Issues

Graham Richard Is Bringing Business And Government Together To Encourage Clean Energy

There’s enormous potential in clean energy. Not only will it finally wean us off of harmful fossil fuels, but it will create an entire new industry with lots of new jobs.

But in order to make this vision of the future a reality, businesses and government need to work together. That’s where Graham Richard comes in.

The former mayor of Ft. Wayne, Indiana, Richard is now chief executive of Advanced Energy Economy, a San Francisco-based advocacy firm that is working to bring about a “prosperous economy based on secure, clean, affordable energy.” Richard works with companies such as Apple and Facebook that want to purchase more clean energy. He also works with federal and local governments to put policies in place that encourage the growth of the clean-energy sector.

“I’m more optimistic today than I have ever been,” Richard told CALInnovates Chief Evangelist Kish Rajan during an interview for the podcast “A Step Ahead.” “Because of innovative forces, the job-generating and economic impacts are becoming more effectively understood.”

Richard understands that in order to bring about a truly robust renewable economy, we need more than clever entrepreneurs coming up with great ideas like Nest and Tesla. We need the government to make fundamental changes in the way utilities are built and regulated. Instead of siloed regulations that look at things like the energy grid and renewables as different beasts, we need system-wide regulation that can bring lots of different players to the same table.

“Innovation in environmental technology is creating a $200 billion market,” says Richard. “That could climb to a $1 trillion market by 2030 and create new jobs all across the country.” If everyone comes together to make it happen.

Listen to the full interview below:

Like what you hear? Subscribe to A Step Ahead on iTunes.

A Step Ahead: Graham Richard

Hi, everyone. Kish Rajan, Chief Evangelist at CALinnovates, and welcome you to this, the latest edition of A Step Ahead, the CALinnovates podcast. This time we’re joined by Graham Richard, who is the CEO of AEE, Advanced Energy Economy. They are a nonprofit that’s been around working with businesses across the energy landscape and the technology landscape, and as you’ll hear in our conversation, doing tremendous work all across the country helping to catalyze this new change towards advanced energy, and promoting all the economic possibilities associated with that.

He’s an interesting guy with a great background and a great story to tell about how much progress we’re making and how much more progress there is to make, so I hope you’ll enjoy the conversation I’ve had.

Graham Richard, thanks so much for joining us today. We appreciate it.

Graham Richard: Kish, great to be here.

It’s good to have you here on A Step Ahead, our new CALinnovates podcast, so thanks for being part of it. We’re here at your offices in San Francisco, at Advanced Energy Economy. For our listeners, just give us a quick orientation to tell us what AEE is all about.

We’re a relatively new business association with a national footprint, and we have a vision, Kish, of a prosperous world that runs on secure, clean, affordable energy. We now are active in 27 states, very active here in California, and we have over 100 national companies, wonderful companies, the names of which you know from your work.

Innovators like Apple, and Microsoft, and Intel, and Salesforce, and Facebook, and General Electric and Schneider Electric and Sun Power… a long list. Wind, solar, storage, systems integrators, and now, companies that want to buy advanced energy, they want to buy clean energy. And we’re helping face this wonderful new opportunity of creating jobs in the advanced energy, the clean energy sector, by encouraging policy that will make the growth of these new technologies become more present in our lives.

Right.

More real. And we think that that’s a prosperity agenda. So we’re a business association representing many of the companies that I’ve mentioned, and others, and every state is a different challenge, because every state has a different energy mix. My home state of Indiana, we were just talking about, right?

Yeah, I want to get into all of those issues that you’ve talked about. What you do, and policy, and I love what you said about this being a path to prosperity now going forward, I want to get into that. But very quickly, you’re from Fort Wayne, Indiana and now here you are in downtown San Francisco. How did that happen?

Well, it’s one of those wonderful opportunities. I had the chance to be an energy investor and serve as a state senator in Indiana, and Mayor of my city of Fort Wayne for eight years, and through mutual friends I was introduced to some funders and founders. Tom Steyer, Hemant Taneja, individuals that have a strong track record in investments and they were looking to support a business-based voice across the country and so, I’ve been on the board of an organization, The Clean Economy Network, which was merged into the Advanced Energy Economy and then I was selected to help build the organization. So, what we do is to make sure that the technologies and all the innovation around these wonderful new technologies is able to be embraced by policies that open up the market for these new technologies. And, as you know, energy is a highly regulated market-

Sure.

and its regulated state by state. So, we really have to work at the federal level, at the state level and the city level to open up the markets to encourage the adoption of technologies that even four or five years ago didn’t exist. Remember that company Nest? Who thought about having a thermostat that could ultimately do security, it could help you with… so, the technology has now created a demand for opening these markets.

There really is this tremendous confluence as we speak of amazing new technologies, inventions that creating brand new technologies that are taking place, but at the exact same time, there is clearly greater political awareness and demand for changing policies, to change behavior that would change the way that we create and consume energy for environmental preservation purposes and certainly here in California we’ve been very much at the forefront of that. You know, landmark pieces of legislation and other policies that it seems are quite at the forefront of driving a national and global movement in this regard.

And, is that policy that opened up the market years and years ago for clean wind, solar, and now batteries and storage and so, we want to see policies open these markets. The good news, Kish, is that this is now a very cost competitive opportunity. We were in Texas recently where we have our Texas Advanced Energy Business Alliance and one of the largest industries in Texas includes DOW Chemical, which has a plant. And, DOW Chemical announced purchasing 200 mega watts of wind and they did that on the basis of the economics.

Apple, one of our member companies, buying over $820 million worth of clean solar power from solar here in California and its the 20 year economic value of that. That is the driver, not just the fact that it’s great for the environment. That’s important and we want that, we want to be able to deal with that but it’s also because it makes economic sense. That’s the innovation that’s happening in the market place.

That’s what .. and it seems to me that that’s so critical because that has been on the political side, and the arguments… one of the great criticisms has been and continues to be amongst some that these technologies—solar, wind, geothermal, go down the line—that they actually aren’t viable unto themselves, they aren’t economic and that engaging or purchasing those types of services or products really is a philanthropic exercise or it’s an exercise in at least public interest first and not purely business decisions. But, you’re saying that that’s…we’re seeing that change in the marketplace?

The innovation is coming in a number of ways. Improvement in overall systems cost in wind and solar is now making those, particularly the large scale, large city, a cost competitive purchase. So, you see a company like Warren Buffet’s MidAmerica’s power in Iowa throughout the upper Midwest, who are planning to have 100% clean energy by 2028. They just made the largest purchase of wind power in the history of the country and they’ve indicated that they’re going to keep their rates flat until about the end of 2020, 2027, 2028. So, this is cost effective and cost competitive.

In this last year, if you look at new installations in the electric power sector capacity, these innovations in clean energy, advanced energy have been so great that over 90% of all new installations have been what we would call advanced energy, clean energy. There’s another that’s happening. So, lets give some companies some roots here.

This is CALnnovates. You’ve got Sun Power, one of our very active members. You’ve got a company called STEM, which is a battery manufacturer, based here in California but then you have EnerNOC, which has a home base up in Boston. They’ve formed a partnership and what are they doing? The innovation is to take the software from EnerNOC, take the panels that are manufactured by Sun Power and put them into a system that is supported by storage to be able to deliver to a customer, perhaps a commercial or a industrial customer.

And, they say we would like to have more of our on site power, we would like to do more energy efficiency but we would like to have all of that integrated in a way that’s very different when you just used to have… envision in your mind a plug you plugged into a socket and the electricity will come to your device, but now all of a sudden you got to have more like the internet, a system that’s two way. So, it’s not just a plug in electrical socket with an extension cord. And, the innovation around the technology driven by the public policy to open those markets is creating a market that we estimate today to be a $200 billion market. We think that market can go to a trillion dollar market by 2030 and have job creation opportunity all across the country.

What are the keys to that you think, to continue to unlock that market? What’s it going to take to get to that next level of growth that you are suggesting?

Continued innovation by the great companies we are talking about. Continued innovation in public policy. We have to rethink how the electricity system is governed and operated and what is the business model for return on investment for electric utilities, so our association is involved in that across the country. I think continued innovation in finance and what I would call a systems way of regulating versus a silos way of regulating.

Tell me more about that.

For example, if you are an individual who buys a company and you have some use for natural gas, lets say you also use water, lets say you also use electricity. Right now, we’ve got systems and if you add to that broadband and the smart of the smart grid, the smart of the smart city, the smart of the smart transportation is wireless and fiber optic broadband. We need more of it just like we need more cloud computing, more storage capacity so it’s thinking how about you put all those pieces together.

This is a secret of the US economy. Obviously, it’s happening all over the world but one of the things we do well here is we figure out how to put pieces together. Just go back for a minute, I use this analogy a lot but I have a different frame line—recent studies and talk about when President Kennedy said we’re going to go to the moon –

Right.

and, people said we don’t even have the technology to do that. How are we going to do that? We don’t have… so, part of the solar industry got its start by talking about the solar cells on spacecraft.

Interesting.

It was the integration of all kinds of scientific advancement that drove ultimately a very successful outcome. Today, hey, we have private space companies. Tesla, Elon Musk-

Space X. Right.

and, Bezos has got his company. And again, what are they doing? They’re integrating systems including energy systems for the moon for Mars. So, what I think is exciting is we’re starting to see a change in public policy that encourages thinking about “wait a minute. Why are we regulating all of these technologies and services separately?” So, the California Public Utility Commission, Public Utility Commissions across the country are starting to say-

We’ve got to rethink this.

we got to rethink this. You might have a smart water system here in California and Texas and other places where there is droughts and water issues. We’re not going to get it from a silo-based solution.

Well, I think you’re right and it’s such a fascinating thing to think about from a policy standpoint because listening to you talk to how we sort of re-imagine and help inspire new systems that can get the next moon shot to sort of follow your analogy. We do have all these layers and legacy at the legislative level and at the CPUC level, the current construct and conditions that we use to regulate our utilities today, both energy power utilities but then also from telecommunications standpoint… I don’t want to lose that thought… that you are also suggesting that in order to achieve these big advancements in energy well, if we don’t have the underlying information, technology systems that can power these smarter approaches you’re describing, it won’t work. So, re-envisioning energy regulation, telecommunications regulation, and other things I’m hearing you say are indispensable to getting to this economic potential you’ve described.

