Modern-Day Redlining in Communities of Color

By Elisabeth Risch and Jackie Hutchinson

This column was originally published by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on August 18th, 2016. To view the original article, click here.

Elisabeth Risch

Elisabeth Risch is the Director of Research and Education at the Metropolitan St. Louis Equal Housing and Opportunity Council. She is the Co-Chair of the St. Louis Equal Housing and Community Reinvestment Alliance (SLEHCRA), where she works directly with banks to increase investment and services to low-income communities and communities of color. She holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Sociology from Calvin College and Master’s Degree in Social Work from Washington University in St. Louis. She is a board member of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition.

Jacqueline Hutchinson is VP of Operations for People’s Community Action Corporation in St. Louis. She is actively involved in policy and advocacy issues that affect low-income consumers in the St. Louis region. Jackie is Co-Chair of SLEHCRA, where she works to increase investment in LMI communities; serves as board chair for Missouri Consumers Council; and is a member of the Unbanked Task Force. She has a Master’s Degree in Policy Analysis from Southern Illinois University and a Bachelor’s Degree in Business from Washington University in St. Louis.

Jackie Hutchinson

SLEHCRA is a coalition of non-profit and community based organizations working to increase investment in low- and moderate-income communities, regardless of race, and in minority communities, regardless of income. SLEHCRA ensures that banks are meeting their obligations under the Community Reinvestment Act and fair lending laws.

In St. Louis, it is harder to get a loan in communities of color. That’s what a new report by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC) found. The report looks at mortgage lending data in the St. Louis region over the last few years and finds extensive disparities in communities of color.

The data and the maps in this report help to visualize what many of us already know and experience. Lending is concentrated in white areas and scarce in black neighborhoods. Certain neighborhoods have poor access to banking resources, and many households are unbanked or underbanked, particularly African-American households. In the entire St. Louis metropolitan area, median family income of the neighborhood is the best predictor of home loan activity. However, in the City of St. Louis, the racial composition of a neighborhood is also a strong predictor of mortgage activity. In hyper-segregated neighborhoods in which the population is over 75 percent black, less than one percent of homes received a home purchase loan in the 2012-2014 period. Most problematic: the lack of lending in high minority areas is not fully explained by income differences. Credit is still available to white neighborhoods with the same income level.

Isolation from financial services further concentrates poverty and perpetuates the cycle of disinvestment seen in black neighborhoods all around us. If our city hopes to rebuild and revitalize long-neglected neighborhoods, we must break this pattern that hurts individual homeowners, families and our entire region. Housing values have plummeted in those neighborhoods, and there are few comparable sales in the area to fuel the market. To find a cash buyer, families in black neighborhoods must often sell their homes for thousands less than if their neighborhood had equal access to credit. Homes sit vacant and fall into further disrepair. For many families, buying a home builds equity and increases wealth, plus will often cost less in the monthly mortgage than what they pay for rent in these same neighborhoods. Lack of credit access prevents families from building wealth in home equity and savings.

Since 2009, the St. Louis Equal Housing and Community Reinvestment Alliance (SLEHCRA) has worked with banks in our region to improve access to banking and improvements have been made. During this time, banks have opened new branches, created new products, and increased outreach and investment in communities of color. More banks are participating in collaborative efforts to address unbanked and underbanked households, as well as financial education programs.

But this report shows that we have a long way to go. Decades of discriminatory practices will take many years to reverse. We call for more banks to develop quality products—including innovative loan products and checking and savings accounts—and to actively seek opportunities to develop partnerships that create investment in communities of color. New partnerships can also lead to more bank branches opening in banking deserts. We ask banks to increase support to financial empowerment centers and nonprofits providing financial education. We ask banks to discontinue the practice of providing credit to those payday loan businesses whose interest rates are predatory debt traps that strip wealth from communities, especially communities of color.

We urge community members to join with SLEHCRA in our efforts assure equity in financial services in all communities; to support strong payday lending reforms proposed on a local, state and national level; and to support efforts to strengthen and update the Community Reinvestment Act to better reflect today’s financial system.

Finally, we echo the calls in the Ferguson Commission’s report to Build Equity through Enhanced Access to Banking and to Promote Asset Building. Ultimately, we must work collaboratively—as community members, organizations, banks, regulators, and local governments—to ensure that all neighborhoods, including black neighborhoods, have equal access to credit and the opportunity to build stable and healthy communities.

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.

