- [Announcer] Production and Distribution of City Club forums on ideastream, are made possible by the generous support of; PNC, the Chautauqua Institution, and the United Black Fund of Greater Cleveland Incorporated.

(upbeat music) - Hello and welcome to the City Club of Cleveland, where we are devoted to conversations of consequence, that help democracy thrive.

I'm Dan Moulthrop chief executive here, also a proud member.

Today is September 18th, and you're with a virtual City Club forum.

Continuing our virtual City Club forums, live from the studios of 90.3 WCPN ideastream.

They are our public media partner, and we're very grateful for their partnership.

Clevelanders and City Club members alike, are probably familiar with the George Gund Foundation.

It was established in 1952.

And since then the foundation has given some $722 million in grants.

Making it one of the most significant philanthropic organizations in the state.

Full disclosure here, the Gund Foundation is a financial supporter of the City Club and also ideastream.

But that's not why we're talking about them, and with them today.

Here's why.

In June of this year, the foundation put out a very public statement.

It was titled, "What we believe."

And it came at a time when many organizations, were putting out statements, about their own commitments to end racism.

The Gund foundation statement, however, had been in the works for months.

The foundation called out three issues, as the explicit focus of their work.

Climate change and environmental degradation, entrenched in accelerating inequality, especially racial inequity and weakened democracy.

The statement was written under the leadership of Catherine Gund, the president of the board of trustees for the foundation.

Ms. Gund is the daughter of American philanthropist, Agnes Gund, and the granddaughter of George Gund the second, who founded the foundation.

And she became president of the foundation in November, 2019, succeeding her uncle Jeffrey Gund, who served in the position for 25 years.

She is an Emmy nominated producer, director, writer and activist.

And the founder and director of Aubin pictures.

Her films which have been featured on PBS, the Discovery channel, the Sundance channel, include a documentary about the death of Tamir Rice.

And on September 24th, next week, the Cleveland international film festivals CIFF streams, will present the Cleveland premier of Aggie.

The documentary that explores the nexus of art race and justice through the story of Catherine Gund's mother's life.

Ms. Gund is a graduate of Brown university, also serves on the board of art, the boards of Art for Justice, Art Matters and Baldwin for the arts.

She's co-founder of the Third Wave Foundation, which works to help young women and transgender youth.

And today we're going to talk with Catherine Gund, about the foundation statement, about how their work is challenging the traditional narrative of philanthropy, and probably also about that movie.

So as in every City Club forum, you can participate with your questions, text them to (330) 541-5794, that's (330) 541-5794.

You can also tweet them @thecityclub, and we will work them into the program.

Catherine Gund, welcome to the City Club of Cleveland.

- [Catherine Gund] It's so nice to be here.

Thank you for having me in the middle of COVID and I love Cleveland.

And even though I'm not there physically, I'm there in spirit.

It is my home.

- It is your ancestral home, and also the home of so much of your work, and so much of your impact.

It's really great to see you Catherine, thank you for joining us.

I'd really like to start with the statement, the "what we believe" statement, that the George Gund Foundation put out in June.

Why was it important to put that statement out?

- [Catherine Gund] We had been working on it for a long time and it came out at an interesting moment.

Because people were issuing statements, in response to the new visibility, where so many people had assumed that the manifestations of the problems in this country, were not lethal.

And in fact, they were and are, and more people are coming to terms with that.

So it came out at kind of a critical juncture, but the reason we had been working on it, was because to do the kind of work we really... That the times demand is to do work, that is more collaborative, that is in relationship among people.

And I think it was our effort to start or continue, that process, deepen that process by coming up, with a shared language.

And coming into a notion of what we believe, and being able to really solidify these three important areas, that would then transcend and interact with everything we did was really important to us.

And we had an ideal example in, say yes Cleveland because, and that's written into the statement, as you'll see on the website as the, as a perfect example of something, that does address each of those issues.

We don't have a one program area called democracy.

We want democracy to be throughout.

We don't have one program area called racial justice and equality.

That's something that touches every single thing we do.

Climate change of course, we do have an environmental focus on a program area, but climate change is something, that also has to appear in every other area.

And it was important for us to make that a clear gesture, and offering to the community, and to our current grantee partners, and potential future grantee partners.

To say, this is what we're thinking about what we do, does that resonate with you?

And because we need them more than they need us.

- That's an interesting way of putting it, that the Gund Foundation needs it's grantees, more than the grantees need the Gund Foundation.

Doesn't always feel like that on the grantee side, but why do you say, why do you put it that way?

- [Catherine Gund] I do believe that if we are, and it goes to King to so many people, have talked about the, philanthropy is something that only exists, because of economic inequality.

And if we actually are trying to dismantle the structure, and the systems of economic inequality, the drivers that create poverty and create racial injustice, we need to actually put philanthropy out of business as we've known it.

And that I would say is traditional philanthropy.

And I hope that the Gund Foundation is part of this work, that so many people are doing to really change that.

- Yeah, a friend of mine who works in philanthropy, I was talking to him earlier today.

And I called him specifically because he had said something, that totally reframed philanthropy for me.

Not as noblesse oblige or some sort of old world concept.

But he said that it's really re gifting taxpayer dollar.

- [Catherine Gund] That's right.

That's another reason that the grantees, are really our partners whether we own up to that or not.