And transportation opportunities. I was just meeting with a group of chief sustainability officers from hospitals. And, hospitals are big consumers of energy but they’ve been focusing on, and I think this is fantastic, energy efficiency. Now some of the hospitals are saying, “Well, wait a minute, I’ve got all these–my customers, my patients, my consumers, trying to get to the hospital and we’re trying to provide services at home and we’re trying…and in addition to that, we’re having constituencies who are saying we want cleaner air, we don’t want that old diesel stand-by generator there, we want a new micro grid, we want a new energy storage devices, we want systems that will integrate that.

So, the demand side of that is creating a lot of the innovations. We convened a group of-

Doesn’t it always, right?

we convened a group of our major companies that were all saying we’ve made a pledge to add 100% clean energy by a certain time in the future and many of these are companies that own data centers. Well, it’s predicted that at the current growth of the cloud, you could have 1,000% growth of cloud computing in the next 10 years. That could go from 2% or 3% of the consumption of electric power to who knows what that number would be and if that’s clean energy or if it’s fueled by traditional energy, particularly heavy fossil fuel energy, there’s a different dimension to that and the innovation that comes around combining new solutions.

Let me give you an example… I’m going to go a little different direction. We have a lot of people that feel that innovations happening in cities, and a lot is happening in cities, and it’s very important but we see technologies move to other locations around the world and in this country. So, one of our member companies, I love telling this story, they said in a small town that might have a rural electric cooperative providing electricity, maybe it has a telecommunication provider that is cable TV and they haven’t gone fully to broadband, they’re beginning to see that you can piece together technologies.

So, in the case of one of our members, Jewel Energy, in northern Minnesota with another member company, General Electric, they’ve designed a system that they’re bringing up in the next 60 days and it’s a small system that is wind, solar, and battery storage and they put that battery storage, and I love this as a Mayor, together with the critical resiliency assets. So, they put it in the police station, the fire station, the hospital. They put it at the 911 center. They put it at places where it really matters that when the power is out, particularly if it’s in the middle of Minnesota winter, you got-

Backup.

resilience. It’s a problem. And, the pricing on this appears to be at 4.4 cents a kilo watt hour and because of the way they are designing this system, it’s going to be firm, dispatchable, 100% clean power. Now, it is the innovation of each individual piece of that low cost wind, low cost solar, lower storage but it’s putting it together as a package.

Well, it’s a really great story and has great resonance I would think with policy makers. Understanding that instance you’re providing is a tremendous value to the community that you serve because as you said, you’re creating resilience around those critical operations and assets. That sort of leads me to the question, a bigger question I was going to ask which is, you and I had both served in government and we have great respect for the role and the importance of government and the communities that they represent and protect and serve. It seems to me, at least this is my thought, and I just want your reaction, your experience, that when you think about the way we are regulating the energy utilities, the way that we regulate telecommunications and other critical systems is with a concern about everyday folks that if we don’t continue… the feeling to me seems that if we don’t continue to keep things the way they are that we somehow we will be abandoning our responsibility to protecting those folks… that we’ve created what we believe are these protections around them to this point.

I feel like there is a real reluctance on the part of regulators to let go of the old constructs for fear that they will be exposing vulnerable populations. A legitimate concern but I’m wondering: ‘A,’ if you sort of agree that that’s part of the driving force of where we are at the regulatory level and if so, what do we do to break through that and change that mindset?

Well, there is a power of an incumbent regulatory structure and economic order, and whenever changes come through innovation we have to deal with it so our belief is that we aren’t having enough of what I would call critical conversations among and between folks who don’t get a chance to talk to each other in a safe trusting environment. That doesn’t mean you don’t disagree but you least have a conversation.

So, our organization works heard to bring together people as we’ve done in now 10 different states, in California, New York and Michigan, Pennsylvania, and we bring together, in this particular case, the PUC regulators, members of our advanced energy network, executives from our companies, and then, say, regulated gas utility, electric utility, water utility, and we have a conversation. And, we say what is the need that you see each of the different parties having? And, of course, public utility commissioners and sometimes regulators that are advocates come to that table and express their view. So, out of that you then, we call convene, connect, collaborate for an action that will open up the market but also make sure that those who need some opportunity for transition get it.

Right. I’m curious what we see with the leaders that we’re talking to is new generations, new attitudes, new information is creating, it seems, a new era of legislators or mayors that not only understand these issues but are prepared and enthusiastic about getting in front to try to usher in this new kind of change.

And, part of this, as we say, this exchange of ideas and understanding, is so many folks aren’t as familiar with the public utility regulatory process but just think there are about 198 people that are elected, less than 200 people, some elected, most appointed-

Right.

who have authority over about a 100 billion dollars a year of investment in the electric power sector. So, how does a person maybe recently appointed by a governor and not have the depth of knowledge of all these technology innovations, how are you going to look at regulatory change if you don’t understand the technology that you’re having influence over? So, we work to bring together small groups of public utility commissioners by region and innovative technology companies to say this is a challenge, here is a potential solution so one of those areas is the use of micro grids, the use of on site power generation, the use of innovative software to help people whether it’s a hospital, whether it’s a school, whether it’s a factory, college, university, whatever…to be able to understand how their energy management, their energy savings, how that can integrate with all the other things in that environment that you’re working in. Transportation, for example.

Those PUC commissioners have signed up for some pretty important jobs but it’s a big deal. No doubt. Your personal energy seems to be as high as I’ve seen it in the last several years. As we wrap up here, I would love just sort of get your sense of the time you’ve been here and what you see in to the future. How do you feel about the progress that’s being made in ushering in this new era of advanced energy and how do you feel about where we’re headed?

I was in a conversation with the chief sustainability officer who works for the Cleveland Clinic, a very well known, innovative, Midwestern clinic and we were both commenting that we are most optimistic today as it relates to the future of advanced energy and clean energy then we ever have been because the innovation forces in finance and policy, in technology and now at a national and state level, around the job generating and the economics, that’s becoming more effectively understood, Kish. And so, as we seek first to understand and learn then the innovation is easier.

I will give you a specific anecdote. I was attending a conference that we hosted with CEOs of major electric utilities on the East Coast in October of 2013 and I brought up the question. I said, “What if, as an electric utility, by 2020 you could have a significant part of your revenue, certainly by 2030, that would come from electrification of transportation?” And, this executive turned to me, we were at a break time in the meeting, and he said, “We aren’t even looking at that. That’s not a strategy we’re even interested in because the regulators will never allow us to do that.” That same executive in a conversation said, “We’re investigating today, so that was 3 years ago, we’re investigating putting in charging stations, working with our regulatory authorities, talking with the automobile manufacturers, and I’m not just talking Tesla, I’m talking a whole wide range.

Sure.

So, it’s that kind of shift. Why did the shift happen? Because the technology and innovation and number of vehicles and consumer demand. So, he’s seeing healthcare institutions, or colleges and universities, that want an EV and they want a place to charge it and they’re calling the electric company and they’re saying… and then there are fleet buyers so the mayor of Indianapolis, Indiana, who I’m working with. Greg Ballard, established the first all electric ride sharing vehicle system. So, like you’d have a bike share you can now put a card and you can get a electric vehicle that you just drive around town and drop it off on another location-

Right.

100% electric vehicle. And he’s put in place, in his 8 years as mayor, the purchasing of an entire EV fleet for the city.

Wow.

So, what I’m seeing is a combination of demand, policy, cost curves coming down and integration of systems that allow all those things to happen.

That’s really fascinating.

That’s why I’m very optimistic. I believe we’re going to solve all these challenges because the combination of innovation in all these dimensions will produce solutions.

Well, the convergence is clearly happening. We’re at the cusp of a really exciting time and clearly Advanced Energy Economy is making a very significant contribution to helping, to working each of those areas that you just described but also that confluence of those factors that will make a big difference. We appreciate your leadership. Graham Richard, CEO of Advanced Energy Economy and thanks a lot for your time. It was great to have you here.

Thank you, Kish.

Technology Can Help Heal This Divided Country

By Mike Montgomery

On Tuesday night, America was hit with an earthquake. It doesn’t matter whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican. What Tuesday showed is that we are a country that is even more deeply divided than many of us thought.

At the heart of that division is a schism between the haves and the have nots. People who feel they have been left behind by the government and the economy may not have been heard by pollsters but they made themselves heard loud and clear Tuesday when they voted for radical change at the top level of government.

While it may be an uncomfortable situation, those of us in the tech space need to talk about the role technology played in that divide.

Those of us living in the iPhone bubble may believe that things like online banking, video calls and streaming music are part of the everyday life of all Americans but that’s not true. We still live in a country that has a very real digital divide.

Studies from the Pew Research Center show that people who earn less money and are less educated also have less access to the internet. While 88% of adults earning more than $150,000 per year have broadband at home, only 45% of those earning under $30,000 a year have the same access. Ninety percent of people at the top income level have smartphones compared to 53% of those at the bottom.

As more and more of the services that people rely on move online, those at the bottom are truly being left behind. They have less access to things like employment websites, online education and new banking options. Without fast access to the internet they are increasingly isolated.

Then there’s the very real problem of job displacement. While technology has made many things easier in our lives, it’s also made a lot of jobs redundant. By 2020 robots will have replaced an estimated 5 million jobs, according to the World Economic Forum. Those people who feel that the jobs they once relied on are deserting their communities — they’re right.

But here’s the thing. I also believe that technology can help solve these problems. Knowing the benefits that come from more people having access to the internet we can put policies in place to close the digital divide. We need policies that encourage states to upgrade their infrastructures to bring broadband to everyone.

We need to accept the reality that the economy, and with it the future of work, is changing fundamentally and it’s not changing back. We can’t pretend that we’re headed for a resurgence of reliable factory jobs.

