Metro Denver Urban Coalition: A Vehicle to a Better Equality America during the 1960s provided a landscape of vast social movements and a growing recognition of the lack of societal health for many underprivileged citizens residing in the states; economic opportunity, education, desegregation, among many other social aspects were being placed under the microscope of scrutiny by entire communities across the country. Groups of all sorts came into existence and waged battles against the hegemonic power structure in order to create a more equal land for all whom had previously been left out and had been ignored or abused for decades. Among the strongest fights that American society found itself battling were in the realms of housing and educational opportunities in the urban communities that had quickly, over the previous decades, become a center for slums and an impoverished citizenry whose voices for justice were growing louder and louder over the decade. Across the country major city centers themselves had endured a drastic change in demographics during previous decades', which sparked race and poverty to become the catalyst for unequal opportunity and treatment in the aspect of education in the population centers of major cities. Civil Rights victories had brought the country ities more freedom in desegregation and other legal amendments that allowed min American society. John Rury, who studies race relations in Chicago, paints a picture of the effect that the suburban sprawl had on metropolitan centers, referring to white abandonment, “As these people moved to suburbia the countries central cities became " No statistics directly related to Denver in the 60s found in housing or education relating to topicolder, poorer, and darker in complexion.” The urban center had lost many the privileged faces that had led the economy and powered the social engine that, in the middle class mindset, had kept the cities vibrant, youthful, and moving forward. Following the flow of the masses to suburbia, major cities were, for all intents and purposes, left behind by middle class whites and looked down upon by many who had once called the city centers home; abandoned and left with Jess resources and political voice then ever before.? It took new organizations and special interests groups to spark change in many of these cities, groups like the Metro Denver Urban Coalition, which stood up for the poor and minorities and provided the voice which would carry a message for change in city centers like Denver. Educational inequality was battleground number one during the 1960s for many who felt that they and their children were being given an unfair shake from the very start of life within a larger society. As Bemard Watson framed it in his study of inner city schools, “In the broadest sense, schools are both the gatekeepers and gate openers of our credentialed society. They are the only means by which many citizens, especially poor and minority citizens, can prepare for jobs, increase their income, and move upward on the social ladder into full participation.“ With proper schooling highly lacking among poor and minority neighborhoods due to lack of funds and middle class, white apathy it ‘made for an uphill battle for citizens among these communities to compete with the more John L. Rury, “Race, Space, and the Politics of Chicago's Public Schools: Benjamin Willis and the ‘Tragedy of Urban Education” History of Education Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 2 (Summer 1999) pp. 121 * John L.. Rury, Race, “Space, and the Politics of Chicago's Publie Schools: Benjamin Willis and the ‘Tragedy of Urban Education.” History of Education Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 2 (Summer 1999) pp. 122 * Beard Watson, “Accountability in Inner City Schools Through Community Involvement.” The High ‘School Journal Vol. 60 No. 4 (1977) pp. 158privileged class for future employment, higher education programs, or most any aspect of life that first stems from a decent start at becoming sufficiently educated. Schooling, higher education and public schools, in the inner cities were in full decline hand in hand with the economic decline throughout the inner cities themselves. ‘The poor class which remained in the cities saw their resources leave with the privileged class and education was the main vietim left in the suburban sprawls wake. Rury explains that “[]f the big cities have poor schools, itis at least partly a reflection of their equally poor constituencies and an impoverished social em mnment.” Because major cities saw their citizens become more and more poor, fewer resources like money, books, and teachers were available to be allocated to the educational system with in the cities. Rury continues, “Urban education was judged problematic in contrast to schooling elsewhere, places demarcated by space and time.”* Major cities across the country were suffering from this drop off in resources, which in tum was making it more difficult for the cities’ youth to gain the basic tool in order to gain the necessary recourses for upward mobility with in society, The availability of adequate housing was another topic in which the inner cities populations were finding themselves disadvantaged in society. The housing market during the 50s and 60s had left to the suburbs and left the cities with very little of the market, which created over crowding of neighborhoods and substandard dwellings for the poor who had remained in the centers. A persons race and financial means made for the biggest gap in the housing realm between middle class whites and poor minorities, as Robert Mitchell and Richard Smith note that socicty “[RJecognizes higher levels of * John L, Rury, “Race, Space, and the Politics of Chicago's Public Schools: Benjamin Willis and the ‘Tragedy of Urban Education.” History of Education Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 2 (Summer 1999) pp. 117,118overcrowding, greater density, more dilapidation, lower levels of home ownership, higher expenditures for comparable quality housing, less satisfactory housing environments, and fewer locational choices for the black population of metropolitan areas than for whites.”