please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. [stand by -- audio difficulty] We have four amazing and brilliant people to help us unpack this conversation about governance for social impact. We have the cultural affairs manager for the city of Oakland. Judy belt the President and C.E.O. of the California wellness foundation. Cedric brown, chief of community engagement for social impact, and Jeff Chang, an author and director of the Stanford institute for diversity in the arts. Thank you, guys. let's give our audience sort of the premise for this conversation. A community thrives when all its members shape and contribute to its creation. Among many of the established cultural institutions, however, low income communities, communities of color, and younger demographics are persistently under represented as patrons, collaborators, staff, contributors, and board members. The field has responded with diversity, inclusion, and engagement initiatives. Staple ull tain yousely more have been embracing equity as a value and committing to social impact as a core part of their missions. Many arts organizations are working to resolve many aspects from the programming they nurture and present to the people they hire, collaborators they embrace, and beyond. Less understood are the profound implications that an equity social framework has for governing boards. We are framing today's panel discussion and afternoon breakouts for the following inquiries. As arts organizations pivot to become more equitable and relevant, there is a growing sense of urgency and opportunity for us to reimagine the role of the board. What does the pivot toward equity look like for a board? What does governance for social impact look like? So I want to manage some expectations. Those are huge, over arching questions. We're not going to cover everything. By no means are we going to be able to solve all the world's equity issues in the next two hours. What we will do is explore, unpack, dig deep, and attempt to make a dent. Okay. I imagine race, gender, sexuality, class, education, etcetera are lots of issues that will come up. I am going to ask the panel to go deep . No super fish yailty here. Bring it. I know you can. The room may find itself in discomfort. That's okay. I know from experience it is absolutely possible to talk about equity and within that power and decision making without the world ending, right? Without jeopardizing the integrity of valuable relationships. Okay? So we got this. All good. We will hear from each of the speakers individually first then move into preplanned questions, enjoy any spontaneous conversations that ensue, then move to audience, folks in the room and folks in the Twitter verse for a q and a. With that, it is my pleasure to introduce our first speaker, Jeff Chang, author and director of the Stanford institute for diversity of the arts. 

Jeff: Thank you. Can everybody hear me okay? Good morning. It's wonderful to be here. Thank you so much to the irvine foundation for response oring this and a lot of love for initiating this and to Diedra for leading us through this. I wanted to start off in the spirit of discomfort with two uncomfortable facts. There's been a lot of studies over the last several years on the questions of cultural equity. And the first stat is that from a report that was done something like 87% of leadership staff at museums are white. Across the country. The other stat is maybe even more telling. The New York department of cultural affairs put together a study of all of its grantees. A thousand arts organizations. Over a thousand arts organizations in New York City. Pretty much every arts organization you could possibly imagine. They asked a question of these organizations, do you think your organization is diverse? 69% of those organizations said yes. Absolutely. We're diverse. But if you looked at the staffing and the board makeup over 3/4 of the staff and boards of those same organizations were white. This in a city that's about one-third white. And so this sort of points out, I think, the gap between our intentions, our views, and what the reality is of this particular moment in history. We're hurtling. I tell my students all the time at Stanford -- we're hurtling toward 2042, which is the year it's all supposed to go to hell. The year in which the U.S. becomes a majority/minority. I tell them the most important question of their time up there with the question of climate change, right, is the question of if we're all minorities, how do we form a new majority? Now, here in California we've already passed that demographic point as well, right? Where we're very much in this. So these questions we're actually grappling with right now, here in California are in some ways the questions that the rest of the country needs to be dealing with as well. This is a perfect example of trying to think about what a new majority is going to be looking like as you reach the middle part of this century and beyond. Okay? So I wanted to kind of lead off with that. That we need to, in many ways, catch up as arts institutions. We need to be able to catch up to what's happening right beyond our doors, right? And that the ways that we solve these kinds of problems are going to have massive impacts all across the state, all across the country for a very, very long time to come. This is our pivot point. This is the point that we need to make good on the promise of diversity of inclusion but especially a cultural equity. And so I wanted to kind of bring in, too, some other kinds of studies that have been happening. The irvine foundation has been at the forefront of this along with the national endowment of the arts looking at the question of arts participation. Right? What we know is that arts attendance has been dropping. Pretty much across the board with maybe the exception of the most sort of expensive, elite museums. Right? That arts attendance is dropping. At the same time, the studies have been finding arts participation is up. This is partly a function I think from a research standpoint, widening the frame. Thinking of all these different types of ways in which people participate in the arts, in communities. And what I want to say is we need to continue to open that frame. We need to continue to shift the frame from butts in seats, arts attendance, to arts participation as a whole. And to continue to think about all theway is in which people are engaging and making art and making culture in their very communities. And what this does, the challenge that it gives to arts institutions, is to think of yourselves not anymore as places that people come to or places that people will consume from , but it begs the question of what arts institutions are doing in communities. What is the role of the arts and the arts institutions in communities? In being able to generate cultural change and cultural transformations? So we need to be able to rethink our roles. And in that regard, we need to think of the way that the arts happens as a kind of creative ecosystem, right? So you've got the Bees and you've got the bears. Many of our organizations are bears, right? There are a lot of bees buzzing around there. They're doing a lot of really important work to make sure the ecosystem is happening. Then there are all the animals and flora and fauna in between. Right? We have to think of ourselves in terms of being part of this rich ecosystem of culture that makes up the cultural production that we are seeing happening. And in that regard, as we continue to expand this idea of arts engagement, right, we need to then be able to think about the ways in which different parts of these ecosystems might be represented in our institutions on our boards. So I just want to maybe leave it at that to say that the impact of what we're doing here is going to ripple out, right? Moving toward the promise of a new California. Moving toward the promise of a new America. This kind of stuff is fundamental to who we're going to see ourselves as in 2042 and beyond. Thanks very much. 

Diedra: Thank you. [applause] 

Diedra: Our next speaker, Judy, I told you you were third. You're actually second. Judy I heard that. I had something sticking out my cord. I just want you to know. But I'm ready. 

Diedra: Judy? 

Judy: Can you guys see it? It's not always about me, but I am vain. [laughter] 

