayor Dr. Bevery O'Neill and planner Dr. Jack Humphrey provide an overview of the Long Beach strategic planning context that corresponds very nicely to the OECD framework above. Pressures for Long Beach originate predominately from two

6

sources, world trade patterns and human migration. These pressures in turn have an impact upon the social and economic state of the city. Data such as those presented by Dr. Humphrey provide information to civic leaders who then respond with strategic initiatives aimed at responding to these pressures. In the case of Long Beach, as outlined by Mayor O'Neill, the City's response is formulated in terms of the "three T's and an R": trade, tourism, technology, and retail.

In chapter two, civic leaders discuss efforts to attract tourism through redevelopment of the Long Beach harborfront, particularly the Queensway Bay and Rainbow Harbor redevelopment projects that feature a world class aquarium and other attractions on reclaimed harborfront land adjacent to the downtown. In the context of figure 1 above, this response represents resource investments altering the physical setting of the city in a manner designed to generate a positive flow of tourism pressures, leading in turn to a regeneration of the downtown area. Dr. Tani of PRCUD offers advice based on the experience of Kanazawa, Japan, which also made substantial investments in tourism "hardware and software". He cautions that tourism and retail trade are by nature quite footloose, and that they may easily be drawn elsewhere by similar investments made by other locales. He advises designing such investments in a way that accentuates the unique and special characteristics of Long Beach that may not be easily replicated elsewhere, pointing to Long Beach's naval and ports tradition as key assets.

Chapter three summarizes presentations by leading officials from Long Beach's port and from related transportation and trade services industries. The Port of Long Beach shares San Pedro Harbor with its companion and competitor, the Port of Los Angeles, and the combined port complex is one of the busiest in the world. The Port of Long Beach is a semi-autonomous public organization that is owned by the City of Long Beach but whose Board of Port Commissioners are drawn wholly from the private sector. It is a "landlord port" insofar as its revenues are derived primarily from the lease of port facilities that are in turn operated by the shipping lines themselves.

The steady exponential growth in the movement of goods through the Port of Long Beach over the past decades creates both opportunities and challenges. Opportunties such as increased economic development and trade potential are being realized in the Long Beach context through large-scale investments of the Port itself for facilities expansion and through ancillary activities such as the World Trade Center that provides "software" support for businesses seeking to do link to trade opportunities abroad. The primary challenge presented by the ever-increasing flow of goods through the Port of Long Beach is to buffer the surrounding community from some of the less attractive impacts such as noise and traffic congestion associated with port activities. The ambitious Alameda Corridor is a prime example of large-scale inland transportation infrastructure projects designed to mitigate those impacts and to facilitate the free flow of goods to and from the Port.

PRCUD's lead discussant for this session, Dr. Yiu-Kwan Fan, compared the situation in Long Beach with that of Hong Kong and questioned the assumption of continuous exponential growth of trade flows through the Port based on a simple extrapolation of past trends. He pointed out that the economic and political situation in East Asia is changing rapidly and that this could easily complicate the trade picture. This is another example of how global events may have a profound effect on local conditions. Likewise, macroeconomic imbalances in the United States in the public and private sector accounts (eg: investments in excess of savings and government

7

expenditures in excess of tax revenues) can only be sustained by a flow of imports in excess of exports. However, as the government continues to make strides in reducing these public and private sector imbalances, trade patterns will necessarily adjust, and so these macro-scale factors are the critical determinants of the future fortunes of the Port of Long Beach.

Chapter four addresses the provision of health and human welfare services in Long Beach, with presentations by leading hospital administrators and benefactors. The challenge that Long Beach faces is shared by many local governments that seek to reconcile the sometimes conflicting goals of human compassion and fiscal prudence. This challenge is exacerbated by a steady flow of immigrants who often have special needs but a limited capacity to pay the full cost of servicing those needs. This situation is complicated by a rapidly changing regulatory environment defining the obligations of health care providers. Long Beach civic leaders have responded in various ways to this situation. One is through the exemplary leadership of benefactors who raise private donations to support health care facilities. Another response is to reach out to the community through community based health councils to promote increased health awareness.

Dr. Gina Meng of Beijing responded on behalf of PRCUD by pointing to similar developments in China as its health care institutions make the transition from a socialist to a more market oriented system. She observed that prior to the transition the primary health care emphasis was on prevention of disease through healthy life styles focused on concerns of diet, exercise, and stress management. Individuals, she said, were more prone to take responsibility for their own health care, and doctors or health clinics were seen as a last resort. Following the transition to a more market oriented health delivery system in China, Professor Meng observed, there is a much greater reliance on expensive drug related treatments rather than on low-tech life style instruction geared to prevention, with strong economic incentives by pharmaceutical companies for doctors to prescribe medicines that were previously deemed unnecessary to good health. General discussion that followed explored parallels and differences between the Chinese and American experiences.

Finally, the fifth chapter explores issues of economic development in Long Beach. As noted in previous presentations, the population of Long Beach is one that offers great diversity in terms of economic well-being, ethnicity, and lifestyles. Part of the challenge of economic development in this context is to find ways to channel the economic prosperity flowing from trade, tourism, technology and retail (the "three T's and an R" spoken of by Mayor O'Neill) so that it provides long-term sustainable benefits for the community as a whole. Examples of innovative efforts to engage these community and economic development goals were discussed in the final session, and PRCUD Council member Elwyn Wyeth of Brisbane, Australia, provided his overview and assessment.

The 1999 PRCUD Long Beach Report builds on the experience of the 1998 PRCUD Kaohsiung Report and in turn provides a basis for next year's PRCUD Tokyo Report and subsequent endeavors elsewhere in the Pacific region. The PRCUD Board of Directors and its Council affirmed their intention to work with local governments throughout the Pacific Rim to forge practioner-friendly solutions to contemporary challenges in the field of urban development. The PRCUD Forum is a key component of that effort. Our experience to date confirms that the Roundtable discussion format delivers unique and valuable benefits to civic leaders from the host city and to visiting

8

PRCUD Council members alike. It is our intent to expand and improve upon what is already a most worthwhile endeavor, and we invite potential host cities to join us in this continuing effort.

9

10

INTRODUCTION

Dr. Beverly O'Neill, Mayor of the City of Long Beach, introduced her city through a narration of Long Beach's recent transformation from a naval base and aerospace industrial city to a hub of international trade that doubles as a tourist destination. This turn around began in the early nineties during the beginning of Mayor O'Neill's tenure and is only just now being completed. Soon after the federal government announced plans to dissemble the Long Beach naval base in 1992, Long Beach received another blow in the merger of McDonnell Douglas with Boeing. Some 20,000 jobs were

lost in the downsizing that accompanied that merger on top of the 27,000 jobs being phased out over the five years of the base closure. The impact of the loss of both public and private sector jobs was devastating to the community.

Assessing its resources and prospects, the city determined to focus on developing the three "T'"s of tourism, international trade, and advanced technology. An "R" for retail was later added to this strategy to recapture revenue lost to other communities as Long Beach's retail sector lagged behind that of its neighbors. Space, geography and history combined to provide Long Beach a comparative advantage in these three sectors. The mayor highlighted three projects to demonstrate the success of its three "T'"s strategy. First, the Queensway Bay project built on Long Beach's waterfront asset to attract tourism. A complementary utilization of its waterfront is apparent in the Alameda Corridor project to more efficiently link the railways to the port. Finally, a number of Boeing projects were offered to illustrate Long Beach's ability to build on its aerospace experience to attract advanced technology in other areas.

Rounding out the focus on the three "T'"s is renewed attention to retail. A significant aspect of the naval conversion project was devoted to retail, allowing Long Beach to recapture tax revenue that had been accruing to surrounding communities during the time that Long Beach's retail sector had lagged behind that of its neighbors. Long Beach's success in the diversification of its economy must be attributed to the sum of these endeavors rather than any single aspect of its strategy.

