Equity Analysis isn’t a one and done kind of thing, its an iterative process. At least that is what I learned at the Parks Committee meeting I went to. So, I’m wondering, what would it take to do a real equity analysis on Judge Doyle Square – how do we get it done?
Here is the Judge Doyle Square equity report that was done on September 25th, just 4 days before the vote. Most importantly, it points out on the first page:
This document should not be mistaken as a racial equity analysis. For a project of this size and
scope, a racial equity analysis should begin early in the planning of a project and include a robust
community engagement element with individuals who stand to be affected by the project – particularly with people of color and individuals and families living with lower incomes. In addition, such an analysis
would more comprehensively consider possible benefits and burdens related to race and socioeconomic status as well as the potential for unintended consequences.
As noted in the report, they were never even requested to do an equity review until August 24, 2015 and were only given one month to do it.
A REAL EQUITY ANALYSIS REPORT WOULD ANSWER . . .
A comprehensive equity analysis would go through the following process and include answers to the following questions:
INSTRUCTIONS
Use this tool as early as possible in the development of City policies, plans, programs and budgets.For issues on a short timeline or with a narrow impact, you may use the RESJ Tool–Fast Track Version.
This analysis should be completed by people with different racial and socioeconomic perspectives. When
possible, involve those directly impacted by the issue. Include and document multiple voices in this
process.The order of questions may be re-arranged to suit your situation.
BACKGROUND
Mission of the Racial Equity and Social Justice (RESJ) Initiative: To establish racial equity and social justice as core principles in all decisions, policies and functions of the City of Madison.
Equity is just and fair inclusion into a society in which all, including all racial and ethnic groups, can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential. Equity gives all people a just and fair shot in life despite historic patterns of racial and economic exclusion (www.policylink.org).
The persistence of deep racial and social inequities and divisions across society is evidence of bias at the
individual, institutional and structural levels. These types of bias often work to the benefit of White people
and to the detriment of people of color, usually unintentionally or inadvertently.Purpose of this Tool: To facilitate conscious consideration of equity and examine how communities of color and low-income populations will be affected by a proposed action/decision of the City.
The “What, Who, Why, and How” questions of this tool are designed to lead to strategies to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts and unintended consequences on marginalized populations.
ANALYSIS
Title of policy, plan or proposal
Main contact name(s) and contact information for this analysis
Names and affiliations of others participating in the analysis1. WHAT
a. What is the policy, plan or proposal being analyzed, and what does it seek to accomplish?
b. What factors (including existing policies and structures) associated with this issue might be affecting
communities of color and/or low-income populations differently?
c. What do available data tell you about this issue?DATA RESOURCES FOR RACIAL EQUITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT ANALYSIS
City of Madison
– Neighborhood Indicators (UW Applied Population Lab and City of Madison)
– Open Data Portal (City of Madison)
– Madison Measures (City of Madison)
– Census reporter (US Census Bureau)
Dane County
– Geography of Opportunity: A Fair Housing Equity Assessment for Wisconsin’s Capital Region (Capital Area Regional Planning Commission)
– Race to Equity report (Wisconsin Council on Children and Families):
– Healthy Dane (Public Health Madison & Dane County and area healthcare organizations)
– Dane Demographics Brief (UW Applied Population Lab and UW-Extension):
State of Wisconsin
Wisconsin Quickfacts (US Census)
– Demographics Services Center (WI Dept of Administration)
Applied Population Laboratory (UW-Madison)
Federal
– American FactFinder (US Census)
– 2010 Census Gateway (US Census)d. What data are unavailable or missing?
e. Which focus area(s) will the policy, plan or proposal primarily impact? Please add any comments regarding the specific impacts on each area:
– Community/Civic Engagement
– Criminal Justice
– Early Childhood
– Economic Development
– Education
– Employment
– Environment
– Food Access & Affordability
– Government Practices
– Health
– Housing
– Planning & Development
– Service Equity
– Transportation
– Other (please describe)2. WHO
a. Who (individuals or groups) could be impacted by the issues related to this policy, plan or proposal?
Who would benefit?
Who would be burdened?
Are there potential disproportionate impacts on communities of color or low-income communities?
b. Have stakeholders from different racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups – especially those most affected
– been informed, involved and represented in the development of this proposal or plan? Who
is missing and how can they be engaged?CITY OF MADISON RACIAL EQUITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CONTINUUM
Adapted from Community Engagement Guide: A tool to advance Equity & Social Justice in King CountyThe continuum provides details, characteristics and strategies for five levels of community engagement.
