Comments on: What's in a name: All-America City?

By: pila

pila — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 14:44:10 +0000

I think this was a good project for the kids, and for that alone it was probably worthwhile. There are other potential projects that this Richmond youth could work on that might have a more lasting impact on the community. Basically, the adults got a group of kids to engage in boosterism. I can understand why some people would criticize that. I have a problem with that, also.

Those kids also had to consider the problems in teh community as part of the project, if I recall correctly, which could motivate them to become involved with solving those problems. There could be some good that comes out of the project. Will there be lasting, substantial change in Richmond as a result of being designated an All American City? It is doubtful, but I don't want to say that the project was a waste of time.

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:01:15 +0000

It's interesting to see what the award makes other people think of Richmond:

My guess is that this is a town that cares about its people and goes all out to keep the lines of communication open. Must be a nice place to live...

What is great is that the Richmond “adults involved showed kids that they mattered and that they cared about them and what they think.” What a novel idea - involving others, especially youth, rather than having the “powers that be” be the presenters! [Our] officials could learn from this...

By: Jean

Jean — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 22:46:28 +0000

Hi Chris -
Yes, I suppose my blog post was a little biting. But I'm with Dan R-M: this is a rather hollow award. You do apply for it, you compete for it, and frankly I'd love to see an analysis of the cities that have "won" this over the years, and what their per capita income was at the time of the award, as well as graduation rate, crime rate, and other telling statistics. And whether, in the wake of the award, anything has substantively changed. THAT would be an interesting portrait, I suspect.

By: Dan R-M

Dan R-M — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:00:47 +0000

I remember back in the 80's when Richmond won last time. As someone in Elementary school, I was extremely excited about it for about a week, and maybe a little more when they painted the water tower. I was too young to understand that Richmond wasn't simply singled out from the many thousands of American cities, but instead applied.
Not knowing what great accomplishments are necessary to qualify or to win, I feel like this is an almost completely hollow kind of award, and only worth to the community what it put into the effort.
What are the costs associated with competing for the award? Are they in the hundreds, thousands, tens-of-thousands? That seems like a pertinent question in weighing whether it is a good idea.

By: Doug

Doug — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 23:28:00 +0000

I agree that there is a huge hype component to the award. But it seems to me that the effort itself might have been the prize -- particularly this time around where the kids have apparently done a lot of the heavy lifting.

Maybe I don't fully appreciate the resources expended, but I can't see where there was a particular downside to this effort -- would the time and energy have gone elsewhere? Or would these folks have just watched more TV in the past year?