PRESENTATION

Dr. Jack Humphrey, Advanced Planning Officer for the City of Long Beach, fleshed out the mayor's introduction with his presentation of the demographics and the human history of Long Beach (See Appendix I). Settled by conservative and middle-class white Midwesterners, Long Beach was something of a weekend tourist destination that lived up to its reputation as an "Iowa by the sea." Long Beach was fairly prosperous in its younger days and the discovery of oil in Signal Hill portended even greater wealth for the region. Long Beach's desirability as a residential area eventually attracted developers seeking to construct high density residential units that would offer absentee landlords an attractive profit. The formula of overly

11

dense housing paired with absentee landlords unsurprisingly created blight in the urban landscape that Long Beach is currently attempting to emerge from through HUD and other programs encouraging occupant ownership. Figure 2: Percentage Change in Population (1980-1990)

Source: City of Long Beach

The population of Long Beach grew steadily from the beginning of this century on through to the present decade, with a current population of 452, 905. Accompanying this growth have been changes in the median age and ethnic composition of the city. Over the course of the last two decades, the aging white population has been declining, while the younger Asian, African American and Hispanic populations have been growing rapidly. Much of the population growth among these ethnicities results from overseas immigration; of particular note is Khmer immigration into Long Beach. Among the immigrants to Long Beach, the bulk of the Khmer population is of refugee status and a sizable portion of the non-Khmers are undocumented.

Both these conditions among immigrants continue to pose particular challenges to the city--impoverishment among these immigrants contributes to overcrowding in many immigrant populated Long Beach districts. Studies show that overcrowded housing creates conditions in which gangs develop and Long Beach is no stranger to organized youth violence. To complement programs aimed at easing overcrowding and encouraging resident-ownership, more community policing substations have been built to discourage gang activity. Additionally, programs for children during the window in which they are dismissed from classes and not yet under the supervision of parents still at their workplaces strive to engage youth in constructive activities.

Mr. Douglas W. Otto, Attorney at Law, presented the Long Beach strategic plan that was formulated to keep apace of demographic changes in Long Beach and establish goals for the city's future. The current strategic plan for Long Beach is the city's second such undertaking, following an earlier plan of the mid-1980's. It is

12

interesting to note that both plans were undertaken in times of relative prosperity for the city. In 1997 the decision was made to undergo the strategic planning process that is near completion at present. Essentially the plan comprises of two components: a prioritized list of actions and a set of performance indicators to measure progress. During the formulation of the plan, the city solicited community views on future goals, believing citizen input to be crucial in a democracy and hoping to foster a higher degree of community interaction. The community expressed goals of safety, aesthetics, educational standards, youth orientation, accessibility, affordability and prosperity that most urban inhabitants everywhere might share.

Five task forces centering on neighborhood community, youth, safety, economic opportunity, and environmental health were formed to convert these goals into an action plan, with each task force producing a list of concrete goals in its area. The community of neighborhoods group identified goals to foster empowerment and neighborhood identity, invest in infrastructure, develop community centers, increase home ownership and provide a diversity of housing opportunities. The youth group cited preschool services, youth engagement, college preparation, parental involvement and youth safety as areas to target for improvement. For its part, the safety committee prioritized police visibility, emergency programs and community programs for at-risk youth. In these times of relative prosperity, the economic opportunity committee was more complacent with the status quo in its area than some of the other groups. Still, plans for the future were developed to create a new industry cluster around health care, to implement work force development programs, to target new sites for economic development, and to expand small business support and e-commerce. Finally, the environmental health group advanced goals of a sustainable city with reduced auto dependency, preservation of green space and natural resources and attention to diesel emissions and water pollution.

As is readily apparent from the above list, there is a great deal of overlap between the goals in each group. Consequently, overarching goals of capitalizing on the city's cultural diversity, maximizing its fiscal resources, and encouraging collaboration and partnership were also put forward.

RESPONDENTS' REMARKS

Ms. Gloria Cordero, who is the Region Manager of Southern California Edison and served in the development of the strategic plan, underscored the importance of the plan's focus on youth. For Ms. Cordero, the viability of the city's future work force pivoted on its ability to meet the goals it had set for itself with regard to youth.

City Council member Mr. H. Delano Roosevelt was mindful of the City Council's need to involve itself in the implementation of the plan. Mr. Roosevelt illustrated his point with the example of community feedback on policing and the environment. The community had expressed comfort with the level of policing in his district, but dissatisfaction with accumulations of trash, so Mr. Roosevelt himself phones rental property owners with his constituents' complaints. The community, Mr. Roosevelt reported, is appreciative of a more proactive stance on the part of the City Council.

OPEN DISCUSSION

13

Questions were raised as to the plan's lacking the usual concern that urban growth not impinge on quality of life. Mr. Robert J. Paternoster, Director of the Queensway Bay Project, explained that that was the focus of the earlier plan, the goals of which had largely been accomplished. Instead, the new plan was more focused on neighborhoods. This narrower focus reflected Mr. Otto's efforts to persuade citizens' groups that tended to be over-comprehensively focused to concentrate on specific areas for action.

Concern was expressed that the plan was too inward looking, but here again Mr. Roosevelt and others pointed to the already large level of coordination with surrounding cities. Though the plan is only in its final stages of formulation, it is clear that much thought has already been given to the implementation stage.

DISCUSSANT'S REMARKS (by Dr. Kenneth Corey)

We came to Long Beach with little knowledge of the city. Our prior perceptions largely were mis-perceptions. Mayor Beverly O’Neill laid the groundwork for the strategic plan by describing the principal components of the city’s economic revitalization: i.e. "three T’s and an R.” Tourism, trade, technology, and retail are the components that drove Long Beach back to economic health. The city’s turn-around was remarkably

rapid. The way the leaders of Long Beach pulled together and accomplished their goals is not typical of American urban development.

As one listened to Mayor O’Neill, one wanted to know how the planners and citizens of Long Beach accomplished their transformation. After listening to Mr. Douglas Otto, Ms. Gloria Cordero, and Mr. H. Delano Roosevelt, one can see how commitment, vision and innovation were combined to generate the Long Beach strategic plan.

The earlier economic strategies of the "three T’s and an R" addressed the downtown and major economic fundamentals of Long Beach, whereas the strategic planning effort of 1997 through to the present addresses the neighborhoods and the people of the city. The strategic planning was conducted during good economic times, so that there was less a sense of urgency, and more reality of discretion and wide-ranging dialogue throughout the community. A year-long process of organized citizen meetings generated opportunities for representatives of the city’s diverse stakeholders to frame a vision, turn specific needs into planned strategies, produce action plans and priorities, and finally, to develop performance indicators to measure progress. A community scan process enabled the formation of task forces in five strategic areas; the visioning process involved 150 people who were served by a consultant who insured that the discussions engaged the community's opportunities, threats, and the pros and cons of each major issue of the visioning.

Five strategic substantive (thrusts, and foci emerged from this process: (1) neighborhoods; (2) youth; (3) safety; (4) economic opportunity; and (5) healthy environment. From the points of view of the PRCUD participants, there was special interest in the means by which these foci lead to celebration of the city’s diversity; fiscal resource maximization; collaboration and partnerships; telling the story for the internal

14

and external stakeholders; and keeping a community scorecard of performance indicators in support of the strategic vision.

The community and citizen planners of Long Beach worked hard to make the effort strategic, and not a wish list. "We recognized that we need to know where we want to go next and how we can get there,” they informed us. The Long Beach strategic planners have taken a global perspective. This includes attention to competitiveness and effective marketing of the city in relation to the competition.

Looking to the future, the health sector may be added to the "three T's and the R." Further, the strategic planning of Long Beach has to become an on-going process, and not a singular event.

As a result of the presentation and discussions on Long Beach strategic planning, several observations and recommendations are suggested: From the freshness and innovative nature of Long Beach strategic planning, it is

clear that outsiders know little of the city’s efforts. As a result, a strong marketing and education effort is imperative so as to attract interest and investment.

Other communities can learn a great deal from the Long Beach rapidity in transforming its concepts into realities.

Since the Long Beach strategic planning efforts are not typical of U.S. urban development, it is suggested that PRCUD make an explicit effort to systematically analyze and compare the principal and special lessons from its focused professional visits. Comparative research of Kaohsiung, Long Beach, and next year, Tokyo is strongly suggested and would be important contributions to the study and practice of contemporary urban development worldwide.

The explication of the content or urban development needs to be complemented by the analysis of the strategic plan’s means. An understanding of both content and means are needed to be able to learn from an effective urban development case study.

While maintaining a community scorecard can be an effective means of educating the community, it also is politically risky for the city’s leaders.