A lot of people will say that, you know your money, once you have your money, it's yours, you can give it away.

You can give it away to who you want.

But it's actually tax deductions, tax system that has gone into that money.

It's not in fact, just ours.

We have not only made that off the labor of other people, but the whole tax structure, has allowed it to exist that way.

And I would say that, philanthropy to me, and you and I have talked about this, that to me, philanthropy really is a debt that is owed to society.

That it's not a char..

It gets treated like charity, like generosity.

And Darren Walker from the Ford Foundation has spoken at length about moving from generosity to justice.

That if we are functioning out of a place of generosity, charity, we're never gonna undo the systems, the root causes of the problems, that we say we're seeking to solve.

- We're talking with Catherine Gund today, here at your City Club, Friday forum.

You can join us with a question to (330) 541-5794, or you can tweet your question @thecityclub, and we will work it in.

Catherine, as you know is president of the board of trustees of the Gund Foundation.

Catherine, I wonder if you would talk about your introduction to the Gund Foundation.

Because I know that when you and I first talked, I made this assumption that you were sort of always familiar with philanthropy and you corrected me on that.

- [Catherine Gund] Well, philanthropy, I was definitely always familiar with.

And I will back up to say it was the Gund Foundation in specific that I was unaware of.

Which I frankly can't believe.

It seems like a magical mystical story.

But my mother is the only one of their six siblings, who had never served the board.

And although she is super philanthropic, so philanthropy wasn't a stranger to me.

My whole life I watched how she sort of embodied, and has grown so much in the kinds of philanthropy, and the way she conducts her philanthropy.

But I had been right out of college involved with the Australia National Lesbian Action Foundation and I was on their board.

And that was really my first experience in that kind of, it wasn't a giving circle, but it was a very multi-racial across class.

It was a very diverse group who was deciding how, and where to spend money, that had been given by many different people.

And then I served on the founding board of the Sister Fund, which Helen Hunt started, who also started Women Moving Millions, and the New York Women's Foundation, actually with my mother many decades ago.

And then I had started fledgling at the Tom philanthropy, called the Third Wave Foundation, whose focus was on young women between 18 and 35, who fall through even more cracks than women in general, if you look at the percentage of philanthropy dollars, that go to women.

It's very small and it was even smaller to this group, at such a pivotal moment in their lives.

And so I was doing all of that and someone in a Sister Fund meeting said, "Oh yeah, I was talking to the program director from the Gund foundation the other day."

And I was like, the what?

And it was so mortifying.

I was like 24 years old or 25 years old.

And I had literally never heard one word about it.

And so I immediately dedicated myself, to changing that and jumping forward many years, once I was on the board, instituted a family tour.

I think some people may be familiar with our sort of site visits that we do in the summers, and go around and make sure, that the board members have, get to go out to the locations of grantee partners and meet with grantee partners, see them at work, see what they're up to.

And we created it so that all family members could come.

And I brought all of my children, but all four of my children came to the board meetings at the Gund Foundation as babies, were running around watching Sesame street, in Cindy's office, you know.

They were all there from the beginning.

And I was the first third generation board member brought on and have since I think there are, I've got now five cousins, one sibling who are now on the board.

So it's a lot more of our generation, and it's an opportunity, to really expand our notion of family, and how we integrate into being the offspring, of the offspring of George Gund.

- Is your philosophy that you articulated earlier about philanthropy as paying a debt.

Is that widely shared, or did you have to make a case?

- [Catherine Gund] That's an interesting question.

I would say that we're certainly in a process, of a more shared language.

Making what we believe statement was integral to that.

And I think a big, big, first step.

There's a lot of changes on the horizon, just because of both our democracy and society, and then the city of Cleveland, and then the physical structures of the Gund Foundation.

So there's a lot that's coming in, and there's a lot of opportunity.

I think people are looking for transformation, not transaction.

Especially some of the more progressive thinkers around philanthropy, people who are understanding, that if we do want to make change, and allow everyone to participate with their full selves.

Everyone in society, treat everyone like you would want to be treated.

I'm not even a religious person.

And I can't believe that people claim to be religious, and then will go and steal children, babies, and separate them from their families at the border.

I mean, there's just some unthinkable things.

And I think the more people realize what is going on, the more dedicated they are, to trying to find a systemic solution.

So I would say that we do have the benefit of being at core, a family and our Cleveland trustee members, always comment on that.

And it's not about, not ruffling feathers or not disagreeing, although it may have been like that, 25 years ago when I joined.

I was very comforted by the fact, that people wanted everyone to get along, and it had gone for decades like that.

I do think now that there is a way, that forcing people to do the repair, to do the listening, to do the apologizing, to spend time understanding the roots of what created this foundation that, that has put us on the same page.

And I would say, we definitely want to move forward together.

- Can you say more, about the roots of what created the wealth?

- [Catherine Gund] Well I think it came up for me a lot.

When I joined about 25 years ago, there was a question, because I was the first third generation board member.

All the siblings in my family were born in Cleveland, by a fluke.

I was born in Australia, but we are from Cleveland.

The other cousins were never, even lived in Cleveland.

So I went to Malvern we lived in Cleveland for awhile, and although all of our parents had been born, and raised in Cleveland.

My family was the only one with any vestige of the actual living there left.

