Exactly a year to the day since I landed in Brazil. It seems quite pertinent that it happens to be the day that Great Yarmouth Borough Council has changed from Conservative control to Labour in the 2012 local council elections. Voter turnout was significantly low and civic engagement remains a challenge for the British democratic process in spite of initial fanfares surrounding the repackaging of initiatives such as community organising and participatory budgeting.
I have since completed the paper on my fellowship and am happy to share. I travel to London on 30th May to collect my official Churchill Medallion and pass out as a Churchill Fellow.
I am also now a fully fledged member of the East Anglia Regional Association Committee. We had a meeting last week in Cambridge, where amongst other things we were looking at ways of increasing applications to the Churchill Trust from the region. If anybody has any ideas please let me know!
I am currently also working on a reflective paper with my colleague Holly Notcutt, looking at community organising in the context of an established community development programme in Great Yarmouth, much of this has been informed by my time in San Francisco.
My work in Great Yarmouth continue to focus on community development and social change. We are shortly about to launch a Centre of Excellence -CoSocial, which will offer expert training and advice to others, particularly local government practitioners in enabling communities to shape their own destinies. Our web-site is www.cosocial.org.uk
Apart from that, life continues… and I hope richer as a consequence of my time abroad.
-RG
04/05/12
Friday 4 May 2012
Sunday 14 August 2011
August Update
The process of writing up my report has begun. I've been hampered by writer's block over the past few weeks as I attempt to consolidate both the academic reading I've done and my fieldwork into a coherent paper. I'm mindful that time is of the essence as the national context is progressing rapidly. I had lunch the other week with my old MA supervisor, Dr Marjorie Mayo. Marj was a source of useful information and encouragement and has helped me to think more widely about the implications of the community organiser programme for community development practice. At the same time, locally I have spoken with local voluntary sector organisations in Great Yarmouth about the potential of them hosting one or more of the "5,000 organisers" and how these might engage with existing community development practice.
There seems somewhat of a silence on the PB front. This was echoed by an article in last week's Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2011/aug/12/participatory-budgeting-localism-big-society
I have contacted the Big Society Network to chase the learning from the Your Local Budget activity earlier this year, but there has been no response to date.
I intend to have a final paper drafted by September for submission to both the WCMT and Local Government Journal.
There seems somewhat of a silence on the PB front. This was echoed by an article in last week's Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2011/aug/12/participatory-budgeting-localism-big-society
I have contacted the Big Society Network to chase the learning from the Your Local Budget activity earlier this year, but there has been no response to date.
I intend to have a final paper drafted by September for submission to both the WCMT and Local Government Journal.
Sunday 3 July 2011
Reflections
For friends who know me I often joke about finding a nice hideaway to write my memoirs when I retire - (not far off now I've turned 30). I think I may have found it at the Berkeley campus, University of California - just across the bay from San Francisco. When I was studying for my undergraduate degree at Manchester University- Berekely was a renowned centre for anthropological research. One of the first ethnography's on Brazil that I read- "Death Without Weeping" by Nancy Scheper-Hughes was published here (and she is still based in the department). The campus seems quintessentially American with lots of greenery and gothic architecture adjacent to the quaint Berkeley downtown area full of independent cafe's and shops -my own little King Street (although I'm writing this in remorse for BBQ Chicken, which I understand has closed due to a massive hike in rent, with my other favourite eating place on the street- Dee Thai having already faced a similar fate). Gentrification of King Street into an "Anytown" High Street of pizza outlets and chain bars would be a real loss to that street's identity - anyway enough of a rant about home...
Berkeley is a lovely campus town and I have pitched up in the university library to spend my last few days writing up my notes from the last 2 months. This blog has acted as an aide memoir and reading back I realise how my language swings from British English to American English interchangeably - so at times I talk about "organisng" and others "organizng" -Sorry!
The last 2 months have been awe-inspiring. Speaking to others in the same field of work, grappling with different systems of government, culture and language and most importantly seeing real examples of communities mobilising for change. I am planning to write a paper summarising the learning from this fellowship and I will post it on here once it is complete.
Final Thoughts
My thinking is still very much evolving, but i think neither community organizing nor participatory budgeting alone can be the panacea of civil society in Britain. By experiencing both processes in their authentic settings it is clear that they have both evolved due to a wider set of political, historical and social processes. They are also not stand alone processes and are part of a larger network of relationships and arrangements between the state and civil society - established and institutionalised over a period of time. There are however, some real commonalities in terms of the plight of communities in North and South America and indeed in Britain to affect change. Where communities have the capacity and skills to organise they can utilise participatory structures of the state to their advantage. Communities will only engage with such structures if they can identify a tangible benefit to themselves, their family or their immediate community. Such structures may also be restrictive and may limit the possibility of community involvement. Those communities which seem to have the highest levels of social capital seem most capable of circumventing these limiting structures and will often challenge the state and other power holders such as big corporations in a more direct way. There is equally a risk that some communities will not be able to organise so effectively and therefore risk further marginalisation where structures prevent opportunities for their full involvement.
