Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
A view from below: the development and role of organizational social capital in neighborhood regeneration in Los Angeles
(USC Thesis Other)
A view from below: the development and role of organizational social capital in neighborhood regeneration in Los Angeles
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
A VIEW FROM BELOW:
THE DEVELOPMENT AND ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIAL CAPITAL
IN NEIGHBORHOOD REGENERATION IN LOS ANGELES
by
Ellen L. Shiau
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(POLICY, PLANNING, AND DEVELOPMENT)
August 2012
Copyright 2012 Ellen L. Shiau
ii
DEDICATION
To Mom and Dad, for your unwavering love, support and encouragement.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The journey of finishing a dissertation is never accompanied alone—in fact, it
would not have been possible without the generosity and support of many, many people.
Foremost among them are my family—Mom, Dad and Justin—who always have had the
utmost confidence in me even when mine flagged, and always have lovingly provided me
with the moral and financial support I needed along the way. I am so grateful. To my
wonderful extended family, and circle of friends in Los Angeles and beyond, thank you
for leavening the journey. And last but not least, I am grateful for Mykie—particularly
for cheering me on in the final stretch—in what has become an unforgettable year.
Gratitude also is due to my doctoral committee, which has served as an invaluable
source of encouragement and constructive feedback: Jefferey Sellers for connecting me
to the Regenerating Urban Neighborhoods Project that served as the springboard for this
dissertation and for sharing his insights on urban politics; David Sloane for his incisive
advice and warm encouragement; and especially my dissertation chair, Juliet Musso, who
has and will continue to be a wonderful model to aspire to, for her immense generosity,
practical and wise guidance, and confidence in me. I was lucky to first delve into
academic research under Juliet as well as Chris Weare, from whom I have learned much.
Finally, this work would not have been possible without the assistance of many
interview respondents in Boyle Heights, Pacoima and Watts who graciously and
generously lent their time and insights. I am in awe of the passion and efforts of many
community members I encountered to incite change in neighborhoods, and I aspire to
contribute to that change in a meaningful way.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Abstract viii
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Study Context and Methodology 8
A View from Below: A Neighborhood-Level Approach to Los Angeles
Politics 10
Case Study Selection 13
A Qualitative Case Study Approach 19
Data Collection and Analysis 20
Methodological Strengths and Weaknesses 24
Organization of the Dissertation 25
Chapter 2: Contextualizing Social Capital: Organizational Networks and
Neighborhood Regeneration 30
Divergent Perspectives on Social Capital 31
Adopting the Resource and Network Perspectives of Social Capital 35
Non-Profit Organizations, Local Capacities and Organizational Social Capital 38
Social Capital and Neighborhood Regeneration 40
Social Capital in Historical and Political Contexts 44
Historical Trajectories and Social Capital 46
The Politics of Race, Class and Social Capital 48
Summary 52
Chapter 3: Neighborhood Regeneration in a Fragmented City 55
Socio-Spatial Diversity in Los Angeles 57
Los Angeles’ Fragmented and Multi-Centered Institutional Context 69
Ad hoc and Market-Oriented Neighborhood Regeneration in Los Angeles 77
Barriers to Strategic and Comprehensive Neighborhood Initiatives 78
Ad-hoc and Opportunistic Redevelopment Initiatives 81
A Focus on Market-Driven Redevelopment and the Politics of Property 85
Challenges to the Representation of Community Interests in City
Policymaking 89
Viewing Neighborhood Regeneration from Below 93
v
Chapter 4: The Legacies of Community Action in Context 100
Historical Investments in Organizational Capacities 101
Historical Influences on Neighborhood Organizing Norms 103
Demographic Transitions and Institutional Development Over Time 106
Boyle Heights: The Creation of a Latino Barrio 109
Boyle Heights’ Legacy of Grassroots Organization 114
Pacoima: Globalization and Racial Transition 121
Investments in Collaborative Capacities in Pacoima 127
Watts: Social Unrest and Community Transitions 133
The Politics of Protest in Watts 141
Summary 148
Chapter 5: Neighborhood Resource Access, Community Empowerment and
Organizational Networks 154
Accessing Housing/Development, Health and Education Resources in
Boyle Heights 159
Accessing Education and Environmental Resources in Pacoima 168
Accessing Public Safety and Public Housing Resources in Watts 177
Summary 185
Chapter 6: The Dynamics of Race, Class and Competing Interests in Organizational
Networks 191
Competing Commuting Visions in Boyle Heights 198
The Less Contested Organizational Environment of Pacoima 209
Gaps in Organizational Representation and Capacity Building in Watts 218
Summary 226
Chapter 7: The Promise and Prospects of Neighborhood Regeneration: Lessons
from Los Angeles 230
Viewing City Politics from Below: A Neighborhood and Organizational
Approach 232
The Challenges and Opportunities of Community Action 236
Investments in Organizational Capacities 241
Concluding Thoughts 246
References 250
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Study Findings and Implications for Theory and Practice 6
Table 2: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Case Study Neighborhoods 14
Table 3: Population of the Case Study Neighborhoods 16
Table 4: Sources of Documentation 21
Table 5: Interview Respondents by Area and Sector 22
Table 6: Total Population of the City of Los Angeles, 1850, 2010 58
Table 7: Comparison of Foreign-Born Share of Total Population 60
Table 8: Los Angeles in Regional and National Context 63
Table 9: Los Angeles Poverty Rates in Regional and National Context Over Time 64
Table 10: Poverty in Los Angeles Census Tracts (2000 U.S. Census) 65
Table 11: History of Neighborhood Organizing: Three Dominant Approaches 104
Table 12: Historical Development of Organizational Networks and Social Capital 108
Table 13: Differing Characteristics of Neighborhood Organizational Networks 157
Table 14: Race, Class and Competing Interests in Organizational Networks 195
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Los Angeles Case Study Neighborhoods 13
Figure 2: Race and Ethnicity in Los Angeles 15
Figure 3: Racial Composition of Los Angeles County, 1940-2010 62
Figure 4: Median Income in 2000 by Neighborhood Council 66
Figure 5: Percentage Latino Population in 2000 by Neighborhood Council 66
Figure 6: Percentage African-American Population in 2000 by Neighborhood Council 67
Figure 7: City of Los Angeles Organizational Chart 73
viii
ABSTRACT
This study investigates the role that local non-profit organizational networks play
in influencing community revitalization, focusing on the conditions that facilitate and
shape the development of organizational social capital. These networks of relationships
allow organizations to access economic and political resources crucial for marginalized
communities. In particular, this study focuses attention on the manner in which local
historical, political and socioeconomic contexts shape the development of organizational
social capital and the influence of organizational networks within communities by
comparing organizational networks and neighborhood regeneration efforts in three Los
Angeles neighborhoods. This study demonstrates that diverse patterns of community
politics conditioned by local contexts exist across neighborhoods within the city, where
differences in organizational capacities, organizing norms and the dynamics of race, class
and competing interests have important implications for the prospects of community
influence, local empowerment and neighborhood regeneration.
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The potential for community action and empowerment cannot be understood
while ignoring the role of organizations. Local non-profit and philanthropic organizations
can play a vital role in the representation of community interests. On behalf of their
constituents, organizations not only can exert influence on political decision-making
processes that affect local communities but also can facilitate access to resources for
community and economic development, and for policy initiatives aimed at community
improvement. However, obviously, not all communities are alike; and not all
organizations are alike. Rather, significant variation exists in the types of organizations
active in communities, the constituents which they represent, the ability to influence the
dominant political and economic institutions that shape community life, and the strategies
utilized to influence neighborhood regeneration.
The persistence of distressed conditions in urban neighborhoods reflects an
enduring failure of city policy in the United States toward neighborhoods, and requires an
assessment of how community non-profit and philanthropic actors can work together
toward reversing the political processes that have systematically disadvantaged low-
income, central-city neighborhoods. Historically, cities have engaged in an array of
injudicious practices, such as racially restrictive covenants that limited non-White
residents to particular residential areas; the concentration of federal public housing in
minority neighborhoods; redlining practices and freeway construction that facilitated the
exodus of White residents from the central city to the suburbs; all of which have fostered
persistent spatial inequality. It is not only government that is culpable; as Squires and
2
Kubrin (2005) point out, patterns of injustice also relate to “policy-related actions taken
in the private and non-profit sectors” (p. 48).
Spatial and racial inequality concentrates problems and privileges in disparate
places among disparate groups. As Squires and Kubrin write, “place and race have long
been, and continue to be, defining characteristics of the opportunity structure of
metropolitan areas” (2005, p. 48). Racial discrimination and segregation have contributed
to disparities in wealth, employment opportunities, health, education and quality of life
among other inequities across geographies. While historic discrimination has created
impoverished urban minority communities (Wilson, 1996), the effects of inequality
remain embedded in contemporary relationships, structures and institutions.
Obviously those who wield influence and power—political offices, holders of
capital, the civic elite and so forth—strongly shape the private and public decisions that
affect urban development and urban life. Even so, neighborhood-level actors have not
been powerless in their efforts to improve or advocate on behalf of marginalized
communities. In particular, neighborhood change is influenced by the capacity of
communities and organizations to act and voice local needs (Kretzmann & McKnight,
1993; Fredericksen & London, 2000; Chaskin et. al, 2001). Moreover, within
increasingly complex governance landscapes, non-profit and philanthropic organizations
play a critical role as intermediary organizations that channel information and advocate
on behalf of neighborhood stakeholders.
With no coordinated national policy regarding urban poverty, local governments
address neighborhood redevelopment in a manner largely independent of the federal
3
government, while facing economic pressures associated with rapid globalization. Thus,
urban policy has become increasingly fragmented as cities work to leverage functional
programs undertaken by various governmental entities, and participate in intersectoral
networks of private, non-profit and government agents (Wolman & Agius, 1996; Peters
& Pierre, 1998; Goss, 2001). Within this fragmented territory, the persistent social
distress among U.S. urban neighborhoods and the increasing importance of intersectoral
networks in local governance warrant a closer examination of how non-profit and
philanthropic organizations obtain resources for communities and influence policymaking
processes to shape neighborhood regeneration.
This dissertation contributes to both the scholarly and policy debate regarding the
role that local non-profit organizational networks play in influencing community
revitalization, focusing on the conditions that facilitate and shape the development of
organizational social capital. Organizational social capital is defined as “established, trust
based networks among organizations or communities supporting a particular non-profit,
that an organization can use to further its goals” (Schneider, 2007, p. 644). These
networks of relationships allow organizations to access resources crucial for communities
experiencing disinvestment.
A growing literature has been attentive to the relationship between effective
governance and social capital, defined variously as networks, norms, and social trust that
facilitate cooperation (Putnam, 1995); the aggregate of resources linked to the possession
of a network of institutionalized relationships (Bourdieu, 1986); certain aspects of social
structure that facilitate action for those within the structure (Coleman, 1988); and the
4
ability of members of social networks or other social structures to secure benefits through
membership (Portes, 1998). Despite the vast body of literature, however, an imperfect
understanding exists of the ways communities foster social capital, much less how it in
turn influences neighborhood regeneration through community action.
This dissertation expands our theoretical and practical understanding of social
capital and its role in neighborhood regeneration in several ways. First, this study focuses
on organizational social capital among non-profit and philanthropic organizations rather
than social capital that exists between individuals. Little work has examined how local
organizations utilize social capital themselves to access resources and influence decision-
making processes on behalf of communities as opposed to how organizations cultivate
social capital for individual members. This organizational focus is important given that
the decentralized nature of U.S. government and trends in federal devolution have
elevated the importance of non-profit and philanthropic organizations. Thus,
organizational networks have emerged as important institutional arenas for neighborhood
revitalization where markets have failed and government resources are inadequate.
Moreover, focusing on the “organizational field” advances understanding of how
institutions collectively negotiate with and influence dominant political and economic
institutions. As agentic actors, organizations can exert influence on other organizations
and institutions in ways that individuals cannot (Marwell, 2007). Understanding these
linkages is important because it points to the differential impact of broader contexts on
communities and demonstrates how local actors, through community organizations, can
exert influence.
5
Second, this dissertation focuses attention on the manner in which local historical,
political and socioeconomic contexts shape the development of organizational social
capital and the influence of organizational networks within communities. Rather than
naturally occurring, social networks are constructed through the institutionalization of
group relations (Portes, 1998). Critiques of the social capital literature have called
attention to the lack of consideration of how local contexts shape these processes (Goode
& O’Brien, 2006; Portes & Mooney, 2002). This dissertation explores the influence of
local contexts by comparing organizational networks and neighborhood regeneration
efforts in three lower-income Los Angeles neighborhoods: Boyle Heights in East Los
Angeles, Pacoima in Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley and Watts in South Los Angeles.
To help explain why different neighborhoods might experience different outcomes, this
dissertation asks, how do local organizational networks in distressed inner-city
neighborhoods develop and influence city action to benefit their communities? What
explains the varying nature and activities of organizational networks? What results for
communities from these variations?
The findings from this study, as summarized in Table 1, inform the literature on
urban politics and social capital, and provide important lessons for non-profit and
philanthropic organizations and neighborhood regeneration strategies.
6
Table 1: Study Findings and Implications for Theory and Practice
Findings Implications
• Los Angeles’ fragmented and multi-centered
institutional context and socio-spatial diversity
constrain citywide policymaking regarding
neighborhood regeneration.
• Rather, divergent patterns of community politics
and neighborhood regeneration activities emerge
across neighborhoods.
• Utility of greater attention to the role of local
actors, the third sector and socio-spatial variation
in analyses of neighborhood regeneration and
urban politics.
• A spatialized and historicized account of social
capital and community politics helps explain why
neighborhoods adopt different avenues of
community action.
• In particular, the timing and nature of institutional
investments in organizational capacity building,
and the trajectories of demographic change within
neighborhoods condition the nature of
organizational relationships, organizational
representation and organizing norms.
• Importance of spatializing and historicizing
accounts of social capital and community
politics, paying particular attention to
demographic transitions and legacies of
institution building in analyses of neighborhood
regeneration and urban politics.
• Institutional investments by the non-profit and
public sectors in organizational capacity
building, which can be reinvested in future
efforts, play a key role in community action.
• These different avenues of community action that
involve various types of organizational
relationships lead to differential access to
economic and political resources with
accompanying advantages and disadvantages.
• Different avenues of community action vary in
their implications for community empowerment
with some supporting local capacities more than
others.
• With different avenues of community action and
differential access to resources, resource and
capacity gaps exist across communities, but
opportunities also exist to expand community
influence strategically.
• Multiple tactics and bonding, bridging and
linking social capital relationships are necessary
for effective community action.
• Contemporary neighborhood population and
socio-economic dynamics are reflected in
organizational networks and coalitional
alignments.
• Social cleavages that occur within marginalized
communities are important to consider in urban
politics.
• The development of organizational
representation is vital for advocating and
obtaining resources on behalf of diverse
community groups.
• Empirical questions remain about the ability of
organizations to bridge diverse and conflicting
interests in strongly contested environments.
7
First, this study finds that the City of Los Angeles’ fragmented, multi-centered
institutional context and social-spatial diversity constrain citywide policymaking
regarding neighborhood regeneration; however, contrary to the conventional wisdom of
Los Angeles as a city devoid of community, a focus on neighborhood-level politics
reveals vibrant patterns of community action within neighborhoods, although these
patterns exhibit important differences across neighborhoods that warrant explanation.
Second, as a corrective to other accounts of social capital and community politics, this
dissertation adopts a spatialized and historicized approach, paying particular attention to
the ways that a neighborhood’s history of socio-cultural change, and the nature and
timing of institutional investments in organizational capacity building shape the
development and nature of organizational relationships and networks. In particular,
neighborhoods differ in organizational capacities, organizing norms utilized and types of
social capital relationships established.
Third, the varying trajectories in the development of organizational networks and
organizational relationships lead to important differences in what these organizational
networks accomplish in communities. Differences emerge in the policy arenas in which
these organizations work, the types of economic and political resources accessed, and in
the types of relationships that foster access to resources. These variations lead to different
strengths and weaknesses for communities with varying impacts on local capacity
building and community empowerment. Finally, examining the contemporary contexts in
which these organizations act—particularly contemporary race and class dynamics—
highlights the ways they condition organizational activities and the importance of
8
organizational representation in diverse communities. For example, a community’s race
and class dynamics can lead to social cleavages and conflict, which points to the
importance of greater attention to power dynamics within marginalized communities in
studies of urban politics. In particular, without adequate organizational representation,
some groups may have limited access to resources; however, an empirical question
remains whether organizations operating in strongly contested environments can bridge
social cleavages effectively in communities.
Study Context and Methodology
The research underlying this paper was conducted as part of a multi-city
comparative study of urban regeneration in the United States, Canada, and Europe
(Regenerating Urban Neighborhoods Project, 2005). The research design for the larger
study involves city comparisons of two-to-three neighborhoods as embedded units of
analysis within each city case study. In addition to Los Angeles, the North American
wing of the larger comparative study involves the cities of Baltimore, Chicago, Denver,
Phoenix and Toronto. These cities vary in geography, size, institutional arrangements,
economic standing and population dynamics among other characteristics. Key differences
emerged across these six cities in terms of the type, scope and focus of neighborhood
regeneration interventions utilized; however, despite these differences, some clear
common patterns also emerged in the politics of neighborhood regeneration (Horak,
Stoker & Stone, 2012).
For example, in all of the cities, neighborhood regeneration receives fleeting
rather than sustained citywide political attention, typically arising in response to a
9
temporary convergence of particular factors (Horak, Stoker & Stone, 2012). Without
occupying a distinct policy subsystem, neighborhood regeneration more often occurs in a
fragmented and ad hoc manner in reaction to threats or opportunities perceived by city
policymakers. Resources are limited, and draw from a complex mix of public, foundation
and intergovernmental support. Moreover, cities often rely on market-oriented strategies
that aim to leverage private investment, although these strategies often have limited
impacts on neighborhoods experiencing historic disinvestment, and at times raise issues
of gentrification and displacement.
As U.S. cities face similar challenges to neighborhood regeneration, this study’s
focus on Los Angeles yields important lessons that can be applied and tested in different
contexts. For example, Chapter 3 of this dissertation focuses on Los Angeles’
fragmented, multi-centered institutional context and vast socio-spatial diversity that
constrain neighborhood policymaking. Other large U.S. cities experience similar
complexities in institutional and population dynamics; however, the City of Los Angeles
as a case highlights particularly the impact of demographic change on communities with
the significant waves of immigration experienced by the city in the last 40 years with
consequent implications for neighborhood regeneration and community action. Shaped
by its socio-spatial diversity, the city has more than 100 distinct neighborhoods with
unique characteristics, population dynamics and cultures.
Thus, rather than a citywide approach, this research is extended here to focus
more closely on the role that non-profit organizations and civil society actors have played
in revitalization within our three case study neighborhoods. This comparative
10
neighborhood approach enables a more in-depth exploration of the influence of
community contexts on organizational social capital, which provides an important
contribution to the existing work on social capital, and on urban and Los Angeles politics
and policymaking that largely focuses on citywide contexts.
A View from Below: A Neighborhood-Level Approach to Los Angeles Politics
Few accounts of Los Angeles have scrutinized politics at the community level
across the city. In a rare exception, Jones-Correa (2001) argues that the city’s “privatizing
tendencies,” where “political authority is dispersed and if possible rendered impotent (p.
199),” extend to community-based organizations and other civic actors. He writes:
The city’s political design encourages minimal government and the privatization
of communal efforts over channeling these efforts through public systems. As a
result, [community-based organizations] orient themselves, on the whole, away
from city politics and toward an alternative political vision of their own (2001, p.
200).
Due in part to government unresponsiveness and also their lack of fiscal dependency on
government as compared to in other cities like New York, Jones-Correa argues,
community-based organizations tend to function as a substitute for government rather
than engaging in city politics and attempting to influence city policy (2001). Other
accounts of Los Angeles politics have focused on the secession movements that began in
the late 1990s, when San Fernando Valley and Hollywood attempted to secede from the
city (Boudreau & Keil, 2001; Box & Musso, 2004; Faught, 2006; Haselhoff, 2002;
Hogen-Esch, 2001; Keil, 2000).
1
1
These accounts focus mainly on the desire of these communities—which felt disconnected and underserved by the
city’s government—to relinquish responsibility for other parts of the city and seek local autonomy.
11
However, none of these previous accounts considers one of the most obvious
potential inferences from the institutional fragmentation and socio-spatial diversity of Los
Angeles. Rather than following a uniform pattern of politics, neighborhoods and the
organizational activities within them are widely divergent. Many forces affect the nature
and role of neighborhood organizational networks and consequent patterns of
neighborhood regeneration, including institutional features of the neighborhood, its racial
and ethnic composition, and the opportunities available as legacies of previous policy,
market dynamics and civic organization. The first step toward drawing reliable
conclusions about relationships between organizational activities and neighborhood
regeneration is to capture the range and dimensions of variation across communities.
The vast and varied social and political geography of Los Angeles necessitate
sensitivity to local variation that a neighborhood-level account can furnish. A
neighborhood-level analysis provides an important corrective to accounts that have
interpreted community politics in Los Angeles in terms of regional initiatives. Soja
(2010), for instance, argues that progressive organizers have brought a regional strategy
to community-based campaigns that included advocacy for a living wage ordinance (Los
Angeles Alliance for a New Economy), pioneering the community benefits agreement as
a tool to negotiate and exact community benefits from real estate developers (LAANE
and Strategic Actions for a Just Economy), and winning a lawsuit that charged the Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority with establishing a separate,
unequal and discriminatory bus system for people of color (Bus Riders Union).
Soja writes:
12
Springing from this place-based politics has been an integrative regional
consciousness, an awareness of how the regional economy significantly shapes
local conditions. A strategic community-based regionalism has entered the
activists’ agenda and has facilitated coalition building and the formation of what
might be described as regional confederations or networks bringing together
diverse organizations that in the past would rarely work together (2010, p. 25).
In a similar vein, Pastor, Benner and Matsuoka (2010) examine what they call “regional
equity” and the rise of social movement regionalism in Los Angeles and across the
nation, and argue that the region is the appropriate scale and political space for coalition
building (also see Dear and Dahmann, 2008).
While drawing needed attention to scale in analyses of urban politics, these
accounts fail to acknowledge the diversity among distressed communities in Los Angeles,
or consider how community politics plays out in relation with the local state across the
city. Pointing to this deficit, Halle (2003) calls for refocusing theory at the neighborhood
level. Similarly, Mollenkopf (2008), recognizing that neighborhood “microclimates” may
exhibit significant variation, argues that a need exists “to place theoretical emphasis on
understanding neighborhood formation, evolution, and trajectories within the larger
dynamic of racial, ethnic, and cultural change” (p. 243).
This examination of Los Angeles politics and particularly the role of non-profit
and community-based organizations in neighborhood regeneration considers the diversity
of these political “microclimates” through case studies of political processes in three Los
Angeles neighborhoods. This neighborhood focus contributes to our understanding of
urban politics by allowing for a contextual understanding of how the unique racial, ethnic
13
and cultural dynamics of a neighborhood interact with political institutions and historical
contexts to affect neighborhood organizational activities and neighborhood regeneration.
Case Study Selection
This study focuses on three neighborhoods—Boyle Heights, Pacoima and
Watts— as seen in Figure 1. Neighborhood boundaries utilized in this study are akin to
those delineated by the City of Los Angeles’ Neighborhood Council system as these
boundaries were drawn based upon community conceptions and community processes.
Figure 1: Los Angeles Case Study Neighborhoods
14
The case study neighborhoods were selected from among the most distressed
neighborhoods in Los Angeles as determined from 2000 U.S. Census demographic and
socioeconomic data, employment statistics from the California Employment
Development Department, and crime statistics from the Los Angeles Police Department
among other data sources. Data were collected to identify the bottom quartile of Los
Angeles neighborhoods in terms of distress from which the three case study
neighborhoods were chosen. As seen in Table 2, the case study neighborhoods, for the
most part, are similar or worse than the City of Los Angeles and Los Angeles County on
average in terms of indicators of distress.
The neighborhoods selected vary not only in location but also in their racial and
ethnic composition, policy initiatives and neighborhood resources—all important
dimensions to consider in the politics of neighborhood improvement. Figure 2
2
Updated 2010 U.S. Census data at the Census tract level were not available at this time.
Table 2: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Case Study Neighborhoods
Average Median
Household
Income in 1999
Unemployed Attained High
School Diploma
or Above
Population
Below
Poverty
Households
with Public
Assistance
Boyle Heights $25,209 13% 32% 34% 15%
Pacoima $39,588 9% 39% 19% 9%
Watts $21,009 20% 40% 43% 24%
City of Los Angeles $36,687 9% 67% 22% 7%
Los Angeles County $42,189 8% 70% 18% 6%
California $47,493 7% 77% 14% 5%
United States $41,994 6% 80% 12% 3%
Source: 2000 U.S. Census Summary Files 1 and 3
2
15
demonstrates the variation in racial/ethnic composition across neighborhoods and in
comparison to the City of Los Angeles.
Figure 2: Race and Ethnicity in Los Angeles
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
Table 3 provides additional context by depicting population size and share of
foreign-born population of the case study neighborhoods. Boyle Heights and Pacoima,
predominantly Latino communities, have served as immigrant gateways, while Latino
immigrants have more recently settled in Watts.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Boyle
Heights
Pacoima Watts City of
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
County
California United
States
Asian
Black
White
Hispanic/Latino
16
Table 3: Population of the Case Study Neighborhoods
Total population Foreign Born Population
Boyle Heights 94,314 52%
Pacoima 108,928 47%
Watts 72,131 33%
City of Los Angeles 3,694,820 41%
Los Angeles County 9,519,338 36%
California 33,871,648 26%
United States 281,421,906 11%
Source: 2000 U.S. Census Summary Files 1 and 3
Detailed descriptions of the three case study sites follow below.
Boyle Heights
The first case study area, Boyle Heights, is situated east of downtown Los
Angeles across the Los Angeles River. The community began transitioning from being
the center of Los Angeles’ Jewish community to a predominantly Latino/Hispanic
community in the 1920s as Jewish residents moved to the western portions of Los
Angeles (Sanchez, 1993). Today, Boyle Heights has a population of about 93 percent
Latino/Hispanic, many of whom are multi-generational residents, with the most common
country of origin being Mexico. With a 13-percent unemployment rate and 34-percent of
its population below poverty, Boyle Heights consistently ranks below the city average in
terms of socioeconomic and employment indicators and it has experienced problems with
crime and gang violence; however, the community has a rich and active non-profit sector.
In the 1950s and 1960s, four major freeways constructed to facilitate access from
outer-lying areas to the city displaced about one-tenth of Boyle Heights residents, and
vivisected the neighborhood (Avila, 1998). Today, the community is facing gentrification
pressures given the proximity of Boyle Heights to downtown Los Angeles and the recent
17
extension of the Metro Gold Line subway, which is expected to encourage development.
While a strong sense of community pride exists, the changing nature of the neighborhood
has led to competing community visions that play out in terms of organizational
cleavages and alignments.
Pacoima
The second case area is Pacoima, located in the San Fernando Valley north of
downtown Los Angeles and the Santa Monica Mountains. Pacoima’s population—
approximately 81 percent Hispanic/Latino, 7 percent White, 6 percent Black and 5
percent Asian—has shifted from largely African American in the 1940s to predominantly
Hispanic/Latino today. While the larger community hovers near the city average in terms
of levels of distress with an unemployment rate of 9 percent and 19 percent of its
population below poverty, parts of Pacoima are extremely distressed. Pacoima has had a
large concentration of industrial development, and is also crisscrossed with interstate
freeways; these polluting land uses along with an array of “broken window” problems
have focused community improvement on issues of environmental justice and community
beautification. The community experienced significant job losses when several
manufacturing plants closed in the 1990s, and gang activity also is a significant
community issue.
However, the community has had a tradition of strong partnerships with external
actors, such as foundations, that have worked to improve the community (Gaeke &
Cooper, 2002). Collaborative partnerships among community members emerged in the
1980s particularly around youth and education issues. This collaborative work—often
18
spearheaded by strongly engaged non-profit leaders—has led to the formation of several
coalitions in Pacoima. The aim of these coalitions has been to work productively together
to coordinate and leverage resources, and address community problems comprehensively.
Watts
Lastly, the community of Watts located in South Los Angeles demonstrates the
greatest level of distress among the three cases selected. Undergoing transition with more
Latino and Hispanic residents moving in today, Watts had been a predominantly Black
neighborhood beginning in the 1940s (Sanchez, 1993). In 2000, Watts’ population was
40 percent Black, 58 percent Hispanic or Latino, and 1 percent White. With an
unemployment rate of 20 percent and 43 percent of its population below poverty due in
part to economic restructuring and the loss of manufacturing jobs in South Los Angeles,
Watts has been a site of civil unrest (1965 Watts Riots and the 1992 Los Angeles Riots)
in response to injustices faced by the community.
Crime and gang activity also are significant concerns in the community
particularly around the community’s public housing developments; the police station
responsible for patrolling the Watts area records a noticeably higher number of offenses
compared to the police stations encompassing Boyle Heights or Pacoima. To address
crime and violence issues, the Watts Gang Task Force has been meeting weekly at a local
city government building since 2006. The task force emerged after a string of gang-
related shootings and homicides occurred in the community in 2005. While originally
established to address public safety issues, the task force largely is concerned with
creating a safe environment in which community youth can learn, develop and thrive.
19
A Qualitative Case Study Approach
This case study involves qualitative research utilizing multiple sources of data
outlined in detail below. A qualitative case study of organizational social capital lends
insight particularly into the nature of the interactions of non-profit, community-based and
philanthropic organizations with other private and public institutional actors and their
outcomes. Schneider (2009) argues that many quantitative analyses of social capital use
general proxy measures, such as membership, to indicate social capital, where non-profit
organizations become “black boxes that generate social capital and civic engagement” (p.
644). In contrast, qualitative research promotes a contextual understanding of the role of
organizations in generating social capital and the impacts on communities.
Thus, like Small (2009), who examines how organizational contexts structure
opportunities for the development of individual social capital, this study “does not
constitute a standard social network analysis … a project in which relationships are
conceived mainly as nodes and the ties between them” (p. 27). Rather, “the focus is not
structure but interaction, thus revealing those elements of social capital that formal
structural analysis largely sets aside” (Small, 2009, p. 27). In particular, this study will
analyze organizational social capital as defined as the “social relationships based in
patterns of reciprocal, enforceable trust that enable people and institutions to gain access
to resources such as social services, volunteers, or funding” (Schneider, 2007, p. 575).
20
Data Collection and Analysis
To understand how neighborhood-level politics shape municipal policies towards
neighborhoods, a multi-methodological, qualitative approach was taken that utilized
multiple data sources as outlined below. This dissertation focuses on the neighborhood
political activities of local organizations occurring in the most recent decade but also will
examine historical contexts that continue to shape neighborhoods today.
Neighborhood Profile/Descriptive Statistics
Neighborhood-level statistical data were collected on a number of demographic and
socioeconomic indicators from such sources as the 2000 U.S. Census, the California
Employment Development Department, the Los Angeles Police Department and the
California Department of Health. These indicators provided information about
neighborhood contexts that may influence neighborhood political action. Indicators
compiled included population size, racial/ethnic composition, poverty levels, educational
attainment, unemployment rates, housing characteristics, employment and payroll
growth/decline, incidences of crime and health data.
Document Research
Documents related to neighborhood conditions, organizational activities and
neighborhood regeneration initiatives were collected as “for case studies, the most
important use of documents is to corroborate and augment evidence from other sources”
(Yin, 2003, p. 87). These documents provided information regarding neighborhood
historical, political and socioeconomic contexts. Moreover, they provided evidence of
neighborhood regeneration initiatives and organizational activities within each
21
neighborhood. Documents also captured community conflicts and controversies that exist
regarding organizational activities and neighborhood regeneration. Table 4 provides a list
and description of the primary sources of documentation.
Table 4: Sources of Documentation
Documentation Type Description
Plans, reports and literature from public and non-
profit agencies
Provides information on neighborhood regeneration
initiatives, organizational activities and involvement of
organizational networks
Newsletters, press releases and announcements from
public and non-profit agencies
Provides information on neighborhood regeneration
initiatives, organizational activities and involvement of
organizational networks
Agendas, announcements and meeting minutes from
community meetings hosted by public or non-profit
agencies
Provides information on organizational activities and
salient issues of discussion in community
Research reports on case study neighborhoods Provides information on neighborhood contexts
News reports (print, video and audio) Provides information on neighborhood contexts,
neighborhood regeneration initiatives and community
sentiment
Web content Provides background information on public agencies
and non-profit organizations
Semi-Structured Interviews
This study entailed 48 semi-structured, face-to-face field interviews with
respondents between 2007 and 2009 that involved open-ended questions about
neighborhood conditions, organizational activities and neighborhood regeneration
initiatives. This study sought to identify relevant actors in neighborhood regeneration
initiatives and neighborhood politics from each case study neighborhood, including staff
of elected officials, representatives of public agencies and leaders of community-based
organizations. These actors as listed in Table 5 were identified through internet research
22
and existing relationships established in the community from prior research; the sample
was supplemented through snow-ball sampling.
Questions asked related to descriptions of neighborhood and governmental
contexts and conditions, the nature of neighborhood regeneration initiatives, and the role
of various neighborhood-level actors in decision-making. Confidentiality guarantees were
offered to respondents and no personal identifying factors are associated with comments
from respondents published in this study. Interviews typically lasted for about an hour,
and were conducted one-on-one; in a few cases, interviews were conducted with two or
more people at the same time. Interviews occurred at the workplaces of respondents,
community meeting spaces, cafes and restaurants, and on a few occasions at the home of
a respondent. Interview notes were recorded by hand and then transcribed into typed
notes. To identify common themes, the typed interview notes were coded according to
themes that emerged during the review process, and those themes were then synthesized
into a separate document.
Table 5: Interview Respondents by Area and Sector
Respondent Geographic Area Served Sector
1 Citywide Public
2 Citywide Public
3 Citywide Public
4 Boyle Heights Non-Profit
5 Boyle Heights Non-Profit
6 Boyle Heights Non-Profit
7 Boyle Heights Non-Profit
8 Boyle Heights Non-Profit
9 Boyle Heights Non-Profit
10 Boyle Heights Non-Profit
11 Boyle Heights Non-Profit
12 Boyle Heights Public
13 Boyle Heights Public
23
Table 5 (Continued)
Respondent Geographic Area Served Sector
14 Boyle Heights Public
15 Boyle Heights Public
16 Boyle Heights Public
17 Boyle Heights and Pacoima Private
18 Pacoima Non-Profit
19 Pacoima Non-Profit
20 Pacoima Non-Profit
21 Pacoima Non-Profit
22 Pacoima Non-Profit
23 Pacoima Non-Profit
24 Pacoima Non-Profit
25 Pacoima Non-Profit
26 Pacoima Non-Profit
27 Pacoima Non-Profit
28 Pacoima Public
29 Pacoima Public
30 Pacoima Public
31 Pacoima Public
32 Watts Non-Profit
33 Watts Non-Profit
34 Watts Non-Profit
35 Watts Non-Profit
36 Watts Non-Profit
37 Watts Non-Profit
38 Watts Non-Profit
39 Watts Non-Profit
40 Watts Public
41 Watts Public
42 Watts Public
43 Watts Public
44 Watts Public
45 Watts Public
46 Watts Public
47 Watts Public
48 Watts Public
Ethnographic Field Observation
Finally, field observations of public meetings, public forums and neighborhood
conditions were conducted during 2008 and 2009. Field observations were not structured
but rather aimed to document the behaviors, discourse and environmental conditions that
might contribute to an understanding of the politics surrounding neighborhood policies
24
and the role of community actors. Observations of this type provide valuable insight into
the actors involved in neighborhood policies, community interests and decision-making
processes. Descriptive, reflective and demographic notes (Creswell, 2003) were taken.
Methodological Strengths and Weaknesses
The strength of a case study design is that it enables the researcher to conduct
explanatory research that asks complex questions, such as “how” and “why” a
phenomenon occurs. In addition, a multi-methodological approach allows for the deep
exploration of contexts and their influence on particular phenomenon, in this case, the
influence of neighborhood political action on neighborhood policies (Yin, 2003).
Findings from this case study also may serve as a model for analyzing neighborhood
political action in other cities and domains. While a multiple case study is ideal, this
dissertation’s limited scope to a single case study allows for an in-depth and substantiated
analysis. The neighborhood embedded units of analysis also capture important contextual
differences in explaining the development and nature of organizational networks, which
differ across neighborhoods.
While each methodological approach this study uses has its own weaknesses,
using a multi-methodological approach allows this study to take advantage of the unique
strengths of each method. Triangulation of multiple data sources can confirm evidence
and establish of construct validity through “encouraging convergent lines of inquiry”
(Yin, 2003, p. 36). Concerns regarding internal validity—such as the subjective
interpretation of data—can be checked through the use of systematic analytic strategies,
such as pattern matching and explanation building (Yin, 2003).
25
Finally, a general critique of case study design is that it cannot provide a basis for
scientific generalization. Therefore, Creswell asserts that reliability and generalizability
play minor roles in qualitative studies (2003). However, Yin argues that case studies are
generalizable in the sense of theoretical propositions as opposed to populations or
universes (2003). Therefore, the goal is to expand and generalize theories through
analytical rather than statistical generalization (Yin, 2003). External validity to particular
domains then can be established as case studies aim to “generalize a particular set of
results to some broader theory” (Yin, 2003, p. 37). Replication of findings, however, is
necessary before results can be accepted as supporting a broader theory (Yin, 2003).
Organization of the Dissertation
In sum, this dissertation aims to expand our theoretical and practical
understanding of social capital and community politics, particularly at the organizational
level, and its role in neighborhood regeneration through a qualitative case study approach
that examines the development and nature of local organizational networks working to
improve community outcomes in three Los Angeles neighborhoods. This dissertation is
organized as follows. Chapter 2 provides a theoretical framework for this study, drawing
from the vast and varied literature on social capital. It argues for a resource and network,
organizational and context-dependent approach to social capital, which provides an
important corrective to accounts of social capital that have been divorced from local
contexts. This approach permits one to trace how historical and political factors shape
organizational development within communities, in turn influencing the ability of
community members to access resources for the purposes of neighborhood regeneration.
26
Chapter 3 argues that Los Angeles’ institutional context and socio-spatial
diversity constrain citywide policymaking regarding neighborhood regeneration;
however, contrary to conventional wisdom, Los Angeles neighborhoods are not without
social capital or the ability to advocate on behalf of neighborhood interests in significant
ways. In particular, the city’s institutional context and socio-spatial diversity also point to
the importance of considering more closely the activities of local organizations and actors
involved in community improvement efforts, and the diversity of those activities. The
vast and varied social and political geography of Los Angeles necessitates sensitivity to
these local variations, and only a neighborhood-level account of Los Angeles politics
allows for this kind of understanding.
Chapter 4 argues that the social capital literature has not paid sufficient attention
to localized, historical contexts in the development of social capital in communities. The
chapter shows that the unique historical trajectories of urban neighborhoods shape the
development of organizational networks and organizational relationships in important
ways. First, trajectories of socio-demographic change—such as the differing experiences
of racial transition in communities—influence the development and activities of local
organizations. For example, in Los Angeles neighborhoods, differing patterns of racial
transition appear linked to varying expressions of social conflict. Moreover, there appears
to be a lag in institutional development such that existing organizational networks do not
altogether represent new residents entering communities as a result of rapid migrational
change. Second, targeted investment by external supporting institutions in local capacities
at particular times is another important historical consideration, where some
27
neighborhoods have longer histories of institution building and thus greater
organizational capacities to participate in neighborhood regeneration efforts. Moreover,
the trajectory and timing of institution building shape the organizing norms—such as
conflict-oriented approaches characteristic of the radical 1930s and 1940s era and the
1960s civil rights era vs. consensual approaches promoted in the 1980s—that become
recognizable in the community and reinforced by local organizations.
Chapter 5 argues that much of the social capital literature has not connected the
structure of organizational relationships within a community to the actions taken by
organizations and the likely implications for community empowerment. In the three Los
Angeles cases, variation was observed in terms of the primary means of accessing
resources (grassroots mobilizing in Boyle Heights; philanthropic linkages in Pacoima;
political networks with state agents in Watts); in turn these relationships played out in
different sectors and policy arenas, and varied in their ability to access different kinds of
resources necessary for neighborhood regeneration, with differing potential avenues for
community expression. For example, some relationships were more politically oriented
than others, and some relationships reinforced local capacities more than others. The
implications are that communities have access to some resources important for
neighborhood regeneration but not others, further exacerbating uneven development.
Calling attention to these resource gaps and the different avenues of community influence
informs the strategies of non-profit, philanthropic and public-sector organizations
concerned with neighborhood regeneration, where a combination of approaches and
28
bonding, bridging and linking social capital relationships are vital for effective
community action.
Chapter 6 argues that by primarily assessing the effects of community
heterogeneity on measures of social trust using quantitative measures of racial and class
groupings, the social capital literature traditionally approaches issues of race and class in
a manner that obscures nuanced community dynamics. Shifting attention to the
contemporary dynamics of race, class and competing interests in organizational networks,
this chapter argues that social cleavages and social conflict can be reflected in
organizational alignments, which point to the importance of understanding power
dynamics within marginalized communities in studies of urban politics.
Moreover, community organizations are vital for the representation of diverse
community interests along race, class and other social divides. In other words, paying
greater attention to assessing local organizational representation and capacity building
may be more fruitful in fostering social capital relationships than attention to ideas of
social trust, anomie and social identity that scholars, such as Putnam (2007), identify with
community heterogeneity. As Small (2009) also argues, the structure and practices of
institutions and organizations can shape the development of social capital. Thus, this
chapter argues that the absence of community-representing institutions and organizations,
particularly in communities undergoing socio-demographic transition, have implications
for social capital building. However, in communities with strong organizational
capacities representing diverse interests in a strongly contested environment, it remains
29
an empirical question whether bridging social capital can be fostered among disparate
interests to pursue common aims.
Finally, Chapter 7 summarizes the arguments and findings outlined in the
previous chapters. It also discusses implications from this research for local governments,
and non-profit and philanthropic organizations engaged in neighborhood regeneration.
30
CHAPTER 2: CONTEXTUALIZING SOCIAL CAPITAL:
ORGANIZATIONAL NETWORKS AND NEIGHBORHOOD REGENERATION
Understanding the role of organizations in community action and empowerment
requires a close examination of the particular contexts in which they operate and the
particular actions they take to advocate on behalf of communities and improve
community outcomes. Variation occurs across communities in the types of organizations
active in communities, their organizational foci and the strategies utilized to achieve
gains for communities. To understand this variation, this dissertation examines the role of
organizations in community action using concepts of social capital as a theoretical
framework; however, it diverges from traditional perspectives and assessments of social
capital that focus on aggregate measures of social capital and organizations as proxies of
social capital to adopt a context-dependent, and historically and politically embedded
view of organizations and social capital.
In the last two decades, social capital has become a widely explored concept in
the social science literature examined in a diversity of contexts including, but not limited
to, its role in governance, housing, crime, family support and academic achievement.
3
Foundations and public policy initiatives eagerly have embraced the expectation that
fostering social capital in communities will assist in addressing a number of complex
policy problems. But despite, or perhaps in part due to, the vast body of literature on
social capital, we have an imperfect and contested understanding of social capital, and the
manner in which it may be fostered within communities. This dissertation calls for a
3
On governance, see Putnam, 1995; Evans, 1996; Bowles & Gintes, 2002; on economic development, see Woolcock,
1998; Green, 2003; Crowe, 2007; on housing, see de Souza Briggs, 1998; on crime, see Rose & Clear, 1998;
Lederman, Loayza & Menendez, 2002; and Choi & Sloane, 2012; on family support, see McLanahan & Sandefur,
1994; Hao, 1994; on academic achievement, see McNeal, 1999; Valenzuela & Dornbusch, 1994.
31
more nuanced approach to social capital that provides an important corrective to accounts
of social capital that narrowly have focused on “civicness” and social trust, and that have
been divorced from local contexts. Rather, a resource and network, context-dependent
approach to social capital adopted by this dissertation permits one to trace how historical
and political factors shape organizational development within communities, in turn
influencing the ability of communities to access resources for neighborhood regeneration.
This chapter situates this dissertation by establishing the key tensions and
shortcomings in the social capital literature. It justifies grounding this examination in
Bourdieu’s (1986) resource and Coleman’s (1988) network perspectives of social capital
rather than the neo-Tocquevillian perspective popularized by Robert Putnam. Moreover
the chapter suggests the importance of Schneider’s (2009) concept of organizational
social capital particularly for understanding the role of social capital in neighborhood
regeneration. It develops the importance of these concepts for understanding
neighborhood regeneration, calling attention to the ability of social capital to connect
communities to economic and political resources. Finally, this chapter argues for the need
for especial attention to the historical and political contexts within which organizational
social capital develops.
Divergent Perspectives on Social Capital
Perhaps the most fundamental debate in the social capital literature surrounds the
definition of social capital as a construct. Scholars have identified several divergent
streams in the social capital literature (Foley & Edwards, 1999; Woolcock & Narayan,
2000; Schneider, 2009). One strand of the literature, referred to as neo-Tocquevillian in
32
perspective (Edwards, Foley & Diani, 2001), stems from the work of political scientist
Robert Putnam, whose influential writings examining Italian regional governments
(1993a) and the decline of social capital in America (1995, 2000) have spawned a
number of subsequent studies conceptualizing social capital in similar veins. Putnam
defines social capital as the “features of social organizations, such as networks, norms,
and trust, that facilitate action and cooperation for mutual benefit” (1993b, pp. 35-36). He
argues that strong traditions of civic engagement, such as membership in voluntary
associations and newspaper readership, engender the trust and norms crucial to the
functioning of democratic governments as well as to economic development (1993b).
