2021 Award for Transparency and Trust

Congratulations to Nikki Woelfel, Vice President of Community Development with Carrollton Bank, recipient of our 2021 Award for Transparency and Trust!

The Award for Transparency and Trust recognizes a person, organization, institution, or initiative that:

  • Works with honesty and openness and isn’t afraid to be vulnerable, especially when things don’t go as planned.

  • Co-creates work with the people and partners they serve and works to build shared trust so that all at the table feel supported and valued as part of the process.

  • Embraces mistakes and weaknesses in the open as opportunities to learn and grow.

Humans of St. Louis storyteller Lindy Drew met with Nikki to learn more about her and her work. Here’s some of what Nikki had to say.

Nikki Woelfel, Vice President of Community Development with Carrollton Bank (Humans of St. Louis / Lindy Drew)

Nikki Woelfel, Vice President of Community Development with Carrollton Bank (Humans of St. Louis / Lindy Drew)

Most people don’t come out of the womb or even out of high school or college thinking community development is the work they’re going to do. Oftentimes, they just kind of fall into it. I’ve been in banking since 1999, but I’m not a traditional banker. I worked in marketing for an institution years ago that did a lot of community outreach and investment. When it was purchased, I didn’t know if I’d be able to have the same impact I was having. Then in the luckiest turn of events, Carrollton Bank reached out to me. They have this community feel and giving back is folded into the fabric of who they are — not just the bank but the people they hire. Having the autonomy to work in that space has been an honor. Like you hear from community development workers, it all began for me by happenstance.

Over the years, I was lucky to learn about the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), a regulation that’s been around since the ’70s, and how banks must adhere to its principles. So every day I get to look for opportunities to influence people’s lives and make opportunities available for them for wealth building, affordable housing, and livable wage jobs. We try to elevate their lives with opportunities that maybe haven’t been there before. And we partner with quality organizations also doing those things well to bring more opportunities to people.

DSC_ 83363.jpg

What’s one of the most memorable stories for why you continue to do the work you do?

One part of doing the work I do that’s the most emotionally meaningful is teaching financial education classes. Prior to the pandemic, I was teaching a class weekly. The thing about it that strikes me so much is that this information is not required learning. People aren’t forced to know this stuff. But mistakes you can make from not having this knowledge can follow you for so many years if not a lifetime. And I bring my personal experiences to class to share how I’ve made a lot of the financial mistakes that I teach about.

I’ve racked up credit card debt. I’ve had an extensive student loan balance. Working for a bank, you learn the tricks of the trade though. So I started learning even more about what it means to have financial wellness and about how your credit and credit score can impact your day-to-day living. That was impactful because it was something I had to go through the trenches about on my own to teach myself.

I remember teaching a class to high school students about student loan debt and trying to educate them on the magnitude of what that means. I said, “You’re going to remember that Nikki Woelfel spoke to you your senior year of high school. And you’re going to remember this conversation when you’re 30 years old and potentially paying back student loan debt.” So everything they learn in that moment might not be pertinent to their lives today, but they walk away with that knowledge, they’re going to keep that forever, and no one can take that away from them.

DSC_ 83381.jpg

I was born and raised in Illinois, so I feel like I have the credibility there. Still, it’s never easy because you always have to show up. You always have to be honest and trustworthy. I had a harder time building that trust in Missouri because I was teaching financial classes at night and then driving back to Illinois to my suburban lifestyle. So I try to always show up, be present, and make that a priority. Showing up and being there is the first step.

DSC_ 83382.jpg

I was teaching a financial education class talking about credit. And when you do these classes, especially online, the video isn’t always on, so you don’t know if the participants are engaged. About three weeks later, I got an email from one of the participants who said, “Okay, here’s the situation. Here’s how much credit card debt I have. Here’s the balance.” She’s laying out the scenario to me and I was like, “I’m so glad you reached out. This is totally something I can help you with! These are your options.” I walked away from that thinking, “It’s so hard to know sometimes, but people really are listening.” So when she reached out, it was amazing. I knew she had kids because I had seen them in the background. And I just thought, “She’s making a difference in their lives and for their futures too.”

DSC_ 83365.jpg

I grew up in a family that didn’t have a lot of money. I didn’t wear designer jeans or have any of those things. So when I went off to college, I had stars in my eyes with those tables at orientation where you could apply for your first credit card. I had VISA cards and a card for American Eagle. And I walked away from college with not just student loan debt but credit card debt. I made those mistakes. I mean, I was a month shy of 18 when I started college. At freshman orientation, how in the world I was able to commit to the amount of student loan debt that I was going to be saddled with? I don’t even know how that’s legal at 17. I had no idea what that was going to mean for me at 21 and then beyond. That’s why when I teach financial education classes, I try to impart on people that the decisions you make early on when credit is available to you can have an impact for years to come, so let’s think logically and wisely about it.

DSC_ 83370.jpg

How have you helped people obtain Payment Protection Program (PPP) loans during the pandemic?

PPP has been critical for people during the pandemic. When it rolled out, our bank took it very seriously. Because we’re a community bank, our relationships with customers are personal and one on one. So our relationship managers were working with people on how to fill out the applications and it was really labor-intensive. We heard early how minority-owned and small businesses were having a hard time connecting to PPP lenders. We on the community development side asked, “What can we do?”

We started reaching out to partners and some movers and shakers to connect us with people having those challenges so we could help. During the second round of funding, we worked with business districts to get the word out that we can help with some of the one-on-one applications. What was happening was that folks were filling out information through portals and they didn’t have access to a person to tell them if they made any mistakes. Even I took a couple of applications, and I didn’t know what I was doing in the beginning, but I did my best to try. We set up a hub with a quality control team who knew the ins and outs of the application. I reached out to clients to get their paperwork in order. And on the back end I was always asking our team, “What do I do with this? How do I fill this out?”

I was emailing back and forth, day and night, with this one restaurant. Obviously, restaurants were so hard hit. Eventually, I got to hand-deliver their check. I’ve never been a loan officer, but what a great feeling to know I could help this establishment that needed access to capital. We even emailed to discuss the PPP loan forgiveness piece and the owner was so appreciative. Banks are typically transactional in nature. As a community bank, relationships have to be front and center. That’s what we’re meant to do. The pandemic really shined a spotlight on that.

Nikki Woelfel

During the beginning of COVID, we realized small businesses had typically been moving along with transactional relationships with their financial institutions. That probably served them well to an extent because of the nature of their businesses. But when it came time to needing that relationship, not all businesses had that. I’m the chairperson of the Metropolitan Saint Louis CRA Association and we took the pandemic as an opportunity to say, “We need to transition to create programs designed to help educate small businesses on things to keep in mind.” It’s easy to get bogged down with the day-to-day with your business. But sometimes you’re going to need your banker or a relationship with somebody to help you with things like going over your budget and answering questions about the way your business is running.

DSC_ 83379.jpg

What was your biggest personal change during the pandemic and how were you able to do your job well?

On March 4th, 2020, about nine days before everything started shutting down, my husband and I brought a foster child home from the hospital. She was 13 days old. I worked on March 3rd, and that was going to be my last day for two months. That was a Wednesday, and that following Friday everyone was working from home and not in the office. I was going to figure out a way to work from home a bit, but then everybody was working from home. It was easier because I didn’t have to miss meetings and I could join in between feedings and all that. It was challenging, but because daycares weren’t open and she was too young to even be in a daycare, we made it work. COVID created a challenge, but it also created an amazing chance for me to have more flexibility and time for our foster daughter.

It’s not lost on me that people have had struggles over the past year. It’s very apparent in the work I’m doing. But, surprisingly, we’ve been able to get things accomplished over this time. I thought it would be natural to hit the pause button on community development because there were so many other emergent needs. I thought we’d need to slow down big projects to focus on food and housing and shelter. And we didn’t do that. There was a lull for a couple of months because I was spending so much time with the baby. But by the time I plugged back in, I was on calls all week.

My colleagues were saying, “So many communities have waited forever for help. They’ve waited forever for investment. They’ve waited forever for assistance and for affordable housing. We can’t take a break because of the pandemic. They’ve waited long enough. Let’s keep working.” So we did. There’s always going to be something. Maybe not a global pandemic. But there’s always going to be someone that says, “Slow down. Maybe it’s not the right time.” People have been hearing that for too long. So let’s keep going.

DSC_ 83355.jpg

How do you grapple with working with community partners and have the wherewithal to collaborate in an impactful way?

Sometimes banks can be seen as adversaries. But since the housing crisis of 2008, the banking industry has asked itself, “What can we do to make change?” There are limitations banks have, but opportunities to learn have also been created. We started showing up, and I include myself in that ‘we.’ I started listening to people’s needs. One thing that’s a strength of mine is that I never view a problem as insurmountable. I think there’s always a solution. It’s challenging and we’re one of the most regulated industries in the world. So there are times when there are things we just can’t do. It’s not because we don’t want to, but we can’t. So I always think about how we can figure out ways around it or create solutions to the problem. And there are a lot of systemic challenges we’re all trying to solve in community development.

