Economic Development in three Urban Areas: Atlanta, Baltimore and Cleve

Executive SummaryThe following pages review the comprehensive strategies that suck in been used by the cities of battle of Atlanta, Baltimore and Cleveland to improve their economic conditions. It should become apparent to the indorser that the fate of separately city is determined by many factors including historic events, the balance of power between stakeholder groups, the ability of the city to capitalize on federal programs and the relationships between the private sector and the community. Unfortunately, no clear lovable strategy arose from each citys economic development efforts they solely caused both gainers and losers.Atlanta is a city that is led by business sector leading whose main priority is to promote business interests that are at times at odds with the communities development. Baltimore, with very little private investment, relies heavy on its citizens involvement whose collective bargaining and activism possess hindered its political leadings attempts at growth. Cleveland has fallen victim to ivory tower leadership that has led to financial mismanagement and increased community frustration.I have attempted to review the last decade in each city, and in the context of that city examine the strengths and weaknesses of their actions. The scope of this project is large. To focus on the ratifiers attention on the difficulty the cities have experienced in trying to meet their stakeholders needs and expectations, I have chosen to focus on a few specific actions that were taken in each city to promote economic development. This discussion is by no agency exhaustive additional learnings can be gleamed from further research.AtlantaAtlantas political and social structure and development has been characterized by what reference Clarence Stone labels regime politics in his book Regime government Governing Atlanta 1946-1989. The regimes determining factor is the mostly formed coalitions and collaborations between the white Atlanta elite an d the black set class leadership. The partnership (although the power was not balanced between the groups equally) has its beginnings in the 1940s when astute white businessmen properly predicted the growth of a black middle class and a shifting in electoral power. Faced with two choices to use their social and economic clout to crusade the inevitable changes in politic... ...nnovation Study Suggests Metro Area Must modify its Priorities to Increase Prosperity. Atlanta Journal & Constitution. Nov. 5, 2001.Shields, Gerard. 2 bills Aim to Bring BDC Into the open(a) city Senators Want Agencys Meetings Accessible to Public Mayor Opposes Measures Proposals Critics Say bloodline Dealings Require Secrecy. The Baltimore Sun. February 21, 2000.Siegel, Eric. Renewal Efforts Move at Slow maltreat Empowerment Zone Shows Spot Successes Five Years After Grant. The Baltimore Sun. Jan 10, 2000.Smith, Jane. A Dialogue on The Atlanta Project with Jane Smith, Executive Director. The Inner City Urban Poverty and Economic Development in the Next Century. ed Thomas Boston and Catherine Ross. New Brunswick, NJ Transaction Publishers, 1997. pp. 291-297.Smothers, Ronald. Cleveland Mayor Warns Newark an field of operation Is No Cure-All. New York Times. Oct 20, 1999.Stone, Clarence. Regime Politics Governing Atlanta 1946-1989. Lawrence, Ks University hale of Kansas, 1989.Videotape The Cleveland Turnaround Leadership In Action, (Boston Harvard Business Publishing Corporation, 1996).The Cleveland today website. http//www.clevelandtoday.org/info/edit.html