Two cheers for regional government.

In theory, I’m glad to see that several regional bodies are coalescing into what may become a governing body for the Bay Area. In reality, though, I fear that this will be our own version of the European Union, a Mandarin project run by technocrats and the politicians who serve as their patrons.

The EU is many things, but its claims to be democratic are tenuous. Yes, it has an elected parliament, but its history is littered with initiatives that were forced down the throats of its member states. We’re already seeing that here in the form of legislative end-runs that erode local right-of-say over building, for example. Like the EU, these measures are put forward as progressive, but they’re also put forward in the face of voter disapproval, as with expanding rent control, which lost 60:40 last November, but is now being revived legislatively. I believe this is a preview of coming attractions here if regional government doesn’t build in mechanisms for direct voter representation and make the leadership accountable in regular elections.

That we need regional leadership is clear. The Bay Area suffers from its fragmentation. One reason for this is the weakness of its counties. Alameda County is an example. Despite pressing problems like homelessness, the County is generally MIA, the burden falling on cities like Oakland and Berkeley that can’t afford to solve regional problems on their own.

So, yes, two cheers for the possibility, but the details aren’t there yet to assess how it would work and how counties and cities would work with it. Like high-speed rail, it’s a Grand Design by Committee. The fact that SPUR has already endorsed it signals to me that it’s not figured out.