DSC_ 83360.jpg

What’s an example of when you had to be transparent in your work and it worked to your benefit?

I’m part of the group that put together the Gateway Neighborhood Fund. We looked at disinvestment and blight and decay of properties in North St. Louis City and County, and a lot of it ties back to the appraisal gap. And to get a mortgage you have to get an appraisal on a property and it has to appraise for an amount equal to or more than the sales price. So when there’s a gap, mortgages can’t happen due to regulatory limitations. This is an ongoing problem.

Well, an organization from Detroit talked about a product they created back in 2017. We listened intently and their solution was ingenious. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis reached out to the Metropolitan Saint Louis CRA Association asking if anything could be done here in St. Louis. Several bankers got together to research and I reached out to St. Louis Equal Housing and Community Reinvestment Alliance (SLEHCRA) and Metropolitan St Louis Equal Housing and Opportunity Council (EHOC). They had been talking about the same thing. I said, “Let’s get together.” So we started having a conversion. It took a long time to button everything up but, over the past three years, we’ve been building this program. 

There have been times when community members have said, “We need this,” and banks would say, “Our regulators won’t let us do that.” It would have been easy to get bogged down in what was needed versus what couldn’t be done because when those things can’t marry, it slows everything down to a halt. But we kept coming back to the table to figure out how we could get around it and solve the challenge to get everyone back on track. And that created a great deal of transparency that ultimately led to trust.

DSC_ 83375.jpg

So many talk about the American Dream, and if you’re someone who hasn’t been able to take advantage of that, that can cut to the core. The Dream is homeownership. But there are a lot of people who feel like that’s not an opportunity open to them. We’re working towards a wealth-building American Dream opportunity. I think about that since I came from a less affluent background. But I also think about how my grandparents and great-grandparents owned their homes. Many people can’t say that. That first generation of homeownership for some might begin with the folks we’re helping by starting that process for them now. We can be sad that that started in 2021, or we can be overjoyed that we’ve worked to get here.

DSC_ 83372.jpg

Where did you learn to hone that skill of having and developing trust?

It is intentional, but it’s also second nature for me. I don’t have a filter sometimes. I’m someone who’s okay with stopping the conversation to say, “Wait, these are not insurmountable challenges. Let’s talk about this.” With a curious inquisitive mind, I’m not afraid to ask questions. Why does something have to be no? Or, black or white? Isn’t there room in the middle?

When’s a time you had to trust someone to move your work forward?

Sheri Flanigan-Vazquez is an incredible leader at Justine Petersen. She’s super honest, transparent, and trustworthy. But one of the things she has a unique ability to do, which I am not great at and am still learning, is that she doesn’t get emotionally overwhelmed by a problem. I can come into a meeting knowing the challenges we have to solve for and she’s taught me that no matter what the challenges, we can solve for it. And she does it in such a calm and practical way. Peter Hoffman says she’s like a human salt lamp. She can just bring the tension down. I think I’m a little too high-strung to do it the way she does it, but I just love being in a room with her. If I ever experience a problem related to this work, she’s the first person I call.

DSC_ 83354.jpg

What’s something you know now about community building that you didn’t when you were younger?

You can’t do it all. Community building means so much. The definition is so broad. It’s important to remember to stay in your lane and focus on things you can have an impact on through your expertise. Don’t get distracted by the things you can’t control. I’ve learned, although I haven’t always embraced it, that change is slow. I follow politics as a frustrating side hobby, and change doesn’t happen overnight. I keep in mind that you can’t just abandon places. Places are going to exist whether you invest in them or not, so why not invest in them? And I’ve also learned that we can too easily let the noise get in, especially local noise, so I try to not get bogged down by the noise of the news. Like, “Oh my gosh, there is so much violence and crime,” and the 30,000-foot belief is that communities are just that way. But we’re talking about people who have lives there. I remember at another job, someone told me, “You’re sending me into this neighborhood, but is it safe for me to go there and do a credit fair?” I said, “You’re probably gonna pass kids waiting for the school bus. It’s going to be 8 a.m. This is where families are raising their kids. Remember that.”

DSC_ 83367.jpg

We all have common challenges. They might not all look the same, but there are common themes. That’s what I keep at the front of my mind. My husband is a police officer. He sees some of the worst of society and situations every day. It’s so easy to let that noise in, but you have to step back to see individuals. It’s been a tense seven years for us since Ferguson. There have been times where our conversations have been a little combative. It can happen. We learn a lot from each other from that too. It’s easy for him to view communities at a high level thinking they’re full of drugs and crime and bad actors. So I always try to say, “There are families there — folks getting up every day and sending their kids to school. Those families deserve to have flourishing lives like everybody else.”

- Nikki Woelfel, Vice President of Community Development with Carrollton Bank

 

We hope you can join us to celebrate community builders like Nikki at our Community Development Family Reunion event on September 23!

 

Photostory by Humans of St. Louis and Lindy Drew. Photostory narratives represent the opinions of the speaker(s) featured only and do not necessarily represent the views of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis.

2021 Rising Star in Community Building Award

Congratulations to Latasha Barnes, Attorney with Legal Services of Eastern Missouri, recipient of our 2021 Rising Star in Community Building Award!

The Rising Star in Community Building Award recognizes a person who:

  • Demonstrates strong dedication to and passion for community building work.

  • Exhibits leadership, vision, and a commitment to action and results.

  • Shows promising potential to catalyze outstanding impact in community building policy, investment, and/or community change.

  • Works to challenge the status quo in the St. Louis region.

Humans of St. Louis storyteller Lindy Drew met with Latasha to learn more about her and her work. Here’s some of what Latasha had to say.

Latasha Barnes, Attorney with Legal Services of Eastern Missouri (Humans of St. Louis / Lindy Drew)

Latasha Barnes, Attorney with Legal Services of Eastern Missouri (Humans of St. Louis / Lindy Drew)

What was the first award you ever got?

You know when you get honor roll certificates in school? It’s like, ‘Yay! I remembered a bunch of facts.’ But my favorite award was when I was in high school. My senior year I was voted Most Likely to Become the First Female President. Like, what? And then in law school, I got the Saint Louis University School of Law’s David Grant Clinic Student Award for some work I was doing. I will say there are times I’ve gotten awards and felt like, ‘Yes, I did that. I accomplished that.’ But this time, I was notified of the award and I didn’t have the same feeling. Because, really, the work comes from the residents. All I do is stand with them. This is their award. They earned it. Yes, we collaborate, but this is about their effort, vision, and passion for their communities and about their dedication. They’re the ones who inspire me. What am I doing here having this conversation? They should be having this interview talking about how much they love Hyde Park and the West End and Academy and Old North.

If anything, I feel like a spotlight because when I’m advocating for my clients in court or in community meetings or through collaborations with other agencies, I am shining a light on the residents so people see them clearer. Maybe I’m the one on the microphone, but I want people to hear them. I’m just saying, “Look at my residents. Look at my clients. Look at my friends,” because some of them have become friends now, and, “hear what they’re saying. I’m just saying what they’re saying. You shouldn’t respect it coming from me more than when it is coming from those who are the most impacted.” It frustrates me when people say, “You’re a lawyer. We’re listening.” I’m like, “No, if you listened to them the first time, we wouldn’t have to come to court and say these things or take some of the other actions we do on the legal side.”

DSC_ 83423.jpg

I was shocked and humbled that people would nominate me for this award. It was their way of saying thank you for how I show up for them, but I should be thanking them because a lot of what I do in my work is driven by what their desires are. We’re not creating new visions for them. They already have these visions and dreams. I’m just pointing them in the right direction, saying, “Here’s a pathway. Here’s an open door. Here’s the administrative process that allows you to get your message out front and center.”

DSC_ 83384.jpg

What has been the hardest thing for you when challenging the status quo with the hope of achieving the results you get in the community?

When we think about community development, redevelopment, and commercial development, a lot of times the people who have the money and power are the ones making the decisions about communities. They’re telling residents, “This is what we’re doing and this is what’s going to happen.” One way we can challenge that is by amplifying the residents we serve and allowing them to be the decision-makers about what housing is developed in their communities and what commercial businesses will be invited in and supported. Mobilizing the residents and giving them a voice at the table is so they can participate in the process. That challenges the status quo because, without their input, things will continue to be done the same way and happen ‘to’ communities instead of ‘with’ communities. The biggest thing lawyers like me can do is help residents and communities be a part of what’s happening around them so they can steer things in a way that reinforces their values and supports their vision for their neighborhoods.

DSC_ 83412.jpg

When was a time you felt most alive doing the work you do?

There was a vacant property that residents had been concerned about for several years. The neighbors who live on either side and across the street had been complaining about it for quite some time. The yard was overgrown. There were a lot of weeds. People had been dumping trash there. It was unsecured, meaning the windows or doors had been open. There was a lot of trespassing happening. The neighbors had been complaining and filing reports with the City, calling the police about it, and trying to get the owner to improve its condition. 