Instead, let’s enact policies that train people for the jobs of the future. Let’s have a minimum wage so that those in the growing service industry earn enough to take care of their families. And let’s seriously consider things like wage insurance so that when people move into jobs that have less consistent income, they can still count on steady earnings.

But let’s also make sure that at a state level, we don’t overcorrect and put so many regulations in place that we chill new businesses. If the economy is going to grow, we need to encourage our tech entrepreneurs to continue to come up with new ideas that are going to drive the economy of the future.

These ideas are not liberal or conservative, they’re common sense. They are ideas that people on both sides of the aisle can, and should, come together to support.

With the election behind us, it’s time for both sides to work together to heal the problems we saw so nakedly exposed on Tuesday night. Our future depends on it.

The 3 Words Shaking The Tech Sector: President Donald Trump

Donald Trump’s election to the U.S. presidency was a political earthquake that leaves the structural integrity of Silicon Valley’s economy in question.

“It’s the dawn of America that I think everyone is trying to put their finger on,” CALinnovates Executive Director Mike Montgomery told Chief Evangelist Kish Rajan on a special post-election episode of their podcast, “A Step Ahead.”

Right now, it’s hard to say what a Trump presidency portends for innovation, technology and public policy. Whereas Clinton had a detailed section in her policy platform dedicated to technology and innovation policy, Trump’s campaign hasn’t offered such guidance.

One thing we have some insight into, however, is Trump’s stance on immigration, which Montgomery says could have grave implications for talent acquisition, entrepreneurism and economic growth in California. For example, the H-1B visa program brings in a large portion of the talented coders who keep Silicon Valley humming. If he restricts skilled visas to make jobs available to Americans, that could hinder growth at high-tech companies. And the lack of a robust talent pipeline, already a concern for the tech sector, could become even more dire if the state’s top universities no longer matriculate STEM students from foreign countries.

If the new administration doesn’t show a commitment to creating conditions that appeal to businesses here in the U.S., might we see a tech drain out of the U.S.? “I certainly hope not,” says Rajan. “But I think it’s something that we have to think about.”

Listen to the full interview below:

Like what you hear? Subscribe to A Step Ahead on iTunes.

A Step Ahead: The Night After the Election

Hey everyone Kish Rajan, Chief Evangelist at CALinnovates. This time, joined by our fearless leader, Executive Director of CALinnovates, Mike Montgomery. We welcome you to this special edition of A Step Ahead, the CALinnovates podcast. It’s special because we are recording this the day after Election Day 2016 and wow.

Hey Mike, how are you doing?

Mike Montgomery: All right Kish, how are you?

Good. I’m up here in San Francisco and you’re down in world headquarters in southern California. How about that election?

You know, I don’t think it’s what many people expected. I think it’s taken a lot of people by surprise. It’s really interesting that I talked to a lot of adults, a lot of grown ups today and so many people seem like they are having trouble stringing sentences together and thoughts together. They’ve really been kind of taken by surprise…

No doubt.

and are not quite sure what this means, what the implications are. We have a very unique perspective because we’re in California, which may be very helpful and maybe also shows why so many people didn’t expect this result.

Well, there’s no doubt. I mean, let’s be clear. This thing is a political earthquake, right? I mean, no one…well, I shouldn’t say no one, but very few people in the popular media, pundits, academics, all the standard experts, very few people were willing to come out and predict that this would happen. Now that it has happened, it’s a massive shock, it seems to me, to the United States political landscape and certainly as it relates to the issues that CALinnovates focuses on.

Yeah, I think it’s the dawn of a new era that everyone is trying to put their finger on.

Yeah, it’s the dawn of dawn, right?

Dawn of dawn.

What I think what we wanted to do here, was there’s going to be a lot more to talk about, and we’re looking forward to it, a lot more of A Step Ahead, many more episodes where we’ll talk about these issues in more depth. But I think here, we wanted to just kind of have some immediate reaction as best as we can to discern what this portends for innovation and technology and public policy issues that we concentrate on here. So. let’s just kind of talk about that for a minute.

You tell me, but I think the first thing that comes to my mind is, frankly, the lack of certainty about where this new Trump administration is going to go on innovation and technology issues. At least with the Clinton campaign and her policy platform, she had a detailed section in her policy platform that talked specifically about innovation and technology policy and the types of things that she would do in a Clinton administration. We don’t have any such guidance from the Trump campaign. Do we?

No, we’ve got a fairly blank slate. The Trump ticket talked about cyber. We’ve got a pretty decent understanding, we think, of where President Elect Trump stands on immigration, but the rest of the overall tech agenda is TBD.

No kidding. So, let’s talk about what we kind of do know, right? So, take immigration for a minute. I mean, given his incredibly strident approach to immigration during the campaign, if he even begins to implement that type of approach or philosophy, what does that mean for the innovation community?

One of the things that Hilary Clinton was very clear about, like you said, was her stance on tech issues. I think comprehensive immigration reform was an issue that Silicon Valley, in particular, really cared about. Trump kept saying that the United States got drug dealers and the criminals and the murderers, but there is a great value to, at the very least, the H-1B visa program that helps bring a lot of people who write code and do the high tech work that’s so valuable for a number of these different companies from startups all the way to the big boys. Is that in danger, I mean, for the future of entrepreneurialism in America? What does that mean to the talent base that comes into the United States to help build these companies? There’s probably a direct correlation to the future of education in America, but we can’t fill that gap in a matter of a few years.

I mean, this is the thing, right? It’s been a vexing challenge for technology companies already about a lack of a robust work force pipeline, either domestically created through the type of education programs that you’re talking about or through the utilization of the immigration rules, specifically H-1B. Now, we just don’t know if or how either of those will be priorities for the Trump administration, let alone whether we know that he would be supportive of the types of actions that will help deal with that pipeline issue, right?

Right. You know Kish, one question for you is during your time running business economic development for the state of California, you got to witness first hand why companies stayed in California and decided to leave to go to Texas or they’ve left the country or whatever. We want to do everything that we can to keep those companies headquartered in California. If they’re not in California, we want to keep them in the U.S., but we have foreign founders coming over. They hit Sand Hill Road, they raised their money, they maybe go to 500 startups or whatever. We don’t want them to found a company and go leave, right? We want them to stay.

Yeah, you’re totally right. I have to tell you that when…what we would deal with in California was trying to be competitive relative to our other states in the union and present that we had favorable conditions for those companies to come here or to be formed here and to grow here. Talent acquisition and retention, human capital was one of the great advantages that California had and it continues to be one of the reasons why California remains the epicenter of innovation and technology nationally and one of the global epicenters. It’s funny that you bring it up because I thought about that this morning and thought, “Not only were we trying to retain that business in California, and we faced real competitive threats, I’m worried about now, just trying to retain that in the United States.”

One question I’m going to add is, if we don’t show, if the new administration does not show a commitment to creating the types of conditions that businesses want to invest in here in the United State, might we start to see a tech drain out of the U.S. to other places that appear more favorable? I certainly hope not, but I think it’s something that we have to think about.

Yeah, absolutely. So, that’s on the table. One other thing that’s very obvious, of course, is that President Trump will be able to make some very important appointments in Washington to run different agencies and commissions. We spend a lot of time at CALinnovates, of course, on the FCC and the FTC. So, those agencies play major roles in the tech industry and they’ll have new leaders sometime after the first of the year. So, that’s something we’re going to have to follow and we’re going to have to pay close attention to and try to figure out what those policies may look like with the new chairmen, what it means to rules that have been put into place but weren’t enshrined in law by congress. So, it’s going to be an interesting next few months as we start to understand what this all means.

Well I think the last issue for now, and I think we’re going to…over time, we’re going to want to unpack all of this as the days, and weeks, and months unfold and continue to talk about it. But I think the last thing on my mind, are the political implications and that is to say, Trump has been elected President, I think, on a populist movement, it’s fair to say. I guess the question is politically speaking, how is the Silicon Valley…I’m using that as a metaphor, how is the innovation and tech community going to fair, politically, given this prevailing wave that has brought Donald Trump to the presidency?

Well, I think Silicon Valley has a little bit of a problem on its hands. Other than Peter Thiel, Silicon Valley at large was with Hilary Clinton.

Right. I remember that letter that was signed by…sorry, how many tech people signed…

By everyone.

That letter? 100 or 150 tech leaders? Yeah.

Yeah, by everyone. Those issues won’t go unnoticed, at least in the stories that have been running today in terms of the Trump transition team. For the people that they’re considering right off the bat, there was a full scrubbing of what people had written on social media. Certain people would bounce from the list for consideration for important jobs because they may have said something critical. If any industry thinks they’re going to get off scot free if they weren’t with Trump, then they probably have something else coming to them, which means it’s going to take a new approach, right? There’s got to be a new approach. There’s got to be a new way of thinking about this relationship or moving forward and perhaps messaging as well.

Well, I’m with you. Well look, there’s so much more to talk about and I think so much more to dive into. I think the political challenge that you’ve raised is a big one. I think there’s another dimension here that we’ll talk about more, which is the opposite side of the equation, places like California, that will, I think, have a very strong counter reaction, or reaction I guess, to prove that it can grow an economy and force technology and innovation companies to deal with the challenges of broader opportunity and prosperity. There could be a lot more heavy hand of government in the way of regulation and other ways they’ll want to compel that type of behavior. So, that’s going to be another reaction to this election that I think we’re going to have to watch, as well.

Boy, there’s going to be a lot going here. But look CALinnovates, we’re going to be involved, right? I think this is going to be a continuation of the work that we’ve been doing and thinking about. What is the right agenda and the right way to communicate to policy makers in D.C. and California and beyond about how innovation and technology can be a constructive force here and not something to be battled against?

That’s right. Whether you’re happy about the results of the presidential or you’ve been reduced to tears, there’s got to be a way that we move forward. We’re going to be there every step of the way. We’re going to try to continue chopping this up. We’re going to come to some interesting conclusions and pass forward. I hope that everyone listening will be with us every step of the way because it’s going to take a great effort to help the tech industry forward on its new advocacy path.