Both downtown and the city’s neighborhoods need to be strategized and implemented.

Local universities can be useful in deriving lessons from local urban development case studies such as Long Beach, and universities also can contribute to international comparative research among such cases. The City of Long Beach and PRCUD might consider activating their local universities to aid them in evaluating planning efforts.

The particularities of U.S. intergovernmental relations needs to be taken into account when analyzing American urban development cases: the relations between Long Beach city government and the school board are reflective of this.

In the end, the Long Beach PRCUD Forum participants learned some innovative urban development planning and implementation lessons from strategic planning in Long Beach. We will follow the progress toward the vision with interest and good wishes.

15

16

PANELISTS' PRESENTATIONS

As President and Chief Executive Officer of the Long Beach Area Convention and Visitors Bureau, Ms. Linda Howell DiMario was part of the force behind the diversification of the Long Beach economy. Long Beach, Ms. DiMario explained, made a calculated decision in the face of economic turbulence and determined to embrace tourism in an economic development that took advantage of location, climate, and other factors to reclaim the destination status that Long Beach lost after the inter-war years. Much resourcefulness and creativity were brought to bear in this endeavor that was already yielding great achievements after only five years time. That progress is apparent in tourist revenue increases over the period from $750 million to $1.6 billion, an average hotel room rate hike from $58/night to $101/night, and an occupancy rate jump from 48% to 75%. Over those five years, a critical mass of attractions including the Queen Mary, a new aquarium, and a redeveloped downtown and waterfront, has been established which offers visitors more than a full day's worth of activities. The overnight stay most visitors choose to make generates revenue in the form of a 12% transit occupancy tax which goes to a general fund to reinvest in the city. Tourism, Ms. Howell DiMario asserted, was a means of "recession proofing" the city because in good times or bad, "people will always meet."

Figure 3: Total Employment (1990)

Source: US Bureau of Economic Analysis.

17

Adding weight to the critical mass that has already been achieved will be the Queensway Bay project, scheduled for completion in June of 2001. Adopted in March of 1990, the Queensway Bay project is envisioned as the keystone of downtown revitalization. The project's objective, according to its director, Mr. Robert J. Paternoster, is to refashion Long Beach into a premier waterfront attraction. Mr. Paternoster explained how Long Beach's downtown was no exception to a trend in 1970's America in which city centers became non-destinations. Queensway Bay features a number of attractions aimed at reversing this state of affairs. Surrounding the Queen Mary will be an events park, from which an aquabus, or water taxi, can be taken across the harbor to Rainbow Harbor. Fashioned after Baltimore's inner harbor, Rainbow Harbor is a landfill that separates downtown from the waterfront. The project's anchor is a new aquarium that drew 1.9 million visitors last year, creating a market for other family attractions in the harbor.

Mr. Paternoster stressed that the $180 million Rainbow Harbor project presented a very high risk to the city, which was able to raise funds from a variety of sources without drawing from the general tax base of Long Beach. Mr. Paternoster credits a number of elements with helping in the project's adoption, including the City Council's full support, the dynamism of the mayor, and the commitment of the City Manager. The project is scheduled for completion in seven to eight years.

Mr. Tony Pauker provided more detail of the Rainbow Harbor project. The project site, he explained, sits on thirteen acres at the foot of downtown. Its ten or twelve buildings will comprise five separate districts that are intended to collectively create a single destination. These will include a Dock Street district offering an IMAX theater and shops modeled on Pike's Marketplace in Seattle. The two major anchors of the project are the already established aquarium mentioned above and a convention center that currently draws two million visitors per year. Between these two anchors, buildings will be spaced three hundred feet apart with a footbridge across busy Shoreline Drive to ensure easy pedestrian traffic. There will be an amusement park theme to the development, with the footbridge constructed to resemble a roller coaster and a hundred-foot in diameter Ferris wheel on the premises. The Rainbow Harbor terminal building will be the site of a carousel with fanciful, marine-themed creatures. The project's overall intent, Pauker informed the Council, is to mix "have to" retail shopping visits with "want to" entertainment consumption to attract a mixture of local and tourist traffic.

Mr. Sy Perkowitz, President and CEO of Perkovitz and Ruth Architects, went on to sketch the details of the town center project his firm has undertaken. The development has just opened and, like the Rainbow Harbor project, will combine entertainment and retail businesses in a single setting. Mr. Perkowitz listed some sociological factors contributing to the success of this formula, noting these entertainment/retail sites' echoes of European plazas with their religious or government anchors and these gathering places' features of near proximity to home and also their safety. Mr. Perkowitz remarked that the town center project was part of a trend moving malls out of doors. Also harkening back to Long Beach's earlier roots are the nautical and aeronautical elements captured in the project's architecture.

18

OPEN DISCUSSION

In response to concerns raised that Long Beach may have a somewhat underdeveloped local flavor, Ms. Howell DiMario spoke to the strength of Long Beach's local character and the extraordinary collection of arts that is representative of the cultural convergence characteristic of the city. Ms. Howell DiMario stressed the fortuitous blend of both human-created and natural elements Long Beach had to offer tourists. Mr. Paternoster underscored these points with specific reference to the navy, amusement center, Balboa Studios, art deco architecture, and other historic elements to the city and then discussed the way in which these elements were further developed in recent projects. Mr. Paternoster added that its waterfront locale afforded Long Beach a distinct tourist advantage. Mr. Pauker spoke to other advantages of locale, namely those of having a town center accessible to one of the most frequently traveled highways in South California.

Some concern was expressed that the naval and industrial former character of the city was not perhaps an ideal tradition from which to construct a tourist image. When further queried on the tourist market Long Beach was seeking to attract, Ms. Howell DiMario replied that it was very narrowly targeted. Internationally, the UK, Germany and Japan were precise targets. Nationally, Long Beach looked to Chicago and other cities directly connected to the Long Beach airport and regionally sought to attract drive-in visitors. Ms. Howell DiMario pointed to the success of this strategy with statistics expressing the quadrupling of convention traffic over the last five years. Follow-up questions were raised as to the possibility for airport expansion, which, it seems, is severely constrained both by residents' concern over the amount of noise existing traffic already makes and time limitations, as the 41 slots are presently utilized at full capacity.

Much evidence was presented of inter-city agency coordination and collaboration in response to questions on that issue. Such collaboration, together with citizens' contributions in the form of advisory committees, was felt to be in large

19

measure responsible for the positive tone evinced in City Council meetings and in the local press. Cooperation, remarked Ms. Howell DiMario, was almost magical. Everyone had a combined vision and seemed willing to set aside obstacles to restore

the tourist destination status to Long Beach.

Robert Paternoster, Director of Queensway Project, introduces new developments along Long Beach harbor front.

DISCUSSANT'S REMARKS (by Dr. Akihiko Tani)

First of all I was very impressed by the variety and magnitude of the projects the City of Long Beach is taking on. As Japan is in a prolonged recession, we have not seen any new projects of this nature in our country for a long time.

I am from the city of Kanazawa in Japan, located on the Japan Sea side of Honshu Island. Because the city survived the W.W.II air raid, it is fortunately left with a rich heritage of historical buildings and townscape. It is often praised as the best city in Japan in terms of townscape preservation. This makes the city an attractive tourist destination. I would like to raise several points for our discussions from the experience I had in Kanazawa.

It seems that tourism and retail are quite footloose and mobile. New projects may always claim that they are the largest or have newer concepts and designs. However, unless the area has some distinct characteristic or unique resources of which local projects are able to make good use, these projects can always be surpassed by newer ones elsewhere that copy the concept and design. It is therefore important that the projects of Long Beach make use of the city's local characteristics and local

20

resources. In Kanazawa where history is the font of local flavor, there are also special foods, traditional industry, craftsmanship and other cultural elements that play an important role.

It seems to me that the projects presented today have newer hardware (buildings and space) and Long Beach itself has certain locational and geographical advantages in the Southern California market. Still, the concept and design of the hardware can be transportable and locational advantages may disappear when projects with similar locational characteristics have emerged as competitors or when the behavior of the market has shifted. This is why I believe it is essential for planners to identify and build on the local characteristics of Long Beach.