Well, the neighborhood brought this property to our attention because its vacancy brought in a lot of unwanted activity and safety concerns. No one had any way of communicating with the person who abandoned the property. The police wanted to enforce the trespassing laws, but the owner was not available to press charges. The building inspector wanted to enforce the building codes and cite the owner, but the owner was not responsive. City agencies were at a standstill because they didn’t have the cooperation of the house’s owner. So we were able to file a lawsuit on the building and get permission from the court to take possession of the property to help enforce those rules.

A cross-agency team worked to coordinate our efforts and we showed up at the house together — and this is one of my favorite moments of doing this work because we were all there as a group to take back this property so the neighborhood could clean it up, get it fixed, and hopefully see a new family move into it soon. There were four or five officers in uniform, the neighborhood improvement specialist, a private developer, the president of the neighborhood association, the alderwoman, the building inspector, and myself. And we all represented different government agencies, organizations, and parts of the system. 

So we pulled up, took out the court order, and talked to the trespassers who claimed they had the right to be there. We knew that wasn’t the case. We told them we had permission to come in, inspect, and assess the condition of the building. We wouldn’t have been able to do that if we hadn’t told the judge what was happening and shared the neighborhood’s safety and health concerns. Showing up with that piece of paper made a world of difference. Since that time we have been able to secure the property, which made the neighbors really happy.

DSC_ 83408.jpg

As lawyers, we recognize we can’t do this type of work by ourselves. We need the support and collaboration with other agencies that have the power to do things we can’t do. And on that particular day, we were all there in alignment. It was so perfect. And this is gonna sound so corny, but — I really like Marvel films! — and you would have thought we were the Justice League or the Avengers. We were all there, we were all ready. Everybody had their superpower. Everybody had their role and they were there to play their role so we could accomplish what we needed. The neighborhood association and residents were there to coordinate the process. The inspector was able to find out what was going on with the building. The police were able to remove the individuals who brought crime and safety concerns to the block. Together, we restored a level of safety for the neighbors. Now, the neighborhood has possession of the building. It’s being cleaned up and we have a contractor rehabbing it.

DSC_ 83400.jpg

What’s the biggest obstacle in the work you do? How difficult can it be when you’re looking at the light at the end of the tunnel and it just takes time to get there?

There are so many vacant, abandoned properties. The hardest part we do is finding individuals willing to partner with neighborhoods to address these concerns and realize they’re probably not going to get rich in the process — especially during a time when it’s hard to find labor, material costs are increasing, and the housing market has a shortage. What we do also depends on the availability of private developers or contractors who care about these communities, who want to engage in this work, and who recognize there may not be a substantial profit to be made. We have one property that needs over $300,000 worth of improvements to restore it to its former glory. People may be able to invest that money and maybe they’ll break even, but they do it because they care about the community. That is the biggest challenge because our clients may not have the resources to fix or repair these houses. They have to depend on others to make things happen and sometimes it doesn’t seem profitable enough to do it. If we can’t find a rehabber for a project, everything comes to a pause. We can’t move forward on a property if there’s no one to invest in it. Imagine preparing a case for trial, going in front of a judge, getting that final victory, and not being able to find anyone to say, “We care enough about this building to fix it up so the family across the street doesn’t have to live in front of a crumbling four-family flat.”

DSC_ 83411.jpg

Building up the infrastructure in our neighborhoods supports our city and our region in ways you can’t imagine. But there’s an incongruity where the people who actually care enough to do it, may not have the skills, resources, or money to take on the number of properties in disrepair. And those who have the skills, resources, or money may not care enough to join the effort. Often the neighbor who has to look out their window at the crumbling house next door, worried that it is collapsing or could collapse onto their property, will step up to fix a house or two near them and restore their neighborhood if they could. Why wait for the private market to decide they care enough to do it when you can be a part of the effort to alleviate environmental hazards for the people who live there?

DSC_ 83421.jpg

What’s your connection to St. Louis and why do you care so much about the work you’re doing here?

I was born in St. Louis, and I lived in a six-family unit in the West End off of Cabanne across the street from Russell Park. My family attended church in the neighborhood and has a lot of ties there. We moved to Atlanta when I was young and I came back here for law school. When I saw the opportunity to do the work I’m doing in this neighborhood, it was like coming back home. This is where I lived. These are streets I used to walk. This is a park I used to play in. It felt so familiar to me because it is. This is a community I remained a part of and my family remains connected to after so many years. Supporting residents who care about this neighborhood has been really important to me. Sometimes when I see the level of disinvestment in parts of St. Louis, or when I drive through the City or County and see rows of vacant, collapsing homes, it can create this intense feeling of hopelessness. I used to have those feelings of hopelessness, but now I know there are solutions.

DSC_ 83404.jpg

My son is 17, but when he was a kid, several large anchor stores in our neighborhood started closing. There were these massive empty buildings in our neighborhood and he and I would ride past them and play this game: I would ask him, “What would you open there? What kind of business would you put in that building? What would it look like?” He was a kid in elementary school at the time and he always came up with some cool ideas. He thought of a Chuck E. Cheese or something similar to Monkey Joe’s or Sky Zone. We didn’t have anything like that in our neighborhood or on our side of town at all. He’d say, “We can put that here! And what if we had a go-cart place? Mom, there’d be pizza and a Subway!” It was so cute. As he'd just think of stuff I’d ask, “Who would work there?” and he’d name people in our family. There we were, a legal aid attorney and an elementary student, making stuff up. We didn’t have the resources or skills to do any of it, but, “It would be really cool if we could turn that old Lowes into a rock climbing gym!” At that time, the only thing I knew about development was that you needed people with capital to come in and create businesses. So we’d just dream about how we could make a Magic House in North County and North City. Then all the kids who went to school in Kirkwood could come over to our neighborhood and play in the castles over here.

DSC_ 83409.jpg

Stores and restaurants started closing where I currently live too. These buildings are just sitting empty and I wondered, “What’s happening?” When you get buildings neglected over a decade and they’ve partially collapsed, you think about what that means for the people who live near them. My cousin bought her first house next to a long-standing vacant property. I’d visit and hear her talk about concerns she had about what might be happening in that house and the condition of it affecting her and her son living next door. It’s easy to turn a blind eye to things when you’re not personally impacted. This work has given me a greater level of empathy for residents and friends who live in high-vacancy communities. They don’t deserve that. We all deserve to live in communities we can be proud of. St. Louis should feel like home to everybody who lives here.

I watch residents get together and support each other and they really fight for what they believe. They’re fighting against elements that detract from their neighborhood. They have development meetings, pop-ups at parks, and community cleanups. And people from one neighborhood support and attend events from other neighborhoods nearby. They’re so connected. For example, there was a conditional use zoning hearing a couple of months ago and residents from other neighborhoods came out to show their support saying, “Nope. We’re doing this together because what affects you over there affects us over here.” I love that they have that synergy. I’m lucky I get to be a part of it.

DSC_ 83405.jpg

What would make a difference for the work you’re doing now and especially when we come out of the pandemic?

I want people to desire to live in the neighborhoods I work with the way they might desire to live in Clayton, Ladue, Chesterfield, or the Central West End. The residents I work with love their neighborhoods and I want them to have neighborhoods deserving of them — neighborhoods that are safe and developed, that look the way the residents want them to look, where building codes are enforced like in other places, where permitting processes work the same as in other places. They deserve better than what they’ve been getting.

More collaborative urban planning would make a tremendous difference in how neighborhoods look and develop, as would working with communities to develop neighborhood plans. Some neighborhoods have established plans, but the ones I work in do not. Oftentimes professional urban planning has not been available to neighborhoods north of Delmar and historical planning efforts have not included residents in a meaningful way. Having resident voice at the table is important and necessary. It is better than making decisions in a vacuum without input from the people impacted by them. It’s about making sure residents are consistently part of the decision-making process and that their perspectives are heard, respected, and incorporated into the outcomes. Planning would help a lot of our neighborhoods better implement their vision to create communities they can continue to be proud of.

DSC_ 83420.jpg

What are some of the high-level band-aid fixes you see when a neighborhood plan isn’t in place?

If there was a plan in place for a neighborhood that outlines what they aspire to, how many single-family homes and multi-family homes they want to build, and how and where they want them placed, you wouldn’t have as many big-money private developers swooping into neighborhoods to build housing that residents don’t want. If there was a plan for what businesses were allowed in our commercial districts, we wouldn’t have as many predatory businesses swooping in to buy properties and set up businesses residents don’t want. There are development tools available to help address and prohibit some of these things. Other neighborhoods have them — just not always the neighborhoods I work with. 