* This gap in the 50s and 60s left minorities to struggle in their daily lives, as living in inadequate dwellings with few real opportunities to get out of them left them downtrodden, with little chance for mobility. Poor and minority communities residing in the cities were left out of any realistic hope of social mobility. The racial disparity in the aspect of housing was great by all measurable accounts. Blacks lived in far worse conditions than their white counterparts, as Howard Ehrlich, writing on social conflict during the 60s, proves that “Negro-white differences in housing quality are striking, one out of every six Negro dwellings is substandard as compared with one out of every 32 white dwellings.” Not only were black Americans living in worse housing units but they had far fewer means at moving out of them and into more sufficient living quarters. Ehrlich continues, “The 1960 Census of Housing showed that over four million urban housing units were classified as sub-standard, while one million more units were so deteriorated that they required constant repair. In more personal terms, this probably involves around 35 million people, at least half of whom are fl children.”’ This massive amount of sub-par housing across the country and their residents spoke for a resounding number of people around the country that simply ° Robert E. Mitehell, Richard A. Smith, “Race and Housing: A Review and Comments on the Content and Effects of Federal Policy.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 441 (Jan. 1979) pp. 169 Howard J. Ehrlich, “Social Conflict in America: The 1960"s”, The Sociological Quarterly Vol.12 No. 3 (1971) pp. 298weren’t getting a fair chance in daily life, and this lack of opportunity would have to be confronted.* Founding ‘These poor and minority communities, in large, were unable to sustain any firm change for the betterment of their daily lives. The people who had been left behind by the housing boom in suburbia needed louder voices, voices that had the ability to ‘empathize and echo the struggles that were taking place in the once great city centers. For the city of Denver this voice took form in the Metro-Denver Urban Coalition (MDUC) which had sprung up in the late 1960’s as a branch of the national Urban Coalition that was working for communal improvements across the nation. The Metro- Denver Urban Coalition would become the voice of the poor and minority groups that politicians and policy had ignored during the previous decades. The national Urban Coalition was an organization founded as an outlet for the poor and minority constituency in the cities to be heard and accounted for in policy making, business, education, and many more topics that were starting to corrode the urban centers of major cities around the country.’ Its implementation into Denver by the creation of a local branch would become a pivotal step in equalizing the social playing field of Metro-Denver. In mid 1967 Thomas Currigan, Denver's mayor, made a push to get a local branch, of the Urban Coalition formed in Denver in order to address social issues that could no longer be hidden or ignored by the masses. After nearly a year of planning and politicking, Currigan received his first victory in bringing the efforts and work of the Urban Coalition to the city of Denver. In a personal letter to John Gardner, secretary of * ata was national statistics from across America, No housing statistics found for Denver specifically. ° Publie Pamphlet, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition. May 11, 1969, McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17the national Coalition, on September 19, 1968, Currigan responded to the news he had been waiting for: “It is with great pleasure that I leamed you have agreed to come to Denver on October 11" to help us launch the Denver Urban Coalition. We have been in the planning stage since last November. I have every confidence that your appearance here will enable us to formally structure the Coalition and launch an on-going program.” For the people of Denver this proved to be a giant moment in the war on inequality and injustice that had taken a strangle hold on the urban region. Without the national chapter, Denver would have certainly had a much tougher job in forming a coalition of its own and confronting the issues that were needed in order to work towards a stronger Denver. ‘Thomas Curtigan left office after 1968; however, his replacement was fortunately completely in agreement with the desire to obtain the Urban Coalition for the city. William MeNichols, elected to replace Corrigan as mayor, showed the same enthusiasm in the early stages of the coalition and made it one of his priorities from the moment he walked into the mayor's office. The vital decision made by McNichols involved his insistence on personally seeing the MDUC through every aspect in its early days, much like it was his own work which he needed to nurture through infancy. MeNichols attended meetings regarding the MDUC and had weekly discussions with the National Urban Coalition 10 make sure that there would be no hold up in the creation of the L Denver chapter." MeNichols was in close contact with those involved in planning and forming the MDUC; demanding reports and updates on meetings and procedures that ° personal Letter from tom Corrigan to John Gardner, September 19, 1968, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 1 Correspondence from William MeNichols to Parties to be Involved in the Metro-Denver Coalition, January 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17were worked through, In a letter back to McNichols, written by Bill Miller of the mayor's office, it was reported on January 30, 1969 that “This organization really got underway Tuesday night at a meeting held at the University of Colorado, Denver center. I have great hopes now for the Metro Denver Coalition and the role