With Community Foundation Support, Smart Growth Works

Mike, this interview takes place at a Smart Growth conference hosted by the California Center for Regional Leadership, SURDNA Fdn. and the Smart Growth's Funders Network. First, why is the East Bay Community Foundation here, and second, how is the foundation engaged in the work of encouraging smart growth in the East Bay?

Michael Howe: Keep in mind that the foundation is serving a region of California that is pretty large-about 2.4 million people in two counties, Alameda and Contra Costa. When I came to the foundation in 1993, it became clear that unfettered development was occurring at an extraordinary rate. Landowners and developers were making lots of money without consideration for the issues associated with housing and transportation.

The board and I entered into conversations on the issue and what role the community foundation might play. In the mid-90's, the capital infusion in this region was so great that we needed to look beyond our financial resources and rely on our extraordinary social capital in order to affect a change in behavior. Our board and the other voluntary groups that surrounded the foundation were well positioned in the hierarchy in East Bay politics, business, and philanthropy communities.

So, we looked at the issue and focused not just on the issue of livable communities or smart growth as envisioned in the mid-90s, but we also looked at it as it related to equity, inclusion, and diversity. We developed a mission statement that focused on how the foundation would invest its resources, both financial and social.

We began by talking to the local political leaders developing a number of projects throughout the East Bay focused on identifying ways in which we could be more proactive in identifying common interests among parties as opposed to being a negotiator in conflicts. And as a result, one of our early wins was in Brentwood, a local rural community. We saved a lot of farmland in Brentwood and created what I would call some good, but not great, growth planning. We reduced the number of housing units that were supposed to be built in the area, mostly as a response to transportation problems. We also saved a lot of the organic farmland that was the last organic farmland in the region.

Elaborate on the value-added role that the East Bay Community Foundation is now playing in its service area?

Michael: First, we decided that we were a values-based organization. Community foundations are oftentimes described as neutral convenience. However, the fact is that, as a values-based organization, we put those values out there. We don't play hide the hanky. Second, we tried to play a role as an even-handed convener. Over the years, this effort has evolved such that we are able to bring politicians, business leaders, and residents to the table to talk about issues in ways that heretofore were not happening in this region. We bring resources to the table, dollar resources and our social capital, to address the questions that face the communities in which we are involved. We don't tell anyone how to answer those questions. But, we do ask what is needed to address the problems and where is it needed. And if they don't know, we give them some suggestions. They make the decision about who to bring in and they begin to dream. They begin to dream about what can be possible rather than fighting over what the other wants.

We have succeeded in establishing ourselves as this even-handed broker in the community. We're not seen as an aloof organization. We get as dirty as everybody else does and there is risk. But, because we do not benefit in any way other than in helping to create a healthier community, the foundation is seen, and is relied upon, by politicians in ways that are new and previously nonexistent.

Let's turn to some examples of placed-based projects being supported by the East Bay Community Foundation. Allison, could you describe the foundation's role in Richmond, California?

Allison Brooks: We're embarking on a school-centered revitalization program in Richmond by investing in the resources necessary to initiate a community planning process. It's going to be a year-long process to help the community understand the revitalization opportunities presented by attracting a grocery store, capitalizing on the joint-use possibilities presented by having a community center adjacent to a school, rehabilitating older housing, and creating new housing. We're going to have to hear from the community about what types of development they'd like to see as well as how best to create opportunities for wealth-creation by selling shares in the development.

But what's the role of the East Bay Community Foundation in the City of Richmond? We have examples of philanthropy leading like efforts in San Diego (City Heights) and in Los Angeles (First Five L.A.- NSBN). And Mary, please comment on the replicability of Price Charities' investments in City Heights.

Allison: That effort wouldn't have happened without the EBCF. So we've raised these ideas by speaking with all of the stakeholders, the mayor and other prominent civic leaders to figure out what kind of process we should pursue. We've now reached this point where we are beginning this community planning process. As we begin this process, we have established a partnership with the Richmond Children's Foundation to lead this effort.