5 Reasons Why CDCs Should Communicate the Health Impact of Their Work

This column was originally published by the National Alliance of Community Economic Development Associations (NACEDA) on June 5th, 2015. To view the original article, click here.

By Kavya Sekar

Kavya Sekar is Master of Public Policy Candidate at Duke University Sanford School of Public Policy. She recently served as the Mel King Institute (MKI) Program Coordinator with the Massachusetts Association of Community Development Corporations, coordinating trainings, forums and programs to boost skills, knowledge and leadership of community development professionals in Massachusetts. She is a 2013 graduate of UNC Chapel Hill with a double major in Biology and Anthropology. During college, she was extensively involved in social justice initiatives around homelessness and poverty as well as public health research on nutritional issues in the United States and India. Before working at MKI, Kavya served as a Fulbright-Nehru research student fellow in India, studying the health behavior and access of Type II diabetes patients among low-income and slum communities in Mumbai. In her recent role with the Mel King Institute, Kavya used her public health research background to boost community development and public health partnerships in Massachusetts by coordinating a training series, convening health and community development leaders, conducting research, and writing editorial content on health and community development.

When I started my role at MACDC back in September, one of the first events I attended was our Innovation Forum “How Can We Better Leverage the Health Impact of Community Development?” With my background in public health, I was excited to connect the dots between my previous work and my current role in community development. I decided to move away from public health, in part, to learn more about economic and structural inequalities, so it was important to be reminded that “a person’s zip code has a greater impact on a person’s health than his or her genetic code.”

With my background and interest in health, I am helping develop training programs on community development and health for The Mel King Institute. As a part of this process, I explored CDC websites to look for health related programs. What I found was somewhat disappointing: while CDCs are doing work that helps improve the health of their communities, very few are talking about it. Housing, economic development and community building all have a positive health impact and here’s why we should tell the world:

• It tells a compelling story: In a Rooflines blog post, Jonathan Reckford of Habitat for Humanity writes about how moving into a safe mold-free home helped stop a young boy’s asthmatic seizures. Stories like these can help the general public understand the real importance and urgency of providing safe and affordable housing to save lives.

• There is plenty of evidence to support your claims: In the recent “The Health Impact of the Community Investment Tax Credit” report, Health Resource in Action, MAPC and MADPH use evidence from the latest public health research to show how CDC activities are linked to better health outcomes. Using the conclusions from this report, community developers can confidently speak about the health impact of their work and reference research to support their claims.

• It could lead to new partners: Under a provision of the Affordable Care Act, nonprofit hospitals are now required to conduct Community Health Needs Assessments that “take into account input from persons who represent the broad interests of the community served by the hospital…including those with special knowledge of or expertise in public health, and is made widely available to the public.” Based on their findings, hospitals must adopt an implementation strategy to meet community public health needs at least once every three years. As community organizations, CDCs can play a major role in helping hospitals understand community needs, develop plans to meet those needs and implement solutions. Openly communicating your organization’s commitment to and impact on health can help hospitals see your organization as a potential partner.

• It could lead to new resources: As health-related funding agencies and organizations have become more aware of the social determinants of health, there is movement towards supporting healthy neighborhoods. For instance, Madison Park Community Development Corporation has a grant from the Boston Public Health Commission for programs to reduce youth violence. CDCs all over the state receive donations from hospitals and healthcare centers. Communicating the health impact of your work can help attract these sources of funding and, therefore, leverage your work to meet the mission of health organizations.

• It helps us move beyond our silos: Ultimately community development and health organizations have a common goal: to promote the overall well-being of people and communities. Poor health leads to poverty and poverty leads to poor health. By acknowledging this linkage and working together, we can move the needle on addressing the major health and economic inequalities in our society.

CDCs are already improving people’s health on a daily basis. By articulating the health impact of your organization, you can offer a more compelling story about your organization, access more resources, and ultimately have a bigger impact on the communities and families you serve.

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.

Augmented Reality and the Future of Community Development

By Gary Newcomer

Gary Newcomer is the newest addition to the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis (CBN). As a native of South St. Louis City, Gary has always had a passion for exploring and strengthening the rich fabric of neighborhoods in the St. Louis region. He graduated from Boston College and later received his Masters from Saint Louis University in Urban Planning and Development with a research focus on alleys in St. Louis City. Before starting at CBN, Gary worked on historic redevelopment projects in St. Louis and Davenport, Iowa and specialized in the historic tax credit program. His background in urban planning and historic real estate development have contributed to his approach to community development and made him a strong believer in place-based solutions for promoting vibrant and inclusive neighborhoods.