it can play it the city”? The coalition was now officially underway and all thanks to two mayors, one at the end of his term and one just starting his legacy, who dedicated their political power and time to the birth of a coalition that was long overdue to the people living in metro Denver. Without the steadfast dedication of Currigan and MeNichols it is perceivable that metro Denver residents could have had to wait much longer to claim their voice in order to stand up and direct change to the city they called home. ‘The coalition was formed, but without a strong foundation and plan it would have failed before ever getting an opportunity to create the positive impact that it was seeking to accomplish. A charter had to be produced and a clear plan thoroughly looked over, criticized, and refigured in order create a foundation which could impact the citizens of Denver; '? all of them, despite race, creed, class, or any other aspect that goes into the diverse city. A charter was ratified, with close scrutiny by the national Urban Coalition, in February of 1969 with a clear-cut system of management and involvement." It was decided that every possible voice of Denver shall be heard at weekly board meeting held at the University of Colorado, Denver campus and these voices would be headed by new Chairman, J.F. Baxter. Chairman Baxter sat through the first meeting working through kinks and ultimately it was decided by those in attendance that the coalition meetings ® Inter-Office Correspondence from Bill Miller to William McNichols, January 30, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 © No Information on what Denver citizens actually took part in this process. ™ public Pamphlet, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition, May 11, 1969, McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17‘would be comprised of citizens from the black, Hispanic, youth, church, government, business, educational, and legal communities throughout the metro area.'® This scenario provided the best possible solution for the entire city, as it allowed diverse views and concepts from all walks of the city in order to create a true base revolved around team work. Oras the coalition worded it to the general public, the coalition was a place “[Wy]here the militant can meet with the conservative. ..and satisfy the proper objectives of the conservative and remove social injustices identified by the militant.”"* This was crucial to for the coalition to recognize, for had a single voice been left out, grievances could revolve around the city in a never ending loop. In order for any substantial change to firmly take hold it had to involve every demographic that could be affected ‘The next step in the evolution of the MDUC arrived from. the need to actually put their feet on the ground and take stances in the community that could get individual citizens involved and invested in the change for which they fought. The MDUC first had to reach out and let the community know that the Coalition was around and had the capability to listen and use the sheer power of the people in order to accomplish what was needed for the improvement of the citizens the MDUC worked for. The MDUC released a public pamphlet in May,"” written by the panel and Chairman Baxter, which was spread through Denver and informed the citizenry of the MDUC emergence in the city. The pamphlet made clear to the public that the MDUC was there for the people and that power resided in solely in them, Community relations were described as the “essential aspect” of the MDUC and its ability to create a greater and more fair city for all who ° Board of Governors Meeting for the Metro-Denver Urban Coalition, January 28, 1969, Transcribed by Tony Lovato. MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 "© publie Pamphlet, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition. May 11, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public, Library, Box 37 FF. 17 No information of methods of distributionreside within it.'* This community outreach was essential for the MDUC to function; without the people in the community taking part and getting involved, the MDUC would have had no function. ‘The MDUC began to take on their social battles by implementing task forces which were speci lized towards specific topics and issues in order to create a multi- headed system that could take on numerous concems at the same time. As the pamphlet distributed to the public pinpointed, the MDUC believed that “The most immediate threat to Denver is...the deterioration of our metropolitan urban center. This is a threat potentially more destructive than war, depression, or political revolutions. We have been so busy with the quantity of our growth that we have not given attention to the quality of our growth.”!? ‘The task forces that were implemented were made to focus on fixing the “quality of growth” problem issue by issue in a specialized manner in which the panel members of the MDUC would partake in a task force of their expertise and work in tandem with the citizenry affected, By working “in and with existing organizations,” the MDUC set the stage for success but, “[T]o involve people from every socio-economic level in the community in the identification and solution of urban problems,” was the key aspect in creating task forces that could truly earn the trust of the citizens and begin ive direction.”” constructive work that would push Denver in a po: ‘These task forces were put into place on January 28, 1969 during the third board meeting in which a “Motion was made and seconded to create the first task forces of the "* Public Pamphlet, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition. May 11, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 °° Public Pamphlet, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition. May 11, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 ® Public Pamphlet, Metzo-Denver Urban Coalition. May 11, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17MDUC, which included education and housing.”