Well, it’s going to be an interesting path indeed. We’ll look forward to more discussions. So for you, Mike Montgomery our Executive Director, this is Kish Rajan Chief Evangelist of CALinnovates. Thanks so much for listening to this edition of A Step Ahead.

Kyra Worthy Is Helping The City Of Richmond Help Itself

As the executive director at For Richmond, Kyra Worthy is a tireless advocate for the people of Richmond, a working-class community located north of Berkeley and just across the San Francisco Bay from tony Mill Valley.

Worthy’s job is to help the people of Richmond live up to their full potential through better education and better jobs. She helps students and parents navigate the tricky waters of education beyond high school by working with historically black colleges to send promising students to college summer programs and then to four-year programs. She makes sure that when companies promise jobs for the community, they deliver, and that residents are prepared to fill those jobs.

For Richmond helps lots of people, but Worthy says there is still more work to be done.

“To have this negative cloud over the city as if folks aren’t ready [to work] is really doing an injustice for folks who just sort of skip over Richmond,” says Worthy. “People try to make the answers for the community instead of engaging the community.” She’s working to turn that around.

Listen to “A Step Ahead”‘s full interview with Worthy below:

Like what you hear? Subscribe to A Step Ahead on iTunes.

A Step Ahead: Kyra Worthy

Hi everyone and welcome to this edition of The CALinnovates Podcast, this is Kish Rajan, Chief Evangelist at CALinnovates, and this time we’ve got…we’ve had a wonderful conversation with Kyra Worthy who’s the Executive Director of a community-based non-profit called For Richmond here in the East Bay in Richmond, California. At CALinnovates, as you know, we’re talking all the time about the fundamentals of the innovation and technology-based economy, and what are some of the gaps, what are some of the barriers to everyday people being able to participate in that economy.

Kyra does amazing work in a community that really exemplifies the kind of community that is in transition, but needs a lot of support and help to be able to participate. She’s got a really fascinating personal story and as you’ll hear, she’s doing remarkable work here in her part of the world, so I hope you’ll enjoy it.

Kyra Worthy, executive director of For Richmond, thanks for being with us.

Kyra Worthy: No problem.

It’s nice to be here in your beautiful offices in beautiful downtown Richmond.

Well thank you for coming!

It’s good to be here. So tell us about For Richmond. What do you all do?

We are here, the easiest way to say what For Richmond does for our community in Richmond is that we supplement services and support to the residents to be a bridge to community and to get them where they need to be to be socio-economically connected, to also build a bridge that could be self-sufficient, and that they can have the same opportunities as any other resident in the community and their neighbors.

So let’s break that down a little bit and we’ll talk about some of the specific programs that you’re doing, how you’re doing what you just said. But I want to talk about you though, for a minute, too. Where did you…how did you end up here? Are you from here?

Nope, I’m from San Jose.

Okay, so not too far.

Nope, not too far.

How did you end up at For Richmond?

After leaving the city and county of San Francisco at the mayor’s office, I started working at the school district here in Richmond. I worked in the Community Engagement Office at which time our current board member of the school district, Madeline Kronenberg, was one of the first influential folks to create For Richmond, and she plucked me from my job at the school district and I took on the job here at For Richmond.

What were you doing…what did community engagement in the school district…what did that mean?

So, I was in charge of half the schools in the school district, so I supervised about 15-16 schools and I engaged parents of color within their students’ academic success and also creating a line of community services and getting them help in that regard.

Like what?

It could be employment, helping students’ success whether it was the right school they needed to be enrolled at, I also helped a lot of Spanish-speaking parents with getting their students out of…to get them classified into being proficient in English, to be able so that then when they get into high school, they’ll be able to take their A-G credits and graduate on time as opposed to being in English learning classes, which kept them sort-of behind the rest of their peers.

How big of a problem was that?

It’s a very big problem in Richmond.

I live in Walnut Creek, so you have to help educate folks like me that…I guess because I’m extremely fortunate, I don’t even…I haven’t had these types of experiences. You have to help me understand how many students are we talking about in the district…I don’t need the exact statistics but I’m just curious as to the landscape that existed and exists inside of the West County School District in terms of some of these fundamental barriers you’re talking about.

It’s 60% English learners in the…

60. Six zero.

Uh-huh. Six zero. In the school district. It’s a very big problem. A lot of parents don’t know what it means, they think that their kids are in classes just to help them with English, but it’s also…they’re not able to take, at the same time, the regular classes that they need to be on track to graduate. There’s a way to opt-out, there’s a way to test out, it’s called FEP and educating the parents on requesting that test so that their children can be just as successful as their neighbor.

Because otherwise what you’re saying is just trying to deal with the fundamental language barriers was preventing…just tackling that problem was fundamentally preventing these kids from participating…all the other A-G requirements that are necessary to get them out of high school and to whatever the next level might be for them?

Yes, and what would usually happen would be around after Christmas break, when the kids return, after the grading period, students would then be called to the office and we’d let them know there are different alternatives for getting across the stage, whether it’s just going to be their GED or to just get homeschooled because graduating a normal graduation with the cap and gown like you and I had wasn’t an option for them because they didn’t have all their credits.

Yeah.

So then that would cause a dropout.

Yeah. And so, I’m curious…how long were you there? How long were you at the school district?

2 1/2 years.

So long enough. How many of those kids, in your mind, again, I don’t need exact statistics, but just in your experience, how many of them were graduating and then going on in a post-secondary way into something that was on a career pathway?

About 10%.

10%.

Mm-hmm.

And what are the other 90% doing?

Come to For Richmond now looking for work.

No kidding.

Yes.

So let’s talk about that. So I guess that’s why…that is clearly part of how you got here.

Mm-hmm.

It’s great that there was a leader in the school district that identified the good work that you were doing but I know there were others that saw that you could draw on your background to help really kind of build this program.

Mm-hmm .

It was still in its early stages when you got here.

Oh, it was very, very…there were no blinds, there was no furniture in here. It was like a little vacant storefront.

The artwork in here is beautiful, by the way. Where’d it come from?

It came from NIAD.

What’s that?

It’s a facility to help adults with disabilities and they create art. All of these photos are done by African-American artists at their facility.

Wow.

I made the request.

It’s beautiful, that’s really great. How do people find that, by the way. That would be interesting to know, if they could find that…

It’s right here off of Nevin in Richmond.

In Richmond?

Mm-hmm

How do you spell NIAD?

N-I-A-D.

Okay, cool. Very cool. What did you think you were getting hired to do here?

Well at first I got hired just to be the educational convener, just supporting and pushing different support services into the schools, which I really enjoyed. About a year and a half later, I was asked to be the interim ED and I did that for about six months, and then I interviewed to get the job and I was gratefully…I gratefully accepted and I’ve been here ever since.

And in those interviews you obviously must have brought to them a vision of what you thought For Richmond could and should be, I assume. What was that?

One of the main things is being honest and being understanding of the community. Recognizing that we all come from different spectrums. I come all the way from San Jose, you know. It’s night and day between San Jose and Richmond. And also just being trustworthy with the community, letting them know you know everything is not perfect but you can do your best to try to help them get to where they need to be. And it took a lot of trust. I came to Richmond with a lot of trust and so people were happy to see that I was still around. And centrally located on McDonald, one of the busiest streets in Richmond. I love my job, there’s never the same day, ever. I’ve never had the same day twice.

So tell us about, then, you’ve said it in your introduction but let’s dive into it a little bit of more…the actual programs. What are some of the key programs or activities that you perform here? People come and engage at For Richmond, what are you helping them with?

I think that the main programs that people really reach out to us for is our barrier-removal program and our educational services because we help kids get off to college. Primarily we work with all the historically black colleges, HBCUs, around the world, but it’s also an opportunity for the undocumented population in Richmond to get involved in a post-secondary education as well because a lot of schools outside of California aren’t concerned about your status. And I’m able to help them get to a zero balance with full scholarships, and that’s for all students that put that package together. We send the kids away in groups, we don’t send just one. They’re either going in twos or fours, boys they all go with one group. That’s fine. We want them to have a sense of community when they go. One of the other special caveats is that I don’t send kids far away from my personal family so that there’s places the kids can go to still have that sense of family.

Hmm. You have that much family at all these different schools around the world?

Yes, my mother has 19 brothers and sisters.

Say what?

You know, yeah. There’s many cousins after that.

Wow.

Many extended family.

I guess so.

So there’s always someone not so far away.

Wow.

And when talking with the parents, I do give them the choices of those schools of where they’re going to be near somebody.

That’s really interesting.

Mm-hmm.

So the kids go in a group, a small group or what have you…

Mm-hmm.

…they go and visit one of these historically black colleges…

Mm-hmm.

…how long do they go for and what do they do when they’re there?

During the summer programs, a program can last anywhere from 3-8 weeks. So the Howard University program, that lasts eight weeks, so that’s more of a medical-focused biology program for folks that are interested in medicine. So of course that program is going to be a little bit longer. So they take college courses, they take an English, a science, and a math. They get all their assessments done. And they return. So usually I send kids their junior year and their senior year. Their senior year, they’re going to be going to the summer program to where they’re going to be attending school in the fall. So we already know after your 11th grade year where you’re going to be going to school.

Wow.

So we sort of get all that stuff knocked out.

That’s really great. How interesting. And then the cost of all that, that’s underwritten by For Richmond and other donations?

Yes.

Because that sounds like…

Mm-hmm. And the school itself.

And the school itself.

Because we keep sending them students.

Okay. That’s fantastic. So that’s great, so a big part of your job then is not only identifying these kids and getting them engaged in a program and preparing them, but I guess also managing all those engagements with all those colleges at the same time?

Yeah. And we manage their courses.

Wow.

We choose their classes.

Wow. That’s really, really great.

Mm-hmm.

How many kids have gone through this program since you’ve…

Oh.

…instituted it.

Over 300.

Wow! That’s really fantastic. And you’re capturing their stories.

Yes.

All those things.

Everything. Capturing the suspensions, academic probations, we capture it all.

I could imagine. The first thing you said was barrier removal, too.

Mm-hmm.

Which I think is different than education…

Yes.

…so tell me about what that means.