The relationship between the state and civil society is therefore a fluid one. There are often times when co-operation and collaboration is mutually beneficial, but equally there are times when the independence of civil society is paramount. These will be important points to consider as we consider policy initiatives stemming from the Big Society agenda in Britain - ultimately the agenda can only be led by Civil Society (and by Civil Society I mean residents and community associations, rather than larger NGOs - There seems a real lack of definition around this, but there is an absolute difference between grassroots community-led groups and the growth of large, quasi "social purpose" conglomerates). There is however, a strong role for local government to consider its role as facilitator and co-producer of activities and actions responding to community need.
Local government can and should respond by creating structures of participation which are meaningful and relevant, but equally recognise that communities will often organise outside of these structures (and often at odds with other local government processes) to address the issues that affect them. There is also currently a risk of pilot overload and as such these processes will be seen as a short-term, tinkering at the edges type approach which doesn't really reach or have any bearing on the wider population. There needs to be conviction and long-term commitment politically, constitutionally and operationally to any participatory democratic process...
Acknowledgements
This trip and the fieldwork I have undertaken has been made possible by the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust. Fellowship Manager Julia Weston has been a tremendous help in responding swiftly to any dramas along the way. She was particularly good humoured when I managed to complete my ESTA application incorrectly and was initially refused entry to the USA- fortunately this was quickly resolved.
The help of strangers along the way has been incredible and the list of people who barely know me but have helped, with contacts, accommodation, food and good company is endless; Sergio Baierle, Oli Henman, Phil Teece, Claudia Cunha, Rebecca Abers, Geraldo Campos, Dande Talveres, Sergio Torres, Karina Dino, Mila Pavlin, Sara Short, Erika Katske, Mike Miller, Sarah Swensen, Catherine Swanson, Gaelle Boesmans, Angela and Lenadro Rist and of course my friends Marika Stone, Claire and Tom Way and Ginny Skeen. I've also made alot of friends over the past two months, many of whom I hope to continue a dialogue with and reciprocate their generosity should they ever fancy a trip to GY.
I'm returning to the UK with lots of practical examples, useful tools, case studies and a real desire to continue developing thinking around some of these concepts around community development. They are as relevant in Great Yarmouth and the UK as they are around the rest of the world and particularly now as we look evermore closer to communities being at the heart of driving social and economic change.
I would wholeheartedly recommend anyone to consider a WCMT fellowship. The web-site is
www.wcmt.org.uk and the application is relatively straight forward- the deadline is sometime in October. I'd be happy to talk to anybody who might be interested in applying. I plan to be quite actively involved in the Regional Association upon my return (one of my promises to myself, inspired by everything that I've seen is to get more involved as a citizen rather than just a facilitator- although heading up any kind of demonstration outside the homes of unscrupulous landlords in GY isn't on the cards just yet)!
Berkeley is a lovely campus town and I have pitched up in the university library to spend my last few days writing up my notes from the last 2 months. This blog has acted as an aide memoir and reading back I realise how my language swings from British English to American English interchangeably - so at times I talk about "organisng" and others "organizng" -Sorry!
The last 2 months have been awe-inspiring. Speaking to others in the same field of work, grappling with different systems of government, culture and language and most importantly seeing real examples of communities mobilising for change. I am planning to write a paper summarising the learning from this fellowship and I will post it on here once it is complete.
Final Thoughts
My thinking is still very much evolving, but i think neither community organizing nor participatory budgeting alone can be the panacea of civil society in Britain. By experiencing both processes in their authentic settings it is clear that they have both evolved due to a wider set of political, historical and social processes. They are also not stand alone processes and are part of a larger network of relationships and arrangements between the state and civil society - established and institutionalised over a period of time. There are however, some real commonalities in terms of the plight of communities in North and South America and indeed in Britain to affect change. Where communities have the capacity and skills to organise they can utilise participatory structures of the state to their advantage. Communities will only engage with such structures if they can identify a tangible benefit to themselves, their family or their immediate community. Such structures may also be restrictive and may limit the possibility of community involvement. Those communities which seem to have the highest levels of social capital seem most capable of circumventing these limiting structures and will often challenge the state and other power holders such as big corporations in a more direct way. There is equally a risk that some communities will not be able to organise so effectively and therefore risk further marginalisation where structures prevent opportunities for their full involvement.