Once the distinctive local characteristics or scarce local resources of Long Beach are realized, the question arises of how the City can best utilize them to produce local flavor. The key to success lies with the “software” of the project. As I have mentioned earlier, local products and services are vital in sustaining the tourism and retail sectors that are otherwise capricious and drifting. I would like to know more in what areas and with what instruments Long Beach tries to meet this challenge.

The success of that effort in large measure depends upon the human factor. It seems that Long Beach has a long tradition of being a tourist destination. Although the City had departed from the weekend resort for Los Angeles to a more diverse industrial and residential town, it has regained its original character over the past ten years. The question is whether the people of Long Beach are willing to accept this transition and envision their community as a tourist destination.

My final point has to do with economic conditions. We believe that the success of the project for tourism and retail also rests on economic conditions. As the nation has enjoyed an economic boom for a considerable length of time, the future of these projects looks to be rosy right now. But the real challenge comes when the economy sees a downturn; the true success will be measured by the resilience of these projects in times of adverse economic conditions.

21

22

INTRODUCTION TO THE PORT OF LONG BEACH

Mr. Hal Hillard, Marketing Manager for the Port of Long Beach, opened the discussion with an outline of Long Beach's current successes and its plans for continued success in the future. The port itself handles both liquid and dry bulk ranging from petroleum to automobiles and its major growth trade has been driven primarily by the Asian market, whose currency devaluations have only accelerated the inflow of products from the continent.

It is this acceleration over the past 8 years that currently constitutes the port's biggest challenge and is manifesting itself primarily in its containerized trade, namely goods moved in 20, 40 and 45-foot cargo containers, which has grown by 150% since 1990 (4 million cargo containers up from 1.6 million). This makes Long Beach one of the two busiest ports in the US and, in combination with the other port, Los Angeles, makes it part of the busiest port complex in the world. The problem of congestion is being dealt with primarily through physical expansion, currently by the redevelopment of the closed Long Beach Naval Station and Naval Shipyard, a 300-acre terminal slated to open in 2000. Infrastructure (roadways and railways) is also in on-going expansion, with the Alameda Corridor project currently in development (slated for 2002). Capital improvement projects are funded at over $1 billion for the 1994-2000 period.

Location is a major reason for this top rating. With the rise of Pacific Rim

manufacturing centers, Long Beach has become a primary gateway for the trans-Pacific trade. In domestic terms, Long Beach also enjoys the advantage of close proximity to the 17 million consumers of Los Angeles County, the 11th largest economy in the world. Long Beach's natural advantages are also a factor as it is endowed with deepwater berths (which must be at least 45 feet deep) that do not silt up.

Aside from geographic advantages, the port also benefits from considerable infrastructural investment and facilities. These include 50 container cranes, two thirds

23

of which can accommodate ships too wide for the Panama Canal. This naturally attracts large ships. Intermodalism, or movement of cargo by train and truck, is also highly developed at the port and provides immediate access to national markets for which 50% of cargo passing through Long Beach is destined.

Management is also a factor in Long Beach's success. The primary operating principle is to run the port like a business with commensurate leasing policies for terminals, prudent fiscal policies and an exclusive, professionalized focus on cargo handling. All policies are set by the Board of Harbor Commissioners, who work in the private sector rather than in government. The port is, consequently, self-sufficient and largely autonomous from state government.

The port currently accounts for 260,000 jobs and its growth rate is expected to continue well into the next decade, with a total of 24 million container units and 875,000 new jobs anticipated by 2020. The major determining factor in continuing growth will be the long-term health of the Asian economy.

PRCUD members enjoy port tour.

PANELISTS' PRESENTATIONS

Ms. Gil Hicks, General Manager of the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, described the new rail corridor project, which is intended to eliminate traffic conflicts at all 200 grade crossing locations along the 20 mile line between Long Beach and the rail yards east of Los Angeles. Double-stacked or intermodal trains will move along a high-speed double track main line under centralized control. Improvements in efficiency, air quality, and economic performance are anticipated in this joint public-private sector project with $1.4 billion of the total $2.4 billion coming from revenue bonds, grants, federal loans, etc.

One key problem has been getting the railroads to agree to consolidate lines and give up their expensively acquired rights of way. The cooperation of cities along the new route, which are generally reluctant to increase their environmental control problems, was also a problem. Finally, in order to obtain adequate funding extensive negotiations with the federal government were necessary.

24

Mr. Don Wylie, Managing Director of Maritime Services for the Port of Long Beach, elaborated on Mr. Hillard's comments regarding the port's handling capacity, stating that as one of the fastest growing regions of the Pacific Rim, Long Beach has increased its handling from 3500 TEU's to 6000-7000 TEU's over the past several years.

Mr. Michael Roddy, President of Green Framing Systems, provided a perspective from local business on another dimension of Long Beach's facilities for commerce, its World Trade Center, whose optimal location facilitates coordination with other agencies. Mr. Tom Teofilo, President of the World Trade Center Association, elaborated on the Center's facilities in more detail. The Center opened in 1988 to link Long Beach to the globe by helping its 800 members find buyers, joint venture opportunities, financing and consulting services. It is the leading Center in the world based on volume of trade activity, which is mainly due to its location as a major Pacific Rim port. Its activities have created jobs and brought in tax revenue. Indeed, Long Beach is so important that the state of California itself, the leading state for import-export, has its own export office not in Sacramento, but in Long Beach, where much of the trade occurs. All this success has stimulated interest by other cities eager to increase their foreign trade opportunities.

OPEN DISCUSSION

The presentations sparked questions as to the sustainability of Long Beach's phenomenal growth. While the port was well-positioned to take advantage of Pacific Rim economic development, new developments, such as E-commerce might reduce these geographic advantages. In particular, attention was drawn to the impact of E-business at the levels of retail and delivery source as well as at the manufacturing level. The overall economic impact of such innovations raises questions regarding how to project future growth rates. Finally, economic crisis in Asia, which has transformed the patterns of full containers both entering and leaving Long Beach into empty ones for the return trip to Asia, also makes growth uncertain as does the more conventional worry of competitors. It was pointed out, however, that while the current imbalance of trade is relatively new, that imbalance in one form or another is the standard state of affairs and as such is not an unmanageable problem.

Several participants underscored earlier remarks as to the distinct connection between trade and transportation. While innovations in communications technology are generating corresponding enhancements in trade, transportation remains dependent on non-internet vehicles. With most current projections reckoning on a six to eight percent growth in trade far into the future, innovations in transportation will be necessary to keep abreast of the growth in trade. It is for this reason Long Beach endeavors to understand how logistics are changing as a result of the rising role of the internet in transportation. Thus far, the Port of Long Beach has benefited from the changing trade patterns, just as surely as some other West Coast ports have declined in the wake of the same transformations.

It was pointed out that even under the shifting relations between trade and transport, shipping continues to be the best bargain and no change in that fact seems to be on the horizon. Freight rates, in fact, are lower today than they were ten years ago. This condition has, of course, been partially responsible for a rise in shipping and panelists from Long Beach were queried about human resource deficiencies in

25

conditions of rapid expansion. Employees were gleaned from laid-off aerospace workers. The Port of Long Beach was fortunate in that its workforce was already assembled and needed only to be shifted into employment in international trade. What's more, international trade is perceived to offer a more secure career path. Even in times of recession, the Long Beach port was in a boom.

Under such conditions of prosperity it was urged that we pause to question whether spiraling trade is an altogether good change. By removing production activities from consumers, there is a separation of consumption and its consequences. Some of the profits derived from the expansion of trade should be ploughed back into efforts to restore those connections and heighten concern for the long-term impact on the global environment.

DISCUSSANT'S REMARKS (by Yiu-Kwan Fan)

As discussant, I see my role as one in which to stimulate thought and raise questions for more in depth discussion. Having said that, I must still acknowledge that the questions I am raising are probably unfair because of my relative ignorance about the city. We have learned a lot over the past couple of days, chiefly in the form of visits and some very good presentations that proved both informative and well-delivered.

The changes of the city over the past few years have been most impressive. There used to be a close, stable and highly predictable relation between trade and transportation. The growth of trade would demand the support of transportation systems, and the availability of transportation would enhance trade. However, two recent changes may lead to a shift in the relationship between trade and transportation:

1. Globalization of business: This shift has been produced in large measure by trade liberalization. The increasing flows of direct foreign investments among countries and between regions have induced companies to set up manufacturing plants and distribution centers in many different locations in the world. In most cases, the distance between the center of final consumption and the center of production is minimized to cut transportation cost. Thus, there may be increases in trade globally, but the demand for transportation in any one location may not be increased.

