Community Connect and Social Capital

This is the first of what will be a series of posts over the course of the campaign as I invite the citizens of Portland to dialog with me, the candidate, and our campaign about issues of concern to Portland. I’m looking forward to your feedback!

A little over a week ago, I had the opportunity to attend a “Connection Café” for Portland’s Community Connect project. Community Connect is an effort “to increase the number and diversity of people who are involved in their communities, strengthen community capacity, and increase community impact on public decisions.” Certainly a laudable goal!

After listening to the presentation and recommendations, it seems to me that the rubber meets the road on one particular question on the feedback form:

What is the best way to give groups that are not neighborhood-based a "seat at the table" in Portland's community involvement system? (Please choose only one.)

OPTION A: Within the existing neighborhood association and District Coalition system: Provide a role within District Coalitions for under-represented groups (e.g., people of color, immigrants, etc.). Possibilities include providing organizing support and capacity building to under-represented groups through the District Coalitions; representation on District coalition boards and committees; or creation of identity-based caucuses or standing committees for different populations within the District Coalitions.

OPTION B: Through an expansion of the existing neighborhood association and District Coalition system: For instance, by giving District Coalition status to citywide identity-based organizations or by creating a citywide Multicultural Coalition.

OPTION C: Through a new system parallel to the neighborhood system: For instance, by creating formal access to City government for grassroots organizations that meet certain criteria. These organizations would be "recognized" by the City as representing the input of specific communities and would be consulted on public decisions affecting the community much in the same way that neighborhood associations are now.

This is a critical question and I’m not sure I know the right answer. As someone who has spent a great deal of time in the neighborhood system, I have always been impressed by the power of allegiance to a “place” to bring people together (and occasionally to polarize them when there are differing visions). I would love to think that with the right combination of resources and techniques, the neighborhood system could bring in diverse participants in the community to work together. But that is not our recent track record. Minority groups have expressed clearly that they often do not feel able to participate effectively in neighborhood associations.

Can this be overcome? Can neighborhood associations create what sociologists call “bridging” social capital? If we focus instead on empowering groups that gather by some form of identity (sociologists call this “bonding” social capital) do we do this at the expense of creating opportunities for bridging between groups?

I was struck that in our discussion group two very smart and sincere young people across the table had blank stares when I talked about the unifying politics of place. Do neighborhoods only become and effective organizing principal for property owners (or at least those in long-term stable rental situations)?

How do we both empower and connect at the same time?

What do you think?