Coalitions that Count: Using Local Partnerships to Power Equitable Change

One of the most practical strategies I've found in advocacy is building coalitions that reflect the diversity of the communities we serve. This doesn't happen by accident. It requires intentional outreach, relationship-building, and a willingness to meet people where they are. In municipal government, we often rely on formal channels like public hearings or advisory boards, but true advocacy demands we go beyond these structures. Whether it's hosting listening sessions in neighborhood centers, attending community-led events, or collaborating with grassroots organizations, we must create space for authentic dialogue. Doing so not only builds trust but also strengthens the legitimacy of our policy recommendations.

The City of Seattle’s Department of Neighborhoods offers a strong example of this approach. Their Community Liaison program hires trusted local leaders to facilitate engagement between city departments and historically underrepresented populations. This effort has resulted in increased participation in city planning and budgeting processes, especially among immigrant and refugee communities¹. By integrating community members as partners instead of participants, Seattle has managed to institutionalize advocacy that centers lived experience. Municipal practitioners can replicate this model by identifying respected community figures, compensating them fairly, and giving them real authority in shaping outcomes.

Turning Community Input into Policy Action

Advocacy doesn’t end when the conversation is over; in fact, that’s when the real work begins. Moving from community feedback to policy action requires a structured process that tracks commitments, communicates progress, and ensures accountability. In my experience, it’s critical to translate what we hear into tangible deliverables. That means documenting input clearly, aligning it with existing policy frameworks or budget priorities, and then looping back with the community to validate interpretations. Without this follow-through, we risk turning advocacy into a performative exercise rather than a tool for systemic change.

One practical tool that helps bridge this gap is the use of equity impact assessments. Jurisdictions like Portland, Oregon have embedded these assessments into their policy development cycle to evaluate how proposed actions affect different demographic groups². These tools help quantify community concerns and connect them to data-driven decision-making. When used consistently, they enhance transparency and enable staff to advocate internally for policies that reflect community values. Municipal staff should be trained not only in using these tools but also in presenting their findings effectively to elected officials and department leadership.

Advocating Within City Hall

Advocacy is not limited to interactions with the public. As municipal practitioners, we also have a responsibility to advocate within our own institutions. That might mean pushing for inclusive hiring practices, equitable resource allocation, or better support systems for frontline staff. Internal advocacy often requires navigating organizational hierarchies and aligning with political realities, but it can be just as impactful as public-facing work. For example, advocating for translation services or ADA-compliant materials may not generate headlines, but it directly affects who can access government services.

One effective strategy I’ve used is creating cross-departmental working groups focused on equity or community engagement. These internal coalitions can share best practices, troubleshoot barriers, and collectively advocate for institutional reforms. The Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) has documented how such internal capacity-building efforts have led to structural changes in cities like Minneapolis, which now requires racial equity criteria in all budget decisions³. For staff at any level, advocacy within the organization means being willing to ask hard questions and propose solutions that prioritize fairness and inclusion.

Using Data to Strengthen Advocacy

Data is a powerful advocacy tool, but only when it's used in context. Too often, we rely on aggregate statistics or broad indicators that mask disparities within our communities. Effective advocacy involves digging deeper into disaggregated data to understand how different groups are affected by city policies. For instance, while citywide unemployment might be declining, the rate for young Black men in a specific ward may be rising. Identifying and articulating these differences is critical to crafting equitable responses.

Cities like San Antonio have pioneered the use of equity dashboards to track outcomes by race, income, and geography⁴. These dashboards are publicly available and guide resource allocation decisions across departments. When advocates within city government use this data to highlight disparities and propose targeted interventions, they add credibility to their arguments. But data alone is not enough. Practitioners must also partner with community members to interpret the information and prioritize responses that reflect local knowledge and values.

Sustaining Advocacy Over Time

Advocacy is not a one-time effort. It requires sustained attention, adaptability, and resilience. Political administrations change, budget priorities shift, and public interest can wane. To ensure long-term impact, advocacy strategies must be institutionalized. That means embedding community engagement expectations into job descriptions, developing standard operating procedures for inclusive planning, and incorporating equity metrics into departmental evaluations. These changes make advocacy part of the culture, not just the initiative of a few passionate individuals.

One way to sustain advocacy is through leadership development. Programs like the Civic Leadership Academy at the University of Chicago support municipal staff in deepening their understanding of policy, equity, and community engagement⁵. Investing in staff capacity builds institutional knowledge and creates a pipeline of advocates who can carry the work forward, regardless of external changes. Practitioners should look for opportunities to mentor colleagues, share lessons learned, and document effective practices to ensure continuity.

Conclusion: Advocacy as Daily Practice

Advocacy in municipal government is about showing up consistently, listening deeply, and acting with integrity. It's about recognizing that every policy, program, and budget decision affects real people and that our role is to ensure those impacts are just and equitable. When we approach advocacy not as a task, but as a daily practice rooted in compassion and accountability, we become better public servants.

The path is not always easy, but the outcomes are worth it. When we advocate with communities, when we elevate their voices and ensure they are reflected in the decisions we make, we build trust and legitimacy. And most importantly, we move closer to the kind of local governance that truly serves everyone.

Bibliography

1. City of Seattle. “Community Liaisons.” Department of Neighborhoods. Accessed May 10, 2024. https://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/programs-and-services/community-liaisons.

2. City of Portland. “Equity Toolkit.” Office of Equity and Human Rights. Accessed May 10, 2024. https://www.portland.gov/oehr/equity-toolkit.

3. Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE). “Advancing Racial Equity in Local Government.” GARE, 2016. https://racialequityalliance.org/resources/advancing-racial-equity-local-government/.

4. City of San Antonio. “Equity Atlas.” Office of Equity. Accessed May 10, 2024. https://www.sanantonio.gov/Equity/Initiatives/Equity-Atlas.

5. University of Chicago. “Civic Leadership Academy.” Center for Effective Government. Accessed May 10, 2024. https://ceg.uchicago.edu/civic-leadership-academy.