2. The rapid growth of e-commerce: Commercial activities are conducted in cyberspace and the delivery of goods and services may by-pass the traditional modes of transportation. The impact of e-commerce on the demand for transportation is not fully known. It may act to reduce the importance of the city’s advantageous location as a shipping port.

The patterns of international and inter-regional trade are also changing rapidly. For example, the Asian financial crisis has flooded exports into the United States, but lowered the volume of U.S. exports to Asian countries. This has caused the “empty containers” phenomenon – ships come to Long Beach with fully loaded containers, but leave with empty ones. The nature and impact of such changes in trade patterns should be studied carefully.

26

Designed to help cope with changing patterns of trade, the Alameda Corridor project is important to Los Angeles and Long Beach. It has involved a lengthy political process dealing with land acquisition, environmental issues, coordination of the railway, etc. It is a democratic process reconciling many different interests for the common good. Other cities can learn from this experience. Both the port expansion and the Alameda Corridor projects are based on the estimates of high demand growth for freight transport from now to 2025. While the estimates for the earlier years have been surpassed (partly due to the strong demand for consumption brought about by the booming economy, and partly due to the Asian financial crisis, which drove many Asian countries to export more), the estimates for the later years are likely to be overly optimistic as the U.S. economy slows down its growth and the rest of the world continues to adjust to new changes.

The future is full of uncertainties. Competition will come not only from other West Coast cities, but also from cyberspace. Is Long Beach ready to meet these future challenges?

27

28

INTRODUCTION TO LONG BEACH MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

Mr. Chris VanGorder, CEO of Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, opened the discussion with an overview of the economy of the California health system, which employs 1 in 14 private sector workers in California, a total of over 400,000 people who are paid $20 billion/year to care for over 3 million patients.

Long Beach Memorial Hospital itself is a 742-bed acute care facility with 1200 doctors on staff, making it the second largest community-owned hospital in the state. As it breaks even on its $300 million/year operating revenue, the hospital is highly dependent on philanthropy to fund its capital expansion and its academic teaching center, staffed by 150 teaching physicians. The hospital is affiliated with the University of California/Irvine and was accredited with commendation during its last review.

PANELISTS' PRESENTATIONS

Ms. Jean Bixby Smith, Chairman, Bixby Land Company, also began with general observations regarding the California health care economy, noting that health care, which includes social services, was the #1 employer in the state. However, her primary focus was on the problems created by excessive expansion of community hospitals, encouraged by financing made available by the Hill Burton Act. In addition, demand for state-of-the-art technology has caused its price to spiral. HMO's are, in part, a response to this problem. HMO's themselves, however, have become targets of consumer resistance and government regulation.

Mr. Ron Arias, Manager, Bureau of Public Health in the City of Long Beach's Department of Health and Human Services, explained how public health fits into the Long Beach community via a mission centered on insuring health care access to all. Arias traced the changing health care needs in Long Beach over the course of this century before sketching the role and function of public health in today's Long Beach. Chief among the missions of public health is of course a need to protect and promote health. This mission is carried out by endeavors to prevent disease and injury which include efforts as varied as providing a safe and healthy environment, underwriting research, and promoting healthy lifestyles. To this end, some public health projects currently underway in Long Beach include a Healthy Kids Coalition that serves 2,000 children in four school-based clinics that provide immunizations and preventative care,

29

a Senior Public Health Clinic that provides similar services of health education, disease prevention and flu treatment, and a Coalition for a Smoke-Free Long Beach that brings together partners from the private sector, universities and schools to spearhead restrictive smoking ordinances. This last project was particularly innovative and highly successful; Long Beach was one of the first major cities in the state of California to achieve a 100% smoke-free atmosphere in public space.

Mr. Stephen O'Keefe, Commercial & Retail Development Officer of the City of Long Beach's Business Development Center, addressed the business end of health care, which runs close to the aerospace industry in Long Beach in terms of employment. The city's enterprise zones offers tax credit for employment and equipment purchases, especially for large transactions such as the recent purchase of a building by Long Beach physicians. The city is moving from a revenue-based collection of data to a business outreach program intended to gather data from 5 industries.

Ms. Freda Hinsche Otto, Vice President of St. Mary's Medical Center Foundation, sought to provide a broader perspective on hospitals' economic issues. Private support is a crucial component for the financial sustenance of hospitals, which generally operate on increasingly thin margins, especially since they are required by law to provide charitable and indigent care, the cost of which must be recouped by delivered care.

Both St. Mary's and Long Beach Community Hospital returned $36 million in care last year. Major expenses were replacing technology, which become rapidly obsolete and which both patients and doctors demand be constantly upgraded. Another factor driving up costs was competition between hospitals for patients. Cost-cutting solutions focus on finding private support to underwrite outreach and social services.

Mr. Manuel Perez, AIA, UrbanArt Design & Development Consultants, stressed that health care, whether as part of the economy's service or consumption sector, is both an important social service and an important industry. Local government has recognized their important contribution of the over 1,000 people responsible for providing social services in the Long Beach community by providing social services with empowerment grants, a recognition that the region's economy cannot be totally expressed in terms of profit and loss. Nevertheless, the city remains in conflict over where to site unpopular social services that the community nevertheless acknowledges are needed but is reluctant to host.

Mr. Chris VanGorder began with a brief historical overview of American health care leading up to the current system of managed care, which arose due to increasing health care costs. This is a corporate model of health care with hospitals and physicians consolidating. While measures to control the cost of health care reduced it from 13% of the GDP in 1991 to a current 10%, there are now no more cost-cutting measures possible. As a result, 44.3 million Americans are without health insurance, in part because employers do not always provide it. In California alone 50,000 people/month become uninsured and emergency room service has now become a primary health care provider.

Dr. Gina Meng, Associate Professor in the Department of Urban and Environmental Studies of Beijing University declared healthy people were the basis of a healthy economy in her account of Chinese health care in China, where a hospital stay is likely to worsen a condition. Consequently, the emphasis is on prevention, including

30

exercise regimens designed to assist the body to treat itself. These practices have reduced the cost of health care in China, which is now a growth industry. Contradictions, however, exist between profit motives and the treatment of illness, especially during periods of market contraction. The current economic reforms in China have probably exacerbated this situation, which, in the wake of socialist austerity, now excessively emphasizes profit, particularly by prescribing unnecessary medicines.

PRCUD Members discuss issues on health and human welfare in Long Beach.

OPEN DISCUSSION

Much agreement was expressed on the notion that people must be weaned from an over-reliance on hospitals and instead encouraged to take more responsibility for their own care, particularly in the area of health maintenance and disease prevention. It was pointed out that ours is an aging population and that the generation that is reaching retirement age is one that has traditionally neglected to adapt to a healthier lifestyle. Long Beach, along with many other American communities, is facing an odd demographic dichotomy of having to simultaneously care for increasing populations of both seniors and children, but not many adults in the 25-44-year old range. Those in the health care industry in Long Beach are aware of the correlation between risk factors and ethnicity and income and so are striving to promote wellness in the form of physical activity and nutrition to overcome those conditions.

Although Long Beach hospitals have too many beds at present, these beds are expected to soon become occupied by the aging residents of Long Beach. The demand for beds is also seasonal; occupancy rates are much higher in the winter months.

It was pointed out that economic health and health care in Long Beach are very tightly linked by the "three T's" strategy which encourages the development of affordable technological solutions to medical problems. A need was expressed to link demographic trends on policies' effect on different communities. Long Beach is, in fact,

31

the perfect social lab for America; most cities in the U.S. will look like Long Beach in twenty or thirty years. Moreover, Long Beach is already a perfect microcosm of the state of California.

Long Beach has an impact on health care beyond its borders by exporting technology and research and development. The Long Beach health care industry partners with technological firms in its efforts to be a benchmark for America. One of its more striking innovations include the use of laptops for home health to prevent visits.

