by Bernadine Joselyn, Blandin Foundation

The White House wants to be sure that the American Reconstruction and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) is making a positive difference for rural America. Last week, I joined representatives from five other foundations invited to DC to talk straight about what’s working, what’s not, and what the Administration can do to help the stimulus package have a bigger, better impact on rural places. Blandin Foundation’s assignment was to talk about the stimulus’ approach to broadband and to describe our work to help rural Minnesota communities benefit from the $7.2 billion earmarked to build and enhance broadband networks and utilization, especially among “unserved” and “underserved” populations.

Our six person “Team Rural,” assembled by the National Council of Foundations at the request of the White House, had been asked to come prepared to respond to the question: How can the administration best partner with rural leaders? We met in the Vice President’s impressive formal reception room — ornately adorned with painted ceilings, 19th century furnishings and thick velvet drapes — with staff from the White House Office of Recovery Implementation. The office is charged with making sure the Recovery Act is implemented quickly and effectively.

Recovery Office staff began with an overview of the five “lanes” of oversight in their charge. They include to: 1) “get the (stimulus) money out the door” 2) get it under contract 3) support and manage the spending 4) identify, gather and monitor performance measures, and 5) maintain the support of the American people. At this early stage the office is focusing on the first four challenges, but staff recognize that the “long tail” of the final goal – maintaining the support of the public – is the one that matters most.

Office of Recovery Implementation Deputy Director Frank DiGiammarino described the Administration’s vision of government as a “platform” for citizen and community-focused collaboration, one in which the government is a “convener first,” and a “problem solver second.” He explained that this view of government is based on an appreciation that real wisdom and knowledge and capacity resides in the public. “Our role is to align public resources in support of people solving their own problems,” he said. “Our goal is to see that these stimulus funds are used to build a healthier, greener economy, with better educated citizens who have access to quality jobs.”

Karl Stauber, former President of the North West Area Foundation and currently the President and CEO of the Danville Regional Foundation, introduced our funders’ group with four key points:

1. There is a fundamental imbalance in the ability of high capacity and low capacity communities to benefit from stimulus funds. The imperative to spend the stimulus funds quickly disadvantages low capacity communities. The challenge is not to implement the ARRA in ways that deepen this divide.
2.  There is a “battle in America between the past and the future.” In rural America this battle is played out between those who continue to see rural in terms of (mostly commodity) agriculture and extractive natural resource-based economies, and those who recognize that rural America is already more globalized than much of urban America (in terms of markets).
3. “Rural” is many places. It is diverse. Although policy is not necessarily a zero-sum game, programs intended to benefit one region can inadvertently disadvantage another.
4.  Too much focus on speedy implementation makes it more likely the money will go where it’s easiest to spend, not where it’s most needed. (48 of the 50 poorest counties in America are rural.)
5.  How impacts are measured matters. Rural poverty is highly dispersed. A focus on numbers of people served as opposed to the percentage of populations served almost always disadvantages rural.

My role was to offer perspectives on the broadband provisions in the ARRA. Recognizing that the details are still unannounced, I highlighted aspects of the ARRA broadband program that benefit rural:

1. the decision to allocate these funds through competitive grants, not formulas, thus increasing the role of local control;
2. transparency and opportunities for public input on rules and definitions (including the meaning of “broadband,” “unserved” and “underserved.”);
3. the non-discrimination and interconnection contractual obligation requirements that will help ensure an open Internet;
4. a focus on utilization and community market development, not just infrastructure; and
5. the ubiquity requirement for the National Broadband Plan.

On the negative side, I noted that the ARRA’s focus on “shovel ready” as opposed to “vision ready” projects makes it less likely that the funds will go to where they are needed most, as opposed to where it is easiest to spend them quickly. I also cautioned about the inefficiencies of repeating restrictions of some previous FCC programs (including especially in the health and education sectors) that have made it difficult for sectors to share infrastructure.

Racheal Stuart of the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation/Neil and Louise Tillotson Fund spoke about one other area of ARRA focus in which Blandin has a particular interest – natural resource use. Though we had never met, Racheal had contacted me about the Foundation’s Vital Forests/Vital Communities work, and I knew her to be a thoughtful and innovative thinker. While noting that rural America can and should play a significant role in production of renewable energy, Racheal highlighted significant potential risks, including over harvesting or unsustainable extraction of natural/economic assets; use of a region’s natural resources to create wealth that is exported from the region. To help mitigate these risks and ensure long term community benefits, Racheal called for the ARRA to support community scale energy systems (especially district heating), support community ownership of facilities and natural assets; and pursue community benefits agreements.

A common theme among all of our presentations was that foundations are well positioned to help communities respond to and leverage the opportunities provided by ARRA. This is particularly true of the broadband funds, which are being distributed directly through competitive grants, rather than state agencies.

The White House staff found enough value in what they heard from us to ask for more. Discussions between the Council on Foundations and the Office of Reconstruction are likely to continue. Blandin Foundation will be thinking about how we might contribute to this opportunity.