So say somebody wants to open up a new liquor store. The band-aid for that might look like showing up at administrative hearings to fight and convince the excise division that the establishment shouldn’t have a full-package liquor license because of ongoing safety concerns. The reality is that if there was a plan in place that regulated if and when a store could operate, this would be an issue for residents to address in a piecemeal fashion. Residents may know they can go to their alderperson and complain. Beyond that, they may not know if they establish a Special Use District, they wouldn’t have to chase behind these types of bad actors. They can establish a protective bubble that prevents unwanted development from coming into the neighborhood in the first place. Instead of fighting it one by one, guidelines can be in place to provide greater protections and transform the way a lot of things happen. 

A neighborhood plan is expensive to develop, technical assistance is often needed, and many neighborhoods may not have access to be able to build one. And that’s what they need to protect themselves from outside influences that can take advantage of their communities.

DSC_ 83401.jpg

Is there an inspirational person in your life or a mentor who’s driven you to do community development work?

That’s a hard question because this work is new for me. I’m learning from my colleagues and picking up information all the time from whoever is willing to talk to me. I’ve learned a lot from the residents I work with. Some have been doing this for years. They love it, understand how important it is, and know how to use systems to get the most benefit for their neighborhoods. So I watch and learn from them. Then, being a part of the St. Louis Vacancy Collaborative and connecting with people who are developers and people in the financial industry, I’m gleaning a little here and there — just taking direction where I can.

DSC_ 83397.jpg

What does community building mean for a place like St. Louis?

Community building means we can create a place where our values are truly reflected in how we build and sustain our neighborhoods. Through building that is resident-driven, we can create a St. Louis that feels like home to everybody. That resonates with me because it does not feel like home for everyone. We live here, but some of us live in places because we have to and not because we really desire to. If we had our choice, we might go somewhere else. But in my head, when something feels like home, it’s where you want to be and you’re able to access what you need to thrive. It’s important to feel like you belong, you’re safe, and that there’s no place you’d rather be because your neighborhood is the absolute best and most desired. St. Louis can be that for everyone.

- Latasha Barnes, Attorney with Legal Services of Eastern Missouri

 

We hope you can join us to celebrate community builders like Latasha at our Community Development Family Reunion event on September 23!

 

Photostory by Humans of St. Louis and Lindy Drew. Photostory narratives represent the opinions of the speaker(s) featured only and do not necessarily represent the views of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis.

It’s Time to Move On From Community Consensus

Jeremy Levine

Jeremy Levine

Jeremy Levine, Assistant Professor of Organizational Studies and Sociology at the University of Michigan

This column was originally published in Shelterforce.

When it comes to community development projects in poor urban neighborhoods, practitioners and scholars often ask a seemingly simple question: what does the community want? Since the 1960s and the War on Poverty, the community development field has embraced (to at least some extent) the idea of “community control.” Rooted in the Black Power Movement, community control originally referred to Black people reclaiming control over schools, businesses, and other institutions that affect Black neighborhoods. Today, community control is a normative idea that the community—broadly defined—should have a say and determine neighborhood priorities. While developers sometimes agree to formal contractual obligations like community benefits agreements (CBAs), no mechanism of achieving community control has been more common than the public meeting.

Critiques of participatory processes abound. Political scientists Katherine Einstein, David Glick, and Maxwell Palmer find that public meeting participants tend to be white homeowners—meaning public meetings will disproportionately serve white homeowners’ interests. Sociologist Michael McQuarrie argues that community-based organizations, motivated by organizational survival, use participation and consensus organizing to establish legitimacy and curry favor with funders. As a result, participation tends to support elite authority rather than challenge it. Focusing on affordable housing debates in the Bay Area, New York Times journalist Conor Dougherty shows how public meetings are in effect veto points that can block new development. New projects generally require community agreement in order to move forward, and so all it takes is a handful of opponents to signal a lack of consensus. By design, then, public meetings give the people who say “no” a much louder voice than the people who say “yes.”

For most observers, the solutions are technical. More meetings. Better attended meetings. Differently designed meetings. In short, the challenge is to fine-tune public meeting practices in ways that elevate the authentic voice of the community.

While conducting research for my book, tentatively titled Constructing Community and forthcoming with Princeton University Press, I came to question these and other assumptions. I spent four years conducting fieldwork in some of Boston’s highly segregated and disadvantaged neighborhoods. I wanted to understand who made important decisions about affordable housing, public transit, economic development, and open recreational space. I was particularly interested in the relationship between public participation and community control.

I argue that no participatory process can accurately reflect the voice of the community, no matter how well run. The reason is fundamental: there is no such thing as “the” community. As sociologists Mary Pattillo and Monica Bell persuasively show in separate studies, opinions and experiences with institutions vary, even in demographically segregated neighborhoods. To say that “the community” is in support of anything is a misnomer.

Community development practitioners, by contrast, generally assume there is in fact community that has a voice; community control requires the community to control development, after all. When those in power circumvent participating community members, it is clear community control has not been achieved. But how do we evaluate community control when some community members might oppose a project that others pursue—did the community control the project in those cases? Or when community members pursue projects that would ultimately harm rather than help the urban poor—did community control lead to more equitable outcomes? 

The Community Replaces an Abandoned Factory

In 2009, the City of Boston foreclosed on an abandoned warehouse in the ethnically diverse, low-income neighborhood of Upham’s Corner. The building sat vacant until 2013 when the City announced plans to replace it with a street lighting storage facility. A group of mostly Cape Verdean residents from the streets adjacent to the building heard about the proposed facility and were outraged. They unequivocally opposed the City’s plans, though they were not necessarily in agreement about an alternative use of the space. “The community process has been short-circuited in a major, major way,” one nonprofit leader explained.

After hearing concerns from the community—that is, the people who showed up to public meetings—city officials abandoned their plans for a storage facility and pledged a new community-driven process to guide the site’s redevelopment.

What, then, should replace the factory? In September, officials presented draft guidelines for a new mixed-used development. Yet some residents pushed back at what they saw as top-down decision-making. Organizers from a local nonprofit, nationally recognized for its community organizing expertise, offered to conduct a participatory process. The following month, they held a meeting with 33 participants, including about a dozen white, Asian, Cape Verdean, and Black residents. Organizers divided everyone into three groups to discuss development priorities as city officials listened in.

Each recommendation directly contradicted another. One resident requested a park; another objected and said the neighborhood already had plenty of parks. One wanted an industrial facility for local jobs and absolutely no housing; another wanted only housing and no commercial uses. Some wanted only affordable housing. Others pointed to the concentration of poverty in the neighborhood and recommended only market-rate condos. And still, others suggested a mix of uses, such as a ground-floor commercial development below two floors of apartments.

As the meeting ended, City officials looked dejected; the contradictory information did not reveal any clear priority. Reflecting the lack of consensus, the final guidelines, unveiled in March 2014, were practically indistinguishable from officials’ initial draft. That didn’t stop the City’s head of property disposition from telling a local reporter, “The community in Upham’s Corner has been a wonderful partner to help us envision what they’d like to see in this space . . . Their opinion and input will be critical to our analysis.”

In June 2016, the redevelopment authority approved a local community development corporation to build a mixed-use development at the site, including 80 apartments and 9 market-rate townhomes on top of light industrial and office commercial space.

Was this an example of community control in action? Put differently, did the community control the process and pursue the project it wanted? The answer was both yes and no: The handful of community members who wanted a mixed-used, mixed-income development got what they wanted, and the others who wanted only affordable housing (or only commercial development and no housing, or only housing and no commercial uses, or only a park, and so on) did not. Because the community did not agree—a completely understandable and common situation—there was no single voice from the community to control the development. After 3 years of community process, City officials approved exactly the kind of project they wanted from the beginning.

The Community Contests a Transit Station

In 2005, the state transportation authority agreed to build a new commuter rail station on Blue Hill Avenue, in the predominantly Black, low-income neighborhood of Mattapan. The new station would give residents a single-seat ride to jobs and other services in downtown Boston. Without the station, ride times were twice as long and required multiple bus and subway transfers.

Nonprofit organizers and transit advocates—including a mix of privileged nonprofit leaders, residents of nearby poor neighborhoods, and at least one Mattapan resident—pushed hard for the new station. But in 2009, vocal opposition emerged from a group of older Black middle-class homeowners whose homes abutted the proposed site. They believed the new station would damage their homes’ foundations, negatively impact their property values, and disrupt their quality of life. For years, they participated in public meetings and vocalized their disapproval.

Initially, the opposition appeared successful. Five years passed and plans for the station remained “in design.” Yet the nonprofit organizers continued their advocacy as well. Planning for the station continued behind the scenes, and in October 2014, Gov. Deval Patrick formally announced the new station’s construction schedule. At a public event, one of the Black middle-class residents expressed her frustration. “The opposition has fallen on deaf ears because the powers-that-be have decided that this is what is best for this community,” she said. The local press acknowledged her disapproval, but nevertheless concluded that “[c]ommunity members…praised the news.”