When participating in civic life that requires interaction and involvement with
others, citizens learn norms of reciprocity, cooperation and coordination, and to reject
purely self-interested aims. From this perspective, social capital largely is seen as
normatively positive with higher levels of social capital leading to better outcomes,
although Putnam later discusses the potential negative effects of social capital in
communities (2001). Putnam draws support for his argument from his comparison of
regional governments in Northern and Southern Italy, where he ties the Northern region’s
rich civic culture to effective government, while the southern region’s “stunted” concept
of citizenship leads to the citizen perspective that “public affairs is somebody else’s
business – i notabili, ‘the bosses,’ ‘the politicians’ – but not theirs” (1993a).
In Putnam’s view, communities can accumulate and possess “stocks” of social
capital that facilitate cooperation, collective action and good governance. Communities
with high levels of social capital “value solidarity, civic participation, and integrity. And
33
here democracy works” (1993a, p. 2). The strand of scholarship following Putnam thus
presumes that voluntary associations facilitate economic growth or democratic
performance through their effect on individual norms and attitudes, which in turn affect
broader society (Foley & Edwards, 1996).
In contrast sociologist James Coleman (1988) stresses the structure of
relationships in facilitating social capital, contributing to a network perspective of social
capital. Grounded in rational choice theory, Coleman defines social capital by its function
as a resource available to an actor consisting of both “some aspect of social structures”
and something that facilitates action within the structure (1988). He emphasizes that
social capital “inheres in the structure of relations between actors and among actors. It is
not lodged either in the actors themselves or in the physical implements of production”
(1988, p. 98). Thus, rather than Putnam’s focus on the generalized trust and reciprocity
created and aggregated in communities with social capital, Coleman focuses on the
obligations and expectations, norms and sanctions, and information channels that develop
through the structure of relationships between individuals and corporate actors that can be
utilized as resources. His work has been associated particularly with a focus on social
capital as a form of social control (Portes, 2000).
Recognizing the embedded nature of social relations, Coleman also contrasts with
Putnam (who aggregates levels of social capital to the community, state and even nation
level) by emphasizing the context dependency of social networks and social capital,
where “a given form of social capital that is valuable in facilitating certain actions may be
useless or even harmful for others” (1988, p. 98). Thus, social capital is context
34
dependent and morally neutral. Coleman also pays attention to the forms of network
structure that facilitate social capital, such as network “closure” that ensures the
emergence and enforcement of social norms, which are of particular interest in social
network analyses (Portes, 2000).
Similar to Coleman’s structural focus, sociologist Pierre Bourdieu conceptualizes
social capital as a “social relational and structural resource characteristic of social
networks and organization” (Edwards & Foley, 1998, p. 135); however, he pays
particular attention to how differential access to resources occurs through durable
relationships (Foley & Edwards, 1999, p. 144). He defines social capital as the
“aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable
network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and
recognition” (1986, pp. 248-249). Thus, social capital can be assessed by examining the
size of an agent’s social network and the volume of capital held by each of the other
actors in the network (Bourdieu, 1986).
Rather than naturally occurring, these social networks must be constructed
through the institutionalization of group relations (Portes, 1998). Bourdieu argues that the
fungibility of social capital allows an actor to gain access to other forms of capital, such
as economic resources, and that the development of social capital requires to some degree
the investment of material resources and the possession of cultural knowledge (Portes,
1998, 2000). Thus, it is this differential access to what Bourdieu identifies as the three
forms of capital—economic, cultural and social—that shape the social world (Bourdieu
& Wacquant, 1992; Foley & Edwards, 1999). Scholars interested in the role of social
35
capital in social inequality, poverty and development have utilized the work particularly
of Bourdieu and Coleman (Schneider, 2009). Bourdieu’s conception particularly aligns
with a focus on social capital as a source of resources mediated by non-family networks
(Portes, 2000).
Adopting the Resource and Network Perspectives of Social Capital
This dissertation focuses on the resource and network perspectives of social
capital as suggested by Bourdieu and informed by Coleman particularly because of the
conceptual issues that arise with Putnam’s perspective. In particular, this study focuses on
how social capital facilitates access to economic and political resources crucial to
communities engaged in neighborhood regeneration efforts. In contrast to a resource
perspective, Putnam’s conception of social capital tends to lead to circular argumentation
that confuses causes and effects (Portes, 1998 2000; Sobel, 2002). For example, Putnam
ties the presence of social capital to the presence of “civicness” that then leads to greater
democratic performance. Thus,
As a property of communities and nations rather than individuals, social capital is
simultaneously a cause and an effect. It leads to positive outcomes, such as
economic development and less crime, and its existence is inferred from the same
outcomes (Portes, 1998, p. 19).
In other words, Putnam’s argument amounts to the contention that “cities where everyone
cooperates in maintaining good government are well governed” (Portes, 1998, p. 20).
Putnam’s view also associates high levels of social capital with facilitating economic
development and economic performance.
In contrast, a resource and network perspective of social capital acknowledges
that although some communities may have access to organizational and individual-level
36
social capital, access does not necessarily translate into improved community outcomes.
As Portes and Mooney (2002) argue:
Given the unequal distribution of wealth and resources in society, actors may
have trustworthy and sound social ties and still have access to limited or poor-
quality resources. Saying that only those who secure desirable goods from their
associates have social capital is tantamount to saying that only the successful
succeed (p. 306).
Thus, poor and marginalized communities may have social networks that lead to
resources, but a need exists to focus on what particular kinds of resources these networks
lead to and their potential in facilitating neighborhood regeneration. Thus, this study pays
especial attention to differentiating between the ability to secure resources, and the type
and quality of resources secured—an important distinction identified by Portes, (1998)
and Portes and Landolt (2000).
In a similar vein, Woolcock and Narayan (2000), focusing on the international
development context, argue that in many Latin American countries:
Indigenous groups are often marked by high levels of social solidarity, but they
remain excluded economically because they lack the resources and access to
power that are necessary to shift the rules of the game in their favor (p. 230).
Conversely, communities with low levels of solidarity are not necessarily marginalized or
poor (DeFilippis, 2001). DeFilippis (2001) uses the example of exclusive gated
neighborhoods. In these wealthy communities, individuals or organizations may have
greater access to political and economic resources, but they may not necessarily reflect
Putnam’s vision of a civic community. This observation suggests that “it is not the lack of
social capital, but the lack of objective economic resources … that underlies the plight of
impoverished urban groups” (Portes & Landolt, 1996).
37
To facilitate neighborhood regeneration, DeFilippis (2001) emphasizes that social
capital needs to be connected with the production and reproduction of economic capital
in society as the problem with poor communities is not necessarily their lack of trust-
based social networks and mutual support but that these networks lack the linkages to
generate economic capital. Foley and Edwards (1999) also suggest that while more
community ties might be more beneficial, one tie that allows access to vital resources
may be sufficient. Thus, the quality and quantity of resources accessible through social
networks—including linkages to economic capital—must be better understood to assess
the value of social capital for communities (Foley & Edwards, 1999).
While challenges exist to tying social capital to community outcomes, one
approach that this dissertation adopts is to assess the role of social capital relationships in
connecting communities to key economic and political resources that may in turn
influence neighborhood regeneration outcomes. Thus, the focus of this dissertation rests
on community organizational relationships and how they facilitate access to resources for
neighborhood regeneration. As Daniere et al. (2005) argue in their comparative study of
the influence of social capital relationships on environmental management policies in
Bangkok and Ho Chi Minh City:
A more effective conceptual approach to understanding how communal resources
might influence urban environmental quality would focus on the actions that
communities actually engage in or the outcomes achieved using social
relationships (e.g., rather than emphasizing the potential assets or relationships
that groups of people possess). Consequently we argue for a focus on specific
types of social relationships to clarify this linkage by emphasizing the ways in
which individuals and groups are openly or public interconnected to one another,
and the mechanisms they use to work together in a variety of circumstances (p.
24).
38
Non-Profit Organizations, Local Capacities and Organizational Social Capital
In examining neighborhood regeneration, this dissertation understands social
capital in a manner informed by Bourdieu (1986) and Coleman (1988); however, it also
focuses on the role that local organizational networks play in influencing community
revitalization. Thus, this study shifts the unit of analysis from the individual to the
organization; it uses the concept of organizational social capital, which refers to
“established, trust based networks among organizations or communities supporting a
particular nonprofit, that an organization can use to further its goals” (Schneider, 2009, p.
644) rather than social capital that exists between individuals. Little work has examined
the role of social capital in the work of organizations themselves as opposed to how
organizations cultivate social capital for their members (Schneider, 2009). In particular,
quantitative analyses of social capital use general proxy measures, such as membership,
to indicate social capital, where non-profit organizations become “black boxes that
generate social capital and civic engagement” (Schneider, 2009, p. 644).
In a review of the social capital and non-profit literatures, Schneider (2009) finds
that “despite this volume of research on social capital and nonprofits, theoretical
understanding of the role of social capital in nonprofits as organizations remains in its
infancy” (p. 643). Schneider (2009) begins to shift this focus with her conception of
organizational social capital, which she argues, can exist independent of the individuals
involved in the organization, and may be based on the organization’s history and
reputation. Smith, Maloney and Stoker (2004) provide a similar “corrective to the
dominant individual-level approach by offering an organisational-level analysis of social
39
capital” in their study of relationships between organizations and city administrations in
Birmingham and Glasgow (p. 508).
This organizational focus is important given that the decentralized nature of U.S.
government and trends in federal devolution have elevated the importance of non-profit
organizations in policy formulation and implementation. In the United States,
community-based, non-profit and philanthropic organizations have become more
influential in community development and neighborhood social programs given cuts in
federal spending in the 1980s (Koschinsky & Swanstrom, 2001; Saegert, 2006), and
trends in the devolution and decentralization of federal policy (Wolman & Agius, 1996;
Kettl, 2000. Milward and Provan, 2000). These organizations may be vital for poor urban
neighborhoods, where markets have failed and government resources are insufficient
(Deschenes, McLaughlin, & O’Donoghue, 2006). Thus, networks of local non-profits and
philanthropic organizations have emerged as important institutional arenas for the
advancement of neighborhood revitalization.
Moreover, focusing on the organizational field—“a set of organizations linked
together as competitors and collaborators within a social space devoted to a particular
type of action” (Marwell, 2007, pp. 3-4)—advances our understanding of how
organizations can negotiate with and influence dominant political and economic
institutions. As agentic actors, organizations can exert influence on other organizations
and institutions in ways that individuals cannot; “an organizational rendering, then, can
elucidate ways in which seemingly faraway market forces, as well as political decisions,
facilitate or deny poor people access to power and resources” (Marwell, 2007, p. 7).
40
Marwell (2007) examines the organizational field of six community-based organizations
in Brooklyn to highlight how elements of social structure and broader social processes
underlie poverty, opportunity and inequality. However, by strengthening local capacities
to negotiate with institutions that regulate, Bebbington (1997) argues that local
institutions “can influence those processes through which the social distribution of rights
and entitlements is defined” for communities (p. 190).
Chaskin similarly argues (2001) that through the agency of individuals,
organizations and networks, communities have the capacity to solve collective problems
and improve the well- being of the community. In Chaskin’s conception of community
capacity, organizations may go beyond the production of goods and services to
“incorporate issues of constituent representation, political influence, and the ability to
engage in instrumental interorganizational relationships” (2001, p. 298). Through these
interorganizational relationships involving social capital, organizations may access
resources and influence community outcomes (Chaskin, 2001). This dissertation
considers how such networks develop and the manner in which they influence
community revitalization.
Social Capital and Neighborhood Regeneration
Recognizing the complexities of social capital, the social capital literature has
made strides in differentiating among the different types of social capital available to
communities—such as bonding, bridging and linking social capital—and to theorize
about their potential effects on communities. While the social capital literature has
progressed in the conceptual clarification of social capital as a construct, this study
41
contextualizes the role of social capital in communities particularly in the context of
neighborhood regeneration. A deeper contextualization of the concept of social capital
leads to new insights regarding the opportunities and challenges communities face in
efforts to regenerate neighborhoods. In particular, in Chapter 5, this study identifies the
economic and political resources necessary for neighborhood regeneration, and the
different relationships through which these resources are accessed, which have
implications for community empowerment.
In differentiating the types of social capital available, the social capital literature
identifies bonding social capital as relationships between homogeneous groups that share
similar characteristics, while bridging social capital involves relationships across
heterogeneous groups that differ in terms of culture, race, class, gender or other
characteristics (Putnam, 2000). A subcategory of bridging social capital—linking social
capital—involves vertical relationships where clear power differentials exist between
groups, such as between people in positions of authority and neighborhood residents
(Woolcock, 2004). Woolcock attributes the idea of linkages to German sociologist Georg
Simmel, “who early on recognized that poor communities needed to generate social ties
extending beyond their primordial groups if long-term developmental outcomes were to
be achieved” (1998, p. 168).
Scholars suggest that these different types of social capital have different
implications for individuals and communities. For example, De Souza Briggs (1998)
argues that bonding social capital provides social support in coping with life struggles. As
such, social relationships within a close community may provide access to child care,
42
emergency groceries or temporary housing when needed. Thus, bonding social capital is
particularly useful for “getting by” (De Souza Briggs, 1998). In contrast, bridging social
capital in the form of social leverage is key to social mobility and thus particularly useful
for “getting ahead” (De Souza Briggs, 1998). De Souza Briggs argues:
The evidence is that although the poor need supportive ties that may lie in the
immediate neighborhood and come from socially similar others, bridges to
leverage—ties outside the neighborhood and, in general, to people of higher
socioeconomic status and different racial/ethnic groups—also are important. The
wider and deeper the social net, the greater and more varied the information and
other social resources available (1998, p. 189).
In other words, marginalized communities may have strong intra-community social
networks that provide important supports to community members but lack the inter-
community and external relationships that may lead to key resources crucial to
neighborhood regeneration.
Orr’s study (1999) of citywide school reform in Baltimore illustrates this tension
with the differentiation between “black social capital” and “intergroup social capital.”
Black social capital entails the interpersonal and institutional forms of social capital
within the African-American community, while interpersonal social capital “refers to
cross-sector formations of mutual trust and networks of cooperation that bridge the black-
white divide, especially at the elite level of sociopolitical organization” (Orr, 1999, p. 8).
Orr (1999) argues that black churches, newspapers, civil rights organizations, colleges,
and fraternities and sororities among other institutions have played an historic role in
facilitating social capital for the African-American community, particularly in resisting
racial exclusion and segregation. However, “social capital within the African-American
community does not necessarily translate into the kind of intergroup social capital
43
required to accomplish systemwide school reform,” such as cooperation with White
corporate elites and suburban residents in the case of school reform (Orr, 1999, p. 9).
Similar to arguments regarding the role of bonding vs. bridging social capital in
improving individual and community outcomes, Granovetter (1973) focuses on “weak”
vs. “strong” interpersonal ties. He points to the importance of weak ties, which bridge
different groups of people, in contrast to the strong ties that characterize cliques and
friendship circles. Individuals with weak ties may be in the best place to diffuse
information as weak ties may serve as local bridges to other groups, where “those to
whom we are weakly tied are more likely to move in circles different from our own and
will thus have access to information different from that which we receive” (Granovetter,
1973, p. 1371).
Granovetter supports his argument through a labor-market study that finds that
job seekers more likely found their position through weak rather than strong ties. He also
argues that successful community mobilization also rests on the strength of weak ties.
Granovetter suggests that Boston’s West End community failed to fight “urban renewal”
efforts because of fragmentation and clustering of cliques in the community. Using a
concept related to weak ties, Burt (1997) discusses the importance of “structural holes,”
which are spaces between networks that provide opportunities for brokerage by
entrepreneurs with a wealth of weak ties. He argues that these entrepreneurs can broker
information flows and control the form of projects involving people from different sides
of the structural hole.
44
Vidal (2004) particularly addresses the role of social capital in promoting
community equity and argues that two types of social capital matter. First, Vidal (2004)
asserts, neighborhoods must foster stronger working ties to external sources of economic
and political resources to develop. In this sense, linking social capital must be
strengthened. Second, Vidal (2004) argues for the need for stronger working ties among
neighborhood stakeholders with disparate interests to engender a shared vision of goals
and priorities. Thus, bridging social capital among disparate groups must be strengthened.
Following these lines, this study pays especial attention to the economic and
political resources, accessed through linking organizational social capital, necessary to
facilitate neighborhood regeneration, as well as the characteristics of the organizational
relationships that enable access to these resources using a case study of organizational
networks in three Los Angeles neighborhoods. It adopts a path of inquiry suggested by
Foley and Edwards (1999), who argue:
Analysts are required to do more than place actors in the proximity of resources;
analysts need to demonstrate that actors have access to those resources, and
network analysis shows the way. Yet, to the extent that such an approach equates
social capital with access, the quality and quantity of resources accessible are
implicitly held constant. But in fact, the use value of social capital depends upon
how specific networks are embedded within the broader system of stratification,
i.e., how and why different networks provide access to richer or poorer stores of
resources. The quantity and quality of the resources available must also be
examined in any judgement of the value of the social capital available to an
individual or group (p. 168).
Social Capital in Historical and Political Contexts
Finally, this study also draws greater attention to the role of historical and
political contexts in conditioning the development of organizational social capital; thus, it
heeds Woolcock and Narayan’s (2000) call for a “synergistic” view of social capital that
45
not only combines the resource and network perspectives but also, as Woolcock (1998)
writes, “invokes a social-structural explanation of economic life and seeks to identify the
types and combinations of social relations involved, the institutional environments
shaping them, and their historical emergence and continuity” (p. 185).
Several critics have pointed out the tendency to evoke social capital as though it
involved purely ego-centric relationships devoid of and apart from the contexts within
which they develop. This risks perpetuating a naïve belief that community self-help
strategies can be palliatives, rather than understanding the contingent manner in which
community outcomes result from the interaction of social networks with historical,
political and socioeconomic contexts. For example, Foley and Edwards (1996) critique
Putnam’s association of poorly functioning democracies to a lack of citizenship and civic
culture, and instead suggest that the problem lies with the failure of democratic
institutions to respond to citizen demands and with broader political and economic trends,
such as economic restructuring, the decline of the welfare state and federal devolution.
Along similar lines, in their study of the role of social networks in environmental
management, Daniere, Takahashi and Naranong (2002) argue that government agencies
can “provide enabling/disabling settings that enhance/obstruct the capacity of residents,
communities, and organizations” (2002, p. 455). Thus, Edwards and Foley argue that
there is a need to focus on “the ways in which constitutional and political settlements
structure state-society relations; how, why and with what success groups mobilize to
attain greater responsiveness and accountability on the part of the state” (1998, pp. 134-
135; also see Tarrow, 1996).
46
Without attention to political contexts—or what Foley and Edwards call the
political variable, “the prevailing ‘political settlement’ that governs who plays, the rules
of the game, and acceptable outcomes” (1996, p. 47)—the concept of social capital
becomes problematic when applied to situations of sociopolitical conflict involving
differences in power and interests. Thus, this historically embedded and context-
dependent concept of social capital is used to explore the role of community-based, non-
profit and philanthropic organizations in responding to neighborhood conditions and in
influencing neighborhood regeneration in Los Angeles. An examination of the social
capital literature’s dominant approaches to understanding historical and political contexts
follow below as well as a consideration of opportunities for further exploration.
Historical Trajectories and Social Capital
The social capital literature has recognized the role of historical contexts in
shaping the development of social capital. As Goode and O’Brien argue, social capital “is
not an ahistoric, fungible, publicly held good” but “must be seen as emanating from
social relations that exist in contexts of history and power” (2006, p. 174). One of the
most notable studies of the historical development of social capital is Putnam’s (1993a)
study of Italy, which traces regional differences in social capital to characteristics of civic
life established beginning in early medieval Italy. Putnam argues, “social patterns plainly
traceable from early medieval Italy to today turn out to be decisive in explaining why, on
the verge of the twenty-first century, some communities are better able than others to
manage collective life and sustain effective institutions” (p. 121).
47
In northern Italy, communal republicanism, which emerged as an alternative to
medieval feudalism, fostered horizontal relationships of collaboration and mutual
assistance—through communes, guilds and business partnerships—that led to a vibrant
modern civic life. In contrast, vertically structured social and political relationships,
stemming from the hierarchical rule of the medieval Norman regime beginning in the 13
th
century, dominated in southern Italy, which have had negative implications for modern
civic life in the region. Putnam (1993) ties these historical differences to contemporary
variations in government and economic performance, where “social context and history
profoundly condition the effectiveness of institutions” (p. 182).
While Putnam acknowledges the importance of history in the development of
civic life, critics of social capital theory have called for a more place-specific approach to
history rather than a broad national or regional-level treatment (Goode & O’Brien, 2006;
Portes & Mooney, 2002). A national or regional approach to history threatens to over-
simplify relationships between historical contexts and the development of social capital.
It also may be an empirical stretch to link national and regional historical analyses of
civic life with variations in contemporary government and economic performance.
As this dissertation will argue, Los Angeles’ significant socio-spatial diversity
calls for greater attention to variations in local contexts and the divergent patterns of
neighborhood politics that emerge. A national or regional focus on historical contexts can
neglect variations in neighborhood-level historical trajectories or unique historical events
that may shape the development of local politics and civic life. To understand who
benefits from social capital and why, Goode and O’Brien (2006) argue: “a grounded,
48
place-specific, and historicized description begins to answer these questions and
demonstrate the limits of abstract discussions of social capital and civic engagement
measured by membership statistics, as a panacea for social problems” (p. 175-176).
Portes and Mooney (2002) also question the link between collective social capital and
national development but view relationships between social capital and local community
development as less problematic as “it is easier to trace the historical development of
specific community structures and to observe their operations in daily life” (p. 312).
This dissertation adopts this “grounded, place-specific, and historicized
description” of social capital, which entails an examination of the historical community
trajectories that have shaped the development of organizational networks in local
neighborhoods. While it does not claim to support simple causal linkages between
historical contexts and outcomes in neighborhood governance or economic performance,
this chapter calls attention to the possible ways in which historical trajectories shape
neighborhood politics. For example, as this dissertation argues, Los Angeles’ history of
growing socio-spatial diversity has implications for the development of organizational
networks in communities. Moreover, neighborhood historical trajectories also may shape
the development of community organizational capacities, organizing norms and
organizational relationships in significant ways.
The Politics of Race, Class and Social Capital
The dissertation also contributes to the social capital literature by drawing explicit
attention to the manner in which racial and class discord is enacted through
organizational relationships. Putnam asserts a relatively de-politicized view of
49
community organizations—primarily clubs, associations and civic groups—and their role
in socializing members into norms of reciprocity and trust. This “pluralist analysis” leads
to the question of how such associations can “shape political participation and ‘civic
engagement’ without engaging in specifically political issues and without representing
compelling social issues” (Foley & Edwards, 1996, p. 41). As an important corrective,
this dissertation examines particular political and socioeconomic community contexts,
and how they shape organizational networks and organizational relationships.
The social capital literature has been critiqued particularly for insufficient
analyses of race, class and power (Hero, 2003; Jennings, 2007), and the potential
negative effects of social capital (Portes & Landolt, 1996). Studies of social capital and
civic engagement largely focus on “White middle-class America” (Portney & Berry,
1997, p. 633). Moreover, studies that conceptualize social capital as an aggregate
community, regional or national concept mask the uneven development of and access to
social capital that occur along race, class and other social divides (Edwards & Foley,
1998). Portes and Landolt (1996, 2000) particularly have examined the role of “negative
social capital” in communities, which can have exclusionary effects as “the same strong
ties that enable group members to obtain privileged access to resources, bar others from
securing the same assets” (Portes & Landolt, 2000, pp. 532-533).
Moreover, several economics studies have cited similar findings regarding the
inverse relationship between community heterogeneity (in terms of race, ethnicity and
class) and the production of social capital, where more heterogeneous communities
appear to have less social capital (see Costa & Kahn, 2003 for an overview of economics
50
literature examining community heterogeneity and social capital). For example, in their
study of 307 Flemish cities, Coffé and Geys (2006) find a negative relationship between
social capital and the number of nationalities within a municipality. Coffé and Geys
(2006) suggest that heterogeneous communities may have lower social capital because
people may feel more comfortable interacting with their own racial/ethnic or
socioeconomic groups due to prejudice or fear of discrimination; competition over
resources, public goods or cultural dominance; less feelings of a shared common destiny;
or a lower likelihood of shared common values and norms.
Hero (2003) not only finds an inverse relationship between social capital and
racial/ethnic diversity, where U.S. states with high social capital tend to be relatively
homogeneous in terms of race/ethnicity, but also an inverse relationship between social
capital and civic/economic equality among racial groups. Contrary to Putnam’s claim that
more social capital leads to greater equality, Hero (2003) finds that social capital across
states is not related to more equal Black/White voter turnout, minority school graduation
ratios, Black incarceration ratios and minority infant mortality ratios among other
measures of equality. In other words, “the ostensibly salutary benefits of social capital do
not extend to minority populations” (Hero, 2007, p. 154). Rather, Hero (2007) argues, a
community’s racial diversity as opposed to its level of social capital has greater
explanatory power regarding community outcomes with greater diversity associated with
better relative outcomes for minorities (Hero, 2007).
While directing much-needed attention to race and class in examining social
capital, these studies continue in Putnam’s vein of conceptualizing social capital as an
51
aggregate concept measured by indicators, such as group membership, volunteerism,
state spending and social trust at the municipal, state or national level. These aggregate
measures of social capital as well as general measures of community heterogeneity fail to
capture the complex race and class dynamics that occur within communities, and the
contingent and context-dependent nature of social capital. As this study demonstrates, the
relationships between race, class and social capital depend on the context—historical,
socio-demographic, political, institutional, and so on—at hand.
Rather than a path of inquiry that attempts to answer whether community
heterogeneity has a positive or negative effect on aggregate levels of community social
capital, a contextualized approach to understanding social capital reveals the complex and
often contested nature of community-level interactions. This approach heeds Cathy
Cohen’s (1999) call for greater attention to power dynamics within marginalized
communities as “intracommunity patterns of power and membership can have a
significant, if not overwhelming, impact on the political histories and approaching futures
of marginal groups” (p. 36).
Cohen also points to the importance of indigenous institutions in brokering access
to resources otherwise unavailable to marginalized groups, where “understanding the
internal or indigenous structuring of marginal communities, where needed resources and
support can be found, is critical to understanding the political actions and attitudes of
marginal group members” (1999, p. 25). In other words, community organizations, which
are the focus of this dissertation, play a key role in community power dynamics and the
distribution of resources within marginalized communities.
52
Finally, studies examining community heterogeneity and social capital typically
consider racial diversity in terms of minority populations in relation to Whites. As Hero
(2007) explains:
Racial diversity entails black (African American), Latino, and other minority
populations. These groups are commonly thought of as “minority groups” or
“protected classes,” implying unique historical experiences in the United States.
The size of these racial minority populations in a state is taken as a reasonable
barometer of the extent to which the legacy and current effects of racial
(ascriptive) hierarchy is manifest in political jurisdictions. That is, to the extent
that a state has a high concentration of minority groups, we expect to see more
manifestations of historical formal (and informal) inequality (p. 49).
While pointing important attention to racial hierarchies and the persistent inequality
between White and non-White populations, these studies do not consider race and class
dynamics among different minority groups or the disparate dynamics that may occur
within minority groups. This study particularly examines inter- and intra-group dynamics
along race and class lines. Thus, approaching the dynamics of race and class as
something “constitutive of American social and political life,” this study heeds Garcia
Bedolla’s (2005) call for “the development of a social capital framework that takes more
seriously the role of social relations and the ways that race informs collective social
organization in the United States” (p. 13).
Summary
A vast and varied literature exists that examines the concept of social capital. This
chapter aimed to provide an overview of the theoretical framework and approach to
social capital adopted by this study of community influence on neighborhood
regeneration. First, this dissertation adopts a resource and network perspective of social
capital, focusing on how networks of social capital relationships facilitate access to
53
resources. Rather than tying abstract notions of social trust and civicness to improved
community outcomes, a resource and network orientation of social capital highlights the
concrete gains organizations can achieve for communities through relationships of social
capital as well as the challenges to neighborhood regeneration.
Second, shifting the level of analysis, this study draws attention to organizational
social capital, and the role that organizational networks and relationships play in
facilitating access to resources for communities as opposed to the social capital
literature’s traditional focus on individual-level social capital. This theoretical focus on
organizations assists us in understanding the role that organizations can play in
neighborhood regeneration, which the social capital literature has not fully addressed.
Third, social capital is examined in the context of neighborhood regeneration,
which highlights the importance of accessing both political and economic resources for
community improvement and the different means through which these resources are
obtained. Assessing political and economic resource gaps in communities is particularly
useful for non-profit and philanthropic organizations concerned with neighborhood
regeneration and helps inform neighborhood regeneration policies and practices. Finally,
this dissertation adopts a context-dependent approach to social capital, which considers
the particular historical and political contexts that condition the development and nature
of social capital in communities. Rather than considering the development of social
capital divorced from local contexts, this dissertation ties broader historical and political
forces to the nature of local action, and explores the complex power dynamics often at
play within communities.
54
Considered together, this resource and network, organizational and context-
dependent approach to social capital allows for new insights into how communities exert
influence over neighborhood regeneration. It allows for a greater understanding of how a
confluence of factors—historical, political, institutional, socioeconomic and so forth—
contributes to shaping community action and community empowerment in diverse ways
across communities, leading to differing patterns of community politics and community
gains. These divergent patterns and their implications are the focus of this dissertation;
however, Chapter 3 begins by considering Los Angeles’ socio-spatial diversity and
institutional context, which sets the backdrop for an examination of organizational social
capital in Los Angeles communities.
55
CHAPTER 3: NEIGHBORHOOD REGENERATION
IN A FRAGMENTED CITY
4
Reflecting stereotypes of Los Angeles as a sprawling and superficial metropolis,
the conventional political and sociological wisdom about Los Angeles suggests a city
without community and cohesion; one that is marked by individualism, and anemic civic
and political participation. For example, Robert Putnam’s 2000 Social Capital
Community Benchmark Survey suggests that Los Angeles has a deficit in social capital.
This social capital deficit implies that Los Angeles communities face challenges to
neighborhood regeneration without the relationships, collaboration and cooperation
necessary for community action. However, such interpretations of Los Angeles social
capital lack a more nuanced understanding of the city’s vast socio-spatial diversity, as
“the sizeable aggregate deficits of social capital observed in Los Angeles seem to reflect
the composition of its population rather than differences in inclinations to engage or costs
of engaging for members of particular social strata” (Brown & Ferris, 2002). For
example, certain types of social capital may be positively related to various
socioeconomic indicators, such as education and income level (Brown & Ferris, 2002).
While well-known for its diversity, the City of Los Angeles has more than 100
distinct neighborhoods—some that have more recently developed community identities
but many with long and significant histories—that exemplify unique characteristics,
4
Parts of this chapter are drawn from a manuscript by Shiau, Musso and Sellers (2012), which has a more extensive
analysis of neighborhood policy in Los Angeles.
56
population dynamics and cultures.
5
This chapter aims to highlight the development of the
city’s socio-spatial diversity as a whole, as well as its institutional context, which will
provide the backdrop for this study’s focus on neighborhoods and neighborhood
regeneration. Examining the varied socio-spatial landscape of Los Angeles and its
complex, multi-centered institutional context highlights the political challenges of
addressing neighborhood needs. Other large U.S. cities experience similar complexities
in institutional and population dynamics; thus lessons can be learned from Los Angeles.
Moreover, Los Angeles as a case particularly highlights the impact of demographic
change on communities with the significant waves of immigration experienced by the
city in the last 40 years, which shapes neighborhood regeneration and community action.
As in other large U.S. cities, Los Angeles’ lack of citywide neighborhood
regeneration strategies and the dominance of ad hoc, opportunistic approaches to
neighborhood regeneration point to the importance of focusing more attention on
neighborhood-level contexts and organizations, and their role in shaping neighborhood
regeneration throughout the city. Focusing on this view of city politics from below,
vibrant and diverse patterns of community action, social capital relationships and
neighborhood politics emerge that counter the conventional view of Los Angeles civic
and political participation, and citywide accounts of Los Angeles politics. These patterns
are conditioned by the unique and particular historical and socioeconomic contexts of
neighborhoods, and they may have significant implications for the regeneration of
distressed urban neighborhoods.
5
For an alternative guide to Los Angeles, see Laura Pulido, Laura Barraclough and Wendy Cheng’s A People’s Guide
to Los Angeles, which documents sites of struggle related to race, class, gender, sexuality and the environment in the
city.
57
Socio-Spatial Diversity in Los Angeles
Los Angeles’ vast socio-spatial diversity suggests the existence of diverse patterns
of community action and the importance of understanding how unique local contexts
shape these patterns. In particular, understanding how networks of social capital
relationships develop and operate in communities necessitates a consideration of Los
Angeles’ socio-spatial diversity and the dynamics of community change that have
occurred in recent decades. The second most populous city in the United States, Los
Angeles has an estimated 2010 population of 3.79 million spread across some 470 square
miles and more than 100 distinct communities, from the Harbor area communities 25
miles south of downtown to the San Fernando Valley suburbs more than 20 miles north.
6
The City of Los Angeles had established itself as an ethnically diverse city as
early as the turn of the 20
th
century. Social reformers, such as W.E.B. Dubois, even noted
with optimism the rich opportunities available for minority populations in Los Angeles
(Modarres, 1998). For example, in the early 20
th
century, Mexican residential distribution
was characterized not by intense segregation but widespread dispersal in central and
eastern Los Angeles (Sanchez, 1993). In fact, “the outstanding social fact of the early
downtown era … was not social conflict and ethnic segregation but rather racial mixing
and relative tolerance” (Laslett, 1996, p. 41). These opportunities never fully came to
fruition as the demographic shifts in the 1920s hastened the development of the city’s
exclusive Westside neighborhoods and the marginalization of ethnic communities that
persists today (Modarres, 1998).
6
Through a public interactive mapping project informed by more than 1,500 submitted comments, the Los Angeles
Times identified 113 distinct neighborhoods within city limits. See http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-
la/neighborhoods/.
58
From 1880 to 1930, Los Angeles’ population boomed as seen in Table 6,
facilitated in part by the out-migration of African Americans from the Southern United
States (Erie, 1992) as well as the development of infrastructure and L.A. boosterism that
attracted new residents (Laslett, 1996). In addition, California’s thriving agricultural
industry and later the emergence of core industries in the 1930s—such as steel,
automobile and tire manufacturers—created a large demand for cheap labor (Modarres,
1998). The war machine of World War II and concomitant federal military spending in
the region “merely solidified Los Angeles’ position as the premier Western city” (Erie,
1992, p. 519), drawing a significant number of migrants to the region during the 1940s.
Table 6: Total Population of the City of Los Angeles, 1850, 2010
Number Percent Change National Rank in Size
2010 3,792,621 2.6% 2
2000 3,694,820 6.0% 2
1990 3,485,398 17.5% 2
1980 2,966,850 5.4% 3
1970 2,816,061 13.6% 3
1960 2,479,015 25.8% 3
1950 1,970,358 31.0% 4
1940 1,504,277 21.5% 5
1930 1,238,048 114.7% 5
1920 576,673 80.7% 10
1910 319,198 211.5% 17
1900 102,479 103.4% 26
1890 50,395 350.6% 57
1880 11,183 95.2% N/A
1870 5,728 30.6% N/A
1860 4,385 172.4% N/A
1850 1,610 N/A
Source: U.S. Census
Accompanying the population growth, beginning in the 1920s, massive real estate
development began further west of downtown Los Angeles, where many Anglo
Americans moved (Modarres, 1998). The diversity of downtown Los Angeles began to
wane. Moreover, the Jewish community moved westward from the enclave established in
59
Boyle Heights on the Eastside of Los Angeles. Racially restrictive property covenants
shaped residential patterns, with Mexican-American immigrants settling in Boyle Heights
and other areas east of Downtown and African-American residents concentrating south of
Downtown and in parts of the Northeast San Fernando Valley.
City land use decisions continued to marginalize minority neighborhoods through
the placement of industrial uses and federally funded freeway construction beginning in
the 1940s and 1950s that vivisected neighborhoods and concentrated lower-income
residents. However, following the war, minority communities also began to spread
throughout Los Angeles County. In addition to the development of the freeway system,
suburbanization also was fueled by the growth of a significant middle-class among
second-generation Mexicans, African Americans and Asians, and later by the defeat of
racially restrictive property covenants by the Open Housing Act of 1968 (Laslett, 1996).
While the immigrant boom has tapered in recent years, Los Angeles’ current
demographic landscape largely was shaped between 1970 and 1990 by the large number
of immigrants settling in the region (Myers et al., 2010). In the latter part of the 20
th
century, as seen in Table 7, Los Angeles became the nation’s major immigrant gateway
similar to the role that New York played in the early 20
th
century (Myers et al., 2010).
60
Table 7: Comparison of Foreign-Born Share of Total Population
1970 1990 2009
Percent Percent Increase
in Share
Percent Increase in
Share
City of Los Angeles 14.6 38.4 23.8 39.7 1.3
Los Angeles County 11.4 32.7 21.3 35.7 3.0
New York City 18.2 28.4 10.2 24.7 7.3
United States 4.8 7.9 3.2 12.5 4.5
Source: Adapted from Myers et al., 2010
In 1965, passage of the Hart-Cellar Immigration and Nationality Act, which
tipped immigration toward immigrants from the Eastern Hemisphere and toward highly
educated and skilled populations, had a profound effect on the demographic composition
of Los Angeles as well as its socio-spatial landscape. In 1960, Los Angeles County had
an Asian population of about 2 percent of the population; by 1990, the Asian population
grew to 11 percent, increasing the region’s socio-spatial diversity. Modarres writes:
The arrival of yet another group of minorities and the fact that Los Angeles had
never resolved its inter-group conflicts created a landscape in which segregation
and population isolation became a permanent reality over the last two decades
(1998, p. 139).
In the City of Los Angeles, Chinatown, Koreatown and Little Tokyo have served as
enclaves for Chinese, Korean and Japanese immigrants, respectively; although, the foci
of these communities have shifted to other regions of Los Angeles County outside of the
City of Los Angeles (Modarres, 1998). Spatially, Asian immigrants have settled more
broadly throughout Los Angeles County in ethnic enclaves such as Monterey Park,
Alhambra and Rosemead in the San Gabriel Valley east of the City of Los Angeles
(where Chinese residents have moved); Torrance, Palos Verdes and Gardena in the South
Bay south of the City of Los Angeles (which serves as hub of the Japanese community);
61
and in Cerritos in the southeastern portion of Los Angeles County and Fullerton in
neighboring Orange County (where many Korean residents live) (Allen & Turner, 2002).
Los Angeles County’s Asian population, which grew 377 percent from
approximately 202,000 in 1970 to 964,000 in 1990, demonstrated the highest rate of
growth; however, the greatest inflow of residents to Los Angeles came from Mexico,
Guatemala, El Salvador and other Central American countries. Economic restructuring—
which generated demand for low-wage, low-skilled labor—that began in the 1970s
contributed to the migration of Latinos from Mexico and Central America to the Los
Angeles region (Rocco, 1996) as did political unrest, particularly in El Salvador and
Guatemala. Rather than through the 1965 immigration reforms, Mexican and Central
American immigrants were more likely to arrive in the United States via unauthorized
migration (Waldinger & Bozorgmehr, 1996). Between 1970 and 1990, Los Angeles
County added more than 2 million Latino residents with Latinos representing
approximately 38 percent of the county’s total population by 1990 as seen in Figure 3.
62
Figure 3: Racial Composition of Los Angeles County, 1940-2010
Sources: Ethington, Frey & Myers, 2001; 2010 American Community Survey
During this period, the racial composition of Los Angeles County shifted from
nearly 70 percent White in 1970 to nearly 60 percent non-White in 1990. In the City of
Los Angeles, historically African-American communities in South Los Angeles and the
Northeast San Fernando Valley began transitioning into predominantly Latino
communities with African-American residents moving west and south into communities
outside of the city, such as Inglewood, Hawthorne, Long Beach and Carson.
The result of these trends is a city with complex spatial patterns of race and
ethnicity, and accompanying social and racial tension. These significant and rapid
population shifts raise questions regarding the prospect of developing organizational
social capital within communities as the instability of communities may present
challenges to building inclusive relationships of social capital that facilitate neighborhood
regeneration. Moreover, changing populations have differing needs, which existing
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Asian
Hispanic
Black
White
63
relationships of social capital may not address adequately, resulting in the potential
mismatch between organizational social capital and community needs. Thus, dynamic
population trends may play a role in the uneven development of social capital along race
and class as Los Angeles continues to experience significant racial segregation and
socioeconomic distress.
While the city experienced a decade of relatively rapid economic growth that
began in the mid-1990s, patterns of severe economic disadvantage have persisted in parts
of the city with clear racial and ethnic dimensions. As Table 8 suggests, the City of Los
Angeles’ population is economically disadvantaged relative not only to its regional
context but also relative to California and the United States as a whole. In 2010, it had a
lower average median household income, a lower rate of high school attainment, and a
higher rate of poverty compared to the region, state and nation, although the
unemployment rate in Riverside and San Bernardino counties doubled between 2000 and
2010 likely due to the impact of the recent economic downturn on these counties.
Table 8: Los Angeles in Regional and National Context
Average
Median
Household
Income in
2010
Unemployed Attained
High
School
Diploma
or Above
Population
Below
Poverty
Households
with Public
Assistance
Foreign
Born
Population
City of Los Angeles $47,031 13% 73.9% 17.6% 5% 39.1%
Los Angeles County $52,684 12.4% 75.8% 13.9% 4.4% 35.5%
Orange County $70,880 11% 83.1% 8.6% 2.5% 30.4%
Riverside County $54,296 16.3% 78.8% 12.2% 3.5% 22.4%
San Bernardino County $52,607 16.2% 77.4% 13.6% 5.7% 21.5%
Ventura County $71,864 10.2% 82.1% 7.6% 2.5% 23%
California $57,708 12.8% 80.7% 11.8% 4% 27.2%
United States $50,046 10.8% 85.5% 11.3% 2.9% 12.9%
Source: 2010 American Community Survey
64
In contrast to national trends that indicate a decline in concentrated poverty in the
1990s compared to the previous two decades (Jargowsky, 2003), the proportion of poor
individuals in the Los Angeles region living in poor neighborhoods with poverty rates of
at least 20 percent doubled from 29 to 57 percent between 1970 and 2000 (McConville &
Ong, 2003) with concentrated poverty having clear racial and ethnic dimensions. In
addition, the poverty rate in Los Angeles County rose from 10 to nearly 18 percent
between 1970 and 2000, while the national poverty rate has remained relatively stable at
12 to 14 percent in the same period (McConville & Ong, 2003), as seen in Table 9.
Several factors may explain Los Angeles’ departure from national trends, including the
1992 civil unrest in South Los Angeles that accelerated the city’s middle-class flight, the
influx of immigrants to the city beginning in the 1970s, and the severe impact of the early
1990s recession on the region (Jargowsky, 2003).
Table 9: Los Angeles Poverty Rates in Regional and National Context Over Time
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Los Angeles County 10.7% 13.4% 15.1% 17.9% 13.9%
Orange County 6.4% 7.3% 8.5% 10.3% 8.6%
Riverside County 13.2% 11.4% 11.5% 14.2% 12.2%
San Bernardino County 11.7% 11.1% 12.6% 15.8% 13.6%
Ventura County 9.0% 8.0% 7.3% 9.2% 7.6%
California 11.1% 11.4% 12.5% 14.2% 11.8%
United States 13.7% 12.4% 13.1% 12.4 11.3%
Adapted from McConville & Ong; 2003, 2010 American Community Survey
In the most recent decade, however, poverty rates in Los Angeles County declined
from 18 to 14 percent between 2000 and 2010, which perhaps reflects California’s
stabilizing population. California’s population is projected to grow much more slowly
compared to previous decades largely due to a sharp decline in immigration (Pitkin &
Myers, 2012), which likely contributed to growing poverty rates between 1970 and 2000.
65
Still, in 2010, the City of Los Angeles continued to exhibit a significantly higher poverty
rate at 17.9 percent compared to the rest of the region. As Table 10 indicates, in 2000,
more than 20 percent of residents lived below the poverty line in 44 percent of the City of
Los Angeles’ Census tracts. In 8 percent of Census tracts, more than 40 percent of
residents lived below the poverty threshold.
Table 10: Poverty in Los Angeles Census Tracts (2000 U.S. Census)
7
% of Tract Below
Poverty Threshold
Households
in Poverty
Tracts
# % # %
0% to 9% 23,169 10 228 27
10% to 19% 60,559 25 231 28
20% to 29% 57,678 24 162 19
30% to 39% 61,651 26 146 17
40% and above 35,016 15 70 8
Total 238,073 100 837 100
Adapted from Matsunaga, 2008
Parts of northeast, central, east and south Los Angeles particularly continue to experience
significant distress. The maps in Figures 4 through 6 summarize 2000 U.S. Census data
on median income and racial/ethnic composition for the city’s neighborhood councils.