Judy: And I'm not so sleepy. I, although I view the bay area as, you know, my home, my California home, I'm actually a Virginia girl. I'll tell you a little about that in a moment. I grew up outside D.C. and Alexandria, Virginia before it was a tourist destination, but made my way to California a long time ago for either love or work depending on the story that either I tell or my husband tells. And then 12 years ago did something I never thought I would do . I moved to L.A. As a bay area snob kicking and screaming. And so the reason I got up at 4:45 this morning to get on a plane was because of the focus of our discussion. One, the arts. I am really passionate about the arts. The arts have really transformed my life and really in significant ways. If you guys can tap into that, you know, I think if we came together five years from now, it might be a different story. By the way, just tap me if I'm talking too much, because I am a -- because I am passionate. I talk because I am passionate. I also -- boards are very much, you know, in my life. I serve on a board for one of the larger funders of arts in the country. My bosses are boards. Board members. And I'm advised a lot -- I've advised a lot of boards. So what I bring to the discussion will be some practical tips . I hope that you can leave with these and start working on tomorrow and as board members and C.E.O.'s. I wanted to just tell you two stories. I'm passionate about the arts. I grew up in Alexandria, Virginia outside of Washington, D.C., before it was a tourist destination. I'm of the age that when I started school I was bused about 10 miles away from my home to school even though there was a perfectly fine school a block away. Separate but equal. Separate but very unequal. My mother, who was 25 at the time, got tired of my sister and I standing out waiting for this bus that often was late, and one snowy morning and the bus didn't come, she pulled us into the house and I heard her say, the Belt girls are in. What she had decided, and it was a very courageous decision at the time, was that we were in a lawsuit that was testing the Brown decision. And that lawsuit was funded by primarily a group of Jewish, white leaders in Alexandria, who felt this was outrageous. Shortly, we won the lawsuit and my sister and I went to that neighborhood school. And shortly after that, another group of Philanthropists, a woman who really believed that art is so important that she funded a program providing the opportunity for folks like me -- we didn't have a lot of resources -- you know, we lived 10 miles from the White House but didn't have running water, which is unbelievable -- but she funded a program to take children like myself and my sister to experience the arts. So I remember with so much clarity going to the national theater in Washington, D.C., seeing a production of "Carmen" and prior to going to see that, we were told about the story. And I sat there transformed. It was like, I didn't even know something like this could exist. And that began a life long passion and love for the theater and for the arts. It was trans formative in so many ways. So fast forward about my first board experience. I blew it and the person asking me blew it. I was working at a local university, really young. And I had a crush on this professor of Portugese studies. [laughter] and one day he came up -- I didn't even know he knew I existed. He said would I be willing to serve on a board of a small organization, the Portugese cultural center. And I said, of course. Didn't ask any questions. Went to the first meeting. The meeting was held in Portugese. the executive director was glaring at me, because I hadn't met her. She hadn't met me. You know, after a while I -- I had never been to Portugal, didn't know anything. I just was like, I had done it for all the wrong reasons. So, finally, I went up to this professor and said, you know what? Why did you ask me to do this? And he said, because we needed diversity. I was devastated. I didn't think he looked so cute anymore either. [laughter] Judy : I've probably done my five minutes. 

Diedra: You have two more. 

Judy: So I guess I would say that is a way not to do it. [laughter] About diversity. But it also meant I didn't do -- I didn't do my job either. And I guess the part that is still painful is that , you know, as I've gone throughout my career, I would say almost -- and even before I got this job where everyone in California is my new best friend -- is that I -- I asked, you know, to be -- I'm still asked to be on boards, and I'm a little smarter. I'll ask up front now, and I'll say, why? And most of the time folks would say, you know, we're really trying to increase our diversity. And that is still as painful as it was the first time. Because, yes, I am an African-American. I'm a woman. And I own all of that. But I bring much more to the table. And so as Diedra said, if we're just talking about diversity, you know, you just can't get folks into the room, even how you ask them. Finally, one last story. You should know I'm a story teller. Last night the reason I'm a little ti red is we -- Cal wellness just finished a big Cal wellness poll asking people what they thought about community. And we had it in a very unusual place. In terms of sharing the findings. We had it in the museum of contemporary art last night. And it was one of the most diverse groups I've e ver seen in a large arts institution. Most of the people were there to hear about the findings. I also eavesdrop a lot on Bart and all of that. You can get some interesting pickup. And what I heard this Hispanic woman talking to this Asian man saying, you know, I've never been in this place before. I mean, I'm thinking how could you be in L.A. and not go to the museum of contemporary art? Because, you know, it just -- they hadn't been outreached. And what I heard, which was really exciting, is, you know, I think I'll come back. Because we couldn't get in to see the exhibits. We could only see them from afar. We were using the community room. I don't know who's in charge of community relations at the museum of con tremendous pri art, but that was Brill -- at the museum of contemporary art but that was brilliant to offer that building to bring in folks who otherwise wouldn't. I have as you can tell lots to say on this topic but I'll stop. Thank you. [applause] 

Diedra: Thank you. And next it's my pleasure to ask Cedric to join us. 

Cedric: Thank you. Can you hear me okay? Okay. Great. So good morning, everybody. Good morning, everybody. 

>> Good morning. 

Cedric: As the other Klummists, I come from tradition. I want people to know. That's what I'm about. I thank everyone for inviting me to be on the panel today and I'm certainly flattered and honored to be here with these folks that I just respect so much. I want to also make sure to thank Laurie and Deb and Suzanne for constructing this, putting this together. equity means we're all in it together. While conversations may get scary it means we're all in it together. We're building a boat for everybody. So keep that in mind. I also want to make another point and paint a metapicture. I'll try and stick with my notes here so I don't become too loquacious. There is tremendous economic inequality in the United States. We know that. Where the top 25% of households own 85% of the wealth. Just let that sit. 20%, rather, own 85% of the wealth. Hum. If you overlay that with the race and ethnicity lens, the picture doesn't look brighter. It looks whiter. And because the great wealth is concentrated in the hands of so few people and because philanthropic institutions and traditional nonprofit funding, charitable donations and grant making, rely on the kind of larges, lack of a better word, of those few people, there is a practical danger that some if not many of our nonprofits aren't going to get the kind of financing that they need to get up, to get running, and to become stable because those N.P.O.'s are on the periphery of those networks of wealth. We've all seen that with our grass roots community organizations particularly. so when organizations rely on boards as the fundraising apparatus it is easy to become lulled into thinking most worthy board members are the ones who have the best or most connections to financial and social capital -- money and networks. So my fear is that without a conscious and consistent effort to strike a balance between what I'll call the money and the subject matter expertise, organizations are going to fall into this trap of defaulting to those same circumscribed pools of potential board members with the financial and the social capital. The money and the networks. So I feel like the challenge is really to legitimately solicit and value the input of board members who are rooted in the mission work. Those folks who may not have had the same kind of financial or social capital as wealthier members of the board but whose information, whose perspectives, advance the mission and the impact bottom line. So equity, again, begins with this finding and establishing that kind of equilibrium between resources, kind of capital resources, and subject matter expertise. and there is a lot of work to be done in that regard in trying to establish that equilibrium. Often, because too often folks substitute money for expertise or money for knowledge. Not the same thing. I've met some dumb rich people. [laughter] 

Cedric: Just put that out there. I mean --. I think we all have. On another note about boards, how do we think about boards? Do we think about boards as being dynamic like the staff or do we think of them as being these kind of rigid bodies that are kind of right on the edge of understanding what organizations are about. Oh, yeah, yeah. I'll look at the 990 when we really don't have a deep understanding of the daily workings of the board and sometimes are regarded by staff folks as being the necessary interloper. Right? Okay. We have to have a board meeting. What are we going to tell them this time? They don't know what's happening on a day-to-day basis here. We need to change that kind of involvement and perception. Can boards shape shift and code switch and move back and forth between the formality of business and then formality of building trusting relationships? Because here, yet again, questions of the hierarchy of human value come into play. Hierarchy of human value is a concept that gale Kristoffer at the Kellogg foundation has talked about a lot and really advanced this notion of we ascribe the most value to people at the apex of that hierarchy based upon app earance, based on class, based on these other things that really have little to do with actual value. If we're moving toward equity, everybody in that -- there shouldn't be a pyramid. Everybody should be equal and you should be able to turn the pyramid on any side and anybody would o pop up. The hierarchy of human value. Whose voices are loudest on boards because of the perceptions of boards being all powerful? And how do we work beyond the hierarchy of human value to indeed strike this equal ibary um between -- equilibrium between folks bringing in necessary resources, and we value them, and the folks bringing in subject matter expertise and making arts organizations, making any kind of organization relevant in the community in which it exists? I'll stop there and wait for the questions. 

Diedra: Excellent. Thank you very much. [applause] 

Diedra: It is my pleasure to in vite Roberto bedoya into the conversation as well. 