Even if some community members praised the new station, it would be a stretch to say that the process was community-controlled; a vocal, participating segment of the community did not want the station in their backyards. Transportation officials pushed through with their station plans despite opposition—but to the benefit of poor transit riders in Mattapan.

Coda: Rethinking Participation and Community Control

That seemingly simple question— “what does the community want?” —was not so simple in either case. In Upham’s Corner, the community wanted a park, didn’t want a park, wanted affordable housing, didn’t want affordable housing, and on and on—there was no single community position to juxtapose against the City or a potential developer. Similar scenarios are easy to imagine; in any neighborhood, opinions will vary. The Mattapan case is complicated for additional reasons. The community simultaneously “won” and “lost”: Middle-class residents were unable to block the new station, while low-income residents gained greater access to public transit. Supporting the community did not necessarily mean supporting poor urban residents.

No additional meeting, alternative community organizing strategy, or clever urban planning activity would have made a difference. Community control was elusive because there was no singular voice of the community.

If there is no bounded, unified community to control development, does that mean we should abandon resident participation and rely exclusively on top-down expertise? Absolutely not. Instead, we should rethink the problem participation can solve: not uncovering community consensus, but amplifying the political voice of marginalized residents. Poor urban residents face intersecting inequalities that prevent local knowledge from breaking through into political debates. Our focus should be on dismantling these inequalities rather than pursuing what is often a farce of “community” consensus.

What if instead of public meetings—constrained by both time and space, where the optimal outcome is consensus and therefore “no” has more power than “yes”—we invested more in low cost, ongoing exercises that produce a high volume of information, persist even after particular projects are completed, make priorities transparent, and neither seek nor assume a singular position from “the community”? Take the abandoned factory in Upham’s Corner. A few residents spent a couple of hours brainstorming ideas, but officials reverted to their original plans when consensus did not emerge—all while justifying the decision as influenced by “the community.” The contradictory recommendations represented a failure to reach consensus. Contrast this with the work of Design Studio for Social Intervention (DS4SI), a nonprofit in Boston. DS4SI develops creative public art exercises to generate and catalogue public space priorities—activities that are far more engaging and accessible than any 2-hour meeting. Or consider pairwise wiki surveys. These surveys are like a game where people choose between two answers to a question—like, “What should replace the abandoned factory?”—and can keep choosing between paired answers (and add their own possible answers) for as long as they like. A back-end algorithm ranks answers and, importantly, gets more accurate the more people play. Here, the entire point is to reveal contradictory recommendations and force a public conversation about why some ideas are better or worse than others.

These alternative activities creatively solicit, collect, and even rank ideas without any assumption that community members should agree. By displaying the full range of ideas, they also put more pressure on public officials to transparently explain why they pursued a certain path without resorting to the kind of “community” talk I observed in Upham’s Corner and Mattapan. Neither public art exercises nor wiki surveys can fully solve the problems of participation and inequality. And more questions certainly remain, such as who would control these activities and whether decisions should be binding. But when we rethink the problem as one of political voice rather than community consensus, it opens up new, innovative techniques to determine public priorities. From there, people and organizations can mobilize around the proposals they believe are best for poor neighborhoods.

***

Jeremy R. Levine is an Assistant Professor of Organizational Studies and Sociology (by courtesy) at the University of Michigan. He earned his A.M. and Ph.D. in Sociology from Harvard. His work analyzes the politics of inequality, particularly in U.S. cities. His first book, Constructing Community, was published in 2021 with Princeton University Press and is available for purchase through Princeton University Press and on Amazon.

***

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the views of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

We invite readers to contribute to the civic conversation about community development in St. Louis by writing an op-ed for the Community Builders Exchange. Op-eds should be short (400-700 words) and provocative. If you have an idea for an op-ed, contact Jenny Connelly-Bowen at jenny@communitybuildersstl.org.

Green Collar Jobs a Catalyst for Strong Communities

Rachel Witt

Rachel Witt

Rachel Witt, Executive Director of the South Grand Community Improvement District

This column was originally published on Engaging Local Government Leaders.

Many ways exist to address poverty, unemployment, and social equity. The green collar industry made up of recycling, landscaping, food production, and energy production with wind and solar can be a solution because those industries need both skilled and unskilled employees. Many opportunities are available for skilled workers: energy, green building, and mechanics. But there are also multiple green-collar jobs where no previous skills are needed, such as recycling, landscaping, and food production. These jobs are key to building a sound community. In fact, today’s manual labor workforce can improve overall environmental health through the partnership of green-collar jobs. Such partnerships, with small business startups, nonprofit assistance in job training, and local governments’ zoning regulations and tax incentives will in turn make communities stronger and more economically sound.

Many small business startups are happening nationwide in this industry from landscaping companies specializing in native plants, stormwater management, restoration of prairies, to the creation of food production and solar installation and maintenance.

These small business startups can pay well, offering health insurance, retirement, training, and incentives for higher education coursework. Providing well-paying jobs translates into economic growth.  For instance, communities that saw no growth now can be a catalyst to bring additional jobs to the area such as healthcare, education, and can foster the rebirth of main streets. Lastly, skilled green-collar jobs can be a catalyst to build population density. Building population density is a game-changer for struggling under-employed communities.

Many nonprofits are seeing the need for these green jobs and are stepping up to assist with job training. Grants are available to train the local workforce on solar and wind installation. In the coming years, it will be exciting to see the evolution of these alternatives and what will be next for the industry.

Local governments are the key to encourage the growth of these emerging jobs through incentives, proper planning, and zoning. Also, it is key for local governments to set benchmarks and regulations to encourage sustainable practices. Creating an economic sustainability plan will encourage developers and entrepreneurs to invest in the community, adding more job opportunities and housing options. Local governments can help underserved communities by making green-collar jobs a priority, which in turn makes their community more desirable and prosperous for all.

Plus, green-collar jobs can help increase revenue to local governments while creating a brand and identity that provides pride and hope to communities. Green collar jobs can be a catalyst for job growth that brings needed taxes to struggling local governments. This public-private partnership of local governments, nonprofits, and small business startups is the key to success to elevate and encourage the development of green-collar jobs.

Many under-employed communities that once prospered with blue-collar jobs are now struggling with abandoned industrial properties and bleak and desolate main streets. These once-thriving communities can be brought back to life through green-collar jobs. Green collar jobs can bring happiness to the workforce that helps the environment and makes the quality of life better for others. It builds morale, and longevity in the work of the future. When an industry can bring hope and enjoyment, the effects trickle down into the community. Beautification projects take shape, residential and commercial buildings are repaired, and investment brings community prosperity, making communities stronger and more economically sound.

***

Rachel Witt has been the Executive Director of the South Grand Community Improvement District for 15 years. She is a graduate from Southern Illinois University Edwardsville with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Geography, minor in Sociology and certification in Nonprofit Management. She also has a Master’s degree from Widener University in Chester PA in Public Administration emphasizing in local government and economic development. Ms. Witt serves as Secretary for the 2nd District Police Business Association. Proud graduate of the police citizens academy. She serves as Member at Large and for the Missouri Chapter of the American Planning Association-St. Louis Section and committee member for their Public Advocacy Committee. Her past board positions have been President of the Third District Police Partnership Vice President DeSales Community Development and Treasurer for River Styx Magazine. 

Received the 2018 Maestro Award from the Hospitality Sales and Marketing Association International, assisted with South Grand becoming the first Green Dining District in the City of Saint Louis in May 2018, American Planning Association Great Places in America of 2017, American Planning Association of Missouri Great Places of 2015, 2011 Outstanding Local Government Achievement Award for collaboration on the South Grand Great Streets Initiative.

***

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the views of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

We invite readers to contribute to the civic conversation about community development in St. Louis by writing an op-ed for the Community Builders Exchange. Op-eds should be short (400-700 words) and provocative. If you have an idea for an op-ed, contact Jenny Connelly-Bowen at jenny@communitybuildersstl.org.

Congratulations to our 2021 Community Building Awards Honorees!

We’re thrilled to be honoring six incredible awardees (four individuals, one initiative, and one organization) at our 2021 Community Development Family Reunion on September 23!

We’re also excited to be working with the talented Humans of St. Louis team again this year to put together stories about the important community building work that each of these honorees is doing. Watch our website in September for a special post about each awardee!

 

2021 Community Building Awards Honorees

 

The Neighborhood Vacancy Initiative at Legal Services of Eastern Missouri
Collaboration & Coalition Building

WEPOWER
Growing in Equity & Antiracism

Nikki Woelfel
Vice President - Community Development, Carrollton Bank
Transparency & Trust

Sundy Whiteside
Walnut Park East Resident; Board President, St. Louis Association of Community Organizations (SLACO); and Co-Chair, St. Louis Vacancy Collaborative Vacancy Advisory Committee
Resident Leadership

Latasha Barnes
Attorney, Legal Services of Eastern Missouri
Rising Star in Community Building

Barbara Levin
Teaching Professor, Office of Field Education, Brown School of Social Work at Washington University in St. Louis
Lifetime Dedication to Community Building

 

Come help us celebrate these incredible folks on September 23!

