DECEMBER 2007: OREGON LEADERSHIP SUMMIT
Back to the future
Can an 18-year-old policy join forces with the Oregon
Business Plan to develop a better mission for the state?
By Christina Williams
Rita Conrad of the Oregon Progress Board: “What
we need is implementation.”
PHOTO BY FRANK MILLER
|
|
On Dec. 3, hundreds of business leaders will assemble at the
Oregon Convention Center for the Oregon Business Plan’s
sixth annual leadership summit.
They will talk about progress and the economy. And the
conversation will sound familiar. Because as much progress as
Oregon Business Plan has made in its efforts to rescue a
lagging economy, there are aspects of the state’s
problems that haven’t been touched by its efforts.
But starting this year, there’s an opportunity for bigger
impact.
Consider this: What if Oregon had a plan for more than just the
economy? What if its leaders could track, manage and improve
its environment and the living standards of its citizens along
with its economic progress? What if this plan had real
benchmarks against which lawmakers could measure the outcomes
of their policy, against which businesses could track the
performance of the economy, against which anyone could see how
well we’re doing and what still needs improvement?
Surprise: Oregon has that plan. And this year the two plans
will have a chance to meet each other and, if the state is
really serious about sustainability, start working
together.
TIMELINE:
Oregon Shines
1989:
Neil Goldschmidt launches Oregon Shines as a 20-year
policy plan. The Oregon Legislature creates the
Oregon Progress Board to measure progress.
1996-97:
Gov. John Kitzhaber oversees a top-to-bottom review
of Oregon Shines, resulting in Oregon Shines 2.
2002:
Oregon Shines 2 is due for an update, but budget cuts
have drastically trimmed the staff at the Progress
Board, which is being called on to create performance
measurement systems for government divisions.
2007:
The Oregon Progress Board releases its 2007 benchmark
report in April and unveils a new website
(benchmarks.oregon.gov) with report-generating
capabilities. The division’s focus turns to
Oregon Shines 3.
2008:
The Progress Board plans to formally launch the
Oregon Shines 3 process with a renewed focus on the
interdependent systems and a plan for forward
movement and citizen involvement.
2010:
Oregon Shines 3 will be presented as a 20-year plan
to the Oregon Legislature.
|
|
FLASHBACK: MAY 1989. Gov. Neil Goldschmidt unveils a set of
policies under the lofty title Oregon Shines: An Economic Strategy for
the Pacific Century. Its mission was an overhaul of the
state’s economy, one that would involve social and
environmental factors as contributors to a healthy
situation.
“We are clear about what we want: well-paying, productive
jobs for Oregonians, providing an economic base that enriches
all aspects of Oregon life,” wrote Goldschmidt.
It’s a rallying cry that sounds like the ones still heard
today.
To execute the Oregon Shines plan, the state Legislature formed
the Oregon Progress Board. The board was charged with
establishing and tracking a set of benchmarks that would
measure its progress toward the goal of better: better jobs,
better quality of life.
Over the years, Oregon Shines and its benchmarks gained an air
of celebrity in the wonkish ranks of public policy schools.
It’s a case study. Harvard University’s John F.
Kennedy School of Government recognized the policy with an
award in 1994.
One could argue that Oregon Shines is better known outside the
state than inside, where its ’70s-sounding name is all
but forgotten.
That’s because, other than an enthusiastic overhaul in
1997 under Gov. John Kitzhaber, Oregon Shines has been pushed
aside as the state’s lawmakers have dealt with more
urgent matters, such as billion-dollar budget shortfalls.
(Remember the first half of this decade?)
In 2002, the Oregon Business Plan was established with the
stated goal of working together to build a stronger, more
competitive state economy. Each year, the Business Plan
publishes its Competitiveness Index, a booklet of benchmarks
that puts the state’s economic performance in
perspective. Is any of this starting to sound familiar?
It’s no coincidence. The first executive director of the
Oregon Progress Board was Duncan Wyse, who now heads up the
Oregon Business Council and is champion of the Oregon Business
Plan. “We did the original Oregon Business Plan with the
Progress Board,” Wyse says. “They’re highly
integrated.”
Last year at its leadership summit, the Oregon Business Plan
leaders embraced sustainability as its organizing principle, as
in: Oregon should stake its leadership claim in sustainability.
There was much talk about woody biomass, wave energy and why
green is good for business.
This year, the summit’s theme is “moving
forward,” and on the agenda is the launch of initiatives
“aimed at leveraging Oregon’s reputation as a
‘green’ leader to build sustainable environmental,
economic and social vitality.”