Communities with lower median incomes are spatially concentrated in the areas just
south and east of downtown Los Angeles. These tend to be communities with
proportionally higher Latinos and African-American populations.
7
2010 U.S. Census data on poverty and income are not yet available at the Census tract level.
66
Figure 4: Median Income in 2000 by Neighborhood Council
8
Figure 5: Percentage Latino Population in 2000 by Neighborhood Council
9
8
Neighborhood Councils divided into lowest third, middle third and highest third of range of median income. The
values for the categories are: Low = $0-$29,889; Medium = $29,889.0001-$54,979; High = $54,979.0001-$147,768.
9
Neighborhood Councils divided into lowest third, middle third and highest third of range of percentage Latino
population. The values for the categories are: Low = 0%-33%; Medium = 34%-64%; High = 65%-95%.
67
Figure 6: Percentage African-American Population in 2000 by Neighborhood Council
10
While Andranovich and Riposa tie the general “anemic state of community
participation” in Los Angeles to the city’s spatial development (1998, p. 189), the
eruption of violence in 1965 in Watts and in 1992 in the broader region of South Los
Angeles palpably demonstrated community outrage regarding neighborhood social
distress and racial segregation. Despite public investment that followed, the conditions of
Watts and other South Los Angeles neighborhoods failed to change significantly.
Community anger and frustration about the distressed conditions of South Los Angeles
neighborhoods erupted again nearly three decades later with the acquittal of four White
Los Angeles Police Department officers in the videotaped beating of Black motorist
Rodney King in 1992. City officials implemented a number of neighborhood policies
aimed at addressing distressed neighborhood conditions in South Los Angeles following
10
Neighborhood Councils divided into lowest third, middle third and highest third of range of percentage African-
American population. The values for the categories are: Low = 0%-18%; Medium = 18%-52%; High = 52%-80%.
68
the 1992 civil unrest. Once again, however, the these policies and public investment had
limited impacts as South Los Angeles remains one of the most distressed areas of the city
with the high rates of poverty, unemployment and crime.
More recently, in the 1990s, the city experienced a largely middle-class
movement toward secession, as the San Fernando Valley, Hollywood and Harbor
communities sought unsuccessfully to detach from the City. These communities cited “an
unresponsive city hall, the belief that they were shortchanged in city services, and the
need for more local control over community affairs as reasons to seek independence”
(Hogan-Esch, 2001, p. 783). These movements illustrate how the city’s urban form, rapid
population change and socioeconomic segregation divide communities, while supporting
geographically diffuse political identities and a strong sense of competition for resources.
In other words, Los Angeles’ shifting population dynamics have created diverse
communities with diverse needs, which calls for greater examination of how disparate
local contexts shape community action, particularly the development of organizational
networks and organizational social capital to address neighborhood regeneration.
Moreover, the emergence of these movements in South Los Angeles, the San Fernando
Valley and other Los Angeles communities also alludes to the inability of city
government alone to adequately address uneven development and the disparate needs
across Los Angeles neighborhoods, which is due in part to the city’s fragmented and
multi-centered institutional context.
69
Los Angeles’ Fragmented and Multi-Centered Institutional Context
Neighborhood revitalization in Los Angeles not only confronts a diverse and
highly segregated social landscape, but also occurs within a city institutional structure
that is characterized by extreme political fragmentation and a multi-centered power
structure. In turn, fragmented and ad hoc policymaking dominated by private interests,
such as developers, tends to occur regarding neighborhood regeneration, which often fails
to adequately address neighborhood interests, needs and concerns. In the City of Los
Angeles, power is shared among the city’s relatively weak Mayor; a 15-member City
Council elected through nonpartisan local elections; and more than 240 city
commissioners appointed by the Mayor that govern city departments (Box & Musso,
2004). This council/commission form of government dates to Progressive era charter
reforms undertaken in an attempt to prevent patronage politics and partisanship
(Sonenshein, 2004; 2006).
The Progressive movement in Los Angeles consisted largely of young, middle-
class, Republican businessmen and professionals who sought greater access to
policymaking processes (Sitton, 2005). As Sitton describes,
Alarmed by the increasing corruption and inefficiency of government, the
political and economic power of large corporations, and social problems
intensified by urbanization and industrialization, the progressives sought to
modernize American institutions while attempting to recapture the ideal and sense
of community which they believed had existed in the past (2005, p. 3).
The legacy of Progressive-era reforms persists today with Los Angeles’ non-partisan,
weak-mayor system that precludes the dominance of machine politics but creates a
“multi-centered” system with its own challenges:
70
The progressives intended to modernize municipal politics and administration by
making it more centralized, but their successes and failures de-centered it even
more. Nonpartisan reforms eliminated major political parties, which had unified
interest groups and politicians in the city. Attempts to increase the powers of the
mayor at the expense of the council were blocked by the voters, who refused to
modify the weak-mayor system, a vestige of the Jacksonian Age intended to limit
the power of a tyrannical executive. The multi-centered nature of Los Angeles
politics kept a permanent machine from running City Hall, but it also allowed
political managers to take advantage of the new system to dominate urban
government by assembling temporary alliances of interest groups (Sitton, 2005,
pp. 4-5).
In particular, in a city of nearly 4 million people with a 15-member City Council
with districts the size of some U.S. cities, the City Council operates as “15 little
fiefdoms,” where Council members seek resources for their districts rather than looking
more broadly at citywide need.
11
In the words of one city insider, “the most important
thing to know is that the most powerful person in Los Angeles in the neighborhood is the
Council person.”
12
City Council members have a strong hand in shaping land use
decisions and facilitating service delivery within their large districts that encompass
wide-spanning geographies with dozens of neighborhoods that are diverse in physical,
social, economic and cultural characteristics. Demonstrating the decision-making power
of Council offices on local issues, one city department administrator observed that if a
City Council member directive is within reason and within the bounds of the law, “we’ll
spend the money where they want us to spend it. We try to make it work.
13
”
11
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
12
Interview with the author, Aug. 25, 2008
13
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
71
Moreover, unless an issue is particularly contentious, Council members typically
respect the prerogatives of the Council person in which the issue or project is located.
14
In
a similar manner, the Mayor also defers to Council members on local issues, although the
Mayor may try to exert influence or work strategically with Council members on certain
issues of interest.
15
Given the size of each Council District and the influence of Council
members, the constituents with the knowledge, capacity and resources to access their
local City Council office typically receive the most attention. As Purcell observes, “in
practice, it is not the entire electorate in each district that is empowered by the council
structure so much as it is organized groups who develop a strong relationship with the
council member and his or her staff” (2002, p. 33).
In 1993, dissatisfaction with city government contributed to the passage of a
ballot initiative limiting the tenure of the Mayor and City Council to two four-year terms;
however, a 2006 ballot measure extended term limits for City Council members to 12
years, thereby weakening the relative power of the Mayor. In general, term limits have
made political regimes unstable; in 2001, the City replaced its mayor along with more
than half the City Council. Moreover, in response to the threat of secession by some parts
of the city, the City undertook a massive charter reform, and in 1999 voters enacted a
new Charter that shifted political dynamics within the city, creating a stronger Mayor
relative to the City Council, and authorizing a citywide system of advisory neighborhood
councils and regional planning areas. Charter reform increased the power of the Mayor
14
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
15
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
72
vis-à-vis the City Council by grant the Mayor more power over department and
commission appointments.
In what one city insider described as an “integrated and convoluted dynamic,” the
Mayor in theory can play a significant role in negotiations and in shaping the vision of
particular projects because he or she hires and can more easily fire the general managers
of city departments as well as members of certain commissions as a result of Charter
reform.
16
The pro-activeness of the Mayor on a particular issue also affects the degree of
influence. While Charter reform suggests that the Mayor has more oversight over city
departments and can assume a larger role in developing and managing policy, interview
respondents note that the Mayor still encounters significant challenges to citywide
policymaking and implementation.
In addition to having to influence and work strategically with key City Council
members to further objectives, the Mayor also must contend with savvy department
general managers who, although appointed by the Mayor, can create allies on the City
Council. While the Mayor can remove most general managers, the City Council can
override the Mayor’s decision by a two-thirds vote. Thus, department general managers
can lobby both the Mayor’s office and the City Council to pursue particular objectives.
Complicating policy coordination, the City of Los Angeles has more than 30
service departments—police, transportation, public transit, housing, parks and recreation,
and so forth, as seen in Figure 7. City departments and agencies operate in what our
16
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
73
interview respondents characterized as functional “silos,” concentrating on their own
objectives and programs.
Figure 7: City of Los Angeles Organizational Chart
Source: City of Los Angeles
According to one city department administrator, “a lot of the times, we don’t know what
[other departments are] doing, and they don’t know what we’re doing. Everyone’s in
their own little silo for the most part.”
17
Inter-agency conflict, differing organizational
17
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
74
goals and the diversity of funding streams for city departments contribute to difficulties
in policy coordination.
18
As an illustrative example, the current Mayoral administration has taken some
steps toward collaboration to address the fragmentation of city institutions, particularly in
the area of affordable housing. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s office has taken the lead on
developing an affordable housing strategy called Housing that Works, which focuses on
transparency and capital planning. City officials sought to create a strategic housing plan
with capital planning targets, such as plans adopted by Chicago and New York. In recent
administrations in Los Angeles, the focus has been on funding the city’s Affordable
Housing Trust Fund, which provides gap financing to affordable housing developers,
rather than the development of a strategic, coordinated approach to housing.
Mayor Villaraigosa’s strategy entails the participation and coordination of the five
agencies primarily involved in housing issues: the Housing Department, the Housing
Authority of the City of Los Angeles, the Community Redevelopment Agency,
19
the
Department of City Planning, and the Homeless Services Authority; however, according
to a city official, the fragmented political process in Los Angeles makes decision-making
on housing issues extremely difficult with the involvement of these five different
agencies in addition to the Mayor’s office and the City Council, which share an uneasy
balance of power.
20
The Los Angeles Housing Department initially was tasked with
18
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
19
In 2011, California Gov. Jerry Brown successfully advocated for the elimination of the state’s 400 redevelopment
agencies. This issue is explored further in this chapter.
20
Interview with the author, Jan. 21, 2009
75
leading the city’s housing strategy, but the department had little incentive to do so; thus,
Mayor’s office took leadership of coordinating the agencies.
Complicating the task of coordination, each of the departments involved in
housing has its own particular mandates and objectives, constituencies and disparate
funding streams. The Planning Department is governed by a decision-making
commission and receives money from the city’s general fund. It has the responsibility of
preparing, maintaining and implementing the city’s General Plan and 35 community
plans, which guide housing, land use, transportation and open space decisions. The
Housing Authority is federally funded and has a policy-making commission. The
Housing Authority owns and manages 9,300 public housing units throughout the city and
administers housing assistance payments for more than 100,000 city residents.
The Housing Department, which has an advisory commission, is funded through a
variety of funding streams, including the general fund and state and federal funds.
According to its mission statement, the Housing Department is responsible for
developing citywide housing policy, and developing and preserving affordable housing. It
administers the city’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund, implements the city’s rent control
ordinance, inspects rental properties for code enforcement violations, and provides
homebuyer assistance.
Although no longer in operation at this time, the Community Redevelopment
Agency was funded by tax-increment financing and also had a policy-setting commission
that was answerable to the Mayor and City Council. Assisting private investors in
revitalizing neglected communities, the CRA worked in 32 designated redevelopment
76
areas and committed 25 percent of its tax-increment financing to affordable housing. And
finally, the Homeless Services Authority receives general, county, state and federal funds
as a joint powers authority between the city and county. The agency provides shelters,
housing and services to homeless people in the city and county. “As you can see, it’s
exceedingly complex, and that makes coordinating and decision-making difficult,” one
respondent said.
21
This sectoral fragmentation occurs not only in housing issues but also
with other policy areas, such as economic development, education and youth issues,
housing, public safety and transportation.
Moreover, it should be noted that the functional fragmentation within the city also
is magnified by the broader institutional context of local government in California.
Education is provided by the massive Los Angeles Unified School District that contains
not only the City of Los Angeles but numerous other cities and unincorporated
communities in Los Angeles County, although the Mayor can exert control over the
school board by supporting school board campaigns.
22
In addition, public assistance,
health, mental health and other social services are primarily the purview of county
government, even though county service delivery outcomes play out on city streets.
21
Interview with the author, Jan. 21, 2009
22
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa attempted to gain greater control of the Los Angeles Unified School District through a
bill passed through the California State Legislature in 2006, which generated significant opposition from the school
district and teachers’ unions. The bill passed, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the bill into law in September
2006; however, three months later, a California Supreme Court ruled the bill unconstitutional, which blocked its
January 2007 implementation. Using another strategy to gain control, Mayor Villaraigosa supported the races of a
number of school board candidates, which in effect gave him a near majority on the school board. This strategy allowed
the Mayor to gain control of the operations of 10 of the school district’s most under-performing schools in his Mayor’s
Partnership for Schools Initiative.
77
This institutional fragmentation creates challenges to accomplishing
neighborhood revitalization, which requires policy integration in response to a
concentration of interrelated problems that affect not only the physical and material but
social and cultural aspects of a community. These types of complex, intersectoral
problems necessitate an inter- and multi-organizational response (Trist, 1983, p. 270; also
see Selsky and Parker, 2005). While intersectoral issues require policy coordination and
integration, local government agencies in the United States typically do not take a holistic
approach to neighborhood distress. Rather, networks of local non-profits and
philanthropic organizations have emerged as important institutional arenas for the
integration of neighborhood revitalization policy (Chaskin, 2001; Hopkins, 2005).
Ad hoc and Market-Oriented Neighborhood Regeneration in Los Angeles
The City of Los Angeles’ scale and its significant socio-spatial diversity create
challenges to policymaking around neighborhood issues given the vast diversity in the
needs, interests, cultures and characteristics of the city’s more than 100 communities.
Moreover, the city’s political institutions, characterized by fragmentation and a multi-
centered power structure, further complicate policymaking processes. Neighborhood
regeneration in the City of Los Angeles has not consistently been a high priority on the
citywide agenda and tends to receive sporadic citywide attention in response to
community mobilization. To the extent that it does get attention, it tends to involve highly
visible, market-driven redevelopment projects, such as the current push to redevelop
downtown Los Angeles, neglecting needs in other parts of the city. Thus, redevelopment
initiatives tend to emerge in an opportunistic, market-driven and ad hoc manner.
78
Barriers to Strategic and Comprehensive Neighborhood Initiatives
With the city’s political fragmentation characterized by the dominance of City
Council members on local issues within their districts, one city insider explained that “the
bottom line is there is no strategic plan for community revitalization and for the city.”
23
Another city insider observed that the city lacks “coherent policy” regarding
neighborhood regeneration as well as any interest in developing a coherent policy.
24
The
city occasionally has appeased communities with neighborhood initiatives in response to
episodes of community protest. Notable examples include the city’s attention to
neighborhoods after what many activists termed the Watts rebellion in 1965 and the 1992
rebellion in South Los Angeles. In addition, 1999 city charter reform included the
decentralization of planning review and the creation of a neighborhood council system
that can be understood as responses to the threatened secession of the San Fernando
Valley, Hollywood and Harbor areas of the City. However, none of the neighborhood
policy responses as a result of these community protests have been particularly effective.
For example, during Mayor Villaraigosa’s administration, efforts began in 2008 to
develop a five-year strategic plan to improve the socioeconomic conditions of the 45-
square-mile area of South Los Angeles involving coordination between the Mayor’s
Office, the City Council Offices representing South Los Angeles and city departments.
Geographically targeted, the South Los Angeles 5-Year Strategic Plan appears
comprehensive in that it involves cross-sectoral coordination and collaboration among 15
city departments and includes 10 initiative areas, such as housing, quality of life, job and
23
Interview with the author, Aug. 25, 2008
24
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
79
workforce development, business development, education and public transit; however,
while coordinating various city actors around the objective of improving the conditions of
South Los Angeles, the plan primarily aggregates existing projects and programs aimed
toward South Los Angeles into one document, and creates accountability mechanisms to
ensure project and program completion. The city rarely utilizes systems of performance
measurement, which this plan includes. Some interview respondents believe the increased
inter-agency coordination and use of accountability mechanisms will have an important
impact on improving city processes.
While these efforts to promote inter-agency cooperation and accountability may
be important in themselves, the question remains whether this approach translates into a
strategic, coordinated guiding vision for improving the socioeconomic conditions of
South Los Angeles or significantly changes the way in which the city’s various political
actors interact. In addition, the initiative does not involve significant additive resources
despite the acknowledgement that South Los Angeles experiences considerable distress.
For example, one city administrator with knowledge of the plan said many projects
included in the South Los Angeles plan have been in the works for some years and
“would have happened anyway.”
25
The plan, however, suggests that significant efforts
are underway to address the historic disinvestment in South Los Angeles. Lastly, other
neighborhoods experiencing distress in other parts of the city, such as in the Northeast
25
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
80
San Fernando Valley and the eastside of Los Angeles, do not have similar plans; rather,
strategic investment in communities reflects a “scatter shot” approach.
26
While the South Los Angeles strategic plan focuses on aggregating existing
projects and ensuring their timely completion rather than formulating new policy
initiatives for the region, significant challenges still existed in creating the plan, which
required the cooperation of the Mayor’s Office, four City Council offices and 15 city
departments. For example, it took some time to reach agreement on the plan’s contents,
which does not encompass all initiatives underway in South Los Angeles. The Mayor’s
Office and City Council offices left certain projects and initiatives out of the plan for
which they wanted sole credit as each office also has its own South Los Angeles agenda.
Moreover, a city hall outsider initially was asked to lead the South Los Angeles plan, but
the outsider was met with resistance from city departments. Consequently, the influential
and well-connected Los Angeles Board of Public Works Commissioner Valerie Shaw
now coordinates the plan. City department general managers comply with the plan, which
requires regular meetings and progress updates on projects, because of the support for the
plan from the Mayor and the City Council.
The example of the South Los Angeles 5-Year Strategic Plan demonstrates the
significant challenges to coordinated policymaking in the City of Los Angeles with its
multi-centered power structure. As one city insider observed, “one Mayor can’t do it
[alone]”
27
but needs the cooperation of the City Council, whose members often fail to
26
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
27
Interview with the author, Aug. 25, 2008
81
think more broadly beyond their own districts. In addition, given the latitude of
department general managers, interagency coordination requires a “firmer hand from the
top,” such as the Mayor’s Office, to mandate and sustain cooperation.
28
Moreover,
Commissioner Shaw with her influence and connections plays a vital role in
implementing the plan as “someone with less clout might have a harder time … unless
someone really strong is pushing [the plan], it’s going to die of its own weight,”
according to a city insider.
29
The South Los Angeles plan experience also highlights the tenuous nature of
political coordination among the various loci of power in the City of Los Angeles.
Without mechanisms for policy coordination embedded within city departments or an
adopted citywide strategic plan, “the only coordinating mechanism is the political
stratum.”
30
The city currently lacks administrative means of integrating services to
address neighborhood problems. Moreover, with terms limits, shifting Mayoral
administrations and new City Council members come new agendas and alliances that
easily can unravel previous efforts at policy coordination.
Ad-hoc and Opportunistic Redevelopment Initiatives
In Los Angeles, neighborhood regeneration typically occurs “organically in an ad
hoc way” and as a response to the influence of either the will of the Mayor, the City
Council offices, visionary department general managers or ongoing strong advocacy from
28
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
29
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
30
Interview with the author, Aug. 25, 2008
82
the community.
31
Any one of these elements can shape the policy process; however,
interview respondents attributed a particularly large role for City Council members in
shaping neighborhood vibrancy. Thus, significant variation occurs in neighborhood
regeneration efforts across neighborhoods. For example, Councilwoman Jan Perry, who
represents the 9
th
District that encompasses parts of Downtown and South Los Angeles,
32
has been viewed as particularly successful in attracting resources to her district.
As an illustrative example, Councilwoman Perry has spearheaded the
development of the more than $19-million South Los Angeles Wetlands Park on a 9-acre
former Metro bus yard in her district in what one interview respondent described as “the
middle of hell.”
33
The park features an urban education center, a passive recreational
nature center and wetlands vegetation; a rail museum and community space also are
planned for the site. The park is not included in the South Los Angeles 5-Year Strategic
Plan because it is seen solely as Councilwoman Perry’s legacy rather than as a joint
project of the Mayor and other Council offices. Councilwoman Perry’s success has been
attributed to her “vision,” “aggressiveness” and to her fortune of having a district that
encompasses Downtown Los Angeles, which more easily attracts investment and
resources with its market advantages compared to other areas in South Los Angeles.
34
31
Interview with the author, Aug. 25, 2008
32
The City Council approved a new, hotly contested redistricting map in March 2012 that significantly alters the
boundaries of the 9
th
City Council District, which loses a signification portion of Downtown Los Angeles to the 14
th
Council District.
33
Interview with the author, Aug. 25, 2008
34
With the loss of Downtown Los Angeles from her district as a result of redistricting in 2012, Councilwoman Jan
Perry has argued that the new district boundaries disempower the poorer parts of her district in South Los Angeles.
83
Moreover, City Council members traditionally have shaped the activities of the
Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) in their own districts. For the
most part, neighborhood redevelopment has been the historic purview of the CRA, which
administered more than 30 redevelopment areas throughout the city. The CRA was a
particularly powerful actor due to its fiscal autonomy from the city. Relative to other City
agencies, the CRA had access to locally generated resources through the tax increment
financing mechanism, where it retained the full 1 percent of property tax received on all
increases in assessed value generated within redevelopment project areas. These funds
were then available for additional investment within the project area.
The agency was established in 1948 under the Community Redevelopment Law
of California. Sufficient evidence of blight as defined by state law had to be demonstrated
to designate a redevelopment area; however, the condition of blight had a broad enough
definition that notable variation in levels of distress existed across redevelopment areas.
A seven-member board of commissioners appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the
City Council oversaw the agency, although all commission actions were subject to City
Council approval. Therefore, the CRA closely aligned with City Council members, and
thus City Council members had significant influence in shaping CRA projects in their
districts, which contributed to the ad hoc and opportunistic nature of neighborhood
regeneration in Los Angeles.
While one of the city’s few explicit strategies for neighborhood redevelopment,
the CRA primarily supported a market-oriented style of redevelopment with a project-
based rather than comprehensive focus. The agency focused on coordinating, facilitating
84
and providing incentives for private development and the construction of affordable
housing as well as streetscape and façade improvements. Redevelopment areas typically
covered several blocks within a neighborhood, rather than an entire community.
The CRA—like many other Los Angeles city agencies—had a decentralized
structure with regional offices responsible for guiding redevelopment activities in their
particular region. Thus, the activities, strategies, leadership and effectiveness of CRA
field offices varied significantly. Some field offices had strong leadership that used CRA
resources strategically to complement other redevelopment activities in the area, while
other CRA offices languished with ineffective staff and project delays. Moreover, due to
their funding structure, some redevelopment areas, which saw growth in property values,
had abundant resources, while others redevelopment areas saw very little growth in
property values and thus had limited means to reinvest in the community.
The future of redevelopment in Los Angeles is unclear, however, as in 2011
California Gov. Jerry Brown successfully advocated for the elimination of the state’s 400
redevelopment agencies due to the state’s budget crisis and charges that redevelopment
agencies failed to use funds effectively.
35
At this writing, the effect on community
redevelopment programs within the city is unknown; however, interview respondents
observed that the CRA was one of the few tools the city had to attract investment and
served as a powerful source of independent funds. According to a city insider, “it’s very
difficult for us to attract private investment and bring new investments to an area without
35
Upheld by the California State Supreme Court, the legislation to redirect redevelopment agency funds pitted city
leaders and business groups against the governor and local school districts, which supported the re-allocation of
funding. Following the State Supreme Court ruling, the Los Angeles City Council voted not to absorb the city’s
redevelopment agency due to fiscal constraints.
85
a redevelopment zone.”
36
In February 2012, Governor Brown appointed a three-member
governing board, responsible for disposing the agency’s assets and paying existing bond
debt, to dismantle the Los Angeles CRA.
A Focus on Market-Driven Redevelopment and the Politics of Property
In the City of Los Angeles, private-sector interests have played a significant role
in initiating redevelopment. Moreover, neighborhood regeneration typically reflects the
city’s bias toward the politics of property, which Peterson (1981) identifies as a constraint
of municipal-level policymaking. Strategies to improve neighborhoods often occur on a
“case-by-case, project-by-project basis.”
37
Typically, a developer will have an idea to do
“X, Y and Z” at a particular place, and if the project “sounds juicy,” the city will invest
resources from the CRA or other funding sources, according to one city insider.
38
Another city insider confirmed that the redevelopment process usually begins when a
developer makes a proposal to the CRA for a public subsidy in order to make a project
financially viable, and thus negotiations initiate with the city.
39
The city’s approach to neighborhood regeneration typically utilizes a market-
oriented approach. In addition to CRA subsidies, the city also utilizes several other
funding sources administered by the city’s Community Development Department (CDD)
as redevelopment tools. For example, Section 108 federally guaranteed loans provide gap
financing ranging from $2 million to $20 million for large projects. Federal
36
Interview with the author, June 25, 2008
37
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
38
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
39
Interview with the author, June 25, 2008
86
Empowerment Zone bonds support projects in the city’s Federal Empowerment Zone that
was formed following the South Los Angeles outbreak of civil disorder in 1992.
Moreover, the city utilizes business incentives associated with the city’s Federal
Empowerment Zone and State Enterprise Zone, such as tax credits for local hiring and
tax rebates for equipment purchases, to attract businesses to the city. The CDD also
administers a business assistance program through six sites supported by federal
Community Development Block Grant funds that assists new entrepreneurs and small- to
medium-sized businesses.
However, projects that receive the most city attention and resources tend to be
high-profile developments with significant market potential, such as the redevelopment
of the Figueroa Corridor between Downtown Los Angeles and the University of Southern
California (which includes the Staples Center and L.A. Live entertainment complex),
Grand Avenue in Downtown Los Angeles, and the NoHo Commons development in
North Hollywood. A city insider described the types of projects that generate city interest
as the “glossy, giant projects” for which elected officials can claim credit;
40
another
interview respondent said the city focuses on major developments and “all of the popular
projects you hear of in the newspaper,” such as L.A. Live.
41
The heavily subsidized $2.5
billion L.A. Live development, which sits adjacent to the Staples Center—home of the
Lakers and Clippers—includes theaters, luxury hotels, condominiums, and amenities
designed to attract tourists and entertainment-seekers to downtown Los Angeles.
40
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
41
Interview with the author, June 25, 2008
87
A third city insider observed that in a Council District like District 15, which
includes communities as diverse as Watts in South Los Angeles and San Pedro near the
Los Angeles Harbor, more city attention and resources tend to be directed toward
redevelopment in San Pedro compared to Watts because of San Pedro’s market
advantages.
42
San Pedro’s proximity to the waterfront has attracted high-rise
developments and a “renaissance of capital” returning to the community as “there’s a
difference there. You’ve got the waterfront … The success formula, unfortunately, would
not be as easy to implement [in Watts].”
43
The city seems to have less interest in the “nuts
and bolts” of economic development, such as small business development, which is less
visible than high-profile development projects.
44
City Council members have the strongest influence on development in their
districts; however, the Mayor’s Office also can exert influence on development projects
and also has a particular interest in large, market-oriented development projects. For
example, former Mayor Richard Riordan created the Los Angeles Business Team under
the Mayor’s Office to attract and retain businesses in Los Angeles. Under Mayor
Villaraigosa’s administration, the Los Angeles Business Team has shifted its focus to
large commercial real estate development projects, such as L.A. Live, that propose to
have a significant economic impact. The team does not have a specific strategy for
particular neighborhoods but has a particular interest in increasing city sales tax revenues
and job creation. While it does not take the lead on projects and ultimately defers to City
42
Interview with the author, Dec. 7, 2007
43
Interview with the author, Dec. 7, 2007
44
Interview with the author, July 16, 2008
88
Council members on local land use decisions, the Business Team partners with the City
Council offices and CRA to facilitate commercial development, and utilizes the Mayor’s
leverage over department and commission appointments to influence decision-making.
The $78-million Price Pfister redevelopment project in the working-class
community of Pacoima in the Northeast San Fernando Valley provides an example of
strong Mayoral influence over local matters and interest in large-scale, tax-generating
projects. Mayor Villaraigosa became involved in the redevelopment of the 25-acre former
Price Pfister plumbing manufacturing site because of his interest in locating a Costco
Warehouse at the site. The Costco Wholesale Corp. had sought assistance from the
Mayor in identifying sites for new Costco stores in the city. The city’s fiscal calculation
was made clear by a respondent who identified the goal of the project as reducing
“leakage” of sales tax revenues to other smaller cities in the Greater Los Angeles area.
45
In a Los Angeles Times article, the Mayor echoed similar sentiments:
Development is important not only for the Valley, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio
Villaraigosa said at Thursday's groundbreaking, but also for the city as a whole, as
economic leaders seek to boost sales tax revenues to bridge a burgeoning budget
deficit.
"L.A. will not lie down in the face of this recession," Villaraigosa said, adding
that the Costco project was expected to bring $2 million in annual sales tax
revenues into city coffers (Oldham, 2009).
46
The city has few large parcels left for “big box” developments. And as it stood, the
industrial-zoned site generated relatively little tax revenue for the city, and the
environmental contamination on the site deterred development.
45
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
46
Accessed 3/22/2012 at http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jan/09/local/me-costco9
89
Pacoima community members had differing visions for the site, such as
development of a pedestrian friendly community plaza surrounded by retail stores as
originally proposed by the developer. They also raised concerns about the environmental
implications of locating a Costco with a gas station on the property—a designated
Superfund site; however, Mayor Villaraigosa’s involvement strongly influenced the
outcome of the project. With the inclusion of the Costco, the redevelopment project was
re-conceptualized into a big box development that eliminated the community plaza
component, which was seen as an “inefficient use of space.”
47
Using various funding sources, the city contributed $9.9 million to the project,
which was expected to generate 330 construction jobs and 354 permanent jobs
(Community Redevelopment Agency, 2009). However, the Price Pfister site conceivably
could have been redeveloped with the community plaza component if enough pressure
existed from the community and from Councilman Alarcon’s office, according to
interview respondents. For example, former City Councilman Alex Padilla, who
represented Pacoima before Alarcon took office and now serves as a State Senator,
supported the community plaza design.
Challenges to the Representation of Community Interests in City Policymaking
The socio-spatial diversity and fragmented institutional structure of Los Angeles
particularly has important consequences for the representation of neighborhood interests
in the revitalization of low-income communities. Lejano and Taufen Wessells argue that
no formal institutions exist in the city that allow for the “forging of a collective and
47
Ibid
90
shared sense of vision and purpose, something which takes time and continuous
engagement” (2006, p. 1487). The city has been characterized by relatively depoliticized
and weak electoral and political arenas, which do little to concentrate power (Ferman,
2002). As Ferman argues,
Los Angeles’s electoral arena has produced neither the highly individualized
politics associated with traditional machine politics nor the strong coalitional
politics often found in reform cities. Within this context, descriptions of Los
Angeles’s political system as “decentralized, de-politicized, and fragmented, if
not disorganized,” (Mollenkopf et al, 2001:63) and “horizontally stratified”
(Jones-Correa, 2001:199) seem both apt and seriously problematic from a
coalition building perspective. Moreover, the extreme racial and ethnic diversity
that characterize the Los Angeles electorate poses additional problems to coalition
building efforts (p. 17).
In a city with a significant immigrant population, participation in electoral politics may
not be a viable channel for communicating neighborhood preferences. Rather, those with
the capacity and resources—such as developers, unions and business interests—tend to
have the most influence on city politics.
In 1999, charter reforms did create a citywide neighborhood council system with
the intent of institutionalizing community participation and providing opportunities for
residents to provide advice on policy making, budgeting, and service delivery. The city
now has 90 neighborhood councils, which are self-governing elected boards of
neighborhood stakeholders that represent communities on average of 38,000 people.
While they did create new forums for community-level engagement, neighborhood
councils generally have not integrated neighborhoods with city decision-makers or
encouraged targeted policies for community improvement. Rather they further fragment
91
policy making by providing new arenas for opposition to emerge around neighborhood
redevelopment and land use.
In many cases, Neighborhood Councils have not served as a unifying force in
communities. Homeowners are overrepresented with Neighborhood Council boards being
disproportionately wealthy, White and highly educated and underrepresented by Latinos
(Musso, Weare, Elliot et al., 2007). In addition to issues of representative bias,
Neighborhood Councils in some communities have faced capacity issues that challenge
their ability to organize and effectively take community action on issues. These capacity
issues are coupled with the lack of institutional support for Neighborhood Councils to
engage with the city. Structured arenas for interaction with the City Council, Mayor’s
office, city departments, and boards and commissions do not exist (Musso, Weare, Elliot
et al., 2008). For example, many city department officials, questioning their
representative legitimacy, do not view Neighborhood Councils as integral to decision-
making and the day-to-day work of departments (Musso, Weare, Elliot et al., 2008)
Without strong channels of community representation, ad hoc developer-driven
economic development may act against neighborhood interests in a variety of ways. As
demonstrated with the Price Pfister redevelopment in Pacoima, developer interests may
subordinate neighborhood preferences and concerns. In communities, such as Boyle
Heights, developers can contribute to gentrification, residential displacement and ensuing
social conflict. Moreover, a reliance on developer-driven neighborhood regeneration can
exacerbate race and class segregation and economic disadvantage by concentrating
resources in locations with market advantages to the neglect of other city neighborhoods.
92
Despite challenges to the institutional representation of community interests,
community members are not powerless in their efforts to influence city policymaking.
For example, in the 1990s, Los Angeles experienced a resurgence of labor and
community organizing energized by the politicization of Latinos and Asian Americans
who immigrated to the region and filled the region’s low-wage jobs. These progressive
social movements led to significant gains, such as the adoption of a living wage
ordinance by the Los Angeles City Council; a successful lawsuit against the Los Angeles
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority regarding the county’s separate, unequal
and discriminatory transit systems for people of color; and the development of a
pioneering community benefits agreement that exacted community benefits from real
estate developers redeveloping the downtown Figueroa Corridor.
Scholars argue that these organizing efforts exhibit a new focus on regional issues
and regional organizing strategies that have been particularly effective (Soja, 2010;
Pastor, Benner, & Matsuoka, 2010). While important in winning gains for marginalized
communities, these regional movements have not brought sustained attention to the needs
of distressed neighborhoods throughout the city. However, in many Los Angeles
neighborhoods, networks of non-profit and community organizations have been active in
advocating on behalf of neighborhood interests, which scholarship on Los Angeles has
not addressed sufficiently. These organizational networks have played an important role
in the representation of community interests, particularly in communities that face
barriers to accessing formal channels of representation. Thus, the socio-spatial diversity
of the City of Los Angeles and the significant role local organizational networks play in
93
neighborhood regeneration warrant a closer examination of city politics from a
neighborhood perspective.
Viewing Neighborhood Regeneration from Below
The City of Los Angeles’ expanse and its significant socio-spatial diversity that
developed through a historic confluence of events translate into dozens and dozens of
neighborhoods with unique characteristics, population dynamics and cultures. Moreover,
an examination of the Los Angeles context demonstrates the occurrence of uneven
development across the city characterized by race and class. Thus, a diversity of needs
exist across city neighborhoods. Despite the levels of distress experienced by many city
neighborhoods, however, Los Angeles’ fragmented institutional context with multiple
centers of power leads to a fragmented and ad hoc approach to neighborhood
policymaking. The dominance of Los Angeles’ 15 City Council members, who govern
districts of more than 250,000 residents each,
48
in local decision-making complicated by
the delicate balance of power between the Mayor and city department general managers
makes strategic citywide policymaking exceedingly difficult. Moreover, community
influence over city policymaking processes requires the capacity and resources to access
City Council members.
As a result, neighborhood regeneration has not been a sustained priority on the
citywide agenda. Neighborhood regeneration efforts have emerged in response to
episodes of community protest; however, these efforts have been limited. Instead,
neighborhood regeneration efforts in Los Angeles typically are characterized by ad hoc
48
Chicago’s complex institutional structure includes 50 aldermen who represent the city’s wards; however, each ward
on average consists of approximately 50,000 residents.
94
and opportunistic initiatives with significant variation in the efforts that occur across city
neighborhoods. This variation stems from the different initiatives individual City Council
members choose to pursue in their districts and the different opportunities that arise for
redevelopment across neighborhoods.
Moreover, given their resources and capacity, developers play a significant role in
neighborhood regeneration in Los Angeles, and they reinforce ad hoc development
because they initiate redevelopment based on their interest in a specific project, often
with disregard to the broader community or city context. The types of tools the city
primarily utilizes to support redevelopment—such as gap financing and tax incentives—
and the city’s interest in high-profile, tax-revenue generating projects reflect a bias
toward market-oriented approaches to redevelopment and the politics of property. This
approach pays insufficient attention to the social needs of distressed neighborhoods and
concentrates resources in market-advantaged locations, while neglecting other city areas.
In the face of City Council and Mayoral preferences for high-profile economic
development projects, neighborhoods in Los Angeles have not been helpless in their
efforts to improve community conditions. Rather, this dissertation’s examination of three
Los Angeles neighborhoods—Boyle Heights in East Los Angeles, Pacoima in the
Northeast San Fernando Valley and Watts in South Los Angeles—demonstrates the
diversity of efforts undertaken particularly by non-profit and philanthropic organizations
to obtain resources for their communities and influence local policymaking processes
through networks of relationships. However, given Los Angeles’ considerable socio-
spatial diversity, the nature, activities and focus of these networks of community
95
organizations were found to differ in significant ways. Consider the following
illustrations of the three case study neighborhoods.
In the predominantly Latino neighborhood of Boyle Heights, located just a few
miles east of Downtown Los Angeles across the Los Angeles River, signs point to a
community at a crossroads with significant changes underway. At the neighborhood
landmark of Mariachi Plaza, mariachi musicians dressed in bolero jackets and carrying
violins, guitars and other instruments continue to gather like they have been for the last
three decades, waiting to be hired for a gig. Just steps away from the dramatic stone kiosk
(a gift from the Mexican State of Jalisco) that dominates the plaza, a scallop-shaped
canopy shades the escalators that lead to the new underground Metro station that opened
adjacent to the plaza in 2009 as part of the subway system’s Gold Line extension from
Downtown Los Angeles to East Los Angeles. Across the street from the plaza, a wine bar
that opened in 2006 called Eastside Luv—dubbed “the most badass bar in L.A.” by the
L.A. Weekly in 2011—attracts a young, upwardly mobile Latino crowd to the same
neighborhood where Mexican immigrant street vendors dodge Los Angeles police
officers in order to sell tacos, tamales and elotes to make ends meet.
In Boyle Heights, the community is anything but indifferent to the
neighborhood’s changing landscape brought on in part by the Metro Gold Line extension
and ensuing development. Some organizations, such as the East Los Angeles Community
Corporation (ELACC) and Union de Vecinos, have aligned themselves with the goal of
preserving affordable housing in the community and advocating on behalf of lower-
income residents who fear residential displacement by gentrification. For example, in
96
2011, several community organizations successfully mobilized support—through public
rallies, testimonies at public hearings and the collection of oral histories among other
actions—for the preservation of the 17-acre, affordable Wyvernwood Garden
Apartments, which a developer planned to replace with a mixed-use project of
apartments, condos, retail, commercial and office space. These efforts contrast with the
efforts of other organizations in Boyle Heights, such as homeowner groups, that strongly
advocate for more middle-class amenities and quality of life issues.
About 25 miles to the northwest of Boyle Heights lies the community of
Pacoima. Like Boyle Heights, Pacoima is a predominantly Latino community, but unlike
Boyle Heights, the threat of gentrification is a distant prospect. On a daily basis, diesel
trucks rumble off freeway exits toward the many industrial operations located in the
community, which is home to five Superfund cleanup sites. On some hot days, a thick
haze of smog hovers over the basin in which Pacoima sits, and the smell of rubber and
gasoline permeates the air. Asthma is a significant problem for the neighborhood’s youth.
A mix of small shops in aging and weathered buildings—Mexican and Salvadorian
restaurants selling tacos, pupusas and mariscos; barber shops; panaderias; party stores
with balloons tied outside; check cashing stores; mini marts and auto repair shops among
others—and a plethora of fast food restaurants line the community’s main artery of Van
Nuys Boulevard. Among the community’s rows of suburban single-family homes,
multiple working-poor families crowd under one roof, or live in illegally converted
garages or in campers parked on properties.
97
While not as vociferously and contentiously as in Boyle Heights, community
organizations have made strides in Pacoima. The non-profit environmental justice
organization Pacoima Beautiful trains local adults and youth to spot environmental
hazards in the community and how to be catalysts for change. Reaching out to regulatory
agencies and local businesses, the organization’s philosophy involves improving
environmental conditions through community partnerships. And within the walls of
Pacoima schools, several philanthropic and non-profit organizations have invested quietly
in changing the educational environment for students in a community with a local high
school that has an approximately 50 percent drop-out rate. Successful in obtaining public
and private grants, non-profit organizations have been busily connecting existing
resources in the community to better serve students and spearheading new educational
programs to support the development of area youth; however their actions tend to be
more apolitical and focus on inter-sectoral strategies funded by public and private grants
rather than confrontation of city policymaking processes.
Thirty-five miles south of Pacoima sits the South Los Angeles community of
Watts, well-known for the violent outbreaks of civil disorder that occurred in 1965 and
1992 in response to the injustices experienced by the historically African-American
community, which is now transitioning into a Latino community. Like Boyle Heights and
Pacoima, Watts has many single-family homes that line neighborhood streets, but
community members long have contended with social problems associated with four
aging and once feuding public housing developments—Jordan Downs, Nickerson
Gardens, Imperial Courts and Gonzaque Village. A noticeably heavy police presence
98
compared to other Los Angeles communities exists in Watts with police cruisers
patrolling neighborhood streets a common sight. And one of the gains to the community
following the 1965 outbreak of civil unrest—the fenced and heavily surveilled Martin
Luther King Jr. Shopping Center with its grocery store, pharmacy and fast food chains—
remains one of the few commercial areas serving Watts.
Across from the shopping center, however, every week, representatives of non-
profit organizations, public housing developments, arts organizations, faith-based
institutions and others gather in a cramped room inside a city building to meet with high-
ranking city officials, including police officers, city department managers and staff of
elected officials. Here, at this venue, community concerns are voiced, and elected
officials and city administrators take note. Topics range from addressing outbreaks of
crime and violence in the community to informing public housing redevelopment plans to
discussing incidents of alleged excessive force by police. At times, meetings are heated
and contentious; it is not uncommon to hear a community member berate a high-level
public official for missteps in policy or community neglect. At other times, the mood
lightens into good-natured needling and joking among community members and city
officials—something that might have been seen as unlikely in Watts’ a few decades ago.
These brief illustrations suggest that very disparate community and organizational
dynamics surrounding community improvement efforts occur across Los Angeles
neighborhoods, which this dissertation aims to examine more closely. Given the
fragmented nature of city neighborhood regeneration efforts and the dominance of private
interests, the efforts of local organizations and neighborhood actors to access resources
99
for communities and influence local decision-making processes become all the more
important to consider. However, the variation observed across neighborhood efforts
raises significant questions. For example, how do local organizational networks in
distressed inner-city neighborhoods develop and influence city action to benefit their
communities? What explains the varying nature and activities of local organizational
networks? What results for communities from these variations?
This dissertation attempts to begin answering these questions particularly by
exploring the historical contexts of the three case study neighborhoods, the particular
activities of the organizational networks involved in community improvement efforts,
and the disparate socioeconomic characteristics and population dynamics that shape
organizational networks and alignments. The vast and varied social and political
geography of Los Angeles suggests a need for sensitivity to these local variations, and
only a neighborhood-level account of Los Angeles politics allows for this kind of
understanding. This dissertation aims to provide this neighborhood perspective of the
diverse roles of local organizations and actors in improving communities, namely, a view
of Los Angeles neighborhood regeneration from below.
100
CHAPTER 4: THE LEGACIES OF COMMUNITY ACTION IN CONTEXT
Whereas much of the social capital literature examines networks as a snapshot,
historical trajectories shape organizational capacities, organizing norms and relationships,
and institutional development in important ways. As Goode and O’Brien argue, social
capital “is not an ahistoric, fungible, publicly held good” but “must be seen as emanating
from social relations that exist in contexts of history and power” (2006, p. 174). While
social capital scholars, such as Putnam, acknowledge the importance of history in the
development of civic life, critics of social capital theory have called for a spatialized,
place-specific approach to history rather than a broad national or regional-level treatment
(Goode & O’Brien, 2006; Portes & Mooney, 2002). A national or regional approach to
history threatens to over-simplify relationships between historical contexts and the
development of social capital. It also may be an empirical stretch to link national and
regional historical analyses of civic life with variations in contemporary government and
economic performance.
As Chapter 3 of this dissertation argues, Los Angeles’ significant socio-spatial
diversity calls for greater attention to variations in local contexts and the divergent
patterns of neighborhood politics that emerge. A national or regional focus on historical
contexts can neglect variations in neighborhood-level historical trajectories or unique
historical events that may shape the development of local politics and civic life in a
particular community. To understand who benefits from social capital and why, Goode
and O’Brien (2006) argue: “a grounded, place-specific, and historicized description
begins to answer these questions and demonstrate the limits of abstract discussions of
101
social capital and civic engagement measured by membership statistics, as a panacea for
social problems” (p. 175-176).
