Featured in Community Development Advocates of Detroit (CDAD)’s Newsletter

CDAD recently launched a new initiative that will fund and support the creation of a Neighborhood Action Table (NAT) in two Detroit neighborhoods: McDougall Hunt and Hope Village.   These Neighborhood Action Tables will bring together residents, community development organizations, businesses, schools and faith leaders to collaborate on a neighborhood scale.  Janet Fitzsimmons, a collaboration coach from Toronto who is trained in the connected communities approach (CCA), has been providing technical assistance to the convening partners: Bailey Park Neighborhood Development Corporation and HOPE Village Revitalization CDC.  We sat down with Janet to discuss the work she’s doing. 

Tell me about your experience with bringing folks together to collaborate on neighborhood priorities? 

The majority of my work has been neighborhood based, supporting grassroots folks to build their collective power and equip them to interact with policy makers in ways that honor lived    experience. I've done this work in one form or another for 20+ years and am equally comfortable in a board room or the basement of a high rise. My practice is grounded in an anti-oppression framework that centers the lives and experience of racialized people, and works to call out and dismantle white supremacy culture. 

What is your role in CDAD’s Neighborhood Action Tables (NATs)? 

Essentially my role is part network weaver and part cheerleader. By understanding the way that partners want to collaborate and what benefit they are each hoping for, I can support them to build and enact a collective vision. I will curate a team of experts that will provide one:one leadership coaching, facilitate learning processes and support real time collaboration.  In concrete terms I am there to do a lot of listening and create space for partners to define the impact they want to have together, and I will be taking my lead from them. 

What vision are you working towards with HOPE Village and Bailey Park? 

The vision belongs to the neighborhoods:  

In Bailey Park we will be working to engage residents in community building. We will be working to discover how residents prefer to engage, what their particular strengths and aspirations are for their community, and will be developing partnerships to support their goals.   

In Hope Village, we will be exploring ways to address issues related to urban development, and will seek to strengthen relationships with decision-makers, developers and potential funders in order to center the voices of lived experience and build community benefit. 

Will the two NATs collaborate? 

The goal is that the NAT's will work together to create mutual benefit. This might look like sharing expertise, or resources. It might also look like collaborating on community learning initiatives or joining forces to tackle issues that impact both neighborhoods. There are differences in the two neighborhoods, but a lot of the core work is similar, and the relationships that will support community priorities are sometimes the same. 

What will/could these NATs look like in a year? 

The potential of this kind of deep collaboration is that each partner is strengthened by the collaborative. In the future I imagine that NAT's may attract joint funding to create neighborhood wide initiatives that speak specifically to local goals. They might have the collective strength to compel decision-makers to relate differently to neighborhoods, to center lived experiences in their decisions. 

What kind of partnerships build stronger neighborhoods? 

Strategic partnership design is key to this work, and needs to work across sectors and constituencies: involving local residents, charitable organizations that serve local interests, local businesses, and government and corporate decision-makers whose work has an impact on the lives of local people. The common model of partnership is that organizations meet together, and government officials and staff meet together, and residents meet together, and there is no place for them all to come together to develop collective purpose. This work requires people who have been overlooked for too long to give it one more try, and it requires people with power to give up some control, and to listen to those most impacted. 

What is different about doing this work in Detroit compared to Toronto? 

Toronto's context is different, in that the City intentionally identified 31 neighborhoods that it wanted to focus on to build social capital, so it was motivated to get behind the collaboration from the beginning. A Community Development Officer (CDO) from the City sat at each Neighborhood Table and bridged City services and supports with neighborhood goals. If a question came up at a Neighborhood Table, the CDO could go back to the City, clarify the process and if necessary, invite staff from the related department to attend a future meeting to answer questions. The Tables were able to develop relationships with the City that went beyond elected officials into the civil service, the folks doing the work that impacted neighborhoods. Residents played an active role in the Neighborhood Tables from the beginning, and work was done to demystify the workings of municipal systems for local folks so that they could engage in ways that were meaningful. 

Speaking as a very interested outsider, it seems that in Detroit the municipality's involvement in the process of neighborhood building is less mandated, while resident voices seem stronger. There is definitely a more activist flavor to grassroots voices in Detroit, people are much more forthright and prepared to identify issues, to call out racism and inequity, and the issues themselves are more obvious and I think feel more urgent. There is an incredible sense of grassroots momentum here which can work in collaboration with other local stakeholders to build collective strength and bring neighborhood priorities to centers of power. 

What impact could NATs have on equity in Detroit neighborhoods? 

I think being strategic about how and why we create partnership enables us to really unpack power dynamics and to talk about equity and who is included and who is not. White supremacy culture messes with all of our abilities to have authentic relationships. Neighborhood Tables need to be super intentional about inviting equity-denied folks to the party, and centering the experiences of Black lives particularly. This process can amplify perspectives that have been left out of the conversation for too long.  

Co-creating processes to address equity and to call out white supremacy and publicly sharing that is a great way for a Neighborhood Table to let the broader community know that their experiences matter and their voices are welcome. 

In addition, with the strength of their collective voice, Neighborhood Tables can encourage people with power to name and challenge white supremacist practices, and they can throw their support behind them when they do so. 

What’s one thing you love about Detroit? 

I honestly don't know where to begin!! 

I have said for years that if I ever move to the US, I will only live in Detroit. One thing that is striking here is the amount of street art that exists. I'm not talking about the statue or installation that is funded by Big Rich Foundation, but the murals that are on the sides of small businesses, probably painted by local artists.  

There is a beautiful mural in Hamtramck that really caught my eye: it is on the side of a Yemeni restaurant, and is a really meaningful way to illustrate welcome for Yemeni newcomers. Also, shout out to ALL the yummy food in Detroit!!!