The relationship between the state and civil society is therefore a fluid one. There are often times when co-operation and collaboration is mutually beneficial, but equally there are times when the independence of civil society is paramount. These will be important points to consider as we consider policy initiatives stemming from the Big Society agenda in Britain - ultimately the agenda can only be led by Civil Society (and by Civil Society I mean residents and community associations, rather than larger NGOs - There seems a real lack of definition around this, but there is an absolute difference between grassroots community-led groups and the growth of large, quasi "social purpose" conglomerates). There is however, a strong role for local government to consider its role as facilitator and co-producer of activities and actions responding to community need.
Local government can and should respond by creating structures of participation which are meaningful and relevant, but equally recognise that communities will often organise outside of these structures (and often at odds with other local government processes) to address the issues that affect them. There is also currently a risk of pilot overload and as such these processes will be seen as a short-term, tinkering at the edges type approach which doesn't really reach or have any bearing on the wider population. There needs to be conviction and long-term commitment politically, constitutionally and operationally to any participatory democratic process...
Acknowledgements
This trip and the fieldwork I have undertaken has been made possible by the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust. Fellowship Manager Julia Weston has been a tremendous help in responding swiftly to any dramas along the way. She was particularly good humoured when I managed to complete my ESTA application incorrectly and was initially refused entry to the USA- fortunately this was quickly resolved.
The help of strangers along the way has been incredible and the list of people who barely know me but have helped, with contacts, accommodation, food and good company is endless; Sergio Baierle, Oli Henman, Phil Teece, Claudia Cunha, Rebecca Abers, Geraldo Campos, Dande Talveres, Sergio Torres, Karina Dino, Mila Pavlin, Sara Short, Erika Katske, Mike Miller, Sarah Swensen, Catherine Swanson, Gaelle Boesmans, Angela and Lenadro Rist and of course my friends Marika Stone, Claire and Tom Way and Ginny Skeen. I've also made alot of friends over the past two months, many of whom I hope to continue a dialogue with and reciprocate their generosity should they ever fancy a trip to GY.
I'm returning to the UK with lots of practical examples, useful tools, case studies and a real desire to continue developing thinking around some of these concepts around community development. They are as relevant in Great Yarmouth and the UK as they are around the rest of the world and particularly now as we look evermore closer to communities being at the heart of driving social and economic change.
I would wholeheartedly recommend anyone to consider a WCMT fellowship. The web-site is
www.wcmt.org.uk and the application is relatively straight forward- the deadline is sometime in October. I'd be happy to talk to anybody who might be interested in applying. I plan to be quite actively involved in the Regional Association upon my return (one of my promises to myself, inspired by everything that I've seen is to get more involved as a citizen rather than just a facilitator- although heading up any kind of demonstration outside the homes of unscrupulous landlords in GY isn't on the cards just yet)!
Wednesday 29 June 2011
Grassroots!
I have been overwhelmed by the size of the city's civil society. This weekend's Pride celebrations were testament to the thousands of individuals in the community who volunteer and the countless number of community organisations that exist. This is something very particular to the psyche of the City and the Bay area in general. I have spent some time this week in Oakland- home of the original Black Panther (Black Civil Rights) Movement in the United States in the 60's and have been talking to a number of groups operating in the area. Oakland has become the more affordable part of the Bay area to live in in recent years. Since the dot com boom San Francisco real estate prices have rocketed. The outward signs of homelessness across the city is particularly striking. Housing affordability is a particular issue for San Francisco residents and the Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco is an organization which employs a community organizng model to advocate on behalf of renters across the city- whether they are in private rented or social housing. I have met with Sara Short Director and Tommi Avicoli Mecca Head of Counselling and part-time community activist to learn more about their work.
www.hrcsf.org
Tommi has spent a number of years as a community activist (and is also a freelance columnist in the Bay Guardian http://www.sfbayguardian.com/2011/06/21/no-equality-without-economic-equality), particularly in issues relating to housing. As a resident in Castro since the 70s Tommi has been involved in a number of community organizations tackling a range of issues across the city. The most recent being a campaign to raise the plight of spiralling rental prices in and around Castro and the growing number of young people from the LGBT community living on the street. When at the LGBT center some weeks ago, Mila Pavlin had mentioned the migration of many young people to San Francisco from across the western states thrown out of their family homes because of their sexuality. Tommi and others living in the Castro had witnessed the increased number of young people sleeping rough and decided to "organize" to address the issue. The organzing included direct lobbying to City Hall, more radical protests outside the homes of real estate promoters and the development of a shower club and food co-op. Negotiating and forming alliances with political leaders also seemed to be part of this strategy. Whilst the issue of youth homelessness remains and real estate prices continue to grow in the Castro neighbourhood, Tommi referenced the success of the group in securing a dedicated LGBT homeless shelter, funded by city hall and likely to be run by a local church. For Tommi the organizing had achieved it's first key success- acceptance of a "problem" by City Hall, which previously they had been unwilling to consider.