*' These task forces would be charged with tackling issues such as education, housing, public attitudes, justice and law, and ‘employment. It was now time to put boots on the ground and confront the societal ills that were plaguing the Denver community and which represented the largest step since the founding of the MDUC. ‘The MDUC were now empowered to do the most important tasks needed in the city, give the lower economic classes and minorities a solid platform and voice to stand on, The MDUC pamphlet stated that “Our distinction is that we bring together leadership elements that do not normally collaborate....In fact, we bring together segments of American life that have often been utterly out of reach with one another. =a By collaborating with all communities inside the city the MDUC could create long- standing influence which could satisfy the public, instead of waging warfare against the privileged class who could have snapped back at any moment, the MDUC included them in the process in an attempt to make more peaceful transitions. These task forces made their most important stands in two arenas, education and housing. Education ‘As soon as the task force on education was formed, the MDUC had to work as, quickly as possible to get their stances out in the open and begin the process to help where ever they possibly could. Their first true stance came out in opposition of the problems facing public education from elementary through high school in the metro area. 2" Board of Governors Meeting for the Meiro-Denver Urban Coalition, January 28, 1969, Transcribed by ‘Tony Lovato. MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 = Proposed Task Forces and Illustration Areas for Action, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition, McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF, 17 public Pamphlet, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition. May 11, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17‘The MDUC immediately released memo’s outlining the vast problems that they felt the youth were facing in the Denver Public School system, The task force on education wrote to Bill Miller, “It is the position of the Metro-Denver Urban Coalition that the Denver School Board must undertake a massive attack on the problem of unequal ‘education opportunity, not only for the sake of the disadvantaged child, but also for the benefit of all other children who must leam to function in a multi-racial society.”** This was the key point made to the school board and its importance can not be over looked. Denver had over the previous decades become more diverse culturally and racially, changes in education would not only benefit those in poor schools, rather it would benefit all children who were in need of experience in a melting pot culture. Once again, the MDUC made a point that by attacking these problems would benefit all children not just the previously disadvantaged. If every child was fully implemented in the change sought by the coalition then they would be better off to face a future life as part of a multi-racial, multi-class society. The grievances were few but major in nature, The task force attacked the education problem by bringing awareness to those who could join the fight and play a part. The Denver Public Schools were, in the minds of MDUC members, “Guilty of following when you should have been leading. Development of the individual, his community and his nation demand that education, at every level and every discipline be strengthened and its effectiveness enhanced,””* Simply put, Denver schools were not concerned with the plight of the poor and minorities of its city. Education in Denver was * Memo from Metro-Denver Urban Coalition to Bill Miller, March 10, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF, 17 ® Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. | No. 1 pp. 11, October 10, 1969,MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF, 17blindly forging ahead, willingly leaving certain demographies behind. The MDUC believed that the education system was ignoring the poor while they put all the effort into middle class and suburban schools. As statisties showed in the MDUC pamphlet, “In some predominately black and Hispano schools, as many as 75 percent of the students drop out before high school graduation. Even some of the graduating seniors rank, by national norms, at only the ninth grade education level.””* Education was not being tailored in a manner that could reach the minority students; they weren’t being included in the belief that children had the right to education. This statistic was horrifying to the MDUC, as without the proper educational base, minorities had virtually no chance for upward mobility in the American social structure. In order to remedy this disparity between the haves and the have not’, the MDUC came up with a full list of grievances that they felt the Denver school district must confront. First and foremost was the MDUC belief that education must be fully tailored to its constituents in order to create an interest in education and a fair standard that all children must learn by. First, “The introduction of Hispano and African culture as accredited high school courses” must be implemented.”” This was important to the MDUC for a few reasons; it could create an interest in the children of blacks and Hispanics to continue in their education and fee! fully involved in the process as a people, but more importantly, the MDUC believed that these courses would ereate an “urban empathy” which would connect students of all backgrounds in understanding of their * Public Pamphlet, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition. May 11, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 2 Memo from Metro-Denver Urban Coalition to Bill Miller, March 10, 1969, McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF, 17communal past.”