Roberto: Thank you everybody. Look out there. Thank you for inviting me. Thank you, my fellow colleagues. I have an odd mind so my notes feel really lost in the stars. So I will go there because those are my notes. So I've been thinking a lot about governance. I think about governance and I think about race. But I also think about right now what I want to talk about, stewardship. So these are some very -- some things I pulled together. The definition from Webster's dictionary is around stewardship, the office, duties, and obligations of a steward. The conducting, supervising, or managing of something especially the careful and responsible management of something entrusted to one's care. Stewardship is a responsibility of taking care. Taking care of property, finances, the needs of others, something that one does not own. Religious orders often speak about stewardship in the context of service over self-interests. They also speak about stewardship in the context of being responsible for church finances. Stewardship and philanthropy refers to donor relations taking care of the intention and management of donor funds. In the organizational context it refers to the proper management of property and facilities, personnel, finances, and stakeholders' relationships. Environmental stewardship refers to the management and conservation of natural resources, consistent with the ecosystem management principles . It is often in this context you hear the word sustainability. Then there's cultural stewardship. That's kind of my home plate. My ground. I think about stewardship and us in this room being good stewards of imagination. And that means that we celebrate our cultural communities' work, we support the management practices grounded in stewardship that enable our services to fully -- now that is a key word -- fully meet and advance the social, economic, and aesthetic goals of our constituency. We prompt and promote the ways we imagine our lives together through aesthetic experiences that animate our pluralityy . As a policy maker stewardship is a guiding principle. It is a metaphor we employ in our practice so to enliven the social imaginary which the philosopher describes as "the way people imagine the social ist, how they fit together with others, how things go on between them and their fellows, the expectations that are normally met and the deeper Normative notions and images that underline these expectations." He goes on to say, I adopt imaginary because my focus is on the way ordinary people imagine their social surroundings. That is often about not expressed in theoretical terms but is carried in images, stories, and legend. My charge, and our charge, and it's a governance charge is to introduce the language of stewardship into how we work. How do we prompt the social measure? How do we talk about the value of the organization in our community and understand that they operate as being good stewards of imagination coupled with being good stewards with how one manages their systems of operations. A fault line among art management analysis and rhetoric is the embrace of sustainability as a tool used in evaluation. Instead of stewardship. I've seen how over the last 20 years the definition of stewardship, sustainability, excuse me, pause. I've seen how over the last 20 years the definition of sustainability has been used against organizations of color. That fail in some measurement metric of it. Yet, they're still around. You know, we all know the nonprofit art center that has failed some management tool assessment kit and yet they're still alive. I'm saying it's not that they failed. The way that we're understanding their value is totally wrong. The politics -- and so the deficiency associated with sustainability as a management tool is that it does not acknowledge risk or the politics of governance of structural racism in our sector. If we look at stewardship as a way to understand impact and value, what does it mean to be good stewards of a call? Being good stewards of imagination? Acknowledge aesthetic experiences, legends, stories, events of humanity. That we can balance the management needs for the empirical. You all need data. But with the knowledge at work that administrators, board members, and artists deal with? So I think ab out that in the context of, again, my hypothetical, the nonprofit that's 30 years old and still hand to mouth. We're not counting their volunteers. We're not counting all of the people that kind of keep the doors open and somehow this notion of success is not tied to being good stewards . Stewardship is the key ingredient for creating a sense of community. For developing the ability for collective action and for building a healthy democracy. Stewardship illuminates how taking care, imagination, and policy condition each other. I love that line. I'll say it again. Stewardship illuminates how taking care, imagination, and policy condition each other. It emboldens the contract between artist and audience by paying attention to the caller respond context of that contract. Our charge is to deliver an understanding of cultural stewardship that can be used for the benefit of our civic charge tethered as it is to ethics and aesthetics. Sort of our biggest note our biggest challenge today is structural racism and how it shapes our governance policy. [applause] 

Diedra: Thank you. I'll take it from there. So I want to follow that up that we have a question for you, Cedric, planned. I want to know kind of what your thoughts are to that question, that statement of one of the biggest issues for governing boards right now is structural racism. What does that mean to you? 

Cedric: I think Roberto was more blunt about saying it than I was with the hierarchy of human value but the y are tied together and the ways that again we view and value certain kinds of contributors, certain kinds of members of community as potentially bringing forward more worth, more value, more whatever to conversations. That's part of -- that is what structural racism is built on, so I'm glad you called it out. I was being a southern gentleman. [laughter] 

Cedric: I'm just kidding but I'm glad that you named what it is. 

Diedra: It is interesting when you say that. I thought when I was taking my notes there was that commonality around value and what is it we are valuing. This is something you brought up around the, you know, how the balance between money and subject matter and the value -- the value of -- the human value, the hierarchy shall the pyramid. I guess my question is, how would you actually disrupt that balance that currently exists? We know it exists. How do we break it? Is that a force from the outside? Is that governing board members who have to do that work? 

Cedric: You're asking all of us right? 

Diedra: I'm starting with you but, yes, you guys can jump in for sure. 

Cedric: Of course everything starts with awareness and intention and taking action based on the awareness and intention. That's what this forum is supposed to be about. If folks were to leave from here and I don't know who is gathered here so I'm not judging you personally but if folks were to leave from here without taking further action on what we know is an issue for organizations, then it would be kind of a disappointment. I feel like that's just the first and most accessible step with trying to disrupt what these systems have been. Do I have more finely tuned advice right now? No. 

Diedra: It's okay. 

Jeff: I'm trying to figure out, and I think this is actually the afternoon conversation where folks will be talking about systems, methods, tactics, goals, and those kinds of things, but I just was trying to square the conversation that you started about being the person who gets asked to be on the board because you're -- because you suddenly become the diversity. 

Judy: They like tall people. 

Jeff: Yeah. [laughter] 

Jeff: And thinking about sort of the -- what needs to be done. I'm sort of struggling with that in so many ways because I've been there. I know that kind of feeling. Not nearly as much as you've been there but I know that feeling. I think there are ways we could devise a whole bunch of systems and tactics and goals that maybe get us there. But it seems to me that there needs to be a cultural shift in terms of the ways that we think about the boards. That's what the -- that's what I think both of you are alluding to in this particular instance. 

Judy: Because I'm not going to be with you this afternoon I feel like I'm going to jump to tactics and ideas now. I want to give a shout out to all of the board members. I know many of you have day jobs anti deyou would give up a day, I don't know if it is because irvine told you you have to be here or you're just here but you're here and so I am always disappointed sometimes when I come to meetings because I'm kind of saying, that was great. Now what do I do? And so only just because as I now have more years behind me than before, my deal is what can I do kind of where I am? Because races specially , race, equity, all of those sorts of things are really hard to do. So I'll just throw out a couple of things. One, you know, excellence. Kind of look at how you could do your job the best that you can. And if you -- if you're thinking, well, I got to have money raised and all of this just kind of look at research that Scott Paige from the university of Michigan has done where he basically says, makes a business case for equity, inclusion, and others. Basically he did a study. He took several groups. A really diverse, average, intelligent group and a group of geniuses. And every way that matters for organizations and problem solving the average diverse group, you know, was just more productive in many ways. So if there is anything -- you are, you know, the custodians of organizations, you should be looking at ways that you can do things the best that you can. And one, you know, I could have 20 but I'll just -- one is I just think in general nonprofits give away their board seats , you know, too easily. You know, I've gone on a site visit for nonprofits and I really prepare and I do a good job when I'm out doing a site visit. And at the end I can, three or four times, you know, the executive director said, boy, that was really great. Would you be willing to join my board? I'm saying, you don't even know me. You know? And so the sense is what I get from that is if you will just kind of grab anybody that's breathing off the street, you deserve whoever you get around your table. [laughter] 