Many saw a need to improve overall efficiency and competitiveness in the American health care industry. Why, it was asked, does a country that devotes 14% of its GDP fail to deliver health care to 30-40% of its populace? Long Beach, if it wishes to be exceptional, must endeavor to act as a model of efficiency and comprehensive delivery. Still, cost-effective public health care faces many structural obstacles, some of which have to do with patient demands in a consumer-oriented society. Americans will not queue for medical care, for example. Another factor driving the cost of health care in America is the country's litigious culture. Further, connections were made as to the individual's responsibility for the cost of health care and that person's willingness to engage in disease prevention. If someone else was paying for the care, it was argued, most would be disinclined to take a role in prevention.

DISCUSSANT’S REMARKS (by Dr. Gina X. Meng)

This session on Health Care and Economic Health makes it very clear that we cannot have a healthy economy without healthy people. Two points of view about health care have been represented and discussed in our roundtable: patients, or consumers, and the health care industry. I would like to bring a Chinese perspective to this discussion. From the perspective of the consumers, I want to make three points:

1. Prevention is more important than treatment. When people are ill, it is important to give them treatment and help them recover. Modern medical technologies are very good and are still developing. But the costs are high and people still have to suffer. The best alternative is to pay more attention to prevention, which can reduce the social resources that are allocated to medicine, and people can have a good life with less need for medical support. This has been the stance of Chinese medicine for centuries.

2. A healthy life-style contributes infinitely more to wellness than drugs. To prevent illness occurring, a proper life-style is essential. Many problems come from unhealthy habits such as over-eating, diets lacking in nutrients, smoking and lack of exercise. Chinese medicine has a lot to say about the components of a healthy life, which range from diet, to dress, housing and all manner of daily behavior. All of these factors should change with the natural changes of different seasons. Adoption of a healthy life-style implies acceptance of the responsibility to first care for oneself and not to rely only on medicine and doctors.

3. Mental health is important to physical health. Chinese medicine estimates about 80% of illness results from mental problems, or psychological imbalance. The human condition has a large potential to adjust itself, but when we have high stress

32

levels for long periods, the body is unable to adjust itself and illness follows. So the Chinese have “tai chi” and meditation to help them relax psychologically and physically. In a relaxed mode, the body can adjust its balance. In modern society, competition is quite serious and many people live under considerable strain and pressure. Sooner or later, they develop health problems. So a healthy mind (self-adjusting psychologically) is very important to adjusting to this physical stress.

From the view of the medical industry, there are two points:

1. The medical industry is important to the economy (10-15% of GDP) creating jobs and contributing to the GDP. However, the medical industry has a dilemma. On the one hand, it creates more jobs and contributes to the economy and this requires a steady flow of paying patients. On the other hand, we hope people have a good health and recover quickly from illness. If we do well on this side, the industry will stagnate or shrink. In China, doctors prescribe patients more medicine than they need in order to generate income for the hospital. The medical industry is an industry in which consumers cannot be in control because they do not know what they need for medical treatment. Doctors have the power to order prescriptions and tests and regardless of the recommendations, patients must pay. So society needs to keep a balance between the medical industry's growth agenda and society’s needs for maintaining good health.

2. Other consumer industries also have significant impact on people’s health. Some products like cigarettes are harmful and some are not healthy like fried potato chips and fast food. Society should have more stringent controls on the unhealthy products and should teach people to understand what is healthy and what is not. Chinese medicine says many things can be harmful if used incorrectly, but even poisons could be beneficial if used correctly. What is key is to produce the right things for the appropriate people-- a challenge in a market driven society with strong profit motives.

Perhaps what is most significant about Long Beach is a strong Bureau of Public Health. If its programs were expanded and the benefits increased to the community at large this could offset the excess in demands for medical service placed on facilities like Long Beach Memorial Medical Center and other community medical centers. There is an opportunity to learn from Chinese medicine's emphasis on health and wellness, in order to achieve balance in the economics of health care delivery in Long Beach.

Healthcare is a social issue. Although PRCUD members are not experts in this field, they provided a useful discussion and insights from a general social and urban perspective from the Pacific Rim that is relevant to the situation of Long Beach. The following points that were raised bear repeating:

Long Beach is a diversified society with a minority population over 50%, which makes it a model for the future US population. Diversity, on one hand, can contribute to a dynamic economy; on the other hand, newly arriving minorities are usually poor, which makes the poverty rate for Long Beach 17%, or 5% over the average for the state of California. Healthcare access for the poor is a major issue and requires creative financing through State, Federal and private programs.

33

The increasingly aging population is a common phenomenon of modern society and Long Beach is also facing this challenge. Older people need more health care and medical services. With the increase of the older population, health care costs will become a burden on society. Changes in life-style can help reduce this burden.

In Long Beach, 55% of deaths result from heart and cancer problems, both of which are related to lack of physical activities and poor nutrition/diet and general life-style problems. More effort should be made in promoting healthy life-styles. Much can be learnt from the western Pacific Rim countries in this respect in their focus on healthy life-styles.

From the health care industry perspective, efficiency and competitiveness are very important. In the process of industrial globalization and high-tech development, the scope and extent of competition will be much wider and stronger. How this challenge is met will prove significant for the local economy of Long Beach. Can 15% of the GDP be allocated to the health industry with significant numbers still without access or should there be structural change which increases competitiveness and improves the distribution of services?

Based on the above points, several recommendations follow:

Long Beach can set up a model health care system in a diversified society by strengthening public health participation. The key issues are cost-effective health care delivery and access for low income people through creative financing. Special emphases should be placed on life-style changes through creative public awareness programs targeted at special groups, thus reducing the demand for expensive and duplicated medical services and reallocating these resources to broad based community health care.

The key is a healthy life-style to prevent or reduce illness. Western scientific knowledge and Chinese traditional methods both are helpful. Heart problem and cancer in large measure result from mental stress that is a common phenomenon of our modern competitive society. Eastern exercises like “tai chi” and meditation are very good at helping people relax and keeping healthy. Self-care benefits both individuals and society and reduce demands on expensive and unaffordable medical care.

For implementing the three “T” (tourism, trade and technology) strategy of Long Beach, the medical industry can make a major contribution. The export of medical services can be done through channels of tourism (services to tourists and overseas visitors through skillful marketing) and high-tech (internet). Facing the Pacific Rim, Long Beach has a distinct advantage to enter the market of newly industrializing countries (NIC's). The local cultural diversity will be helpful in establishing the relations and connections for promoting of services in the NIC's. In the globalization process, service exports increase faster than physical products. Advance initiative is important in market competition, so Long Beach should consider formulating an early action strategy for medical service export. At the same time, the city should be strengthening its domestic health and wellness programs as a model US community.

34

35

PANELISTS' PRESENTATIONS

Mr. Steve Chesser, a Senior Manager of Community Relations at Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, explained that the firm he represented constituted not only the largest employer in the City of Long Beach, but also in the State of California. As such, Boeing plays an integral role in the Long Beach economy. With its local workforce of 16,000, Boeing employees comprise an enormous volunteer base engaged in projects of beach clean-up, literacy campaigns, and a number of other areas. The firm prides itself on its charitable contributions to the community and its partnership with the city. Some areas of past cooperation include Boeing's private sector endorsement of the city's federal grant proposals for youth opportunity endeavors, as well as support for grants to retrain laid-off Boeing workers. Employers, stressed Mr. Chesser, recognize the linkage between community quality of life, quality of workforce and business climate. It is for this reason that the top priority in Boeing's community investment is to strengthen local education. In 1999, this particular commitment expressed itself in the form of a $65,000 charitable contribution to Long Beach Unified School District.

The Honorable Bonnie Lowenthal, Member of the Board of Education at Long Beach Unified School District, echoed Mr. Chesser's valuation of education. Indeed, education, in the form of both English as a Second Language and vocational training, was a vital component of the package of services aimed at empowering the Cambodian community with which Ms. Lowenthal has worked extensively. Ms. Lowenthal discussed the unique challenge posed by the attempt to empower the Cambodian community in Long Beach. In distinction to other immigrant groups, the Cambodians in Long Beach are, with few exceptions, an entirely refugee community. The Cambodian empowerment group with which Ms. Lowenthal works began just over a decade ago with a goal of self-sufficiency for the Cambodian community. To this end, services the organization provided covered a range from education to health care to cultural preservation deemed crucial for sustaining the identity necessary to any empowerment. This focus on culture was not without its material effects; in commodified form, the arts became a source of profit for several local Cambodian artists and entrepreneurs. The City's outreach to its 40,000 Cambodian residents has also resulted in the construction of a bridge between the City of Long Beach and its Sister City, Phnom Penh. The combined effect of these endeavors has indeed empowered the Cambodian community of Long Beach. The key to that success, stressed Lowenthal, was collaboration, both within Long Beach and beyond, at every level.