So it’s a job barrier removal program, and how I came to this program was, when I first started with For Richmond, it was around the time where Chevron was preparing for their modernization project, trying to get the city council’s approval. It came out when they said they were going to have about 2500-2600 jobs for the community. And for someone who applies for jobs and there are certain things you’ve got to meet, you’ve got to be qualified for those positions.

Sure.

Right? And in a community like Richmond, there’s a lot of different barriers. There’s drug addiction, there are those who’ve never had employment before, experience is low, they don’t know how to obtain or sustain employment, and I asked, what things are in place to assist people with obtaining their positions? They said, “We never really thought about that.”

Hmmm.

And I was very concerned because if you’re soliciting to the community, saying that these jobs are for you in the community, who is preparing them and how are you getting them prepared? So that’s something I started working on with the community. So I worked with all the trades doing small, open-houses where questions and answers can go back and forth for folks to get a deeper understanding about what it meant to be in a trade. What it took to get into the trade. What tests had to be taken? I was also able to convince the trade to let them take the test here at For Richmond. So we did the tutoring and prepping and the testing right at For Richmond. So it was a comfortable place, they were used to coming here, they didn’t have to go away to Concord or Martinez or anywhere far. And they worked with the instructor who’s from Richmond to help them get through those steps.

And so to date I’ve placed over 1,000 at the refinery for work. To actually bring truth to what was being advertised to them. Last week I sent 80 laborers out there and just today I sent another 40. There’s folks in Richmond that do want to work. I’ve had people tell me that no one in Richmond wants to work, no one in Richmond wants to go to school, they’re just here, they don’t want to do nothing, and I take a lot of offense when people are describing the community because they’re using words like “they.”

Yeah.

Community has names, you can say the community.

Sure.

You don’t have to represent it. A lot of the community looks like me, so I take personal offense myself. I have a brother with many barriers. I know how hard of a track it is for even someone that’s my own sibling to make it to where my sister and I have been able to make it.

I hear you. You’re talking about, we’re here in Richmond, CA. The Chevron-Richmond refinery, a major industrial facility, has been in this community for 100 years I suppose.

Mm-hmm.

It’s been a significant employer, and you’re talking about just trying to go through a process of capturing local workers, youth or people of all ages, really.

Mm-hmm.

People that just need jobs and are willing to work, but just trying to create that connection and get their skills, training, get their confidence, get them proficient to be able to pursue local jobs right here in the community and that’s a process unto itself. Where I’m going with this is that…I’m trying to imagine but what I want to ask is what’s that like then, to try to get people prepared for jobs that aren’t even right here locally?

How I’ve explained to the community, a job is a job.

Yeah.

You just, you take it if you meet the qualifications. So it took a lot of one-on-ones and trust to say, okay, For Richmond and the staff that work at 3109 McDonald are really here to help us. All of us live in Richmond. I’m the only non-Richmond native on staff. And all of my staff are under 30. So these are folks they’ve known and grown up with that are trying to help.

Wait a minute, you’re saying there’s millennials that are trying to do things that are constructive?

That’s right. Only at For Richmond!

I don’t know about only, but at least those are good examples, right?

Yes. And so one of the bigger things of that, Richmond has a local-hire ordinance. A lot of people weren’t following it. So when I brought it to people’s attention, I said, “You have to be able to fill this gap and not use the excuse as of, people aren’t ready.”

Yeah. I hear you. The intensity and the real authenticity of what you’re doing locally seems like it’s critically important just to make things happen right here in the community. At CALinnovates, when we talked about this before we sat down, we’re thinking about the global innovation and technology economy all the time and how things are changing so dramatically.

Mm-hmm.

It makes me anxious, it makes me worried about the fact that that economy seems to be moving at breakneck speed in a certain global direction and what does that mean to people that live in communities like this one? What is your feeling about perhaps this disconnect or this widening gap that may be between where the economy’s really going and where people really live in towns like this?

I think it is very much a disconnect, and opportunities are being missed by not engaging communities like Richmond. It’s rich in a lot of different ways. I think that folks need to be given an opportunity and shared information to see where they fall, just like you do in any other community. Right? You’re not going to engage everybody, but you will engage some. To have this negative little cloud over the city as if folks aren’t prepared and ready, is really doing an injustice for folks in office who just skip over Richmond. I think that, and I always tell people this, one day Richmond, the residents of Richmond, are going to be so upset it’s going to be a little revolt. “Stop skipping over us, don’t build over us, don’t include us, don’t ask us…” People try to make the answers for the community instead of engaging the community.

It is an interesting thing, where as we are having this conversation we’re about three weeks away from the presidential campaign and it seems like it’s something that that campaign is exposing nationally. You have a lot people that are supporting both candidates for different reasons, I suppose, but you have a lot of people out there that clearly are expressing their frustration, their fears, the fact that they feel like their community is being skipped over as well. You’re having your own experience but it definitely seems like this is a challenge that’s very widespread, and it’s not just here, is it?

No. It’s not just here. It’s predominately in cities where opportunity is not being given to them.

Yeah.

Folks sort of feel like, “I’m not just missing the boat, the boat is not even coming near me.” I’m like waving at the boat, I’ve got to swim to the boat.” I think it’s an unfortunate feeling for a city like Richmond which is such a working class community.

Right.

I think that going to college is great. I went to plenty of college, but I don’t think that college is for everybody, and I think that until people get used to saying that, it will continue to be this way.

And even if it isn’t, our view of a four-year university…we have, clearly, in our lifetime…and I think people for really good reasons…because people that are our parents’ age, that was a critically important thing, to give people of color, people of all stripes, opportunities to go to college, because that had been shut out for people…

Mm-hmm.

…in previous generations, so folks worked really hard to create and set an expectation that that four-year degree is something that is attainable and something that we should all strive for. But it is interesting how it feels like that is coming back around and if we’re too narrowly focused on what that means, we maybe leaving people out all together.

Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yeah.

Yeah.

Definitely. I think like the community in Richmond, there’s a lot of different age groups here, right? There’s generations and generations of families. I always tell young people, “Go back and speak to your elders about what it was like growing up.” My mother, my grandfather was a slave, my mother was not given the opportunity to go to school until she was in 9th grade. So the woman who she worked for, the white woman who she worked for, educated her after she got done doing her work when her kids came home from school. My father, he grew up in the East Coast, came from much more, was given an opportunity to go to Bronx Science and NYU, had a different sort of experience as a young person, but as a kid hearing both of these stories all the time, it really helped me understand what I wanted to do for my own life. Right? Because I was able to see that you can make it with not being afforded much, my grandfather had 19 kids to take care of, and my dad just had himself and a set of twins and they were all very, very successful.

But to hear those types of experiences about how they grew up and what school meant to either of them was very important. And to actually meet the woman that my mother did work for and her explaining to me why she felt my mother needed to learn was also…I never would think anybody would ever take the time to explain to her child why that was.

Clearly it takes people that are committed and people that are thinking about their own experiences but wanting to share what they have and make a positive impact in the communities that they serve. I think that will always matter. As we sort of wind up our conversation, I’m wondering also about technology.

Mm-hmm.

I’m wondering at the Chevron-Richmond refinery that we’ve been talking about, a tremendous amount of technology, engineering is basically the foundation of what a company like that is. Given your experience at For Richmond and in schools in the West County District before, how do you feel about how we’re preparing youngsters in terms of equipping them to participate in what clearly is a much-more technology-driven economy moving forward?

They’re not coming out prepared.

Yeah.

Even some of the entry-level admin positions at the refinery need to have a technology knowledge. They have to have it. And right now going in, there’s a lot of on the job training that folks have to do with the companies because, number one, they’re committed to who I send to them being local residents, but also, they recognize that there is that gap. So I don’t know to get that done or bridge that gap, but technology is very important. As much emphasis and time young people, or we all, take just answering emails or sending a text, there needs to more on the technical side of creating spreadsheets, understanding the formulas, knowing which programs are used to do what, and it is very important because from there automatically you want to learn more.

Yeah.

But once you get folks interested in learning those things, those components of what it’s going to take to get for them to get their job to the next level, it will be beneficial for everybody, not only the employer.

Do you see technology becoming a bigger part of what you do here at For Richmond?

It is, because before I…I do all the pre-screening for the employers. Me personally. So depending on the job, I need you to show me what you know how to do. So I’ll say, “okay, log on the computer, do this, make this spreadsheet, I need to see a payroll something,” and sometimes people will just look at me. So I say, “okay, we need to get those skills.” Because when you get there, these are construction people…I’ve placed people at veterinary hospitals, answering phones someplace, just being able to take a message. I think people take all these little things that we do in our day-to-day life for granted.

And you see some of these youngsters that are working for you here now, are they pushing you? Not that you’re much older than them, but are you…

I am.

…I know if I was working here, I know they probably would be pushing me. But is that part of the culture or part of the experience?

Yes. I have to ask them … Everyone knows I don’t like social media, you can’t find me anywhere until I came to For Richmond and had to write all these things, but I ask them, “What do you guys do? What does this mean?” And that’s what we try to implement. Because I tried to get on a Facebook page one time and I erased everything and they were like, “You can’t touch it anymore.” And I was like, “That’s fine.” Because it was all gone. I didn’t know what happened.

Last question, which is what are you most proud of in, now, the couple of years that you’ve been here? The vision that you started with and the things that you’ve been able to accomplish, what stands out to you?

I think from receiving our money from Chevron and the community seeing us as an independent entity. And not a façade or some fake face or, I’m not their puppet or anything like that. I really take pride in that. I always tell people my name is not Chevron, my name is Kyra. And I have a mind of my own. That’s just how it is.

What about in terms of a student that you’ve reached or a story that you can think of of someone that, just through the course of their interaction with you, that stands out to somebody … A life that you’ve been able to impact.

Oh, this last student I just took was Latayna. That was the hardest rock ever to move. Ever.

Tell us about it.

I think that when you’re going to a school where all you hear is your teachers saying negative things about your community all the time…she was very aggressive, fighting…she’s a very good fighter.