Judy: And so people make crazy decisions just, you know, like Cedric says, you pick someone because they have a lot of money. And then you are kind of crazy. This guy is an --. Oh, this is taped. Isn't it? Shoot. [laughter] Make a decision, well, she's black and then you're disappointed and why we still find ourselves kind of talking about it. The boards that I have joined and have been most impressed with are the ones that have really put me through the paces to even get in the room. Like it's like, are you good enough to join this board that we care about so much? I mean, at least an interview. At least a job description. And that -- so that begins, just who do you have in the room? Second, just on the other side of the board, governance, what can you do tomorrow? does your C.E.O. have within his or her goals something that deals with, you know, building an equitable, inclusive organization? And if you, when you're talking to your C.E.O., and you give the impression that building that type of organization is as important as raising the money, you know, maybe there will be a shift because guess what? You know, we do what we think is the bottom line kind of our boards. You know, my board is really clear. You're not going to be successful, Judy. It's not how many grants you get out but how you -- how are you furthering our commitment around equity inclusion or whatever? And then, finally, a third issue is, let's say you're successful and you have a diverse board. Look at your governance structure. Most large boards and arts organizations are really guilty of this. They actually have two boards in one. It's like, the executive board and that's where really all the decisions are made and then there's all the rest of the peons. And look who it just so happens in most boards, why is it that most boards, you know, audit and finance committees are run by men? No matter how many women are on the board. You might want to look at that around equity. What happens when your auditor comes in, the good Ole boy that's been your auditor for 25 years, have you ever thought as my board did just recently and the guy turned purple, could you tell us about your audit firm's commitment to equity, to diversity, to inclusion? Because guess what? If you want to do business with us, with this board, you need to know we're looking for partners that share our values. So those are just a few. 

Diedra: There is something you said and I want to bring it back to this question of the cultural change that needs to happen. There is something you said about you like that you were being put through the wringer in terms of the questions that you were being asked. 

Judy: Right. 

Diedra: I can totally understand that and at the same time I think there is a connection to the, what are we valuing and the cultural shift, because there are folks out there who haven't stopped to think about what they're valuing who would never look to you as someone who could even be put through the wringer. 

Judy: Right. Yeah, I think backing up, even more, is before you do all of this, and maybe I'm making an assumption, you have to have a discussion on the board and with the C.E.O. about what is it that you value in the organization and then, you know, if you -- you don't value it, you're never going to ask the questions or you're never going to -- because it's not important. If you are, if what you are really valuing and you need to be really clear is, how much money can we get into this place, that is going to determine who is going to be sitting around the table and what you value or is it? Because, hey, I know, you know, Cal Wellness and irvine, they're going to ask how many, you know, folks of color we have on the board so we had better just get, you know, some folks of color on the board. so you're right. It really kind of starts with what -- the board has to have that kind of discussion. 

Diedra: Right. Jeff, I want to ask you. You said there is a question that came up when you were speaking earlier. Well how do we shift the frame of who is in the seats? Which is really to this. And I do have the prequestion that I think is appropriate right now. How do you -- how do our current practices perpetuate governance that is not representative of communities of color or low income communities? How might we change those practices to not only bring excluded voices to the conversation but embed some real power and decision making authority to those voices? Again, it's connected to that. 

Jeff: I'm actually going to say it in a very few words and then I want to kick over to Cedric on this because I thought Cedric was outlining, beginning to outline a lot of ideas around this and also Roberto, as well. But I think that in so many ways -- to pick up on an idea that you were Kine of putting out there about -- you were kind of putting out there about bringing people on to the board in order to raise capital, right? So you have either capital capital write the check or you have social capital. The networks that you're coming from. And I think that that actually is the under thought part. The social capital piece. Because a lot of folks who come on to the boards will already actually be in the networks you're already in, right? That's partly how the validation kind of happens. And so what if we thought of the social capital piece as being an opportunity to be able to bring in networks that strengthen the institution 's relationships within the community. I think that is sort of what you were getting at. 

Cedric: Absolutely. 

Jeff: Maybe I ought to kick it over to you at this point so you can go deeper on that. 

Cedric: I don't know that there is much more to say. Looking at who the constituencies are both through the direct programming arts institutions and organizations are offering and through the aspirations that organizations have. Whom do we want to serve in our broader community? How do we want our organization to thrive and to continue to grow and continue to reach new audiences and actually be places where we can heal? One of the points that I jotted down is that, arts and cultural institutions can provide the kind of necessary community building and healing that we really need in order to start moving toward this greater equity. I was amazed. I had the great pleasure of going to a gathering put on by the institute for library sciences in Philadelphia, a town hall about catalyzing the community at the beginning of the September. I was just thrilled to hear, first of all, it was a rather diverse representation of folks in the room. I was thrilled to hear about the kinds of work folks are doing through their libraries, through their communities, through their museums, and really making them community centers. In their respective locales. Thank you. So again, I feel like there's a fantastic opportunity here for organizations to really be the catalyst ts around some healing and genuine community building and in order to do that we have to make sure that we're reaching all corners of the communities in which we exist and serve. And sometimes that means, well it does mean expanding the definition of what social capital is. What is the knowledge that such folks are going to bring in and contribute? Certainly we have advisory boards that advise on specific pieces or specific subject matters. Are we grooming any advisory board members to then become part of a governance body as well and to take on the duty of care shall the duty of loyalty shall the duty of obedience that is called for? The stewardship that is called for from board members? I'm going on and on. 

Roberto: Go ahead. 

Jeff: Well, so, does it become a thing of as you put it sustainability vs. stewardship? Obviously organizations and institutions have to be able to fund the programs. 

Roberto: I would say this. So I went here. The point for me, we're talking about pi vot points. I think we need languages. I'm inserting stewardship is there. I'm not abandonning sustainability but I also see it as a tool of whiteness. And I want to call that out and say that in its inefficiency and that was my little story telling, it could be any of the ethnic organization s of color in the bay area that have been stuck and penalized because they've not been seen as sustainable. I see that as a language that I think is a management assessment language that I don't want to buy. I want to unravel it. I want to be subversive and put new criteria around stewardship and figure out what the hell that looks like for us that are in the mix. Because I think that that is where I get all my board present. One of my board Presidents when I lived in Tucson and I would run a localized council there so my boss were the elected officials to a certain extent. So I'd be meeting with the mayor about something and he'd just sort of hold my hand and say, control your inner Chihuahua. You know? [laughter] Because I get all hot and bothered and say, no. I don't believe that. But I had a lovely board member that knew that was my job. Because I wasn't -- I'm not about complicity. I'm actually about reframing, constantly. So in some ways I'm not, I guess, where the dreamer part of me is, let's imagine new governance systems. Can we do that? Can we just go there and take this moment to honestly listen to the constituents we serve and look at them? I mean, I, in Arizona, I had three Native Americans on my board. They're not talkers. They communicate through eyebrows. You know? You sit in a circle and they're like -- oh, I better learn how to read that note to me. You know what I mean? A bad board experience and I was butting heads with -- I was running an organization and I was butting heads and I was announcing kind of the challenge that the board was facing. The financial challenge. All of a sudden everybody is going like this. And nobody heard me. And afterwards, the Japanese American board member said to me, nobody heard you because you do what we know , when something is serious, you dropped your voice. As if to say, this is serious. When I had a board where everybody talked over each other. They're always animated. So there was that cultural difference that I had to negotiate. Sort of different world views and different communications. Kind of patterns, behaviors among a diverse board. And final thing. I worked at -- I worked for a while at the research institute, the programmer. And kind of like the one Latino -- well, there were two. Actually Josephine was the other one. She is not here. So we were the two Latinos . There is another story I could tell you about. [laughter] 

Roberto: So we're sitting there and we're the Latinos in this institution that's U.S. centric to the Max and it was like I felt like there was -- I felt two things. Two song references came to my head. My older sister loves little Anthony's I'm on the outside looking in and then I'm Patty Smith. Outside is the way I take. There was a way in which I was not inside because I was a brown man inside the White House and out on the street I was a brown man inside the White House. You know? And there was no way I could ever be inside. So in some ways I realized that my difference, my racial difference became an interesting experience . 