And so it did raise, I think, predictably a question about, do we keep it in Cleveland?

This is, you know, this family.

And do we then recognize that some of us are in the Bay area and some of us are in Massachusetts, and we're all over the place.

Do we split it up?

Do we move it as a whole?

So we had to entertain those.

And it was a really fruitful conversation, because I think it recommitted all of us, to the knowledge that the foundation, needs to stay in Cleveland.

It's never been raised again as an issue, as our grantees will be happy to know.

- [Dan] Everybody is suddenly on the edge of their seats.

- [Catherine Gund] Yeah.

But I think it was a good process, because people needed to understand that's where the money was extracted.

That's where the money was made.

That money belongs to Clevelanders.

That there's a real belief that Cleveland is a dynamic, incredible place.

Not just because it's a perennially purple state, but because it has knowledges and solutions, and geographic access, and a history that can be a model for all other places in the country.

And because we're large, but we're small by many measurements, especially these new tech philanthropists, who are giving away a billion dollars in a week.

- [Dan] Or the former wives of tech philanthropists.

- [Catherine Gund] Yes.

Thank you.

And we love her.

I'm not criticizing her.

I'm just saying it does make me feel like we're smaller potatoes.

But our smaller potatoes, are big potatoes in a local situation.

And so it's all the more reason to keep, the foundation in Cleveland.

- And just to sort of clarify, when you say wealth was extracted, that's sort of through industrial businesses, and financial businesses that founded the Gund Foundation, or the Gund family and your grandfather were involved in.

That is sort of explicitly made possible by the American form of capitalism.

- [Catherine Gund] That's right.

And by the tax structure, and I was saying to one of my colleagues here in the office this morning that some of these things are things that small children can figure out.

When you have them do the exercise where you have 10 chairs, and you have one person lay across nine, and then nine people try to get on one chair.

A child will tell you, everyone should get a chair.

Everyone has a body.

Everyone needs a chair, a place to sit.

One person does not need nine chairs.

It's very simple.

So I mean to me, the extraction isn't specific to my grandfather George Gund.

It's just saying that the structures are in place, that we have to actively acknowledge what's going on, and not blame people, or put the onus on individual families, and workers to say that it's their fault, that they don't have billions of dollars.

It's not, it's structured into our system.

And we have to acknowledge that, if we're going to ever change it.

- I would encourage people to check out the, what we believe statement.

It's an important piece of writing, not just if you're a grant seeker, but if you'd like to understand more about the sort of direction that philanthropy is taking.

Catherine Gund is our guest today.

She's the president of the board of trustees, of the George Gund Foundation.

And Catherine, do you find yourself in, you've mentioned other philanthropists and other people, professional philanthropists, people who work in the industry, Darren Walker of the Ford Foundation and others.

Are finding yourself, drawn into conversations with colleagues, at other family foundations, or peers at other family foundations, who are trying to figure out how to move from traditional family philanthropy?

Which we give some money to the charities that I really like or the charities on whose boards I sit, to what you are doing, which seems to me, to be practicing a form of a justice based philanthropy.

- [Catherine Gund] I am in constant conversation, with people who are trying to understand these challenges.

And I would say that I wasn't always...

But the founding about five years ago, during the occupy wall street movement of the Solidaire network has been very transformative for me.

Because it is a community of primarily wealthy activists and donors and people with more money than they need.

However, they define their wealth.

Who are really looking to address some of these core issues, and to figure out a way in community, with the leaders of the movement.

So with social justice movement leaders, as peers and as teachers and as coaches and as partners, and how do we make some of these changes?

So many of them are on family foundations.

And there's different ways that families are doing it.

There's gonna be a lot of things, that we'll be able to explore, in terms of ways to integrate more Cleveland leadership, even into our own board structure, into the structure of the organization.

So I think there are lots of models, and people who know about philanthropy, know these different, you know there's a spend down model.

There's been a really incredible response during COVID, and the uprisings.

I think that hopefully will continue afterwards, in a lot of areas in criminal justice reform, in tax and health.

But in philanthropy, one of them is that we signed on and responded with many foundations to a 10% payout.

And what we're required is this minimal 5% by the government.

Which is to say, we've gotten all the tax deduction we need and can get, and then the money can just sit there.

And the tax deduction is on the back of the taxpayers, and then they don't necessarily have access to the money.

So it's an imperfect system for sure, but we've always given, well not always, but recently we've given more than the 5% , closer to six, 7%.

But right now, a lot of us dedicated to giving 10% right now this year, because of the crises that are upon us.

We can't necessarily stay at 10%, unless we do wanna be a spend down, and for all the reasons I just stated, we don't want the foundation to disappear.

- I want to give you an opportunity as well, to talk about your mother and the documentary film, that Cleveland International Film Festival is streaming on their, is premiering or Cleveland premiering, on their streaming service next week on the 24th.

The film is just called Aggie.

Tell us more.

- [Catherine Gund] This is a film that is about her, but my purpose in making it was so much broader.

You know, I almost used our little love story as a platform, to introduce and engage people, with a variety of conversations around philanthropy, around women's leadership, around criminal justice reform, and certainly around the arts.

And I would say that, what I really wanted was to just put so much art in the film that people realize that it's a portal.

And it's the portal through which my mother sees the world.