A notion particular to local democratic arrangements in San Francisco is a term a number of community organizers have referenced- the ability to take an issue to "the Ballot"- meaning a number of signatures on a petition can take an issue to referendum at next local election. This issues can be anything which has sparked community support, for example the circumcision ban is on the ballot for the November Mayoral election. This provides a real tool for community organizers who are able to mobilise enough residents to take action. For the Housing Rights Committee this is a powerful tool- as 60% of San Francisco's residents are renters. Therefore proposals they may propose for a ballot decision as a result of organizing stand a very good chance of getting passed. The link between organizing and affecting change is tangible in this respect.
I have spent the last two days visiting further community-led projects. One in Oakland called Points of Distribution- which has grown as a community-led response to high levels of drug use and the desire to promote safe needle use and reduce HIV infection rates. The model is volunteer led, receives some federal funding and resources from foundations but is ultimately a community-led model. The other project- The African Advocacy Project in the Mission neighbourhood is a newly established organization, growing out of the identified need to provide support for African communities across the city. Unlike many other ethnic communities the African communities of San Francisco are not identified by a physical neighbourhood and similarly they are not bound by origin from one nation-state. Differences in culture, traditions, language and heritage provide more of a challenge for African Organizng. Even so, a critical mass of people sharing similar experiences and issues is paramount in making an organization effective. The Advocacy Project is starting to build this critical base in order to move its mission forward.
Grassroots activity is alive and well in San Francisco, generated by an identified community need, a sense of solicarity and a belief that the action will and can lead to change. Overhearing residents on a bus talking about MUNI- the public transportation system and how they had mobilised to pressure the department of transportation to improve services appears testament to this and is engrained in the city's consciousness. Interestingly City Hall is seen as a big enough and powerful enough, local entity to be able to have some impact on the issues that affect local resident's lives. Interestingly local residents seem more civically aware of how to influence change, how to work with politicians and what part they can play themselves.
I have learnt that the community organizng model is a distinct model of community action. Distinctly different from community development, but in the US context serves a valuable social and political function. Whilst organizing is not such a widely recognised concept in the UK- it certainly shares similarities with Trade Union movements. There is also a role for organizing in enabling communities to address "issues". I don't think this will ever make the need for community development redundant and am doubtful a government-led community organizer programme will lead to communities running public services, but the examples of organizing I have seen demonstrate that communities can take control of issues affecting their lives and that those furthest away from decision-making processes through dedication and perseverance can affect change.
Saturday 25 June 2011
Organizing and the State
I have dedicated some time this week to reconciling the relationship between community organizing and the state - both at a national and local level.
Political organizing has received considerable interest in the UK by both the Conservative and Labour parties - inspired by the 08 Obama campaign and the widespread publicity of the President's early career as a grassroots community organizer, both political parties have recognised the value of community organizing in terms of political mobilisation. Since the Obama campaign "Organizing for America" has been established as an ongoing national organizing movement for the Democrat party. I met with Autumn Sample from the Democratic National Committee for California, who is currently working on the 2012 campaign. Whilst Autumn acknowledges the success of the 08 campaign in terms of grassroots mobilisation she also recognises the challenges in maintaining a grass roots base thereafter. She suggested organizing for change is far easier than organizing to maintain. The Organizng for America campaign has therefore hooked into more tangible and topical issues such as the Healthcare Bill which seems emotive enough to engage ordinary citizens in political campaigning. The role of grassroots political organizer follows much the same approach as that of a community organizer and often involves building local committees in key areas who will employ a range of efforts such as door knocking, social events and rallying to raise the profile of their cause. Organizing seems very much to be the accepted form of grassroots mobilisation in the US.
I also got to spend some time at the Community Development Division of the Mayor's Office of Housing at San Francisco City Hall. Albeit after a long wait at reception -(1 receptionist could not deal with my appointment as it was not her "section" and the other receptionist needed to finish her call to stop the direct debit payment on her bank account). My thoughts immediately were "is this a system's thinking organisation???" given Great Yarmouth Borough Council's interventions this past year.
My counterpart Brian Cheu gave me an overview of the role of his team and its relationship with grassroots community organizing. Brian was quite clear on the difference between community organzing- which he saw as campaign-based, focused on issues of power and often directed towards government at some level and community development - which he saw as a more consensual, community building type approach. He cited some tenant leadership training they have recently undertaken (similar to Tenant Participation models in the UK) and suggested that he would like to dedicate more time to neighbourhood based activity and outreach, which he saw as the more impactive area of his team's work. Brian's team are also responsible for community buildings and the grants programme for not-for-profit organizations. Brian stated that for some organization's there is a dilemma because they adopt a community organizing approach, but then seek funds from City Hall to support their projects. His view was that organizng by it's very nature should be separate and funded independently of any form of government. Brian was also clear about the need from a City Hall perspective to validify representations put forward by organisation's stating to represent the community's views. In his view community organizing with merit is organizing which is truly representative of those it is seeking to represent and organization's need to demonstrate this. He did however, provide examples of times when the needs presented by community leader's have helped shape policy and those contributions have been welcomed. He also expressed concerns over not hearing the voices of those unable to organize. He cited the growing latino population in the city, which he felt were often not as vocal in articulating needs as more outspoken and established parts of the community. City Hall therefore needs to recognise this in both planning and consultation.