I spent Friday night playing Pokémon GO. I admit it. In fact, I downloaded the iPhone app on the first day it hit the market. But before you relegate the game or my op-ed to Millennial hogwash, consider that Pokémon GO has strong implications for the future of community development.

I intend to convert the nonbelievers, but first let me take a moment to initiate those unfamiliar with the game.

Pokémon GO works by scattering Pokémon monsters, Pokéstops, and Gyms across a street map not too different from what you find on Google. By commanding your smart phone’s GPS and pedometer, the game requires users to get out of the house and explore the neighborhood. Pokémon are all over (I caught a Rattata on a man’s lap outside of Cafe Mochi), but the Pokéstops and Gyms are actual landmarks. These range from churches to statues to that Chinese restaurant you’ve been meaning to try. My roommate and I took to the streets of Tower Grove South to test it out. We meandered up South Grand, holding our iPhones at arm’s length and attracting dozens of stares. What we discovered immediately, besides hordes of digital Pokémon bouncing across the sidewalk, was how much the game encourages social interactions.

Neighborhoods with a high density of businesses and landmarks have more Pokéstops, Gyms, and wild Pokémon. Essentially, St. Louis’s most walkable areas like South Grand and the Delmar Loop are packed full of Pokémon and, inevitably, young people playing Pokémon GO. Pokémon want to be around people, and the game ultimately rewards vibrant, community-oriented spaces.

Gyms are community gathering spots in the most organic sense. Pokémon GO manages to identify a community’s assets and amenities like a team of social workers. These locations are not just schools or parks or popular restaurants. On my block, the two gyms are a gay bar specializing in amateur drag and a Vietnamese restaurant. Both buildings are fairly nondescript and rarely attract the attention of those driving past. However, I can attest to the tightly-knit communities that frequent both.

The game is a success because it harnesses an aspect of community that too often gets neglected: a sense of place. Pokémon GO elevates the ordinary spaces where we conduct our lives by signaling an added importance. Users do not just catch imaginary Pokémon and battle in virtual Gyms, but explore the places they pass every day and even check out new neighborhoods altogether.

The joy of playing Pokémon GO is sharing an array of community spaces and, just as importantly, a common language to describe them and our experiences. My roommate and I had a reason to pause at Franz Park. We had a reason to walk around the block after dinner and, ultimately, bump into a few neighbors. We had a reason to engage with strangers and visit the Grey Fox Pub. I may have lost my Pokémon battle, but stayed for the cabaret. I have heard these stories countless times: people discovering local businesses through the game or noticing a historical marker or speaking to a neighbor for the first time.

Pokémon GO is an example of the role technology can play in community development, an aspect of 21st century engagement too often cast aside in favor of hands-on, boots-on-the-ground, by-the-sweat-of-our-brows community development. I know it is easy to scoff at a game where twenty-somethings catch virtual Japanese creatures. Naysayers are right to call it what it is: a fad. However, the future of augmented reality is not.

How can we bridge the virtual and physical world to better our communities? This question will define the field in the next decade. Imagine pointing a phone at a vacant lot and seeing a 3D architectural rendering rising from the street. Consider virtual markers identifying places in community history. Envision rewards for young people to vote, attend public meetings, or contact their local representatives. If these technologies seem farfetched or unattainable, talk to the child catching a Pikachu in Tower Grove Park. Pokémon GO showcases all of these tools with incredible success. We are cheating ourselves if we do not engage with them for the purpose of community development.

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.

The Public Sector’s Role in Community Development

By Stephen Acree

Stephen Acree has been with Rise Community Development (Rise) since 1999 and has been its President and Executive Director since late 2002. He brings over 25 years of experience in community development and considerable knowledge and experience in development finance, particularly with the structured financing of development in more difficult to develop areas. Mr. Acree received his undergraduate degree from The George Washington University and his Juris Doctorate from Washington University. In 1997 Mr. Acree was a Fannie Mae Foundation Fellow at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.

Mr. Acree is a former Director of the City of St. Louis Community Development Agency, responsible for the administration of the Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME programs for the City, and is a former Chairman of the Greater St. Louis Regional Empowerment Zone. He has extensive knowledge of the Consolidated Plan, HOME and CDBG regulations, as well as the citizen participation, environmental review and other related requirements.

