Chair Williams asks how Council and DCLA would share a cultural agenda

Yeah, you mentioned the council's role.

So do you have a sense of what a shared agenda could be between, you know, the council's role and the CLA?

Yes, of course.

I think that one of the advantages of thinking about it as a shared agenda is that the mandates of the different institutions and actors in the system allow us to dig deep into very specific dimensions.

For example, the councils and the way that council members come from a specific borough or neighborhood allows us to have a conversation at a neighborhood level like the SIEP team has recommended.

There's a lot more nuance in that work.

We would be talking about resourcing neighborhoods and communities rather than just acting through a patronage model, put it like that way, where you fund an artist or an organization, which is also important.

But our conversation and the repertoire for action would expand.

So DCLA's mandate and what they're doing with the programs they have, as you said, there's an executive prerogative, right?

With the council, it's of a different sort.

We can talk about Sukasa and all these different ways of articulation.

So it allows us to represent that complexity and operationalize our actions through coordination.

A lot of the criticisms that come up is how we work in silos.

This is a way of attending that problem.

And if you may, the same way that you build evaluation in any plan, you could build oversight in that plan, right?

Just all of us think together what our site would look like so nobody's surprised when questions are asked.

And I'll add one more thing.

It's interesting because also in the last years, the capacity of organizations to produce research has increased in a way filling the gaps of the research that doesn't exist.

So there's a lot of high specialization in each organization that brought together to the table to attend shared problems would be very beneficial.