Portes and Mooney (2002) also question the link between collective social capital
and national development but view relationships between social capital and local
community development as less problematic as “it is easier to trace the historical
development of specific community structures and to observe their operations in daily
life” (p. 312). This chapter considers the historical community trajectories that have
shaped the development of organizational networks in three Los Angeles case study
neighborhoods. While it does not assert simple causal linkages between historical
contexts and community outcomes, this chapter traces how historical trajectories
condition the development of organizational capacities, organizing norms and
relationships, and the institutional representation of community interests, which in turn
have an enduring influence on neighborhood politics.
Historical Investments in Organizational Capacities
Over time targeted investments in building local organizational capacity can have
persisting effects for communities. As Ferman (2006) argues, the activation of social
capital requires not only exposure and access to networks but also instruction on the use
of networks. This draws attention to the importance of capacity, the ability of an
organization to pursue its organizational mission and achieve desired outcomes within
organizational networks. Cassidy and Leviton (2006) define organizational capacity as
the ability to manage and sustain operations successfully, run programs that conform to
102
performance criteria, and implement and complete new projects or expand existing
projects. They write:
Simply having the resources is not enough. Programs and organizations must
develop core skills and capabilities, such as leadership, management, and
fundraising abilities, and they must utilize the insight and knowledge they gain in
ways that address problems and implement change effectively (2006, p. 149).
Organizational capacity also may entail knowledge of how to navigate local politics and
government channels to connect resources with community needs.
49
Thus, organizational
capacity is crucial for local organizations in helping to foster connections that develop
and use organizational social capital to improve communities (Sobeck & Agius, 2007).
This study illuminates how historical developments, namely institutional
investments in local capacity building, have contributed to differences in organizational
capacities across neighborhoods and how these differences have important implications
for neighborhood regeneration. By focusing on organizational capacity, this study avoids
an unduly narrow focus on social capital against which Silverman (2001) warns:
Too much emphasis on social capital may cause policy makers to overlook
opportunities to address financial capital and human capital deficiencies in urban
organizations and the communities in which they are found. Second, an
overemphasis on social capital ignores the degree to which it becomes unstable as
interorganizational networks proliferate. As a result, focusing too heavily on
mobilizing social capital and implementing urban policy through nonprofits
ignores the weaknesses that many of these organizations have in terms of capacity
building and collaboration (Silverman, 2001, p. 264).
Increasing evidence has pointed to the importance of adequate organizational-level
capacity in facilitating improvements in community-level outcomes (Nowell & Foster-
Fishman, 2011).
49
Interview with the author, Dec. 4, 2008
103
This chapter examines neighborhood histories to demonstrate the role of external
institutions in building local organizational capacities. In the cases of Boyle Heights and
Pacoima, strategic investments in neighborhoods from outside non-profit organizations
have had far-reaching impacts on the communities, although these impacts vary due to
the nature of institutional investments and the organizing norms promoted. In contrast, a
paternalistic approach by political leaders towards neighborhoods stifles the development
of organizational capacity in some communities, such as in Watts. While Watts achieves
gains from political power through legacies of protest politics, arguably, the community’s
weaker organizational capacities limit access to other resources and mechanisms for
community improvement.
Historical Influences on Neighborhood Organizing Norms
A focus on historical trajectories also demonstrates how unique neighborhood
historical trajectories—for example, the timing and nature of institutional investments in
local capacity building—can condition the development of particular norms that persist in
organizational networks. In his history of neighborhood organizing in America, Robert
Fisher (1994) develops a typology of the dominant forms of neighborhood organizing—
social work, political activist and neighborhood maintenance—that have occurred
throughout U.S. history as seen in Table 11. He highlights the importance of national
historical contexts in influencing local politics as “neighborhood organizing efforts
develop in a larger context that transcends local borders and determines the dominant
form of neighborhood organizing in any era” (1994, p. 188).
104
Table 11: History of Neighborhood Organizing: Three Dominant Approaches
Social Work Political Activist Neighborhood
Maintenance
Concept of
community
Social organism Political unit
Power base
Neighborhood residence
Problem condition Social disorganization
Social conflict
Powerlessness
Exploitation
Neighborhood destruction
Threats to property values
or neighborhood
homogeneity
Insufficient services
Organized group Working and lower class Working and lower class Upper and middle class
Role of organizer Professional social worker
Enabler and advocate
Coordinator and planner
Political activist
Mobilizer
Educator
Elected spokesperson
Civic leader
Interest group leader
Role of
neighborhood
residents
Partners with professional
Recipients of benefits
Fellow activists
Indigenous leaders
Mass support
Dues-paying members
Strategy Seek consensus
Pursue gradualist tactics
Work with power structure
Promote social reform
Engage in conflict
Mediate
Challenge power structure
Seek consensus
Do political lobbying
Engage in legal action
Goals Form groups
Achieve social integration
Deliver services
Bring about social justice
Obtain, maintain or
restructure power
Develop alternative
institutions
Improver property value
Maintain neighborhood
Deliver services
Examples Social settlements
Community centers
Community chests
Community Action
Program
United Way
Tenant organizations
Alinsky programs
Student Nonviolent
Coordinating Committee
(SNCC)
Neighborhood
preservation associations
Neighborhood civic clubs
Property owners’
associations
Source: Adapted from Fisher, 1994
In his typology, Fisher (1994) argues that social work organizing characterized by
social service delivery at the neighborhood level dominated during the Progressive Era
from 1886 to 1929. Rather than challenge existing power structures, social work
organizing tends to involve service-delivery organizations, operate within power
structures and pursue consensus. In contrast, political activist organizing distinguished by
oppositional efforts where issues of power were fundamental was prominent in
105
neighborhoods from 1929 to 1946—when the Communist, Socialist and other radical
movements dominated—and in the 1960s with growing recognition of racial and
socioeconomic inequality, and the emergence of the civil rights movement (Fisher, 1994).
Finally, neighborhood maintenance organizing marked by middle-class defensiveness
against neighborhood change and threats to the neighborhood dominated from 1946 to
1960 during the McCarthy era’s anti-radical sentiments as well as in the 1980s with the
turn toward government privatization (Fisher, 1994).
Fisher acknowledges that “neighborhood organizing projects do have a significant
origin, nature, and existence of their own at the local level,” but he focuses on the role of
national and international political and economic contexts as “to no small degree, the
larger political-economic context determines the general tenor, goals and strategies, even
the likelihood of success, of local efforts” (1994, p. 188). However, in addition to a
historicized view of community organizing, this study spatializes the development of
community organizing by demonstrating that dominant organizing norms, conditioned by
historical events particular to place, differ across neighborhoods. In other words,
neighborhood trajectories—such as the timing in a particular era and the nature of
institutional investments in organizational capacities—can shape local organizing norms
that vary across neighborhoods as opposed to over time. Thus, the different
neighborhood organizing norms—social work, political activist and neighborhood
maintenance—can characterize different organizational networks across different
geographies, persist over time and continue to be shaped by contemporary contexts.
106
While neighborhoods can—and more often than not—embody multiple
organizing norms, some organizing norms are more emblematic of neighborhoods than
others. For example, while some Boyle Heights organizations today reflect social work
and neighborhood maintenance organizing norms, institutional investments with roots in
the radical organizing era of the 1930s and 1940s have promoted the well-recognized
norms of political activism, grassroots organizing and conflict-oriented politics that
utilize bonding relationships among groups with shared interests.
In Pacoima, institutional investments that began in the more conservative 1980s
with its emphasis on privatization and voluntarism promoted social work norms in the
community that facilitated a more collaborative, consensual approach to politics
involving bonding relationships among groups to achieve policy goals and linking
relationships with supportive funders. And finally in Watts, the community has
experienced more severe disinvestment compared to the other case study neighborhoods
that has limited local capacities; however, the community’s history of protest politics
beginning with the 1965 violent outbreak of civil unrest during the tumultuous 1960s era
has engendered norms of political activism expressed through strong linking relationships
with state actors that provide unprecedented access to decision-makers.
Demographic Transitions and Institutional Development Over Time
Finally, Los Angeles’ history of growing socio-spatial diversity has undeniable
implications for the development of organizational networks at the community level.
Histories of neighborhood socio-demographic change, such as differing experiences of
racial transition in communities, influence the development and activities of
107
organizational networks. In particular, challenges to building social capital emerge with
lags in institutional development, where existing organizational networks may not
represent new residents entering communities as a result from changing migrational
patterns. As Cohen (1999) argues, “indigenous” institutions particularly are crucial for
marginal populations, which have limited access to dominant institutions. Thus, marginal
groups “rely upon indigenous organizations, leaders, networks, and norms to provide
some version of the resources and information that are unavailable from dominant
institutions and relationships” (Cohen, 1999, p. 51); however, this study highlights how
the stage of development of indigenous institutions, shaped by trajectories of
demographic change, varies across neighborhoods.
For example, Boyle Heights has a relatively stable Latino population with a long
history of institution building that has facilitated the representation of the Latino
population’s diverse community interests. In contrast, Pacoima, referred to as a “young
Boyle Heights,” more recently shifted to a Latino community and thus has a more recent
history of institution building dominated and supported by outside non-profit and
philanthropic organizations. And finally, in Watts, racial transition is currently underway
from a predominantly African-American to a predominantly Latino community with a
short history of institution building among the growing Latino population that limits the
organizational representation and influence of Latino residents.
In sum, this chapter finds varying trajectories in the historical development of
organizational capacities, organizing norms and organizational relationships that
permeate organizational networks, which suggests some processes of path dependency in
108
the development of organizational networks that build on previous investments. This
finding points to the importance of contextualizing understandings of organizational
social capital in terms of history and geography as well as the importance of investing in
the development of organizational capacity, and purposive relationship building among
organizations and other institutional actors. Table 12 summarizes the neighborhood
historical trajectories that contribute to contemporary characteristics of organizational
politics in the three case study neighborhoods.
Table 12: Historical Development of Organizational Networks and Social Capital
Neighborhood Historical Trajectory Contemporary Characteristics of
Organizational Politics
Organizing Norms*
Boyle Heights History of capacity building
and mobilization dating to
the 1940s; often in response
to community threats
Active non-profit sector with many
CBOs functioning as community
organizing vehicles
Political activism
through grassroots
mobilization
Pacoima Targeted philanthropic
investments in building
organizational capacity
begin in 1980s
Networks of philanthropic and
non-profit organizations working
in a relatively apolitical manner
Social work; norms of
collaboration among
non-profit
organizations
Watts History of protest politics
marked by the 1965 Watts
and 1992 South Los Angeles
outbreaks of civil disorder
Weaker organizational capacity
due to historic disinvestment;
strong, confrontational
relationships with public officials
Political activism
through state–society
relationships
*Based on Fisher’s (1994) typology of organizing norms
The historical trajectories of the three case study neighborhoods and their linkages to
contemporary characteristics of organizational politics are detailed in this chapter. In
turn, Chapter 6 will relate how contemporary community contexts continue to shape
organizational networks and their activities in important ways, such as the emergence of
neighborhood maintenance organizing in Boyle Heights in recent years due to
development and gentrification pressures.
109
Boyle Heights: The Creation of a Latino Barrio
Originally called Paredon Blanco (White Bluffs) during the era of Mexican and
Spanish and control, the land that later became Boyle Heights was sparsely populated by
a few families and used primarily for grazing and vineyards in the early 19
th
century. In
1858, Irish immigrant Andrew Boyle—the first Anglo-American to live in Los Angeles’
eastside (Acuña, 1984)—purchased land in Paredon Blanco, which his son-in-law
subdivided in 1876 for residential development and re-named Boyle Heights in Boyle’s
honor. The extension of the Los Angeles Cable Railway into Boyle Heights in 1889
facilitated residential settlement in the community. Well-to-do Anglos built spacious
houses within view of the Los Angeles River (Wild, 2005). Mexican railroad workers
settled nearby in “Boxcarvilles” established by railroad companies.
In the 1920s, many Mexican immigrants established themselves as homeowners
in East Los Angeles neighborhoods, including Boyle Heights (Sanchez, 1993). Moreover,
by the 1920s, a significant Jewish population had settled in Boyle Heights with Brooklyn
Avenue—lined with kosher butchers, bakeries, delis, bookstores and other shops catering
to Jewish patrons—serving as the thriving hub of Los Angeles’ Jewish community. By
1930, Boyle Heights had nearly 10,000 Jewish households (Sanchez, 1993). The
working-class Jewish community in Boyle Heights—home to several local union
chapters reflecting the radical politics of Jewish workers—contrasted with elite Jewish
communities established further west in the city (Sanchez, 2004).
The multiracial community—what some have dubbed the “Ellis Island of the
West Coast”—was home to many other ethnic groups as well, including a significant
110
Japanese-American population. As Avila (2007) describes, by virtue of proximity to
centers of employment and lack of racial restrictions, “East Los Angeles attracted a
racially and ethnically diverse, working-class population. Jews and Mexicans
predominated, but they shared that space with Italians, Japanese, Chinese, Russians,
Armenians, and African Americans (Avila, 2007, p. 85).” In 1915, construction was
completed on the Breed Street Shul, which became the spiritual center of the Jewish
community in Boyle Heights. A few blocks away on Mott Street, the city’s first Japanese
Buddhist temple—the Los Angeles Higashi Honganji Buddhist Temple founded in Little
Tokyo in 1904—relocated to Boyle Heights in 1926 and remained there for 50 years. The
community’s multi-racial history continues to serve as a source of pride today that
residents frequently invoke.
To accommodate the wartime housing shortage precipitated by the boom in war
industry-related work, three public housing developments—Ramona Gardens (the city’s
oldest public housing development), Estrada Courts and Aliso Village/Pico Gardens—
were constructed in the 1940s in Boyle Heights. The community’s market location near
downtown Los Angeles historically has played an important role in urban development
and continues to shape urban development and organizational politics today. Viewed as a
means of “slum clearance,” public housing developments were built in Boyle Heights in
part because of its role as an “eastern gateway to the city” (Cuff, 2001, p. 107). However,
like other U.S. public housing developments, Boyle Heights’ developments eventually
became physically, politically and racially isolated.
111
Boyle Heights began transitioning to a predominantly Mexican population in the
1930s and 1940s when other ethnic groups began leaving East Los Angeles in significant
numbers (Sanchez, 1993). Many Jewish residents moved to the western portions of Los
Angeles, where a more assimilated Jewish community had established itself (Avila,
2007). After returning from internment camps after the war, Boyle Heights’ Japanese-
American population re-settled in outer-lying suburban communities. In addition, despite
strong opposition from a diverse array of community groups, the postwar construction of
four major freeways in the 1940s and 1960s to facilitate access to outer-lying areas
displaced about one-tenth of Boyle Heights residents (Avila, 1998), vivisected the
neighborhood and contributed to the exodus of non-Mexican residents as the interchange
built to connect the tangle of freeways became “one of the most intrusive structures ever
placed into an urban neighborhood (Roth, 2004, p. 731).
The out-migration of Boyle Heights residents created space for Los Angeles’
growing Mexican population, bolstered by the federal Bracero Program that invited 4
million Mexican guest workers to work in U.S. agriculture between 1942 and 1964
(Avila, 2007). Early 20
th
-century Los Angeles’ central city neighborhoods were
characterized by multi-ethnic communities, where inter-ethnic interactions occurred daily
and relationships entailed conflict, friendship and tolerance (Wild, 2005); however, as
non-White populations grew in Los Angeles during and following World War II, racial
tensions rose, and central city neighborhoods increasingly experienced racial segregation.
Illustrating growing racial strife in Los Angeles, the Zoot Suit Riots occurred in
1943, when hundreds of U.S. military personnel in transit to their stations in the Pacific
112
rampaged through downtown Los Angeles and surrounding neighborhoods, such as
Boyle Heights, for 10 days beating Mexican-American and other non-White youth. The
riots were precipitated in part by the “Sleepy Lagoon Murder” investigation of the death
of 22-year-old José Díaz, which led to a Los Angeles Police Department dragnet that
rounded up more than 600 Mexican-American youth for questioning and the largest mass
trial in California history with 17 defendants.
In addition to racial animosity, public policies also facilitated the exodus of
Europeans and Anglos from central city neighborhoods, which “reflected and contributed
to a hardening of racial divisions” (Wild, 2005, p. 203). For example, in the early 20
th
century, the Los Angeles City County established zoning laws to protect west Los
Angeles communities, largely inhabited by White residents, from industrial development;
however, working-class neighborhoods, such as those on the eastside of Los Angeles,
were designated as industrial zones (Wild, 2005).
Moreover, federal housing policies in the 1930s supported redlining practices in
central city neighborhoods, such as Boyle Heights. In 1936, the Home Owners Loan
Corporation (HOLC) assigned Boyle Heights—described as “a ‘melting pot’ area …
literally honeycombed with diverse and subversive racial elements” (as quoted in Cuff,
2001, p. 112)—a red grade, which prevented lending in the community. Federal housing
policies in effect limited government loans to White homebuyers and restricted them to
housing purchases in White neighborhoods, which along with massive freeway
construction encouraged movement to outlying areas (Wild, 2005).
113
By 1960, most of Boyle Heights’ Jewish population had moved out with only 4
percent of Los Angeles’ Jewish population living there (Sanchez, 2004). National
immigration reform in 1965 combined with the pull of economic restructuring that
generated demand for low-wage labor and the push of political unrest in Central
American countries contributed to Los Angeles’ immigrant boom between 1970 and
1990. Boyle Heights, a solidly Latino barrio, continued to serve as an immigrant gateway
for Mexican and Central American immigrants. In 1994, Brooklyn Avenue was renamed
Avenida Cesar E. Chavez after the labor and Chicano civil rights leader.
The historical development of Boyle Heights into a solidly Latino community
with a mix of multi-generational residents and more recent immigrants has important
implications for contemporary organizational politics. Today, Boyle Heights’s population
is about 93 percent Latino. Thus, compared to other Los Angeles neighborhoods
undergoing racial transition, Boyle Heights does not experience significant inter-racial
tensions within the community. Rather, intra-racial conflict in Boyle Heights exists often
along lines of socioeconomic and immigrant status. However, with the community’s long
history of institution building, representation exists of the diverse interests of Boyle
Heights’ Latino community with different organizations advocating different community
values. For example, as a multi-generational Latino community, several “progressive”
non-profit organizations in the community are led by younger, Latinos who espouse
different community visions as opposed to older generations more concerned with quality
of life issues.
114
While slowed by the recent economic downturn, development and gentrification
pressures have increased in recent years due to the construction of the Metro Gold Line
extension, connecting Eastside neighborhoods to the central city. Boyle Heights’
proximate location to downtown has contributed to the contested nature of neighborhood
regeneration in the community today; interestingly, the once street-car suburb is now
being transformed by a modern street car of sorts, the Metro Gold Line. As one
respondent noted, “in the case of the Eastside, transportation has always played a very,
very, how can I say, transformative role in both the negative and positive sense of the
word.”
50
These development issues, which have pitted community organizations against
each other, remain a significant concern that will be discussed in Chapter 6.
Boyle Heights’ Legacy of Grassroots Organization
In addition to the community’s history of cultural change, Boyle Heights also has
a history of community encroachments, community mobilization against these
encroachments and institutional support for local capacity building dating at least to the
1940s that has shaped the development of local organizational capacities and cultivated
norms of political activism. With the support of Saul Alinsky’s Industrial Areas
Foundation (IAF) that emerged in an era of radical organizing in the 1930s and 1940s,
community organizing reflecting norms of political activism among Boyle Heights’
Latino population grew beginning in the 1940s. World War II served as a “watershed” as
“after the war, for the first time, large-scale political organizing on the part of Mexican
Americans took place in Los Angeles” (Garcia Bedolla, 2005, p. 49). In 1949, Edward R.
50
Interview with the author, March 25, 2008
115
Roybal—a Boyle Heights native—became the first Mexican American to win a seat on
the Los Angeles City Council since 1887. After losing his first election bid in 1947,
Roybal co-founded the Community Service Organization (CSO)—well-known for
training labor leaders Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta—to improve political
representation for East Los Angeles residents through voter registration efforts and
community advocacy of local needs.
Demonstrating the importance of institutional support for local capacity building,
the CSO was co-founded by Fred Ross, an IAF organizer sent by Alinsky to assist
Roybal. The IAF’s involvement stabilized the organization and allowed it to focus on
empowering residents and addressing community issues (Underwood, 1997). Growing to
more than 3,000 members, the CSO registered 17,000 new voters (Underwood, 1997) and
paved the way for Roybal’s successful 1949 City Council bid, marking a “pivotal
moment in the emergence of Chicano consciousness” (Roth, 2004, p. 743). Roybal’s
campaign spoke to the community grievances experienced by Boyle Heights and other
minority communities, such as destructive freeway construction, police harassment and
the lack of recreational facilities (Roth, 2004). With support from minority groups,
Roybal was elected to U.S. Congress in 1962 and represented the 25
th
Congressional
District, which included Boyle Heights, for 30 years. In the 1970s, he began advocating
for federal funding for alternative transportation systems to East Los Angeles due to
negative freeway impacts, such as air pollution.
By the 1960s, the CSO no longer served as the leading advocate of social change;
however, the more student-oriented rather than neighborhood-based Chicano movement,
116
influenced by the CSO’s organizing activities, emerged in the late 1960s in Los Angeles’
Eastside (Pardo, 1998).
Even as the CSO’s own influence diminished, the networks that the organization
built upon and fostered continued to influence politics into the 1960s with its civil
rights and Chicana/o movements. The CSO shaped a generation of ethnic protest
and politics, providing foundations upon which 1960s and 1970s-era Chicana/o
activists built. It launched the civil rights careers of future activists like César
Chávez and Dolores Huerta, whose influence extended later into the Chicana/o
movement (Bernstein, 2011, p. 265).
In March 1968, in a political action now known as the “blowouts,” 10,000 Chicano
students walked out of five East Los Angeles schools, including Roosevelt High School
in Boyle Heights, to protest the lack of Mexican-American teachers and administrators,
discussion of Mexican-American history in school curricula, and resources for inner-city
schools. Marking the birth of the Chicano movement, the blowouts led to the
organization of the Chicano Moratorium, a movement protesting the Vietnam War,
between 1969 and 1971.
Political experience gained through participation in the CSO and other influential
Eastside organizations—such as the labor union-supported East Los Angeles Community
Union (founded in 1968) and the IAF-trained United Neighborhood Organization
(founded in 1976) sponsored by the Catholic Church—led to continued community
activism in Boyle Heights (Pardo, 1998). For example, the Mothers of East Los Angeles
(MELA) formed in 1985 out of Resurrection Church in Boyle Heights to fight the
proposed siting of a state prison in the community. Pardo’s study of the women involved
in MELA reveals that for many of these activists, “experiences in groups like CSO and
UNO crisscrossed their life stories,” which shaped their commitment to the community
117
and their contemporary grassroots activism (1998, p. 27). The women involved in MELA
participated in protests, demonstrations, media campaigns and lobbying among other
tactics to halt the prison construction.
In another example of the role of institutional support for local capacity building,
the California Province of Jesuits in collaboration with local residents founded Proyecto
Pastoral out of the Dolores Mission Church in 1986 to address needs in Boyle Heights,
which community members described as a “disenfranchised community.” Still active
today, Proyecto Pastoral most recently served as the lead agency in obtaining funds to
address education issues in the community from President Barack Obama’s Promise
Neighborhood initiative. Reflecting a commitment to grassroots mobilization, Proyecto
Pastoral’s vision involves ensuring that the “community is empowered to address
evolving challenges and practices community solidarity. The organization serves as a
model for similar communities of empowerment and community participation in self and
social transformation.”
51
Demonstrating the significance of initial investments in local capacity building,
Proyecto Pastoral facilitated the formation of two other active community organizations.
In 1988, Father Gregory Boyle, a Jesuit pastor of the Dolores Mission at the time, created
Homeboy Industries, which initially began as a job training and placement program under
Proyecto Pastoral called Jobs For a Future. Homeboy Industries grew out of the gang
violence that permeated Boyle Heights, which has one of the city’s densest gang
populations. The now nationally recognized organization operates the largest gang
51
Proyecto Pastoral at Dolores Mission Vision. Accessed 2/18/2012 at http://www.proyectopastoral.org/aboutus.php.
118
intervention and prison re-entry program in the nation. In addition, the non-profit
organization InnerCity Struggle branched off of Proyecto Pastoral in 1994 primarily to
address educational justice issues through the same ethos of community organizing and
community empowerment.
Thus, often in response to community threats, political activism and community
mobilization—at times successful, at other times not—have fostered notions of political
empowerment and political efficacy. Activism on one issue or through one organization
in the community has led to political learning that spills over into activism on other issues
and through other organizations. For example, Boyle Heights activists who opposed
freeway construction in the 1960s that displaced hundreds of residents “transformed this
experience into a springboard for resistance” to additional community encroachments,
including the proposed siting of a state prison near Boyle Heights (Pardo, 1998, p. 62).
As Pardo writes:
The freeways that cut through communities and disrupted neighborhoods remain
as a tangible reminder of shared injustices and the vulnerability of the community
in the 1950s. The community’s social and political history thus informs
perceptions of its current predicament; however, today’s activists emphasize the
progression toward political empowerment rather than the powerlessness of the
community (1998, p. 73).
Garcia Bedolla (2005) reaches similar conclusions in her comparison of Mexican-
American youth activism in East Los Angeles and the City of Montebello. In East Los
Angeles, interview respondents discussed community mobilization and collective action
as a response to community problems; in contrast, interview respondents in Montebello,
which “experienced a much more paternalistic attitude on the part of the dominant group
and likely as a result, much less community-based activity and organization,” primarily
119
suggested government intervention as a community solution (Garcia Bedolla, 2005, p.
59). Garcia Bedolla finds that:
The difference is that [East Los Angeles’] strong sense of local community and
group worth, which likely is a product of East Los Angeles’ long history as a
Latino area and location for Latino mobilization, gives them a positive identity
that makes them feel efficacious and motivates them to engage in collective action
to solve area problems (2005, p. 166).
Los Angeles’ Eastside residents, such as those in Boyle Heights, developed a distinct
identity in part because of their segregation from broader society, which has fostered
community solidarity (Garcia Bedolla, 2005).
Echoing Garcia Bedolla’s findings, Boyle Heights’ history of both
marginalization and mobilization was well recognized among interview respondents in
this study. “The issues always have been issues of economic justice,” an interview
respondent said of the challenges facing Boyle Heights.
52
A second respondent related
Boyle Heights’ “long history of negative impacts from government agencies,” such as
through the construction of freeways and the use of eminent domain to acquire residential
properties.
53
A third interview respondent observed that:
Because the community has been a minority community of working-class
residents, that has had a big stake in contributing to why we have so many
problems and concerns with government entities ignoring the community and not
putting enough investment in the community.
54
However, respondents in this study also frequently referenced the richness of
Boyle Heights’ culture and history of community mobilization. Boyle Heights continues
52
Interview with the author, March 25, 2008
53
Interview with the author, June 13, 2008
54
Interview with the author, Jan. 9, 2008
120
to have a large and active civic sector with the largest number of non-profit organizations
among the three case studies. As one observer noted, non-profit organizations today
largely “run the community,” and work to access resources and influence local politics.
55
Another described Boyle Heights as a neighborhood with a continued history of
community involvement in trying to improve the community, where the push for
resources from the community has evolved to policies at the city level focusing on
bringing resources to Boyle Heights.
56
Moreover, as an InnerCity Struggle administrator
asserted, “Boyle Heights has a long history of bringing together community residents to
solve their own problems and we will continue to build from this legacy.”
57
Thus, Boyle Heights is characterized by a history of community encroachments—
freeway construction, the proposed siting of a state prison and toxic incinerator, the
redevelopment of public housing etc.—that has catalyzed community mobilization and
fostered political learning, local capacities and norms of political activism. Moreover,
Boyle Heights has a relatively long history of institutional investments in capacity
building with early institutional support from organizations—such as the IAF, labor
unions and religious institutions—that fostered the internal development of several local
organizations; they also particularly cultivated norms of political activism in the
community. These legacies continue to shape community action and organizational
politics in Boyle Heights today. Most recently, community action has centered on
55
Interview with the author, June 4, 2009
56
Interview with the author, Jan. 9, 2008
57
Promesa Boyle Heights Press Release. Accessed 2/19/2012 at
http://www.proyectopastoral.org/PNBHPressRelease.php.
121
development and gentrification pressures spurred in part by the construction of the Metro
Gold Line extension that will be discussed in Chapter 6.
Pacoima: Globalization and Racial Transition
In 1873, State Senator Charles Maclay purchased 56,000 acres of the Rancho Ex-
Mission San Fernando Mexican land grant, which eventually comprised several
communities in the Northeast San Fernando Valley, including Pacoima, Sylmar and the
neighboring City of San Fernando. In 1887, lawyer and real estate developer Jouett Allen
purchased 1,000 acres of Maclay’s land between the Pacoima Wash and the Tujunga
Wash. Allen subdivided half of the land into 1-acre tracts, part of which became
Pacoima. Pacoima initially was established as a railroad stop for the Southern Pacific
Railroad. The community’s name came from the San Gabrielino Indians who had called
the area Pacoima, meaning “rushing waters,” as flooding from nearby streams (Maida,
2008) emanating from the snow-capped San Gabriel Mountains often occurred (Muller &
Espenshade, 1985). Prone to flooding, Pacoima primarily served as a farming community
until World War II (Maida, 2008). Home to European Americans, California natives and
Mexican nationals, the community was “dotted with olive groves, peach and apricot
orchards, orange and lemon groves, alfalfa fields, and chicken ranches” (Maida, 2008, p.
188). Japanese vegetable farmers and flower growers also lived and worked in the
community (Barraclough, 2011).
Moreover, Pacoima became an affordable and desirable suburb for railroad
workers; the community drew a small proportion of minority railroad laborers with
Mexican, Japanese and African-American residents living east of the railroad tracks,
122
while White residents continued to defend other parts of the San Fernando Valley (Sides,
2003). With their multi-ethnic environment, Pacoima and the neighboring community of
San Fernando constituted the Valley’s “unofficial minority district” (Barraclough, 2011).
As writer Mary Helen Ponce, who grew up in Pacoima during the 1940s and 1950s,
recalls in her autobiography,
Most of the townspeople were Mexican immigrants, as were my parents who had
moved to Pacoima in the 1920s. Across the tracks lived the white folks, many of
them Okies. There were few blacks in the area up until the early fifties, when the
Joe Louis housing tract near Glenoaks Boulevard allowed black ex-GIs to buy
there. (1993, p. 3).
World War II brought the establishment of aircraft and other manufacturing plants into
the area as well as residential housing for the growing workforce. To support the
burgeoning industries in the Northeast San Fernando Valley, racially restrictive
covenants were relaxed in Pacoima (Maida, 2008); thus, Pacoima became one of the few
places in suburban Los Angeles where non-White residents could own homes.
Housing developments, like one purposively named “Joe Louis Homes” in the
late 1940s, were advertised in the Black press to attract African-American homebuyers
(Sides, 2003). Other developments built in the early 1950s and open to non-white
residents included the Hansen Hills (Maida, 2008), Green View Homes and Valley View
Village tract developments (Sides, 2003). During the wave of urban renewal in the 1950s,
lower-income African-American, Latino and White families also began moving to
Pacoima with the construction of the San Fernando Gardens public housing development
(Maida, 2008), which replaced a predominantly Mexican barrio (Ponce, 1999). During
the war, approximately 2,000 black migrants settled in Pacoima; another 6,000 black
123
residents moved to the area in the 1950s (Sides, 2003). According to the 1960 U.S.
Census, 90 percent of the Valley’s nearly 10,000 African-American residents lived in
Pacoima, where factory and manufacturing jobs were readily available (Maida, 2008).
During the 1960s and 1970s, Pacoima “began to transition from resolutely white and
working class or middle class to majority Black and Latino” (Barraclough, 2011, p. 132).
In the 1980s and 1990s, however, globalization and economic restructuring led to
the closure of several manufacturing sites, such as the General Motors plant in
neighboring Van Nuys, the Lockheed aircraft plant in Burbank and the Price Pfister
plumbing plant in Pacoima, and thus a loss of well-paying jobs. Since the signing of the
1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, estimates point to a loss of approximately
half of the minimum- and lower-wage jobs in manufacturing and warehousing in the area
(Maida, 2008). The lack of jobs forced many African-American families to leave the
community, while Latino immigrants, many of whom pooled resources, began to take
advantage of the affordable housing available (Maida, 2008). The same push and pull
forces that brought waves of Latino immigrants to Boyle Heights between the 1970s and
1990s also affected Pacoima.
In addition to the impacts of economic restructuring, as the 1968 federal Fair
Housing Act banned discriminatory housing practices, many African-American residents,
who had become more upwardly mobile, began moving out of the neighborhood in the
1970s. Today, Pacoima has transitioned into a predominantly Latino community with a
population of more than 80 percent Latino or Hispanic. In contrast to the other case study
neighborhoods in this study, rates of homeownership in Pacoima are relatively high at
124
approximately 56 percent (compared to 24 percent in Boyle Heights and 32 percent in
Watts), according to the 2000 U.S. Census.
The community continues to serve as a gateway for Latino immigrants. Thus,
according to interview respondents, overcrowding is a significant issue in Pacoima as
multiple families often live in single-family homes with converted garages; by some
estimates, about 20 percent of residents rent rooms in single-family homes and garages
(Maida, 2008). As described in one study of Pacoima:
The driveways, front yards, and back yards are likely to be crowded with the cars
and trucks of the several families living together not only in the small houses but
also in the garages and other outbuildings. According to one resident, an old
garage now houses an eleven-member family from El Salvador. Residential
housing Pacoima is densely populated—averaging almost one person to every
room if living rooms, dining rooms, and kitchens are all included (Muller &
Espenshade, 1985, p. 72).
Moreover, from its legacy as an industrial base, Pacoima is surrounded by three
freeways and divided by a railroad line, and it has been disproportionately burdened by
industrial activity with more than 300 industrial facilities and a small airport within its
territory. The neighborhood contains four U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Superfund clean-up sites and several brownfields,
58
and thus has
Endured multiple crises, including deindustrialization, transnational migration,
and environmental degradation compounded by natural hazards, as the
community was near the epicenter of the 1994 Northridge earthquake (Maida,
2008, p. 187).
Politically marginalized and distant from downtown decision-makers, lower-income
residents in the community lacked influence over city decision-making; for example, at
one time, the city allowed entrepreneurs to re-zone half of the only local park near the
58
The other case study neighborhoods do not have Superfund sites.
125
Vaughan Street Elementary School into an industrial use (Oppenheim, 1999). In the
1970s, within the City Council District encompassing Pacoima,
Minority residents were considered a political throwaway, since they voted in
very low numbers and rarely gave campaign contributions, and thus their needs
were often overshadowed by the more vocal and politically empowered white
residents of Shadow Hills and Sunland (Barraclough, 2011, p. 133).
While the representation of community interests for Pacoima has improved,
environmental justice remains a significant concern for the community, which also lacks
many of the services and amenities found in the nearby City of San Fernando.
In 1978, City Councilman Bob Ronka attempted to revitalize Pacoima through the
establishment of the non-profit Pacoima Revitalization, Inc.—a public-private partnership
with the city that aimed to provide low-interest loans for home rehabilitation, renovate
several local shopping centers, beautify the community and attract private investment
(Banks, 1980c). However, the organization, funded in part by federal Community Block
Development Grants, faced a number of controversies, some reflecting the racial change
underway. For example, Black homeowners in Pacoima argued that the organization’s
programs unfairly provided more benefits to Latino homeowners as the Census tracts
eligible for loans were disproportionately Latino (Banks, 1980a). Moreover, Pacoima
residents criticized the organization for failing to include broad community representation
on its board of directors or allow local residents to participate in decision-making
processes (Banks, 1980b).
In 1980, the board unanimously selected a White West Los Angeles businessman
to serve as executive director of the organization (Banks, 1980b). Largely ineffective, the
organization failed to meet performance goals; for example, it only assisted in the
126
rehabilitation of seven homes in 1980, although the organization had a goal of
rehabilitating 105 homes (Banks, 1981a). These controversies played out in internal
struggles within the organization (Trounson, 1980) and between the organization and the
city (Banks, 1981b). The organization was dismantled in 1981 upon the recommendation
of the city’s Community Development Department and a unanimous vote by the City
Council (Banks, 1981b). City officials later discovered that the organization had misused
funds (Banks, 1981c).
Like Boyle Heights, Pacoima’s history involves a story of cultural change,
although one that has occurred in more recent decades compared to the transition of
Boyle Heights from a Jewish to a Latino community during the post-War era. The
transition of Pacoima into a predominantly Latino community in the last three decades
also has important implications for contemporary organizational politics. With near
completion of racial transition, racial tensions are not as sharply expressed in Pacoima
between the Latino and African-American communities compared to other parts of the
city; however, some tensions still exist, and African-American institutions, such as
churches, remain active in the community.
Moreover, with the more recent transition to a predominantly Latino community,
the representation of Latino interests through elected offices and non-profit organizations
has developed more recently compared to Boyle Heights. For example, community
members characterize Pacoima as a “young Boyle Heights” with the election of Pacoima
residents to office—such as former City Councilman and current state senator Alex
Padilla—occurring in the last 15 years. Elected in 1999, Padilla became the first Latino
127
and youngest person ever to serve as City Council president in 2001 at 28 years old.
Other young leaders from Pacoima subsequently have emerged to head community non-
profits. Targeted investment to build local organizational capacities also began in the last
three decades in Pacoima, and non-profit organizations have sought to engage Pacoima
residents, including its significant immigrant population; however, non-profit and
philanthropic organizations with bases outside of the community play a significant role in
Pacoima as opposed to the dominance of locally based organizations in Boyle Heights.
Investments in Collaborative Capacities in Pacoima
While political activism through grassroots organizing also occurs in Pacoima,
one of the prominent features of the community today is the collaborative norms that
have emerged over time among non-profit organizations that largely reflect a politics of
consensus. Primarily led by non-profit service providers, organizational networks in
Pacoima reflect Fisher’s (1994) conception of social work organizing, where
organizations tend to work within existing structures of power rather than exhibiting the
political activist norms characteristic of organizational networks in Boyle Heights.
Pacoima, like Boyle Heights, illustrates the path dependent effects of targeted
investments by external, resource-rich institutions in building local organizational
capacities; however, institutional support in Pacoima, which emerged in a more
conservative era of community organizing in the 1980s, primarily focused on facilitating
organizational collaboration and capacities to accomplish policy-oriented efforts.
Organizations active in Pacoima particularly have obtained resources for
community projects, and acted as advocates and initiators of community interventions in
128
the policy arenas of youth development and education. Moreover, in contrast to the
prevalence of locally based organizations in Boyle Heights, institutional investments
have supported the work of many non-profit organizations that have bases outside the
community. Thus, using a more de-politicized approach, organizational networks in
Pacoima tend to operate in a manner distinct from organizational networks in
communities, such as Boyle Heights.
In Pacoima, non-profit collaboration has roots reaching back to 1986 and the
United Way North Angeles Region, which initiated community building efforts in
Pacoima under its Underserved Geographic Areas Project (Maida, 2008). The United
Way identified the lack of educational attainment as its focus and selected Vaughn Street
Elementary school as a demonstration site to “address non-educational barriers to
educational success through integrating services” (Maida, 2008, p. 190). Working with
the downtown-based non-profit Los Angeles Education Partnership (LAEP), the United
Way established the Vaughn Family Center in 1989 as a “one stop resource and referral
center that would assist children’s transition from preschool and promote parental
involvement in the school community” (Maida, 2008, p. 190).
The parent center program sought to connect residents to and integrate the
services of more than 30 public and non-profit service providers in the community. By
1997, the school transformed from one of the worst-performing schools in Pacoima in
standardized test scores and attendance to the best school in reading scores and one of the
highest attendance records in the state; many community members linked the school’s
success to the parent center (Oppenheim, 1999).
129
In 1993, based on the success of the center, the United Way and other funders
supported the FamilyCare/Healthy Kids Collaborative administered by LAEP that aimed
to “provide comprehensive, school-linked services through collaborations with
community agencies to improve student learning and support families” (Maida, 2008, p.
191). In 1995, the parent center model, which has a strong focus on parent engagement
and empowerment, was replicated at five more schools in Pacoima, and the network
remains active today.
This initial investment by the United Way sowed the seeds for the development of
relationships among non-profit, community and philanthropic organizations that have led
to gains for Pacoima. For example, the community-based environmental advocacy
organization, Pacoima Beautiful, began as a beautification committee organized by
parents and volunteers active in the Vaughn Family Center, a parent center at Vaughan
Street Elementary School, in 1995 and was established in 1996 as a separate organization
through the support of other non-profit and philanthropic organizations. LAEP served as
Pacoima Beautiful’s fiscal agent and helped the group develop community relationships
(Maida, 2008). Today, the organization secures resources to address environmental risks
and advocates for environmental justice through its own network of organizational and
institutional relationships, where “Pacoima Beautiful became a catalyst for action, and a
linkage point among community organizations within Pacoima as well as a connection to
universities, nonprofits and government programs from the outside” (Gaeke & Cooper,
2002, p. 14).
130
Additionally, following the 1992 civil unrest in South Los Angeles, the Los
Angeles Urban Funders (LAUF)—a group of philanthropic organizations that pooled
more than $21 million—selected Pacoima as one of three community recipients in part
because of the collaborative partnerships and community-building work already
underway in the neighborhood (Maida, 2008). LAUF strengthened and utilized
Pacoima’s existing parent center network in its own work (Hopkins, 2005). Departing
from the traditional model of philanthropy,
A major goal was fostering the development of a collaborative neighborhood
governance structure which would provide a framework to encourage local
residents and their neighborhood institutions to work in concert with a broad array
of community-based, nonprofit organizations to define, negotiate, shape and carry
out comprehensive neighborhood initiatives (McCaffrey & Letts, 2003, p. 4).
This collaborative approach to local organizational capacity building contrasts with
traditional models of philanthropy that “tend to view non-profits as isolated enterprises
and set up competition among them for scarce resources” (Hopkins, 2005, p. 29). Elwood
Hopkins, former LAUF executive director, explains that:
One leap of faith that almost never happens is when foundations go beyond
grantmaking to make institutional commitments to a nonprofit effort, complete
with nonfinancial contributions. It implies a level of intimacy and commitment
that most consider perilous. LAUF members have been called upon to think of
themselves not only as grantmakers, but as human links between resource-poor
communities and the vast nonfinancial assets that exist throughout our
philanthropic and corporate institutions (2005, p. 46).
LAUF utilized a bi-modal funding system to build organizational capacity while
also supporting direct neighborhood programs. Funders contributed to traditional
programmatic and categorical grants, such the Pacoima Workforce Development
Initiative (PWDI) that utilized Pacoima’s existing parent center network and networks of
131
the regionally based Valley Economic Development Corporation (VEDC). LAUF also
supported curriculum reform initiatives in Pacoima schools by organizations, such as
North Hollywood-based Project Grad Los Angeles; after-school programs by Pacoima
Beautiful, downtown-based LA’s BEST and South Los Angeles-based Kids in Sports
among other organizations; and family support services by LAEP, California State
University-Northridge and the Pacoima-based social service agency MEND among other
organizations (McCaffrey & Letts, 2003). By the end of 2001, LAUF had invested $8.8
million in Pacoima (Gaeke & Cooper, 2002).
The funders also contributed to a pooled fund—of which Pacoima received $1.5
million—to convene agencies, cultivate local leadership, provide management assistance
and facilitate comprehensive planning (McCaffrey & Letts, 2003). The fund was
designed “to be used flexibly to underwrite all of the facilitation, networking, training,
leadership development and management assistance required to set up a comprehensive
initiative” (Hopkins, 2005, p. 16). A VEDC administrator stated that VEDC’s role in
implementing the PWDI would not have been successful without LAUF’s investment in
organizational capacity building and development (McCaffrey & Letts, 2003). The PWDI
served nearly 700 job seekers between 1998 and 2001; a follow-up survey of 466 clients
demonstrated that 46 percent of them had been hired, were still employed or found a new
job (McCaffrey & Letts, 2003).
Moreover, efforts to shape organizational norms influenced not only relationships
between non-profit organizations working in Pacoima but also relationships between non-
profit organizations and external funders, which also strengthened the community’s
132
organizational capacities. For example, LAUF’s relationship with the community evolved
over time from “mild distrust to a form of open ‘shuttle diplomacy,’ managed by LAUF’s
executive director, to open conversations among stakeholders” (Hopkins, 2005, p. 57).
Implicit power relationships began to shift as LAUF moved from gathering input from
non-profit organizations and residents to allowing them to take over resources with very
few restrictions (Hopkins, 2005). Highlighting again the importance of organizational
capacity, “this shift directly corresponded to the increasing maturation of the
neighborhood-based collaboratives, and their ability to synthesize and represent the views
of multiple community constituencies” (Hopkins, 2005, p. 57).
Thus, the development of organizational networks in Pacoima demonstrates the
role of external institutions in supporting the development of social work organizing
norms in the community. Reflecting a politics of consensus rather than of conflict, an
interview respondent from one local organization observed that “we are changing the
paradigm of how we’re working together. It’s not chasing the money. It’s not
competition. It’s what are the needs and who has the resources?”