* If the white children in the Denver area were taught the history of the Hispanic and black communities then they could realize that they have been linked together the whole time, rather than worlds apart, with no similarities. To teach all kids that Denver was, in fact, a shared community comprising great histories from all people. Just as importantly for the Hispanic community was the ability of education to cross language barriers that blocked many children from being educated. The MDUC recommended, “The provision of bi-lingual education for students whose learning would be advanced by the use of a second language for instruction,” which would be a big step all its own but the MDUC continued to push further by noting that bi-lingual education would “benefit all” and create a more “cohesive” society by teaching second languages to native English speakers, further bridging the gap and creating empathy amongst all Denver children. Spanish school books were proposed, along with faculty who could specialize in reaching children who had previously been left to their own devices due toa language barrier.” The MDUC was searching for a communal sense of compassion for all citizens involved; it would have been far too easy for the MDUC to demand bi-lingual education while ignoring any voice of opposition. Instead, the MDUC gave priority to highlighting that this step would not only benefit Hispanics, who would gain the basic education that they had been lacking, but it would benefit all Denverites, mn and adult education in the ‘The MDUC also set their sights on higher edu metro Denver region. Their first stance in this realm was by backing the creation of the Auraria campus. The Auraria site was a top priority for the MDUC for many reasons, * Memo from Metro-Denver Urban Coalition to Bill Miller, March 10, 1959, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF, 17 ® Memo from Metro-Denver Urban Coalition to Bill Miller, March 10, 1969, McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF, 17outlined in a resolution given to participants in the Auraria debate: “WHEREAS a study of potential sights for an educational center in the Denver Metropolitan area has been completed and indicates the Auraria site as the most feasible and....[T]he Auraria site will best meet the needs for an urban educational center located close to the core city area.” The MDUC felt the location was perfect for the city to create a true center for education and they continued in its resolution to point to its backing, “-[T]he Auraria site has received the endorsement of many official groups including being designated as an ‘urban renewal project and having over 12 million dollars of federal funds reserved for the use in the project.”"” Not only was the geographic location perfect but the money was there from the federal government to move forward, which benefited the MDUC and its goal two fold: first it would give the city an educational center which had been lacked and it also gave the MDUC a natural spring board to confront colleges in general regarding admission and recruitment of minorities. Colleges and universities in the metro Denver region were now in range of serutiny from the MDUC. ‘The coalition began immediately to form statements and publicize exactly what would be expected in the future from higher education institutions. ‘The MDUC began by recommending, “Respond to the increased demand for higher ‘education by the minority groups and the poor by adjusting admission standards, providing special instructional assistance, avoiding use of admissions tests containing artificial and socially biased standards, and by providing additional financial aids and grants to poor students while inereasing the flow of nonwhite students into graduate study 2 4 Resolution, Metro-Denver Urban Coalition. Circa June 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Publie Library, Box 37 FF. 18.and professional schools," This was a powerful stance from the MDUC, one the MDUC felt carried immense importance to minority and poor citizens because it laid the gauntlet down for colleges to perform the tasks expected of them; provide education fairly and equally to all who qualify under fully equal standards, despite race or class. By pushing higher educational facilities to open their doors, social mobility could become truly with in reach, far more than it had been and the MDUC put their money where their mouth was, “Course offerings would permit students to improve and expand their educational background for their present job promotions or new job opportunities. MDUC would assist in recruitment of students and helping in the task of securing jobs for students.”>* By their willingness to recruit and work side by side with the colleges, MDUC really chose to set the pace for change and directly involve itself into implementation of their recommendations. Adult education opportunities were encouraged by the MDUC in its stance on higher education. “Basic adult education programs must be expanded and redesigned to eliminate adult illiteracy... Iiteracy that denies some citizens of the Metro-Denver area the opportunities for full citizen participation and job advancement.”** Education was seen as a never-ending human process, as people never really stop leaming. ‘The MDUC recognized this and made a point to take on the battle for previous generations who had been left behind and, for obvious reasons, couldn’t reengage in high school or below. ‘The MDUC solution, a “weekend college” held on the campus of Metro State, comprised Memo from Metro-Denver Urban Coalition o Bill Miller, March 10, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF, 17 > Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. | No. 1. pp.6 October 10, 1969,MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 » Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. | No. 1. pp. 7 October 10, 1969,McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17of classes offered on Friday aftemoons and Saturdays, These weekend classes would run the gamut; offering literacy courses, occupational education catered to adults looking for promotion or new job opportunities, and basic GED equivalency classes.