And as Ava DuVernay says at the beginning of the film, and at the end of the film, I asked her what the relationship, the filmmaker, Ava DuVernay, who made the 13th, that inspired my mother to sell a Lichtenstein painting, and dedicate a hundred million dollars, towards ending mass incarceration.

And Ava, I said to Ava, what is the relationship between art and justice?

And she said, "They're the very same thing.

They're both about something that doesn't exist yet.

Seeing something that doesn't exist, knowing that it could and working towards making it so."

And to me that was so simple of an understanding, of what justice is.

The sad part is that it means we don't have justice yet, but we know that to be true.

What is justice?

We look at it and we work towards it.

It's the arc bending.

And that's what artists, that people have these blank canvases or blank pages, and they have to imagine what to put forward.

So I made the movie because Aggie started the Art for Justice Fund.

I would never have made a documentary about her.

Otherwise it's a very intimate, close insane thing to do.

It's been wonderful, but the Art for Justice Fund really allowed me, the opportunity to draw people's attention to this action, to this propaganda of the deed of what she did, she did something.

She didn't talk about it.

She just went and did something.

And I feel like the difference, Edgar Villanueva who wrote, "Decolonizing Philanthropy", talks about this, he says, "That money is not the master's tool.

It's the intention behind the money, that's creating the problems."

And for me, her sale of the Lichtenstein was so beautiful because there's a lot of collectors who give money.

There's a lot of philanthropists who collect art, but nobody before had said, my intention behind selling this piece of art, is to end mass incarceration to invest in imagination.

And so one day there was a painting.

The next day, there was a painting, it didn't get lost, and a hundred million dollars for ending mass incarceration.

It was a miracle, it was an alcohol chemical miracle to me.

- An alchemical miracle.

It was a big news moment, and came as a surprise to many in the art world, because so often the art world is seen as separate.

And this kind of this other ethereal world, in which people are trading extraordinary objects for vast sums of money, that generally stay in that other world.

- [Catherine Gund] That's true.

And I think that this is starting a different dialogue.

And partly because it wasn't just that moment that resonates or continues through the life of the project.

It's a five year spend-down, which is to say it's a hundred million dollars.

We give away $20 million a year, so that all the money goes into the field where it's needed.

We're not gonna create an endowment.

We don't want to be fighting, to end mass incarceration in 20 years.

We want it to be over.

We want the change to happen.

So the idea behind it is also to bring artists and advocates together so that they're solving the problems together, because we know that narrative change, is what is gonna change our society, not policy, policy's important, but it can't do it, without all of the culture change around it.

- How much of an influence was your mother on you, and your pursuits, your beliefs about philanthropy, the direction that you've pushed the foundation.

- [Catherine Gund] That's such a good question.

'Cause it totally depends on the day that you ask.

- [Dan] Are you and your mother getting along right now?

- [Catherine Gund] We are.

Which is probably one of the reasons, I'd say we're different.

So some days I say, Oh, we're so similar.

'Cause I'm looking at certain aspects, and other days we're completely different.

I mean she was born in the late thirties.

I mean, how could we not be completely different?

But you know, one thing I learned making the movie, that I really appreciate is, that she is so willing to grow and that she wasn't stagnant in this position, that she lived in when she became a parent.

From being a parent, they think you have all the answers, even though they'll challenge you, and they want you to have all the answers because it gives them more stability.

And I think with her, there was something, maybe it was in me or in her, but I did not think she had all the answers.

And I was very explicit about that.

And instead of telling me that I was wrong, she listened to me and she changed.

And I think that's what I try to pull out in the moments where I talk about the AIDS crisis, which we really shared going through that crisis together.

And how we responded was empathetically, and emotionally very similar.

What we actually did was different, from what our different roles could be, what our different journeys were.

But also then having a multiracial family, she was raised obviously in a white family, in a very segregated Northern suburb of Cleveland, Ohio.

And now she lives in New York city, which is if we could get out on the street, and see anybody is this super diverse, beautiful environment to be in.

And her, in her own family, she has black grandchildren.

And I think those things really, for someone who's so open and empathetic because of art, and because she knows there's other answers and other questions, she was really open to learning and she always, she keeps learning.

So I hope that's something I have in common with her, is the humility to know that I don't have the answers and the wisdom to know I don't have to pretend I do.

(laughs) Yeah.

- We're talking with Catherine Gund, she's president of the Gund Foundation, which was founded by her grandfather.

And she is apart from that though, apart from helping to change philanthropy, not changing philanthropy single handedly.

She is a filmmaker, has produced a documentary, and directed a documentary, many documentaries, but the most recent one is called Aggie.

It's about her mother.

We were just talking about that.

You can join our conversation at the City Club Friday forum with a text to (330) 541-5794.

Just send your question that way.

(330) 541-5794.

Or if you're on Twitter, tweet it @thecityclub, and we'll be delighted to work it into the program.

I wanna take a quick moment to thank your colleague, on the Gund Foundation board, Mark Joseph, whose idea this forum was.

So thanks to Mark Joseph, who teaches at Case Western Reserve University.

- [Catherine Gund] Yeah.

I'll get him back for that.

- Well I've also been trying to get him to come and speak at the City Club Friday forum.

He keeps putting me off for about two years now.

So getting to some questions from our community, we appreciate how the foundation's recent statement focuses on justice issues, in both civil and criminal context.

