The economic and demographic energy that's needed to keep Minneapolis healthy depends on a competitive metropolitan economy, an increasing city population and a healthy mix of household types.
When a metro economy languishes, the central city begins to die. Metro Detroit's population dropped 3.5 percent between 2000 and 2010, but the city's population plummeted 25 percent.
When metro Cleveland's population dropped 3.3 percent during the same period, the city sank 17.1 percent. As metro Pittsburgh lost 3.1 percent of its population, the city lost 8.6 percent.
Minneapolis fared better because as metro population expanded by more than 8 percent, the city held steady after 2000, its numbers creeping upward in recent years.
So far, so good. But how can Minneapolis government and civic leaders improve odds for a healthy future? Can zoning and regulatory policy facilitate constructive adaptations of land use needed in the years ahead? I hope so.
Consider what we inherited: Minneapolis's early Yankee leadership shaped civic legacies we now enjoy — schools, libraries, art, music, the university, participatory politics, and a park system that reserved waterfront for use by all instead of a privileged few, bestowing on us outstanding neighborhoods that attract and retain classes of residents long gone from other central cities.
Early business leaders worked with city officials on infrastructure to support industry and commerce at a time when people moved to jobs and found housing close to work. Today an increasing share of households decides first where to live, then travels to jobs, shopping and entertainment.
If the city's challenge is attracting and retaining healthy and secure households able and willing to exercise stewardship over the city they've inherited, while maintaining and improving it for later generations, an effective way is by carefully managing the city's housing inventory.