Judy: Let me tell you how all of this is kind of interconnected going back to the tactical and the governance issue. Let's talk about fundraising. Money. On your side of the table. And later I'm sure Cedric and I will also be talking -- telling you on our side of the table we don't have such a stellar record, either in terms of the philanthropic factor. But fundraising, money . There is assumptions out there that are deadly to your sustainability. And a couple are that folks of color don't give . I mean, I've actually -- I actually, you please, heard some diverse donors saying that I'm never asked by two sectors , the environmental sector and the arts sectors for dollars. It's like there is an assumption that if I do give that I'm only going to give to kind of communities of color or whatever. That's obviously, if you listen to the statistics of how our demographics are changing, for you to just write off a whole sector of potential donors. The other issue is who is asking for the money? I have sat before many development directors and I would say I could probably count the number of development directors that are in the position of doing the ask in the cultural setting that are folks of color. Now, maybe it's changed, but I would say that's one area that you might look for. It was so frustrating when I worked at Rockefeller philanthropy advisers where I worked with donors, we developed a huge program around diverse donor engagement because, you know, the connection just wasn't happening. A lot of it had to be doing, who was asking for the money? Why is that important in governance? One, part of your role is sustainability and fiscal management and you're just kind of not going after a group. The other is that donors is a fertile fwround for who is sitting at the board -- ground for who is sitting at the board table, too. If you give to an organization you should be cultivating those relationships. They could be folks tha t you would put on committees and then they could be in a pipeline. So the fact that we start with assumptions that are not right, and, in fact, you know, for example the African-American community per capita gives more than, you know, any other kind of demographic kind of sector. So the assumptions that folks have about race and equity really are a direct line to your role and who sits at the table and how do you sustain your organization if you don't fix that? I don't think you can successful. 

Diedra: I feel like there -- 

Cedric: I feel like there is a lesson to learn. You mentioned some of what I call our grass roots organizations, some of the scrappiest organizations we have around. What is the lesson around sustainability that you have brought up in your opening remarks? What can we learn from those -- the organizations that despite all the odds have stayed in existence? What is their definition of sustainability? How do we learn from that? And then apply it in the board conversations about fundraising, about how we're going to maintain resources, about how then that is linked to governance and the people that we bring on to the board and the way that we think about networking, etcetera? I think it's all part of that money vs. subject matter expertise kind of framework. But I'm so intrigued by sustainability. 

Roberto: I think listening to that and trying to understand their success, this notion of stewardship . So -- and not to sideline the money part of running the shop, you need to balance it. So ultimately I think governance is about creating a system of quiffleenss so that you and that the values of stewardship and the values of sustainability, and as a management sort of necessity co-exist. They co-exist as quiffleenss. What I've seen so often is that community call is like a little extra to get maybe a few more points from a philanthropic donor who won't say, oh, you've got diversity on your board. Horse you've got community voice -- oh, you've got community voices on your board. But I don't feel that the overall governance of the board -- I feel sometimes that the governance of the board -- maybe I'm just saying, I've been too many damned times the one person of color on a board that needs to be in the community. And I know exactly what role I'm being asked to play. Judy you know how black folks feel and everybody looks toward you. I don't know any black person -- 

Roberto: Right, right. So in some ways I just feel that. 

Diedra: We're going to if you guys are ready for questions take some questions from you guys but I want to, the last question I'm going to ask is related to what you just mentioned in terms of I'm wondering about -- there is something around the current structure has to shift to make space for this new language, this new idea, this new definition. You know, perhaps my age is making me think that. I don't know. I'll put that out there. But I think how does that shift happen? You're talking about a shift in having people who are comfortable in their space because of privilege and from the models that are happening speaking from a place where you're coming from who don't know your experience, who don't know, right, that's survival, just maybing your way -- making your way through the world and that's the reality. But how do you shift that so that the folks who are in positions of power, who are comfortable in those positions of power by their -- and comfortable by privilege to actually shift and want to push what you're saying forward? 

Jeff: I was going to say I think it goes back to what you said at the beginning which is equity is all of us. Right? Diversity is all of us. I was tripping on the fact you're talking about diverse board members or diverse donors because the original definition of diversity was all of us. Now it's like the diverse folks are the folks of color. And the white folks are not diverse. 

Judy: Right. 

Jeff: Which is really weird. Even the academy of whatever, the academy, right, academies when they did their whole sort of announcement of how they're going to diversify the ranks, they were going to bring in diverse members. I thought, okay. Do is that mean more white folks? But they meant folks of color. But we can't lose that. Right? The idea that equity is all of us. And so the people shall the shift has to be that, yes. There has to be room made but everybody needs to be engaged and brought into this notion that equity is not just about the survival of the institution. It's not just about looking toward new donors. It's not just about putting butts in seats. It's not just about all of these things. It's an ethical, moral type of thing that we're investing in the future of what we want our communities to be about and look like. And I think that that's where the rubber really meets the road. That we're all in this together. And I think that that's the stakes of this. 

Cedric: Yes. We're all in it together and you mentioned 2042 as a turning point for the nation. I had actually written some notes about how in 2042, if we don't anticipate these trends and deal with equity and inclusion in real ways, we could end up with an economic apartheid situation here in the United States. Now, some of that is already happening but it isn't as visible to us yet. But when we get to a point where this country is majority people of color, if the wealth and power remains in the hands of the few, apartheid is a word that I use very deliberately. And the optics of that won't be cute nor will the lived reality because it could be really destablizing to this nation if you have wealth and power concentrated in the hands of a few folks who look alike. So we have to deal with this issue of equity. We have to deal with the issues of thinking about deconstructing this hierarchy of human value and really getting to what the founding forepeople, forefathers and mothers were trying to lay out as a vision for this nation. But never would they be able to anticipate where we have come. So I want us to take both -- that is both a warning and a, something that's aspirational for us to move toward, because we can do it, if we survive global warming. [laughter] 

Cedric: We're going to be all right. 

Roberto: I just want to sort of Pooh ush that a little bit further. I think the equity charge is a racial equity charge. I was on the board at grant makers and the arts. We've done lots of work on studying how racial equity operates in arts philanthropy. Diane Sanchez was on that board as well. And understood what this -- where do we begin to unpack structural racism? You have to study it. You have to do antiracism work. You have to send your board to do that. You have to find the right people to do it. It's not like I take a pill and all of a sudden I'm no longer racism. We have this -- let me just also -- John Powell, if you haven't read him, he is brilliant, Berkeley. He's just like the most brilliant, one of the most brilliant thinkers around understanding structural racism and how it gets Embedded in systems of governance. And understanding that you need to sort of step out of it a little bit and study it . Con structural racism as he says is a silent opportunity killer. It just slams you down. So the fact that you need to sort of take a pause and study it and also the fact stha -- that -- I said this in our phone conversation. I'm being very deliberate about race -- racial equity because cultural equity is a whole nother -- disability, fe minism, queerness, all those equity kind of desires are there. But that can -- I've witnessed how cultural equity still maintains whiteness as a dominant ideology. 