59
Another interview
respondent more recently involved in the community said they were drawn to Pacoima
because “every organization and every person there is valued. And you feel important to
the work, and there’s an openness, and there’s not a lot of territorialness about like, ‘This
is mine, I’m doing this already. Don’t come here.”
60
A 2009 map of organizational networks in Pacoima created by the non-profit
organizations active in the community depicts the existence of more than a dozen
59
Interview with the author, June 19, 2008
60
Interview with the author, Oct. 27, 2009
133
collaborative partnerships that aim to coordinate and obtain resources, address
community needs, and facilitate policy experimentation. Many of these organizational
partners previously were involved in LAUF-funded initiatives, demonstrating how
organizational relationships can shift and reconstitute over time. Rather than direct
confrontation, these collaboratives often work in partnership with government institutions
and actors to accomplish policy goals. For example, a collaborative led by LAEP recently
obtained U.S. Dept. of Education funding to address the high drop-out rate at San
Fernando High School; working with the Los Angeles Unified School District, this
collaborative has implemented a number of new programs at the high school to support
student achievement and coordinate local resources. Leadership by citywide and regional
non-profit organizations continues to dominate these collaborative partnerships, although
concerted efforts have been made to encourage the active involvement of local residents.
Watts: Social Unrest and Community Transitions
Originally part of a Mexico land grant called El Rancho Tajauta, the South Los
Angeles community of Watts began as a labor camp for workers on the Pacific Electric
Railway, which opened a Watts station in 1902. For decades, the station, which is listed
today in the National Register of Historic Places, served as a major stop for the railway’s
Red Car line that stretched from Long Beach to Los Angeles. The community was named
after the Watts family, who donated a 10-acre site where the station was built to Pacific
Electric to catalyze development. Dubbed “Mudtown” for its marshy soil, Watts became
a diverse community of Mexican, Black, Anglo and Japanese residents and was touted as
the “workingman’s garden suburb” (Nicolaides, 2001, p. 80). In particular, early 20
th
-
134
century Los Angeles was hailed as the “golden era” for African Americans with job
opportunities, and less racial segregation and racial violence compared to other U.S.
regions (Anderson, 1996).
Beginning in the 1920s, however, Watt’s white majority population rapidly
increased as did its Black and Mexican populations (Sides, 2003), paralleling the swift
growth of Los Angeles as a whole due in part to in-migration from Southern Blacks and
Whites. With rapid population growth came greater numbers of non-White residents and
less tolerance for multi-ethnic neighborhoods. Racial restrictive covenants, campaigns by
block protective associations and block-busting tactics by realtors contributed to
increasing racial segregation by the 1930s; “by this time, “racial lines began to harden
and a formidable array of forces had the practical effect of herding African Americans
into designated areas of the city” (Anderson, 1996, p. 342).
The wartime labor shortage in the 1940s triggered a second wave of migration of
African Americans from the South to the Los Angeles region; many African Americans
settled in Watts because of its proximity to industrial jobs. The influx of new residents
led to increased demand for housing, which was limited for African Americans due to the
prevalence of racial restrictive covenants and other discriminatory housing practices. As
an early example of community action, Watts played an historic role in the demise of
racial restrictive covenants through the struggle of the Anna and Henry Laws, who fought
a court-ordered eviction notice they received in 1942 after moving into a home they
owned on East 92
nd
Street. Sparking a movement for civil rights and fair housing
practices, the case was linked with other similar cases, which went to the State Supreme
135
Court and eventually were decided by the outcome of the 1948 U.S. Supreme Court case
Shelley v. Kramer that struck down racially restrictive covenants.
The influx of African-American residents to the region and the collapse of
restrictive covenants had significant implications for the Watts community. First, middle-
class African Americans living in Watts began patronizing stores and facilities they
previously had been denied access to as well as moving out of the community, leading to
a growing distance between working-class African Americans in South Central Los
Angeles and middle-class African Americans in the suburbs (Laslett, 1996). Moreover,
White residents increasingly left Watts as with the wartime migration of African
Americans to Los Angeles, “Whites were now forced to interact with Blacks to a degree
unimaginable in pre-war Los Angeles, a situation that generated unprecedented racial
conflict and more frequent articulations of racist sentiments throughout the city” (Sides,
2003, p. 44). At the beginning World War II, the African-American, Mexican and Anglo
populations in Watts were of approximately equal size; however, by 1958, the African-
American population had grown to 95 percent of the Watts population (Sides, 2003).
Exacerbating Los Angeles’ social and racial divides, in the 1950s, Watts became
the “dumping ground for public housing developments that were not welcome in other
parts of Los Angeles” (Sides, 2003, p. 120). Between 1953 and 1955, three large public
housing developments—Nickerson Gardens, Jordan Downs and Imperial Courts—were
constructed in Watts, adding to the existing public housing project built in the
neighborhood in 1942. Intended to be racially integrated, these public housing
developments became predominantly Black in the 1950s as White and Mexican residents
136
left the area. At the same time, the city consistently failed to provide adequate funds for
public services—such as sewage, street repairs and public transportation—to lower-
income, minority neighborhoods, exacerbating their marginalization (Sides, 2003).
Black political influence on city government remained minimal well after World
War II due in part to the relatively small size of the African-American population
compared to Chicago or New York (Freer, 2004) and the expansive boundaries of the
city’s 15 City Council districts (Sides, 2003). It was not until 1963 that the city’s first
black City Council members—Gilbert Lindsay, Tom Bradley and Billy Mills—were
elected. They improved public safety and basic city services in their districts (Sides,
2003); however, under conservative Mayor Sam Yorty’s administration, bringing
resources to inner-city neighborhoods failed to rank highly on the political agenda despite
the greater availability of federal anti-poverty funds (Sonenshein, 1994).
For example, under Mayor Yorty’s administration, public controversy emerged in
1964 regarding local control of federal War on Poverty funds and the establishment of the
city’s anti-poverty agency, which delayed funding disbursal for more than a year (Sides,
2003). It took the 1965 Watts uprising, which occurred in August, to facilitate a
compromise that ended the controversy (Sides, 2003). Political observers have suggested
that the political stalemate over the control of War on Poverty funds, which engendered
community frustration and anger, contributed to the conditions that led to the Watts
uprising in 1965 (Bauman, 2008).
In the postwar years, African Americans in Los Angeles began to experience
greater social and spatial isolation, leading to the 1965 outbreak of civil unrest in Watts,
137
which palpably demonstrated community outrage regarding neighborhood social distress,
racial segregation and the Los Angeles Police Department’s tradition of policing
practices involving police brutality, racial profiling and harassment in minority
communities (Davis, 1990; Gottlieb et al., 2006). The violent episode of civil disorder
was precipitated by the arrest of an African-American man for drunk driving by the
California State Highway Patrol. Six days of rioting ensued that led to 34 deaths, more
than 1,032 people injured and 3,952 people arrested. Approximately 600 buildings were
damaged with 200 completely destroyed (DiPasquale & Glaeser, 1996).
Following the unrest, President Lyndon B. Johnson sent Community Relations
Service Director LeRoy Collins to Los Angeles to assist in resolving the political
stalemate over the establishment of the city’s anti-poverty agency; however, the civil
unrest pointed to the inadequacy of the broader civil rights movement in addressing the
economic exclusion of African Americans as “it was upon the problem of the poor in
cities that the black political movement stumbled, and Watts was its first stumbling
point” (Anderson, 1996, p. 351). As African-American residents in Los Angeles were not
subject to the Jim Crow laws of the South, a disconnect emerged between the civil rights
movement, which focused on integration and middle-class desires to access all-white
institutions, and the needs of poor African Americans (Bauman, 2008). Illustrating the
frustrations of Watts residents, when visiting Watts shortly after the 1965 uprising, civil
rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., was heckled by local residents, which profoundly
re-shaped his thinking about economic justice issues (Bauman, 2008).
138
Civil rights measures were instituted following the 1965 Watts uprising as well as
the development of infrastructure; but despite the public investment, the conditions of
Watts and other South Los Angeles neighborhoods failed to change significantly. As in
other parts of Los Angeles, economic restructuring in the 1970s and 1980s severely
impacted the South Los Angeles region, where “the decline of manufacturing, the
suburbanization of employment, and the rise of the low‐wage service sector reduced the
number of gainful employment opportunities in the central city” (Ong et al., 2008, p. 10).
Moreover, the demise of the Southern California Chapter of the Black Panther
Party—due in part to the efforts of the FBI’s COINTELPRO program that disrupted
domestic political organizing activities and the assassination of local party leaders John
Huggins and Alprentice “Bunchy” Carter in 1969 by a rival Black nationalist
organization—and other black political organizations led to the resurgence of gang
activity in South Los Angeles in the 1970s to fill the void (Davis, 1990). In Watts, gangs
marked their territories by the community’s public housing projects: the Grape Street
Crips from Jordan Downs, the P Jay Crips from Imperial Courts and the Bounty Hunter
Bloods from Nickerson Gardens. With the re-emergence of street gangs, violence
escalated in Watts over turf wars and growing gang ties to the illicit drug market.
61
While the election of the city’s first Black mayor Tom Bradley in 1973 led to
gains for minorities through administrative appointments and affirmative action programs
in city hiring, Bradley’s focus on downtown business interests drew attention away from
61
While all three case study neighborhoods have issues with gang violence and public safety, Watts has the most
serious crime concerns. In 2005, according to the Los Angeles Police Department, the police district encompassing
Watts had a reported crime rate of 52 incidences per 1,000 people, while the Boyle Heights police district had a rate of
29 incidences per 1,000 people, and the Pacoima police district had a rate of 23 incidences per 1,000 people. The
citywide rate was 35 incidences per 1,000 people. These crimes include homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated
assault, burglary, larceny and vehicle theft.
139
inner-city neighborhoods (Sides, 2003). “In his unswerving commitment to make Los
Angeles a ‘World Class City,’ Bradley diverted resources toward downtown
redevelopment and away from projects aimed at expanding the affordable housing stock
in the city or improving infrastructure in blighted neighborhoods” (Sides, 2003, p. 194).
In addition, Bradley, who served as mayor until 1993, failed to direct policy initiatives to
address the “greatest blow to South Central”—the loss of industrial jobs due to economic
restructuring (Sides, 2003, p. 194).
By the 1980s, community transition also had begun with the settlement of Latino
residents in significant numbers in the mainly African-American areas of Watts (Ortiz,
1996). Diver-Stamnes (1995) argues that the conditions facing Watts at this time were
more severe compared to the 1960s given the flight of industry from the area combined
with the community’s shifting demographics that created competition for resources
between Latino and African-American residents. Thus, Los Angeles’ “increasingly
complex ethnic realities” with the influx of Latino and Asian immigrants coupled with
widespread unemployment due to economic restructuring sharpened the city’s ethnic and
racial tensions (Gottlieb et al., 2006, p. 70).
Gang violence in Watts tempered in April 1992, when warring gangs from the
community’s public housing developments entered into a gang truce, which allowed
“safe passage” for community members throughout Watts, with the support of
community activists and leaders. However, days later and nearly three decades after the
1965 Watts social unrest, anger and frustration about the distressed conditions of South
Los Angeles neighborhoods erupted again with the 1992 acquittal of four White Los
140
Angeles Police Department officers in the videotaped beating of Black motorist Rodney
King in 1992. Six days of rioting led to 55 deaths, 2,383 injuries and more than 17,000
arrests (Dreier, 2003). Approximately half of those arrested were African American, and
the other half were Latino (Gottlieb et al., 2006). The city’s racial and class tensions
came to a fore with rioters destroying Korean-owned liquor and convenience stores
across South Central Los Angeles.
In contrast to the significant federal response with resources in 1965, the response
to the 1992 outbreak of civil disorder relied predominantly on the private sector—
primarily the city’s Rebuild LA initiative led by former baseball commissioner Peter
Ueberroth, which sought to enlist private corporations in investing in disadvantaged
neighborhoods. The federal response—Los Angeles’ designation as a Supplementary
Empowerment Zone that also aimed to stimulate private investment—reflected the same
business and private-sector focus. While bringing some investment into South Los
Angeles, these initiatives failed to have a transformative effect on Watts and other South
Los Angeles neighborhoods.
The community’s history of social unrest and the ongoing racial transition from
an African-American to a Latino community has had significant implications for
organizational politics in Watts. First, the community’s history of social unrest has led to
the development of political relationships particularly with the offices of elected officials
and public agencies. In addition, while Boyle Heights and Pacoima have undergone or
approached complete racial transition, Watts today is experiencing population churn as an
increasing number of Latino residents move into the community. Thus, racial tensions in
141
Watts are more palpable; moreover, without a long history of institution building, the
representation of Latino interests by community organizations in Watts remains minimal
as discussed in detail in Chapter 6.
The Politics of Protest in Watts
In contrast to Boyle Heights’ norms of political activism through grassroots
mobilization and Pacoima’s norms of collaborative social work organizing, Watts
exhibits norms of political activism that particularly has developed relationships with
elected and public officials; moreover, these norms did not emerge from institutional
investments in local capacities. Rather, the 1965 Watts riots and the 1992 civil unrest in
South Los Angeles—moments when the nation’s racial and socioeconomic inequalities
came to the fore—have been defining events in the history of Watts that has led to the
formation of community political power. As a result, the community’s history of protest
politics has significantly changed the way in which elected officials and city
administrators engage with the community. For example, U.S. Congresswoman Maxine
Waters is a visible advocate in Watts. Recognizing the legacy of public housing, Waters
has supported the redevelopment of the Jordan Downs public housing development,
which aims to be a national model of mixed-income, mixed-use redevelopment that
provides a one-for-one replacement of public housing units and phased construction, thus
eliminating the need to displace residents.
In addition, former City Councilwoman Janice Hahn, who represented Watts from
2001 to 2011,
62
facilitated the formation of a coalition around public safety issues, known
62
Hahn was elected to U.S. Congress in a 2011 special election to fill the seat vacated by U.S. Congresswoman Jane
Harman.
142
as the Watts Gang Task Force. The task force emerged after a string of gang-related
shootings and homicides occurred in 2005. Established to address public safety issues,
the Watts Gang Task Force meets weekly where a diverse mix of stakeholders—
including high-ranking city officials, police leadership, public housing residents, pastors,
gang members, artists and non-profit administrators—dialogue openly about issues that
now stem beyond public safety.
At these meetings, community anger is directed openly toward public officials
over policing, housing and other issues. While problematic in many ways,
It is one of the most successful groups as far as actually getting things done, part
of it is because they, for whatever reason, that group has huge political clout. I
mean all the way up to the President of the United States. When the U.S. Attorney
General came out here to view the housing developments, he wanted to go see the
Watts Gang Task Force. The Mayor has been there, the Sheriff has been there, the
Chief of Police has been there. I mean, you have Assemblymen, you have
Congress people, you have City Council people, who will show up at the next
meeting upon request. It’s just, it’s crazy, the political power it has.
63
Contemporary community interactions of conflict and confrontation with public officials
are reminiscent of the sharp exchanges between residents and public officials following
the 1965 violent outbreak of civil disorder. For example, federal official LeRoy Collins
recalled the anger and frustration expressed by Watts residents when he visited the
community in 1965:
For nearly two hours I met with a large number of those people in the Watts area
while they tore my hide off, pouring out all the fury of their resentment against
the white man and his officials (as quoted in Bauman, 2008, p. 46).
63
Interview with the author, Nov. 3, 2009
143
One interview respondent described the early days of the task force as being similarly
contentious, and exchanges between community members and public officials today
often continue in a confrontational style, as observed at task force meetings.
The first few months, six months of this, it was yelling at [the City Council
woman]. So she took her lumps, and then it was an interesting dynamic. They
yelled at her, and she yelled at police. Then so the police yelled at her, then they
yelled at the community, and then they all yelled at each other. You know, so it
was this thing where they had to work out a lot of anger. And so at the end there is
no magic potion, but there are elements that if you follow, you could have
returns.
64
Thus, the community’s history of political, social and economic exclusion and
resultant political protest have contributed to a level of command over the attention of
elected and public officials. The community’s ability to command political attention
brings to the fore community concerns about policy impacts and potential injustices.
Moreover, fear of future civil unrest in Watts likely facilitates the responsiveness of
elected and public officials to the community. The task force provides a venue for the
regular political access and inclusion previously denied to the Watts community.
65
Because every week people feel like they can go there, they can express
themselves, they can get it out, get it off their chest, and that somebody’s listening
and somebody’s hearing. And so I think from a standpoint of keeping a very
volatile community from blowing up, it’s huge. It’s huge because if you didn’t
have that with all of the violence and all of the hopelessness there is down here,
you have that potential.
66
While primarily focused on public safety issues, the task force’s focus has broadened to
address other community issues, such as public housing redevelopment.
64
Interview with the author, Nov. 5, 2009
65
Interview with the author, Nov. 3, 2009
66
Interview with the author, Nov. 3, 2009
144
However, the political power wielded by Watts residents may be a double-edged
sword. Despite the community’s political power, a frequent tension voiced by public
officials and community leaders concerns the lack of local community capacity and the
significant role the public sector plays in Watts. Watts’ history of civil unrest has meant
that political decision-makers have been reluctant to impose costs on the community in
fear of political backlash. For example, one respondent observed that the redevelopment
of the Jordan Downs public housing development in Watts would not have been broached
without the ability to ensure one-for-one housing replacement and phased redevelopment
that eliminates the need for residential displacement.
67
In contrast, the redevelopment of the Pico Gardens and Aliso Village public
housing developments in Boyle Heights occurred without such considerations, which led
to the establishment of the non-profit Union de Vecinos in 1996 to advocate on behalf of
the interests of public housing residents. Thus, while protecting the community from
threats, paradoxically, this political sensitivity in Watts combined with a more
paternalistic government approach may contribute, along with other factors, to weaker
organizational capacity and political development in the community.
For example, interview respondents have noted the relatively weak
organizational capacity of the task force.
68
According to a respondent, despite its
immense political power:
67
Interview with the author, July 22, 2008
68
Interviews with the author, Jan. 16, 2009; Feb. 5, 2009; Nov. 3, 2009
145
It is one of the most dysfunctional groups I’ve ever been around who get together
and vent, argue, collaborate, socialize, and they do not have the ability at this
point anyway to do all of the things that they are supposed to be done with an
organized group. They can’t set an agenda that they’ll stick to. They cannot set
goals that they stick to. They cannot create committees that become functional.
They can’t do any of the things that are supposed to make a group functional and
be able to accomplish goals.
69
Rather than relying on community leadership, city officials—such as former City
Councilwoman Janice Hahn and the city’s Human Relations Commission—have taken a
lead role in facilitating gang task force meetings; however, in recent years, the Human
Relations Commission turned facilitation responsibilities over to organizational leaders to
encourage capacity building. However, it is uncertain whether the organization has the
“skills, capacity and track record” to take on significant projects,
70
or the ability to build a
broader coalition.
71
For example, some community members dismiss the task force as
ineffective
72
and in the pockets of elected officials.
73
The issues facing the Watts Gang Task Force reflect broader organizational
capacity issues in Watts. As the most distressed neighborhood of the three case study
neighborhoods, the community’s level of poverty presents particular challenges to local
capacity building. Moreover, Watts has attracted fewer targeted efforts by supportive
institutions to build organizational capacities. Thus, compared to interviews in Boyle
69
Interview with the author, July 22, 2008
70
Interview with the author, Jan. 16, 2009
71
Interview with the author, Jan. 16, 2009
72
Interview with the author, Feb. 5, 2009
73
Interview with the author, June 17, 2008
146
Heights and Pacoima, a greater general sense of political inefficacy emerged through
interviews in Watts, where:
74
My theory is with [public officials], if we can get anything, we’ll take it … We’re
accustomed to being treated that way.
75
I think what would make a difference is if we could see something that has been
promised take place and manifested. That would be such an inspiration. We need
something we can actually see. We’ve been talking about it for so long.
76
Because the frustration level is so great, people just go home and sit down. They
don’t complain. Policymakers make decisions by the astuteness of their clientele
rather than the needs of the people.
77
Me or no one else can change the history or the statistics … It’s almost jokable.
It’s a self-perpetuating hole in the map of Los Angeles, and everyone knows it. It
won’t fix itself.
78
While a number of small-scale non-profit organizations exist in Watts, only a
handful of non-profit organizations in Watts—such as the Watts Labor Community
Action Committee (WLCAC) and the Grant Housing and Economic Development
Corporation (GHEDC) —wield significant resources and capacity; however, according to
interview respondents, the role of these organizations in the community is contested. The
WLCAC has a particularly significant history in the community that stems from the War
on Poverty era. The limited War on Poverty programs and disillusionment with the
leadership and integrationist approach of the civil rights movement created opportunities
74
Interviews with the author June 17, 2008; June 25, 2008; Aug. 15, 2008; Dec. 4, 2008; May 29, 2009
75
Interview with the author, June 17, 2008
76
Interview with the author, June 25, 2008
77
Interview with the author, Aug. 14, 2008
78
Interview with the author, May 29, 2009
147
for alternate visions to take hold, namely the ideas of cultural, political and economic
empowerment of the Black power and Chicano movements (Bauman, 2008, p. 68).
This shift from integration to self-determination manifested in Watts with the
establishment of the WLCAC in early 1965 with the assistance of the United Auto
Workers and other labor unions. Again demonstrating the importance of external
institutions in organizational capacity building, union and foundation support were
instrumental to the creation and success of the organization. Developed according to a
community union model, the organization aimed to serve as a community action agency
that provided services for Watts residents, strengthened community participation and
developed a local economic base (Bauman, 2008).
Under the leadership of UAW representative Ted Watkins, the WLCAC engaged
in a multitude of community initiatives, where “the ideology of Black power—
particularly the elements of self-definition, community control, and cultural
nationalism—infused virtually all WLCAC programs” (Bauman, 2008, p. 78). WLCAC
participated in housing development; established community-controlled businesses; and
ran federally funded youth development, employment training and recreational programs.
It also played a key role in advocating for the construction of the Martin Luther King Jr.
Hospital in the community.
The organization became a national model of a community action agency; a
number of other Black nationalist and self-help organizations also emerged in Watts after
1965 as well as a Black cultural movement in the 1960s and 1970s that supported Black
artists, writers and poets. For several years after the 1965 uprising, African-American
148
street gang activity in South Los Angeles virtually halted as the rebellion led to the
involvement of youth in the building of radical political organizations and institutions—
such as the Black Panther Party—to counter social injustices (Davis, 1990). However,
attempts by the federal government to disrupt radical domestic political organizing
significantly weakened these organizations (Davis, 1990).
The WLCAC is one of the few remaining organizations from the 1960s that
remains active today. With strong linking relationships with City Hall, the organization
continues to participate in many of the same activities as it did in its early history. But
rather than serving as a broadly representative and inclusive voice, the WLCAC instead
has been described today as the “community power broker.” Bauman (2008) attributes
the WLCAC’s lack of participation in broad coalitions advocating on behalf of low-
income groups, or engagement with broader structural or institutional barriers to
eradicating poverty to its ideological roots of local control and empowerment; however,
without strong organizational capacities and relationships throughout the community,
Watts faces limits to accessing resources that benefit the broader community.
Summary
An examination of the particular historical trajectories of the case study
neighborhoods in this study calls attention to the unique, place-specific events and
circumstances that have shaped each neighborhood, and the development of
organizations and organizational networks in the community. Specifically, tracing
neighborhood historical contexts helps illuminate the implications of demographic
change for organizational networks, and how organizational capacities and organizing
149
norms have developed over time in neighborhoods, for example, through the timing and
nature of institutional investments in local capacity building.
Community action in Boyle Heights is recognized for its norms of political
activism through grassroots mobilization with roots dating to the radical organizing era of
the 1940s. Mobilization efforts in response to repeated community threats combined with
the support of external institutions contributed to the development of organizational
capacities and a sense of political efficacy in the community. Moreover, Boyle Heights’
transition into a solidly Latino community has implications for intra-racial organizational
politics along lines of class and immigrant status rather than the inter-racial
organizational politics as seen in other communities.
In contrast, resource-rich non-profit and philanthropic organizations—many with
bases outside the community—have spearheaded initiatives in Pacoima beginning in the
1980s era of conservative politics, which has contributed to the development of
organizational capacities and an organizing environment characterized by social work
norms of community organizing. Led by collaborative non-profit service providers,
organizations in Pacoima utilize a less confrontational, policy-focused approach to
community improvement compared to organizations in Boyle Heights and Watts.
Moreover, with the near completion of racial transition into a Latino community,
Pacoima experiences some but less sharply expressed racial tensions reflected in
organizational networks.
Finally, rather than the timing and nature of institutional investments in local
capacity building, Watts’ history of protest politics with the 1965 and 1992 outbreaks of
150
civil unrest that reflected the nation’s stark racial and socioeconomic inequalities has
influenced the nature of organizational relationships in the community today. Because of
its unique history, Watts has developed strong relationships with elected and public
officials with the strong ability to command the attention of political decision-makers;
however, this attention—along with historic and persistent disinvestment in the
community—may contribute to weaker community organizational capacities. Moreover,
the ongoing racial transition of Watts with the recent growth in the Latino population
contributes to community tensions, and a mismatch in organizational representation with
population needs.
Supporting the findings from this study, Crenson’s (1983) study of Baltimore
neighborhoods also suggests the existence of distinct neighborhood political “cultures.”
In Baltimore, differences also exist in neighborhood capacities and capabilities as “some
neighborhoods actually function as fully developed political units; others, in a more
limited way; and still others, hardly at all” (Crenson, 1983, p. 10). However, Crenson’s
study (1983)—which entailed a survey of residents in 21 Baltimore neighborhoods and
interviews with neighborhood leaders—does not attempt to describe the particular
political climates of the different neighborhoods or explore in-depth the implications that
varying neighborhood capacities may have as this study attempts to do.
This study re-emphasizes that place-specific historical contexts are important, and
certain path dependencies exist in neighborhoods; however, the dynamic nature of
neighborhoods should not be overlooked. Shaped by a number of complex forces,
neighborhoods and the larger society in which they function are continually changing and
151
continually in the process of history-making. Thus, while they shape contemporary
conditions, historical trajectories shift over time. For example, Barraclough’s history
(2011) of the San Fernando Valley describes the once rural nature of Pacoima, which was
home to wealthy horse enthusiasts. During this period of middle-class defensiveness in
the late 1940s (Fisher, 1994), Pacoima exhibited neighborhood maintenance norms in
community organizing, where white residents sought to defend the region’s rural
landscape from city actions to re-zone the community into residential and commercial
districts to meet the needs of the growing population (Barraclough, 2011).
In 1947, the Pacoima Saddle Club opposed a proposed re-zoning that would have
closed the club’s amateur riding arena (Barraclough, 2011). As Barraclough (2011)
writes:
In response to incidents such as these, as well as the broader changes they
portended, equestrian organizations focused their energies on the preservation of
the San Fernando Valley’s historic rural landscapes. Though first and foremost
recreational associations, these organizations also cohered white middle-class and
elite suburban residents around a distinctive rural land-use agenda. Through their
involvement in equestrian organizations, many members became involved in
more explicitly political activities, particularly as they saw their way of life
increasingly threatened by land-use and other changes (p. 129).
As the community changed during the post-war period due to industrial growth in the
area that drew an increasingly diverse population, local organizations mobilized to defend
their interests. With the sea change that occurred in Pacoima’s population, which is
largely working class and Latino today, Pacoima’s equestrian community largely has
disappeared (although they are still active in the nearby communities of Shadow Hills,
Sunland and Tujunga). With institutional investments in local capacity building
beginning in the 1980s, neighborhood organizing norms in Pacoima now reflect norms of
152
social work organizing, and organizations coalesce particularly around youth and
education issues.
In more recent history, norms of social work organizing also have begun to
characterize community mobilization in Boyle Heights with foundation investment in the
community that supports a more collaborative and consensual approach to community
improvement. For example, in 2010, the California Endowment selected Boyle Heights
as one of 14 communities for its 10-year, $1-billion Building Healthy Communities
initiative that aims to create healthy and safe communities for children. Thus, the
continually shifting nature of neighborhoods points to the myriad factors—trajectories of
institutional development, population dynamics and unique historical events among other
factors—that potentially shape the nature of community mobilization.
Considering the dynamic nature of neighborhoods raises many additional
questions for further exploration outside the scope of this study. For example, with
dramatic population shifts occurring in neighborhoods, do some neighborhood legacies
persist? For example, Watts is becoming an increasingly Latino community; thus, how
will the Black community’s well-known history of protest politics continue to shape the
community? How might organizing norms change, transform or fade as new populations
move to the community? Or how might these organizing traditions in turn shape new
populations? Two-way processes of influence could be imagined. These are questions
that require further exploration beyond this study. The next chapter of this study details
how organizational networks facilitate access to resources and decision-making processes
153
for communities, which play out differently in different neighborhoods depending on the
character of the organizational network.
154
CHAPTER 5: NEIGHBORHOOD RESOURCE ACCESS, COMMUNITY
EMPOWERMENT AND ORGANIZATIONAL NETWORKS
This chapter turns to a consideration of the manner in which the organizational
networks in the three case study neighborhoods enable community members to access
resources for neighborhood revitalization. Whereas the conventional wisdom in much of
the poverty literature is that lower-income neighborhoods lack both organizational
density and effective inter-organizational ties (Wacquant & Wilson, 1989), the present
study finds that the case study neighborhoods engage and access resources through
vibrant networks of active organizational relationships. As Chapter 4 argues, historical
contexts have shaped the development of organizational networks in the three case study
neighborhoods, leading to variability in organizing norms and capacities. In turn,
neighborhoods differ in terms of the primary means through which organizations access
resources—for example, grassroots mobilizing in Boyle Heights, philanthropic linkages
in Pacoima, and political networks with state agents in Watts.
These differences have important implications for communities, particularly in the
ability and manner by which neighborhoods access resources vital for neighborhood
regeneration. Within each neighborhood, different organizational social capital
relationships—bonding, bridging and linking—are enacted within different sectors and
policy arenas, and vary in their ability to access important economic and political.
Variations across organizational networks imply that communities may have access to
some resources important for neighborhood regeneration but not others. These different
avenues of community action also have implications for local capacity building, where
155
some organizational relationships are more conducive to supporting local empowerment
than others.
While this study argues that differences in organizational networks have
implications for neighborhoods, connecting organizational social capital to community
outcomes is a challenge; however, this study suggests alternative ways of assessing
organizational capacities and relationships by paying particular attention to the types of
relationships that organizations form and their ability to access resources for communities
through these relationships. Thus, as a more modest undertaking, this study highlights the
importance of organizational capacities and relationships in facilitating access to
economic and political resources. Moreover, evaluating community outputs as the result
of connections to economic and political resources may be more realistic than evaluating
community outcomes. In assessing the impact of particular policy initiatives or economic
investments, effective outcomes likely require much more than access to resources;
however, a likely connection could be inferred where neighborhoods with resources
generally are better off than neighborhoods without resources.
While scholars have discussed the importance of assessing not only the quality
but also the quantity of resources accessed through social capital, this study does not
attempt to conduct an exhaustive community inventory of resources obtained through
organizational networks given the difficulties in achieving a comprehensive catalog of
resources stemming from numerous sources. Nor does it utilize Putnam’s approach of
assessing the aggregate amount of social capital in each community. Rather, through a
qualitative case study design, this study provides illustrative examples of how
156
organizational social capital can lead to access to different resources from varied sources
and the possible implications; however, it does suggest that organizational networks in
different neighborhoods tend to exhibit different characteristics.
In particular, this study finds distinct differences in the types of economic and
political resources accessed through social capital that may be useful for neighborhood
regeneration as well as the various types of relationships and sectors that provide access
to these resources as outlined below:
• Economic resources for capital investment through linking social capital with
private, public or non-profit/philanthropic sources
• Economic resources for policy initiatives through linking social capital with
private, public or non-profit/philanthropic sources
• Political resources defined as the ability to influence public and private decision-
making processes through linking social capital with public and private decision-
makers
• Political resources defined as the ability to influence public and private decision-
making processes through bonding or bridging social capital among community
members
Focusing attention on the kinds of resources that organizations obtain for
communities provides a clearer understanding of the concept of social capital, its role in
neighborhood regeneration and the potential avenues for community action. In the three
case study neighborhoods, organizations use intersectoral networks to access private,
public and philanthropic economic resources that in turn have influenced neighborhood
regeneration within the community. Moreover, organizational relationships have
facilitated access to public and private decision-makers, enabling local actors to use these
political resources to influence neighborhood regeneration outcomes. The cross-
157
neighborhood comparisons demonstrate variation in the character and capacities of
organizational networks across city neighborhoods as reflected in the types of resources
accessed and the means by which they are accessed.
Table 13 demonstrates the most prominent arenas and activities in which
organizations participate in the three case study neighborhoods. For example,
organizations in Boyle Heights and Watts particularly are adept at influencing public and
private decision-making processes in the policy arenas of development in Boyle Heights
and public safety in Watts. Pacoima organizations operate more apolitically, accessing
private and public economic resources for policy initiatives particularly in the areas of
education and the environment.
Table 13: Differing Characteristics of Neighborhood Organizational Networks
Neighborhood Resources
Accessed
Source Type of Social Capital Policy
Arena
Boyle Heights Political
Resources
Economic
Resources for
Policy Initiatives
Grassroots
Mobilization
Public,
Non-Profit and
Philanthropic
Bonding Among Local
Organizations
Bonding Among Local
Organizations & Linking
with Funders
(that support local
capacities)
Housing &
Development
Health &
Education
Pacoima Economic
Resources for
Policy Initiatives
Public,
Non-Profit and
Philanthropic
Bonding Among Local
Organizations & Linking
with Funders
(that support local
capacities)
Education &
Environment
Watts Political
Resources
Political Partnerships
Linking with State Agents Public Safety
& Public
Housing
Moreover, contrary to Putnam’s (1993) view, this study argues that vertical
relationships that facilitate access to resources can support local capacities if cultivated in
a manner that supports local empowerment. In Making Democracy Work, Putnam (1993)
158
argues that vertical relationships are not conducive to the collaboration or solidarity
exhibited by horizontal relationships but lead to relationships of dependency and
authority characteristic of patron-client relationships.
However, this case study demonstrates that vertical relationships not only are
crucial to neighborhood regeneration efforts in providing access to external resources
lacking in marginalized communities but also can facilitate collaboration, local capacities
and local empowerment. For example, vertical linking relationships with resource-rich
external organizations, such as philanthropic foundations, in Boyle Heights and Pacoima
have bolstered local organizational capacities; in contrast, vertical linking relationships
with state agents in Watts do not necessarily foster the same local capacities. Thus, it is
important to understand that different feedback loops affecting local capacities operate
according to the particular context and nature of linking social capital relationships.
As Woolcock (1998) argues, a productive approach to social capital “seeks to
identify the types and combinations of social relations involved, the institutional
environments shaping them, and their historical emergence and continuity” (p. 185).
Contextualizing the role of social capital in neighborhood regeneration in this sense
complicates our understanding of the various types of social capital—bonding, bridging
and linking—and in particular the feedback loops for local capacity building associated
with different types of social capital. The discussion now turns to the types of
organizational networks observed in the three case study neighborhoods.
159
Accessing Housing/Development, Health and Education Resources in Boyle Heights
Organizational networks in Boyle Heights have been particularly active in
accessing economic and political resources in the policy arenas of affordable housing,
development, and health and education issues. They often use organizational capacities
and grassroots organizing strategies to achieve gains for the community, which entails
bonding social capital between organizations with shared interests used to influence
public and private decision-making processes regarding housing and development.
Moreover, linking social capital in the community has garnered economic resources from
various sectors for health and education policy initiatives.
First, Boyle Heights has several examples of cooperation and community
mobilization among local organizations, which exhibit bonding social capital, to
influence public and private decision-making processes regarding housing and
development in the community. Development and gentrification pressures in recent years
have accompanied the construction of the Metro Gold Line extension into Boyle Heights.
While the 2007 economic downturn slowed these pressures, community organizations,
often working together, remain vigilant in monitoring local development activities.
An important example is the 24-acre Sears property at Olympic Boulevard and
Soto Street in Boyle Heights. One of the largest properties available for development in
the city, the site houses the 1.8 million-square-foot Sears Roebuck & Co. Mail Order
Building—an iconic, 14-story art deco building visible from nearby freeways. Built in
1927, the building was one of nine Sears mail-order retail centers constructed across the
nation between 1910 and the Great Depression; however, Sears closed its mail-order
160
operations at the site in 1992 and sold the property. A Sears retail store remains in
operation on the ground floor of the building, which was designated as an historic
cultural monument in 2004.
While the property currently does not have a developer, the East Los Angeles
Community Corporation, a non-profit organization that advocates on behalf of lower-
income residents in Boyle Heights, spearheaded the formation of a coalition, the United
Communities of Boyle Heights, in response to the proposed redevelopment of the Sears
catalog property. The coalition—which includes non-profit organizations Homeboy
Industries, Inner City Struggle and Union de Vecinos—met regularly to track and
strategize responses to the proposed redevelopment, which in 2004 included plans by Los
Angeles real estate company Mark J. Weinstein Investments to build 772 condominium
and apartment units.
Community organizations raised concern that the project would not benefit
residents in Boyle Heights, where more than 60 percent of the population earns $24,000
annually or less.
79
At one point, the coalition mobilized more than 400 community
members to demand affordable housing and local hiring provisions for the Sears property
(LISC, 2009). The cooperation of these organizations, which support the notion that
“people living here should be at the table and be active decision-makers with projects in
the community,
80
” serves as a political resource for the community for influencing
development decision-making processes. According to an interview respondent, many of
79
Interview with the author, Jan. 9, 2008
80
Interview with the author, Jan. 9, 2008
161
the community-based organizations that share similar interests in Boyle Heights work
well together and support one another.
81
Just a few blocks east of the Sears property on Olympic Boulevard, a coalition of
community organizations also has been monitoring the proposed redevelopment of the
70-acre, 1,187-unit Wyvernwood Apartments that houses approximately 6,000 residents.
Constructed in 1939 and reflecting tenets of the Garden City movement, Wyvernwood
has been targeted for a $2-billion redevelopment project by private developer Fifteen
Group, which has proposed to replace the complex with 4,400 condominiums and
apartments, offices and retail space. Shortly after the project was proposed in 2008,
Wyvernwood residents—organized as El Comité de la Esperanza (Committee of Hope),
which formed in 1984 to address community needs—began organizing in opposition to
the redevelopment.
Benefitting from the bonding social capital among organizations sharing similar
concerns regarding Wyvernwood, El Comité de la Esperanza became part of a larger
coalition—including several high-capacity non-profits, such as ELACC and the Los
Angeles Conservancy—that continues to monitor and organize actions against the
proposed redevelopment. For example, the coalition staged protests, lobbied the local
City Council representative and collaborated with the Los Angeles Media Collective in a
multi-media project to document Wyvernwood’s community history. Similar to the Sears
property coalition, these organizational relationships created access to political resources
81
Interview with the author, Jan. 9, 2008
162
through community organizing that could be used to influence policy decision-making
processes regarding Wyvernwood.
In a victory for the coalition, City Councilman José Huizar, who represents Boyle
Heights, publicly announced his opposition to the redevelopment project in March 2011
in a press conference where representatives of El Comité de la Esperanza, the Los
Angeles Conservancy and other coalition members also spoke. Huizar’s opposition to the
project in effect blocks the Fifteen Group’s proposed redevelopment plans as the City
Council typically defers to individual members regarding land use decisions in the their
districts. Previously, Huizar had expressed support for the Wyvernwood redevelopment
project (Vincent, 2008); however, in a blog post on the day of the announcement of his
opposition to the project, Huizar acknowledged the role of community organizations in
advocating against the redevelopment and recognized the community’s long history of
community organizing with a reference to labor leader Cesar Chavez. He wrote:
Today, as we celebrate the birthday of Cesar Chavez, I joined with Wyvernwood
residents to oppose a project that will vastly increase density and do more harm
than good to a community that has existed since 1939. Thank you to our friends at
ELACC, Healthy Homes Collaborative, Comité de la Esperanza and the residents
of Wyvernwood for allowing their voices to be heard today.
82
Thus, through bonding organizational relationships between organizations, organizations
in Boyle Heights organize as a political resource to shape development outcomes in favor
of their constituents, in this case the defense of affordable housing in the community.
In addition to access to political resources through bonding social capital,
organizational networks in Boyle Heights have provided access to economic resources
82
Accessed 4/12/2012 at http://josehuizarblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/joining-with-community-to-oppose.html.
163
for policy initiatives particularly focused on improving health and education outcomes in
the neighborhood. For example, based in part on the existing organizational capacities
and relationships in the community, the California Endowment selected Boyle Heights to
be one of 14 California communities involved in its 10-year, $1-billion Building Healthy
Communities initiative launched in 2010 that aims to create healthy and safe
communities for children. The relationship established between local organizations and
the California Endowment, which provides economic resources for facilitating systems
change to address the root causes of community problems, represents an example of
linking organizational social capital.
ELACC serves as the lead community organization on this initiative and works in
partnership with other local organizations, thus building upon and reinforcing existing
bonding organizational social capital among community groups. The Endowment’s
initiative includes target outcomes for increasing access to public and private health care
coverage; influencing land use, transportation and affordable housing decisions to
promote healthy communities; supporting the expansion of employment and economic
development opportunities; decreasing family violence; and promoting health and healthy
behaviors through augmenting neighborhood and school environments.
Developing, prioritizing and implementing the initiative’s objectives involve
collaborative processes among local organizations and community residents.
83
While
only two years into the initiative that entailed a lengthy community planning processes,
the Endowment intends to assess its initiative along 10 community health outcomes,
83
Media audio interview with initiative participant by Jasmine Mara López. Accessed 4/12/2012 at
http://newsdesk.org/2011/05/young-people-define-a-healthy-future-for-boyle-heights/.
164
including improved health care access, community safety, health and healthy behaviors
(The California Endowment, n.d.).
Contrary to Putnam’s (1993) view, these vertical relationships structure
opportunities for horizontal relationship building and community action in
neighborhoods. As a Boyle Heights non-profit administrator discussed in a media audio
interview about participation in the California Endowment initiative,
Community efforts while they seem very extensive and very complicated do
work. All the successes that we’ve seen in Boyle Heights so far has (sic) been
through a community effort. And all of the progress that we’ve seen has been
through a community effort. And it’s been long, and it’s been strenuous but the
community has really been the one to really decide what they want to see. And
they are the ones who have been pushing these initiatives forward …
When you really work with community and you create advocates out of the
community, you see that they’re the ones that really make the choices that
ultimately become the right choices for the community. And they’re the ones that
really bring progress into a community.
84
The Endowment’s initiative in Boyle Heights includes a youth organizing
component that builds the capacity of local youth to act as community leaders and
advocates. Learning about social movement history and “Organizing 101” strategies, the
youth developed their own priority issues, which they shared with the broader community
(López, 2011). These efforts reinforce and continue the grassroots community organizing
tradition characteristic of the Boyle Heights community. According to another non-profit
administrator for a youth organization interviewed in a media report, the program has
been “very empowering for the youth and assists in helping change behavior that would
ultimately affect their health” (López, 2011).
84
Media audio interview with initiative participant by Jasmine Mara López. Accessed 4/12/2012 at
http://newsdesk.org/2011/05/young-people-define-a-healthy-future-for-boyle-heights/.
165
Studies of other communities have similarly stressed the importance of vertical
ties in community empowerment. For example a case study of credit unions and social
capital in Philadelphia found that “vertical organizations provided the necessary
institutional basis for social network development and acted as incubators for trust among
members” (Janson, 2006, p. 131). In addition to the Building Healthy Communities
initiative, the California Endowment, the James Irvine Foundation and other
philanthropic organizations have supported community organizing efforts of ELACC and
other organizations.
Building upon the collaborative community processes established through the
California Endowment initiative, a coalition of non-profit organizations within Boyle
Heights successfully applied for and obtained status as one of 21 federal Promise
Neighborhoods in 2010. Promise Neighborhoods across the country received $500,000
from the U.S. Dept. of Education to develop a comprehensive plan to prepare community
children for higher education and employment that reflects the “cradle to college”
philosophy of support made prominent by the success of the non-profit Harlem
Children’s Zone in New York. In Boyle Heights, the non-profit Proyecto Pastoral serves
as the coalition’s lead organization working in partnership with other local organizations,
such as ELACC, Inner City Struggle, Union de Vecinos and the Boyle Heights Learning
Collaborative. In its application, Proyecto Pastoral describes the role of the California
Endowment’s initiative on building organizational relationships, where
166
As a [Building a Healthy Boyle Heights] partner organization, the intensive year-
long planning process helped us and our partner agencies develop a deep
understanding of one another’s missions and cultures and respective strengths.
More importantly, it helped us shape our shared vision for the community that
encompasses [Promise Neighborhoods] … and create the trusting, synergistic
relationships needed to make that vision a reality (Proyecto Pastoral, 2010, p. 34).
Like the Endowment initiative, the Promise Neighborhood effort also represents a
collaborative effort with significant community involvement.
85
While it did not win additional federal Promise Neighborhoods funding to
implement its comprehensive plan in 2011, the collaborative has committed to achieving
the plan using other sources of funding. For example, the collaborative leveraged its
planning grant with nearly $1 million in additional funding from private sources to
support the initiative (Proyecto Pastoral, 2011). Moreover, as a result of the collaborative
work, schools have made some initial reforms to support educational achievement.