 

Lessons to Guide Future Equitable Development Planning

Chloe Greene, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Associate at Abt Associates

Sarah Wolff, Associate at Abt Associates

This column was originally published in Shelterforce.

Chloe Greene

Chloe Greene

As the U.S. continues to grapple with issues of racial equity and justice, equitable development planning has emerged as a tool to address systemic inequity and advance inclusive investment strategies. In 2018 and 2019, JPMorgan Chase provided funding to 23 communities through the PRO Neighborhoods Competition to support the development of plans to advance equitable development in a range of neighborhoods experiencing disinvestment and neglect, including predominantly Black communities, racially and ethnically diverse low-income areas, and chronically distressed neighborhoods.

Sarah Wolff

Sarah Wolff

We had the opportunity to learn about the progress of these grantees by reviewing their final plans and interviewing a selection of the grantees. We’d like to share three key insights from their work.

No. 1—Root Equitable Development Planning in a Community’s History and Its Residents’ Experiences

In many cases, current neighborhood distress stems in part from unjust past policies and practices. By recognizing this history, and its continued disparate impact, communities can work to dismantle inequitable practices and construct new ones that explicitly and intentionally prioritize equity. This was the case in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where one grantee, Build Baton Rouge (BBR), worked with residents to develop an equitable development plan as part of larger planning effort to address transit and public investment. BBR rooted the Imagine Plank Road plan in the community’s history, experience, and vision for the future.

The plan begins by chronicling the history of the neighborhood, including the white flight and disinvestment the area experienced following the end of segregation in the later part of the 20th century. As Christopher Tyson, executive director of BBR, explains, “If we begin with history, we remove the stigma from the people. . . . If you ride through Black communities and all you see is a collection of people who make poor choices, then you’re going to embrace solutions that likely further penalize, stigmatize, shame, and demean those people. If, however, you understand the failures of urban planning, finance, public and social policy, you are able to begin with people being humanized, valued, and centered.”

BBR led an experiential and participatory community engagement process, which included collecting favorite memories of the neighborhood through a visioning survey, a neighborhood tour (called Walk the Plank) where participants shared their visions for specific sites, a street festival, and a food truck event featuring neighborhood- and Black-owned vendors, and a neighborhood cleanup and public art event. Planners attended the events and collected data to inform the plan. In addition, the planners solicited input through a hashtag (#ImaginePlankRoad), used social media to engage residents, and created a weekly newsletter. As Tyson explains, they strove to “drive a more authentic, experientially based engagement process that deliberately engaged Black and Indigenous people.”

BBR engaged community members in conversations about race and racism to help identify systemic barriers to growth and opportunities. Preserving the history and authenticity of the neighborhood was a primary concern of corridor residents who wanted to ensure that the rich cultural history would not be lost, but instead strengthened through investing in existing residents and institutions. The resulting plan explicitly addresses race and class history, acknowledges the marginalization of Black neighborhoods as a central feature of 20th century spatial development, and prioritizes the preservation of community culture and attracting and growing Black-owned businesses. The projects and investments recommended in the plan are designed to meet the needs identified by the community, which is 96 percent Black and where one-third of the residents live in poverty. The seven development projects listed in the plan include new housing and childcare services, a civic center, a food incubator that will advance community through culture, and a park for recreation. In addition to the development projects, the plan investing in loan repayment and forgiveness programs to support local area businesses and return vacant land and buildings to commerce, and establishing a community land trust to prevent displacement.

No. 2—Leverage the Equitable Development Planning Process to Build Community Leadership

To remedy the effects of inequitable policies and practices, residents of disinvested neighborhoods need information, tools, resources, and authority to lead development efforts in their communities. To that end, the best equitable planning processes do not simply ask residents to express their views. Instead, they empower residents by including them in defining the goals of development projects, build on skills and leadership residents develop during the planning process, and propose strategies for continuing to build community leadership when implementing the resulting plan.

Consider, for example, The Real Estate Council (TREC)’s experience in Dallas. TREC engaged residents through surveys, partner and community meetings, and focus groups to identify the types of physical investments that residents would like to see prioritized in their neighborhoods. In addition, TREC used mapping technology and hired community members to conduct a door-to-door survey. The team mapped each parcel and collected information from residents about their needs.

TREC observed that the residents who engaged in the planning process developed knowledge, skills, and experience that they can continue to draw on to advocate for their needs, including developing an understanding of zoning ordinances and how to get access to government officials. TREC also noted that residents organized in response to the planning process. One group of residents living in the neighborhood known as “the Bottom” formed the Bottom Neighborhood Association to ensure their interests were better represented during the planning process. The formation of the association sparked new dialogues between planners and residents as the new organization could directly represent the residents’ interests in the planning process. Prior to the formation of this group, it was organizations that were less accountable to the residents that interacted with planners. The neighborhood association can also continue to advance residents’ interests beyond the planning process.

The plan that emerged from TREC’s planning process, Community Driven Growth, identifies strategies for continuing to develop community leadership in each target neighborhood through education, community organizing, community benefit agreements, and resident representation in future decision making. A few of the specific strategies identified in the plan include coordinating resident advocacy by bringing multiple local groups together to form a “super neighborhood organization” that can represent more than one area, working with the city council to change the times of zoning meetings so working residents can attend, planning for resident oversight in community land trusts, and promoting voting in municipal elections.

No. 3— Integrate Environmental Justice Concerns Into the Planning Process

Residents of many disinvested neighborhoods contend not only with economic challenges, but also environmental ones, such as industrial pollution, lead poisoning, and contaminated water. There’s an efficiency in addressing both development and environmental inequities at once since there is significant interplay between a community’s economic and development prospects and the quality and safety of its natural and built environment.

South Florida Community Land Trust took on the dual challenges to the development of affordable housing posed by planned transit expansion and rising sea levels in developing the plan South Florida’s Coastal Housing Link. One of the primary environmental challenges facing residents of South Florida is the rising sea level. Though wealthy, mostly white residents of the coastal communities can escape the threat of floods by moving to higher ground, many Black, Latinx, and low-wealth residents do not have the means to do so. Additionally, as moving inland becomes more desirable, wealthy white residents are encroaching on existing Black, Latinx and low- and moderate-income communities.

At the same time as residents of South Florida are grappling with rising sea levels, plans are underway to build a new rail line that will run through 27 neighborhoods. In anticipation of the new line, the South Florida Community Land Trust led the development of a parcel-level analysis to identify opportunities to develop and preserve affordable housing proximate to the planned transit line. From there, the planners overlaid a flood map on the area to identify land likely to be safe from flooding. The land trust is now working to purchase land parcels that are both safe from flooding and located near future transit stations. The resulting plan responds to the community’s articulated priorities, which ranked access to transit as the top priority and protection from future flooding and effects of climate change second.

Learn more about the work of these organizations’ equitable planning efforts in this recorded Abt webinar. More information on equitable development planning can be found in the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies’ report Ingredients of Equitable Development Planning, Government Alliance on Race and Equity’s Equitable Development as a Tool to Advance Racial Equity and NALCAB’s Guide to Equitable Neighborhood Development.

***

Chloe Greene is an Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Associate at Abt Associates with over ten years of experience in qualitative research and analysis, with a particular focus on racial equity and marginalized populations. Her areas of focus include culturally responsive planning and sustainable economies for low and moderate-income communities. Her research also includes solutions to improve the economic and social standing of long-term residents in communities experiencing racial and ethnic banishment, developing entrepreneurial organizational structures for culturally relevant arts organizations, as well as community-led and culturally responsive planning in communities of color. Her career reflects a commitment to solving complex challenges facing Black, Brown, and Native communities and amplifying marginalized voices. She received a dual Masters from The Ohio State University in City and Regional Planning and African American and African Studies.

Sarah Wolff is an Associate at Abt Associates with fourteen years of experience conducting quantitative and qualitative research on community and economic development. Her areas of focus include affordable housing finance; CDFI operations, program evaluation and impact metrics; consumer financial protection; and lending in low- and moderate-income families and communities. She is the Project Director for the national evaluation of JPMorgan Chase’s PRO Neighborhoods and AdvancingCities competitions. Prior to joining Abt, Ms. Wolff worked at Self-Help, one of the nation’s largest community development financial institutions, and its policy and advocacy affiliate the Center for Responsible Lending. She received a Master’s degree in City and Regional Planning from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

***

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the views of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

We invite readers to contribute to the civic conversation about community development in St. Louis by writing an op-ed for the Community Builders Exchange. Op-eds should be short (400-700 words) and provocative. If you have an idea for an op-ed, contact Jenny Connelly-Bowen at jenny@communitybuildersstl.org.

Thank you to our 2021 Give STL Day donors!