In May, the City of St. Louis Community Development Administration (CDA) solicited comments on its draft funding priorities for the 2017 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) programs. The funding priorities will shape Request for Proposals that CDA issues for funding CDBG-eligible activities throughout the City of St. Louis in 2017.

This is a continuation of the revised citizen review and funding application processes initiated by the City with the development of its Five Year (2015-2019) Consolidated Plan. Rise is proud of the role it played as a member of the consulting team that worked with the City on the Consolidated Plan. Through public meetings, focus groups, and surveys, we involved thousands of City residents in the process, far more than the small handful that participated in recent years. As a part of this process, with assistance from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), a group of consultants completed a Market Value Analysis (MVA), or Residential Market Analysis, that established a baseline of information and a way to organize thinking about different residential market types throughout the City.

After years of administering an opaque funding system that allowed little room for competition and made it difficult to fund new or improved programs, CDA and its staff are to be congratulated for negotiating this difficult but important transition period.  I am now concerned, however, that the MVA may be becoming a “catch all” way to designate geographic target areas for various non-housing community development activities in ways that do not make sense.

The MVA compares the residential market strength of different areas throughout the City and classifies them by type.  It is a useful tool for analyzing what residential development strategies or—in some cases—commercial development strategies might be best suited to different market types. It is not designed to determine where different types of social services or public facilities are most needed.

It is difficult to understand why CDA proposes to prioritize funding for early childhood centers, street and sidewalk improvements, child care, crime prevention, financial literacy and counseling, health services, neighborhood clean-ups and beautification, resident leadership training and development, and youth services in MVA clusters D, E, F and G (Target Area 2) and clusters H and I (Target Area 3). There is no rational relationship that suggests a higher need for these services in the selected MVA clusters. Furthermore, this method does not necessarily target services at all: Target Area 2 contains 45 percent and Area 3 contains 22 percent of all block groups in the City, leaving just 34 percent of the City outside one of these general “target areas.” This can hardly be considered “geographic targeting.”

Another curious aspect of the City’s proposed 2017 CDBG and HOME funding priorities is that they fail to prioritize programs and projects in the Promise Zone. The Promise Zone is a City-County collaboration through which an area that includes most of North St. Louis City and a large section of North St. Louis County has been designated by the federal government for funding preferences under a variety of federal programs. It has a total population of 200,000, distributed roughly evenly between the City and County. The area has high unemployment, crime, mortality, and homelessness rates, as well as many vacant lots and abandoned buildings. We encourage the City to take full advantage of the Promise Zone designation by supporting local CDBG and HOME funding proposals that seek additional funding under direct competitive grant programs for projects within the Promise Zone area.

By developing the current Consolidated Plan and implementing administrative changes to processes for assigning CDBG and HOME funds the City has taken the first important steps in a longer term evolution toward a better place-based community development planning and funding system. Objective evaluation that uses data collection and citizen input to explore gaps in services and facilities should drive the solicitation of proposals for CDBG funding. We will not see the real leveraging and benefits that consolidated planning can achieve until we start to develop more targeted, coordinated strategies behind residential and commercial development, public facilities, the delivery of employment training, child care, youth development, and other services.

We need this targeting and coordination to more effectively attract foundation and other funding that can leverage the City’s community development efforts. We should all encourage and help the City to continue to build on its progress and shape a more sustainable community development planning and funding system. Rise encourages others to participate in the process by providing feedback on CDA’s proposed 2017 funding priorities and 2017 Annual Action Plan and by taking part in other ongoing opportunities for input into the local community development planning and funding system.

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.

Our Responsibility to the Neighbors of North St. Louis City

By Claire Wolff

Claire Wolff is the Director of Community Development at Grace Hill Settlement House and a board member at Old North St. Louis Restoration Group and Perennial. She previously served as the Community Engagement Specialist at Old North St. Louis Restoration Group and Program Manager at St. Louis ArtWorks. She received her MSW from the Brown School of Social Work at Washington University in St. Louis in 2009. Claire is a North City resident.

New resources, institutions and leadership will undoubtedly emerge in North St. Louis City over the next few years as a result of the National Geospatial Agency’s relocation, an application submitted for a Choice Neighborhood grant, designation as part of the Promise Zone and local elections in 2016 and 2017. Yet residents in the community indicate a deep-seated skepticism toward the potential of these developments to result in economic mobility and opportunity for their families.