This is from our friends, at the legal aid society of greater Cleveland.

Can you comment on how this holistic view is important, if we want real reform to reduce poverty, and promote racial equity?

- [Catherine Gund] That's a very big question.

I think I'm just gonna to dive into that voting, because it's so much in our moment right now.

My work and my focus in the criminal justice reform movement has really taken me to take a broader, helped me make a broader analysis of how this, the functions of like voter suppression actually manifest.

And so one of those to me is when people see voter suppression as being on that day, that they've moved the voting booth, or they've told someone they needed identification, or something like that.

But if you step back and realize the culture of fear, and distrust that is forced upon us at this time, both in the, in the civic and criminal.

They're using the criminal, to create civic problems, is kind of my answer to that.

So that in Tennessee, he said very explicitly during the uprisings, he said he changed, he passed a law and changed it, so that all the protesters who were camping out, in front of the city hall were then convicted, or charged with felonies.

And if you're a felon in Tennessee, you can't vote.

And so he basically, and he said that, he said, if I make what they're doing a felony, they won't be able to vote.

That's voter suppression.

It's not that day having to stand in the heat.

I mean, it's also that day, having to stand in the heat for three hours.

But I think that when we look at how that functions as the whole there's been a huge focus of ours in Florida, with Florida rights restoration.

The people said they wanted, formerly incarcerated people, who'd been convicted of felons to be allowed to vote.

That was 1.4 million people.

And you know that the right wing, wasn't going to stand for that.

So they created all these hoops and loopholes and problems, and they said that everyone had to pay off all their fines, and fees before they could vote, which was basically a poll tax, which is supposed to be gone by now.

And I think that we have to look at this now, in North Carolina.

It just past that you don't have to pay your fines and fees to be able to vote.

So this is what we were saying in the, in the green room beforehand is, the sort of good news, bad news days, like it goes up and it goes down.

I know we're moving forward, but there's so many slaps in the face as we go.

I don't know if that answers, I'm not sure.

Do you have an idea of, what they were going for in the question?

- Well, I know that legal aid society, has spent a lot of time promoting and advocating for a new law, that establishes the right to counsel in housing court, for instance.

Where as you know, I think because you've probably read Matthew Desmond's, "Evicted" as have many in our community.

Thanks to one community reads.

That if you don't have representation in housing court, and the landlord is required to bring representation, you're outmatched.

The court is not a level playing field.

And so that is one way.

And if evictions, and housing policy is discriminating against communities of color and communities of poverty, which are often kind of overlapping communities, then that is one area in which, civil law matters as much or in different ways, but equally significantly as criminal law, and criminal justice reform.

- [Catherine Gund] Yeah.

I think there are a lot of issues of that overlap.

I'm thrilled with our newest program director, Alicia Washington, who really is focusing on our vibrant growth and democracy, in inclusive economy work at the foundation.

And I know that she's focused on housing and workforce, and transportation and entrepreneurship, all kinds of ways that democracy, will manifest in the civic realm.

But I would say that there are just so many examples.

That's not even a question what you were saying about housing that's the example.

I would say another example is the US post office.

And people think, that's just about mailing ballots, and maybe they're smart enough to realize, that veterans count on all of their prescriptions, coming through the mail.

But there's many reasons why people who are incarcerated, need the mail service.

And it's not just to stay importantly connected to their families and their children, and to the outside, but they have to file their own motions in many cases, like you're saying in the housing court, they have to file their own motions, and they have to get them in at certain times.

And if they can't count on the mail, there's all kinds of examples of that.

Plus of course, people who are charged with felonies and are awaiting trial, legally are allowed to vote, and they'd have to vote by mail.

And if the mail is not coming.

So there's huge problems, all of these things are so interconnected.

- Another question for you, writers such as (indistinct) and Edgar Villanueva, both of whom I should mention spoke at the City Club, have often critique philanthropy as undemocratic, at its core.

How do you respond to that critique?

And then here's a sort of additional thought, that the Gund Foundation may be working with partners in the community, but is still often directive more than it is responsive.

- [ Catherine Gund] Absolutely.

I would totally agree with that.

And that is not to criticize myself, my fellow board members are certainly not the staff.

I think we are looking to change, but that is the fundamental problem of philanthropy.

There was a time in the sixties, where a huge amount influx of money, and philanthropy during the civil rights movement, went to SNAC and to the Congress for racial equity for core, went to the NAACP.

Millions, millions of dollars.

And I think we're seeing that again now, which isn't just to say, that getting the money out the door is the answer, but I think learning how to do that in a useful way, we take criticism, I take criticism really seriously.

And I know Dave does, all of the program directors do.

I think we live in such a bubble as philanthropists, no matter what.

I mean, we're so protected.

Nobody's ever telling us the truth.

Everyone's eternally grateful when they look at us.

The power imbalance is a huge challenge.

And we're looking for ways to address that.

Are we going to be able to do it?

I don't know that it's even possible.

I think it's an imperfect system, and we need to sort of engage with the issues, and just be really honest about what we can achieve, and what we can't.

But I want the person who wrote that question, I'm glad they wrote it.

And to say we wouldn't be doing anything right.

If we weren't getting criticism, we're going to take that to heart.

We need more criticism.

Then I sort of stopped thinking through it.