It was just really hard…I personally took her to school. I personally dropped her off and told her, “Okay, this is it. No one’s here to bail you out. You are far away in a whole other state where it’s either you make it or break it. I bought you a one-way ticket. So here’s all your stuff.” We helped her with her room and that was it. I seen her a couple of weeks ago, she just finished her midterms and she got all As.

Wow.

This is a girl that sort of turned it around her 11th grade year and just blew it out of the water. I don’t know what she was doing back in 10th grade. But 11th grade she really turned it around, and that was a good thing. So I’m happy for her.

That’s really great. Well listen, Kyra Worthy, you are clearly that example of what I was talking about a minute ago, where it’s going to take in communities like this one, and there’s so many of them, industrial communities, urban communities where the economy in many ways had moved away from folks, and there’s still real challenges, and the only way that we’re going to bridge those gaps is some combination of authentic community engagement, a recognition of the past…

Mm-hmm.

…but looking to the future. It’s clear that you’re the kind of person that’s making that happen here.

Oh, thanks.

You were telling me a story, I’d love if you’d repeat it on air here, that you took a field trip to Google recently, is that right?

Yes, we took a field trip…

What was that about?

…we took the Richmond Steelers, the whole team about 100 cheer and football…

Okay.

…kids. They’re all from the south side of Richmond, and we took them to see something else other than what’s been going on in their community as of late. And so we took them on a field trip to Google and to Stanford. We had lunch and toured the kids around. One of the things that the kids were so shocked to see was that there were actually a group of African-American employees there.

And they said, “Kyra, black people work here, too!” And I said, “Black people are everywhere! Stop saying that out loud!” It’s just to get the kids out more, and their parents too, to see that young people that are, or their older siblings are, aunts and uncles ages are working in places like Google that you see everyday. I was very grateful that they were able to take them around, they explained their jobs and talked about where they came from and how they got there, but it is indicative to be able to show kids in communities like ours who aren’t really exposed to as much that we have been afforded to, that it is possible. Just being on it everyday and also encouraging their parents and encouraging the kids because at times when you’re going through hard times or when you feel that you are less than, it is very important to have that light at the end of the tunnel. Working with folks to ensure that they know that there is hope and that they, too, can do it is really important here.

No kidding. We’re really glad that you joined us. Thanks for being part of our program. We appreciate it.

No problem.

The Cautionary Tale Of George Hotz And The Self-Driving Car

by Mike Montgomery

George Hotz is one of the best-known hackers in America. At just 17 years old, he was the first person to unlock an iPhone so it could be used by multiple carriers. He cracked the security on the PS3 and was sued by Sony. The two settled out of court with Hotz promising he would never again tinker with Sony security.

After years of angering corporations, Hotz decided to go legit, trading in his black hat for a white one, signifying his status as a newly minted good guy. He worked for both Facebook and Google before starting his own company Comma.ai, last year. At this year’s TechCrunch Disrupt conference in San Francisco, he unveiled the company’s first product — the Comma One, a $999 box that could help make Honda Civics and some Acuras almost self-driving cars.

But then, last week, any excitement Hotz’s announcement had created disappeared because of some regulatory intervention. All it took was one sharply worded letter from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for Hotz to pack up his toys and go home. The letter, which Hotz posted here, said that the NHTSA needed to ensure that the device didn’t have a “safety-related defect” that might put drivers in danger.

In a series of tweets, Hotz said: “Would much rather spend my life building amazing technology than dealing with regulators and lawyers. It isn’t worth it. The comma one [sic] is canceled. Comma.ai will be exploring other markets and products. Hello from Shenzhen, China.”

But Hotz’s story isn’t about a new product being regulated to death; it’s about entrepreneurs who fail to take the realities of our government into account when they start to build their companies. Certainly, the NHTSA was simply doing its job ensuring public safety, and perhaps the agency could have communicated its concerns in gentler way rather than Napstering the potentially revolutionary device. But had Hotz gone into this with a team that understood the regulatory environment, this axle-breaking speed bump could have been avoided.

Read the full article here.

Why Election Technology Is Stuck In The Stone Age

by Mike Montgomery

In the past, technology firm Democracy Live has used a cloud-based platform to send ballots to U.S. military and overseas citizens around the world. Submariners, ambassadors in Paris and scientists working in an Antarctic lab are among those who have cast their votes using this electronic ballot.

But they are the outliers. We can buy movie tickets, order cars and even pay our taxes online, but for most of us, voting is a distinctly analog experience. We walk into a polling place and have our names penciled off by hand in a giant ledger before entering a booth with our paper ballot and pen or ink blotter.

So when will we see the era of online voting? The short and quick answer: no time soon.

“Voters are satisfied in the way they cast their ballots,” says Eric Jaye of consulting firm Storefront Political Media. “They prefer the security of a paper ballot and have worked to ensure even when the vote is cast technologically, there is a paper record.”

Democracy Live President Bryan Finney points out that most stateside voters (eight out of 10) this election will be marking their choices on paper or using an electric machine that creates a paper trail, even though that can actually cost more than if the states were to upgrade their voting to an online system.

That’s because security is still paramount. As we saw with the recent hack that took out Twitter, Netflix and other sites by exploiting the Internet of Things, there are real issues around online security, and until they are addressed, government officials are understandably wary of trusting something as important as an election to the internet.

Read the full article here.

Anti-Airbnb law will line the pockets of big hotel owners

by Mike Montgomery

Gov. Andrew Cuomo made a huge mistake Oct. 21 when he signed into law a bill that restricts home sharing in New York. The new law will hurt homeowners and visitors and only help a group that doesn’t need any: the hotel industry.

The law allows for fines of up to $7,500 on anyone advertising a home rental available for fewer than 30 nights when the owner is not present. Thousands of people in New York who have been making extra money by renting out rooms (or their entire home) will suddenly be denied an important source of income.

The governor and his cronies claim that the law is being imposed to protect affordable housing, but this argument is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Everyone loves affordable housing, and who wouldn’t want to protect it? But the real aim of this bill is to give a big, sloppy kiss to the hotel industry.

And the industry’s delight was palpable. Hotel owners could barely contain their glee when they heard the news. Mike Barnello, the CEO of LaSalle Hotel Properties, which owns (among others) the Park Central, the Roger and Gild Hall near Wall Street, openly admitted that the bill will help him raise room prices.

On a recent earnings call he told investors that the new law should be a “big boost in the arm for the business … certainly in terms of the pricing.”

Helping hotel owners raise room rates while cutting off home sharing options to all socioeconomic classes will have a negative ripple effect on local economies. Our research has found that for every dollar spent at a hotel, 60% leaves the state and goes to corporate headquarters, many of which reside outside of the United States. But for every dollar spent on a home share, 87% stays in the community.

That means that New York is taking money out of neighborhoods and sending it to multibillion-dollar, multinational corporations with little incentive to reinvest in the communities in which they operate. It’s also going to force visitors to spend more on their hotel rooms, which means they’ll have less money to spend on things like shopping, shows and dining.

And let’s remember New York is more than just New York City. The new law means that a couple in upstate New York counting on home sharing to earn some extra money from tourists coming to see the fall foliage, suddenly face a massive fine just for listing their home. New York City might not be in desperate need of revenue that stays in the community, but other cities and towns are. They shouldn’t be penalized in this egregious way.

Read the full article here.

UFCW’s Jim Araby On Why Business And Labor Need To Talk More

The future of work looks nothing like the past. Technology is changing every industry and few people see that more closely than Jim Araby, the executive director of the United Food and Commercial Workers Western State Council.

The members of his union work on farms and in factories and grocery stores. But instead of buying into the established narrative that business is all about the bottom line and unions are all about protecting the workers no matter the economic realities, Araby believes both sides need to transcend this binary division and work together.

“If we can break through and have a real discussion about what the future of work looks like in California you’d have a lot of people on all sides of the issue say, ‘Yeah, let’s come together,’” said Araby during a talk with CALinnovates Chief Evangelist Kish Rajan.

Araby is helping to shape this conversation. He recently helped push through AB1066 which will provide overtime to farm workers. While some in business may grumble at these kind of pay hikes, Araby points out that California has always had the most progressive labor laws in the country and the state was still responsible for 34% of all new jobs in the last jobs report.

That’s because despite what we sometimes read, these issues aren’t black and white. Araby spoke to Rajan about examining those grey areas and how government, unions and business leaders, need to come together to solve the problems that affect them all around housing, the environment and job growth.

 

A Step Ahead: Jim Araby

Hi everyone. This is Kish Rajan chief evangelist at CALinnovates, and along with our executive director, Mike Montgomery, we welcome you to the new CALinnovates podcast, where we’ll be sitting down with elected officials and policy advocates and other thought leaders to discuss issues of critical innovation, technology and public policy matters that face California and the country. We’ll be talking to guests of all kinds and we’ll be broadcasting this regularly, and we hope that you’ll join us for this important series of discussions about the future of our state and our country.

This time we’re joined by Jim Araby. He’s executive director of the UFCW Western States Council, and as you’ll hear, we had a really great conversation about innovation and technology and the role of labor in helping to usher in a new era that can expand the economy, be consistent with labor’s values, but recognize how do we do all this amidst really difficult change? Jim’s a real leader in this thinking, and I hope you’ll enjoy the conversation we had about this.

Hey, Jim Araby. You’re executive director of the UFCW Western States Council, am I saying that right?

Jim Araby: That’s correct.

Cool. Cool. Tell us what that means. What’s your job, and tell us about UFCW for our listeners who maybe aren’t familiar.

Sure. Well that means I am, it’s a big fancy title that basically means just two things. I am responsible to co-ordinate the work of the United Food and Commercial Workers politics and legislation, primarily here in California. We’re a 160,000 member union, just here in California, all across the state. Most of our members are in, you know, you’re familiar with, grocery store workers, but we also represent workers in retail drugstores, both CVS and Rite Aid.

We have over 2,500 members that work in agriculture, primarily down in Salinas Valley, picking lettuce. Some nurseries down in Oxnard, and then, our other big sector that we represent is food processing. So, Foster Farms Chicken, those are all UFCW members, as well as Hormel Beef Packing here in California, and then, we have affiliates both in Nevada and Arizona. And our union is very similar in demographic. So, that’s pretty much it.