Community development professionals and organizations must take on the responsibility of working across silos and alongside residents in surrounding North City communities, and especially with those on the lowest end of the income distribution, to ensure that they actually experience an increase in economic well-being, health, and quality of life as a result of the new investment.

Our field has always known that place matters, but there is new data surrounding the relationship between poverty and place that makes the case even stronger—and it doesn’t look good for those growing up in North City. According to Harvard economist Raj Chetty, for children in households in the bottom 25th percentile of income distribution, each additional year spent in St. Louis City reduces income in adulthood by 0.83 percent, while each additional year spent in Calhoun, IL increases income by 1.33 percent.

This disturbing data indicates that poor families would have more economic opportunity living elsewhere. In 63106, home to much of this impending North City investment, a whopping 72.9 percent of children under 18 live in poverty, according to ACS data.

However, with this unique confluence of attention and investment in North St. Louis City, we must take steps now, even before the development groundbreakings or the elections, to lay a foundation that spurs successful development and economic mobility down the road.

First, we should advocate for robust resident voice in civic process while investing in community engagement staff to make sure residents are informed, included, and heard. Residents are our most prized and valuable assets and we must treat them as such.

Second, we should take a long-term comprehensive planning approach to economic mobility that incorporates best practices from across the country while encouraging innovative, creative solutions on every level.

Finally, we need to demand local political representation that prioritizes equity and empathy and has vision that inspires a better North City. Elected officials in St. Louis have much work to do in order to prove themselves to constituents as partners in success of strong neighborhoods.

Simply put, we must think about economic outcomes for residents when we strive for strong communities on the North Side. We can no longer tolerate a system where families are better off moving out of the neighborhood.

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.

City Should Meet Legal Requirement to Fund Affordable Housing

By Dr. Molly Metzger

Dr. Molly Metzger is an assistant professor at the Brown School at Washington University and a board member at the Metro St. Louis Equal Housing and Opportunity Council. She received her B.A. in Women’s Studies from Carleton College in 2001 and her Ph.D. in Human Development and Social Policy from Northwestern University in 2012. Prior to her doctoral training, she worked in low-income housing in Chicago as a social services coordinator. As a researcher, her current work focuses on housing policy in the United States. Specifically, she seeks to understand how housing policies create and reproduce segregation and inequality, such that these programs might be improved. Dr. Metzger’s major projects have included a community action project on public housing preservation in Chicago, a national analysis of the Section 8 housing voucher program, and most recently a collaboration with the St. Louis Housing Authority, in which she interviewed Section 8 renters in North St. Louis City and County about their housing options and preferences. Her research also extends into other areas of social welfare, including early childhood health and education.

Many St. Louisans are struggling to keep a roof over their heads. Among households earning less than $35,000 annually, one out of five are spending more than 30% of their earnings on their housing, making them “housing cost burdened.” We have a need for more quality affordable housing. The City of St. Louis’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) is intended to help address that need.

For at least the last four years, the City of St. Louis has funded the AHTF at $500,000 below the legally mandated minimum. This year is shaping up to be no different. If the City sticks with its preliminary budget decision, City residents and neighborhoods will miss out on a half million dollars in housing investment. How did we get to the point where the City has underfunded our commitment to affordable housing by around $2 million over the past four years?

In 2001, the City passed a Use Tax of which 50% was to be “dedicated to providing for the development and preservation of affordable and accessible housing.” After revenue generated by the Use Tax beat expectations, the City passed a new ordinance in 2002 establishing minimum allocations of $5 million to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, $5 million to the Health Care Trust Fund, and $3 million to the Use Tax Demolition Fund. Under the new ordinance, the only way the City of St. Louis could fund the AHTF below $5 million is if the Use Tax raised less than $10 million. With the Use Tax raising $30.15 million on average over the past 4 years, the city has no good reason to underfund affordable housing.

A great gap exists between where we are today and where we would be if the original 2001 law had been implemented. If the 2001 ordinance was in place today, roughly $15 million would be invested in affordable housing in the City of St. Louis this year. If the City of St. Louis simply made up for the lost investment over the past four years under the 2002 law, roughly $7 million would be invested this year.

Alas, if the City of St. Louis simply followed its own legal requirements this year, $5 million dollars would be invested in bringing quality affordable housing in our communities, for our neighbors. Unfortunately, the City of St. Louis is yet again planning to fund the Affordable Housing Trust Fund below its legally mandated minimum despite calls from the Ferguson Commission and housing advocates to increase investment.