Judy: I would say we kind of have a little disagreement on the phone and maybe it's just because I don't think anything is going to change until kind of we all play a role in changing it. I mean, when my daughter was young I remember her coming to me and saying do you think you've been discriminated more as a woman or as a black, mom? And, you know, I got my act together and said, well, you shouldn't have discrimination in any form. It's wrong. But it was really interesting because I am now an African-American woman in this real position of privilege. I think we're all in position of privilege. Then I think we need allies to kind of shift and things don't shift right away. And so I'm still struggling with saying the whole focus should be around race. I just don't want to say we need to all get along. But a couple of things and I just feel like I can't end without just having you know how things look on this side of the table. Because if you talk about power dine amics, the biggest power dynamic I think is in organized philanthropy. You know, I have written about the fact that since taking this job people have come up to me and said I've always thought you were brilliant. Boy, haven't you lost weight, Judy? [laughter] 

Judy: I realize I am brilliant, I haven't lost any weight either. But, you know, I'm standing between folks who care deeply about the community and you know how hard it is to get resources and 35 million. And so one of the things I always tell nonprofits is that that -- is that I think you guy don't always use the power you have to help us be more accountable. In order to do that you might have to take a little risk and be a little unselfish and I wish a nonprofit would call me up and say where the hell is my money? You're taking forever. We take forever because we can take forever. We're trying to change it. 

Diedra: This is being recorded so they might now. 

Judy: Right. But there isn't. So I'm saying what would happen because there is also -- I want to talk about the fact of many small, amazing cultural organizations that we want to keep and that doesn't mean we want the San Francisco symphony. How powerful it would be for me if a group of large arts organizations, you please, would say -- you know, would say, you, the philanthropic sector, you need to be doing more. You need to be -- you say that you're all for equity you're asking us for, you know, information about our boards, first of all, how do your boards look? But you need to be doing even more because, guess what? Our organization cares about the greater common good and we can't be as successful in promoting the arts and appreciation for the culture if these organizations aren't successful. So -- and there is enough resources. There are a lot of philanthropic resources, but we -- and then on the other side the philanthropic sector where a report just came out after five years saying, you know, our board rooms and our executive suites don't really look good and we are not doing what we say we are supposed to be doing and giving more money out to under served areas. And not to get folks to yell and scream but when you're talking, can you tell us a little bit more, Mr., Mrs. Foundation person, about what you're doing broadly about promoting a more diverse cultural environment? It's just one -- another sense of the power that you might have because there's a little secret I want to tell you. We cannot do our jobs if we do not have thriving, vibrant , cultural organizations. It's like having a lot of money and nothing to do with it. We need the sector so you can be a partner. 

Diedra: Thank you. On that golden nugget we're going to move to questions. Just want to remind you we have 40 plus people watching live. We definitely welcome your questions and comments via Twitter, use the # new Cal arts. Or the e-mail address scrolling at the bottom of your screen. So we'll move to the room. Apologies. I got enthralled like the rest of you in the conversation, so we're a little behind on starting the q & a. Eric mayo, on the board of center for the arts. You're talking about the small community organizations and then you're talking about boards and maybe bringing on people for their expertise. And I'm like, the larger organizations really ready to actively engage the, those board members the way that community organization can have them involved in the day to day? And don't we need that along with the governance? Because otherwise you bring on really active, engaged people and there is nothing for them to do. 

Diedra: Is that directed at a particular person or --? 

Roberto: I gave some remarks at the national opera America conference a year and a half ago, two years ago, about engagement work. It was more about territorial sort of strategies. And as the opera tries to figure out their relationship to communities. Diverse communities. Every day people type communities. That was my editorial comment. And so I was just sort of rambling like I do and I just said, you know, I learned this from colleagues who , in Arnet routes, which is a network of community arts groups in the south. I don't know the secret sauce in the relationship. You just need to know that you always start as a guest and you're never the host. You say that to the opera field who are all about the red carpets and the V.I.P., they all -- they only know how to be a host. They do not know how to be a guest. The guests -- they're guests in the city they live in and once they understand guest as value, then you can bring board members to your team. That knows like, you're not -- that maybe is a shift that needs to happen that your board understands, oh, the value of guests and behaviors and how , your relationship to communities. They were stunned. And then I was really -- I said, if you're not a good guest, watch out. They'll burn down your house. [laughter] 

Cedric: I think both things need to happen of course and that we should always -- we should try to default to the thoughtfulness of the proactive and not the rush of the reactive. So if someone is saying oh, we need to get these additional folks in, that's reactive. It's not thinking out the real engagement, strategies around really engaging folks, balancing out power dynamics that exist on the board, trying to strike that equilibrium again. We have to map things out. And not that it can't be done quickly. One of the things that I love coming from the work at the k center, one of the things I love about the lean startup principles that many start-ups adhere to is that you test. You it rate. You test. You iterate and it happens quickly. I think there are lessons certainly in that for the nonprofit sector as well. I am not at all trying to say businesses do everything that a nonprofit does. I'm not at all saying that. But this is one thing that I feel like nonprofits can do really well so when thinking about board governance, when thinking about engagement of community members, what are we going to test, how are we going to iterate, how are we always going to be in a quick learning loop to make sure everybody's voices are heard, and that we level power dynamics on our boards so we can engage people in real ways. 

>> A couple questions over here. 

Question: I'm mark Nielsen, Pacific symphony. There is a lot of discussion recently about equality, diversity, which seems to focus on race, ethnicity, or sex at some point. But socioeconomic seems to be a piece that's often missing. Particularly as Cedric is talking about, the money and the issue. We seem to have what is referred to as the elite particularly within this group of the majority of the organizations are fairly large, typically the boards have a requirement of the certain minimum giving level in that you have a certain level. So is there really diversity even if we have a board of color, of whites, of all of us but all of us are, "the elites" is that really providing the diversity and equality and isn't it an interesting commentary on the organizations if most of our audience, desired audience are more of the middle class and yet we have no representation because of where we structure the boards to that whole middle class which is the majority of our audience. 

Judy: Okay. I guess I would have -- you said a lot and a lot of it is kind of what, I'm not saying your organization but organizations value. So I would test that. For example, in most of the organizations , you know, that I have served on boards in that, sort of my middle career, I know I -- I knew I was the poorest person on the board. I wasn't like dirt poor but just in terms of -- but the boards that I was on, because, remember, I got a little smarter, really valued, and I felt valued for other expertise. Now, they were really clear and this is what I like. You got to either give or get and help in some way with the fundraising and I said, well, I can get, because I really believe in this mission, and they had the tools. And, you know, the one organization that I was on, they had a little competition. I had 10 donors who made contributions every year to the annual fund. My goal was to connect with them -- with these donors every quarter every quarter and then make sure they contribute on -- that was perfect for me. And I surpassed what that expectation or goal was. But it was -- it was an opportunity for me to kind of show my worth in other areas and then there were other ways that I was contributing. It was really the culture of this organization. It was a large organization. So I am saying that if you say, you know, you're not going to be on this board unless you give -- write a check for $20,000 , they would have missed, I think, me because I gave $20,000 but in a different sort of way. And I added a lot more. The other thing, too, is to really think about other ways to , you know, to get various socio economics like having advisory groups or whatever, folks that can play a role and then can help in other ways and eventually kind of get to the board. But it really -- and I really, really encourage you to really, and I'm trying not to make a value judgment but if you feel you cannot have a board unless everybody on the board can write a check for 20,000 dollars or whatever, I'd be really clear about that and you're going to have to find the diversity of experience in a different way. And I'm trying not to make a judgment because I know how hard it is and I know -- but there are some creative ways of -- of board members participating. Another board I was on, would you be willing to host or whatever breakfasts or whatever. There are other ways of contributing. It's what you value. 