For example, at the Felicitas and Gonzalo Mendez Learning Center, the Promise
Neighborhoods collaborative helped develop a system to track student progress in terms
of graduation requirements and identify students needing additional support; already, the
school’s class of 2013 has more students reaching graduation requirements (Castillo,
2012). Thus, the Endowment and Promise Neighborhood initiatives in Boyle Heights
demonstrate how linking social capital that involves vertical relationships can facilitate
access to economic resources, and in turn support local organizational capacity and
network building that can have far-reaching impacts.
85
Media audio interview with initiative participant by Jasmine Mara López. Accessed 4/12/2012 at
http://newsdesk.org/2011/05/young-people-define-a-healthy-future-for-boyle-heights/.
167
Finally, linking organizational social capital in Boyle Heights has facilitated
access to external economic resources for capital investment in the community—
important relationships that community development corporations often foster in
communities experiencing disinvestment. In Boyle Heights, ELACC serves as one of the
primary organizations that accesses economic resources for the development of
affordable housing. Formed from a community development corporation model, the
organization has assembled resources to develop more than 360 units of housing, which
has provided affordable housing to more than 800 residents in East Los Angeles. The
organization obtains resources for development from private, non-profit and public
sources, such as private lending institutions, non-profit affordable housing financiers and
public tax credits.
ELACC also has launched campaigns to raise capital for the community, such as a
recent effort to raise funds to assist eight street vendors (with the goal of assisting more)
in developing their businesses and establishing a farmer’s market where they can vend
legally. The campaign aims to legitimize street vending, a practice currently illegal in the
City of Los Angeles but common in many neighborhoods as source of income for lower-
income families, and thus to support economic opportunities for local residents through
entrepreneurship. However, organizational networks observed within Boyle Heights do
not always work together seamlessly. While many of the organizations working together
in Boyle Heights share similar interests, other organizations in the community represent
alternative neighborhood visions—such as the need for more middle-class amenities and
services—and do not perceive the work of ELACC and its partners favorably. These
168
community cleavages, which present challenges to bridging social capital among
neighborhood organizations, will be discussed in detail in Chapter 6.
Accessing Education and Environmental Resources in Pacoima
Through their network of relationships, non-profit, community-based and
philanthropic organizations in Pacoima have facilitated community access to resources
particularly in the policy arenas of education and the environment. The community
particularly has utilized organizational partnerships that rely on bonding and linking
social capital to secure economic resources for education policy initiatives. Bonding and
linking social capital also have led to economic resources for capital investment in the
community, although Pacoima has less development activity compared to Boyle Heights.
Compared to Boyle Heights and Watts, however, Pacoima organizations tend to operate
in a more de-politicized manner, working within existing institutions and frameworks
rather than participating in political processes or challenging existing power structures.
Non-profit collaboration in Pacoima has roots reaching back to 1986 and the
United Way North Angeles Region, which initiated community building efforts in
Pacoima (Maida, 2008). Working with the Los Angeles Education Partnership (LAEP),
the United Way helped create a parent center network, which “is a place where people
know where resources exist and how to share them.”
86
This initial investment by the
United Way sowed the seeds for the development of bonding and linking organizational
relationships among non-profit, community and philanthropic organizations that have led
particularly to the ability to obtain economic resources from public and philanthropic
86
Interview with the author, June 19, 2008
169
sources to support youth and education policy initiatives in the community. Because of
these relationships that facilitate access to economic resources, unlike other communities,
Pacoima has “the funding to realize our kind of thinking of how to build communities
around schools,” according to an interview respondent.
87
For example, demonstrating the importance of linking social capital, the
Prudential Foundation—a supporter of the parent center-based FamilyCare/Healthy Kids
Collaborative that stemmed from the initial involvement of the United Way and LAEP—
brought together grantees from five cities to a conference in 2005 to discuss what
communities can do to collaborate. A half dozen non-profit organizations working in
Pacoima—including LAEP, Pacoima Beautiful, the Valley Economic Development
Corporation (VEDC) and members of the Los Angeles Urban Funders (LAUF)—
attended the conference, where they discussed how elementary schools in Pacoima had
improved as a result of collaboration in the community. Schools had begun hiring their
own parent center leaders rather than relying on outside funding. Parent center leaders
had expanded their vision of themselves and their work in the community, and schools
had begun to realize their connections with the community and thus leverage resources
from the community. Student performance also had improved.
However, the collaborators observed that middle and high schools in Pacoima
continued to face challenges. For example, the community’s high school, San Fernando
High School, had an approximately 48 percent graduation rate
88
for the 2007-2008 school
year (Rapalee et al., 2011). Thus, the organizations, supported by funding from the
87
Interview with the author, June 19, 2008
88
Calculated using the National Government Association’s formula
170
Prudential and Stuart foundations, decided to shift their focus to improving the
graduation rate at San Fernando High School. The partnership, led by LAEP, evolved
into the San Fernando Neighborhood Partnership, which subsequently received a $2.3
million Full-Service Community School grant in 2008 from the U.S. Dept. of Education
to implement its plan of engaging student and connecting them to coordinated and
integrated services available in the community. The grant also supports the
implementation of the same community school model by LAEP at high schools in the
neighboring communities of Sylmar and Arleta.
The San Fernando Neighborhood Partnership supports on-site staff at the high
schools to coordinate services and resources from local organizations. They also convene
regular meetings with students, school staff and community partners to discuss issues
affecting the community’s youth. The initiative also supports new programs that help
students transition into high school, supplement the academic curriculum, and engage and
develop student leaders. This collaborative environment relies on linking organizational
social capital with funders and bonding organizational social capital among local
organizations to provide access to resources to improve community educational
outcomes. According to San Fernando High School Principal Kenny Lee,
I’ve seen a positive change regarding all the collaborators that we have on
campus. Our students at the present time need a lot of support that I’m unable to
provide. It’s just another resource for the community to outreach all the families
and students in need.
89
89
San Fernando Neighborhood Partnership documentary film produced by the Youth Speak Collective. Accessed
4/16/2012 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq9a8tOnD6M.
171
Moreover, an external evaluation of the initiative documented increased student and
parent engagement at the school, a more student-oriented approach, and improved
coordination and integration of services in the region (Los Angeles Education
Partnership, 2011).
Demonstrating the importance of access to external economic resources, several
other foundations—including the Carol and James Collins Foundation, the Roth Family
Foundation and the Lawrence Welk Foundation— also provide funding for the initiative.
The initiative’s community school model since has expanded to the nearby San Fernando
Middle School, and Edison Middle and Fremont High schools in South Los Angeles.
The collaborative partnerships between foundations and community organizations
in Pacoima again exemplify how linking organizational social capital can enhance local
capacities. The model of collaboration and local empowerment shared by funders and
funding recipients builds upon and reinforces existing relationships established in the
community. In Pacoima, according to an interview respondent, many of the same partners
who have participated in previous community improvement efforts remain involved in
the San Fernando Neighborhood Partnership as “it’s really many of the same folks trying
to problem solve.”
90
Most recently, a coalition of non-profit organizations in Pacoima led by the non-
profit Youth Policy Institute also successfully applied to be one of 21 neighborhoods
across the nation to participate in President Barack Obama’s Promise Neighborhoods
education initiative. The coalition, which received $500,000 from the U.S. Dept. of
90
Interview with the author, June 19, 2008
172
Education to develop a comprehensive education plan, includes many of the same non-
profit organizations active in the San Fernando Neighborhood Partnership and other
community partnerships.
In addition to accessing economic resources for education policy initiatives,
organizations in Pacoima have facilitated access to economic resources for environmental
policy initiatives through relationships with local and federal regulatory agencies. For
example, Pacoima Beautiful, a non-profit environmental justice organization, has
accessed external sources of public funding, such as funding from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. In 2005, the organization obtained a $100,000
Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) I grant that assisted the
organization in assessing toxic risks in the community.
This effort, working in partnership with residents and other community
organizations, led to the identification of 18 categories of community health risks.
Pacoima Beautiful determined that the automobile sector served as a primary
environmental risk to the community, which has more than 100 auto repair shops, and
heavy diesel truck and bus traffic. California’s Air Resources Board classifies diesel
exhaust as a cancer-causing agent, which the World Health Organization validated in
2012 (Loury, 2012).
In 2007, Pacoima Beautiful secured a $300,000 CARE II grant from the U.S. EPA
to address these risks. The organization works with businesses and regulatory agencies to
educate local businesses on environmental impacts, ensure compliance with regulations
and facilitate permitting processes. Rather than “scaring” local businesses, as an
173
interview respondent described, the organization builds relationships of mutual trust and
assistance.
91
During the CARE initiatives, Pacoima Beautiful helped identify several
brownfields for potential redevelopment, which led to the securing of an additional
$50,000 from the U.S. EPA’s Targeted Brownfields Assessment program.
The project resulted in assessments of 25 properties for environmental risks and
redevelopment, agreements with 17 auto dismantlers to adopt more environmentally
sensitive practices, and the training of 34 unregulated granite-cutting operations on
practices to reduce air pollution and environmental health risks to employees (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 2010). The EPA has featured the work of Pacoima
Beautiful on its Web site and in publications as a grant success story.
In another example of the capacity of the organization to obtain external
economic resources of policy initiatives, Pacoima Beautiful also won a $300,000 PLACE
grant from the Los Angeles County Dept. of Public Health in 2008 to create a vision plan
to revitalize parts of the Pacoima Wash, a branch of the Los Angeles River. Moreover, in
2010, the organization won a 3-year, $250,000 California Urban Greening Planning
Grant administered by the state’s Strategic Growth Council to identify and create an
inventory of sites for new pocket parks in the community, which lacks open green space.
The plan aims to connect new and existing parks in Pacoima with a network of “green”
streets with sidewalk improvements and other pedestrian amenities. Thus, these economic
resources, secured and implemented through local organizational capacities, contribute
directly to policy initiatives that facilitate neighborhood regeneration in Pacoima.
91
Interview with the author, Aug. 18, 2009
174
In addition to securing economic resources for policy initiatives, organizational
networks in Pacoima have facilitated community access to economic resources for capital
investment through bonding and linking social capital. One example is the 2003
establishment of a Wells Fargo Bank branch—the first bank to open in Pacoima in 17
years. The effort began when the VEDC obtained a small grant from LAUF to examine
the feasibility of establishing additional financial institutions in Pacoima; the grant
garnered the attention of Wells Fargo, a LAUF member (McCaffrey & Letts, 2003).
Thus, “LAUF leveraged its relationships with one of its banking members, Wells Fargo,
to increase their presence in financial services to the neighborhood” (McCaffrey & Letts,
2003, p. 21); however, the organizational network in Pacoima also had a mutual
obligation to Wells Fargo. The bank partnered with local organizations, which provided
financial literacy, homeownership and tax preparation programs to residents to equip and
enlist potential customers.
The Pacoima experience demonstrates that financial institutions can become more
amenable to entering low-income neighborhoods if there are institutional supports in
place. In Pacoima, these supports stem from linking organizational social capital
developed between financial institutions and local organizations. Within the first year of
opening, the Pacoima branch had more than 1,000 checking account customers and more
than $3 million in deposits (Wells Fargo, 2003); it is one of the most successful West
Coast branches primarily because of the large population of unbanked residents in the
community. Wells Fargo also has partnered with VEDC to capitalize a $200,000 micro-
loan fund, which includes a “loan pipeline” to transition micro-loan borrowers into Wells
175
Fargo customers. Former LAUF executive director, Elwood Hopkins, noted that “there's
a lot of relationship-building that needs to happen before banks feel comfortable enough
to open in some of these neighborhoods. That takes time and work" (Anft, 2004).
While quite capable of forming inter-organizational collaborations, obtaining
public and philanthropic resources, and working with the private sector, coalitions in
Pacoima organizations are less active in challenging political decision-making processes,
which may lead to missed opportunities for influencing community outcomes. Public
agency officials particularly from Los Angeles County and representatives of local
elected officials attend community meetings in Pacoima; however, community members
perceive that opaque city decision-making processes and tokenistic community
engagement seem to characterize local politics in Pacoima.
92
One interviewee said:
The residents of Pacoima are frustrated because they feel like their opinion isn’t
being heard. [Elected officials] try their best to get people’s input, but in the end,
you don’t know how far that input goes. You just don’t see it being made a
priority.
93
Another interview respondent candidly noted that they “honestly do not have a lot of
relationships with those folks [city officials]. The public sector is not oftentimes the place
where people push things forward.”
94
A third interview respondent said rather merely
presenting initiatives at community meetings, public officials should adopt a more
collaborative approach with the community, where “the right way to approach this is,
92
Interview with the author, March 6, 2008
93
Interview with the author, June 10, 2008
94
Interview with the author, May 30, 2008
176
‘Here’s what we’re working on. How do we make it successful? What are the issues that
you see with it?’”
Thus, Pacoima organizations—pursuing their own policy objectives and engaging
in policy experimentation through their own means, capacities and initiatives—tend to
operate relatively apolitically, not viewing local government as an arena for
organizational activities or the active contestation of decision-making processes.
Moreover, the ethos of collaboration reflected by organizational relationships in Pacoima
contrasts with the grassroots mobilizing strategies in Boyle Heights and strong state-
society relationships in Watts used to engage political processes. Rather than conflict and
opposition, organizations working in Pacoima—which include not only local
organizations like Pacoima Beautiful but also large non-profit organizations with bases
outside of Pacoima, such as the LAEP—reflect norms of collaboration and consensus.
One interview respondent familiar with organizational activities in Pacoima and
Watts, described efforts in Pacoima as more professionalized and agency driven:
These are agencies talking about what they’re going to do … You know, so
there’s that sense where I think that when you give a process over to agencies,
they do what agencies do. That’s what they do. I’m not discounting the power of
that collective view there. I’m just saying there’s not that raw feel to it … It’s just
a different feel. And when you go there, it’s more of a formal setting. And people
speak quietly, and people take turns. And you know the emotions are not as
high.
95
However, less politicized organizational activity may occur in Pacoima not only because
of the participation of professionalized, citywide non-profit agencies in the community
95
Interview with the author, Jan. 16, 2009
177
but also because of the community’s lack of development pressures compared to Boyle
Heights and the community’s less severe distress compared to Watts.
Thus, while able to pursue important economic resources for capital investment
and policy initiatives in the community, Pacoima organizations are less likely to engage
in confrontational politics that can challenge existing power structures, influence
decision-making processes and lead to important gains for communities. The Pacoima
experience lends support to Jones-Correa’s argument (2001) that:
The city’s nonprofits are not generally oriented toward altering city policy, but
rather see themselves as an alternative to government, stepping in to do what
government can’t or won’t do. Possibly this comes of working in a system where
government is difficult to access and generally unresponsive when access is
gained (p. 201).
Accessing Public Safety and Public Housing Resources in Watts
In comparison to the other case study neighborhoods, Watts displays particularly
strong vertical linking social capital relationships between local organizations and state
actors, and more tenuous bonding relationships among community groups. Shaped by
Watts’ history of protest politics, these vertical linking relationships have provided access
to political resources particularly in the arenas of public safety and housing. High-level
public officials regularly interact with community leaders; however, by facilitating
paternalistic rather than empowering state-society relationships, these relationships may
undermine rather than support local organizational capacity building.
Moreover, due in part arguably to historic disinvestment in the community, Watts
organizations are less active in building linking relationships that access economic
resources for policy initiatives from public and private sources, or bonding relationships
178
among local organizations that also might facilitate access to economic and political
resources. Rather, mistrust and cynicism more often characterized community sentiments
toward local organizations in Watts as compared to the other case study neighborhoods.
An example of strong vertical organizational relationships with state actors is the
Watts Gang Task Force—which consists of non-profit agency, church, public housing
and public agency representatives. The Watts Gang Task Force supports community
dialogue and political inclusion that have shaped city policing strategies. A unique
phenomenon in the city, the task force creates a regular venue for relationship building
and dialogue among groups. According to one respondent:
It provides people the feeling of being connected. You know that’s really it. At
the end they’re like, “We’re all connected. I feel like I’m listened to.” And the
biggest piece is access. So on a weekly basis, you have access to a Chief, a
Captain, a Councilwoman, the president of HACLA, the access … there have
been people who have come to that meeting, they’re like, “I cannot believe who’s
here.”
96
For example, task force advocacy influenced reform of the city’s policy on civil
gang injunctions, which are restraining orders against groups in geographically delimited
areas that ask for special restrictions regarding a group’s activities. In a civil gang
injunction, named gang members can be arrested if found participating in certain
activities, such as associating with other named gang members, in the geographical area
delimited by the injunction. The growth of civil gang injunctions has raised significant
civil liberty concerns. Shortly after the task force formed in 2006, task force members
brought to light the practical issues associated with exiting a civil gang injunction
(Crawford, 2009). As a result of the task force’s advocacy, in 2007 the Los Angeles City
96
Interview with the author, Nov. 5, 2009
179
Attorney’s office created a process for removing a person’s name from a gang injunction.
In October 2008, the first former gang member was removed from the city’s gang
injunctions, which at the time covered 11,000 people (Winton, 2008).
Moreover, rather than the historic adversarial relationship with the community,
LAPD officers today call upon task force members to assist in responding to violence in
the community. The LAPD has attributed declines in violent crime in Watts in part to the
community engagement that occurs through the task force. Task force members work
with community members at crime sites to prevent further violence and allow the LAPD
to conduct its work. When investigating incidences of crime, the LAPD also turns to the
task force for assistance with information. While claims of police harassment and police
brutality still surface in the community, allegations often are discussed openly at task
force meetings, and LAPD leaders involved in the task force have demonstrated a
commitment to investigating potential cases of police misconduct.
According to one respondent, this has helped to reverse LAPD attitudes in which
“everything is very black and white. You’re a good guy, you’re a bad guy. You’re a gang
member, you’re not gang member. You can’t be a human being. You can’t be a human
being that screws up.”
97
Community interactions through the task force create a more
empathetic understanding of community residents and their experiences; and the venue
provides a regular platform for policy advocacy by non-profit organizations, such as the
Youth Justice Coalition, which works to challenge inequalities in the Los Angeles
County juvenile justice system.
97
Interview with the author, Nov. 3, 2009
180
As an illustrative example, at a Watts Gang Task Force meeting, the Los Angeles
Police Department briefed the participants on a recent curfew crackdown where the
police in one night picked up 70 minors in violation of the city’s nighttime curfew law,
which prohibits unsupervised juveniles under the age of 18 years old in public places or
outdoors from 10 p.m. to sunrise. The police transported the youth to the local police
station, gave them citations and required an adult to pick them up at the station. The
police framed the operation as one that aimed to protect the community’s young people
and encourage parent responsibility.
In an interesting exchange, community representatives at the task force meeting
discussed the possible long-term ramifications for having even curfew citations on a
juvenile’s record, which may facilitate a youth’s involvement in the criminal justice
system and thus perpetuate inequalities. It is likely that curfew crackdowns occur less
often in wealthier neighborhoods, where juveniles also likely violate city curfew laws.
While no immediate changes in LAPD policy resulted in this exchange, this dialogue
represents one small example of how regular access to and exchange with public and
political officials could inform agency practices and policy decisions.
Moreover, significant discussion has occurred at task force meetings with
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles officials regarding the proposed
redevelopment of the Jordan Downs public housing development. While public safety
issues are tied intimately with public housing developments in Watts, the Housing
Authority’s attention to the task force seems to derive from the important role coalition
181
members play in the community as conduits of information—for community residents
regarding city plans and policies, and for city officials regarding community sentiments.
For example, a public housing resident who regularly attends task force meetings
and represents Jordan Downs residents provided an interview to the Los Angeles Times
in 2009 criticizing the redevelopment project, to which high-level city officials quickly
responded by engaging the resident in dialogue at task force and other meetings. The
agency has been quick to reassure residents that residential displacement and the
reduction of affordable units would not occur—considerations that the agency knew must
be in place to receive community support for the redevelopment project. Moreover,
discussions at task force meetings shaped the Housing Authority’s outreach strategies,
which involved door-to-door visits to inform residents about redevelopment plans.
The question in Watts is whether these strong state-society relationships in Watts
support local capacity building in the same manner observed in Boyle Heights and
Pacoima. For example, the city has played a somewhat dominant if not paternalistic role
in the Watts Gang Task Force. Rather than relying on community leadership, public
administrators took a lead role in facilitating task force meetings until very recently
turning over facilitation responsibilities to local community leaders. At one time, city
officials also took responsibility for recording and distributing meeting minutes.
The task force has not been successful in developing funded policy initiatives or
building broad coalitions that exhibit bonding and bridging social capital. It has
attempted to establish committees to tackle different issues, but these committees have
not been sustainable as the group often struggles to accomplish its goals. At one task
182
force meeting, for example, a community participant suggested that the LAPD set aside
staff time to research grant opportunities for the community, rather than suggesting
community organizations take that responsibility. Thus it is not clear that the vertical
social capital relationships in Watts are supporting linkages to economic resources.
Moreover, personal animosities often are displayed publicly at task force
meetings, which can be highly contentious. Bullying and intimidation at times occur, and
given past failed attempts to initiate improvements in the community, newcomers and
outsiders often are viewed with suspicion. An interview respondent observed:
Most believe that somebody new that walks in there, you’re there to get
something, there for yourself. You’re not there to contribute … That kind of thing
causes that group a lot of mistrust. That you’re not here for the good of the
community, you’re here for the good of you … That group will evaluate you, and
if they don’t like you, they will eat you alive.
98
Another interview respondent said the community needs to cultivate leaders who will
garner the respect of community members and unite disparate groups as task force
leaders are well meaning but lack the skills or capacity to rally the community or build
bridges among different groups.
99
Other than facilitating meetings and convening policy decision-makers at task
force meetings, state actors have not invested significant resources in local capacity
building in Watts. While they acknowledge historic disinvestment in the community,
state actors also hold the expectation, as expressed through interviews, that Watts leaders
and organizations over time should assume a greater role in community action.
Unaccompanied by significant investment in local capacity building, however, this
98
Interview with the author, Nov. 3, 2009
99
Interview with the author, Nov. 5, 2009
183
expectation becomes an unrealistic, unlikely and unjust prospect. Thus, while facilitating
access to political decision-making processes, linking social capital relationships with
state actors in Watts differ from linking social capital relationships in Boyle Heights and
Pacoima, where external organizations have provided support for local capacity building.
Public-sector and non-profit involvement in capital investment in Watts is key
because stigmatization of the community creates challenges to accessing private
investment. For example, community leaders have struggled for more than 10 years to
build a movie theater—the community’s last theater burned down during the 1965 Watts
riots. The community has struggled even longer to attract a national chain sit-down
restaurant. An interview respondent observed, “It’s difficult because nobody wants to
come here because they’re scared to death. So anything that would draw positive
attention here won’t touch it. That’s a huge challenge.”
100
According to another interview
respondent, “Watts has been stigmatized to the point that people say, ‘Don’t go there
because you’re not going to get insured anyway.’”
101
The primary organization that facilitates access to economic resources for capital
investment is the non-profit Watts Labor Community Action Committee (WLCAC),
which has been an historic force in the community for nearly 50 years. Founded by labor
leader Ted Watkins in 1965 with the support of labor unions and managed today by
Watkins’ family members, WLCAC is one of the largest landowners in Watts. According
to its Web site, WLCAC has built, owns and/or manages more than 600 commercial
properties, business ventures and housing units in South Central Los Angeles. The
100
Interview with the author, Nov. 3, 2009
101
Interview with the author, May 29, 2009
184
organization provides social services and engages in community development, utilizing
linking relationships with private and public sources of funds for capital investment.
For example, WLCAC recently partnered with another community development
corporation, Affordable Housing CDC, to construct the $45-million, 64-unit Dolores
McCoy Villa apartment complex in Watts that includes supportive services for homeless
and formerly incarcerated community members. WLCAC also recently won a $4.9
million California Urban Greening Grant to build MudTown Farms, a 2.5-acre urban
farm park and community center in Watts. The project involves partnerships with the
California Dept. of Parks and Recreation, the Southern California Institute of
Architecture, the Trust for Public Land and Cal Poly Pomona.
However, in contrast to local capacity building in Boyle Heights and Pacoima,
where external funders have encouraged development of bonding social capital
relationships among local organizations, local organizations in Watts exhibit limited
bonding and bridging social capital. The few high-capacity community organizations in
Watts, such as the WLCAC, tend to operate more autonomously. These organizations
access economic resources for capital investment by linking to the public and private
sector; however, bonding and bridging relationships of cooperation and collaboration
among local organizations in the community are less common. Rather, competition for
access to resources, and issues of community power and control are more apparent in
Watts, which Chapter 6 particularly addresses.
185
Summary
The organizational networks observed in the three Los Angeles neighborhoods
differ considerably in the manner in which they access economic and political resources
for neighborhood regeneration. In the community of Boyle Heights, for example,
organizational networks access economic and political resources particularly in the policy
arenas of housing and development, health and education. Bonding social capital among
organizations with shared interests facilitates political influence by means of community
mobilization and organizing. Moreover, organizations in Boyle Heights use linking social
capital relationships with supportive external institutions to access economic resources
for policy initiatives and capital investment. These vertical linking relationships have had
positive feedback effects in supporting development of local capacities and structured
opportunities for horizontal relationship building among local organizations.
In Pacoima, organizational networks primarily access economic resources in the
arenas of education and the environment. Through linking social capital relationships
with philanthropic organizations, Pacoima organizations have accessed funding to
support policy initiatives and policy experimentation in the community. While operating
in a more de-politicized manner compared to organizations in Boyle Heights and more
independently from political decision-makers compared to organizations in Watts,
Pacoima organizations have benefitted from vertical linking relationships with
philanthropic organizations, which have strengthened local capacities and supported a
collaborative organizational environment among funders and local organizations.
186
Finally, organizational networks in Watts have accessed external economic and
political resources in the policy arenas of public safety and public housing. Linking social
capital with state actors has facilitated access to political resources in the form of the
ability to influence policy decision-making processes. Moreover, a few high capacity
organizations in Watts utilize linking social capital to access external economic resources
for capital investment in the community. However, vertical linking relationships with
state actors have been less conducive to supporting local capacities. Thus, in a
community characterized by organizational mistrust and competition due to weaknesses
in local capacities, challenges exist to building broad coalitions that exhibit bonding
social capital. Community organizations in Watts also have had less success in gaining
external economic resources for policy initiatives.
The observations from these case study neighborhoods suggest several important
implications for understanding the role of organizational social capital in neighborhood
regeneration. First, the uneven development of social capital relationships in these
communities has led to inequities in access to political and economic resources, which
reproduces inequalities in already marginalized communities. The differences in the
policy arenas in which organizational networks are active also suggest that the
development of social capital may be uneven across policy arenas. Thus, communities
may access economic and political resources in one policy arena but not another,
although neighborhood regeneration may require access to economic and political
resources in multiple policy arenas. Given the multi-sectoral nature of neighborhood
regeneration, these case studies suggest that challenges may exist to building
187
organizational networks able to cross-cut policy issues effectively; however, the shifting
attention of organizational networks in the case study communities toward policy issues
in new arenas and the fluidity of organizational relationships point to the potential for
existing organizational social capital in a community to cross multiple policy areas.
Second, this case study of organizational networks points attention to the
important differences in the types of vertical linking social capital relationships that occur
across neighborhoods with some relationships supporting local capacities more than
others. While scholarship has focused on the role of local capacities in facilitating
neighborhood regeneration, greater attention should be placed on the role of resource-rich
external institutions in building local capacities. In contrast to Putnam’s view that vertical
relationships fail to facilitate the collaboration or solidarity fostered by horizontal
relationships, this study demonstrates that vertical social capital relationships can have
varying effects on local capacities and relationships depending on the context. As Goode
and O’Brien’s (2006) argue, “social capital theorization must investigate the power
relations embedded in the ‘vertical links’ or ‘bridging social capital’ between individuals
and institutions of civil society to clarify these relationships” (p. 161).
In Pacoima and Boyle Heights, for example, linking social capital relationships
with resource-rich external organizations, such as philanthropic foundations, seem to
strengthen local relationships and organizational capacities. Linking social capital
relationships with political decision-makers in Watts have less of an effect on building
local organizational capacities. Access to political decision-makers through linking social
188
capital represents an important political resource for marginalized neighborhoods that can
influence policy outcomes. As Woolcock and Narayan (2000) argue:
To be sure, the net-works perspective recognizes that weak laws and overt
discrimination can under-mine efforts by poor minorities to act in their collective
interest, but the role communities play in shaping institutional performance
generally, and the enormous potential of positive state-society relations in
particular, are largely ignored (p. 234 ).
However, strong state-society relationships have the potential to involve paternalism, co-
optation and dependency without robust local capacities and relationships to counter
these marginalizing tendencies. For example, Jennings (2007) argues that the public
sector has weakened social capital in poor communities, despite the call for the
strengthening of civil society, through the de-concentration of poor residents, justification
of gentrification and unresponsiveness of government to neighborhood organizing.
But rather than the source of social capital that determines the feedback
mechanisms influencing local capacities and relationships, the norms involved in linking
social capital relationships seem to be of greater importance. For example, some
philanthropic organizations may adopt a paternalistic approach that drives decision-
making regarding the direction of funding initiatives and fosters relationships of
dependency with funding recipients, while others may focus on capacity building and
local empowerment. While conventional models of community development emphasize
one-way relationships between the public sector and community-based organizations that
provide services to residents who act as passive recipients (Gress, 2004), the public sector
could adopt a more empowered, participatory approach that encourages the capacities of
local communities as suggested by scholars, such as Fung and Wright (2003).
189
Thus, a particularly important question involves the conditions under which the
non-profit and public sectors can support local capacities rather than undermine them.
Community organizations walk a fine line in their ability to facilitate relationships with
resource-rich institutions while maintaining the ability to confront and challenge the same
decision-makers and power brokers that provide access to resources (Goode & O’Brien,
2006). These issues suggest the need for greater attention to the role of local
organizational capacity building in neighborhoods rather than the social capital
literature’s traditional focus on social trust and civic norms. Moreover, a closer
examination is needed regarding the appropriate role of government involvement vs.
local autonomy in neighborhood regeneration, and what constitutes the most effective
relationships between government and civil society for marginalized neighborhoods.
As Goode and O’Brien (2006) aptly state:
What remains to be seen is whether it is possible for local actors, who value both
their own sociality and the use value of space, to escape the governmentalizing
effects and destruction of social relationships of the state’s actions or to create
oppositional identities and social movements. A campaign of development that
took account of the threats important to poorer residents and their networks, that
used existing social networks to achieve winnable goals, and that allowed
residents to participate in ways that they themselves defined could begin to
address, rather than exacerbate, the needs of long-term residents (p. 176).
Of the three case study neighborhoods examined, organizational networks in Boyle
Heights seem most likely to hold this promise in their ability to access vital economic
resources as well as their ability to mobilize the community to challenge power brokers
and influence policy decision-makers. However, barriers exist as well in Boyle Heights to
broad-based movements inclusive and representative of the community as a whole due to
190
cleavages along lines of class and immigrant status. These social cleavages and their
effect on organizational networks are discussed in Chapter 6.
191
CHAPTER 6: THE DYNAMICS OF RACE, CLASS AND COMPETING INTERESTS
IN ORGANIZATIONAL NETWORKS
This chapter considers the social cleavages that arise from dynamics of race, class
and competing interests in the three case study communities, and considers the extent to
which community organizations represent the diversity of community interests. The
social capital literature typically analyzes community heterogeneity using quantitative
measures that categorize networks along racial and class lines, and the impact of
community heterogeneity on measures of social solidarity and trust; however, this static
approach to race, class and social capital obscures the dynamics by which communities
negotiate racial and socioeconomic differences, and the importance of institutional
considerations in representing diverse community interests.
In examining social cleavages within neighborhoods, this study addresses
Cohen’s (1999) observation of the tendency to ignore power relations within
marginalized communities as “intracommunity patterns of power and membership can
have a significant, if not overwhelming, impact on the political histories and approaching
futures of marginal groups” (p. 36). Traditional political analyses typically consider
relationships within the dominant stratum, or between dominant and marginalized groups.
They also tend to perceive marginalized groups as homogeneous in nature.
However, as Cohen argues, contexts matter, where “the options for resistance
available to any specific marginal community vary” (1999, p. 36). Cohen particularly
points to the importance of indigenous institutions in brokering access to resources
otherwise unavailable to marginalized groups, where “understanding the internal or
indigenous structuring of marginal communities, where needed resources and support can
192
be found, is critical to understanding the political actions and attitudes of marginal group
members” (1999, p. 25).
For example, as DeFilippis (2001) argues, not everyone within communities
participates in networks of relationships that lead to the access of economic and political
resources; networks can exclude. This exclusion can be observed particularly in
communities where some members have strong organizational representation that
facilitates access to external economic and political resources, while other community
members do not. Organizations that have a monopoly on economic and political
resources may not necessarily represent broad community interests. In other words, social
capital can involve a “complex power relationship, in that one’s ability to mobilize
networks to access resources comes at the expense of those who cannot” (Goode &
O’Brien, 2006, p. 160).
Following these lines, this chapter illustrates the different ways in which
institutions within marginalized communities broker access to resources for community
members. It particularly argues that the absence of community-representing institutions
and organizations, most apparent in communities undergoing socio-demographic
transition, limits the development of social capital and consequent access to resources for
some segments of the neighborhood population. In other words, as Small (2004) also
argues, the structure and practices of the community’s organizational infrastructure
contribute to shaping the development of relationships of social capital in communities.
For example, heterogeneous communities may have more limited social capital
relationships due in part to the lack of institutions and capacities to facilitate social capital
193
on behalf of particular minority groups; however, over time, these institutions and
organizations may develop and contribute to strengthening social capital relationships for
previously disconnected groups.
This institutional perspective provides an alternative explanation to studies that
suggest that greater community heterogeneity is associated with lower levels of social
capital due to the social mistrust that diversity engenders. For example, Putnam’s (2007)
recent work on social capital and ethnic diversity argues that increased diversity in the
short run challenges social solidarity and inhibits social capital. Based upon an analysis
of survey data, Putnam concludes that ethnic diversity initially causes all residents of
diverse communities to withdraw from collective life and increases community mistrust,
where “in colloquial language, people living in ethnically diverse settings appear to
‘hunker down’— that is, to pull in like a turtle” (Putnam, 2007, p. 149); however, in the
long run, Putnam argues that communities become more accepting of diversity and
inclusive as:
Successful immigrant societies create new forms of social solidarity and dampen
the negative effects of diversity by constructing new, more encompassing
identities. Thus, the central challenge for modern, diversifying societies is to
create a new broader sense of ‘we’ (2007, pp. 138-139).
As opposed to a focus on explanations focusing on social solidarity and identity,
this chapter argues for more attention to institutional considerations in the development
of social capital, where community organizational infrastructures—conditioned by race
and class dynamics—shape the nature of social capital relationships. This chapter
assesses the manner in which organizational networks represent varying community
interests and argues that in diverse communities, relationships of social capital are readily
194
observable in the work of community organizations. As illustrated by observations of the
three Los Angeles case study neighborhoods, social capital relationships in these
communities actively facilitate access to economic and political resources necessary for
neighborhood regeneration.
However, as Table 14 illustrates, variations in the dynamics of race, class and
competing interests that play out across Los Angeles’ socio-spatial landscape are
expressed in the character of organizational representation and organizational capacities.
In Watts, African-American leaders and institutions traditionally have wielded strong
political connections; however, despite the recent growth in the Latino population, few
organizations in the community represent Latino interests. Thus, opportunities to build
social capital relationships involving the Latino community are more limited. Moreover,
reflecting the power dynamics within the community, notions of organizational mistrust
and competition more often emerged in interviews with respondents in Watts compared
to interviews in the other case study neighborhoods.
195
Table 14: Race, Class and Competing Interests in Organizational Networks
Neighborhood Community Characteristics Characteristics of
Organizational Networks
Boyle Heights History as predominantly Latino community
Differences in class and immigrant status lead
to divisions in community interests
Gentrification and development pressures draw
out community cleavages
History of institution building among
Latino community
Organizational representation exists for
disparate groups
Community cleavages reflected in
organizational coalitional alignments
Pacoima Racial transition from African-American to
Latino community near completion
Less explicit tensions around race and class, or
development pressures in community
More recent history of institution building
characterized by norms of collaboration
and cooperation
Attempts to bridge between disparate
groups
Watts History as predominantly African-American
community
Racial transition from African-American to
Latino community under way
Most distressed community among case study
neighborhoods in poverty and disinvestment
African-American leadership and
institutions dominate
Limited history of institution building
among Latino community
Relationships among African-American
organizations at times exhibit mistrust
and competition
In Pacoima, a less contested environment combined with near complete racial
transition and philanthropic and non-profit investments in organizational capacity
building have shaped the development of relatively new organizational networks that aim
to represent the interests of Pacoima community members, including the Latino
immigrant community. Finally, in Boyle Heights, a long history of institution building
exists in the Latino community; however, organizational alignments reflect intra-racial
cleavages along class lines and immigrant status spurred by the neighborhood’s long-time
function as a Latino immigrant gateway, and development and gentrification pressures
supported by the neighborhood’s market location near downtown Los Angeles.
196
The community dynamics summarized in Table 14 also highlight the increasing
complexity of racial politics in Los Angeles. The literature on racial politics in Los
Angeles has focused heavily on ethnic electoral coalitions (Sonenshein, 1994, Waldinger
& Bozorgmehr, 1996; Jones-Correa, 2001), ignoring the manner in which racial and class
dynamics influence street-level politics within communities. As Jones-Correa (2001)
argues racial politics have taken the place of partisan politics in the city, and a traditional
black-white paradigm fails to adequately describe contemporary politics in Los Angeles.
Rapid immigration can lead to a perception if not reality of economic competition for
jobs and public resources between new immigrants and lower-income residents
remaining in inner cities following middle-class flight.
Thus, this study follows in the line of Park and Park (2001), who argue that new
immigrants to Los Angeles “bring a set of multiracial complexities and challenges to the
urban political process … [as] racial politics have gradually moved from the simplicity of
white dominance over blacks to the more nuanced and complex dynamics of ‘post-civil
rights’ politics” (p. 92). To build a liberal coalition, Park and Park argue, a shared vision
must be created rather than the view of politics as a zero-sum game with competition
among racial and ethnic groups (2001).
A largely separate literature on labor organizing and other progressive social
movements has contended that the politicization of Latinos and Asian Americans who
have immigrated to the region and filled the region’s low-wage jobs has led to a
resurgence of community organizing in Los Angeles (Nicholls & Beaumont, 2004;
Gottlieb et al., 2006; Milkman, 2006; Brodkin, 2007; Pastor, Benner & Matsuoka; 2010).
197
For example, Milkman argues that immigrant workers have reinvigorated labor
organizing in campaigns that have garnered national attention, such as the Justice for
Janitors movement (2006).
She characterizes the Los Angeles labor movement as a “harbinger of national
trends” in that it “sparked a wave of immigrant organizing efforts in California and across
the nation in the 1990s” (p. 2, 2006). Brodkin (2007) focuses on the formation of political
identities and individual political activism primarily of Latinos and Asian Americans that
contributed to new labor movements as well as other broader issue-based movements in
partnership with progressive organizations, such as the Los Angeles Alliance for a New
Economy’s campaign for a living wage ordinance in the 1990s.
This study’s neighborhood-level approach to racial and ethnic politics addresses
deficits in these previous accounts of Los Angeles racial and ethnic politics. Beyond
citywide electoral politics or regional labor organizing, this approach enables a view of
how neighborhood-level mobilization and the character of organizational involvement
have played out across other forces that bear on neighborhood-level well-being. A focus
on the neighborhood level enables the examination of variations among different types of
disadvantaged neighborhoods that previous citywide accounts have ignored.
In doing so, this account reveals major differences in the patterns of racial and
ethnic politics that are critical to understanding the wider dynamics of ethnicity and race
in governance. The discussion below of how racial and class dynamics interact with
organizational networks in each of the three case study neighborhoods demonstrates these
variations in the patterns of racial and ethnic politics. A detailed description follows of
198
the ways in which race, class and other competing interests play out in the organizational
networks observed in the three case study neighborhoods.
Competing Commuting Visions in Boyle Heights
Boyle Heights has a long history of institution building leading to strong
organizational capacities and strong representation of community interests; however, the
community’s proximity to downtown Los Angeles and the extension of the Metro Gold
Line subway into the community in 2009 have created development pressures that have
brought into sharp relief ideological differences that are expressed through organizational
politics and coalitional alignments in the community. The development pressures that
have drawn out competing community preferences in Boyle Heights raises questions
about the role social capital potentially can play in bridging community divides in
strongly contested environments.
In particular, while Boyle Heights has been a predominantly Latino community
since the post-World War II era, socioeconomic stratification along class and immigrant
status has led to differing perspectives on the trajectory of development activities in the
community. Given the community’s long-standing role as a Latino gateway, Boyle
Heights exhibits diversity within its Latino population with a mix of multi-generational
residents and newer immigrants, homeowners and renters, and middle class and working
class residents. This diversity contributes to competing visions for the future of Boyle
Heights. Despite heterogeneous preferences regarding neighborhood regeneration, the
energetic organizational activity in Boyle Heights suggests that organizational social
capital is not lacking in the community, particularly between organizations with shared
199
perspectives; and organizations play an important role in representing the diversity of
community interests. Nevertheless the fluid coalitional alignments that emerge in this
contested environment also suggest a need for greater attention to the role of bridging
social capital in facilitating the pursuit of common aims among disparate groups.
One of the most prominent issues in Boyle Heights today pertains to conflicting
community views regarding development. While some residents express concerns
regarding the changing character of the neighborhood, other residents advocate for
development that will provide more services and amenities for middle-income residents.
Still, other community members express a need for more affordable housing for working-
class residents. Interview respondents commonly expressed community tensions
regarding redevelopment:
In Boyle Heights, the biggest challenge I see is that balance between revitalization
and redevelopment and preserving the best parts of the past as we move into the
future.
102
The main question is how to move the community forward without ripping out the
cultural fabric of the community—it becomes a balancing act … You don’t want
to stop growth in the community especially if it historically doesn’t have the
resources it needs. There needs to be a fair and balanced approach to the
revitalization process.
103
The separating and dividing issue is on affordable housing and renters versus
owners. For us, all development is not good development. We need development
that is accountable.
104
102
Interview with the author, Feb. 14, 2008
103
Interview with the author, Nov. 2, 2007
104
Interview with the author, Jan. 9, 2008
200
In general, some people in Boyle Heights are very ready to embrace change.
Others wish they were left alone, and I think that’s to be expected … Boyle
Heights has been neglected for far too long. I think people are ready to get their
fair share.
105
Community organizations in Boyle Heights reflect these ideological differences.
On the one hand, social justice organizations, such as the East Los Angeles Community
Corporation (ELACC) and Union de Vecinos, advocate on behalf of lower-income
residents in the community who include more recent immigrants from Mexico or Central
America. These organizations support multi-family, affordable housing developments
and voice concerns regarding the displacement of residents and small businesses due to
gentrification. ELACC spearheaded the formation of the United Communities of Boyle
Heights in response to the proposed redevelopment of the former Sears catalog
property—one of the remaining large parcels of land in Los Angeles.
Illustrating the importance of market considerations in shaping the politics of
neighborhood regeneration, a marketing piece for the Sears property, which currently
does not have a developer, touts the property’s locational advantages with its proximity to
downtown, easy access to freeways and public transit, and position in an underserved
retail market.
106
According to one respondent, with the redevelopment of the Sears site,
the major question is for whose benefit will the project be?
107
“We are very concerned
and thoughtful about that,” the respondent said.
108
The coalition at one point organized
more than 400 residents, who demanded the incorporation of affordable housing and
105
Interview with the author, Feb. 14, 2008
106
See http://www.olympicandsoto.com. Accessed 3/9/2011.
107
Interview with the author, June 13, 2008
108
Interview with the author, June 13, 2008
201
local employment into the development plan, to attend a community meeting about the
proposed project.
On the other hand, the Boyle Heights Homeowners Association and other
homeowner groups advocate on behalf of homeowner interests, and tend to support
homeownership and services and amenities for middle-income residents, many of whom
are more established Mexican-American residents or non-Latino residents. Referred to as
the “older generation” or the “more established,” these residents have particular concerns
with neighborhood beautification and quality of life issues, such as clean streets.
109
One
respondent described the community as “really run down … There is no sense of
community or people caring about where they live.”
110
Middle-income residents also
have expressed concerns regarding the lack of dining, shopping and entertainment
options in the community. Competing community visions lead to significant controversy
regarding proposed redevelopment projects and divisions in coalition alignments.
For example, some interview respondents expressed the perspective that Boyle
Heights has too many affordable housing developments and services for low-income
residents.
111
One interview respondent, referring to ELACC’s work, said “that’s what
they do because they develop for poor people.”
112
Regarding the controversy around the
Pico-Aliso public housing redevelopment, another interview respondent said that they
“never got that” in that community members spent their whole life organizing saying they
109
Interview with the author, June 4, 2009
110
Interview with the author, July 17, 2009
111
Interviews with the author, July 17, 2009; July 20, 2009
112
Interview with the author, July 17, 2009
202
want a decent living and affordable housing, but when the federal government gave them
a more livable place, they said “Hell no, we won’t go.”
113
The $50 million redevelopment
of the Pico Gardens and Aliso Village public housing developments, which began in
1996, through a U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development Urban Revitalization
Demonstration Grant involved demolishing existing buildings and constructing a lower-
density, mixed-income community, which displaced some public housing residents.