If you believe in providing quality affordable housing for all St. Louisans; if you believe in reinvesting in our buildings; if you have witnessed a child performing better in school because her family’s new affordable home allowed them not to move every month, call your alderperson, call the mayor’s office, and tell a friend that the City should allocate at least $5 million to affordable housing this year.

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.

A Turning Point in Community Development: Invest STL

By Mary McMurtrey

Mary McMurtrey is the Director of Community Engagement for the Greater Saint Louis Community Foundation. She previously served as President of the Gateway Center for Giving (formerly the Metropolitan Association for Philanthropy) for over six years. Prior to joining The Center, she served as the Executive Director of Boys Hope Girls Hope St. Louis and the Executive Director of the Wildlife Rescue Center. Before entering the field of nonprofit management, Mary was the communications officer for the Public Policy Research Center at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, where she was recruited to create a new position within the PPRC and to direct the organization’s communications and marketing efforts as an established professional entity in the St. Louis policy arena with a focus on both regional and national issues.

This op-ed is based on Mary’s keynote speech at the Community Builders Network Awards Reception held March 31st, 2016.

It’s time that we all come together to celebrate the amazing work that we’ve been doing. So many of you, for so many years, have been doing really good work. Sometimes, you’ve been doing good work in isolation, with not a lot of people knowing about what you’re doing, or the lives and communities you’re changing. We want to do something about that.

I was approached a few years ago by Todd Swanstrom and Karl Guenther of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis to look at what other communities were doing to create community and economic development systems that bring these good things together—so that one plus one could equal three—so that we could build on successes, and take good things and really make them great. Instead of a project here, and a project there, how do we stitch everything together in a way that’s cohesive and makes everybody’s life better, healthier, and stronger?

Groups of us went to Baltimore, Cincinnati, Memphis, Cleveland, and other places to find out what other communities were doing. There were some exciting things happening around the country. We looked at that and we said, “What are some of those elements?” There’s not one-size-fits-all solution. There wasn’t some program that we could lift out of some other city and transplant to St. Louis. (And we don’t like that anyway, do we?) Instead, we looked at aspects of what was happening in other communities and said, “What do we think we could adapt to fit our community?”

Out of that process came lots of travel and many conversations. For over two years, representatives from the Community Builders Network, the Metropolitan St. Louis CRA Association, and local philanthropy came together, sat at tables, and said, “We can do this.” There’s nothing about those other communities that makes them any more special than anybody else. What they have is the will.

We have that will in this community right now. I have no doubt about it. I have seen it in all of you. We are at a turning point where fifty years from now, people will look back and say that there was a moment in St. Louis’s community where everyone came together and made a decision to do things differently. And look at where they are now.

I believe that moment is right now. And I believe that the vehicle for that pivotal change is a community and economic development system that we have named Invest STL (http://investl.org). It is a way to bring public, private, and philanthropic donors, partners, and investors together under one tent. We need one table, not a million places where everyone has to run to in order to put a deal together and make some progress. We need a cohesive system that works for everyone. And we believe that we’re going to have that in Invest STL.

I’d like to invite everyone to find ways to participate in being a champion for doing business differently in our community. We have galvanized our local leadership to say: “It’s time for us to be open for business with Invest STL.” We are here. And we want to celebrate what’s happening in your communities and find ways to support the good work that you’re doing. Because without you, none of this would be happening.

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.

Achieving Equity Through School and Neighborhood Integration

By Christie Huck

Christie Huck is Executive Director of City Garden Montessori Charter School. With a background in community organizing and social activism, Christie entered the education reform movement as a parent and community member concerned about education equity and integration in schools. She worked with City Garden’s founder and parents to develop the first Montessori and neighborhood charter school in Missouri. City Garden, which opened as a charter school in 2008, provides children with a rigorous, individualized education with a focus on social justice. Christie lives in St. Louis’s Shaw neighborhood with her three children.

On May 5th and 6th, City Garden Montessori School convened individuals and organizations from across the region to discuss and learn about how racial and economic integration—in schools and in neighborhoods—could be a critical mechanism for achieving equity in St. Louis. (You can read more about the convening at this link.)

