The Bay Area needs a new governance model

Regional governance has been debated for decades, however, in my nearly two decades as an official, I have never seen a wider gap between the state and local governments. The fact is, issues like the jobs/housing imbalance, regional transportation and the rising problems of homelessness are simply too big for cities to solve. And when we don’t solve those problems, we get heavy-handed new laws imposed by the state. I have seen firsthand how unintended consequences result from well-intentioned state laws. That is why we need effective regional governance.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission, better known as MTC, is the transportation planning, financing and coordinating agency for the nine counties and 101 cities and towns in the Bay Area. The Association of Bay Area Governments, or ABAG, is a regional planning agency for the same area. In the ’90s, there was a serious legislative effort to merge these bodies, along with other regional agencies, but that effort failed. A few years back, the MTC and ABAG agreed to a merger of sorts, wherein they share the same staff but operate independently. This relationship has not proven to be any more successful.

One of the big problems with the current model is that the public does not get to determine who sits on these bodies, and most voters have never even heard of them. San Mateo County’s representatives to MTC and ABAG are selected by the county’s mayors from among the councilmembers of the county’s 23 cities, and councilmembers actively jockey for these positions. That means that a part-time policy maker, who was not elected by 96 percent of the county’s residents, represents us on these regional bodies. If that sounds complicated, that’s because it is. It’s also proven to be unaccountable and ineffective.

My plan is simple. Abolish ABAG and MTC, and replace those organizations with a governing body comprised of the members of the Board of Supervisors from each county. Since the nine Bay Area counties (except San Francisco) each have five county supervisors, it would make sense for those supervisors to be our representatives to the regional body. Each county would have five representatives, and every resident of the Bay Area would have one person that they elect directly, who would serve as part of the 45-member body. Since county supervisors represent cities within their districts, they would be incentivized to work with city leadership, something the current model does not incentivize.

As part of planning for the region, this new body would approve cities’ general plans to ensure consistency with the regional plan. Projects with a regional impact would also be approved by this new body, and cities would not be allowed to add thousands of jobs without a complementary plan for housing and transportation. Jobs and housing would be allowed only where they make sense, and cities would retain flexibility and negotiating rights related to local zoning.

Additionally, regional discussions would no longer be dominated by big city mayors, as they are now. Mayors would have power only to the extent that they influence their counties’ representatives, no county would have any more say in the region than any other county, and no new elected positions would need to be created.

My hope is that under a new model, we could work toward regional goals in a truly coordinated way, and tackle the most daunting challenges of the region, while maintaining a reasonable amount of local control. Let’s begin a serious conversation on what our region needs, and what is possible under a new governance model.

Ian Bain is the mayor of Redwood City.