Skip to Content
Streetsblog New York City home
Streetsblog New York City home
Log In
Federal Stimulus

The Missed Opportunity for an Urban Stimulus: Mayors “Were Ignored”

Two-thirds of America's population, and more than three-quarters of its economic productivity, come from major cities. So why did the Obama administration's economic stimulus law end up giving metropolitan areas the short end of the stick?

Dan_Malloy1.JPGDaniel Malloy, mayor of Stamford, CT. Photo: Bridgeport City Council

Harry Moroz of the Drum Major Institute attempts to answer the question this week in a new article for The Atlantic. Talking with mayors from around the country, Moroz heard deeply felt frustration from mayors in both parties about the decision to route stimulus money -- particularly for transportation -- through state capitals rather than cities:

During the bill’s conception, mayors stressed that a state-focusedstimulus would bring slow, inefficient results, and that more jobscould be created if money were funneled directly to urban areas. In a report issued last winter,the U.S. Conference of Mayors listed more than 15,000 “ready-to-go”projects that could provide 1.2 million new jobs in just two years.

So what happened, exactly? “I think we were listened to,” saysStamford, Connecticut, Mayor Daniel Malloy, who will run for governorof his state as a Democrat in 2010. “I just think we were then ignored.And I don’t think we were necessarily ignored by the president. I thinkwe were ignored by the Congress.”

Congress' move to "ignore" city leaders, as Malloy put it, is all the more surprising considering how many senior Democrats hail from urbanized regions: think San Francisco, New York City, and the Washington D.C. area.

But no one can accuse the nation's mayors of failing to speak up. In a February letter to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood [PDF], 20 city chiefs urged that stimulus funding formulas send transportation aid to metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) from regions with more than 200,000 residents as well as to state DOTs. Their pleas were not heeded, however, and cities ultimately paid a price.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog New York City

DOT Testimony: Removing Bedford Ave. Bike Lane Will ‘Reduce Safety’

"Removing the protected bike lane won’t remove cyclists — it will only make the street less safe," the DOT said. "The city risks legal liability for knowingly reducing safety on a Vision Zero priority corridor."

June 30, 2025

Hochul Signs Speed Camera Reauthorization, Enforcement Continues Through 2030

Stating a clear fact that scores of state legislators reject, Hochul said, "Speed cameras save lives and keep New Yorkers safe."

June 30, 2025

Cyclists Tell Judge Carolyn Walker-Diallo: The Bedford Ave. Bike Lane is a Lifesaver

A judge will decide the fate of the Bedford Avenue bike lane on Tuesday. Streetsblog offers some user affidavits.

June 30, 2025

DoorDash Lobbying Sunk Bill to Require Apps to Insure Delivery Workers

A secret memo from the rich app company described a simple insurance bill as "costly." And legislators fell into line.

June 30, 2025

Monday’s Headlines: City Hall Handshake Edition

The Department of Sustainable Delivery finally has funding ... but for what? Plus more news.

June 30, 2025

EXCLUSIVE: Council Will Force Apps To Fund Safe E-Bikes for Workers

The City Council is set to pass a bill on Monday that will make app companies responsible for their workers using safe e-bikes.

June 27, 2025
See all posts