At a local elected member level - 11 Supervisors are elected to represent districts in the City, which is also consolidated as a county. San Francisco by its very nature has some very community-driven politicians - many elected directly from the city's diverse communities. I met with Supervisor Scott Wiener at a community event last weekend. He represents the Castro district, once represented by Harvey Milk and is equally driven to ensure he maintains an active dialogue with his constituents. Organizing is one of the ways in which the collective voice of residents can be heard- particularly given the size and diversity of a Supervisor's district. It is also clear that it is often advantageous for political leaders to maintain a healthy dialogue with community leaders- given the communities they can potentially galvanise.
Organizing certainly appears engrained into the consciousness of citizens and the state. It is not just about mobilisation, which is often single issued-based and time limited- it is about building communities and alliances to alter structures of power in a sustained way.
Political organizing has received considerable interest in the UK by both the Conservative and Labour parties - inspired by the 08 Obama campaign and the widespread publicity of the President's early career as a grassroots community organizer, both political parties have recognised the value of community organizing in terms of political mobilisation. Since the Obama campaign "Organizing for America" has been established as an ongoing national organizing movement for the Democrat party. I met with Autumn Sample from the Democratic National Committee for California, who is currently working on the 2012 campaign. Whilst Autumn acknowledges the success of the 08 campaign in terms of grassroots mobilisation she also recognises the challenges in maintaining a grass roots base thereafter. She suggested organizing for change is far easier than organizing to maintain. The Organizng for America campaign has therefore hooked into more tangible and topical issues such as the Healthcare Bill which seems emotive enough to engage ordinary citizens in political campaigning. The role of grassroots political organizer follows much the same approach as that of a community organizer and often involves building local committees in key areas who will employ a range of efforts such as door knocking, social events and rallying to raise the profile of their cause. Organizing seems very much to be the accepted form of grassroots mobilisation in the US.
I also got to spend some time at the Community Development Division of the Mayor's Office of Housing at San Francisco City Hall. Albeit after a long wait at reception -(1 receptionist could not deal with my appointment as it was not her "section" and the other receptionist needed to finish her call to stop the direct debit payment on her bank account). My thoughts immediately were "is this a system's thinking organisation???" given Great Yarmouth Borough Council's interventions this past year.
My counterpart Brian Cheu gave me an overview of the role of his team and its relationship with grassroots community organizing. Brian was quite clear on the difference between community organzing- which he saw as campaign-based, focused on issues of power and often directed towards government at some level and community development - which he saw as a more consensual, community building type approach. He cited some tenant leadership training they have recently undertaken (similar to Tenant Participation models in the UK) and suggested that he would like to dedicate more time to neighbourhood based activity and outreach, which he saw as the more impactive area of his team's work. Brian's team are also responsible for community buildings and the grants programme for not-for-profit organizations. Brian stated that for some organization's there is a dilemma because they adopt a community organizing approach, but then seek funds from City Hall to support their projects. His view was that organizng by it's very nature should be separate and funded independently of any form of government. Brian was also clear about the need from a City Hall perspective to validify representations put forward by organisation's stating to represent the community's views. In his view community organizing with merit is organizing which is truly representative of those it is seeking to represent and organization's need to demonstrate this. He did however, provide examples of times when the needs presented by community leader's have helped shape policy and those contributions have been welcomed. He also expressed concerns over not hearing the voices of those unable to organize. He cited the growing latino population in the city, which he felt were often not as vocal in articulating needs as more outspoken and established parts of the community. City Hall therefore needs to recognise this in both planning and consultation.
At a local elected member level - 11 Supervisors are elected to represent districts in the City, which is also consolidated as a county. San Francisco by its very nature has some very community-driven politicians - many elected directly from the city's diverse communities. I met with Supervisor Scott Wiener at a community event last weekend. He represents the Castro district, once represented by Harvey Milk and is equally driven to ensure he maintains an active dialogue with his constituents. Organizing is one of the ways in which the collective voice of residents can be heard- particularly given the size and diversity of a Supervisor's district. It is also clear that it is often advantageous for political leaders to maintain a healthy dialogue with community leaders- given the communities they can potentially galvanise.
Organizing certainly appears engrained into the consciousness of citizens and the state. It is not just about mobilisation, which is often single issued-based and time limited- it is about building communities and alliances to alter structures of power in a sustained way.