Roberto: Just for a moment, I work as a public funder. So, you know, my whole experience is as a public funder. And if I -- my fund or review panel will be looking at those applications for diversity and they may say, oh, this person is really a gre at community organizer. They're not of wealth but I value their input and their expertise on this board, this organization. That may result in a check of $20,000. So I'm sort of, just to go back to the composition of your board, there are many different expertise that can come. And some may be an individual that's a trusted, really understands public service and that's kind of what my charge is to look at public impact. 

Cedric: I'd really struggle with give or get. I mean, I'm glad there is a give or get provision that will allow folks who can't write the check to be kind of equals but, again, I think that buys into, kind of promotes the system where you have to either be networked or you have to have it yourself in order to re present on a board. And it overlooks other kinds of assets and knowledge. So I wonder about the re-examining the basic premise of how the board selects its members. Is it for mission or money? And make the decision and then go with that. I mean, be real about who you are. It's all abo ut the money, then okay. If it's about the mission, then what does the board need to do to restructure and reassert itself so it is including all the folks that get affected by or are included in its programs and/or its mission. 

Roberto: Just the last small 

point to make -- Jeff: Just the last small point to make, if we're about diversity, that, yes, socioeconomic class absolutely matters I think for all of us. I think in California it's the intersections of all these things at once. Right? 

Cedric: Yes. 

Jeff: It's race. Obviously there is racial under representation. Gender. Because obviously there is gender under representation. And it's class all at the same time. That's what makes it so difficult. 

Judy: Again, checking assumptions, my daughter, you know, went to private school and it just, everyone just assumed that all the African-American and Hispanic kids were on financial aid. And that, again, you know, put people in a class , but made some assumptions, one, let's start with what's wrong with getting financial aid anyway, but made huge assumptions, and, guess what? Made assumptions about how some of those schools approached those families for fundraising support. Because of assumptions that some folks had. And so it's, you know, complicated because it is about money but I think the under liing is the values and being a little creative. 

>> We have several people more who want to comment. 

Question: Good morning. I'm a board member of the Pacific symphony. I am really impressed with what you guys do today. It very touched me. I want to share a very small piece of my story how I see this whole thing got it together. About three years ago -- I was a poor musician, still, and 35 years ago from Shanghai. I am failure because I don't have money. I went to a different sector. I make some success. About three years ago, there was a grant to give the P.S.O. , able to reach out to me. I'm very touched. So today I'm a board member. I'm not only feeling this is the right thing to do , I bring my time, energy, focus, and my wallet. All together. All in. So I am, you know, we are a board member -- but I feel value teaching my kids but I say, hey, guys, this is great country. I'm 61. It's not 20 anymore. But you have 30 years. Keep it going like that. So we had a dinner, you know, very touched last night. So my whole story for you, this is so great . A lot of work to do. I live in the irvine area. When I moved in, I'm -- there were 48,000 people. Today 250,000 people. 68,000 is Chinese. A lot of immigrants. A lot of work needed to do. The Chinese leader council, I want to be putting this together. The only power of music and the arts will be to bring the culture , community through east to meet west. The only way. We need to put it together. It's a hustle. I like everybody. Work all in one to have a passion and keep it going. And thank you for the foundation. We keep it working and we're with you. Thank you. [applause] 

Question: Hello: I'm the immediate past chair of the La Jolla play house so a female but most importantly nominating chair. All of your comments really were very powerful and we have embraced diversity, inclusion, equity for many years at the play house. We're making some strides but I can tell you we're not where we want to be. Judy, your comments as to your childhood are the basis of my question. As we are going into the three communities that we are going into, we really do believe this is going to kind of lift up the lid of some civic leaders within that community , of other Phelan philanthropicers and companies involved and engaged in the same communities we're in. I would love to ask the panel if there are any best practices or ideas you have as we are utilizing the wonderful opportunity we have with irvine to be in these diverse communities how can we identify -- cultivate board members from that? As, Judy, you said there was a magical moment in your life. I'm sure there are magical moments we will have with leaders within those communities. And we think that's an opportunity. I would love to hear your ideas on how to help us. 

Judy: Yeah. The only thing I would say is that I think that in many ways arts organizations you have a competitive edge in that your product is basically a key to your brand. I know enough about -- that you have a brand that really reflects. I think your commitment to diversity or whatever. But it's really working hard and that's why you're saying you need allies across the sectors in order to do it. And it is really finding, being creative about taking the art too diverse communities as well as how can you bring folks to it. Last night was brilliant. I really think the museum of contemporary art is going to get huge benefits by just saying, this is an asset. We're a community organization. This is our building. It's after hours. Come and use it. We want to be part of the community. And it is so nuts because when I think of especially the African-American community, the Latino community, communities that link so much by the arts, I was just telling Lori that I -- there is a buzz that I'm hearing even in Los Angeles about the exhibit at the museum on the black panther. And the fact, again, it was brilliant in terms of what's happening in the country. Painful now but folks saying, I've already gotten several invitations from folks saying we need to see this exhibit because the art really responds. You know, as, you know, the mother of a 6'6," African-American male who loves classical music and getting surprised by the most surprising folks that he would want to do that as well as liking rap. I know there are opportunities out there. It's really getting past assumptions. 

Cedric: I have three strategies that aren't new but I like them so I'll share them. One is a general call to, I don't know if you all have a membership body or if you kind of collect the names of folks who come through. General call. This is what we're looking for. So that there is a kind of crowd sourced feeling about the nominations that come through . Of course, it requires much more kind of leg work and sifting through but that's a way to discover undiscovered talent, people, contributors, etcetera. I love partnerships with other community based organizations that may be working directly with those constituencies but not in your particular subject matter area. A partnership that would then yield potential nominations based on folks that they know and would advance to the organization and I knew I was going to forget the third one. I'll see you afterwards for the third one. [laughter] 

Jeff: I think that the wonderful thing about, well, it is a very difficult thing to have a cultural shift within an organization. But the wonderful thing about it is that if it's working on all cylinders it can create this virtual cycle, right? So talking about the panther event, that brings in -- that was a product of a lot of work that the Oakland museum was doing with a lot of folks in the community very deeply such that everybody that needed to be brought into that practically was brought into that. And then it becomes a thing where the staff are interacting with folks in a much deeper kind of way. And so the staff are empowered to be able to start being almost talent scouts for the board. And if you're figuring out how to open up the lines of communication between the community, the staff, and the board, then it becomes this virtual cycle that keeps on going , moving up. You know, eventually people start appearing that, oh, of course this makes perfect sense. So it's almost mystical but it's beautiful. 

Roberto: Two thoughts. Ultimately it's about r elationships and relationship building. And be comfortable that the advances are going to happen obliquely. It's going to happen. I learned this from the dance community. When I was talking to them about new work development, the experimentations over here, and it just sort of advances obliquely. So the change of your governance is going to be oblique. But it will be -- that advance will happen. You just need to vest in those relationships and look at sort of like oh, I have this good relationship with Cedric and his organization and maybe he trusts me maybe he don't but let's have a conversation. And before you know it he might be in your shop. You know what I mean? So that advance -- first, you need to be comfortable with time. You don't call up a lawyer or any one of us and say, hey, give me your best and brightest colored person you need. 