So, these are folks that are working in retail stores, food related retail stores, and then as you mentioned, actually involved in helping to, not produce, but at least process the type of food that we find in those retail stores or restaurants or other places.

Absolutely, yeah. These workers, just to give you a little sense of our demographics too, 38% of our members in California are under 30 years old. A lot of immigrant workers, and first generation American’s work in a lot of the industries we are, and on average, they make anywhere between $25,0000 and $35,000 a year. So, you know, these are the working people of California, and also Arizona and Nevada.

And hard working people.

Hard working people.

So, the jobs you’re describing to me don’t sound particularly leisurely.

Absolutely not. And you know, I’d say the last thing is relative to this discussion that we’re going to have, you know, they’re in the sectors of the economy that are growing.

Yeah.

And so, you know, that puts us sort of in the middle of key critical discussions when it comes to the economy and other things that are happening.

Absolutely, let’s get into that, and as you mentioned, one of your key responsibilities is around politics and legislation. There’s a lot going on in that regard. Looking at the legislative session that just ended as we are recording this conversation, AB 1066 I think was the number. It was drafted by Assemblymember Gonzales and related to overtime for farm workers as I recall. Tell us exactly what that bill did and I trust for you all, you see that as a success, and tell us why?

Absolutely. So, you know, when the National Labor Relations Act was passed and signed way back in 1938 I believe by FDR, there were certain levels of workers in the private sector that were excluded. You know, farm workers being one of them, and historically, here in California a lot of people know about the United Farm Workers and Caesar Chavez, and the struggle of those workers that started back right after the exclusion of the NLRA, but really heated up in the 60’s and 70’s with some great victories here in California.

California’s the only state in the country that actually has a board that is designated to regulate agricultural labor in the whole entire country, because they’re excluded out of the NLRA, states have the right to regulate the work of these workers. So, California’s the only place in the country that actually has the agricultural relations board that gives a certain level of rights to farm workers. But, as a part of the deal in 1939 when this exclusion happened, because it was a way for FDR to get southern Dixiecrats to vote for the National Labor Relations Act. And so, agriculture was very powerful, especially in the South, and these workers were excluded. It was also because a lot of the workers that worked in these fields in the 30’s and 40’s were black, and a lot of the people from the South didn’t believe that black folks had the right to anything. Right? I mean, we all know about the civil rights struggle and everything else that went on for decades after that. And so, this was another part. So, we believe it was very racist, as well as a political decision in the 30’s,

And come full circle in 2016 here in California, we have, through the work and leadership of both assemblymember Gonzales, but also, assembly speaker Anthony Rendon, and pro-tem Kevin DeLeon and then ultimately the governor, who has his own history with this issue, was able to sign a bill, which we believe to be very historic. Essentially, all it does is when farm workers work, after eight hours, they get the same rights as every other worker in California, and they get paid overtime. Millions of people already enjoy that, agricultural workers were excluded. They’re no longer going to be excluded.

Wow, that’s remarkable. And certainly, you look at the agricultural sector, I mean, we could do a whole hour long conversation, or longer about the history of ‘Ag’ in California, both economically, politically, and socially, it’s been a tremendous thing, but certainly, when you look at the size and scale of the agriculture sector in California, it’s massive. I mean, we continue to be one of the world’s, if not the world’s largest producing state of agriculture, I believe.

Absolutely. With a little caveat. I mean, California’s economy’s a two trillion dollar economy. The agricultural sector is 50 billion of that. Actually, the grocery industry’s bigger than the agricultural industry in California.

Interesting.

The grocery industry’s a hundred billion dollar business, the agricultural industry’s 54 billion. Still significant, right? And has an historic relationship with California, who we see ourselves as, but at the same time it is a small piece of California’s two trillion dollar economy. An important piece, but a small piece.

Yeah, interesting. And so, some will say though, I mean, obviously, no bill of any consequence in the state is passed without debate, and you know, many in the business community, I’m putting that in quotes, right? There is no monolithic business community, but many folks, when they look at California as a place that’s competitive, nationally and globally, and looking at the cost of labor, and looking at the rules associated with labor, raise some concerns right? They raise concerns that the types of rules that we have in the aggregate in this state, whether it’s about wages, hours, rules around meals and breaks and things like that are out of step. Are so far beyond what they see in other places that it creates a competitive challenge for California that can result in jobs leaving the state for places that those costs, or those rules are not as stringent. Do you agree with those characterizations, or how do you respond to people that make those criticisms in California?

There’s emotion then there’s facts. And the facts don’t merit that out. I mean California’s economy just this last month, produced…35% of all new jobs produced in the last reporting period were produced in California. Despite the fact we have paid sick days and higher minimum wage, and now farm worker overtime, and all these workman’s comp regulations. I would make the argument actually that it creates a more dynamic economy. I mean, California truly has one of the most dynamic economies out of any of the 50 states. And mind you, we have a tendency to boom and bust. You know, we have very big booms and we have very deep busts.

But I think under the leadership of Governor Brown, I think he’s been very smart about what laws to sign and not, but he also knows, California has one of the highest poverty rates in the country, if not the highest. I just end with you know, it’s funny when Governor Brown… I was at the signing ceremony of the paid sick day bill a couple years ago when Governor Brown started talking to the media, that was really interesting because you know, we’re very lucky to have someone like Governor Brown, who’s served in two different eras of government. And he said, you know, when he was governor back in 1976, the same arguments were used by the chamber that are used today. That’s 40 years later and California’s economy is multitudes the size it was in the 1970’s, and you know, we have a very robust economy, so, I just say the facts don’t prove that out. For every one business that leaves California, ten start, right? You know, we were a place of innovation creativity, and I think we got to apply some of that to some of these other things.

Well, I definitely want to turn to that in a minute, but maybe just to drill into this for one other question. And that is that there also is this notion that someone said to me that a practical concern about overtime payment in this segment, is that it could just flat out encourage employers to cut their hours. Right? To sort of divide the hours, spread them amongst workers so that they’re trying to avoid that type of cost, and that ultimately could, as it’s being argued, be harmful to those individual workers because they’ll find their hours being cut for fear of triggering that overtime cost. How would you respond to that kind of suggestion?

I would say if everything was equal, sure, but everything isn’t equal. You have workers that are much better… I mean, you know, farm work is a skilled work, right? I mean, when you have people that are going to pick lettuce, there’s a way to cut the lettuce and wrap it and move it, and the people that are more efficient are going to get more hours. It doesn’t matter if you have overtime rules or not, right? You know, people that can go out and pick the berries… I mean, there are people that are much more efficient at that. Are you going to tell me as a business owner, you’re going to cut your most efficient workers and bring someone on that doesn’t just because you don’t want to pay them a couple more bucks in overtime? I would say that’s a bad business decision on your part.

Yeah.

Right.

Yeah. Got it. Well, you mentioned that innovation and technology, and I’d love to sort of turn in this direction and think about, you’re talking about farm workers and picking crops… I mean, again, God bless these folks that are just doing incredibly difficult work, to be sure. But in this era of increased innovation software technology, mechanization of all kinds of things, I sort of wonder about the future of traditional industries like agriculture and think about, in 10 years, or in 20 years, or certainly 50 years, are those jobs going to even exist anymore, or are we going to be able to find ways to create machines that can do the kind of work that we’re talking about and these folks that are doing it today?

Sure, I mean, you know, I will say a lot of my brothers and sisters in the labor movement sometimes can be Luddites when it comes to technology and technological innovation. I think that’s changing. I think we cannot fight the pace of technological innovation. I actually think in some ways, it could be good. In a lot of ways it’s good. It makes our lives easier, it makes our lives more convenient, right? You know, ten years ago, out here, to catch a cab here where we are in Concord, California it’d be pretty hard. All you’ve got to do now is you go to an app and you can get Uber or Flywheel, or whomever come and get you right? So, I would say that is an efficiency that is a good thing. The question becomes, what does it mean in the greater scheme of things, as technological innovation creates efficiencies, what do we do about the other side of that question, which comes to displacement. Right? Because you still need people to be able to work in order to have our economy thrive.

That’s part of the challenge we’ve had in this economy, right? Is that we are a consumer driven economy, right, where you need more people to have access to… It’s not the millionaires and billionaires that drive our economy, as much as it is the people that make our members. 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 thousand dollars a year. They’re spending all that money, right? They’re the ones that are generating the economic activity. They’re not sitting on massive amounts of money. They actually have to spend the money they make. So, I think, because of that, we have to figure out… I think there’s a responsibility for those that believe in a functioning democratic society to figure out how do we collectively adjust to some of these technological innovations so that we don’t have millions of workers displaced looking for work.

And do you think organized labor in general is feeling that way? Is searching for those answers as well about acknowledging…and by the way, I realize that organized labor is not a monolithic thing either, so, forgive the generalization, but, are there folks there that are realizing, look, what we’re experiencing is a fundamental shift in the economy, away from the industrial into this information technology, knowledge-based world and are folks sort of leaning into that problem and trying to figure out how we help usher in a new era that’s …or…you know, because the frame is that labor somehow is fighting that, or resisting that transition, and I think that it seems too often that the battle lines in places like Sacramento get drawn in that way, and so I would… forgive the length of the question, but I guess I would just love sort of your reaction to, do you agree that that’s sort of what’s characterizing the politics in Sacramento, and how do you assess sort of the state of your colleagues in labor as it relates to where we’re going with the economy?

Yeah. I mean, I think it comes down to two things. One, it comes down to trust. Right? I mean, I think there’s a fundamental… If we could actually break through, and actually have a real discussion about what the future of work looks like here in California, you’d have a lot of people on all the sides of the issue saying, “Yeah, let’s come together.” I mean, I can’t tell you how many conversations I’ve been in with business leaders and investors and others who are like, “I wish I could talk to you or someone like you so we could sit down and solve these problems.” And my answer to that is that there are. I’m not the only guy out there right? There are a multitude of people out there. The problem is, is that we’re not talking to one another, right?