** This move showed compassion on the part of the MDUC, by integrating education with the older generations meant that the MDUC wasn’t too late for them. ‘They still could use the coalition’s achievements to their advantage. ‘And achieve the MDUC did. By 1973 the MDUC had reported many suecesses in the educational field, Much work remained to be done as the coalition was only four ‘years old, but much had been accomplished to bridge the educational gap in metro- Denver schools. In the fifth annual newsletter, the MDUC reported that many schools had begun the transition to full bi-lingual education and a “few select schools” had already completed the goal. Graduation rates among minorities were “gradually improving” and many adults were “receiving or had completed” high school equivalency programs or literacy classes. Even when space was limited and “older students are being taught by volunteers in non-traditional settings,”> the MDUC had made a mark on the city as a very powerful organization that was a force to be reckoned with. Much work in the field of education still had to be done and new problems had certainly arisen, but over the first few years the MDUC had made quite the impact on the city of Denver. With the MDUC firmly behind the impoverished, it had become obvious that life in the classroom ‘was improving for many children and adults. Housing % Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. 1 No. 1. pp. 6 October 10, 1969,MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 ® Metro Denver Urban Coalition: Action Newsletter. Vol. 5 No.2 pp. 6 (November 9, 1973) MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 18The MDUC housing task force was one of the busiest in the organization; they had many different issues to confront that went beyond simple reorganizing of the housing market in Denver. “In 1968” an MDUC newsletter noted that Denver had “9,000 unemployed and under employed found in the target areas of the city.” Many minority families were too poor to move out of their inadequate housing and into reliable dwellings which were needed to raise a family in a more adequate manner.** Many of the houses occupied by the lower class in urban Denver were “falling apart” and in many cases “didn’t even contain full plumbing systems like that in the suburbs.”"” The MDUC had its hands full to even create a solution for the housing conflicts seen in urban spaces. Many of these housing units couldn’t simply be fixed because of complete lack of funding, but also because four times more blacks were renters than their white “Tt had become counterparts, they simply couldn’t just upgrade their current homes.” clear to the task force that the best solution was to focus on construction of new properties and obtaining new land in order to create new structures for those who badly needed them. They decided that effect was most likely to be felt only if new units could be built, easing the tensions of the community by creating new housing units and allowing as many poor minorities as possible to escape the slums.” This was an enormously great decision for the MDUC to make because it meant that they didn’t have to go through land lords who had greater concern for profit above all else, fixing and * Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. | No. 1. pp.7 October 10, 1969,McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 ” Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. 1 No. 1 pp. 6. October 10, 1969,MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FE. 17 * Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 11. October 10, 1969,MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 ® Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. | No. | pp.10. October 10, 1969, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17upgrading units was too costly and the MDUC had no sway with the landlords of metro Denver. The housing task force immediately got to work on formulating plans and ideas that could produce results as quickly as possible to relieve the pressure on the slums of the city. They began “studying plans to build 100 three-bedroom houses for low and moderate income families. Shannon and Maxwell Saul, a Denver architect, have constructed a model of a four-plex: four houses that have separate entrances but share utility connections and walls to reduce costs.""” This was yet another significant move on the part of the MDUC for having the foresight to realize that by planning new units before land was secured and working with contractors to secure at least a cost analysis could put pressure on land holders and investors to back construction of units that could ease the pressure of the urban center. The next reasonable step for the task force was to look into the question of “where” new units could be constructed. ‘The coalition dove into this aspect by “compiling a list of all land in the metro area that would be suitable and available for low-income housing plans, The committee hopes to be able to buy such land and hold it for any group that wants to develop low and moderate income housing.”"' By buying up vacant land and holding it the MDUC ensured that at some point their vision of better housing units would eventually come to fruition. They eventually settled on three sites and began the process of buying up all that they could, the only question left was once land was purchased and built up how was the coalition going secure future plans to Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. 