Stories of Philanthropic Leadership in Advancing Regional and ...

To meet all of these objectives, the group committedunequivocally that its discussion must always leadwith equity. Too often, organizations representinglow-income communities and populations of colorwould engage in public processes only to find thatwhen the hard decisions had to be made, their needswere most readily compromised—or ignoredaltogether. Second, they agreed that those facing theproblem should be at the forefront of the solution,creating an opportunity for constituency to drive aprocess. Third, the regional equity framework forcedthe issue and connected the dots, because bydefinition it blurred traditional divisions that hadlimited the effectiveness of previous conversations.Geography, ethnicity, issue area, developmenttype—each of these characteristics could inhibitpublic discourse. A conversation solely abouthousing might not address the realities of workforcedevelopment and transportation that influence afamily’s ability to own a home. For many of thegroups, the regional equity framework represented arefinement of smart growth that was morefundamentally tied to their values. PolicyLinkcommited to facilitating the dialogue until a clearagenda for action emerged.Those committed toemerging smartFor many of the groups, the growth dialogues alsofound participationregional equity frameworkuseful. “There is norepresented a refinementquestion thatof smart growth that was interacting with thismore fundamentally tied to group hastheir values.significantlysharpened mythinking on equityissues that did not come up in some of theenvironmental circles where I was focused,” observesNancy Goodman of the Environmental League ofMassachusetts.Several meetings led to a decision to commission areport to explore the state of regional equity forgreater Boston. PolicyLink provided primaryresearch, interviewing 88 regional leaders in thenonprofit, academic, government, and philanthropicsectors to develop its assessment—relying heavily onwhat had become a 14-member steering committeefor guidance. A key part of that research requiredadherence to the principle of engagement; to thatend, the group held two Regional Equity Summitsin Boston as a way to share its evolving research andget substantive input into its refinement. More than160 community and organizational leaders attendedthe two events. At the second meeting, held on April11, 2003, the next-to-final draft of the regionalequity report was distributed and reviewed. Eightyrepresentatives from community-based, government,and philanthropic organizations discussed the policypriorities identified by the leadership group andrefined the ideas in the report for short-term actions.At the second meeting, half of the participants werebased in towns beyond Boston. The larger turnoutfrom other cities was the result of a priorityidentified by people at the first convening and theconcerted effort on the part of the committee.From these meetings, the final report emerged,Promise and Challenge: Achieving Regional Equity inGreater Boston, identifying troubling trends and richopportunities for the region. 24 The steeringcommittee participating in this process, now knownas Action for Regional Equity (Action!), set forth aseries of policy recommendations and began its ownpriority-setting process to determine what course itwould pursue. The steering committee ultimatelygrew to a leadership group of 20 of the state’s leadingequity organizations.Funder InterestOne crucial challenge lay in the complexity of themessage. Local foundations already supported therespective individual work of many of theorganizations involved in the effort. A challengeemerged as these groups sought additional support toextend their thinking, challenge the existing regionaldevelopment paradigm, bring new constituencies tothe public conversation, and engage in potentiallycontroversial work.The Barr Foundation’s interest in protectingenvironmental resources, promoting smart growth,ensuring environmental justice, and advancingeducational equity led them to take a closer look atAction! and its potential for policy impact. As Barr’ssenior program officer, Mariella Tan Puerto, explains,“Equity advocates who represent constituencies thathave been historically marginalized anddisempowered need the opportunity to takeleadership and set the equity agenda on their own24PolicyLink. Promise and Challenge: Achieving Regional Equity in GreaterBoston (2003). Available at www.policylink.org.EQUITABLE PUBLIC INVESTMENTPart III: Section 1: Promoting Equitable Public Investment 54