The only civic indicator where greater Seattle ranks lower than the rest of the United States, although not signicantly so, is neighborliness. The specic metrics used to assess neighborliness included: frequency of eating dinner with household members, talking with neighbors, exchanging favors with neighbors, and communicating with friends and family via the Internet. In each of these first three face–to–face interactions, our region scores lower than the national average (Figure 3). Interestingly, however, greater Seattle residents are signicantly more likely (70.5% versus 53.6%) to connect with family and friends online.

One of the reasons for our lower rate of neighborliness may be the transience of our population. While nationally 59.1% of residents have lived at their current address ve years or longer, in greater Seattle, that rate is 47.4%. (Figure 4) We also have a high rate of residents who have lived at their current address less than one year. People in urban areas are more transient than those in suburban and non–metropolitan areas. Even when that is taken into account, however, our three–county region still has a lower number of more than ve–year residents compared with the national urban average of 51.6%.

Political scientist Robert Putnam writes that people in diverse communities tend “to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more, but have less faith that they can actually make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in front of the television.” Putnam suggests that the challenge for all modern cities is to create “a new, broader sense of we.” 1

Since 1990, Washington State has increased its foreign–born population over 100%, and the trend is for immigrants to settle outside cities in suburban areas that are not used to the challenges of immigration. 2 While from 2000–2008, Seattle gained 6,325 foreign–born residents, the proportion of immigrants in the city remained almost steady—rising from 16.9 % to 17.7 %. However, during the same period, the City of Kent gained 9,877 immigrants, increasing that city's proportion of immigrants from 17% to 26.5%. 3 With a more diverse population, more activities focusing on trust– and community–building are necessary.

But immigrants aren't the only newcomers. Seattle was described recently as a “‘city of the first move'… . Restless young people move here right out of college … to hang out in a cool city with lots of starter jobs and other young people and night life. Psychologically, they are not really intending to stay so much as to get launched.” 4 Our statistics support that assessment. The City of Seattle's rate of non–family or unmarried households (55%) compares to a national average of 33%. As marriage and children are demographics that increase neighborliness, Seattle's low average household size (2.08 compared to 2.61 nationally) may be another factor yielding these results. 5

As this is the only civic indicator that doesn't directly rise with college experience, greater Seattle's high rate of educated citizens is not an asset that boosts neighborliness. On the other hand, it may help explain the very high percentage of Internet users who connect with family and friends online.

Is greater Seattle cool to newcomers? How can we provide new residents a sense of connection to each other and belonging to our region? How can we help create bridging ties between diverse communities? How can we ensure that low–income immigrants and communities of color are incorporated into civic life? The City of Seattle's Department of Neighborhoods oversees multiple programs that foster these ties. Since 1988, its Neighborhood Matching Fund has awarded more than $45 million to over 3,800 community–driven neighborhood improvement projects. This stimulus generated an additional $68 million of community match and engaged more than 80,000 volunteers who donated more than 560,000 hours to complete projects throughout the city. Through its P–Patch Community Gardening Program, the city supports 73 community gardens. They are gathering places that strengthen networks of neighbors through land stewardship, and they also provide a valuable way to give back to the community. In 2009, gardeners contributed more than 28,500 volunteer hours and donated 12.4 tons of food to local food banks and feeding programs.

There are also innovative initiatives that promote and expand opportunities for people to get out of their cars and walk or bike through the region's neighborhoods. The Seattle Parks Foundation's comprehensive Bands of Green report is a good example, offering a model for how private and public funders can successfully collaborate to link existing green spaces together through linear parks and pedestrian–friendly boulevards. Programs like this encourage more human connection and should be continued and strengthened. 6

Expanding funding and public support for English–language training is as crucial as supporting high–quality and consistent translation and interpretation services for non–English speakers. Helping legal permanent residents acquire citizenship, if and when they are eligible, is one of the strategies that has been shown to help integrate immigrants and increase overall civic participation and community investment.

The expansion of our metropolitan transit system, including the building of a three–county light rail system, offers a unique generational opportunity to link neighborhoods and cities into a more cohesive regional community. Bus stops and transit stations are natural venues for community arts events and farmers' markets. Neighbors can be invited to participate in festivals across the region through communications delivered on buses and trains.

In order to curb sprawl and protect rural and resource lands, Washington State's Growth Management Act directs new development to designated urban growth areas. Since the mid 1990s when those areas were established for King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties, 85% of all new housing permitted for development was located in the Urban Growth Area. Given the challenge to increase neighborliness as our region becomes more urban, we recommend the following strategies:

RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Support opportunities to enhance “bonding social capital”—connections among people who share common interests or backgrounds—as well as “bridging social capital”—community connections across difference.

2. Support public programs to enrich neighborhoods through community gardens and farmers' markets, neighborhood councils and block watches, matching grants, pedestrian and bike links, and support for libraries and parks.

3. Continue strong cross–sector support for artists and arts and cultural events, especially those that derive from and promote neighborhoods.

4. Support programming that welcomes and orients newcomers to Seattle, especially young people coming to Seattle as their “first move” city.

5. Support programs that promote immigrant integration and civic participation for our growing percentage of foreign–born residents including consistent translation and interpretation services, English language classes and naturalization/ citizenship programs for legal permanent residents who are eligible.

6. Use new light rail as a way to highlight the personality of neighborhoods and connect them together in a welcoming vibrant region.

7. Encourage media and/or public arts agencies to mount a “share our arts” initiative to highlight arts activities of all scope and kinds.