Mary Warshok: I want to make a distinction between philanthropy in general and community foundations. City Heights, which was mentioned earlier, is an extraordinary experiment, but it's the vision of one man and one family. Community foundations are integrative organizations.

Community foundations feature lots of advised funds and lots of diverse interests. However, you can point to two common threads investors seek in community foundations: 1) a commitment to reinvest in the area in which they live and work, and 2) the need for financial protection or tax advantages by choosing to pool resources rather than setting up an independent family foundation.

And that's in part the source of the social capital that Mike is talking about and that is the unique asset brought to the table by a community foundation. A community foundation represents more than the interests of a single person or family. It's a pool of resources interested in the community at large. That's why we can be educative and play the honest broker role.

Isn't it exceptional to have community foundations focused on integrated placed-based strategies rather than on programmatic services? How did the EBCF re-orient its programmatic priorities?

Michael: We were a small community foundation when we started, so we didn't have much of an infrastructure. As the infrastructure was built, I realized that the programmatic focus was becoming as silo-like as the governmental system. So I said, " We're not going to do that. We are going to have account executives, who are focused upon the community as supporters of those communities, not as defined by the education, health or social services departments." One of the questions we like to ask at the EBCF is "When was the last time I solved somebody else's problem?" I know it sounds a little bit like a cliché, but the community foundation is well positioned to be able to help people identify strategies by which they can solve their own problems not only by virtue of our financial resources, but also by connecting people who otherwise would never be connected.

So how replicable is this foundation philosophy?

Mary: It's absolutely replicable because everybody here is talking about how the 21st century requires new models, new organizational devices, and new mechanisms through which the problems of today can be appropriately solved. Community foundations represent a different model of philanthropy. It's not Messieurs Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Pew putting millions of dollars into priorities that are set by a board. Community foundations are grassroots philanthropy-bottoms-up philanthropy. We didn't exist 27 years ago. So there is this sense of accountability to the donors, many of whom are still living.

So Allison/Mary, you both are in the field. How do you overcome the organizational and political silo-like thinking that so often frustrates implementation of integrative placed-based, community planning?

Allison: We understand how policy is implemented at the local level. At the local level, we need to link land use decisions with smart policies that will somehow facilitate smarter, more equitable, land use practices in our communities.

Mary: SANDAG has said that they need to work with the city on issues of transportation and housing. We would suggest that they work with a community foundation to build the community will to organize transportation, housing, and land use. Many of these infrastructure issues can be profoundly affected by how a community comes together.

Community foundations, in times of fiscal stress, are typically seen as the life raft, as the last place a community or civic organization can go to meet its programmatic needs. That puts a lot of pressure on a community foundation's priority setting. How then does a community foundation stay focused on advancing strategic and integrated place-based investments?

Michael: Frankly that's easy for us. We do not have anywhere near the resources that would help them survive. To the extent that we can help inform the flow of dollars from the feds to the state to the local level, we do it. On top of that, the flow that remains is so silo-like, with no flexibility to move those resources around. So, we attempt to call attention to these issues, work with the not-for-profit communities in collaborative groups to try to get them to identify strategies by which they can work with local political leaders around the issues.

Our goal is to demonstrate the inter-connectedness of these issues. We strive to bring a local councilperson or a local resident to the point of achieving a moment of clarity by proclaiming " Ahh, I see the relationship between the school, housing, transportation and land use policy issues. I see the connections and I see how important they are. They are not separate issues."

Mary, is this the East Bay Community Foundation values-based, grant making approach being emulated in San Diego?

Mary: We are talking about building regional capacity. And it may sound hackneyed, but a lot of what community foundations can do is help communities understand how their capacity can be enhanced through collaboration. We are also talking about investment, as opposed to charity, and understanding that you can leverage a small amount of financial capital to release a lot of social capital to come up with these shared investments and build momentum for the future. And so as a volunteer on a board, working with a professional staff or working with committees or working groups, that sort of culture is important in order to do the very specific things Allison and Mike are talking about.