Another interview respondent recognized the tension in redeveloping the Pico-
Aliso public housing developments in that it was “time to provide people with a decent
place to live,” but by the same token, “people have lost a place they called home.”
114
Community-representing organizations, such as the Boyle Heights Neighborhood
Council, have been governed by boards holding various perspectives on redevelopment,
reflecting divisions in the community. One respondent described the Neighborhood
Council board at one time as “anti-development,” “anti-immigrant,” and opposed to
affordable housing, although board representation has shifted in recent years.
115
Controversy also has emerged surrounding the proposed redevelopment of the
historic Linda Vista Community Hospital, which was constructed in 1904 to serve Santa
Fe railroad workers suffering from tuberculosis, work-related injuries and other ailments.
The hospital closed in 1991, and since then various redevelopment plans have emerged
including one to transform the hospital into live/work condominiums known as the Buena
Vista Lofts. Renter organizations, such as ELACC, have advocated for the development
113
Interview with the author, Nov. 13, 2008
114
Interview with the author, Aug. 10, 2009
115
Interview with the author, Aug. 10, 2009
203
of more affordable housing at the site; homeowners and the Boyle Heights Historical
Society wanted to maintain the historic integrity of the building; and finally, alcohol and
drug treatment providers wanting to see the site as a home for treatment services also
participated in the redevelopment debate.
116
Moreover, the proposed redevelopment of the Wyvernwood Apartments also has
led to organizational divisions in the community. A coalition of resident and non-profit
organizations has emerged to oppose the redevelopment; however, the developer
proposing the redevelopment also has mobilized a coalition of local non-profit
organizations, known as the Boyle Heights Jobs Collaborative, in support of the project.
Supporting the redevelopment’s estimated creation of 10,000 construction jobs and 3,000
permanent jobs with many set aside for local residents, the coalition consists of many
youth and employment-focused organizations, such as Homeboy Industries, Jovenes, Inc.
and the East Los Angeles Occupational Center. The organizations involved in the
collaborative would participate in a local hiring program to fill the construction jobs
generated by the development. The support of organizations like Homeboy Industries—
which aligned with ELACC and Union de Vecinos to ensure the responsible
redevelopment of the Sears Catalog Co. property—illustrates the fluid nature of
coalitional alignments depending on the issue at hand.
Community cleavages are complicated by the dynamics of immigration in Boyle
Heights, which highlight issues of intra-ethnic conflict that have been less explored in the
literature on race and class politics. According to interview respondents, Boyle Heights
116
Interview with the author, June 4, 2009
204
historically has been a Mexican-American community with a significant native-born
population; however, in more recent years, a larger segment of the population has grown
to include many new immigrants from Mexico and Central America, many of whom are
undocumented.
117
One respondent characterized the most significant issue facing Boyle
Heights as relating to migration, which includes overlapping issues of poverty,
undocumented status, the lack of employment opportunities for immigrants and
restriction to health care access.
118
According to the 2000 U.S. Census, approximately 93 percent of the Boyle
Heights population is Latino with about 52 percent of residents being foreign born. Like
the Asian-American community, one respondent observed, the Latino community in
Boyle Heights is diverse with different subgroups and varying interests.
119
Thus,
divergent perspectives exist in Boyle Heights among residents and community
organizations regarding the growth of the immigrant population, particularly of
undocumented immigrants. Some residents believe undocumented immigrants in Boyle
Heights create unfair costs for public services, such as health care and education; while
other residents believe that undocumented residents should not be denied services.
120
The recent controversy over unauthorized street vending in Boyle Heights
illustrates this tension as conflict over public space has been divided between lower-
income residents and immigrants, and middle- and upper-income residents (Loukaitou-
117
Interview with the author, July 20, 2009
118
Interview with the author, Jan. 28, 2008
119
Interview with the author, July 20, 2009
120
Interview with the author, July 20, 2009
205
Sideris & Ehrenfeucht, 2009). In the fall of 2009, the Los Angeles Police Department
began cracking down on street vendors who gathered on Breed Street in Boyle Heights
four nights a week in what became known as the Breed Street Food Fair. Those opposing
street vending—which is illegal in Los Angeles—cite concerns regarding public health
and safety, unfair business competition, lost tax revenue and neighborhood unsightliness.
Many of those who oppose street vending consist of non-immigrant homeowners,
who typically do not associate with renters and other lower-income community
members.
121
One respondent described street vending in Boyle Heights as a “huge
problem” and ventured that it would be unacceptable in wealthier communities if a
ranchero truck was parked daily outside neighborhood homes.
122
In contrast, those in
support of street vendors hold the immigrant perspective of the sidewalk as a legitimate
place of economic activity (Loukaitou-Sideris & Ehrenfeucht, 2009) and street vending
as a vital source of income for low-income families. For example, ELACC has taken an
active role in advocating on behalf of street vendors and seeking resolutions that would
support street vending while addressing community concerns.
Because of Boyle Height’s sizable immigrant community, challenges exist
regarding political engagement and the representation of immigrant interests. An
interview respondent active in housing and other community issues recounted
experiences of trying to recruit immigrant participation in community meetings on such
121
Interview with the author, Aug. 10, 2009
122
Interview with the author, July 17, 2009
206
issues as the need for open space in the community.
123
The respondent said the same
sentiment is echoed everywhere: “We don’t speak English, so they’re not going to listen
to us.”
124
A sense of political disempowerment exists among immigrant communities as
according to one respondent:
There are not too many people involved or interested in development … People’s
mentality is that it doesn’t matter because it’s going to happen anyway. It’s been
happening even if people speak up. People lose faith in the process.
125
However, community leadership in Boyle Heights through non-profit organizations has
played a significant role in the representation of immigrant interests and in the provision
of services to immigrant communities.
Similar trends are observed in other cities. For example, in New York and
Chicago, Cordero-Guzmán et al. (2008) argue that the large-scale mobilizations for
immigrant rights in 2006 did not occur spontaneously but stemmed from “an outgrowth
of long-standing cooperative efforts and well-established institutional networks of
immigrant-serving community-based organizations, social service providers, and
advocacy groups” (p. 599). In addition, Graauw’s study of immigrant non-profit
organizations in San Francisco finds that:
As hybrid organizations combining service provision with political advocacy,
immigrant nonprofits are able to build their political capital from the bottom up as
well as from the top down. Due to their position as a bridge between the
powerless immigrant community and the powerful members of the San Francisco
political establishment, immigrant nonprofits are strategically positioned to have a
presence and influence in the local politics of immigrant incorporation (2008, p.
329).
123
Interview with the author, Aug. 10, 2009
124
Interview with the author, Aug. 10, 2009
125
Interview with the author, Aug. 10, 2009
207
Facilitating access to economic and political resources, these organizations provide a
venue for political participation particularly for undocumented immigrants who are
barred from traditional avenues of political participation, such as voting (Cordero-
Guzmán et al., 2008).
As such, previous studies have examined the impact of economic restructuring
and globalization on the decline of social capital, although the case of Boyle Heights
suggests the potential for more positive impacts on social capital. For example, Heying
(1997) ties the decline of civic engagement to “corporate delocalization” and the lack of
incentives to entice elites in mobilizing communities to facilitate place-based
development. Schulman and Anderson (1999) examine a North Carolina textile
community and demonstrate that economic restructuring has enervated vertical
relationships between communities and firms, which have been replaced by horizontal
relationships between unions. However, in Boyle Heights, new relationships of social
capital have emerged with the growing involvement of immigrant populations—shaped
by the push and pull forces of globalization and economic restructuring—in community
organizations and organizational networks, thus drawing attention to another important
dimension of analysis regarding the impact of global forces on social capital.
Organizations in Boyle Heights are able to represent the diverse interests held by
different segments of the community; however, an empirical question remains about the
potential for the formation of bridging social capital to facilitate cooperation among
groups with disparate interests in the pursuit of common goals. For example, one
interview respondents questioned whether Boyle Heights residents could develop a
208
common vision as the community has “so many people at the table. So many non-profits
have a vested interest … and a passion for transforming what’s going on.”
126
Another
respondent observed the lack of a unifying force in the community:
If you ask who could you go to in Boyle Heights and say, “We have to do this,”
and move the community—I don’t know if anyone could do it. You know they
say, Los Angeles has no center. It’s so dispersed. It’s the same in Boyle Heights
… Someone or somebody has to bring people together … We all know what
needs to get done … We need somebody who grasps the reins of leadership and
brings people together.
127
Other respondents active in Boyle Heights contrasted the sense of collaboration
that exists in Pacoima, which has fewer cleavages, with the absence of a collaborative
ethos in Boyle Heights.
128
Compared to Pacoima, organizational politics in Boyle Heights
and the Eastside of Los Angeles in general are more influential in terms of city politics
but also much more contentious.
129
“I don’t think there is any place like it,” a respondent
said of Boyle Heights’ complex political and organizational landscape. “You have to be
much more savvy to get things done in Boyle Heights. You have to understand the
divisiveness and how you’re going to use it.”
130
Another respondent described the
collaboration in Pacoima—not to say that collaboration does not occur in Boyle
Heights—as more “prominent and a bit ahead of the game.”
131
However, development
and gentrification pressures, and the diversity in class and immigrant status within the
126
Interview with the author, Nov. 20, 2008
127
Interview with the author, July 20, 2009
128
Interviews with the author, Jan. 28, 2008; June 4, 2009; Aug. 10, 2009
129
Interview with the author, June 4, 2009
130
Interview with the author, June 4, 2009
131
Interview with the author, Nov. 20, 2008
209
Latino community in Boyle Heights may present particular challenges to the formation of
cooperative relationships across disparate groups in the community.
The Less Contested Organizational Environment of Pacoima
In Pacoima, the lack of development pressures combined with near complete
racial transition and philanthropic and non-profit investments in organizational capacity
building have shaped the development of organizational networks in the last 30 years that
aim to represent the interests of Pacoima community members, including the Latino
immigrant community. Unlike Boyle Heights, Pacoima’s distance from downtown limits
development activity and gentrification pressures in the community. While they exist,
racial/ethnic cleavages are not as sharply pitched like in other parts of the city in
Pacoima, which once attracted a sizeable African-American population because of its
lack of racial restrictive covenants that banned minority homeownership. Nor are there as
palpable divides along lines of class and immigrant status in Pacoima.
Moreover, institutional investments in organizational capacity building have
facilitated relationships of social capital that have attempted to mediate potential
community divides. Thus, working within a less contested environment in terms of race,
class and development, Pacoima organizations have made strides in developing bridging
social capital relationships across African-American and Latino institutions in the
community in the pursuit of common aims
During its period of racial transition, Pacoima experienced more explicit racial
tensions between African-American and Latino residents compared to today. In the
1980s, for example, the two low-income housing developments in Pacoima—San
210
Fernando Gardens and the Van Nuys Pierce Park Apartments
132
—consisted of
approximately half Latino and half African-American residents (Muller & Espenshade,
1985). Today, the two housing developments, which each house about 2,000 residents,
are predominantly Latino. Moreover, in an earlier time, two neighborhood gangs—one
African American, one Latino—carried on feuds in the community (Muller &
Espenshade, 1985).
In the 1980s, tensions surrounding fair access to resources also existed between
the African-American and Latino communities in Pacoima. For example, City
Councilman Bob Ronka sought to catalyze revitalization of Pacoima in 1978 through the
establishment of the non-profit Pacoima Revitalization, Inc.—a public-private partnership
with the city that aimed to provide low-interest loans for home rehabilitation, renovate
several local shopping centers, beautify the community and attract private investment
(Banks, 1980c). However, a coalition of African-American homeowners, church leaders
and the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
argued that the organization’s programs unfairly provided more benefits to Latino
homeowners as the Census tracts eligible for loans were disproportionately Latino
(Banks, 1980a).
In the last three decades, however, Pacoima has experienced significant
demographic change with the transition of the community from predominantly African
American to predominantly Latino. As the 1968 federal Fair Housing Act banned
discriminatory housing practices, many African-American residents in Pacoima, who had
132
The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles owns and operates San Fernando Gardens. A private company
owns the affordable housing complex, Van Nuys Pierce Park Apartments, which receives federal housing-assistance
subsidies and tax relief.
211
become more upwardly mobile, began moving out of the neighborhood in the 1970s.
Mexican immigrants began moving into the neighborhood, which today has a population
of more than 80 percent Latino or Hispanic. Unlike Watts, racial transition of Pacoima
into a predominantly Latino neighborhood appears to be nearing completion. Thus, less
sharply expressed racial tensions appear to exist in Pacoima compared to other Los
Angeles neighborhoods, where racial churn is underway.
For example, a 1991 Los Angeles Times article describes the Van Nuys Pierce
Park and San Fernando Gardens housing developments as relatively peaceful
communities shared by African-American and Latino residents in comparison to the
Jordan Downs public housing development in Watts (Rotella, 1991). The article was
written in response to a recent police investigation of the death of five Mexican
immigrant family members living in Jordan Downs in an arson fire allegedly set by
African-American drug dealers (Rotella, 1991).
In the article, Pacoima residents attributed the reduction in racial tensions over the
years to the near completion of racial transition in the community, the community’s less
severe poverty and social problems, and the presence of well-established leadership in
both ethnic groups that helped bridge community divides (Rotella, 1991). According to
one African-American resident interviewed in the article, "all of my neighbors around me
now are Hispanics … We get along good together. Our kids went to school together.
They are grown up now, and they are still friends" (Rotella, 1991).
Moreover, with fewer gentrification and development pressures compared to more
centrally located communities in Los Angeles, less contestation exists regarding
212
neighborhood redevelopment and conflicting community visions. In contrast to
neighborhoods with significant market appeal, according to interview respondents,
Pacoima is characterized by flat property values and little property turnover. Illustrating
the state of the community, one interview respondent said, a non-profit organization was
interested in purchasing a building along Van Nuys Boulevard. However, the appraiser
experienced difficulties in appraising the property because no property had been sold,
bought or upgraded in the area in 30 years.
133
Reflecting the broader neighborhood context, the organizational landscape in
Pacoima exhibits fewer racial/ethnic and socioeconomic cleavages compared to the other
case study neighborhoods. Some interview respondents cited lingering racial tensions as a
minor community issue; however, organizational activities in the community include
both African-American and Latino community members. While the community has an
approximately 6 percent African-American population, African-American leadership
remains visible; for example, at the time field work was conducted two years ago,
African Americans made up half of the Pacoima Neighborhood Council board.
One interview respondent related differences that have emerged on the
Neighborhood Council board along racial lines, for example, involving control over the
planning of the community’s African-American celebration held annually in March.
134
The respondent said the community’s African-American population “seems to be
threatened by the fact that there’s Latinos here now.” Moreover, during one
Neighborhood Council election, some Latino residents were heard instructing others to
133
Interview with the author, March 6, 2008
134
Interview with the author, March 6, 2008
213
“just vote for the Latino name,” which generated significant controversy during the
voting process.
Community leaders also have noted that redevelopment visions for the
community can vary along racial lines. For example, the 25-acre site of the former Price
Pfister manufacturing plant in Pacoima has been a focus of community organizations in
recent years. Re-designated as a brownfield for redevelopment, the Price Pfister property
recently became the site of a shopping center that includes a Costco Warehouse. The non-
profit organization Pacoima Beautiful played a significant role in monitoring the
remediation of the site. Utilizing its organizational relationships, it successfully
advocated with the California State Water Board and the California Department of Toxic
Substance Control to undertake mitigation efforts to protect nearby residents during the
clean-up process. The organization also spearheaded a coalition of organizations that
negotiated a number of community benefits from the developer of the shopping center,
including a project labor agreement, environmental design standards and $300,000 for a
community arts fund.
Community members supported a proposal backed by Mayor Antonio
Villaraigosa to locate a Costco Warehouse on the site, which promised well-paying jobs
for the community. However, in earlier discussions with the developer, community
members developed a vision for the site that included a fountain and community plaza—a
place for families and youth to gather—surrounded by smaller stores rather than a big
box development. Community members envisioned a “town center vibe” and as a “place
214
to hang out,”
135
more similar to shopping developments such as Paseo Colorado in the
City of Pasadena or the Grove in the City of Los Angeles.
136
Community members also
wanted a community center on the site that would provide youth services and activities.
One observer noted that African-American community members represented by
churches in the coalition seemed to express concern regarding employment opportunities,
while Latino community members seemed to express concern regarding youth and
education issues.
137
The varying preferences may reflect differences in the life stages and
family structure between racial/ethnic groups as Latino residents may tend to consist of
younger families with children. However, as discussed above, racial tensions between
African-American and Latino residents in Pacoima, while at times existent, do not seem
as intense as in other parts of the city; moreover, community interests and visions among
residents do not diverge as sharply.
Moreover, Pacoima’s Latino and African-American communities had institutional
representation within the coalition. Coalition members involved in the Price Pfister
project ultimately agreed that well-paying jobs were a common priority for the
community and supported the redevelopment project in the form of a Costco Warehouse,
Lowes Home Improvement Store and Best Buy. According to an interview respondent,
the coalition built around the Price Pfister site marked the first significant effort in the
135
Interview with the author, March 28, 2008
136
Interview with the author, March 7, 2008
137
Interview with the author, March 7, 2008
215
community where African Americans and Latinos worked together on a common
interest.
138
Thus, Pacoima’s history of institutional investments in organizational capacity
building may play a role in mediating community conflict along racial/ethnic and
socioeconomic lines. These investments appear to have fostered collaborative norms
among community non-profits that continue to facilitate coordinated efforts to obtain
resources and influence policy processes. One observer of the effort by LAUF noted:
At the ground level, what they’re trying to do is create something where the
whole is greater than the sum of its parts, so it’s not just all these agencies
competing with each other for the same foundation dollar, which is the way it
usually goes. But instead, create a very different perspective on the people in the
neighborhood that you bring agencies together around … So LAUF comes along
to agencies that are typically very focused on program and projects and gets them
to broaden their focus, say, to health of children and families and so on in the
neighborhood, to get agencies to achieve more collectively than any one agency
could by itself (McCaffrey & Letts, 2003, p. 9).
This ethos of community engagement, collaboration and local empowerment continues to
permeate organizational networks and community initiatives in Pacoima.
For example, Pacoima organizations aim to identify and pro-actively address
community problems, including issues regarding racial conflict. As one example, a
coalition of non-profit organizations, school administrators, public agencies and parents
called the Pacoima Charter Initiative meets monthly to discuss issues related to Pacoima
Charter Elementary School. Established approximately five years ago, the collaborative
works to coordinate resources and services for youth and families around the school
community, which faces challenges to success with its location across from the San
138
Interview with the author, March 7, 2008
216
Fernando Gardens public housing development.
139
Children attending the elementary
school often come from homes with challenging family issues; the elementary school also
is located near David M. Gonzales Park, which was described as a “hot bed of gang
activity.”
140
At Pacoima Charter Initiative meetings, discussion largely entails updates and
announcements about ongoing initiatives and activities in the community to address
youth and education issues. These discussions keep the various organizations and
agencies in attendance abreast of policy initiatives and organizational activities in the
community, at times encouraging the linking of service and resources. However, at
meetings, community needs and issues also are discussed.
For example, during one meeting, community organizations learned about
emerging issues in the San Fernando Gardens public housing development, which still
experiences some racial tensions. Embodying an approach that sought to address unmet
needs and bridge potential divides, local organizations working with staff of the local
City Council District Office participated in efforts to increase outreach to community
residents in the public housing development and develop programs that serve residents’
needs. According to an interview respondent:
139
Interview with the author, June 19, 2008
140
Interview with the author, June 19, 2008
217
That’s kind of work that can come out of it. Just by listening and hearing what the
need is, and then, you know, figuring out how you can come in and making sure
people want the service and connecting them with, you have to go through a lot of
hoops to do it, but it worked out. And I think really the work of increasing
communication, like I was saying, through the residents who are very fearful and
helping to empower them, you know, to be able to state their own case is huge. I
think that’s the work.
141
The collaborative approach of Pacoima organizations and the capacity they exhibit may
contribute to the community’s ability to develop bridging social capital despite the
presence of community heterogeneity. While organizational competition for resources
still exists in Pacoima as in any resource-constrained environment, animosities among
organizations appear muted compared to the other case study communities.
While potentially able to bridge community divides, Pacoima’s collaborative
approach also has potential drawbacks. For example, organizations reflecting cooperative
norms may miss opportunities to exert community influence and challenge existing
power structures. The Price Pfister redevelopment project provides an illustrative
example. While engaged in dialogue with developers, community organizations did not
strongly assert their preferences for an alternative vision for the site but acquiesced to
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s push to locate a Costco Warehouse on the property.
Moreover, the construction of the Costco included a gas station, which raised
community concerns as the Price Pfister site was a former Superfund site. Costco
indicated that prohibiting the construction of a gas station would be a “deal breaker;”
however, according to an interview respondent, “that was never tested. Of course they’re
141
Interview with the author, Oct. 27, 2009
218
going to say that as an opening gambit. Whether it’s true or not, we don’t know.”
142
Another interview respondent noted that while locating the Costco on the property
brought the city more financial benefits as opposed to a community plaza design, the
community plaza could have been justified if the community had advocated for it as “it’s
a political decision to make.”
143
Gaps in Organizational Representation and Capacity Building in Watts
In comparison to the other two cases, a much more recent racial transition has
occurred in the historically African-American community of Watts, where more sharply
expressed racial tensions exist. The community of Watts has experienced significant
growth in its Latino population in the last two decades. In 2000, Watts’ population was
40 percent Black, 58 percent Hispanic or Latino, and 1 percent White; however, few
organizations actively represent the interests of the Latino community in Watts despite
the population growth. Thus, opportunities to build social capital relationships involving
the Latino community and across racial/ethnic groups are more limited without a strong
history of institution building in the community, adequate organizational representation
of Latino interests and organizational capacities in the broader community to bridge
social divides.
Several interview respondents
144
drew attention to community tensions arising
from the racial transition of Watts from an African-American to Latino community,
142
Interview with the author, March 7, 2008
143
Interview with the author, July 1, 2008
144
Interviews with the author Dec. 7, 2007; June 17, 2008; July 1, 2008
219
describing tensions as “social friction”
145
and Watts as a “racial hotbed.”
146
Consistent
with observations made by Jones-Correa (2001b), community politics often is viewed as
a zero-sum game with gains for one group leading to losses for the other. For example,
interview respondents said apprehension and resentment occur as more and more Latino
families enter into the public school system, vie for public housing and compete for
employment in Watts. Thus, significant challenges exist for building coalitions that
bridge the African-American and Latino communities, particularly with the dearth of
Latino-representing institutions in Watts.
The implications of racial transition in Watts are reflected in the community’s
organizational landscape, which has not yet adapted to the community’s racial change.
Calling attention to the role of community institutions, Von Hoffman (2003) writes that
ethnic transition in recent decades in South Los Angeles has reversed the historic role of
African Americans in urban neighborhoods:
Like the whites they once displaced, they are now the stakeholders—
homeowners, power brokers, and keepers of local institutions—who must
somehow cope with a poorer racial minority group arising in their midst. Since
most recent immigrants, so far, don’t vote—either because they are not
naturalized citizens or are not motivated to—African American politicians have
not had to adjust their behavior. But community institutions operating close to the
ground could not ignore the new reality (p. 222).
Many historically African-American community organizations in Watts, such as the
Watts Labor Community Action Committee (WLCAC), now provide services to the
Latino community; however, community organizations have not effectively or
meaningfully engaged the growing Latino community, although Latino residents make up
145
Interview with the author, Dec. 7, 2007
146
Interview with the author, June 17, 2008
220
more than 40 percent of the Watts population. The Latino population has not taken a
leadership role in the community, and the “old guard” of African Americans remains
involved in leadership positions among community and church groups.
147
At community meetings, such as the Watts Gang Task Force and Watts
Neighborhood Council, participants consist primarily of African-American community
members. However, elected officials rarely address the lack of Latino representation in
Watts for fear of jeopardizing relationships with the African-American community.
148
At
this time, none of the City Council members representing South Los Angeles are Latino
despite the city’s growing Latino population; moreover, community organizations in
Watts primarily led by African Americans still dominate the strong linking social capital
relationships with public agencies and offices despite the demographic change.
According to a city-sponsored needs assessment of Watts, the significant growth of the
Latino community in Watts in the last two decades creates additional challenges for the
community’s already weak civic sector:
While public entities have adopted measures to integrate Latino residents, like
hiring bilingual staff, what remains is a fundamental cultural disconnect that
persists as some Latinos feel unwelcomed or left out of the predominantly African
American Watts public sphere. While much work and organizing is needed to
build trust and understanding between both communities, given the Watts area’s
racial composition, supporting the development of Latino leadership and
organizations in the area should be a top priority (Advancement Project, 2008, p.
21).
Several interview respondents raised the issue of the importance of coalition
building—or bridging social capital—between the African-American and Latino
147
Interview with the author, Dec. 7, 2007
148
Interview with the author, Feb. 5, 2009
221
communities. One interview respondent said in their organization, “we do everything in
our power to let that be known. We let it be known that we’re not going to make it unless
we work together … they’re not the enemy, we’re not the enemy.”
149
Another interview
respondent viewed the lack of political engagement by the Latino community a major
disadvantage for both the Black and Latino communities in Watts.
150
A third interview
respondent discussed the challenge of community divisiveness in Watts as a whole,
where the location of the community’s four public housing developments also contribute
to community divides, as:
If you’re going to ask me what’s the issue with Watts is that it doesn’t speak with
a collective force. So it’s very disjointed. And because of its territory and how it’s
set up, it’s almost set up for competition. And when you compete that hard for
resources that rarely come, then you’re going to have conflict.
151
Thus, community organizations and leaders in Watts recognize the need to cultivate the
skills and capacity to rally the community or build bridges among different groups.
152
Without a long history of institution building in Watts, only one non-profit
organization—the Watts Century Latino Organization, which began in 1990—focuses
specifically on the issues of Latino residents; in other words, “the ethnic transformation
of southern Los Angeles happened so quickly … that this enormous territory as yet has
few organizations dedicated to helping Latin immigrants make the transition to the life of
the metropolis” (Von Hoffman, 2003, p. 215). One interview respondent called the
disparities in organizational activity a “tragedy for the Latino community” as
149
Interview with the author, June 17, 2008
150
Interview with the author, May 29, 2009
151
Interview with the author, Jan. 16, 2009
152
Interview with the author, Jan. 16, 2009
222
organizations function to bring resources to a community. Without organizational
representation, fewer resources are channeled to the Latino community, demonstrating
the uneven distribution of social capital and its effects. For example, in terms of housing
development, no Latino community development corporations that focus on affordable
housing development in Watts exist. Thus, few Latino families reside in the affordable
housing units built in the community by the predominantly African-American led
community development corporations in Watts.
153
Without the assistance of organizations, interview respondents perceive that
Latino residents in Watts are less inclined to participate in civic or political activity as
“immigrant-serving organizations have become an important medium through which
immigrants are able to find and direct their political voice” (Cordero-Guzmán et al.,
2008, p. 603). First, the immigration status of some residents creates barriers to
participation. Second, language barriers also exist. And finally, many Latino residents
lack knowledge regarding how to access or navigate through political processes and
institutions. The political capacity of Latino residents in Watts contrasts sharply with the
political capacity of Latino residents in neighborhoods, such as Boyle Heights, where
several high capacity organizations exist as a result of institution building in the
community. However, capacity building targeted toward the Latino community in South
Los Angeles has been lacking. According to one interview respondent, “unfortunately,
153
Interview with the author, Feb. 5, 2009
223
there has not been a basic interest on the part of the public and private sector to help
create and nurture and develop the Latino leadership in South L.A.”
154
Illustrating the importance of organizations in facilitating political incorporation
and representation, the WCLO has made important strides on behalf of the Latino
community in Watts. For example, in the 1980s and 1990s, African-American gangs
controlled the public housing developments in Watts, which led to the victimization of
Latino residents. The WCLO surveyed residents and documented more than 300 cases of
victimization, including assaults, vandalism and harassment. In 1994, the organization
filed a class action lawsuit against the City of Los Angeles and the Housing Authority of
the City of Los Angeles with the assistance of a private law firm and in partnership with
the Watts Health Foundation. The lawsuit led to a $1.3 million settlement and the
establishment of a blue ribbon commission to investigate tenant complaints. Since the
settlement, racial tensions, while still in existence, have not been as pronounced in the
community’s public housing developments, although demographic change with the
growth of the Latino population also has altered racial dynamics in the developments.
The WCLO also spearheads the Annual Watts Latino/African-American Cinco de
Mayo celebration, which aims to build bridges between the Latino and African-American
communities. The community has great pride in that no single incidence of violence has
occurred during the 20-year history of the event. Foundation support has been key to the
survival of WCLO, demonstrating the importance of organizational relationships with the
philanthropic sector. With foundation support, the bare bones organization, which
154
Interview with the author, Feb. 5, 2009
224
operates out of a formerly abandoned liquor store, supports a small staff and several
community programs, such as youth leadership and development, and financial and home
ownership counseling; however, the WCLO alone faces challenges in catalyzing
transformative community change.
In addition to the lack of Latino representation, the organizational landscape in
Watts is often characterized by competition and mistrust, according to interview
respondents,
155
in contrast to the ethos of collaboration and cooperation promoted in
Pacoima, or to the shifting grassroots allegiances observed in Boyle Heights. Tensions
particularly exist around issues of community control. While organizations and
individuals have good intentions, one respondent said, “they want to control everything
here, and sometimes I feel that stifles progress.”
156
Another respondent described the
challenge to organizational relationships in Watts as one of gate keeping:
By in large, issues in Watts are about gate keepers that continue to hamper a way
at real reform throughout the region. And I don’t blame the gate keepers. This is
their strategy. I don’t blame them because they’re just playing the game that we
set up … and they have no other structure to work with … And so if we took
away the competition in that area, and if we and if everyone was speaking the
same collaborative language, there’s no telling the kind of reform that can happen
in Watts.
157
For example, the Watts Labor Community Action Committee has been
characterized as one of the community’s strongest power brokers: “Basically they are the
ones that have a monopoly on the economic and political power,” one respondent said;
however, the organization lacks social power because of the absence of a base of
155
Interviews with the author Dec. 7, 2007; Aug. 14, 2008; Aug. 21, 2008; Jan. 16, 2009; Nov. 3, 2009
156
Interview with the author Dec. 7, 2007
157
Interview with the author, Nov. 5, 2009
225
community people to support it, “but nonetheless, they are the ones heard by politicians,
including the mayor.”
158
Some community members have taken issue particularly with
the organization’s property owning practices, which are perceived opportunistically as
“land banking.
159
” According to one interview respondent, the land held by the
WLCAC—the “land baron of the community”—has not been optimized in terms of its
use.
160
A third respondent suggested that land banking occurs in Watts because
developers—private and non-profit—want public “hand outs” even though they might
not necessarily need the public subsidies for a project to move forward.
161
These negative views are not universal as several respondents view the WLCAC’s
work in the community in a favorable light. For example, in one interview respondent’s
view, WLCAC acquired properties so that community development decisions would have
to involve the organization, and “in some sense, that’s very wise.”
162
Another respondent
said the organization wants to ensure that a common strategic plan for the community is
in place before making strategic investments to ensure development meets community
needs and interests.
163
Owning the land allows the organization to “create a strong
foothold in the community” that assures a greater voice in planning decisions beyond a
158
Interview with the author, Feb. 5, 2009
159
Interview with the author, Aug. 14, 2008
160
Interviews with the author, Dec. 7, 2007
161
Interview with the author, Aug. 14, 2008
162
Interview with the author, Aug. 21, 2008
163
Interview with the author, Dec. 4, 2008
226
consultative role.
164
A third respondent explained that the organization needed a critical
mass of properties in order “to be at the table” in city discussions regarding neighborhood
revitalization.
165
These divided views toward the WLCAC illustrate how controversy can surround
access to power in a community that has experienced severe disinvestment and
marginalization, where the lack of local capacity building and leadership development
shapes the nature of neighborhood politics and organizational development in the
community. For example, several interview respondents referred to the general problem
of “poverty pimps” in Watts who exploit and profit off the neighborhood’s distressed
conditions on the pretense of aiding it. These politically connected actors are perceived to
receive the lion’s share of resources that do not always return to the community. In
contrast, another respondent ascribed community animosities to the jealousy of
individuals or organizations that succeed as “this community eats its own folk …
Sometimes it’s really self defeating. If you succeed, people will resent you.”
166
Thus,
significant challenges exist in Watts to capacity and coalition building, which could
facilitate access to additional economic and political resources through relationships of
bonding and bridging organizational social capital.
Summary
A comparative neighborhood approach illustrates variations in the dynamics of
race, class and competing interests that affect the character of organizational networks.
164
Interview with the author, Dec. 4, 2008
165
Interview with the author, July 21, 2008
166
Interview with the author, Aug. 21, 2008
227
This approach highlights the potential impacts of community heterogeneity on
relationships of social capital, particularly drawing attention to the role community
organizations play in the representation of diverse community interests along race, class
and other social divides. Moreover, this study pays greater attention to the growing
complexities of minority politics, including inter-group and intra-group minority politics,
as previous studies of social capital as well as Los Angeles racial politics tend to focus on
Black vs. White populations or non-White vs. White populations.
For example, in the predominantly Latino community of Boyle Heights, a long
history of institution building has led to strong representation of diverse community
interests; however, cleavages in organizational alignments reflect conflicting visions
regarding this rapidly developing Latino community are patterned along class lines and
immigration status. In Pacoima, the near completion of racial transition from a
predominantly African-American to a predominantly Latino community, and the lack of
gentrification pressures have contributed to a less contested environment in which
organizations act. Moreover, as demonstrated by the organizational networks in Pacoima,
investments in organizational capacity building also may play a role in mediating social
conflict, and bridging social capital among disparate groups.
In the historically African-American community of Watts, where racial transition
currently is underway, the lack of organizational capacity serving the interests of Latino
residents suggests inadequacies in representation for a large segment of the community
and thus limited opportunities for accessing needed resources. Moreover, existing
228
organizations in Watts often play a gate keeping role, thereby limiting access to important
economic and political resources for the community at large.
This examination of the dynamics of race, class and competing interests as
reflected in organizational networks suggests a tentative alternative explanation for why
community heterogeneity may challenge the development of social capital in
communities. Rather than issues of social solidarity or social identity as inhibitors of
social capital, constrained organizational capacities limit the development of relationships
of social capital. In other words, some segments of the population in heterogeneous or
rapidly changing communities may not have the organizational representation or the
organizational capacity that would provide a venue for facilitating relationships of social
capital. The lack of Latino-representing organizations in Watts despite the presence of a
significant Latino population in the community illustrates this point. Cordero- Guzmán
(2005) makes a similar point in his study of community organizations and migrants in
New York City that organizational capacity is a vital element in the formation of
immigrant-representing organizations.
As DeFilippis (2001) argues, the very concept of social capital suggests that some
people will be connected while others will not; otherwise, social capital loses its value.
Thus, as a result of the lack of organizational representation and organizational capacities
serving certain segments of communities, social capital relationships may facilitate
access to economic and political resources for some community members but not others.
Adopting this organizational perspective,
229
Both changes and deepens our understanding of isolation. The most
disadvantaged person today may well be the organizational isolate, the one
disconnected from childcare centers, religious organizations, political clubs,
schools, gyms, neighborhood associations, community centers, and hobby clubs.
This person is effectively unplugged not merely from the most reliable ways to
form and sustain ties in a time-sensitive society but also from the organizational
apparatus through which grants, information, consumer goods, discounts, political
access, and many other resources are transferred … In a society increasingly
structured around formal organizations, the organizational isolate is the person
increasingly guaranteed to be left out (Small, 2004, pp. 196-197).
Finally, given the importance of organizational representation and organizational
capacities, this study raises questions about under what conditions social capital can
facilitate gains for communities as a whole. The neighborhood case studies suggest that
organizational social capital may benefit communities as a whole when organizational
networks are broadly inclusive, and pro-active in attempting to represent diverse
community interests and bridge community cleavages. As a result, access to economic
and political resources through these organizational networks and relationships of social
capital arguably would benefit broader constituencies; however, questions remain
whether the development of organizational capacities and collaborative organizational
norms, such as in Pacoima, under more contested neighborhood contexts, such as in
Boyle Heights, could be successful in arbitrating conflicting community interests. Further
theoretical and empirical work is required to understand whether and how organizational
social capital could be facilitated in a way that creates space for engaging disparate
values, resolves conflict and leads to the pursuit of common goals for communities.
230
CHAPTER 7: THE PROMISE AND PROSPECTS OF NEIGHOBORHOOD
REGENERATION: LESSONS FROM LOS ANGELES
In this period of California history, neighborhood regeneration in the City of Los
Angeles and in other California cities stands at a crossroad with no clear signposts for the
direction to pursue. The end of community redevelopment agencies in California in 2012
due to the state’s crippling budget crisis—which has threatened not only redevelopment
but also education, social services and health care in the state—eliminated the most
powerful and targeted tool for neighborhood regeneration in California cities.
California’s budget woes entail no easy fixes; thus, the prospect for public sector support
for redevelopment initiatives remains tenuous.
However, disinvestment and poverty persist in many urban neighborhoods,
raising issues of justice and equality. Thus, while the efficacy and efficiency of
community redevelopment agencies have been brought into question with their focus on
market-based redevelopment through the subsidization of private development,
agreement exists that cities need new, innovative and creative ways to facilitate
neighborhood regeneration in distressed communities. While marking the loss of one
means for facilitating redevelopment, this shift may signal an important opportunity to
fill a void in neighborhood regeneration policy.
This case study of organizational networks and organizational social capital, and
their role in neighborhood regeneration in the City of Los Angeles provides important
lessons that can contribute to discourse about the future of neighborhood regeneration.
Given the further contraction of the public sector’s role in neighborhood regeneration that
began with the withdrawal of federal involvement in urban policy, this study’s
231
examination of the role of intersectoral networks involving non-profit and community
organizations in neighborhood regeneration is particularly important. In already
marginalized communities, variations in organizational networks and community politics
have important implications for the prospects for community empowerment and
neighborhood regeneration.
Summarizing this study’s findings, this chapter first argues that a neighborhood
and organizational approach to city politics provides news ways of understanding urban
politics in U.S. cities. As opposed to a traditional focus on citywide politics and elite
actors, a neighborhood and organizational approach uncovers divergent patterns across
neighborhoods of community politics conditioned by neighborhood historical, political
and socio-demographic contexts. In particular, this study draws greater attention to ways
that organizational networks vary across neighborhoods in their ability to facilitate—
through relationships of social capital—community empowerment, represent diverse
community interests and acquire vital resources for marginalized communities.
Second, this chapter considers the implications of these divergent patterns of
community politics for neighborhoods and neighborhood regeneration. It argues that
various avenues of community influence have strengths and weaknesses, and thus
multiple strategies, tactics and relationships of influence may be necessary to access key
resources for neighborhood regeneration and to advocate effectively on behalf of
neighborhood interests. Thus practitioners in the field should take a reflexive approach to
understanding the challenges and opportunities their communities face in influencing
neighborhood regeneration. Finally, this chapter argues that greater investments in local
232
organizational capacity building are necessary to help counter trends of uneven
development, which can be exacerbated by inequalities across neighborhoods in
organizational capacities necessary for acquiring vital economic and political resources
for neighborhood regeneration.
Viewing City Politics from Below: A Neighborhood and Organizational Approach
This study’s view of city politics from below, particularly attentive to
neighborhood contexts and organizational networks, demonstrates variation in patterns of
community politics that traditional accounts of citywide or regional politics obscure. A
neighborhood lens brings into sharp focus the confluence of factors—historical, political
and socio-demographic—that shape the socio-spatial landscape of cities in unique and
varied ways with consequent implications for the politics of neighborhood regeneration.
Moreover, an organizational focus draws attention to the role and capacities of
neighborhood-level actors as opposed to the conventional focus on the civic and political
elite in urban politics. This neighborhood and organizational focus assists in
understanding the forces that shape neighborhoods and community politics, and the
particular challenges and opportunities communities face in influencing neighborhood
regeneration, thus informing both neighborhood regeneration theory and practice.
For example, divergent patterns emerge in the development of community
organizational capacities and organizing norms, conditioned by historical trajectories of
socio-demographic change, and social, economic and political exclusion in communities.
These divergent patterns also result from the type and nature of institutional investments
in local capacity building across neighborhoods. As a result, different avenues for the
233
expression of community interests develop. Boyle Heights’ early transition into a
predominantly Latino community and accompanying history of institution building
supported by external institutions that promoted community empowerment have
contributed to the development of local organizational networks that reflect norms of
political activism through grassroots organizing. Organizations in Boyle Heights
frequently organize and confront the dominant interests that tend to hold sway in urban
politics, such as resource-rich developers, in order to advance alternative community
visions. The success of organizational coalitions in halting, re-shaping or engaging with
redevelopment efforts demonstrates the political resources Boyle Heights organizations
have access to, particularly in the housing and development arena, through joint efforts
among organizations facilitated by bonding social capital.
In contrast, Pacoima more recently transitioned into a predominantly Latino
community and has a more recent history of institution building supported by
philanthropic organizations and citywide non-profit organizations that particularly
promote collaborative norms. Thus, organizational networks in Pacoima reflect a more
cooperative, social work approach to community organizing as opposed to the
confrontational approach characteristic of grassroots organizing. These organizational
networks in Pacoima have been particularly effective in obtaining economic resources for
policy initiatives particularly around youth, education and environmental issues through
bonding social capital relationships among community organizations and linking social
capital relationships with funders. As a result, organizational networks in Pacoima have
234
supported academic achievement in neighborhood schools as well as addressed
environmental risks in the community.
In Watts, the community’s history of social unrest has facilitated norms of
political activism particularly involving relationships with state actors with particular
influence in the public safety and public housing arenas. Strong linking social capital
relationships between public agencies and community organizations in Watts provide
unique access to policy decision-makers and a political resource for shaping
neighborhood policy. For example, community organizations and residents regularly and
at times antagonistically confront law enforcement officials about unjust policing
practices in the community, which has changed the nature of policing in Watts ; however,
historic disinvestment in the community as well as racial transition underway from a
predominantly African-American to a predominantly Latino community have limited
organizational capacities in Watts.
In addition to divergent patterns in organizational capacities and organizing
norms, a neighborhood focus highlights the different social cleavages that emerge within
neighborhoods along lines of race, class and competing interests that are expressed
through organizational networks. Citywide analyses of race and class that utilize
aggregate measures fail to illuminate the complex and varying dynamics that occur across
neighborhoods. In examining social cleavages within neighborhoods, this study addresses
Cohen’s (1999) observation of the tendency to ignore relations within marginalized
communities. Moreover, this study points attention to the importance of the development
of institutional representation of diverse community interests, where the lack of
235
institutional representation may inhibit the development of social capital relationships as
well as access to resources for certain segments of a community.
For example, in the predominantly Latino community of Boyle Heights,
organizations represent disparate community visions along lines of class and immigrant
status, facilitating the active contestation of community development. Faced with strong
development pressures due to the community’s proximity to downtown Los Angeles,
some organizations advocate on behalf of lower-income renters and immigrants,
supporting such issues as the construction of affordable housing and the right to make a
livelihood through street vending. In contrast, other organizations represent the interests
of homeowners and higher-income residents, tending to advocate for more middle-class
amenities and neighborhood quality of life issues.
In Pacoima, organizations operate in a less contested environment facilitated in
part by the lack of development pressures and the near completion of racial transition
from an African-American to a Latino community. While fewer divisions have emerged
in the community, some differences still exist, for example, differing community visions
along racial lines regarding redevelopment plans for the Price Pfister site in Pacoima. The
collaborative norms espoused by organizational networks in the community arguably
have helped bridge community differences as coalition members engaged with the project
eventually united in agreement in support of the Price Pfister redevelopment; however, an
empirical question remains about the potential for collaborative norms to foster this type
of bridging social capital in more contested contexts.
236
In Watts, racial transition currently is underway with the historic African-
American community shifting to a majority Latino community. Racial tensions and
notions of racial competition are more palpable in the community compared to the other
case study neighborhoods. Moreover, African-American leadership and institutions
continue to dominate in the community with strong connections forged with state actors
largely by African-American organizations and state actors. The scarcity of Latino-
representing organizations in the community arguably limits access to economic and
political resources for the Latino community as well as opportunities, capacities and
venues to facilitate bridging social capital relationships across racial divides.
The Challenges and Opportunities of Community Action
A neighborhood and organizational approach to urban politics captures divergent
patterns of community politics, particularly differences in organizational capacities,
organizing norms and social cleavages within communities. These differences have
important implications for communities, particularly in the ability and manner by which
neighborhoods access economic and political resources vital for neighborhood
regeneration. Variations in the nature of organizational networks imply that communities
have access to some resources but not others, and hold sway in some policy arenas but
not others. Thus, this analytical approach to community action highlights the strengths of
community organizational networks and opportunities to expand community influence.
For example, Pacoima organizations often utilize collaborative relationships with
public and philanthropic organizations to obtain economic resources for policy initiatives
particularly in the fields of youth, education and the environment. These collaborative
237
relationships exhibiting bonding social capital among organizations are attractive to
public, non-profit and private funders that have adopted collaborative philosophies of
facilitating community change and are seeking to support communities with strong
existing networks and capacities. Thus, communities like Pacoima often receive a greater
share of available resources; for example, the U.S. Promise Neighborhoods Initiative, the
U.S. Dept. of Education, First 5 LA and several private foundations have invested in
Pacoima as a result of its organizational networks and capacities.