The continuum shows a range of actions from county-led information sharing that tends to be shorter-term to longer-term community-led activities. The continuum can be used for both simple and complex efforts. As a project develops, the level of community engagement may need to change to meet changing needs and objectives.The level of engagement will depend on various factors, including program goals, time constraints, level
of program and community readiness, and capacity and resources. There is no one right level of engagement, but considering the range of engagement and its implications on your work is a key step in promoting community participation and building community trust. Regardless of the level of engagement, the role of both the City of Madison and community partners as part of the engagement process should always be clearly defined.Levels of Engagement/Characteristics of Engagement/Strategies
City Informs
City of Madison initiates an effort, coordinates with departments and uses a variety of channels to inform community to take action
– Primarily one-way channel of communication
– One interaction
– Term-limited to event
– Addresses immediate need of City and community
Media releases, brochures, pamphlets, outreach to vulnerable populations, ethnic media contacts, translated information, staff outreach to residents, new and social mediaCity Consults
City of Madison gathers information from the community to inform city-led projects
-Primarily one-way channel of communication
– One to multiple interactions
– Short to medium-term
– Shapes and informs city projects
Focus groups, interviews, community surveysCity engages in dialogue
City of Madison engages community members to shape city priorities and plans
– Two-way channel of communication
– Multiple interactions
– Medium to long-term
– Advancement of solutions to complex problems
Forums, advisory boards, stakeholder involvement, coalitions, policy development and advocacy, including legislative briefings and testimony, workshops, community-wide eventsCity and community work together
Community and City of Madison share in decision-making to co-create solutions together
– Two-way channel of communication
– Multiple interactions
– Medium to long-term
– Advancement of solutions to complex problems
Co-led community meetings, advisory boards, coalitions and partnerships, policy development and advocacy, including legislative briefings and testimonyCommunity directs action
Community initiates and directs strategy and action with participation and technical assistance from the City of Madison
– Two-way channel of communication
– Multiple interactions
– Medium to long-term
– Advancement of solutions to complex problems
Community-led planning efforts, community-hosted forums, collaborative partnerships, coalitions, policy development and advocacy, including legislative briefings and testimonyc. What input have you received from those who would be impacted and how did you gather this information? Specify sources of comments and other input.
3. WHY
a. What are the root causes or factors creating any racial or social inequities associated with this issue?
(Examples: Bias in process; Lack of access or barriers; Lack of inclusive engagement)
b. What are potential unintended consequences? What benefits or burdens may result?
(Specifically consider social, economic, health and environmental impacts.)
c. What identified community needs are being met or ignored in this issue or decision?4. WHERE
a. Are there impacts on geographic areas? (Select all that apply.)
All Madison neighborhoods
Allied Drive
Balsam/Russet
Brentwood/Northport Corridor
Darbo/Worthington
Hammersley/Theresa
Leopold/Arbor Hills
Owl Creek
Park Edge/Park Ridge
Southside
East Madison (general)
North Madison (general)
West Madison (general)
Downtown/Campus
Dane County (outside Madison)
Outside Dane County5. HOW: RECOMMENDATIONS SECTION
a. Describe recommended strategies to address adverse impacts, prevent unintended negative consequences and advance racial equity (program, policy, partnership and/or budget/fiscal strategies)
b.Is the proposal or plan:
Realistic?
Adequately funded?
Adequately resourced with personnel?
Adequately resourced with mechanisms (policy, systems) to ensure successful implementation and enforcement?
Adequately resourced with provisions to ensure ongoing data collection, public reporting, stakeholder participation and public accountability?
If you answered “no” to any of the above, what resources or actions are needed?
c. Who is accountable for this decision?
d. How will impacts be documented and evaluated? What are the success indicators and progress benchmarks?
e. How will those impacted by this issue be informed of progress and impacts over time?
WHAT WE GOT INSTEAD
NOT. an. equity. analysis. They said so themselves. Here’s what is helpful from the report
PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS ADDRESSING RACIAL EQUITY, DIVERSITY, AND INCLUSION
– The merits of the Judge Doyle Square Project with regard to racial equity, diversity, and inclusion relate primarily to employing a racially diverse workforce in downtown Madison – a central and easily accessible location.
– Transportation and workplace accessibility often arise as significant barriers toward employment for people living with lower incomes.
– A major employer that is committed to diversity and that offers a broad array of job options establishing its headquarters in downtown Madison provides a level of accessibility that will translate into people having much shorter and more direct routes to work.
The rest of this section says that people want this and what the company will do.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. In order to promote racial equity, diversity, and inclusion as much as possible in as many aspects of the Judge Doyle Square Project as possible, the City of Madison should further develop methods of accountability, tracking, and support for the project. To this end, it is recommended that City staff meet regularly with JDS Development, LLC; Exact Sciences; and the eventual operators of the hotel to monitor progress and provide support. This same level of monitoring and support should be applied internally as the City assumes operations
of the parking structureBeyond monitoring progress on meeting diversity goals, the City and the different employers and contractors involved in the Judge Doyle Square Project entities should work together to outline what support might look like. Possibilities for this support might include City staff connecting the respective employers and contractors to additional adult and youth employment and workforce development agencies; helping them provide outreach to Madison residents seeking employment; assisting the employers and contractors to develop internship opportunities; and assisting them to develop equitable workforce development plans.
