A Regional Leadership Model: Joint Venture: Silicon Valley's New President, Ruben Barrales

The following appeared in the January, 1999 issue of Metro Investment Report, the insiders' guide to public investment in the region. For subscriptions, back issues or reprints, go to www.ablinc.net/mir , or call (213) 629-9019.

Last month, former San Mateo County Supervisor Ruben Barrales took over as President & CEO of Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network following Becky Morgan's retirement. TPR is pleased to present the following update from Barrales on Joint Venture's evolving public/private agenda, following release of its new vision statement, "Silicon Valley 2010: A Regional Framework for Growing Together," the text of which is available at www.jointventure.org.

Ruben, you've left politics momentarily and taken on the Presidency of Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network. Last October, our newsletter had a chance to do an interview with Joint Venture's former President, Becky Morgan. Could you take a moment to share with our readers the evolving agenda of Joint Venture: Silicon Valley and what you hope to bring to this task?

Joint Venture: Silicon Valley's real impetus was the economic downturn in the State and Silicon Valley in the early '90s. Local industry and government leaders understood that the region needed coordination and better partnerships between local government and industry. Early on, Joint Venture brought government and industry together to work on permit streamlining, economic development and education. We have evolved, of course, like most organizations and regions. Most leaders in Silicon Valley would tell you that the most pressing issues facing us today are education, housing and transportation. And, Joint Venture is evolving to address these needs in our region. It's important to mention that if the economy cycles downward again-which it will do-and we find ourselves economically challenged, the original reason for this regional effort will come back into focus. We will put our primary efforts into keeping industries in the region and maintaining our quality of life while promoting economic development.

You have just finished a 2010 visioning study for the Silicon Valley region and for Joint Venture. I wonder if you could share some of the highlights of the conclusions Joint Venture's reached in that effort.

The visioning process for the 2010 report brought together the region's diverse economic, geographic and ethnic communities. We came up with 17 goals. The most important are issues in four areas-protecting our environment, expanding economic opportunity, improving public education and encouraging civic engagement.

What tasks must be accomplished before you are able to deal effectively with each of those four areas?

Most critical now is to focus on the quality of our public schools. Most people in our region understand that Silicon Valley has provided its residents with wonderful economic opportunities. And for that to continue, we need to make sure all residents have access to high quality education and the ability to move into the new economy jobs. In terms of the environment, Silicon Valley over the last five decades has grown from primarily agricultural uses and orchards to high-tech industry and industrial parks. That presents a challenge in the form of maintaining our livable environment. We are confident we can come up with a mix that actually promotes economic growth and preserves the environment.

Your predecessor was quoted in her interview last October saying, "State tax policy is a major impediment to improving sustainability. Cities get their revenues from sales tax, so it behooves them to put in a Costco, a Wal-Mart or an auto mall. They don't get property tax from new homes. Until we change that tax policy, we're not going to solve our housing problem." As a former candidate for Controller, do you endorse and subscribe to those concerns, and what is Joint Venture going to do about these issues?

Those concerns are more real today than ever before. I come at this from a local government perspective, having been a County Supervisor. I've seen first-hand that our system is totally backwards and needs to be fixed. Right now, the incentives are for local governments to minimize the amount of housing units built and to maximize the number of Home Depots, Big K supermarkets, shopping centers and big box retail outlets. California has tied itself into a knot in terms of its inability to provide dollars for infrastructure, transportation or housing. The key untying that knot is to allow local governments the ability to make infrastructure investments themselves.

You've just been stumped in California as the Republican candidate for Controller. Given what you've just said, why is it so difficult to galvanize people around the need to focus and remove the barriers to this juggernaut with respect to State-local fiscal and tax policy? What keeps it from happening?

Those of us with a regional perspective understand that the key to more livable communities is to fix the fiscal relationship between the local and State governments. But it's hard to develop a grass roots movement around that issue. People don't get excited about ERAF. You really only get people's attention by having them sit in traffic and pay incredible amounts for housing. So what we need to do-those of us who understand the link between good urban and regional planning and State-local finance-is help make that link clearer. We need to demonstrate how an improved State-local relationship can help create incentives for more housing and help identify dollars to invest in our transportation systems and other infrastructure. In 1998/99, people understand that there is a problem that needs to be fixed. And those of us who are concerned about California need to bring this issue to the forefront.

The Speaker of the California Assembly, Antonio Villaraigosa, in bipartisan concert with other members of the leadership of the Legislature, has appointed a new blue ribbon commission on State-local government finance. I wonder what your open advice and counsel would be to that Commission as they take up their duties in late January.

Move forward with some concrete steps that the Legislature can adopt and that will make a difference. Be aggressive. Try to put some recommendations in place as quickly as possible. And get a sense of whether or not the Legislature is ready to do what needs to be done in California-rearrange the fiscal structure between local and State government.

Lastly, if you were writing Gov. Davis an open letter to elicit his priorities with the intent of urging him to address issues that correspond to Joint Venture's agenda, what priorities would be included in your letter?

First of all-and it's something he has already stated-education is a priority for California. Second is the need to keep local tax dollars at the local level. I think Gov. Davis understands this. Give local entities, whether they're school districts, counties or cities, the opportunity to keep moneys generated at the local level at the local level. This way they can be spent on infrastructure and other local needs. Try to make due at the State level with a little bit less, allowing our regions, our cities and our counties a little bit more to do their jobs.