1 No. | pp.10. October 10, 1969,.MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 pp. 10 *Y Metro Denver Urban Coalition Action Newsletter, Vol. 1 No. | pp.10. October 10, 1969,McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 pp. 10continue to further alleviate pressures on urban neighborhoods? Something deeper had to be worked out for future MDUC housing projects to succeed. ‘The MDUC quickly realized that fact and immediately figured out a solution, one that became quite possibly their most imaginative effort in the infancy of the coalition, They proceeded to work toward the “[s]et up a state wide housing authority that would make loans to developers of low-income housing, assist local governments in carrying out housing programs, and advise the Governor and State Legislature." This was huge in terms of the MDUC and their ability to continue moving forward after initial housing complexes had been built. The MDUC immediately began to place pressure on politicians and contractors in an attempt to convince them that securing land and developing low income housing was in their best interest. In a letter from the MDUC in February 1970 from the MDUC to Mayor MeNichols sets a tone for the type of pressure they were willing to place on anyone who could help, as the letter urged MeNichols to “put aside all possible funds to secure as much land as necessary for the construction of housing units.” By applying pressure on the community's elected leaders, the MDUC ultimately made the leaders accountable the decisions which affected those citizens the MDUC was out to help. MeNichols and others responded promptly and whole heartedly. By the mid 1970s the MDUC had secured land and swayed politicians enough to have built 325 units of low income housing within the metro Denver and was already in the planning stages for another 100. The MDUC had also succeeded in creating a housing authority that could work with the community and its elected leaders in order to secure “Metro Denver Urban Coalition Aetion Newsletter, Vol. 1 No. | pp.10. October 10, 1969,MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 17 pp. 11 © Letter rom MDUC Task Force on Housing to William MeNichols' Office, February 1970, MeNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 18further improvements down the road.’ The importance of these successful housing projects was beyond measure; even though the work was not nearly enough to completely alleviate all the pressures in urban spaces around the city, for 325 families the difference was life changing, There were also set backs for the MDUC; they had failed to secure at least three plots of space outside the city which had been part of a construction effort as contractors and investors had decided to build middle class homes just outside of the Denver area rather than what in the contractors and investors view was “just moving poverty elsewhere." Though disappointed the MDUC continued to search for usable land and work with legislators to create better spaces for those who desperately needed it. Conclusion What started out as a request from exiting Mayor Thomas Currigan to the capitol Washington D.C., where the National Urban Coalition was, in an attempt get a local Urban Coalition, and full support for implementation by entering Mayor William MeNichols, had blossomed into an organization that was focused on improving Denver ‘as much as possible. The MDUC formed as quickly as it possibly could have and it immediately set out for the streets of urban Denver in an effort to communicate and work with the citizens of the city to create a place where everyone could be heard as equals. ‘The coalition viewed positive change as a bottom up process. The MDUC felt that what was good for the poor and minorities of Denver was good for everyone in Denver. By bringing in Denverites from numerous walks of life and various expertise the MDUC attempted to created an atmosphere of collaboration rather than one of constant attacks. * Metro Denver Urban Coalition: Action Newsletter, Vol. 5 No. 2 (November 9, 1973) McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 18 © Metro Denver Urban Coalition: Action Newsletter, Vol. S No.2 (November 9, 1973) McNichols Papers, Denver Public Library, Box 37 FF. 18The status quo had not worked for many and it took individuals from every comer to make the scenario better. The coalition had become a process of communications and orderly confrontations, a vehicle for orderly change, and a mechanism for endi " fragmentation among the variety of social agencies. ‘The MDUC took on education and housing conflicts with a belief that a system of team work made for efficient and constant change for an improved Denver. The coalition organized communities and soaked up every voice that wanted to have a say. The end result was an educational system that began to shape lessons and guidelines that fit everyone; Hispanic children were given classes in their native language which in tum helped them build a foundation conducive enough to allow them full entry into American society. Children in the black community watched as their culture and history made its, ‘way into the classroom and textbooks. Adults of all races and backgrounds were granted literacy courses and GED opportunities that granted them a chance to close the gap between themselves and the middle class. All the while many of the cities poorest people were given the chance to escape life in the slums and acquire decent living quarters inside their city Change is not an easy item to gain and many fight it, but the MDUC was unique in its assault on the disparity the city had seen for decades. They became a true coalition by definition, a community group based on bringing together vastly different social classes, views, and backgrounds in an attempt to make their lives better, and in turn make Denver a better and more fair place to live. ‘The MDUC was not out to create equality by knocking the privileged class down the social ladder, which almost certainly would have ended in tension amongst social classes, instead it focused on a vision of equality basedon bringing the lowest people up the latter and giving them a viable presence in the decision-making process and the future of their city. By working for equality through cooperation the MDUC had begun to create a city where everybody could make a legitimate attempt at living out the American dream. History shows that full equality has never quite been reached, but for the city of Denver, it was getting better thanks in large to the Metro-Denver Urban Coalition.