2. Successfully employing a racially and socio-economically diverse workforce requires many supporting elements outside the actual workplace. As stated earlier, for individuals with limited transportation options, there is exceptional value in an employer committed to diversity locating its headquarters in an easily accessible location such as downtown Madison. Adequate transportation is one of the elements necessary to ensure that individuals living with lower incomes are actually able to take advantage of jobs that pay enough to support their families. As with transportation, easily accessible and affordable child-care and housing are critical as well. City of Madison staff, in partnership with a broad group of stakeholders, should examine strategies to ensure people seeking jobs and employed downtown, and elsewhere, have access to affordable childcare. City staff should also ensure our Affordable Housing Strategy includes adequate measures to increase the amount of housing available for individuals with lower-incomes and ensure it is located with easy access to affordable he
althy food, employment, transportation, and other community resources.3. The City of Madison should fully chronicle and evaluate those strategies used in the Judge Doyle Square Project that address racial equity, diversity, and inclusion. That review should then be used to inform future efforts to support businesses working to improve their workforce diversity and other aspects of equity and inclusion.
4. As stated at the outset of this document, this is not a racial equity analysis. A racial equity analysis
would begin much earlier in the development of a project and incorporate a significant community engagement component. City staff and policy-makers should continue to consider how projects, policies, and procedures intersect with racial equity and the impacts they may have on people of color and those living with lower incomes. That consideration should become routine and automatic at the individual, departmental, and
legislative levels, and be informed by the voices of those most affected by the decision at hand. The RESJI Tools and Training Action Team strongly recommends that formal analyses begin as early as possible in any process and include a full community engagement component.
WITH 2nd RE-BOOT, COMES OPPORTUNITY TO DO A PROPER EQUITY ANALYSIS
Sadly, the Board of Estimates did not include an equity analysis in their re-boot resolution (make sure you are looking at version 3). And the Council didn’t add it as a recommendation. Clearly, they have had an entire year to be working on an equity analysis of the project. And the old report is 100% irrelevant since it talks only about the jobs at Exact Sciences which is no longer part of the project. The work done seems to be only about Exact Sciences and not the hotel or parking or the other elements of the project (bike station, Project Labor Agreement, Labor Peace agreement, targeted business and workforce goals for construction, etc) And now that they started over, I’m guessing no equity analysis is being done now, either. They passed this resolution in late November, they had what was left of November, all of December, January and February before they have to meet with the Board of Estimates. Even once they meet with Board of Estimates in late February, they have a lot of process to go through: choosing a developer, deciding on TIF amounts, approving the land use, and the long list of other documents that need to be completed. This will likely take another whole year of planning and negotiating and city process before they can get a shovel in the ground. There is plenty of time to do an equity analysis if they so choose to do it, and it doesn’t have to be an afterthought sent to the council 4 days before a big decision.
I’d love to see the answers staff come up with for some of the questions such as:
1. b. What factors (including existing policies and structures) associated with this issue might be affecting
communities of color and/or low-income populations differently?
2. a. Who (individuals or groups) could be impacted by the issues related to this policy, plan or proposal?
Who would benefit?
Who would be burdened?
Are there potential disproportionate impacts on communities of color or low-income communities?
b. Have stakeholders from different racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups – especially those most affected
– been informed, involved and represented in the development of this proposal or plan? Who is missing and how can they be engaged?
3. a. What are the root causes or factors creating any racial or social inequities associated with this issue?
(Examples: Bias in process; Lack of access or barriers; Lack of inclusive engagement)
b. What are potential unintended consequences? What benefits or burdens may result?
(Specifically consider social, economic, health and environmental impacts.)
c. What identified community needs are being met or ignored in this issue or decision?
5. c. Who is accountable for this decision?
d. How will impacts be documented and evaluated? What are the success indicators and progress benchmarks?
e. How will those impacted by this issue be informed of progress and impacts over time?
Imagine staff out there in their fancy suits and shoes asking homeless people what they think!
Or imagine staff answering how paying $2 and taking 1 hour and 9 minutes to get to work on time (from Owl Creek), while also trying to get kids to daycare or school isn’t all the feasible. If you get the kids where they need to be and catch a bus at 7:52 you can be to work by 9:01. Take the quicker route, it will only take you 1 hour and 6 minutes and you can be there by 8:48 if you leave 10 minutes earlier.
Or imagine them answering the question “who benefits?” from this project.
Have people from different racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups been informed, involved and represented in the development of this proposal or plan? Or have they been swept out of the sight of the public because of complaints from Iron Man participants who can stay in the new fancy hotel. (If this is still about a hotel?)
Unintended consequences?
Burdens that might result? (hmmm, impact on affordable housing?)
There is time to do it right, 3rd time is a charm, right?
And if this is too burdensome, they can pay someone to do it, since they can pay George Austin over a quarter million dollars to work on this project.
TAKE ACTION
Ask the Board of Estimates members to require a full, comprehensive equity analysis.
Barbara McKinney, Denise DeMarb, Marsha Rummel, Maurice Cheeks, Mike Verveer, Mayor Paul Soglin, Sara Eskrich
district1@cityofmadison.com
district16@cityofmadison.com
district6@cityofmadison.com
district10@cityofmadison.com
district4@cityofmadison.com
mayor@cityofmadison.com
district13@cityofmadison.com
Or ask the entire council and the mayor
allalders@cityofmadison.com
mayor@cityofmadison.com
It’s time to walk the walk on equity. No more talk.
