March 10 Living Cities Policy Committee Meeting March 9, 2011

p2 Agenda for March 10 Policy Committee Meeting I.Review of Committee Role & October Meeting (1:30-1:45) II.Discussion of Influence Network Strategy (1:45-3:00) III.Patton Boggs Federal Policy Update (3:00- 3:45) IV.Staff Update on Current Influence Activities throughout Living Cities (3:45- 4:30)

March 9, 2011 p3 Living Cities Strategies Leadership & Influence Research & Development Local Integration

March 9, 2011 p4 Strategic Role of Committee  Insure that the impact of Living Cities' work extends beyond the work itself  Take a ‘balcony’ view of all LC work and external environment to ‘connect the dots’ and identify opportunities to extend impact  Assess and build organizational capacity to extend impact of LC work

March 9, 2011 p5 Committee’s Impact within LC  Provide guidance and assess LC influence work organization-wide, including issues/opportunities arising from external environment, and report annually to the Board  Build and maintain influence network to extend impact, and assess network’s value to the organization

March 9, 2011 p6 October 2010 Meeting: Approved Guidance to Committees/Working Groups on Extending the Impact I nfluence work is most appropriate when, taken as a whole, it has a multiple number of the following characteristics: Has potential to create change in the policy environment that will have a significant impact on issues of programmatic importance (people, place, and economic opportunity) Encourages alignment of policies across local jurisdictions or across levels of government (federal, state, local) Encourages integrated consideration of issue areas (e.g., transit and housing) Encourages alignment of government, private-sector, and philanthropic efforts and resources Takes advantage of unique characteristics and strengths of our collaborative

March 9, 2011 p7 Proposed Toolbox for Committees and Working Groups  Organize high-impact convenings  Conduct Boot Camps  Form other partnerships with government  Issue reports/briefs  Design new investment vehicles  Engage on specific legislation in rare situations

March 9, 2011 p8 Extending the Impact: Establishing an 'influence network' of people & organizations Make it easier to have impact beyond the work and keep ahead of trends/horizons: 1.Expand LC distribution channels for our knowledge/ideas 2.Stay current on new trends/perspectives 3.Increase capacity of public sector to innovate/collaborate 4.Expand LC's relationships across the political and geographic spectrum

March 9, 2011 p9 Ways to Use the Network  Undertake “permanent activities” for the organization (like 2x year PMI) to cement key relationships  Enable activation for opportunistic activities (like boot camps) often proposed by working groups/committees  Facilitate partnering on papers, convenings, or other activities proposed by this committee or other working groups/committees

March 9, 2011 p10 Key Issues for Building Influence Network  What does the desired network look like?  What are our existing gaps and what signature partners could fill those gaps?  What are signature activities to do with signature partners?

March 9, 2011 p11 Defining the Network: Current Relationships & Gaps Government Business Thought Leaders Local- PMI/HKS Ad hoc Liberal - CAP State - Ohio Moderate - Brookings Federal - Ad hoc Conservative – None Geographic - None

March 9, 2011 p12 Network Partners: Local Government Level  Harvard’s Kennedy School and our Project on Municipal Innovation (PMI) is best-developed network partner  35 mayoral chiefs of staff that convene twice a year at Harvard  PMI has extended our organizational impact by: expanding dissemination of our ideas increasing our knowledge of relevant trends increasing public sector’s ability to innovate expanding our relationships

March 9, 2011 p13 Network Partners: State Government Level  No systematic partnerships at state level  Some ad hoc engagement at state level (Ohio work)  Possible partners: National Governors’ Association State-level version of PMI for gubernatorial chiefs of staff/joint sessions with PMI

March 9, 2011 p14 Network Partners: National Government Level  Significant ad hoc engagement - 3 Boot Camps and Council on Environmental Quality  How can partnerships with administration be made more strategic, and build capacity of the federal government to collaborate?  Should systematic engagement with Congress be a priority, or should that influence take place indirectly through network of national-level thought leaders?

March 9, 2011 p15 Network Partners: Business Community  Currently no systematic engagement  Possible partners? Business Roundtable Committee for Economic Development TechNet U.S. Chamber of Commerce

March 9, 2011 p16 Network Partners: Thought Leaders with Ideological and Geographic Diversity  Broaden this network to increase access and diversify perspectives informing our work?  Moderate spectrum? Bipartisan Policy Center and New America Foundation  Conservative spectrum? Manhattan Institute, American Enterprise Institute  Geographic diversity? High-quality state-based think tanks like Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) and MassInc

March 9, 2011 p17 Key discussion questions 1.What are highest priority areas for developing new partnerships? Do we need partners in all identified areas (e.g., state-level, business, geographic diversity)? 2.Should we have national-level initiatives other than with thought leaders? 3.What organizations/partners should we prioritize doing ‘due diligence’ on? 4.Are there less traditional kinds of partnerships (e.g., relating to new media or emerging organizational forms) that we should be thinking about?