FLASH FORWARD: 2008. There’s an opportunity this
year for the Oregon Business Plan to join forces with the
Oregon Progress Board and get focused on Oregon Shines 3 (name
change optional).
Many agree that sustainability is good for Oregon and its
businesses. But is Oregon ready to evolve beyond green
practices and talk about an all-encompassing approach to
sustainability? Sustainability, holistically defined, includes
a healthy economy, a thriving population and a rescued environment in a
rising-tide-lifts-all-boats continuum.
And, frankly, the Oregon that’s attracting all the young
creatives to move here and look for scarce jobs, the Oregon
that’s home to Silicon Forest and acres of actual forests
and 36 counties each with a unique set of assets, skills and
economic realities, needs a rising tide.
“A good plan is not enough,” says Rita Conrad,
executive director of the Oregon Progress Board, who is
spending the majority of her waking hours developing a plan for
the next round of updates to Oregon Shines. “What we need
is implementation.”
“There’s a buzz going on in Portland right now.
It’s becoming known for all of its work on
sustainability,” Conrad says. “But there are plenty
of things Portland is weak on: homelessness, hunger, education.
Based on our own grading system, when we compare the data,
we’re not making our targets.”
Like the original version of Oregon Shines, the Oregon Business
Plan has a sharp focus on jobs, and both Conrad and Wyse see it
as a part of whatever the new larger policy will be.
“There are a series of issues we’re not going to
take on,” Wyse says. “We’re one voice. This
is the business perspective. There’s a chance for Oregon
Shines 3 to bring a lot more folks in the room.”
Wyse admits that the Oregon Business Plan’s focus on
sustainability, the holistic version, has been overshadowed by
the state’s advantage in green business.
Gail Achterman, director of the Institute for Natural Resources
at Oregon State University, agrees. “If we’re
serious about sustainability, about the triple bottom line,
then we need to have a framework, a plan. We won’t
address the links without looking at the system.”
Achterman, who was Goldschmidt’s natural resources
policy adviser when Oregon Shines was first introduced, spoke
to the Oregon Progress Board’s directors in October and
confessed to them that after reading over the first and second
Oregon Shines, she was depressed.
“We haven’t made progress on some pretty key
goals,” she said. “The report in 1989 was very
silo-ed. That’s not the way the world works. Nobody has a
forestry problem; it’s more complex than that. The
historic silo approach isn’t working. Water and land-use
planning: They’re completely disassociated now. It makes
no sense.”
Is Oregon Shines a powerful enough framework to forge the links
necessary to solve the state’s cross-silo problems and
make true sustainability possible? As Achterman puts it:
“It’s the only framework we’ve
got.”
James Sager, Gov. Ted Kulongoski’s policy adviser for
workforce and education, says the governor, who has so far been
uninvolved in planning for Oregon Shines 3, plans to use his
time at the Oregon Business Plan summit to talk up the
plan.
“We will do what is necessary to promote the
effort,” Sager says. “He sees this as being very
important.”
But count Russell Dondero, adjunct professor at Portland State
University and august expert on Oregon politics, among the
skeptics. “I’m not convinced it’s a benchmark
that legislators or the governor really pore over,”
Dondero says. “I think it’s primarily something
that policy wonks pay attention to in the academic
community.”
“Given the data in front of us, it’s expensive to
live in Oregon. There are haves and have-nots; 14% of the state
lives below the poverty line,” Dondero says.
“[Oregon Shines] will only be useful if the Legislature
and the governor are willing to look at the data without
preconceptions. In this state we’re so polarized.
There’s no capacity for rational discussion.”
Conrad gets the challenge. “A good plan is not
enough” has become her mantra. She’s working on a
business plan for Oregon Shines 3 and talking to potential
funding partners including the Meyer Memorial Trust, Oregon
Community Foundation and the Ford Family Foundation.
She’s worried about launching the formal process for
updating the state’s strategic plan too quickly. She
wants it to bigger, and better, than previous versions of the
initiative.
Perched at the edge of the next century, there may still be
time for Oregon to get serious about a broader definition of
sustainability — one for the haves and the have-nots
— but it’s not going to be easy. It will require
consensus on a common set of goals and a clear, widely
broadcasted strategy for getting there.
“We need to include all voices, all business
organizations,” Conrad says. “How do you include
everyone? That’s an important question, and we’re
working on that.”
Have an opinion? E-mail feedback@oregonbusiness.com
