From Neighborhood to Nation: The Democratic Foundations of Civil Society

Appendixes

Appendix A Characteristics of Surveyed Cities Citywide Demographics Birmingham Dayton Portland St. Paul Population 288,611 193,536 375,897 270,230 Age Median age 29.6 28.4 31.4 29.5 65 or over 13.6 % 11.8 % 15.3 % 15.0 % 17 or under 26.8 % 27.4 % 21.8 % 24.1 % Minorities Black 54.7 % 36.9 % 7.6 % 4.9 % Other minorities 0.5 % 1.1 % 6.0 % 5.0 % Hispanic 0.8 % 0.9 % 2.1 % 2.9 % Education h.s. graduate 60.9 % 59.3 % 75.8 % 72.4 % college graduate 13.4 % 10.4 % 22.1 % 19.8 % Housing owner occupied 53.2 % 50.6 % 53.3 % 55.7 % Median value $31,700 $28,300 $54,800 $52,900 Economic Status persons in poverty 21.6 % 20.8 % 13.0 % 10.9 % Median family income $15,437 $15,292 $19,501 $20,743 Note: All figures are based on 1980 data from the United States Census Bureau. 115 Political Structure Birmingham Dayton Portland St. Paul Structure Mayor Council 7 seats By district 2-year term 5 seats (including mayor) At large 4-year term (overlapping) 5 seats (including mayor) At large 4-year term (overlapping) 9 seats By district 4-year term Elected separately 2-year term Elected separately 4-year term Elected separately 4-year term Elected separately 4-year term Strong mayor Commission Council-manager Strong mayor 116 Appendix A • Appendix B Neighborhood Participation Structures in Four Cities This appendix provides an overview of the major features of the citywide neighborhood participation systems in Birmingham, Dayton, Portland, and St. Paul. Each description is organized into five categories: A. Beginnings and Authorization B. Neighborhood Structures C. Citywide Citizen Structures D. Outreach to Citizens E. Other Major Program Components F. Overall Perspective of the City on Citizen Participation Birmingham Participation A. Beginnings and Authorization Born: October 15, 1974 Place: In City Council Resolution formally adopting the Citizen Participation Plan The Birmingham participation system grew out of an extremely tense racial atmosphere following a decade of racial strife. In 1972, a Community Development Department was created, the first in a city with a tradition of among the lowest levels of per capita public expenditures in the country. At this time, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development was promulgating strict guidelines for participation in a number of cities with past records of racial discrimination, one of which was Birmingham. The regional director for HUD outlined minimum requirements for involvement of the poor to Birmingham ’s mayor in July 1973. In response to HUD’s requirements, the Community Development Department proposed its first version of a participation plan in October 1973, and shortly thereafter a Community Resources Division was set up, which appar117 ently began to implement the plan in several North Birmingham neighborhoods early the next year. The plan drew major protest from black leaders, particularly over its dependence upon a private organization, Operation New Birmingham, as the primary organizer of the neighborhood structure. This protest culminated with 500 people at a public hearing on the plan in the municipal auditorium on April 1, 1974. The official record notes that “almost all speakers expressed opposition to aspects of the initial plan.” Staff listened to tapes from the hearing, conducted a workshop for more than 130 participants, and developed a revised plan which received final Council approval in October. The new plan omitted Operation New Birmingham from its provisions, and was generally well received. At this point the program was off and running at full speed: an election of Neighborhood Citizens Committees was held in November 1974 to fill 258 positions , and neighborhood committees and advisory groups were subsequently formed. A major effort to inform the public about these groups was taken through flyers and posters, churches, community schools, radio and television announcements, and special events. The first meeting of the citywide Citizens Advisory Board (CAB) was held a few months later in February of 1975. The CAB specifically decided to adopt a citywide perspective, avoid partisan politics , and work cooperatively with city officials. Disposition of the $5 million Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) was the major CAB issue during this year. And it was important for this biracial, grassroots group of people simply to meet on a regular basis with the mayor and city council members. B. Neighborhood Structures 1. Neighborhood Associations and Community Advisory Committees At...