About 200 individuals participated in meetings over the course of two days, and we were joined by national experts, Phil Tegeler, Executive Director of the Poverty and Race Research Action Council, Tanya Clay House, Assistant Deputy Secretary of the US Department of Education, and Eddie Wartts, St. Louis Regional Field Director for the US Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Perhaps the most poignant statement made during these sessions was that in the US, geographic income segregation is growing primarily among families with children. This trend is certainly a reality in the St. Louis region.

At the same time, Phil Tegeler shared that there are dramatic benefits for children who move from low-income neighborhoods to “high opportunity” areas with thriving school districts. When low-income children are able to access high-performing school districts, the results include higher test scores and better grades, reduced exposure to the criminal justice system, 130% higher incomes as adults, improved college attendance and completion, lower teen pregnancy rates, reduced obesity and diabetes rates, improved mental health, reduced exposure to lead, and reduced exposure to violence and toxic stress.

The benefits of integrated schools go beyond these “concrete” outcomes. It has become evident that racial and economic integration benefits all children—improving critical thinking skills (learning to see and anticipate others’ points of views), resulting in more “cross-racial” friendships and reduced “racial anxiety.” Children who attend integrated schools are also more likely to choose integrated neighborhoods as adults, which ultimately helps to decrease inequities in our society.

St. Louis is the 5th most segregated of the 50 largest metropolitan area in the United States. The events in Ferguson in 2014 exposed how detrimental this is, and has been, for our region.

It is time to address the segregation that exists in our region, and to ensure that all children and all families in St. Louis have access to quality housing and quality schools. Doing so will go a long way toward creating equity. Not doing so will continue to cause harm not just to individuals, but to our region as a whole.

Through collaboration between municipal governments, school districts and housing officials, we could create an innovative plan that includes affordable housing throughout our region, increasing access to high-opportunity districts for low-income children. By continuing to improve educational options in high poverty areas, we will draw middle-class families to these neighborhoods, dissipating the hyper-concentration of poverty that currently exists throughout the City of St. Louis and the inner-ring suburbs.

City Garden Montessori School is working at a very local level to address these issues. City Garden is a racially and economically integrated neighborhood charter school in South St. Louis City. We situated our school in the 63110 zip code because it is one of the most integrated parts of the city. As the school has become more successful, more middle and upper income families are moving into the neighborhood in order to apply to City Garden. From a community development standpoint, this is a “great” problem to have. However, low-income families are finding it more difficult to stay or move into the neighborhood—which counters the intent and mission of the school.

We have initiated a Coalition for Neighborhood Diversity and Affordable Housing to explore mechanisms to sustain the racial and economic diversity of the neighborhood, even while this area continues to rebound.

The events last week marked the launch of this coalition. On Friday, we invited regional housing and education leaders to discuss this issue at a regional level. The level of interest and enthusiasm was impressive.

I think St. Louis has reached its time—to right the wrongs of the past and to forge a new path forward, toward equity. Integration of schools and neighborhoods must be central components of regional change.

As stated in the Ferguson Commission’s report: “These divides we’ve created—between Black and White, between rich and poor and middle class—are bad for all of us, not just some of us(“Forward Through Ferguson,” 2015).” At the same time, addressing these divides will benefit all of us, starting with our children, to create a more hopeful future for our region.

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.

Pagedale Pride Grows Here: Importance of Neighborhood Branding

By Stephanie Co

Stephanie Co serves as Special Assistant to the President/CEO at Beyond Housing and currently facilitates the Pagedale Marketing Team. She was worked in community development in St. Louis since 2010. She is a graduate of Washington University in St. Louis and a Master of Public Policy Administration candidate at University of Missouri-St. Louis.

Just a few years ago, Pagedale residents had to leave their community if they wanted to shop at a full-service grocery store, go to a bank, see a movie, and the list goes on. Residents spent their money outside of their own community, not because they wanted to, but because of necessity.

Now, residents for the first time have their own Town Center, where they can do all of these things. Pagedale Town Center also has senior living and an array of financial services, and will soon be home to a health clinic and a coffee shop. And these new amenities simply add on to other thriving businesses – delicious barbecue, the best grilled chicken, beauty and barbershops, and more.

In addition, Pagedale will soon have safer and more walkable streets through the Great Streets Project, as well as St. Vincent Greenway, a walking and biking trail. Pagedale is accessible to two MetroLink stations; one of these stations is a future Transit Oriented Development site. Youth and residents build community through community gardens, the boxing gym, an after-school program, community arts spaces, parks and events. Pagedale has a lot to be proud of.