Thank you so much to everyone who donated to CBN on May 6, 2021 for Give STL Day!

Your support means so much to us. We say often that community development is a team sport and we’re very grateful for your partnership on that team.

 

2021 Give STL Day Donors

Adam Castagno
Amanda Honigfort
Becky Reinhart
Charli Cooksey
Cindy Mense
Claire & Dan Hutti
Elizabeth Simons
Ellen Sherman
Emma Klues
Hilary Perkins
Joe Cavato

Kate Grindstaff
Kendra Copanas
Kevin Hahn
Linda Kunz
Pamela Harris
Paul Orr
Paul Woodruff
Rachel D’Souza-Siebert
Stephanie Co
Todd Swanstrom
Zachariah Stillman

 

2021 Give STL Day Matching Fund Donors

Angela Pinex
David Noble
Jenny Ryan
Kathy Siddens
Kimberly McKinney

Monica Campbell
Sal Martinez
Sean Spencer
Todd Swanstrom

 
Thank You.png
 

Sam Moore’s Legacy Should Be Change in North St. Louis

Michael R. Allen, Director of the Preservation Research Office & Senior Lecturer at the Sam Fox School of Design and Visual Arts

This column was originally published in The St. Louis American. Before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, CBN had originally planned to share this in our April 2020 newsletter. Although the context is from over a year ago, the content remains relevant.

Michael R. Allen

Michael R. Allen

I first met Alderman Sam Moore in 2007, when I was a freshman building preservationist tilting at windmills as much to learn how to tilt as to strike the windmills. Moore had just taken office and had pressed the city’s Land Reutilization Authority to demolish some 39 vacant historic buildings in The Ville neighborhood. The volume of this request was astounding, but not the reasons why. The Ville had far more than 39 vacant buildings, and saviors were either invisible or non-existent.

At the Preservation Board’s meeting considering the demolition, I joined other advocates for conserving built heritage in urging a rejection of the request on the grounds that many of these buildings were in good condition and that the Ville never had the chance to explore historic tax credits. The Ville was a local historic district, making demolitions tougher, but not a national one, which would bring state and federal financial incentives for those scarce saviors.

Moore was a shock. When he took to the rostrum to make the case for demolition, he did not repeat the lines I had heard many times – that the buildings were far from saving, that they were threats to public safety or that they were not important. Instead, Moore offered an elegy of sorts, starting by acknowledging how these buildings were built better than anything we would ever see rise in the city again. These buildings also stored more history than anyone in the room could ever learn. Moore valued the buildings as cultural and economic assets.

However, he stated that nothing had been done to save the buildings in all the years since the Ville first became a historic district in 1989 except talk. He didn’t want to tear them all down, but he was elected to do more than talk and, in the absence of a parade of saviors, thought that the most reasonable course was to demolish these buildings and work to keep the occupied ones around them from being abandoned.

The Preservation Board approved some demolitions, but denied others. Moore was not upset, but pragmatic. He approached then-Cultural Resources Office Director Kate Shea and me after the meeting and asked whether, since we thought the buildings were worth saving, we could figure out how to do that. Shea took the lead and found funding for a new survey of Ville buildings, which I ended up conducting with architectural historian Lynn Josse. In the end, we examined almost 400 buildings and were able to create small historic districts giving 96 buildings a chance for historic tax credits.

Moore was supportive of the survey and the national historic district designations at every turn. However, he warned us that what we wanted to do would be hard because we were only designating buildings. We had no power to reverse the denial of capital to his ward, a project that white St. Louis had been inflicting since before World War II. Moore was willing to give a dreamy view of preservation a shot with grace, but he was not blind.

In ensuing years, we joined forces to fight illegal brick theft, garnering a few joint media appearances and seemingly little to show except for battle stories. Moore was right. Making the case that St. Louis should care about the future of a single building in North St. Louis was difficult. Sadly, it was even more difficult to get the city to care about an entire neighborhood, let alone an entire half of a city. As time went on, Moore showed me that the buildings I had set out to preserve were just evidence of concentrated deprivation of people.

When Moore stood on the floor of the Board of Aldermen and showed large images of the conditions in his ward, he was reminding the city that it was running from a long-needed reckoning. If the images of broken walls, boarded windows and overgrown lots seemed dreadful, they just pointed to ten thousand decisions to move out when a black family moved next door, to deny a mortgage or sale to a black family, to turn a blind eye to mob violence, and to grant favors to projects across town profiting the same people who refused to invest in The Ville.

Moore reminded us that these actions are not just in the past but ongoing, and the landscape of North St. Louis is the public record. The buildings are just signs for how the leaders of this city are treating people. We can’t fix buildings and expect much to change. We must change the way we treat people. On the cusp of a mayoral election, Moore’s legacy urges us to remember that St. Louis won’t be a whole city until North St. Louis is a record of equity and justice.

***

Michael R. Allen works as an academic researcher, historian, teacher, design critic, public artist, critical spatial tour guide, and heritage conservationist in private practice. The binding ties in his research are investigation of the ideological and political constitution of architectural and infrastructural space, study of the claiming of material heritage and the politics of its conservation, and inquiry into the forms of liberatory agency that realize the potential of the modern metropolis to distribute wealth, knowledge, and shelter.

Currently, he is a Senior Lecturer in Architecture, Landscape Architecture and Urban Design at the Sam Fox School of Design and Visual Arts, as well as a Lecturer in American Culture Studies (AMCS), at Washington University in St. Louis. At the university, Allen serves on the Advisory Committee for the Mellon-funded The Divided City: An Urban Humanities Initiative. Allen’s university teaching has focused on interdisciplinary investigation of architectural history, cultural landscapes, the economics of real estate and the politics of urban planning.

In professional practice, since 2009 Allen has been Director of the Preservation Research Office, a heritage consultancy. He is a US federally qualified architectural historian who has worked on various historic preservation projects in nine US states. He contributed to the Charting the American Bottom cultural landscape guide, co-led the architectural yoga series Building As Body with Mallory Nezam, and co-convened and managed the Pruitt Igoe Now ideas competition with Nora Wendl. Allen also has been Urbanist-in-Residence at the Pulitzer Arts Foundation and, more recently, Research Adviser to Laboratory for Suburbia.

Allen’s scholarly and critical articles have appeared in a wide range of scholarly and popular sources, such as Buildings and Landscapes, CityLab, Disegno, Forty-Five Journal, Hyperallergic, Next City, PLATFORM, Temporary Art Review, St. Louis American, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and Studies in the History of Gardens and Designed Landscapes. He has contributed chapters to Bending the Future: 50 Ideas About the Next 50 Years of Historic Preservation, Midwest Architecture Journeys and Buildings of Missouri.

In 2018, the National Trust for Historic Preservation named him to its “40 Under 40” list honoring young preservationists whose work is expanding the concept and practice of historic preservation in the United States. Allen’s preservation career started with tenures at the National Building Arts Center and the Landmarks Association of St. Louis, where he was Assistant Director.

Currently he is a Ph.D. candidate in Cultural Heritage at the Ironbridge Institute for Cultural Heritage at the University of Birmingham, England. He holds a B.A. in Literature and History from The Union Institute.

***

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the views of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

We invite readers to contribute to the civic conversation about community development in St. Louis by writing an op-ed for the Community Builders Exchange. Op-eds should be short (400-700 words) and provocative. If you have an idea for an op-ed, contact Jenny Connelly-Bowen at jenny@communitybuildersstl.org.

Urban Planning - North of Delmar

Fatimah Muhammad, Partnership Coordinator, Community Builders Network

Fatimah Muhammad (1).JPG

Throughout the 20th century, the community of urban Black Americans connected with the community of urban planning professionals. At times those connections were sources of conflict and oppression, at other times sources of reform and cooperation. Planning tools were and are often used for the purpose of community division and racial segregation.

Some planners – whose ranks gradually became more diversified racially – dedicated their lives to fighting for the rights of the poor and distressed. Such dedication took the form of “social” or “advocacy” planning, neighborhood planning, or equity planning, but often lacks input from the residents that are being affected.

In general, what is needed is an overview of the critical linkages between the urban planning profession and the nation’s most visible racial minority. Race and racial injustice influence all efforts to improve urban society. Urban planning, an active profession, purports to help improve civic life in metropolitan areas. It cannot do so unless its practitioners more clearly understand the historical connections between the people and this field.

Urban Development pic.jpg

Hospitals Can Partner with Banks Under the Community Reinvestment Act to Create Healthy Communities

Karen Kali, Senior Program Manager, Special Initiatives with NCRC

Marjanna Smith, a senior studying public health at The George Washington University

This column was originally published on NCRC’s blog.

Karen Kali

Karen Kali

Marjanna Smith

Marjanna Smith

Loans and investments made as part of banks’ Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) activities are an important source of funding for hospitals and health systems to address social determinants of health, the physical and social conditions in the environment that influence health. By funneling resources into upstream determinants of health to address root causes of health disparities, such as poverty, economic mobility and supportive community resources, hospitals and health systems have the distinct opportunity to disrupt the cycle of inequity that stymies both health and economic outcomes.

