---

In the new knowledge economy, cities that are most able to attract the highly skilled, intellectual and creative people who drive society’s innovation, are the ones that will thrive economically.

Just ask Richard Florida, one of my favourite authors and writer of The Rise of the Creative Class.

Success in a knowledge economy will depend largely on a metropolitan area’s ability to draw intellectuals, artists, professionals and skilled immigrants from around the world.

So given that most people in Surrey want the city to succeed economically, from a business standpoint, what should be done?

Well, the answer doesn’t seem to be to focus on zero tax increases, which was a failed strategy of Council’s under Mayor Doug McCallum.

Carley Fiorina, CEO of Hewlett Packard once said to a group of American governors: “Keep your tax incentives and highway interchanges; we will go where the highly skilled people are.”

As it turns out, many highly skilled people are attracted to those cities with a sense of place, a sense of vibrancy and dynamism.

Cities with an aesthetic of creativity. Cities that invest in, and value, the arts.

And it’s not to say that Surrey hasn’t already invested in arts and culture. We have a beautiful (and free to the public) arts centre and gallery in Whalley, the Bell Performing Arts Centre in Sullivan, and a gorgeous civic museum in Cloverdale. SFU Surrey’s campus in City Centre is a hub of innovation unto itself, and the city was recently host to a regional workshop of the Creative City Network of Canada.

Surrey should also be congratulated for its commitments to renovating an old firehall into a new cultural centre that will in part house the Surrey Arts Council, and to building a new performing arts centre in City Centre.

But we could still be doing more to invest in the kind of attractive city that creative types choose to flock to.

There are a few commonsense places to start for more investment in the arts.

One would be to support efforts to build mixed live-work housing, to cultivate and support artisans through the provision of affordable housing.

Another would be to institute some sort of preferential zoning for cultural institutions, like art galleries, in targeted neighbourhood centres.

Surrey should implement a financing policy for public art that applies to private sector development.

Neighbouring cities, including Richmond and Vancouver, already have programs that require private developers to either commission their own public art pieces, or contribute toward a city-wide fund, for a small percentage or portion of the costs of certain developments.

Across North America, many successful cities have some sort of “One Per Cent (or more) for Public Art” policy in place.

The money goes toward the sorts of iconic and memorable art pieces you’d remember from visiting just about any major city – statues, fountains, sculptures, murals, interactive and multimedia artwork, and the like.

The public art pieces are all part of a larger strategy of place-making, that not only enhances the livability of a city for its residents, but that also encourages tourism. After all, who hasn’t taken a picture of themselves with a piece of public art in another city at one time or another?

Surrey should remember that developing its economic advantage is about more than just tax breaks. It’s about developing the kind of sense of place that makes creative types, the drivers of the new knowledge economy, want to be here.

In turn, we might end up enhancing the physical environment, driving up the price of real estate, and developing a grown-up aesthetic whose time has come.

Stephanie Ryan,
President
Surrey Civic Coalition

---