Monday 20 June 2011
A Community Organizer's Tale
The weekend has been an eclectic mix of margaritas, mexican food and dancing - all in the name of research. The city is heaving with free year round events and street fairs, which also provide an opportunity for community groups to champion their causes. I attended a number of these this weekend, which provided a real opportunity to talk to volunteers, community leaders and elected officials. All seemed to echo a sense of community spirit embedded in the city- a city of volunteers and not-for-profites built on a strong sense of the city's past as a site for social and civic movements. Somebody said to me "in San Francisco when people identify that something needs doing- they get together and they make it happen - it's what we do in this city..."
It is understanding the ways in which this community mobilisation happens that is of particular interest to my fellowship. I also spent some time over the past few days with Community Organizers- very much the linchpin of the Community Organizing Model here in the states.
Ruby is a community organizer with the San Francisco Organizing Project and spends much of her time supporting community leaders and Local Organizing Committees on "actions" whether they be particular campaigns or building particular community-based infrastructure to meet local needs. Her role is much akin to that of a Community Development Worker in the UK; she facilitates but doesn't lead, helps groups to build skills and capacity and helps groups to problem solve and formulate actions. The key difference however seems to be the more defined and systematic approach adopted by an organizer- their focus is channeling the groups efforts on struggles for power- and they will often revert a group back to that cause through prompts and wider discussions. They are also there to help organise but not deliver the actions themselves. These are taken on by members the Local Organizing Committees (made up of representatives of the community they are working with). When Ruby attends one of these meetings she often supports the Chair / Community Leader and will usually utilise a 30 minute agenda slot on a "training"- which will often consist of an informal workshop around a particular organizing technique i.e. public speaking or utilising the media (as I saw in Sacrametno last week). Ruby's day is diverse and varied depending on the projects she is supporting. The biggest challenge in her job she says is encouraging leaders to recognise their own abilities. Organizng has become particularly profssionalised in recent years with arange of vocational and academic degrees offered by US Universities (I stumbled across a billboard in the subway). This has been aided massively by the publishing of President Obama's book "Tales from my Father" which outlined his early career as a Community Organizer in Chicago.
I also got to meet Mike Miller for lunch. Mike is author of the book "A Community Organizer's Tale- People and Power in San Francisco" - I read this book before my trip and was therefore really keen to meet up with the author - somewhat of a veteran in community organizing in the city- with a career spanning 4 decades in the field. Mike's book plots the journey of the Mission Coalition Organization in the late 60s- and the plight of that community in dealing with the consequence of a City Hall led programme of redevelopment across their neighbourhood. The coalition gained 1000's of members through church congregations, neighbourhood and community associations and local businesses- all of whom contributed membership fees to pay the salary of Mike as the Lead Organizer and associated campaign costs. Mike had been trained by Alinsky (seen as the founder of the organizing movement) and utilised those skills to support the MCO in furthering its aims. Whilst the initial cause for coming together was through a fear of urban renewal and gentrification, the coalition was able to actively mobilise the community to consider other more fundamental issues, such as education and employment. The book is well worth a read and gives a very clear indication of what worked and what didn't.
Today Mike runs his own training centre- "Organize!"
http://organizetrainingcenter.org/about.html
Mike was eager to hear more about the British programme and was sceptical, from the information he had already heard, about whether it would be a pure community organizing model in the Alinsky tradition of organizing. I was overwhelmed by Mike's passion for the cause after over 40 years in the field - he even offered to come back to the UK with me to run some training sessions for community leaders. Mike has also sent me a wealth of literature and papers which I am yet to fully digest. Mike reiterated observations I have picked up over the past few weeks, - organizing is about power - organizing must be lead by communities - and organizng must build a sense of association and grow from a common set of shared values. Perhaps what struck me most about this was when Mike mentioned a group he was currently working with and I asked "What kind of issues are they looking to address?", Mike replied "They are not yet - the first thing is about coming together to address the issue of power - the specific issues they focus on comes after they have done their research" - In community development practice in the UK- it is usually the grassroots issues that brings people together - the solidarity and community building and strategising over social change often comes later. Mike also reiterated the skills sets required to be both a community organizer and a community leader. The art of being a community organizer is about asking groups questions to get them to rethink their approaches. Mike also believed that for community organzing to be truly independent and owned by the local community- organizing must be funded by membership fees. He suggested that if each household in a block were to pay $40 per month (about £30) it would fund an organizer and associated field and office costs. Mike's observation however, was that organizng hadn't become established in the UK in the same way as the US because of the Trade Union movement in Britain. Certainly the campign for worker's rights- often the focus of community organizng efforts in the US has been spearheaded by the Trade Union movement in Britain over the last century...
I am planning to meet some other grass roots organizers over the next few days to understand their motivation for organizing and the methodology they adopt. There seems to be a clear distinction between not-for-profit organisations engaging communities on behalf of state institutions or delivering programmes on behalf of the state and not-for-proift organisations developing to challenge state institutions and tackle a perceived notion of inequality and social injustice. The community organizng ethos appears to fit with the latter.