Simultaneously, a lot of people don’t know about all the progress the Pagedale community has made. Even some residents are still learning about what Pagedale has to offer. A group of residents and business owners are working to change that. Supported by Beyond Housing through a NeighborWorks marketing grant, this group, the Pagedale Marketing Team, is exploring what makes Pagedale special.

Deeply-rooted. Progressive. Vibrant town center. Home. These are some of the words community members identify with when they think of Pagedale. They are thinking of the multi-generational families rooted in the community, the community’s willingness to take action, grow, and change, the new development and their first ever Town Center, and a place where everybody knows everybody (and their grandmother). Those qualities set Pagedale apart.

Through this marketing and branding initiative, the neighborhood marketing team is working to change public perception of Pagedale, increase investment in the community, and engage community members in building a shared identity based on respect and community commitment.  This effort will not only improve community identity among existing residents and business owners, but it will showcase Pagedale and its strengths to the greater region, including to prospective businesses and residents.

Most importantly, this neighborhood branding is driven by the community. It is important to have stakeholders, whether residents, business owners, or elected officials, engaged from the beginning. This community-based team has not only led the visioning and creation of a marketing plan for Pagedale, but will be instrumental in implementing that plan.

Ultimately, we know neighborhood branding alone is not enough. Branding is complementary to revitalization and development efforts working to create better communities to live in. As the team launches its new logo, events, social media campaigns, media press kits, street banners, and more, their efforts will only be successful if partnered with other community development strategies.

Through this neighborhood branding process, the Pagedale marketing team created a slogan to reflect the brand and better represent the community: “Pagedale Pride Grows Here.” They want you to come to Pagedale and see why they are proud of their community. Visit Pagedale Town Center, come watch a movie, and see how Pagedale has grown and will continue to grow.

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.

“The Least of These”: Life-on-Life Community Development

By Dr. Terry M. Goodwin

Dr. Terry M. Goodwin is the founder and Executive Director of Sun Ministries. He lives and works in the Hyde Park neighborhood of North St. Louis with his wife Suzette. Together they are leading a new paradigm of ministry they call Pastoring the Community. 

In Matthew chapter 25 Jesus tells a story about how we should treat people. In this story he states:

“‘I tell you the truth, when you refused to help the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were refusing to help me.”

When we approach our problems in the neighborhoods we serve we must never lose sight of the “least of these.” For many people their work is dedicated to helping provide for the “least of these.” We help them with food, housing, utilities, clothing and many other necessities of life. Yet after decades of hard work our problems persist. To care for someone is a noble venture but to provide for their self-sufficiency is a greater good.

Many charitable efforts are offered as a program or a class. This approach to our work misses the need for life-on-life interaction. What the “least of these” needs is a family, a community, a network of people who will care for them and empower them to be all that God designed them to be. They don’t just need this Monday – Friday from 8 – 5; they need this 24/7. Training and provision will always fall short if they are not connected to loving, caring people who are willing to live side by side with the “least of these.”

There is a marginalized group of people in our communities. They lack education, social skills, job skills and have often never been surrounded by loving relationships. The “least of these” are oppressed, beat down, abused, neglected, and carry their past mistakes like yokes around their necks. If we want to help them, we must walk with them and carry their burdens. We must make a place for them to live and work in our communities.

Many of the “least of these” have never had a legitimate paying job. They do not know what is required of them to show up on time, take instruction from authority, care for the things of others, and many other lessons that are learned in employment. The “least of these” carry burdens that will not just go away with provision and training. They need our love and our care and our grace as they struggle to overcome the weight of the yoke they carry. Many have been conditioned by the pain and failures of their past to expect bad results again.

Unfortunately, for our society, money drives our work. Businesses are looking to hire the best of the best not the “least of these.” Funders drive programming as the desired approach to our work. It is easier to evaluate a program than it is to evaluate life-on-life work. Life is fluid and messy. How can we tell if our money is getting the results we desire without the ability to count and analyze data? If money sources would change the way they offer support to show a priority for life-on-life work instead of programming, we would have more people moving to our most desperate neighborhoods and living alongside the “least of these,”

When we take a life-on-life approach to our work we focus on building the person up and rebuilding the communities they live in, one person and one house at a time. If we adopt a life-on-life approach to our work, we will house and employ the “least of these” and thus raise our entire community in the process. As we lift up the “least of these” we empower them to take advantage of the many opportunities that already exist. We remove the oppressive yoke from their neck and bring equity into their lives.

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.