(indistinct) - It's an interesting thought experiment.

And perhaps more than just an experiment to, to ask if you were to reinvent your processes, for grant giving and your policies for spending, what would the Gund foundation be doing?

How would it... You have these sort of structures and you have a board, and the board is mostly family with some community members.

And you've expanded the number of community members who sit on the board, but there's still just a few individual voices, that are meant to be representative but really are very subjective, right?

And no matter how... And if you were to blow it up and start over, what would that look like?

I realize I'm totally putting you on the spot.

- [Catherine Gund] You are.

We're working on it is all I can say.

There are a lot of opportunities that are coming up.

I think it's no secret that Sherwin Williams, and the tower are undergoing changes.

We're gonna be moving at some point.

- [Dan] But staying in Cleveland.

- [Catherine Gund] But staying in Cleveland, yes thank you.

But not staying necessarily in downtown Cleveland, hopefully in a neighborhood, in a much expanded, accessible place, that's really shared by the community, and that we access as other people access that as well.

I think there's without just addressing, sort of little tiny band aids, like we do our entertaining, how to bring more of a Cleveland presence onto the board, how to engage with the grantee partner voices, at a higher, more powerful level.

I mean, once you get into the nuts and bolts of it, there's a million tiny questions, why do you get to do it and not the other grantees?

Like, why should you be the one on the board?

I know you want to be, but I'm just saying, I'm just saying that- - If I was on the board, you wouldn't be funding the Cleveland, the City Club so like that would be problematic.

- [Catherine Gund] Well, or not.

I mean, in Solidaire we really try to look at these things, like, what does a different kind of solidarity, not charity model look like?

Like a truly horizontal model that, has bumps in the road and has variations, but that is guided, driven by the leaders in the field.

By the people who are closest to the problems, by the people who have the most use, the most to benefit from the solutions.

Who know the solutions, because they're living in the problems.

They're not just making it up, but I think there's so many ways to just kind of turn your mind around.

And I love both the examples that you gave.

And I think those books are really important.

And one thing it makes me think, for example, is like when Amazon was gonna move to Queens and you know, I live in New York city, I'm in New York city right now, downtown.

And the idea of them moving to Queens, they were gonna get a $3 billion tax break, $3 billion.

And then (indistinct) going okay, I'm going to fix up the transportation system in the city.

And it's so... You gotta get out of their head that you have the solutions.

Here he is saying, I know better than the people.

And what he should've done is said, I'm going to pay my 3 billion in taxes.

So the city finally has enough money, to create a good transportation system, to fix up the subways and the public transportation.

So in the buses, so the people can get around safely and efficiently.

Instead of saying, I'm gonna send my kids to private school, and start a charter school, and do this and that because your school system's terrible, even though I just took $3 billion out of your coffers.

Instead of saying, all these people elected our mayor, you let him have the tax money that you owe him.

And we will figure out how to create a better school system.

If we had the kind of money, that people are trying to get out of paying, I mean the New Jersey, I don't know if I should bring it up, but I think the New Jersey tax initiative that's looks like it's going through right now is amazing.

I can't believe it's taken so long to say, that we will tax the 3% of the richest people in this state.

And it will give so much money and services to the other 97% whose taxes will all go down.

It's a no brainer.

So yes, there are challenges.

But if you what?

Go ahead.

- No, I was just gonna remind our listeners, that if you're just joining us, you're hearing from Catherine Gund, president of the board of directors of the Gund Foundation.

And she's also a filmmaker, an activist, and does a whole lot of other things as well.

I'm Dan Moulthrop here with the City Club, Friday forum.

If you have a question, text it to, (330)541-5794, or tweet it @thecityclub, and we'll work it into the program.

Cat Gund, the foundation has often been willing to fund policy work when other funders have not.

Can you talk a little bit about why that's the case, and how this evolved in your family's history?

- [Catherine Gund] I would love to, because that has all happened during the time, that I've been on the board.

And there's a lot of sort of fables and stories, about how if you teach a person to fish, they will not starve.

And if you give them a fish they're hungry the next day.

Or the babies coming down the river, I don't know if you've heard that one.

You can stand at the river and pull the babies out of the river so they don't drown, or you can go to the top of the river, and stop whatever's making them all end up being thrown in the river.

- [Dan] That's just a really weird metaphor.

- [Catherine Gund] It's a weird one I mean, there's no many, maybe that wasn't the one I should have chosen.

But the idea behind it is that, direct service is going to help one person one day, that's a charity model.

If you say you're hungry here's a sandwich.

That's very different than saying, okay, we need to make sure, that there are structures in place, that people don't go hungry, that people aren't living on the streets, that people have shelter, that there's affordable housing.

We have to change the system, that's put that person there in the first place, and not blame them for that situation, by giving them some charity, but actually own our role in it, by having created a system that creates the problem.

Marcia Egbert, our brilliant program director at Gund, can totally parse a budget like no one else can.

And she can tell you how much to the dollar we leverage, by changing a policy that then, creates some part of the state budget, that gets more money to the thing.

Than we could have, if we put our a hundred thousand dollars in there, instead we put a hundred thousand dollars to something, that will bring him a billion dollars.

- So you're going up river.

Why do you think- - [Catherine Gund] Yeah, we're running up to the top, stopping the weird person from throwing babies in the river.