Ms. Phyllis Moore Venable's target population was broader than Ms. Lowenthal's to include approximately 50,000 citizens in distressed areas demarcated as an empowerment zone, so selected in the hope that this community-within-a-community would be the recipient of a federal government grant (See Appendix II). Though Long Beach's bid proved unsuccessful, Ms. Moore Venable, who was appointed to spearhead the project, noted that the process of the application became more important than the target product of the grant as new means of citizen input into community development were forged. Citizens' committees were established to attempt to dissolve long-standing distrust between the residents and city officials in distressed areas. Ms. Moore Venable's story was fraught with a good deal of difficulties. Even as trust was established and citizens came to understand they could help shape change in their community, many shirked responsibility for charting a course

36

for neighborhood renewal. Gradually, however, seven committees were formed in total, each of sixty to seventy people and these committees gradually persuaded other citizens that they had a role to play in mapping their neighborhood's future. With more active input from a greater number in the body politic, community empowerment occurred and institutions were erected that continue to involve more of the citizenry in community transformation.

Beyond those targeted distressed areas, the Long Beach Community Services Development Corporation serves the low income population of the entire city. Dr. Lance Williams, an anthropologist and the organization's president and chief executive officer, explained the enormity of that mission and pointed out how his federally-funded organization empowers its clients through providing education and promoting cultural awareness. To best serve the needs of its diverse community, half of the organization's staff is bilingual; staff members are proficient in a wide range of languages from Tagalog to Khmer. What's more, the multiethnic composition of the staff reflects that of its clientele and is one of a number of attributes that invites participant involvement in its programs. Some of the organization's programs helping to, in Dr. William's words, transform residents into "stockholders in the community," include a charter school, computer training, an economic literacy program, health care initiatives, and sponsorship of activities in the arts.

A recently completed housing project in a distressed area of Long Beach.

OPEN DISCUSSION

Appreciation was expressed for the holistic approach of the Long Beach empowerment programs and their combined focus on the material, cultural, and psychological enrichment of their community. In addition, it was felt that the programs referred to above were contributing very practically to improving the quality of life for the entire city. Indeed, this and earlier roundtables had demonstrated the commitment to improving the quality of life in the city was shared by the city's private sector. Partnership between the city and industry on restoring the air and water quality attests

37

to mutual acknowledgment of the correlation between environment and economic prosperity. Ms. Moore Venable's account of the challenge of harnessing and sustaining citizens' enthusiasm in a community organization were particularly appreciated. The core goals of the Long Beach empowerment programs were reminiscent of those of similar organizations in cities represented by council members, such as Brisbane's "Care Australia" that empowers through low-capital projects providing people with a means to earn. It was pointed out that this long view of quality of life issues is key to invigorating urban communities.

Ms. Moore Venable spoke to the complication of measuring quality of life in her effort to target zones of Long Beach for empowerment. Seventeen of Long Beach's fifty or so census tracts qualified as distressed due to overcrowdedness, unemployment, drugs, or gangs. Even more challenging is persuading beleaguered residents of distressed areas that change is possible. Ms. Lowenthal agreed, noting that the reach of such programs will always be limited. Empowerment programs can only provide opportunity; they cannot ensure that everyone avails themselves of the opportunities. Ms. Lowenthal expressed a need for programs to reach out to traditionally ignored elements in the community, such as the undocumented residents of Long Beach with long roots in the city. Undocumented people, she stressed, are a huge "shadow population" the city often fails to recognize. The refugee population in general comprises the bulk of the city's indigent population. Dr. Williams attested to the hopelessness of youth illegals, the vast majority of whom lack school enrollment or jobs. Because illegals can't obtain licenses and enter businesses, they have no potential for mobility.

In response to questions about some of the more concrete and lasting effects of the empowerment zone project, Ms. Moore Venable pointed to seventy-two non-profit service providers who provide some objectives. She also specified two initiatives that arose from the project: a business development center replicating services in the community and a scheme for the city to buy back absentee commercial rental property.

DISCUSSANT'S REMARKS

The empowerment programs already in place and the benefits accruing to the community are impressive. The commitment of the people to the success of such programs is an essential factor in the success of the movement. There are obvious inter-relationships between what has been put forward in the recent presentations and what may be learned from presentations and discussions at previous sessions. For differing reasons and through different means, all of the major employers in the LBUSD, i.e., the Port of Long Beach, Boeing, the health care industry, and government, are seeking to ensure that the citizens of Long Beach enjoy an ever-improving, sustainable quality of life. However, there are some elements which could affect the overall assessment of the future vitality of Long Beach and which have not been spoken of thus far. These concern the health profiles of neighborhoods charted against their locations relevant to "dirty" industries, i.e., distances from sources of continual pollution, prevailing air movements, frequency of inversion layers, and the like. They also concern the degree to which health services are targeted towards neighborhoods continually afflicted by industrial pollution and the costs of such services to the community as a whole.

38

Such factors bear on the possible quality of life achievable in certain communities. Happiness in this world requires independence of thought and action. Life experienced through a miasma of pollution must be of a lesser quality than that without such limitations. If people are not healthy, their quality of life is diminished, just as their ability to participate in the life of the community is restricted. These consequences directly affect people's opportunities for empowerment. Their chances of achieving equality and full empowerment, in the sense previously described, are minimal.

Long Beach still has pollution traps many of which may well result from emissions from operations in adjoining cities. The City and its employer stakeholders are no doubt aware of the problem and are considering how they may achieve their quality of life objectives through unified action at local, state, and national levels. Another strategy may be to separate "clean/quiet" neighborhoods from sources of continual pollution over time.

Maintaining and/or improving the quality of life in a community requires on-going input and action by its members. It is difficult to create and harness the necessary enthusiasm to initiate group action and it is even harder to sustain it. Still, it must be pointed out that these problems are not unique to Long Beach. Moreover, Long Beach has an impressive repertoire of empowerment ideas which include the Job Corps for 16 to 24-year old people, the Plant-a-tree-then-you-can-hug-it initiative, Habitat for Humanity - a sweat equity housing scheme, and many others.

Finally, the caution offered by Dr. Yiu-Kwan Fan regarding the electronic revolution now underway in international commerce and its possible long term consequences for the Port on the one hand, and other industries on the other, must be considered. Their ability to continue to underwrite the economic well-being of the City and its citizens should not be taken for granted.

PRCUD Board Member Elwyn Wyeth and his wife, Gwenda Wyeth, talking with former PRCUD President Yiu-Kwan Fan.

SUMMARY (by Elwyn Wyeth)

39

Long Beach is home to many different peoples from a multitude of cultural backgrounds. As an urban community, it is quite young when compared with the cities of the East Coast and even younger than those of the Old World. The town grew from an agricultural area into a resort community that was changed radically by the discovery of oil. A processing industry followed but the degree of industrialization never approached that of urban Detroit or Pittsburgh. As such, Long Beach has avoided many of the urban development problems which bedevil other cities.

While the city may not be classified as a "company town", its economy appears to rely heavily on the success of a very few major employers, that is, the Port of Long Beach, Boeing, and the health care industry. All of these appear to be doing well at this time, and are bullish about the future. They should be able to provide the economic base necessary for the empowerment of the economically disadvantaged persons in the community. Most of such people are refugees, recent immigrants from under-developed societies, or illegal immigrants. The refugees and other recent immigrants are formally recognized and can receive assistance through publicly funded programs. The "illegals" are unrecognized and are thus forced into "shadow" existences.