Judy: People do that. [laughter] 

Judy: It is not unusual for me to get a call from a head hunter because some large organizations use head hunters saying, Judy, do you know a person of color in California who has fiscal management experience? I'm saying, well, yeah, but I mean, it's like it's so, as if it's some, you know, scarcity, you know? You know a lot. It's really the relationship. I was on, before I moved to L.A. I was on the Berkeley rep board. They tapped into my love for the theater. But I have to say, I got intrigued with them, too, when I went to one of their productions and saw that they had taken some interesting risk around color blind casting, which I said, hey. This makes sense. I felt, you know, I felt comfortable and then I don't want to under estimate feeling comfortable with the board. I felt comfortable with the culture. They obviously had done some work around this issue even before I came on the board and it just continued but it started with that passion that I felt about the theater. I was able to bring everything including the fact, you know, my race, my gender, and my net worth and being able to bring other folks into that kind of experience also. 

Diedra: Do we have time for one more? 

>> Four minutes left. We have time for one more. 

Question: I'm Dana king, a trustee with the Oakland museum of California. I'm the chair of community engagement task force. Judy, your history, being asked because of your size, your height, and color -- [laughter] I'd like to put a different spin on that. My first big job I got, because I was black. I asked why. He told me that's why. I said, that's great. You won't keep me because I'm black. 

Judy: Right. 

Question: So my question is why, since it's 2016 and communities of color still self-segregate, why can't we be intentional with our selection of our board members or not why can't we. Is that wrong to say, look. We need , around the Oakland museum we have a huge vietnamese community. We have a huge Chinese community. We have a large Hispanic community. We need to be intentional in going into the communities. But the best people who know the people in the communities are people from those communities. So I guess my question is why is it wrong to be intentional? 

Judy: I have a great story because I think it is about the culture of the organization. I think I mentioned earlier I'm on the board which is one of, you know, the country's largest family foundations. It's the andres family, serdna spelled backwards. Gives you an idea how they feel about this. The family is celebrating the 100th anniversary next year. Been around a long time. John andres was a contemporary of John Rockefeller. The family is going to change but right now it is predominantly white. They decided that they wanted to open up the family table because it's a family foundation to get more diversity of experience, I'm sure ethnic diversity and all of that. And I was interviewed. And as we're going through it and I'm thinking, okay. Am I just going to be a token or whatever, and one of the family members saying, Judy, if you haven't noticed, we're white. [laughter] Let's talk about race. And , I mean, it was, you know, after they had really grilled me, really grilled me also on all of the other expertise, we then had a real interesting conversation. That usually does not happen in most -- it just opened up the kind of discussion. The other thing they did which I think you guys probably know research, is that there are three nonfamily members on the board and the staff, which is very much part of the culture, they're in the room and they're more diverse, too . They were thinking -- I'm thinking, okay. I'm a nonfamily member. Will I ever be -- and I raised that issue because I came in on, with nonfamily members, not having as long a term as family members. And then they just said, you know what? We don't want to do that. You're going to -- we're going to make all the board members, all the trustees have the same term. So it takes -- it's not perfect but you're right. They were intentional. It's really probably when folks handle it, you know, you feel like it's a token. You come into it, into the organization, you know you're not on the executive committee where all the decisions -- you'll never get on the executive committee. And then because there is not enough diversity in the organization when there is an issue that comes up about blacks or whatever everybody is saying, well, what do you think? But never also saying, hey, would you also like to serve on the finance committee? Because I can be a good member of a finance committee, too. So it's the culture thing that it's not, it's imperfect, but you are exactly right. In many ways nothing is going to change until we're intentional about it. It's really how you go about changing all of those practices that come with it. 

Diedra: One more question? 

Cedric: Dana, it is a great question. Judy, thank you. It is a great question and it is built on intentionalityy. You don't want to just get anybody who feels like a token coming into a situation that might be hostile where they won't be heard where they're sitting there just as a representative from the community but they can't speak for the myriad voices of that community. If people are really proactive and thoughtful about the folks they're trying to bring onboard to represent certain communities, they will have built partnerships, relationships, they'll be able to ask in a way and say, we want to make sure this board is representative of the broader community that is here. In order to do that, we're addressing these kinds of dynamics on our board so the person isn't going to feel alone, so there will be a critical mass of voices like what the person is coming from or like the kind of background and institution the person might be representing. So I think there's a lot of thoughtfulness that has to happen. We were kind of short handing, I think we were short handing the don't just ask because you want somebody from x, y, z on your board. Be thoughtful about it and make sure that the person is set up to suc ceed. 

Diedra: Thank you. 

>> The live stream may have ended. I'm not sure. We do have one more question that may not be part of the show. 

>> Part of our show. 

Question: I think it may be a short question. I'm Nancy Olsen from the California Shakespeare theater. I'm on the board. I also for my day job and the governance -- am the governance officer for another organization. I'm loving this conversation. You're talking about exactly what I think about and try to work with our boards on. My question was you talked about nonsustainable, nonprofits that actually survived. Do you have any information about how they survived? Is it through volunteers? Is there more you want to say about that or can say about that? 

Roberto: Well, my analysis and this is just me talking to folks, I'm not like a social science -- scientist who is going to do a deep stud oin this but I am a wordsmith so I came up with the notion of stewardship. I just look at volunteers and how crucial they are to a community based organization. How under valued they are and how we don't clock that information. We don't ask for that data. And that -- those people that want data, you know, you can get it. So the best volunteer I ever met was a volunteer at the Japanese American national museum our mutual dear friend past, Karen higa, we worked there, and we chatted to the clerk that sold me the ticket and then later on she gave us a million dollars. So there's a notion of, like, how your contribution is not necessarily -- necessarily the check. It was more important for this elderly woman to sell tickets at the same time as give a check. In some ways it is still volunteer work. And maybe a donor still sees that as volunteer work. And so in some ways maybe we're not measuring or understanding the broad frame of the volunteer. Board members are volunteers. And so let's just sort of -- I don't know. I guess I can go to arts management sc hool and figure it out. [laughter] 

Diedra: I've also worked with an organization over the years that was founded, I mean we're working with the founder. She is extremely Charismatic. She doesn't have any staff support. That is one of the things we've been trying to work with her around. 

Cedric: But she gets it done because she mobilizes her parent volunteers particularly and, I mean, they turn out when she says, let's do this, this, this, and be here then. They turn out and make sure that they're ready to do the work that the program is about. She also has found an alternative, what I call an alternative funding source. I.E., charging for some of the services that she offers a nominal fee but it's enough to generate some income for her and is supplemented by small grants. She hasn't gotten a big grant from anybody. She's never gotten a multi-year grant from anybody. But she has been able to sustain this work through the sheer will of her desire to see her vision continue to come to fruition. And from all of these folks who don't want to see the organization die because they want to see the powerful effects it has on young people. 

>> Thank you. 

>> I'm told we have no more time for questions. On behalf of the new California arts fund I want to say, thank you, Judy, thank you, Jeff, thank you, Cedric, thank you, Roberto, very much. This was amazing. [applause] 

>> Thank you, Diedra. 

>> Roberto, love your socks. [laughter] 

Diedra: And so now we're -- lunch is ready. In there I believe.