In his book Mike states "Community organizing assumes there are situations, structures and systems that must be changed if values of justice, equality, freedom, security, community and democracy are to be realised" (2009:185). The tale of an organizer is therefore a clear and very distinct one!
It is understanding the ways in which this community mobilisation happens that is of particular interest to my fellowship. I also spent some time over the past few days with Community Organizers- very much the linchpin of the Community Organizing Model here in the states.
Ruby is a community organizer with the San Francisco Organizing Project and spends much of her time supporting community leaders and Local Organizing Committees on "actions" whether they be particular campaigns or building particular community-based infrastructure to meet local needs. Her role is much akin to that of a Community Development Worker in the UK; she facilitates but doesn't lead, helps groups to build skills and capacity and helps groups to problem solve and formulate actions. The key difference however seems to be the more defined and systematic approach adopted by an organizer- their focus is channeling the groups efforts on struggles for power- and they will often revert a group back to that cause through prompts and wider discussions. They are also there to help organise but not deliver the actions themselves. These are taken on by members the Local Organizing Committees (made up of representatives of the community they are working with). When Ruby attends one of these meetings she often supports the Chair / Community Leader and will usually utilise a 30 minute agenda slot on a "training"- which will often consist of an informal workshop around a particular organizing technique i.e. public speaking or utilising the media (as I saw in Sacrametno last week). Ruby's day is diverse and varied depending on the projects she is supporting. The biggest challenge in her job she says is encouraging leaders to recognise their own abilities. Organizng has become particularly profssionalised in recent years with arange of vocational and academic degrees offered by US Universities (I stumbled across a billboard in the subway). This has been aided massively by the publishing of President Obama's book "Tales from my Father" which outlined his early career as a Community Organizer in Chicago.
I also got to meet Mike Miller for lunch. Mike is author of the book "A Community Organizer's Tale- People and Power in San Francisco" - I read this book before my trip and was therefore really keen to meet up with the author - somewhat of a veteran in community organizing in the city- with a career spanning 4 decades in the field. Mike's book plots the journey of the Mission Coalition Organization in the late 60s- and the plight of that community in dealing with the consequence of a City Hall led programme of redevelopment across their neighbourhood. The coalition gained 1000's of members through church congregations, neighbourhood and community associations and local businesses- all of whom contributed membership fees to pay the salary of Mike as the Lead Organizer and associated campaign costs. Mike had been trained by Alinsky (seen as the founder of the organizing movement) and utilised those skills to support the MCO in furthering its aims. Whilst the initial cause for coming together was through a fear of urban renewal and gentrification, the coalition was able to actively mobilise the community to consider other more fundamental issues, such as education and employment. The book is well worth a read and gives a very clear indication of what worked and what didn't.
Today Mike runs his own training centre- "Organize!"
http://organizetrainingcenter.org/about.html
Mike was eager to hear more about the British programme and was sceptical, from the information he had already heard, about whether it would be a pure community organizing model in the Alinsky tradition of organizing. I was overwhelmed by Mike's passion for the cause after over 40 years in the field - he even offered to come back to the UK with me to run some training sessions for community leaders. Mike has also sent me a wealth of literature and papers which I am yet to fully digest. Mike reiterated observations I have picked up over the past few weeks, - organizing is about power - organizing must be lead by communities - and organizng must build a sense of association and grow from a common set of shared values. Perhaps what struck me most about this was when Mike mentioned a group he was currently working with and I asked "What kind of issues are they looking to address?", Mike replied "They are not yet - the first thing is about coming together to address the issue of power - the specific issues they focus on comes after they have done their research" - In community development practice in the UK- it is usually the grassroots issues that brings people together - the solidarity and community building and strategising over social change often comes later. Mike also reiterated the skills sets required to be both a community organizer and a community leader. The art of being a community organizer is about asking groups questions to get them to rethink their approaches. Mike also believed that for community organzing to be truly independent and owned by the local community- organizing must be funded by membership fees. He suggested that if each household in a block were to pay $40 per month (about £30) it would fund an organizer and associated field and office costs. Mike's observation however, was that organizng hadn't become established in the UK in the same way as the US because of the Trade Union movement in Britain. Certainly the campign for worker's rights- often the focus of community organizng efforts in the US has been spearheaded by the Trade Union movement in Britain over the last century...
I am planning to meet some other grass roots organizers over the next few days to understand their motivation for organizing and the methodology they adopt. There seems to be a clear distinction between not-for-profit organisations engaging communities on behalf of state institutions or delivering programmes on behalf of the state and not-for-proift organisations developing to challenge state institutions and tackle a perceived notion of inequality and social injustice. The community organizng ethos appears to fit with the latter.