Empower Long Beach, the LBCSD Corporation, and other community action organizations have had some success in their endeavors to make refugees and recent immigrants self-sufficient, productive members of the community. The Alameda Corridor project is an empowerment project as well as being one of national economic benefit. It will provide employment, training, and improved living environments for many in adjacent disadvantaged neighborhoods. Complementing this effect is the Long Beach's "Sustainable City" initiative, which aims at empowerment of all through enhancing the quality of life throughout the municipality. Strategies such as delivering services at the neighborhood level with its locally based programs of code enforcement, mediation, community policing, health services, child care, and preservation are already reducing costs to the community. This must be to the economic benefit of all, with funds saved diverted into other much-needed community-benefit projects.

Some macro problems remain. These need consideration in any strategic planning for economic development of the city and the region.

the effects of rapidly evolving electronic commerce on local businesses (inside and outside distressed areas);

the future directions of seaborne trade in the light of the above and of the emergence of the Asian economies and their consequent ability to prosper through North-South trade rather than East-West trade; and

40

illegal immigrants - how to prevent new arrivals, how to legitimize those now living in the city, and then, how to harness their potential to enhance all aspects of the community.

The success of the empowerment initiative demonstrates that Long Beach cares and that it has a "can do" approach to overcoming challenges. Such attitudes are to be applauded and encouraged. Long Beach is positioning itself well for the new millennium.

41

APPENDIX 1 DEMOGRAPHIC/ ECONOMIC PROFILE OFLONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA

(Data provided by the City of Long Beach)

POPULATION AND AGE (Persons)Total 1990 population 429,433 (100.0%)Under 18 years of age 109,467 (25.5%)18 to 64 years of age 273,503 (63.7%)65 years of age and over 46,463 (10.8%)

Median age (in 1990): 30.0 years

1980 POPULATION (Persons)Total 1980 population 361,334 (100.0%)Asian/American Ind/Other 26,006 (7.2%)Black/Afro-American 40,034 (11.1%)Hispanic (of any race) 50,700 (14.0%)White/Caucasian 244,594 (67.7%)

1980-1990 CHANGE (Persons)Change in Population 68,099 (18.8%)Asian/American Ind/Other 32,448 (124.8%)Black/Afro-American 16,771 (41.9%)Hispanic (of any race) 50,719 (100.0%)White/Caucasian 31,839 (-13.0%)

RACE/ORIGIN (1990) (Persons)American Indian and Others 220 ( 0.7%)Asian and Pacific Islanders 55,234 (12.9%)Black/Afro-American 56,805 (13.2%)Hispanic (of any race) 101,419 (23.6%)White/Caucasian 212,755 (49.5%)

TYPES OF HOUSEHOLDS (Hhlds)Total households in 1990 158,975 (100.0%)Family households 93,913 (59.1%)Couple/children under 18 33,211 (35.4%)Single/children under 18 18,378 (19.6%)No children under 18 42,424 (45.2%)One-person household 49,008 (30.8%)Two or more unrelated 16,054 (10.1%)

Persons per household: 2.61

IN GROUP QUARTERS (Persons)Total in Group Quarters 14,217 (100.0%)Institutionalized 4,026 (28.3%)All others (inc. military) 10,191 (71.7%)

42

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT (Persons)Population enrolled 118,074 (100.0%)Elementary/High School 69,833 (59.1%)College/Graduate/Prof. 41,804 (35.4%)

HIGHEST EDUCATION (Persons)Total age 25 or more 264,625 (100.0%)Less than High School 64,797 (24.5%)High School only 55,970 (21.2%)Some college or AA degree 82,423 (31.1%)BS/BA (assumes HS degree) 41,908 (15.8%)Graduate (assumes BS/BA) 19,527 (7.4%)

LANGUAGE AT HOME (Persons)Population age five or more 392,409 (100.0%)Language other than English 128,567 (32.8%)Spanish spoken at home 75,054 (58.4%)Asian language at home 42,320 (32.9%)English not very good 70,363 (17.9%)

EMPLOYMENT (Jobs)Total employment (1990) 235,027 (100.0%)Agriculture 340 (0.1%)Mining 920 ( 0.4%)Construction 6,115 (2.6%)Manufacturing 65,875 (28.0%)Utilities 13,177 (5.6%)Wholesale 6,569 (2.8%)Retail 30,607 (13.0%)Finance/Ins/Real Estate 10,884 (4.6%)Services 85,017 (36.2%)Government 15,514 (6.6%)

1989 ANNUAL INCOME (Hhlds)Total households (1990) 159,234 (100.0%)Less than $25,000 62,338 (39.1%)$25,000 to $49,999 52,038 (32.7%)$50,000 and over 44,858 (28.2%)

Median household (1989) $31,938Median family (1989) $36,305Median nonfamily (1989) $25,239Per Capita (1989) $15,639

INCOME TYPE (1990) (Hhlds)Wage and salaries 123,645 (77.6%)Social Security 33,498 (21.0%)Public assistance 18,072 (11.3%)

43

Retirement 21,858 (13.7%)

POVERTY STATUS (Persons)Total for whom determined 414,425 (100%)Below poverty level 69,694 (16.8%)Total children under 18 years 105,962 (100.0%)Below poverty level 28,484 (26.9%)Total 65 years and over 43,556 (100.0%)Below poverty level 3,974 (9.1%)Total families 94,905 (100.0%)Below poverty level 12,818 (13.5%)

EMPLOYMENT STATUS (Persons)Civilian Labor Force 211,638 (100.0%)Unemployed (1990) 14,520 (6.9%)

OCCUPATIONAL PROFILE (Persons)Total employed persons 197,118 (100.0%)Professional speciality 30,312 (15.4% )Technicians and support 7,264 (3.7%)Sales occupations 22,343 (11.3%)Admin. support, clerical 34,064 (17.3%)Household and service 27,346 (13.9%)Farming, forestry, fishing 1,908 (1.0%)Precision production, craft 21,284 (10.8%)Machine operators 11,682 (5.9%)Transportation occupations 6,954 (3.5%)Handlers and laborers 7,413 (3.8%)

44

APPENDIX 2 EMPOWERMENT ZONE DETAILS(Data provided by the City of Long Beach)

CITY OF LONG BEACH – PROPOSED EMPOWERMENT ZONE

Area.............................2.31 square milesPopulation.....................................46,409

Latino.........................................45%Asian..........................................26%African American.......................23%

Median Household Income.........$17,956Poverty..............................................39%

City Council Districts 1,2,4,6

Housing Units 12,355Pre 1970 71%Renter occupied 75%Owner occupied 15%

Unemployment 14%High School Drop-out 54%

KEY IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES EXISTING OVERLAYSComprehensive Job Training & Placement CDBG Target ZoneImproved & Accessible Child Care CDBG NIS AreasYouth Mentoring Central Redevelopment Project AreaCapacity Building for Community Based Organizations State Enterprise ZondSmall Business Development Federal Homeownership ZoneHealth Care/Human Services Accessibility/Affordability Federal Transportation HUB zoneGang Prevention/Intervention Federal SBA HUB zone

45

Empower Long Beach

CSULB Foundation

Executive Director

Program Partners Technology Partners Working Committees

Empower Long Beach Executive

Empower Long Beach Coordinating Council35 members. Policy-making and goal setting body.

CSULB FoundationAdministration and management oversight. Empower Long Beach Executive Committee9 members. Provides programmatic oversight and guidance to Working Committees. Empower Long Beach Working CommitteesEstablished by Coordinating Council, as appropriate,feedback, and ensure citizen involvement.

Program PartnersAgencies/organizations selected to implement programs, services, initiatives.

Technology PartnersEstablished by Coordinating Council, as appropriate, to advance EZ goals and initiatives.

Job Training/Employmt Dev.

Youth CBO Development

Health/HumanServices

Implementation/Performance

Business Incentives

GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

EZ PARTNERS SELECTION PROCESS (72 PARTNERS)

RFQ/I Released by EZ Working Group

Interested Organizations &Agencies Submit Response

Responses Reviewed/Rankedby Collaborative Panel

Programs/Enhancements Developed; Agency

EZ PARTNERS ARE GROUPED INTO TIERS OF PARTICIPATION LEVELS:TIER I PARTNERS may receive funds to enhance programs/services & assist in capacity building for other partners.TIER II PARTNERS may participate in collaboratives & partnerships with other partners to deliver programs/services.TIER III PARTNERS may receive technical assistance and capacity building to strengthen organization.TIER IV PARTNERS may receive business counselling and developmental assistance.