During my early experience in the Community Development Clinic, I have had the privilege to work with and encounter many individuals and groups taking on initiatives impacting their communities. The individuals and groups that I have had the opportunity to work with throughout the Capital Region provide a source of inspiration for my day-to-day work. However, I have noticed that some of the issues being tackled are too large or complex for a single or even few organizations to handle by themselves. Additionally, the issues that individuals and groups are tackling (i.e., affordable housing, blight, criminal justice, unemployment, lack of minority-owned businesses, environmental justice, lack of community resources and public services, inadequate public education, etc.) are not unique to any particular community but rather are present in all disadvantaged communities throughout the Capital Region. The similarity of the issues and the bootstrapping mentality present in disadvantaged communities point to the need for coalition building in the Capital Region.
.
The Center for Community Health and Development (the “Center”) defines “community coalition” as a group of individuals and organizations with a common interest who agree to work together toward a common goal. The Center provides a toolkit on starting and maintaining a community coalition. Some of the key takeaways from The Center’s toolkit that I find important to effective coalition building:
- A common barrier to the formation of effective community coalitions is domination by professionals or some other elite. The Center states, “all too often, agency people with advanced degrees, local politicians, business leaders, and others, in their rush to solve problems or to ‘help the disadvantaged,’ neglect to involve the people most affected by the issue at hand and other community members. The issue of lack of substantial community involvement and domination by elite occurs often around community benefits agreements with development projects. Julian Gross, a San-Francisco based nonprofit lawyer, defines community benefits agreement as a contract that sets forth a range of community benefits regarding a development project and resulting from substantial community involvement. In his article, “Community Benefits Agreements: Definitions, Values, and Legal Enforceability”, Julian addresses the issue with lack of substantial community involvement in determining community benefits for a development project. The article points to the Bronx Terminal agreement; Yankee Stadium agreement; and Columbia University agreement as examples of where local elected officials negotiated the benefits to be provided by a developer without involving the community that would ultimately be affected by the development. Groups and individuals from all sectors of a particular community through a community coalition can bear enough political pressure on local officials to create a seat at the discussion table for development projects.
- When thinking about who should be part of a coalition, The Center advises including “formal and informal helpers who are charged with carrying out community functions related to the issue, and others affected by what the coalition might do.” For instance, the Center recommends that staffs of health and human service providers; school personnel, local employers, landowners, etc. should be directly or indirectly involved in the results of coalition initiatives.
- Creating community coalitions are important because it provides consistency in addressing community issues and it empowers the community as a whole to take control of its future. The Partnership For Working Families (“PFWF”) is a national network of leading regional advocacy organizations who support innovative solutions to our nation’s economic and environmental problems. In their article about community benefits agreements, PFWF notes that a key indicator that can impact the effectiveness of community benefits agreements is the use of “divide and conquer” tactics by developers. In fractured communities, developers, and even local officials in some cases, will use the tactic, “to appease some community groups that could be more easily swayed or negotiated with, while excluding and shutting out of the decision-making process groups that were more critical of the project or that represented residents most vulnerable to the consequences of the development.” Through the formation of a community coalition with substantial community involvement, developers and local officials cannot easily deploy this tactic because there will be a consistent message as to the issues and solutions supported by the community.
- Coalitions can be loose associations in which members work for a short time to achieve a specific goal and then disband. Coalitions can also become organizations in themselves, with governing bodies, particular community responsibilities, funding and permanence. Regardless of whether the coalition chooses to operate as a loose association or a wholly new organization, it is important to create committees (i.e., environmental committee, workforce development committee, etc.) so that individuals and groups can contribute their expertise to the coalition and feel included in the coalition’s efforts.
The people I have encountered in the Capital Region have the bootstrapping mentality and grit to take the large and complex issues impacting their communities. The use of community coalitions can be effective in bringing about permanent results to the large and complex issues that are similar to many disadvantaged communities throughout the Capital Region yet whose efforts are isolated to their own enclaves.
Very informative, thank you!