RSP: Making connections, pt. 2

I used the first point to acknowledge that there's some history between residents of Homewood and outside parties that could lead to - I stole a phrase that Dianne Swan had used earlier that morning - "infected perceptions."

I expressed the hope that those of us who work together on the Race Street Project will be able to move beyond that history. I  emphasized that we, the residents of Race Street, are taking responsiblity for our street and that, while we will certainly appreciate any help that we receive, this is our process.

And to our visitors specifically, I said something like, "If you ever feel like we're being slack or whiney, you can call us on that and say, 'You folks need to step up.' Likewise, if we ever feel like you're trying to take control, we will push back."

Everyone seemed to take that well.

On the second point, we moved around the table. Andrew Butcher spoke first, about the opporunity that the project would provide "to pilot cooperation," and said that he wants "to become a productive member of a large team."

Dianne Swan was next. She highlighted what Kim Graziani would afterward call "the elephant in the room," namely, that the leadership of all of the organizations meeting with us, excluding herself and the Rosedale Block Cluster, was all white. Even worse, she had come out on her own - she had not been invited, despite some 14 years of experience at doing, on and around Rosedale, the very thing that we were talking about doing on Race.

"It is not inclusive," she said, clearly hot under the collar. But civil.

She then went further, challenging the organizations to develop diversity within their own ranks. Regarding the project itself, she said that she wants to see children from the community "engaged and getting paid" for working the vacant lots on Race Street.

At that point, as they could have when I spoke about the Committee owning the process, some of our guests could have taken offense or decided not to work with us. They didn't. Again, they received it well, acknowledging the validity of the points being made. After the meeting, Dianne said, "I believe we turned a corner today."

Indeed, Rob Stephany, the next speaker, seemed even more enthusiastic than he did after we first met, offering a slew of suggestions about how we might proceed, and just as importantly, emphasizing the URA's role as helpers: "We're best as followers. We're worst as leaders."

There's more to say about the meeting; for now I'll say this: Dianne touched on an issue even larger than the complex relationship between Downtown and Homewood - namely, the degree to the green movement seems to be white, and this project's potential for exemplifying a new degree of inclusion.

California professor Paul F. Steinberg put it well in a piece, "Black and green," published in the PG's Sunday Forum Feb. 8:

"In a welcome departure from the stereotypical image of environmentalism (think Birkenstock-clad white male), the conservationist-in-chief is African American. In a presidency celebrated for historical breakthroughs, Mr. Obama's breaching of the green-white wall may be one of his most enduring legacies to the American environmental movement.

With the new administration aspiring to build bridges and break old patterns, now is the perfect time to recast environmentalism in more inclusive terms, recognizing its inherently broad appeal and reshaping its public image. It is time to foster a more diverse culture of sustainability that cuts across lines of race, class, political partisanship and urban/rural divides."

To comment on this post, please log in or register here.