March 9, 2011 p18 Patton Boggs Presentation (Slides to be provided separately)

March 9, 2011 p19 Update on LC Leadership and Influence Activities Working Groups:  Transit-Oriented Development (Boot Camp and follow-up)  Green Economy (CEQ convening)  The Integration Initiative  Capital Absorption Work

March 9, 2011 p20 Sustainable Communities Boot Camp  Initiative of Transit-Oriented Development Working Group  Opportunity provided by $98 Million HUD Sustainable Communities Planning Grants  13 Regional Teams at Harvard Kennedy School for 3 days in January 2011  Expert faculty and substantial federal presence from HUD, EPA, DOT, and OMB

March 9, 2011 p21 Sustainable Communities Boot Camp  Disruptive framework establishing economic strategy and equity as central to sustainable communities work  Grantees and HUD agreed to modify work plans to incorporate framework  Framework to be disseminated to non- attending regions through “action guide”

March 9, 2011 p22 Sustainable Communities Boot Camp  Helped to institutionalize cross-agency collaboration with HUD, EPA, and DOT  Helped to build strong cross-sector local leadership tables  Living Cities is continuing to talk with HUD about how technical assistance dollars can best be used

March 9, 2011 p23 Catalytic Convenings on Energy Efficiency  Initiative of Green Economy Working Group  Working with White House Council on Environmental Quality and MacArthur Foundation  Opportunity provided by White House interest in advancing energy efficiency retrofit work  Total of four sessions, mid-March through late May  Participants include top-level leaders from federal agencies, select cities, philanthropy, and the private sector (lenders, utilities, building owners, etc.)

March 9, 2011 p24 Catalytic Convenings on Energy Efficiency  Overall goal is to help bring to scale green markets that will benefit low- income people  Particular focus is energy efficiency retrofit work in multifamily and commercial building sectors, especially overcoming data and financing barriers  Initiative will build collaboration among private-sector, government (federal and local), and philanthropy  Convenings will help institutionalize cross-agency federal collaboration (CEQ, OMB, HUD, DOE, GSA, etc.)  Learning from convenings will influence grantmaking by Green Economy Working Group and its members  Potential to expand impact of the work through partnership with Clinton Global Initiative

March 9, 2011 p25 The Integration Initiative  Designed to demonstrate how public, private, philanthropic, and non-profit sectors can innovatively tackle entrenched problems to improve lives of low-income people  Broadest goal is not merely to succeed in the five cities, but to create a New Normal for how problems are solved in urban communities  Creating New Normal involves challenging obsolete conventional wisdom and establishing new disruptive frameworks  Creating New Normal requires moving from series of pilots to establishing systems-level changes in relationships, policies, and capacities

March 9, 2011 p26 Cross-site Themes BaltimoreClevelandDetroitNewarkTwin Cities Transit-Oriented Development XXX Anchor Institutions (Eds and Meds) XXX Food Access/ Processing XXX Small Business Development XXX Land useXXXX Job Creation, workforce, economic development XXXXX SchoolsXXX Regional FrameXXXX 26

March 9, 2011 p27 The Integration Initiative  Some candidates for broader, nationally-significant impacts already identified: ---Workforce system in Baltimore --- Anchor work in Cleveland --- Land use in Detroit --- Social determinants of health approach in Newark --- Regional collaboration on transit in Twin Cities --- Work at multiple site on building new local governance structures

March 9, 2011 p28 Capital Formation Committee Initiative on Capital Absorption  Project grows out of experience with Integration Initiative  Goal is to systematically identify what is needed to better deploy capital in underinvested neighborhoods; share findings with targeted audiences

March 9, 2011 p29 Capital Absorption Initiative Questions  Where capital flows well to low-income urban communities, what are the elements of success?  What gaps exist that impede the flow of capital to many low- income communities?  How can capacity of low-income communities to absorb capital be strengthened? Federal, state, local policies and practices? Characteristics of financial intermediaries? Role of other organizations (e.g., developers, banks, anchors) Role of philanthropy and public-private partnerships