In his book Mike states "Community organizing assumes there are situations, structures and systems that must be changed if values of justice, equality, freedom, security, community and democracy are to be realised" (2009:185). The tale of an organizer is therefore a clear and very distinct one!
Thursday 16 June 2011
You Gotta Have Faith!
The San Francisco Organizing Project is part of a wider national network of faith-based organizations called People Improving Communities through Organizing (PICO).
I was fortunate enough to be invited along to a rally in the state capital, Sacramento to campaign against ongoing budget cuts. California is currently suffering a $26 billion state defecit, with a rolling programme of cuts ongoing since 2007. The latest state cuts in March had had quite a dramatic impact on those less well off, with over 4,000 children losing health care coverage and significant cuts to education and community policing. PICO has been leading a state-wide campaign through it’s membership congregations to oppose the cuts. Their message for the day was to propose maintaining a state tax (due to end next year) to alleviate the burden of cutting services for the poorest. The day was a combination of collective action, rallying and the lobbying of key senators and legislative directors.
Over 1000 community leaders from across California descended upon Sacramento congregating in the Roman Catholic Cathedral of Blessed Sacrament - just a short walk from the Capitol building. The multi-faith congregation, of jews, christians, muslims, hindus and buddhists heard key messages from clergy and community leaders across the state- who had been organizing in their respective communities to articulate the needs of those most affected by the cuts. Prayers and life stories were shared as was a reminder of key objectives for the day (this acted as a training session to ensure all 1000 attendees were on message). A gospel choir took to the stage and enthused the audience who started chanting “We have the Power” which then lead onto a peaceful march to the state capitol. Further speeches and rallying calls were provided on the steps of the Capitol Building and the President Senator came out to respond to the requests from PICO. As a British delegate I found it quite surreal to see the Rev Sharon Stanley put the Senator Darrell Steinberg on the spot and tell him "We are praying for you to make the right decision" – perhaps this was tactical, it certainly came across as sincere but it certainly made the senator consider his response carefully. It is undeniable that faith plays a significant part in US politics.
SFOP utilized the time in Sacramento to arrange meetings with Senators and Legislative Directors to further drive the specific messages of their San Francisco congregations. I attended two of these meetings and was particularly impressed with the strategic ways in which the community leaders attempted to negotiate concessions with these elected members and senior officials (all part of the organizing training I was told). In spite of quite forthright exchanges the SFOP delegates were courteous and polite and even went out and bought one Senator and his staff team some cookies to congratulate them for doing a good job.... I'm not sure how many MP's in Britain get care packages from their constituents - but it seemed a nice gesture!
I spent much of the day talking to leaders from various congregations across the state. The budget issues aren't the only issues faith communities are organising over in California. For some public education is a cause for others it's about affordable housing, the jewish community are also currently organising for proposed legislation to outlaw circumcision in San Francisco - a rite of passage for both jewish and muslim faiths. It is quite striking how quickly legislation can pass in the US system, which can create a real sense of anxiety for communities - fighting for various civil rights therefore becomes an ongoing imperative.
All of the leaders I spoke to were all very clear on what community organizing was and what it wasn’t and expressed some concerns when I gave an overview of the current model being rolled out across the UK (although there is still very little information available on it). They were particularly sceptical of the authenticity of a community organizing programme being driven by government.
Reflections:
- The power of the faith community in the US cannot be undermined – for the members of the PICO network social justice is one of their missions which brings them together on a common value basis to drive for social change. Equally faith-based communities also organize around ideological issues (although this is not PICO’s mission) but movements like the Tea Party Movement has also spawned out of faith-based organizing.
- The organizing model has a clear process and methodology – training of community leaders is paramount- part of this is about negotiating and lobbying those in power and also utlising the media (which is carefully planned to ensure maximum impact). Power being the ultimate driver for such movements.
- The community leaders I met and spoke to were diverse but were not necessarily representative of those furthest away from decision-making processes, many were faith leaders and many were retired professionals. A diverse skills set is needed to be a community leader in the community organizing model.
Community Organizing in the US has a very strong association with faith-based activity. The proposed British programme has not yet made reference to the relationship with the faith sector – This seems to overlook the significant work taken on by faith organisations in the UK, particularly in terms of welfare, support and advocacy and there is perhaps strong merit in looking at the role of faith organisations in such forms of direct community action.
What was clear however, through talking to various leaders about this model is that community organizing is not about delivering public services- it is about challenging the unequal distribution of power, services may be created in response to that but organizing appears more a process of renegotiating political space to ensure the authentic voice of the community is heard.
What was clear however, through talking to various leaders about this model is that community organizing is not about delivering public services- it is about challenging the unequal distribution of power, services may be created in response to that but organizing appears more a process of renegotiating political space to ensure the authentic voice of the community is heard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)