Nonprofit hospitals must conduct Community Health Needs Assessments (CNHAs) once every three years to ascertain the status of the community health and create a plan to enhance population health in their geographic footprint, in accordance with the Affordable Care Act. By partnering with banks, hospitals can meet their CHNA requirements by collaborating on upstream efforts. Similarly, banks must meet their community benefits requirements as a result of the CRA mandate. When the two entities collaboratively engage and partner with each other as well as community stakeholders, the result is mutually beneficial to both community-focused anchors.

The Community Reinvestment Act And Healthy Communities

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 states that financial institutions have an obligation to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they are chartered. In accordance with CRA, financial institutions are evaluated by how well they meet these credit needs, particularly for individuals with low- and moderate-incomes (LMI) and in LMI neighborhoods. CRA incentivizes banks to increase the availability of credit and capital to underinvested communities. Various types of investment activities qualify for CRA consideration. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, the four categories of CRA-eligible community development activities are as follows: 

  1. Affordable housing,

  2. Community facilities and services targeted to people with LMI (including financial education and capability, charter schools, community centers and daycare facilities),

  3. Activities that promote economic development by providing financing for small businesses or small farms (including workforce development and small business technical assistance),

  4. Neighborhood revitalization and stabilization in LMI geographies, distressed or underserved non-metro middle-income areas or designated disaster areas.

Along with aligning within one of these categories, the activity generally must also be completed within the bank’s assessment area, the defined geographical range in which the bank conducts most of its business activities. Banks can pursue community development activities outside of assessment areas provided they have first met community needs in their assessment areas.

By partnering with hospitals and health systems, financial institutions can directly contribute to the development of healthy communities and enhanced health outcomes. Banks and nonprofit hospitals share common goals in their community activities — banks’ CRA activities focus on community development and reinvestment, and hospitals must develop strategies that create a community benefit based on their community health needs assessments (CHNAs)

Nonprofit hospitals are required to promote community health and provide charity care (e.g. complimentary medical care and services) in exchange for the significant tax exemptions these nonprofit entities enjoy. Every three years a nonprofit hospital must conduct a CHNA in order to retain its nonprofit status. The CHNA is a process led by the hospital to engage the community (and its stakeholders) in identifying, analyzing, prioritizing and planning for community health needs and resources. 

Thus, the activities of banks and hospitals can overlap significantly when considering their shared goal of community development. As hospitals are working to improve health outcomes and health access to care in their communities, they face a growing demand to address the social and economic determinants of health within their community. To fund these initiatives, health systems must partner with financial institutions, as well as other stakeholders such as Community Development Corporations (CDCs) and Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) target upstream community interventions, within the areas of affordable housing, enhanced neighborhood conditions and increased socioeconomic status. 

Banks may obtain CRA credit for working with hospitals and health systems in multiple ways. Funding for healthcare services, healthcare centers, homeless shelters and drug recovery centers are all CRA qualified activities that directly impact community health. Specific investments that have been approved as CRA qualified activities in the past include loans and investments that improve hospitals that serve LMI individuals, investments that fund the construction of health centers, grants to organizations to purchase specialty equipment for federally qualified health centers during a local health emergency, and loans to build health clinics in underserved areas. 

Along with directly contributing to community health, many other CRA activities affect social determinants of health. Activities that promote affordable housing development can improve the health of LMI individuals and families by increasing healthy living conditions and financial accessibility to determinants of health. Families with LMI are more likely to experience unhealthy and unsafe housing conditions in neighborhoods that lack health promotion resources. Severely cost-burdened renters are less likely to have a usual source of medical care, more likely to postpone clinical care and more likely to face food insecurity. Affordable homes can, therefore, allow greater access to food, healthcare and education — all of which are social determinants of health. CRA activities can also improve financial equity and wellbeing for local residents; similar to housing development, this can also increase the affordability of health-promoting resources and services. Lastly, investments or initiatives that improve the local economy and support small businesses improve community health, as research supports a link between economy and health.

Several hospitals and initiatives have emerged in recent years as new leaders and innovations in multi-sector, health and wealth-focused collaborations in community investment, utilizing CRA with leveraged sources of funding from public investments, private equity, grants, government funding and philanthropy. Traditionally siloed in the health field with little overlap to the community development world, hospitals are now becoming more integrated into the CRA environment. Recognizing that personal behavior and clinical care account for only part of the picture of community-level health outcomes, hospitals and health systems are partnering with banks and financial institutions to make significant local investments to upstream social determinants of health.

[See the original NCRC blog post for examples of what this collaboration can look like.]

Coronavirus Pandemic

While the United States continues to grapple with the Coronavirus pandemic, CRA is as critical as ever to the equitable revitalization and stabilization of communities. COVID-19 is hitting LMI households harshly, and it raises a new set of housing challenges for both the homeownership and rental markets, specifically LMI communities of color. LMI communities may be more susceptible to foreclosure, eviction, job loss, reduction in hours and reduced wages. Given health disparities, communities of color experience higher rates of death from COVID-19. 

The disparate effect of COVID-19 on LMI and Black and Brown communities illustrates the relevance of CRA and its essential community purpose of preventing redlining and confronting systemic inequities in financial services and access to credit within LMI communities. 

With more than 354,000 deaths and nearly 21 million COVID-19 cases (as of January 5, 2021), the United States is facing what may be the worst of the pandemic. In May 2020, the regulators of CRA, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, joined together to expand eligible CRA activities in response to COVID-19.  Banks can receive credit for these expanded CRA until six months after the end of the pandemic national emergency declaration.  

Qualified activities under the COVID-19 response include loans, investments and community development services that support the following:

  • Emergency medical care, including medical facility services and supplies, temporary medical facilities and enhanced medical/hospital capacity;

  • Purchase and distribution of personal protective equipment;

  • Provision of emergency food supplies; or

  • Assistance to state, tribal, territorial, or local governments for emergency management and to support communications of general health and safety information to the public.

Coronavirus activities may benefit the bank’s designated assessment area as well as areas beyond, such as statewide or regional areas as credit may be given outside of established assessment areas. 

Given the urgency of the COVID-19 crisis, this expanded guidance from the CRA regulators offers both immediate and long-term opportunities for hospitals and health systems to collaborate with banks and financial institutions and community based organizations to impact health outcomes.  

Looking Ahead

While banks and financial institutions have an urgent opportunity to collaborate during the COVID-19 pandemic, the health crisis has effortlessly exacerbated the inequality that existed in communities across the country well before the virus began. And when the virus is over, communities will need to pick up the pieces and address the widespread setback in housing, income, job opportunity and health outcomes that the pandemic has caused. The obligations of both hospitals and health systems and banks and financial institutions from the ACA and CRA respectively creates a mutually beneficial opportunity for the two community anchors to pursue long-term partnerships. Banks have demonstrated an interest in investing in projects with health impacts. Hospitals see the value in banks utilizing CRA credit to target investment in LMI communities, the same communities hospitals seek to improve population health. While the COVID-19 pandemic spurred targeted action from the CRA regulators, it is long-term engagement and collaboration between banks and financial institutions and hospitals that will ultimately create healthy communities, increase community wealth and advanced health outcomes. 

***

Karen Kali leads the Special Initiatives work for NCRC and focuses on aging in community, Age-Friendly Banking, healthy communities and emerging areas of interest. Prior to joining NCRC, Karen assisted in comprehensive neighborhood planning community engagement in Iowa; provided technical assistance to cities, counties and states creating affordable housing trust funds; provided housing with services consulting with Capital Impact Partners; wrote extensively for HUD’s Office of Policy Development & Research with Sage Computing; and served as a commissioner for the Montgomery County Commission on Common Ownership Communities, resolving consumer disputes filed within the Office of Consumer Protection in Montgomery County, Maryland. Karen is a certified urban planner by the American Institute of Certified Planners and holds a masters in Community and Regional Planning and a bachelor degree in Sociology. Additionally, Karen serves as the Wellness chairperson for her neighborhood school’s Parent Teachers Association, advocating for safe routes to school, clean and accessible water for all students and fresh foods and salad bars in elementary schools.

***

Marjanna Smith is a senior studying public health at The George Washington University. As a student in the dual-degree BS/MPH program, she will continue to pursue a Master of Public Health upon completing her undergraduate degree. During her time at GW, she has worked as a research coordinator for multiple childhood nutrition studies and a peer health educator on a substance education task force. As an intern with the National Community Reinvesment Coalition, she wrote about public health trends and issues in healthy equity.

***

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the views of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

We invite readers to contribute to the civic conversation about community development in St. Louis by writing an op-ed for the Community Builders Exchange. Op-eds should be short (400-700 words) and provocative. If you have an idea for an op-ed, contact Jenny Connelly-Bowen at jenny@communitybuildersstl.org.