|
|
The Impact of Municipal Planning Efforts on Communities of Color: Latino Community Building |
|
|
Amalia Maestas and Felicia Gonzales
|
© & Author Info |
Historically, community based organizations (CBOs) have played a key role in serving, empowering and mobilizing communities of color to renew their interest in public life, facilitate economic development and fight for equal opportunity across a broad range of issues. The concept of community building has been a central theme by which grass roots organizations across the nation have mobilized and invested people in rehabilitating their communities and their neighborhoods. It has been a long held belief that community-building initiatives and community activism make a difference in people’s lives. They can enhance opportunities for those who are impoverished, and more importantly prepare people with the skills to seize opportunities that become available to them through their community involvement.
In the early 1980s as federal, state and city government recognized that social welfare was an incomplete solution to fighting the social ills of the inner cities, they opted for an experiment which would implement neighborhood councils to confront the problems facing their communities. As these government sponsored entities began creating neighborhood councils they failed to recognize that communities of color, unlike European-American communities, had already established grassroots, community-based organizations, which for generations had advocated for and developed relationships of mutual respect and trust with minority and ethnic populations. The solidification of the relationship with CBOs is best exemplified in that communities of color view grassroots organizations as their medium by which to voice their concerns across a broad range of issues.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the criticism of government implemented neighborhoods councils have come from the CBOs representing communities of color. There is a strong sense among these that the government councils have by-passed grass- roots organizations and leadership as they have brainstormed possible solutions to resolving neighborhood problems and infrastructure needs. These feelings are best explained by the fact that government implemented councils have been introduced into communities of color as autonomous entities, which have worked independent of historically important community-based, grass roots organizations. Furthermore, there is a general consensus that the government-implemented councils undermine the established working relationship between CBOs and members of communities of color invested in community building.
The result of these feelings of distrust and frustration is that communities of color are not relating to the government implemented councils. Community members are not participating in municipal planning efforts in their respective neighborhoods and consequently policies and legislation are being passed in these neighborhoods which do not reflect the opinions, character or support of the community. Furthermore, when CBOs have participated in planning processes government often sees them as only representing organizational interests rather than the reality that these historically important organizations represent a broader constituency. When planning processes value individual opinions over those of an organized constituency they misrepresent the actual community perspective.
Examples of this disconnect between governmentally structured processes and the more organic, grass roots development that occurs in communities of color is the current Seattle neighborhood Planning efforts. Over thirty neighborhoods have been engaged in planning efforts over the last three to five years. There is concern among established, neighborhood especially non-geographic ethnic constituencies (Native American and Latino) that neighborhoods are being encouraged to create new Community Development Corporations (CDCs) to implement plans developed by Euro-American dominated councils.
Not only will the emergence of these brand new CDCs strain already limited resources but it will also encourage even more factionalism within communities. Additionally, a number of CDCs that have historically worked in distressed communities may be passed over by the more homogenous, more affluent, less ethnically and economically diverse neighborhoods "creaming" whatever implementation funding may become available for neighborhood plan implementation should a bond or levy measure be passed, since the basic infrastructure needs of these are fewer. The net effect will be a continuance of the pattern of disinvestment in neighborhoods lacking even basic infrastructure.
In closing, as we all move forward and anticipate the changes and challenges of the new millennium with altering demographics that will vary the character of the United States. We must not ignore, but rather support the self-determination of communities of color and confront issues of race and class that divide us. Nationally, a dialogue on race was begun over a year ago in order to bring to light the disparity and historical inequities that have plagued every facet of life. In planning what our cities, what our communities and neighborhoods will look like in the future, we must not ignore the worth and contributions of communities of color to the creation of these livable spaces.
Amalia Maestas and Felicia Gonzales
El Centro de la Raza
2524 16th Ave. South
Seattle, WA 98144
206-329-9442
http://www.elcentrodelaraza.com
email: elcentro@elcentrodelaraza.com