However, the collaborative organizational networks in Pacoima tend to operate
more quietly and apolitically as opposed to the more confrontational, political activist
approach taken by organizations in Boyle Heights and Watts. Rather than actively
engaging in political decision-making processes, organizations in Pacoima tend to
embark independently on their own community improvement initiatives. Organizations
reflecting cooperative social work organizing norms potentially miss opportunities to
influence political decision-making processes and challenge existing structures of power.
The Price Pfister redevelopment project provides an illustrative example. While engaged
in dialogue with developers, community organizations did not strongly assert their
preferences for an alternative vision for the site but acquiesced to Mayor Antonio
Villaraigosa’s push to locate a Costco Warehouse on the property.
In contrast to the less confrontational politics of Pacoima, community
organizations in Watts organizations capitalize on strong state-society relationships to
influence political decision-making processes particularly around public safety and public
housing issues. Community concerns often are vociferously communicated with
238
community leaders unafraid to challenge high-ranking public officials who interact
regularly with the community. As a result, public officials prepare themselves to be held
accountable by the community; and new agency staff often are directed to attend
community meetings as a lesson in how to respond to community demands. Community
observers say the linking social capital relationships between community organizations
and leaders in Watts and public agencies have changed the nature of agency operations,
particularly in the Los Angeles Police Department and the Housing Authority of the City
of Los Angeles. These strong state-society relationships observed in Watts are absent in
Boyle Heights and Pacoima, which inhibits access to political decision-making processes.
However, while adept at confronting political decision-makers and existing
structures of power, community organizations in Watts tend to be less active in securing
economic resources from external sources for policy initiatives in the community or in
building broad coalitions of support to influence political decision-making processes.
Rather, supported by the political power of strong state-society relationships, most
community organizations in Watts have weaker organizational capacities that inhibit the
ability to expand their range of influence. Without norms of collaboration and adequate
organizational capacities, the community misses opportunities for accessing important
economic resources from public, non-profit and private sources that can contribute to
neighborhood regeneration; and mistrust and competition characterize community
organizational relationships rather than cooperation and mutual assistance.
The community development literature has critiqued current trends in community
development as it has moved toward consensual approaches to development, which
239
contradict with the field’s traditions in community control and organizing (DeFilippis,
2008; O'Connor, 2008; Stoecker, 2008); however, this study raises questions of whether
such a clear dichotomy exists regarding organizing approaches and whether conflict-
oriented approaches alone are preferable in contemporary contexts. More consensual
approaches facilitate working partnerships across community organizations and with
external private and public institutions, while conflict-oriented approaches challenge
relationships of power and the social distribution of rights and entitlements.
The case of Boyle Heights suggests that communities can cultivate both norms of
conflict and cooperation to facilitate gains for communities. Community organizations
are particularly adept at influencing political decision-making processes in the policy
arenas of housing and development through norms of political activism expressed
through grassroots mobilizing efforts. Organizations with shared interests often work
together, exhibiting relationships of bonding social capital, to influence private and
public decision-making processes regarding local development.
However, these organizations also build cooperative linking social capital
relationships with external public and private institutions that provide economic resources
for policy initiatives particularly in the areas of health and education. For example, Boyle
Heights also has received investments from the U.S. Promise Neighborhoods Initiative,
First 5 LA and the California Endowment as a result of its organizational networks and
capacities. However, although strong organizational capacities exist, organizations in
Boyle Heights face their own challenges, particularly community divisiveness over the
trajectory of neighborhood development.
240
In sum, various avenues of community action have associated strengths and
weaknesses, which require thoughtful consideration by practitioners in the field. A close
examination of neighborhood contexts, organizational networks and their activities can
serve as a practical approach to assessing the prospects for community empowerment and
neighborhood regeneration. For example, questions practitioners can consider include:
• Do organizational networks tend to operate in a cooperative or confrontational
manner? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each approach?
• What economic resources are accessed by these networks? What political
resources are accessed by these networks? Which sectors and sources provide
these resources? In which policy arenas do these networks operate?
• How do similar organizations in the community interact? How do dissimilar
organizations in the community interact? How do community organizations
interact with external institutions, such as public agencies, foundations and other
resource holders?
• What interests and groups do these organizational networks represent? What
interests and groups in the community are not represented?
Assessing the responses to these questions may assist in identifying the challenges and
opportunities communities face in expanding community influence; however, a particular
challenge to community influence, as discussed in the following section, is the
development of organizational capacities, which serve as an important antecedent to
fostering relationships of social capital in communities.
241
Investments in Organizational Capacities
In the absence of widespread investment in community capacity building, and in
the presence of socioeconomic disparities within Los Angeles and other cities,
considerable disparity inevitably exists in the nature of organizational networks and their
activities across communities, with attendant implications for the equitability of urban
policy. This study argues for the need for greater attention to and investments in local
organizational capacity building to support local empowerment and the expression of
community interests, as opposed to a primary focus on organizational social capital. This
study does not suggest the devolution of responsibility for neighborhood regeneration to
community organizations; however, in the current political climate, community
organizations likely will continue to be the primary vehicle for the representation of
community interests, and the primary means through which many communities pursue
economic and political resources for neighborhood regeneration.
Building organizational capacities, which provide organizations with the
knowledge and tools to form productive relationships, is an important antecedent to the
development of social capital in communities. Investments in organizational capacities
provide organizations with the means to pursue and develop bonding relationships among
local organizations, bridging relationships among disparate groups and linking
relationships with public, private and non-profit institutions that facilitate access to the
resources necessary for neighborhood regeneration. As illustrated by this case study of
neighborhood organizational networks, organizational capacities are particularly
important for the representation of diverse community interests with the absence of
242
institutional development likely tied to fewer opportunities for the development of social
capital and to access key economic and political resources for neighborhood regeneration.
The social capital literature has been criticized as a conservative, communitarian
approach to improving community outcomes. Moreover, strategies of asset-based
community development, which concentrate on the local problem-solving capabilities of
communities, also have been critiqued for their internal focus, which fails to address
broader political, economic and social constraints on poor communities. In other words,
“new localism” calls upon indigenous resources and new collaborative relationships to
revitalize inner-city communities, although “essentially it leaves prevailing economic and
political paradigms unchallenged and approaches urban poverty as, first and foremost, a
local- and individual-level problem” (Lawrence, 2008, p. 291). Moreover, in his history
of U.S. neighborhood initiatives, Halpern (1995) argues that policies reflect the
“persistent tendency to ask those with the fewest capital, institutional, and human
resources to draw on those resources to better their lives” (p. 12). Government and those
who live outside these communities, then, are removed from responsibility for distressed
urban neighborhoods.
Thus, organizational social capital should only be one means through which
resources are channeled to distressed communities and thus just one approach to
countering historic and persistent divestment in communities; however, as demonstrated
through the case study of Los Angeles neighborhoods, institutional investments in local
organizational capacities and organizational social capital have the potential to lead to
important community gains. Moreover, investments in local capacities not only facilitate
243
the ability of communities to work autonomously from the public sector in attracting
economic resources for capital investment and initiating policy experimentation but also
the ability to directly confront and influence political decision-making processes, thus
actively engaging with the public sector. Without sufficient organizational capacities,
power imbalances remain unchallenged and strong state-society relationships could lead
to paternalism and community co-optation.
Moreover, this study demonstrates that the different means by which
organizations access resources have important implications for local capacity building as
some vertical, linking social capital relationships between external institutions and
community organizations are able to foster local capacities more than others. For
example, linkages in Boyle Heights and Pacoima to supportive external institutions, such
as philanthropic organizations, have not only facilitated access to economic resources but
also purposively supported capacity building among local organizations that work
together to shape political decision-making processes. In contrast, linkages in Watts to
state actors provide unprecedented access to political decision-makers; however,
significant institutional investments in local capacity building did not accompany these
linking social capital relationships with the public sector, which suggest opportunities for
paternalism and co-optation.
Foundations likely will continue to be key sources of support for the development
of organizational capacities and relationships. In the case study neighborhoods,
relationships with philanthropic organizations particularly fostered opportunities for
building local organizational capacities and organizational relationships. Investment in
244
local organizational capacity building represents a direct means for supporting local
communities, while addressing concerns in the long-standing people vs. place debate
regarding the target of policy initiatives and investments. It speaks to “place” concerns by
targeting organizations tied to neighborhoods, while addressing “people” concerns
through investments in local organizational capacities, which involves human capital
components, transferrable to different contexts and different places. According to an
evaluation of investments in Pacoima through the Los Angeles Urban Funders:
A principal lesson that the LAUF experiment teaches is the need for a paradigm
shift among funders and foundation boards, i.e., provide the seed money, let time
do its work, be much more patient and in for the long haul than they have been
traditionally (McCaffrey & Letts, 2003, p. 27).
While it is obviously not possible to infer causality from a single case, this
research suggests that concentrated investments that build organizational capacity and
organizational relationships can be reinvested in future efforts. Initially developed with
foundation support, some organizational networks in the case study neighborhoods over
time shifted their focus onto new issues in different policy arenas. However, capacity
building requires a long-term perspective and a re-thinking of notions of efficacy as local
capacities take time to develop with immediate effects less readily discernable. The
fluidity of organizational networks may call for a different view of sustainability on the
part of funders, suggesting that sustainability should be assessed not as survival of
existing partnerships, but the ability of community organizations to form new
partnerships in response to emergent issues or opportunities.
Moreover, to address urban inequities, investments in local organizational
capacities should not occur solely in communities with existing capacities, which is a
245
common practice of funders, but target communities deficient of local capacities. While
foundations and other funders understandably are concerned with outcome measures in
gauging the impact of investments, the effects of building organizational capacities and
organizational relationships are more difficult to measure. Connecting organizational
social capital to community outcomes is a challenge; however, this study suggests
alternative ways of assessing organizational capacities and relationships by paying
particular attention to the types of relationships that organizations form and their ability
to access resources for communities through these relationships.
Thus, as a more modest undertaking, this study highlights the importance of
organizational capacities and relationships in facilitating access to economic and political
resources. Moreover, evaluation efforts could focus on assessing community outputs
rather than outcomes. For example, an output could be the number of job seekers
participating in a job training program developed with economic resources from
foundation support; whether the job training program led to the outcome of improved
employment rates in the neighborhood is more difficult to assess. Access to resources
does not necessarily translate into improved community outcomes. In assessing the
impact of particular policy initiatives or economic investments, effective outcomes likely
require much more than access to resources; however, a likely connection could be
inferred where neighborhoods with resources generally are better off than neighborhoods
without resources, but it may be a whole other question to assess the impacts of particular
policy initiatives or economic investments on communities as a whole. Thus, greater
246
potential to improve community outcomes certainly exists with greater access to
economic and political resources.
Concluding Thoughts
The demise of community redevelopment agencies in California suggests new
opportunities not only for creating new neighborhood regeneration policies that support
local organizational capacities but also for greater participation of community
organizations in shaping discourse regarding the future of neighborhood regeneration.
This dissertation provides important lessons for the City of Los Angeles as well as other
U.S municipalities given the similar challenges they face in neighborhood regeneration.
In other large, complex U.S. cities, divergent patterns of community politics also likely
emerge. Organizational capacities and relationships that connect neighborhoods to
economic and political resources for neighborhood regeneration are vital for all
neighborhoods. And practitioners can learn from this study’s findings on the strengths
and weaknesses of various avenues of community influence.
However, as this dissertation argues for a historicized and place-specific approach
to understanding organizations and their role in community action, analyses of
organizational networks in other cities also require the incorporation of the unique
historical, political, institutional and socioeconomic dynamics of individual cities and
their neighborhoods. For example, what is the nature and what are the prospects for
community action in declining industrial cities, like Detroit and Baltimore, which are
experiencing significant population losses? How do patterns of community politics differ
in growing Sunbelt cities, such as Phoenix? This dissertation’s attention to the role of
247
demographic transitions and trajectories of institutional development in community
politics will be particularly useful for examining other cities experiencing demographic
transitions in their own contexts.
Moreover, to better understand the prospects for neighborhood regeneration,
additional research is required that incorporates other kinds of neighborhoods in Los
Angeles as well as in other U.S cities. While they capture important variations, the three
neighborhoods utilized in this case study do not represent the range of diversity in Los
Angeles neighborhoods. For example, Asians represent the fastest growing minority
group in the Los Angeles region; however, none of the case study neighborhoods in this
study includes neighborhoods with significant Asian populations.
In contrast, Choi (2004), for example, examines the role particularly of Korean
churches as institutions that foster social capital and facilitate economic development in
Los Angeles’ Koreatown. In addition to serving as small business incubators through
their support of business development, Korean churches also provide venues for
developing bridging social capital across different ethnic groups in Koreatown, which is
home to a significant Latino population (Choi, 2004). However, a closer examination is
necessary of the political role Korean churches might play in the community and in
neighborhood regeneration. For example, in addition to the churches in the Korean
community that tend to be more conservative leaning, some organizations in Koreatown,
such as the Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance, have broadened their mission to
advocate on behalf of all low-wage immigrant workers in the community regardless of
race or ethnicity. Thus, important questions emerge about the institutional development
248
of these organizations, the roles they play in community politics, and whether competing
interests exist across organizations.
As another example of the vast diversity of Los Angeles neighborhoods, Kitsuse
(2010) examines community empowerment in the burgeoning East Hollywood
neighborhood of Los Angeles, where the city’s Charter reform facilitated institutional
development in this emerging community through its Neighborhood Council system.
While the three case study neighborhoods in this study have strong neighborhood
identities and longer periods of institutional development, East Hollywood with its
diverse population of Armenian, Thai and Central American residents had little social or
cultural coherence prior to the establishment of the East Hollywood Neighborhood
Council (Kitsuse, 2010). Kitsuse (2010) traces the development of the Neighborhood
Council, which embraced and seeks to represent the neighborhood’s diversity. Thus, East
Hollywood represents another type of neighborhood—an emergent but extremely diverse
one with few neighborhood institutions—where one would expect to find another
divergent pattern of community politics shaped by trajectories of institutional
development and neighborhood population dynamics.
In sum, this dissertation raises a number of additional questions fruitful for
exploration. What are local organizational networks accomplishing in other
neighborhoods and in other cities to support neighborhood regeneration? What other
patterns of community politics emerge, and how do historical, political, institutional and
socioeconomic contexts contribute to their formation? How do complex racial and ethnic
dynamics involving multiple minority groups play out in organizational networks and
249
community politics? What are the prospects for social capital relationships to bridge
disparate community visions particularly in contested community contexts? As Woolcock
(2004) states, social capital is not a “silver-bullet solution to society’s many problems”
(p. 188); however, it is one important approach for understanding the prospects for
community empowerment and influence on regenerating urban neighborhoods that
warrants further exploration.
250
REFERENCES
Acuña, R. (1984). A community under siege: a chronicle of Chicanos east of the Los
Angeles River 1945-1975. Los Angeles: Chicano Studies Research Center
Publications at the University of California Los Angeles.
Advancement Project. (2008). Gang Reduction and Youth Development Watts/Southeast
GRYD needs assessment final report.
Allen, J.P., & Turner, E. (2002). Changing faces, changing places: mapping Southern
Californians. Northridge: The Center for Geographical Studies.
Anderson, S. (1996). A city called heaven: Black enchantment and despair in Los
Angeles. In A.J. Scott & E.W. Soja (Eds.), The city: Los Angeles and urban
theory at the end of the twentieth century (336-364). Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Andranovich, G., & Riposa, G. (1998). Is governance the lost hard "G" in Los Angeles?
Cities, 15, 3,185-192.
Anft, M. (2004, April 15). A new way to curb poverty: grant makers focus on problems
caused by lack of financial savvy. The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
Avila, E. (1998). The folklore of the freeway: space, culture, and identity in postwar Los
Angeles. Aztlán, 23, 1, 13-32.
Avila, E. (2007). East side stories: freeways and their portraits in Chicano Los Angeles.
Landscape Journal, 26, 1-07, 83-97.
Banks, S. (1980, February 28). Easier eligibility for home loans asked. Los Angeles
Times.
Banks, S. (1980, June 26). Agency’s feuding directors headed for showdown. Los
Angeles Times.
Banks, S. (1980, October 26). Redevelopment agency creeping into action. Los Angeles
Times.
Banks, S. (1981, June 25). Pacoima renewal unit hit, may close. Los Angeles Times.
Banks, S. (1981, August 9). Audit tangle stalls new renewal office. Los Angeles Times.
Banks, S. (1981, September 13). Fund misuse suggested in agency audit: renewal unit
may have spent city allocation for bills on salaries. Los Angeles Times.
251
Barraclough, L.R. (2011). Making the San Fernando Valley: rural landscapes, urban
development, and white privilege. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
Bauman, R. (2008). Race & the War on Poverty: from Watts to East L.A. Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press.
Bebbington, A. (1997). Social capital and rural intensification: local organizations and
islands of sustainability in the rural Andes. The Geographical Journal, 163, 2,
189-197.
Bernstein, S. (2011). Interracial activism in the Los Angeles Community Service
Organization: linking the World War II and Civil Rights eras. Pacific Historical
Review, 80, 2, 231-267.
Boudreau, J.A., & Keil, R. (2001). Seceding from responsibility? Secession movements
in Los Angeles. Urban Studies, 38, 1701-1731.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory
and research for the sociology of education (241-258). New York: Greenwood.
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L.J.D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Bowles, S., & Gintes, H. (2002). Social capital and community governance. The
Economic Journal, 112, 419-436.
Box, R., & Musso, J. (2004). Experiments with local federalism: secession and the
Neighborhood Council movement in Los Angeles. The American Review of
Public Administration, 34, 3, 259-276.
Brodkin, K. (2007). Making democracy matter: identity and activism in Los Angeles.
New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Brown, E., & Ferris, J.M. (2002). Philanthropy and social capital in Los Angeles: a
report to the John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation. The Center
on Philanthropy and Public Policy. Los Angeles: University of Southern
California.
Burt, R.S. (1997). The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 42, 2, 339-365.
252
Cassidy, E.F., & Leviton, L.C. (2006). The relationships of program and organizational
capacity to program sustainability: What helps programs survive? Evaluation and
Program Planning, 29, 149-152.
Castillo, G.A. (2012, March 8). Mendez high makes small gains. Eastern Group
Publications.
Chaskin, R. (2001). Building community capacity: a definitional framework and case
studies from a comprehensive community initiative. Urban Affairs Review, 36, 3,
291-323.
Chaskin, R.J., Brown, P., Venkatesh, S., & Vidal, A. (2001). Building community
capacity. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Chávez, M. & Fraga, L.R. (2003). Social trust, civic engagement and
social mobility. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Western Political
Science Association, Denver, CO.
Choi, H. (2004). Social capital and community economic development in Los Angeles
Koreatown: faith-based organizations in transitional ethnic community. (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (AAT 3145177).
Choi, H., & Sloane, D. (2012). Does working together prevent crime?: social capital,
neighborhoods and crime. In N. Brooks, K. Donaghy, & G.J. Knaap (Eds.), The
Oxford handbook of urban economics and planning (230-247). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Coffé, H., & Geys, B. (2006). Community heterogeneity: a burden for the creation of
social capital? Social Science Research Quarterly, 87, 5, 1053-1072.
Cohen, C.J. (1999). The boundaries of blackness: AIDS and the breakdown of Black
politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital and the creation of human capital. The American
Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120.
Community Redevelopment Agency of Los Angeles. (2009). East Valley Region
Quarterly Report.
Cordero-Guzmán, H., Martin, N., Quiroz-Becerra, V., & Theodore, N. (2008). Voting
with their feet: non-profit organizations and immigrant mobilization. American
Behavioral Scientist, 52, 4, 598-617.
253
Costa, D.L., & Kahn, M.E. (2003). Civic engagement and community heterogeneity: an
economist’s perspective. Perspectives on Politics, 1, 1, 103-111.
Crawford, L. (2009). No way out: an analysis of exit processes for gang injunctions.
California Law Review, 97, 161-194.
Crenson, M. (1983). Neighborhood politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Crowe, J.A. (2007). In search of a happy medium: how the structure of
interorganizaitonal networks influence community economic development
strategies. Social Networks, 29, 469-488.
Cuff, D. (2001). Fugitive plans in the provisional city: slums and public housing in Los
Angeles. In C.G. Salas & M.S. Roth (Eds.), Looking for Los Angeles:
architecture, film, photography, and the urban landscape (97-131). Los Angeles:
Getty Research Institute.
Daniere, A., Takahashi, L.M., & NaRanong, A. (2002). Social capital, networks, and
community environments in Bangkok, Thailand. Growth and Change, 33, 4, 453-
484.
Daniere, A., Takahashi, L., NaRanong, A., & Lan, V.T.N. (2005). Social capital and
urban environments in Southeast Asia: lessons from settlements in Bangkok and
ho Chi Minh City. International Development Planning Review, 27, 1, 21-58.
Davis, M. (1990). City of quartz: excavating the future in Los Angeles. London: Verso
Press.
Dear, M., & Dahmann, N. (2008). Urban politics and the Los Angeles school of
urbanism. Urban Affairs Review, 44, 266-279.
DeFilippis, J. (2001). The myth of social capital in community development. Housing
Policy Debate, 12, 4, 781-806.
DeFilippis, J. (2008). Collective ownership and community control and development: the
long view. In J. DeFilippis & S. Saegert (Eds.), The community development
reader (28-35). New York: Routledge.
De Souza Briggs, X. (1998). Brown kids in white suburbs: housing mobility and the
many faces of social capital. Housing Policy Debate, 9, 177-221.
254
Deschenes, S., McLaughlin, M., & O'Donoghue, J. (2004). Non-profit community
organizations in poor urban settings: bridging institutional gaps for youth. In W.
Powell & R. Steinberg (Eds.), The non-profit sector: a research handbook (506-
520). New Haven: Yale University Press.
DiPasquale, D., & Glaeser, E. (1996). The Los Angeles riot and the economics of urban
unrest. Journal of Urban Economics, 43, 1, 52-78.
Diver-Stamnes, A.C. (1995). Lives in the balance: youth, poverty, and education in
Watts. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Dreier, P. (2003). America’s urban crisis a decade after the Los Angeles riots. National
Civic Review, 92, 1, 35-55.
Edwards, B., & Foley, M.W. (1998). Civil society and social capital beyond Putnam. The
American Behavioral Scientist, 42, 1, 124-139.
Edwards, B., Foley, M.W., & Diani, M., eds. (2001). Beyond Tocqueville: civil society
and the social capital debate in comparative perspective. Hanover: University
Press of New England.
Erie, S. (1992). How the West was won: the local state and economic growth in Los
Angeles, 1880-1932.Urban Affairs Review, 27, 4, 519-554.
Ethington, P.J., Frey, W.H., & Myers, D. (2001). The racial resegregation of Los Angeles
County, 1940-2000. Race Contours 2000 Study. Public research report No. 2001-
04. University of Southern California and University of Michigan.
Evans, P. (1996). Government action, social capital and development: reviewing the
evidence on synergy. World Development, 24, 6, 1119-1132.
Fainstein, S.S. (2010). The just city. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Faught, J. (2006) Breaking up is hard to do: explaining the 2002 San Fernando Valley
secession vote. Journal of Urban Affairs, 28, 4, 375-398.
Ferman, B. (2002). Broadening the franchise: charter reform and neighborhood
representation in Los Angeles. Paper presented at the John Randolph Haynes and
Dora Haynes Foundation Conference: Reform, L.A. style: the theory and practice
of urban governance at century's turn. Los Angeles: University of Southern
California.
255
Ferman, B. (2006) Leveraging social capital: the university as educator and broker. In R.
Dilworth (Ed.), Social capital in the city: community and civic life in Philadelphia
(81-100). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Fisher, R. (1994). Let the people decide: neighborhood organizing in America. New York:
Twayne Publishers.
Foley, M.W., & Edwards, B. (1996). The paradox of civil society. Journal of Democracy,
7, 2, 38-52.
Foley, M.W., & Edwards, B. (1999). Is it time to disinvest in social capital? Journal of
Public Policy, 19, 2, 141-173.
Fredericksen, P., & London, R. (2000). Disconnect in the hollow state: the pivotal role of
organizational capacity in community-based development organizations. Public
Administration Review, 60, 3, 230-239.
Freer, R. (2004). L.A. race woman: Charlotta Bass and the complexities of Black political
development in Los Angeles. American Quarterly, 56, 3, 607-632.
Fung, A., & Wright, E.O. (2003). Deepening democracy: institutional innovations in
empowered participatory governance. New York: Verso Press.
Gaeke, M.A., & Cooper, T.L. (2002) Organizing neighborhood councils in Los Angeles:
social capital, leadership, and ethics. Presented at the American Society of Public
Administration Annual Conference. Phoenix, AZ.
Garcia Bedolla, L. (2005). Fluid borders: Latino power, identity and politics in Los
Angeles. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Goode, J., & O’Brien, R.T. (2006) Whose social capital? How economic development
projects disrupt local social relations. In R. Dilworth (Ed.), Social capital in the
city: community and civic life in Philadelphia (159-176). Philadelphia: Temple
University Press.
Goss, S. (2001). Making local governance work: networks, relationships and the
management of change. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gottlieb, R., Vallianatos, Freer, R.M., & Dreier, P. (2006). The next Los Angeles: the
struggle for a livable city. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
256
Graauw, E. (2008). Nonprofit organizations: agents of immigrant political incorporation
in urban American. In S.K. Ramakrishnan & I. Bloemraad (Eds.), Civic hopes and
political realities: immigrants, community organizations, and political
engagement (323-350). New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78,
1360-1380.
Green, G.P. (2003). Civic involvement, organizational ties, and local economic
development. Journal of the Community Development Society, 34, 1, 1-17.
Gress, J. (2004). Sowing the seeds of social capital. Journal of the American Planning
Association, 70, 2, 176-183.
Halle, D. (2003). The New York and Los Angeles schools. In D. Halle (Ed.), New York
and Los Angeles: politics, society, and culture, a comparative view (1-46).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Halpern, R. (1995). Rebuilding the inner city: a history of neighborhood initiatives to
address poverty in the United States. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hao, L. (1994). Kin support, welfare, and out-of-wedlock mothers. New York: Garland
Press.
Haselhoff, K.D. (2002). Motivations for the San Fernando Valley secession movement:
the political dynamics of secession. Journal of Urban Affairs, 24, 4, 425-443.
Hero, R.E. (2003). Social capital and racial inequality in America. Perspectives on
Politics, 1, 1, 113-122.
Hero, R.E. (2007). Racial diversity and social capital: equality and community in
America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Heying, C.H. (1997). Civic elites and corporate delocalization: an alternative explanation
for declining civic engagement. American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 5, 657-668.
Hogen-Esch, T. (2001). Urban secession and the politics of growth: the case of Los
Angeles. Urban Affairs Review, 26, 783-809.
Hopkins, E. (2005). Collaborative philanthropies: what groups of foundations can do
that individual funders cannot. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Horak, M., Stoker, R., & Stone, C. (2012). The policy space for neighborhood
regeneration. Unpublished manuscript.
257
Janson, M. (2006) Credit unions and social capital in Philadelphia. In R. Dilworth (Ed.),
Social capital in the city: community and civic life in Philadelphia (125-140).
Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Jargowsky, P. (2003). Stunning progress, hidden problems: the dramatic decline of
concentrated poverty in the 1990s. The Living Cities Census Series. Center on
Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution
Jennings, J., ed. (2007). Race, neighborhoods, and the misuse of social capital. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jennings, J. (2007). Social capital, race, and the future of inner-city neighborhoods. In J.
Jennings (Ed.), Race, neighborhoods, and the misuse of social capital (87-108).
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jones-Correa, M., ed. (2001). Governing American cities: inter-ethnic coalitions,
competition, and conflict. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Jones-Correa, M. (2001). Structural shifts and institutional capacity: possibilities for
ethnic cooperation and conflict in urban settings. In M. Jones-Correa (Ed.),
Governing American cities: inter-ethnic coalitions, competition, and conflict
(183-209). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Keil, R. (2000). Governance restructuring in Los Angeles and Toronto: amalgamation or
secession? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24, 4, 758-
781.
Kettl, D. (2000). The transformation of governance: globalization, devolution, and the
role of government. Public Administration Review, 60, 6, 488-497.
Kitsuse, A. (2010). Community, empowerment, and the city: sources of capacity in local
government. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (AAT 3418260).
Koschinsky, J., & Swanstrom, T. (2001). Confronting policy fragmentation: a political
approach to the role of housing nonprofits. Review of Policy Research, 18, 4, 111-
127.
Kretzmann, J. and J. McKnight (1993). Building communities from the inside out: a path
toward finding and mobilizing a community's assets: ACTA Publications.
Laslett, J.H.M. (1996). Historical perspectives: immigration and the rise of a distinctive
urban region, 1900-1970. In R. Waldinger & M. Bozorgmehr (Eds.), Ethnic Los
Angeles (39-75). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
258
Lawrence, K. (2008). Expanding comprehensiveness: structural racism and community
building in the United States. In J. DeFilippis & S. Saegert (Eds.), The Community
Development Reader (286-294). New York: Routledge.
Lederman, D., Loayza, N., & Menéndez, A.M. (2002). Violent crime: Does social capital
matter? Economic Development and Cultural Change, 50, 3, 509-539
Lejano, R., & Taufen Wessells, A. (2006). Community and economic development:
seeking common ground in discourse and in practice. Urban Studies, 43, 9, 1469-
1489.
LISC. (2009). Boyle Heights: our place to thrive. Qualify of Life Plan.
López, J. (2011, May 11). Young people define a healthy future for Boyle Heights.
Newsdesk.org.
Los Angeles Education Partnership. (2011, March). LAEP community school strategy
grows. Press release.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A., & Ehrenfeucht, R. (2009). Sidewalks: conflict and negotiation
over public space. Boston: MIT Press.
Loury, E. (2012, June 15). Diesel exhaust can cause cancer, World Health Organization
says. Los Angeles Times.
Maida, C. (2008). Pathways through crisis: urban risk and public culture. Lanham, MD:
Altamira Press.
Marwell, N. (2007). Bargaining for Brooklyn: community organizations in the
entrepreneurial city. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
McCaffrey, A., & Letts, C.W. (2003). Los Angeles Urban Funders. Kennedy School of
Government Case Program. Case CR16-031682.0. Harvard University.
McClanahan, S., & Sandefur, G. (1994). Growing up with a single parent: what hurts,
what helps. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
McConville, S., & Ong, P. (2003). The trajectory of poor neighborhoods in Southern
California, 1970-2000. The Living Cities Census Series. Center on Urban and
Metropolitan Policy. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
McNeal, Jr., R.B. (1999). Parental involvement as social capital: differential effectiveness
on science achievement, truancy, and dropping out. Social Forces, 30, 2, 171-179.
259
Milkman, Ruth. 2006. L.A. story: immigrant workers and the future of the U.S. labor
movement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Milward, H.B., & Provan, K.G. (2000). Governing the hollow state. Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, 10, 2, 359-380.
Modarres, A. (1998). Putting Los Angeles in its place. Cities, 15, 3, 135-147.
Mollenkopf, J. (2008). School is out: the case of New York city. Urban Affairs Review,
44, 2, 239-265.
Muller, T., & Espenshade, T.J. (1985). The fourth wave: California’s newest immigrants.
Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
Musso, J., Weare, C., Elliot, M., Kitsuse, A., & Shiau, E. (2007). Toward Community
Engagement in City Governance: Evaluating Neighborhood Council Reform in
Los Angeles. USC Urban Initiative Public Policy Briefing Series. Los Angeles:
University of Southern California.
Myers, D., Goldberg, J., Mawhorter, S., & Min, S.H. (2010). Immigrants and the new
maturity of Los Angeles. In. A. Modarres (Ed.), Los Angeles 2010 State of the
City. Pat Brown Institute. Los Angeles: Cal State University Los Angeles.
Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the
organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23, 2, 242-266.
Nicholls, W.J., & Beaumont, J.R. (2004) The urbanisation of justice movements?
Possibilities and constraints for the city as a space of contentious struggle. Space
and Polity, 8, 2, 119-135.
Nicolaides, B.M. (2001). “Where the working man is welcomed:” working-class suburbs
in Los Angeles, 1900-1940. In C.G. Salas & M.S. Roth (Eds.), Looking for Los
Angeles (57-96). Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute.
Nowell, B., & Foster-Fishman, P. (2011). Examining multi-sector community
collaborative as vehicles for building organizational capacity. American Journal
of Community Psychology, 48, 193-207.
O'Connor, A. (2008). Swimming against the tide: a brief history of federal policy in poor
communities. In J. DeFilippis & S. Saegert (Eds.), The Community Development
Reader (9-27). New York: Routledge.
260
Oldham, J. (2009, January 9). Work begins on Pacoima’s new Costco. Los Angeles
Times.
Ong, P., Firestine, T., Pfeiffer, D., Poon, O., & Tran, L. (2008). The state of South LA.
Los Angeles: UCLA School of Public Affairs.
Oppenheim, M. (1999). The critical place of community development in school
transformation: the story of the Vaughn Family Center and Pacoima Urban
Village. Teacher Education Quarterly, 135-157.
Orr, M. (1999). Black social capital: the politics of school reform in Baltimore, 1986-
1998. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
Ortiz, V. (1996). The Mexican-origin population: permanent working class or emerging
middle class? In R. Waldinger & M. Bozorgmehr (Eds.), Ethnic Los Angeles
(247-277). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Pardo, M.S. (1998). Mexican American women activists: identity and resistance in two
Los Angeles communities. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Park, E.J.W., & Park, J.S.W. (2001). Korean Americans and the crisis of the liberal
coalition: immigrants and politics in Los Angeles. In M. Jones-Correa (Ed.),
Governing American cities: inter-ethnic coalitions, competition, and conflict (91-
108). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Pastor, M., Benner, C., & Matsuoka, M. (2009). This could be the start of something big:
how social movements for regional equity are reshaping metropolitan America.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Peters, B., and Pierre, J. (1998). Governance without government? Rethinking public
administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8, 2, 223-
243.
Peterson, P. (1981). City limits. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pitkin, J. & Myers, D. (2012). Generational projections of the California population by
nativity and year of immigrant arrival. Population Dynamics Research Group. Los
Angeles: University of Southern California.
Ponce, M.H. (1993). Hoyt Street: an autobiography. Albuquerque: University of New
Mexico Press.
Ponce, M.H. (1999, August 15). For Pacoima Elementary, the name of the game is pride.
Los Angeles Times.
261
Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual
Review of Sociology, 24, 1-24.
Portes, A. (2000). The two meanings of social capital. Sociological Forum, 15, 1, 1-12.
Portes, A., & Landolt, P. (1996). The downside of social capital. The American Prospect,
26.
Portes, A., & Landolt, P. (2000). Social capital: promise and pitfalls of its role in
development. Journal of Latin American Studies, 32, 529-547.
Portes, A., & Mooney, M. (2002). Social capital and community development. In M.F.
Guillén et al. (Eds.), The new economic sociology: developments in an emerging
field (303-329). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Portney, K.E., & Berry, J.M. (1997). Mobilizing minority communities: social capital and
participation in urban neighborhoods. The American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 5,
632-644.
Proyecto Pastoral. (2010). Boyle Heights, Los Angeles, CA - Promise Neighborhoods
absolute priority one planning grant application narrative.
Proyecto Pastoral. (2011, December 19). Boyle Heights stands committed to building a
stronger community that helps children grow and succeed. Press release.
Purcell, M. (2002). Politics in global cities: Los Angeles charter reform and the new
social movements. Environment and Planning A, 34, 1, 23-42.
Putnam, R.D. (1993). Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R.D. (1993). The prosperous community: social capital and public life.
American Prospect, 13, 35-42
Putnam, R.D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of
Democracy, 6, 1, 65-78.
Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community.
New York: Simon & Schuster.
262
Putnam, R.D. (2007). E pluribus unum: diversity and community in the twenty-first
century, the 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30,
2, 137-174.
Rapalee, L., Rahn, M., Chen, A., Garcia, M.E., & Lin, H. (2011). Valley neighborhood
collaborative abridged summary report, 2009-10. Pasadena: Public Works, Inc.
Regenerating Urban Neighborhoods Project. (2005). The politics of RUN (Regenerating
Urban Neighborhoods): a cross-national study.
Rocco, R.A. (1996). Latino Los Angeles: reframing boundaries/borders. In A.J. Scott &
E.W. Soja (Eds.), The city: Los Angeles and urban theory at the end of the
twentieth century (365-389). Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Rose, D.R., & Clear, T.R. (1998). Incarceration, social capital and crime: implications for
social disorganization theory. Criminology, 36, 3, 441-480.
Rotella, S. (1991, September 16). Coexistence, not violence, is the rule at area projects:
Pacoima: race relations aren’t perfect at San Fernando Gardens and Van Nuys
Pierce Park. But despite recent ethnic shifts, black and Latinos have found a way
to live in relative peace. Los Angeles Times.
Roth, M.W. (2004). Whittier Boulevard, Sixth Street Bridge, and the origins of
transportation exploitation in East Los Angeles. Journal of Urban History, 30,
729-748.
Saegert, S. (2006). Building civic capacity in urban neighborhoods: an empirically
grounded anatomy. Journal of Urban Affairs, 28(3), 275-294.
Sánchez, G.J. (1993). Becoming Mexican American: ethnicity, culture and identity in
Chicano Los Angeles, 1900-1945. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sánchez, G. J. (2004). “What’s good for Boyle Heights is good for the Jews”: creating
multiracialism on the Eastside during the 1950s. American Quarterly, 56, 3, 633-
661.
Schneider, J. (2007). Connections and disconnections between civic engagement and
social capital in community-based nonprofits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quarterly, 36, 572-597.
Schneider, J. (2009). Organizational social capital and nonprofits. Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 4, 643-662.
263
Schulman, M.D., & Anderson, C. (1999) The dark side of the force: a case study of
restructuring and social capital. Rural Sociology, 64, 3, 351-372.
Selsky, J. & Parker, B. (2005). Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues:
challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management, 31, 6, 849-873.
Sides, J. (2003). L.A. city limits: African American Los Angeles from the Great
Depression to the present. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Silverman, R.M. (2001). CDCs and charitable organizations in the urban South:
mobilizing social capital based on race and religion for neighborhood
revitalization. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 30, 2, 240-268.
Sitton, T. (2005). Los Angeles transformed: Fletcher Bowron’s urban reform revival,
1938-1953. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Small, M. L. (2009). Unanticipated gains: origins of network inequality in everyday life.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Smith, G., Maloney, W., & Stoker, G. (2004). Building social capital in city politics:
scope and limitations at the inter-organisational level. Political Studies, 52, 508-
530.
Sobeck, J., & Agius, E. (2007). Organizational capacity building: addressing a research
and practice gap. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30, 237-246.
Sobel, J. (2002). Can we trust social capital? Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 139-
154.
Soja, E. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Sonenshein, R.J. (1994). Politics in black and white: race and power in Los Angeles.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Sonenshein, R.J. (2004). The City at Stake: Secession, reform, and the battle for Los
Angeles. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Sonenshein, R.J. (2006). Los Angeles: structure of a city government. The League of
Women Voters of Los Angeles.
Squires, G., & Kubrin, C. (2005). Privileged places: race, uneven development and the
geography of opportunity in urban America. Urban Studies, 42, 1, 47-68.
264
Stoecker, R. (2008). The CDC model of urban development: a critique and an alternative.
In J. DeFilippis & S. Saegert (Eds.), The Community Development Reader (303-
310). New York: Routledge.
Tarrow, S. (1996). Making social science work across space and time: a critical reflection
on Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy Work. American Political Science
Review, 90, 2, 398-397.
The California Endowment. (n.d.). Building healthy communities: ten outcomes for
community health. Accessed at
http://www.calendow.org/healthycommunities/pdfs/Ten%20Outcomes.pdf.
Trist, E. (1983). Referent organizations and the development of inter-organizational
domains. Human Relations, 36, 3, 269-284.
Trounson, R. (1980, July 17). Official fired in Pacoima redevelopment squabble. Los
Angeles Times.
Underwood, K. (1997). Pioneering minority representation: Edward Roybal and the Los
Angeles City Council, 1949-1962. Pacific Historical Review, 66, 3, 399-425.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2010). Promising practices to improve
community performance and sustainability: tips for better CARE.
Valenzuela, A., & Dornbusch, S.M. (1994). Familism and social capital in the academic
achievement of Mexican origin and Anglo adolescents. Social Science Research
Quarterly, 75, 1, 18-36.
Vidal, A.C. (2004). Building social capital to promote community equity. Journal of the
American Planning Association, 70, 2, 164-168.
Vincent, R. (2008, January 11). Towing ambitions for Boyle Heights: condos, rentals and
retail, with some high-rises, are planned for the sprawling site of the 1930s
Wyvernwood apartments. Los Angeles Times.
Von Hoffman, A. (2003). House by house, block by block: the rebirth of America’s urban
neighborhoods. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wacquant, L. J. D., & Wilson, W.J. (1989). The cost of racial and class exclusion in the
inner city. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 501,
1, 8-25.
Waldinger, R., & Bozorgmehr, M., eds. (1996). Ethnic Los Angeles. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
265
Waldinger, R., & Bozorgmehr, M. (1996). The making of a multicultural metropolis. In
R. Waldinger & M. Bozorgmehr (Eds.), Ethnic Los Angeles (3-37). New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
Wells Fargo & Company. (2003). Measuring the next stage of success: the 15 most
important measures of success in today’s financial services industry. Wells Fargo
& Company 2003 Annual Report.
Wild, M. (2005). Street meeting: multiethnic neighborhoods in early twentieth-century
Los Angeles. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Wilson, W.J. (1996). When work disappears: the world of the new urban poor. New
York: Random House.
Winton, R. (2008, October 10). E-gang member taken off injunction. Los Angeles Times.
Wolman, H.L., & Agius, E.J., eds. (1996). National urban policy: problems and
prospects. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Woolcock, M. (1998). Social capital and economic development: toward a theoretical
synthesis and policy framework. Theory and Society, 27, 2, 151-208.
Woolcock, M. (2004). Why and how planners should take social capital seriously.
Journal of the American Planning Association, 70, 2, 183-189.
Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: implications for development
theory, research, and policy. The World Bank Research Observer, 15, 2, 225-249.
Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This study investigates the role that local non-profit organizational networks play in influencing community revitalization, focusing on the conditions that facilitate and shape the development of organizational social capital. These networks of relationships allow organizations to access economic and political resources crucial for marginalized communities. In particular, this study focuses attention on the manner in which local historical, political and socioeconomic contexts shape the development of organizational social capital and the influence of organizational networks within communities by comparing organizational networks and neighborhood regeneration efforts in three Los Angeles neighborhoods. This study demonstrates that diverse patterns of community politics conditioned by local contexts exist across neighborhoods within the city, where differences in organizational capacities, organizing norms and the dynamics of race, class and competing interests have important implications for the prospects of community influence, local empowerment and neighborhood regeneration.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
The impact of social capital: a case study on the role of social capital in the restoration and recovery of communities after disasters
PDF
Social capital and community philanthropy: the impact of social trust and social networks on individual charitable behavior and community foundation development
PDF
Avoiding middle-class planning 2.0: media arts and the future of urban planning
PDF
How does collaborative governance work? The experience of collaborative community-building practices in Korea
PDF
Community, empowerment, and the city: sources of capacity in local governance
PDF
Civic associations, local governance and conflict prevention in Indonesia
PDF
Building spiritual capital in religious communities: how and why?
PDF
A public sector organizational change model: prioritizing a community-focused, inclusive, and collaborative approach to strategic planning
PDF
Transformative learning in the public sphere: the educational dimensions of a broad-based community organizing movement
PDF
The film industry and urban development in metropolitan Los Angeles, 1920-1975
PDF
Urban universities' campus expansion projects in the 21st century: a case study of the University of Southern Calfornia's "Village at USC" project and its potential economic and social impacts on...
PDF
The kindered community: using a child's perspective to improve urban planning and evaluate neighborhood friendliness
PDF
A learning model of policy implementation: implementing technology in response to policy requirements
PDF
Making it: a strategies primer for African-American entrepreneurs seeking capital in Los Angeles
PDF
Civic expression in Little Tokyo: how art and culture empowers communities and transforms public participation
PDF
Community foundations and new governance networks: three studies exploring the role of regionally-networked philanthropic organizations in local problem-solving
PDF
Collaboration: is it worth it? The Magnolia Community Initiative from the perspective of initiative partner participants
PDF
The social functions of private neighborhood associations: the case of homeowner associations in urban China
PDF
Quango reforms and challenges in South Korea: social relations, informal networks, and hidden actions
PDF
Embedding sustainability: a change management guide for ports
Asset Metadata
Creator
Shiau, Ellen L.
(author)
Core Title
A view from below: the development and role of organizational social capital in neighborhood regeneration in Los Angeles
School
School of Policy, Planning and Development
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
Policy, Planning, and Development
Publication Date
07/25/2012
Defense Date
06/08/2012
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Community development,community organizing,Los Angeles,neighborhood revitalization,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizations,social capital
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Musso, Juliet A. (
committee chair
), Sellers, Jefferey M. (
committee member
), Sloane, David C. (
committee member
)
Creator Email
eshiau@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-67040
Unique identifier
UC11288960
Identifier
usctheses-c3-67040 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-ShiauEllen-997.pdf
Dmrecord
67040
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Shiau, Ellen L.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
community organizing
neighborhood revitalization
social capital