- Why do you think more philanthropic organizations, don't do that?

- [Catherine Gund] That's a great question.

And if I didn't just say that it was kindergartners, who could see what you should be doing, and why don't grownups figure that out.

It's about comfort.

I think it's about comfort, and you have to be comfortable in the messiness of it all.

And the first question that you read, was someone saying this doesn't always work.

The power isn't shared.

I don't feel included.

You're not doing enough.

You're not achieving the goals, that you are saying you want to.

And I would rather have a goal that I haven't achieved yet, than to set my bar really low.

And I think what has traditionally happened, is people pay for museums.

Like my family pay for parks, which if they're in John's (indistinct), program area could be very, very important to communities , that need access to fresh air and room to play.

But they pay for things that ultimately benefit them.

They give money.

Who was it you said, Harvard and these big universities, are basically like hospitals, that only allow well people in.

It's like they give money to a place, where they went to school, not to where the poor kids are going to school.

Like, why aren't they, if they really are doing what they, if they're walking the walk, then they would be giving money, to make other people's schools, as good as the ones that they went to.

So I don't know the answer, but I think it has a lot to do with comfort.

And that's why I'm really optimistic about this moment right now.

Because I do feel excited, even though it's so traumatic and painful, and horrible for so many people, that there is this sense, that somebody might hear or see, or do something about what's going on.

And there's such a focus on the local.

And there's like a new consciousness.

It's like there's a way you that hopefully people will see, they don't need to hoard their money.

That if we're taking care of everyone, they would be taken care of too.

- Another question for you, how can philanthropy support black leaders, who work within national organizations on local issues?

Oftentimes we are seen as separate, but this is actually our community as well.

- [Catherine Gund] Do you mean, do you think that it's our community, meaning Cleveland, is the community for a national leader, or that- - [Dan] It's not my question.

So you can take it however you want.

- [Catherine Gund] I mean, I do think we have to support black leadership, across the board, local, national.

I think that a lot of the national black leadership, has been very focused on how do we relate on statewide, regionally, locally?

How do we make sure that there is some synergy, and some ability for support, while not focusing on a single leader?

It's been a beautiful part of the Black Lives Matter Movement since the very beginning.

And all three of the women who are the founders would say, we are a leader full movement.

And people have constantly tried to pick either even one of them or all three of them, and say they are the leaders of this movement.

And in all of their geniusness, the three of them have all been able to say, I know this, this is what I'm doing.

And there are so many people I'm working with, and they're also doing it.

And I think that's going to be what may be, can inspire some philanthropists, more philanthropists, 'cause some are really stepping up right now, to support and really resource, the movement for black lives.

To not say, Oh, you've got, you know, $2 million, that's a lot good.

And then go give a place like the ACLU, or something that does great stuff, but has lots and lots of money and visibility.

Instead to say, we actually believe that organizations with black leadership can be those big organizations, and to put the money into them.

And I should give a shout out, and want to give a shout out to McKenzie Scott, who used to be married to Jeff Bezos, and just gave away $1.6 billion to 116 organizations Which you do the math, some of them are going to be able to function for a while without focusing on fundraising all the time.

I mean that's the other side of it, right?

It's that, as philanthropists, we don't want to create undue reporting and evaluations, and deadlines.

And we should be able to just talk to people, and hear what they're up to, and see what they're up to and listen to them on their Zooms and in their meetings, and read their report, read their writings, and be able to make a judgment that way.

To share resources with them.

But I think that, there really is a great sense of people stepping up.

Susan Sandler just gave $200 million last week I think, to also environmental, but racial justice organizations.

There's incredible visioning happening right now in our field.

And I hope that those people who are not stepping up, and not speaking are really listening closely and will start making their moves.

- Here's another question for you Cat Gund.

I appreciate the example of how private enterprise, can be helpful to the future of public transportation in New York city.

I think there's some irony there.

What role can philanthropy play, in engaging the business community in Cleveland and Cuyahoga County to better fund public transit, in our region, especially given how much return on the investment public transit is proven to bring?

- [Catherine Gund] Absolutely.

That is brilliant.

And I hope Alicia is on the call, and just wrote that one down.

I know, in fact, she's probably already all over that question.

She really is somebody who understands this much.

- [Dan] She may have asked the question.

That would be funny because she's the one with the answers to that.

I mean in sort of in true form, I defer to my team, to the program directors, and the president of the foundation, who are based in Cleveland, who had been doing this work on these levels in the policy, in the budget with the organizations, and the infrastructure and the business community.

I think that that's the kind of question, that Alicia is really focused on.

Is how do we create transportation, so that people aren't isolated.

One of my big efforts some years ago, started being on food justice, and food deserts, and places where people couldn't walk to get food.

Where they had to either have a car, or get public transportation, which also may have been a walkaway.

It touches into every part.

It's a great question.

And it's a great project.

It's a good challenge.

And I think we're up for it.

I don't have all the answers, but we are on that one.

Yes.

- Well, it's one of those, it's an interesting thing because by law, the Gund Foundation cannot give money directly, to the rapid transit authority, the greater Cleveland transit authority, right?

So then you have to do policy work, you have to fund the policy work.

- [Catherine Gund] Or a movement building, or movement building work.