I think the other issue is, we cannot just be a bottom line driven economy, right? Where, I feel like we’re in our two ends, where you have the one side going, this is all about the bottom line, right? The investor class. I need… my responsibility’s to my shareholders. And then the unions say, my responsibility’s to my members. Well, those aren’t wrong, right? And that’s all true. But the question becomes, how do the shareholders and the members have different interests? We don’t. So, the question becomes, how do we make sure these are shared interests and values? I’m not going to say… it’d be naïve of me to say that everyone’s going to be on that page, but we have to seek out the people that want to get on that same page. I think there’s a real opportunity, especially with the way that technology is impacting our society, where I think labor, government, and these technological companies have a shared interest in figuring out how innovation creates space to think about how we organize society in a very different way.

Yeah. Well, it just seems that that’s just such a key, because I do think that… and it’s probably a superficial analysis, but I just worry about where do the jobs of the future come from? Right? It just seems like innovation at its nature is about producing more with less, right? By using greater efficiencies and creating orders of magnitude of more productivity with fewer inputs, right? It seems like that’s what innovation’s designed to do, and I agree with you that it seems that that is about sort of trying to re-shape a new economy where there’s new functions inside of that economy that emerge that are the…that’s the fodder for new jobs, but, I just sort of wonder, how are we going to get there? How are we going to bring those folks together to explore what an expansive innovation economy can actually look like?

Well, one, I think it takes leadership. It takes real leadership to have these difficult discussions on both sides and people that are respected from both ends right? I mean, I think I’ve been in discussions with some folks in the tech sector, where I can sit down with them, and they thought I was on one thing and I said actually this is where we want to be, and there was a tone deafness on that side. Right? You know, I mean if you look at what happens, and I think here in the Bay area, it’s sort of elevated because this is one of the places in which these innovations are happening right? And then the experiment is used in our cities. And like whether it’s Airbnb, or Uber, or, whatever, right? There’s a tremendous amount of pressure that people feel on the other side right? Where they feel like, I’m getting my job taken off, I’m getting displaced, or my rents are going high.

There’s’ a combination of factors happening, and I think humans operate in a very binary world, and politically, binary is like, that’s how you get things done. Like you create a binary problem. But the reality is, this is not a binary problem. Right? This is a very complex problem. And I think those that really want to solve these problems need to come together, put our binary aside and say, how do we get, how do we create a more equitable and sustainable world. Right?

Yeah. It seems that then the venues where those conversations can happen need to be identified and need to be supported, right? I mean, we have to respect our friends in the legislature, and the governors, I mean these are people that have to exert leadership, but it’s also very difficult, I think, if that’s the only place where these things are being thrashed about, right? It seems that the presence of non-profit organizations and other venues, academic and otherwise, it seems that that’s what we really need in order to try to further the kind of dialogue that you’re suggesting.

Absolutely, and you know look, I mean, it’s not like it hasn’t happened before. I mean, even think about some things that are happening here. I think, you know, there’s issues, but there’s a labor, management partnership with Kaiser. Right? Kaiser has this very unique relationship, sometimes strained, but it has a really unique relationship with most of its unions, right? You have AT&T. Right? AT&T and CWA right, you know they have… you know, I mean again, these are very broad brushstrokes, but it can happen. Right? I think you sort of have to…I mean grocery chains right? And we’ve had a…you know, there’s been contentions, but we’ve had good relationships with some of our major employers over a long term time, with instances of elevated conflict, which is part of the deal, right? I mean, because there are ultimately, we share a lot in common, but there are also very different ends that we have to achieve. But, I do think that we have to create that dialogue. I think there are issues around housing, issues around job training, issues around the environment that unify us, right? Like if we don’t have housing in which people can afford to live, then you’re not going to have the workers that you need in order to get the job done.

No kidding. It’s a crisis in California.

I mean like environment, right? Environment can be like, you know…what was it yesterday in San Francisco? 90 degrees? You know it’s like, and what does that mean in terms of…

I was in LA and it was raining, so, there you go.

Right. You know, so I just think there’s the big, big picture issues that, we’ve got to have a discussion about. And I also think the other place is job training and re-training. I think that’s a real place in which labor and business and tech and all can come together and say, “How do we solve some of these issues?”

Yeah. You and I were both invited and part of the California Work Force Association meeting not long ago, where you have just incredibly well meaning and hard working folks that are trying to figure out how to develop and execute workforce development strategies. And you can tell that it’s a real struggle. In the sense that we’re just in such a period of rapid and profound change, that to try to re-orient those legacy types of programs and approaches to meet these new challenges, it’s not easy is it? It’s very difficult.

But, you know, you think about it, the other big challenge is demographic.

Yeah, right.

You have at the same time massive amounts of technological innovation going on, you know, from ten years ago to today, right? The things that we could do even on our phones from ten years ago, have dramatically changed the way we live, work and communicate. And at the same time you have an aging population. Right? You have a population that… I forget what the numbers are, but, how many people every day are retiring?

Oh, sure.

Right? And what strain does that put? On some of these other things that were from the twentieth century industrial economy, right? And then you have at the same time on the other end, massive amounts of millennials every day graduating high-school and college and, you know, so you have this…

And they see the world completely differently.

Absolutely.

You know, one of the venues that you talked about, or that you alluded to, that you and I are connected to is the New Leaders Council, right? A great organization, setting up chapters in all 50 states and both cultivating that new generation of leadership amongst this millennial generation that clearly thinks differently, digital natives, believe in disruption, see the world through a completely different set of eyes than you and I do, and certainly people that are older than us. But New Leaders Council is a place where we have come together. It’s where we met, right? And it’s a place where we’re having these discussions and to their credit…one of the things that’s coming up, again, as we’re recording this, we’re just a few days away from the first Presidential debate, amidst this rather wild and tumultuous presidential campaign. But the goal of the event, and we’re glad that you’re going to be one of our contributors is, to try to bring that millennial voice, which isn’t just a generational voice, but it’s trying to talk about…you bring these issues of the change that you and I are discussing here briefly, into that conversation. I’m wondering your view as we sort of wrap up here of the presidential race and the extent to which you think it’s addressing these topics that you and I’ve been talking about?

I think the presidential race is actually making these topics even more relevant, it’s not addressing it. It’s become a traditional presidential campaign, where you have people going into their corners, but, it’s in some sense traditional, but in another sense, it’s not traditional. You have one candidate who, you know, in Donald Trump, who the other day for instance, lied about a lie about a lie. He basically said Obama was born in America, but Hillary Clinton’s the one who started the rumor.

Right.

Right? And it’s like, you know.

And then he solved it.

Right. To me that’s just insanity. And on the other end, you have Hillary Clinton who can’t get out from like, talking about her emails. And it just seems like every day. So, and that’s the media narrative, but then every day, you have people dealing with these issues about like, you know what we just spent the last ten minutes talking about, right, with, afraid about job security, retirement, health care, housing, environment, like these things aren’t being discussed in large media narratives. Instead, we’re talking about building walls and emails. It just doesn’t…

Well, it is this incredible, I don’t know if it’s an irony, or how we want to put it, but, technology seems to have shortened our attention span, or at least the willingness of the mass media to dive into these deeper issues that you and I’ve just spent a few minutes trying to dig into, and there’s a lot more to go, but you’re right, it seems that the presidential campaign itself has been pulled into this very rapid fire, very binary and limited type of discussion, which is unfortunate, given how serious the issues are.

Oh, absolutely. I think it’s up to all of us to…that’s going to happen and it’s really up to those that actually are concerned about the society we live in to participate in that and make the right decision on that, but really come together and say how do we solve these problems despite what’s being talked about, right? because ultimately, that’s what’s going to make the change right? The change is going to come from the top. They’re going to give direction, but they’re really going to be about the innovators, the business leaders, the labor leaders, community leaders going we need to come together and solve this problem. And I actually think California has led on this issue. We are in the midst of solving, or trying to tackle big issues that the rest of the country isn’t. And our economy’s growing, and we’re doing well.

Well, it wouldn’t be the first time, if we did that here from California. Well, listen, you talked about the fact that the only way we’ll get through this is to have quality leadership, I think, from all the different sectors and it’s clear that labor will always be at the table, and will be a major contributor to where we go. And so, the leadership of labor and folks like you helping to drive that conversation from that sector is critically important, so, Jim Araby, thanks a lot for spending time with us, and thanks a lot for your leadership on these key issues. We appreciate it.

Absolutely, any time. Thanks a lot.

Smart Companies Like Disney Show Why the FCC Is Wrong on Set-Top Boxes

by Mike Montgomery

t’s hard to see what’s missing at Disney. The giant entertainment company (one of the biggest companies in the world with a $147 billion market cap) already has Lucasfilm, Marvel, Pixar, ABC, ESPN, theme parks, hotels and TV channels galore.

But even Disney, as big and powerful as it is, must make deals with distribution partners such as Comcast, Netflix and Apple to get its movies and TV shows delivered to consumers in the manner they desire. So it wasn’t a huge surprise to many media watchers when Disney CEO Bob Iger announced earlier this month that the company was considering buying Netflix or Twitter in order to have its own distribution platform.

“The biggest thing we’re trying to do now is figure out what technology’s role is in distributing the great content that we have,” Iger told the crowd at the Boston College Chief Executives Club. “It’s one thing to be as fortunate as we are to have [our content] but in today’s world, it’s almost not enough … unless you have access to your consumers.”

Now, Disney may never actually buy either Netflix or Twitter, but the point is that when smart people in the media world are thinking about how to get close to the consumer, they are coming up with creative, market-driven solutions – not by asking the government for favors.

Over the past few years the way we consume entertainment has changed in unimaginable ways. People can watch what they want where they want when they want. Children coming of age today have no concept of a linear TV schedule where you have to be in your living room at a certain time to watch your favorite show. To them the world of TV and movies is just an endless giant living library that can be accessed from almost anywhere.

This kind of creative disruption is healthy for an industry and it’s exciting to see creators and innovators rising to the challenge.

And it’s crucial that this movement not be stopped by the FCC.

Read the full article here.

Page 9 of 31« First...7891011...2030...Last »