Stories of Philanthropic Leadership in Advancing Regional and ...

I. I. MOBILIZING ACTION FORREGIONAL EQUITYFunders Highlighted:Barr FoundationThe Hyams Foundation“There is no question that interacting with Actionfor Regional Equity has significantly sharpenedmy thinking on equity issues that did not come upin some of the environmental circles where I wasfocused.”— Nancy Goodman, Environmental Leagueof MassachusettsAction for Regional Equity is comprised ofMassachusetts’ leading equity organizations andgrassroots advocates coming together to shape policyas well as engage in joint dialogue and advocacy. Thisprofile highlights the promises and obstacles ofjoining state and grassroots advocates together inorder to achieve greater collaboration, leveragecollective learning, and foster more effective advocacyfor regional equity.Project ProfileRegional equity advocacy achieved a turningpoint in March 2002, when advocates attendeda national conference in Kansas City, Mo.,sponsored by PolicyLink and the NationalCommunity Building Network (NCBN) thatfocused on equitable development in regionsacross the country. Such issues were of criticalimportance for the Boston region.The Census 2000 revealed metropolitan Boston’sStandard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA)held 3.4 million residents. The increasing diversityof the region is highlighted by a surge in foreignbornimmigration that has directly shaped theregional demographic. 21 But the Census 2000 onlybegins to tell the story. Greater Boston hasundergone a profound transformation during thepast 20 years that has revitalized the economy,energized its considerable intellectual capital, andre-established it as one of the nation’s destinationmetropolitan regions. It has also challengedMassachusetts residents to rethink long-standingnotions of race, class, political autonomy, and localdetermination.For equity advocates, the 1990s were a difficultdecade. In the face of unprecedented economicgrowth, many low-income communities andpopulations of color found themselves left behind.Aggressive private development with insufficientpublic policy safeguards led to a particularly virulentwave of gentrification, with housing prices exceedingnearly every other metropolitan region in the UnitedStates. The future of the Boston region—the type,location, and cost of housing; the quality andaccessibility of jobs; the health, safety, and characterof communities—remains the subject of intensepublic debate. A new dimension in this discourse isthe notion of smart growth principles and policiesintended to counter the prevailing trend of sprawlingdevelopment. Smart growth is best known as astrategy for building more compactly in order toconserve open space, reduce automobile dependenceand energy consumption, and integrate land usesinto more mixed-use, pedestrian-accessibleneighborhoods. Yet for many equity advocates,because of a lack of serious attention to housingaffordability, smart growth represents yet another in aseries of public planning paradigms that could yieldharmful consequences for their constituents.The displacementwave only intensifiedthe impacts forBoston’s minorityneighborhoods suchas Roxbury andChinatown. Since the1950s, Chinatownhas lost two-thirds ofits residential land toother uses. “Smartgrowth does nothingThe future of the Bostonregion—the type, location,and cost of housing; thequality and accessibility ofjobs; the health, safety, andcharacter of communities—remains the subject ofintense public debate.to protect our residents,” notes Lydia Lowe, executivedirector of the Chinese Progressive Association, theneighborhood’s principal advocacy organization. “Tous, it means bringing wealthy residents in from thesuburbs that drive housing prices beyond the abilityof Chinatown residents to stay. There has to be abetter alternative.” Displacement from theseneighborhoods and the influx of new immigrants has21“Census 2000,” available at www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html.In fact, without this immigration, the city would have continued a threedecadetrend of population loss.EQUITABLE PUBLIC INVESTMENTPart III: Section 1: Promoting Equitable Public Investment 52