We can support the Ohio organizing collaborative, who has a whole part or group that's working on the transit, which I used to call the rabbit when I was little.

Living in Cleveland, I was like, "The rabbits coming."

But the rapid transit system, and they can then structure, what does the community need?

And if they're supported enough and resourced enough, they can appear at the town halls.

They can put pressure on the city.

They can work with the business community.

And they're the ones who can help design, a system that works for them.

So I would always end with supporting a movement.

- In addition to increasing the percentage of funds for grant awards, Catherine Gund, will there be any changes in the types of agencies, that you will be funding, or that the foundation will be funding?

- [Catherine Gund] I mean, I'm sure there's a lot of changes that we'll be making, but I think I wouldn't be able to answer, like what the outcomes will be.

'Cause I'm changing.

I'm trying to change how we make the decisions, who makes the decisions, when the decisions are made.

So I would say yes, I would say that people would recognize, that there'll be more multi-year funding, not just like this two years.

There's some organizations, we've been funding for 20 and 30 years.

Like why make that person write a grant application?

If we really believe that they're good, and that they're doing the work they're saying, and that they can manage to make some change, that we can't do from our seats, that's the work, that's your work.

And so I would say we should be giving five-year grants.

Say, great, here's your money for five years, go do what you're doing.

We don't take as much evaluation and analysis of our work as we do expect them to do.

So we'll give people money and say a year later, how'd it go?

It's like, I'm here asking you guys to bear with me for many years.

I've been on the board for a while.

Granted not in the same leadership position.

And I've tried to do what I can do, and who knows what I can do given that I like to work so collaboratively.

And we all are gonna move along.

And I'm asking you guys to give us a few years, to keep working on this, and keep figuring that out more and more.

And in that I would say, I'd like to give our grantee partners, more time to figure out their work.

- I think I just heard about 12,000 people, pick up their pens and start writing, "Ask Gund for five-year grants."

- [Catherine Gund] For five years.

I know Dave's going to kill me afterwards.

I literally, I called him last week.

I was like, is there anything I really can't say?

He was like, "Oh God, where should I start?"

- As we're getting to the end of the hour with you Catherine Gund, I wanted to come back to these commitments to racial equity, to climate change and to democracy.

I think we've spent a fair bit of time, talking about climate change explicitly, and racial equity explicitly.

But I wanted to circle back a little bit to democracy, as an explicit giving area or an explicit area, where you're focusing and threading through everything that you're doing.

We only have a couple of minutes left here, and an entire Nation, entire like 200 year republic to save.

So go.

- [Catherine Gund] Yeah.

(laughs) I think we're definitely at a crossroads, or a reckoning or an awakening, or however you want to look at it.

I think that we have to follow.

Edgar Villanueva has a list of steps to decolonize, to decolonize ourselves, our spaces, our philanthropy in particular.

And I think that repair is a big part of that.

It's the grieving, it's the listening, but it's really about saying, how do I relate to you in a way that makes my investments meaningful, and makes us have a longterm sustainability, to the good that we can have.

And one of my dear friends during my most massive breakdown over my birthday a couple of weeks ago, promised me that we were about to embark, on a very progressive decade, and that those of us who have worked so hard, to try to make that so can rest easy in a couple of years, that we're on the right path.

So Let's do it together.

- We'll find out soon.

Catherine Gund is president of the board of directors at the Gund Foundation.

She's a filmmaker as well.

Her newest film "Aggie" is about her mother, and you can watch it at the Cleveland International Film Festival, streaming service next week.

Catherine Gund, thank you so much for being our guests at the City Club today.

- [Catherine Gund] Thank you so much Dan.

It's been fun.

- It's been really fun.

And thank you to joining us for a Friday forum as well.

Fittingly, our forum today is the annual Sally Greaves endowed forum, in honor of women of achievement.

Sally Greaves, is chair of the board of the Cleveland Foundation.

Thanks also to members and sponsors and donors, and many others who support our mission, to create conversations of consequence, that help democracy thrive.

You can find out more and join them, @cityclub.org/thankyou.

On Friday, September 25th, we will talk with Dr. Margaret O'Mara.

She's author and professor, at the University of Washington, about how decisions being made by big tech companies, may be indicators of what our lives will look like, after the COVID-19 pandemic.

There will be an after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Couple of quick notes too.

Later this month, we're launching a project called, "Five days for democracy."

It's a collaboration, with the nine library systems in Cuyahoga County.

Inviting you to spend just a little bit of time, each day for five days, thinking about what democracy means to you.

We'll hope you'll join us for that.

You can check it out @cityclub.org/fivedays.

Also last night, we launched a new video series called, "Democracy Unchained."

The first episode featured conversations with David Brooks of the New York times, former acting attorney general, Sally Yates, Michael Eric Dyson, Van Jones, and many others.

Find out more @democracyunchained.io.

That's democracyunchained.io.

I'm Dan Moulthrop, stay strong, stay healthy, stay close in your hearts, if you can't be close in person.

And thank you for wearing a mask, our forum is adjourned.

(bell chimes) - [Announcer] For information on upcoming speakers, or for podcasts of the City Club, go to cityclub.org (upbeat music) - [Announcer] Production and distribution of City Club forums, on ideastream, are made possible by the generous support of PNC, the Chautauqua Institution, and the United Black Fund of Greater Cleveland Incorporated.