News & Events Event Reports

Global Crises, Local Impacts: Preventing Hate & Building Social Cohesion Amid Global Crises — Unleashing the Potential of Cities in Western Canada & the Western United States

Publication Date:

28/11/2024

Content Type:

Event Reports

Share:

Tags:

City-Led ActionGlobal Crises Local ImpactsMayoral LeadershipSocial Cohesionvictoria

Summary

On 30 – 31 October 2024, the Strong Cities Network (Strong Cities), in cooperation with the Foundation for a Path Forward (F4PF) and the City of Victoria (British Columbia, Canada) convened more than 65 mayors, councilmembers and other officials and experts from cities across western Canada and the United States, as well as state, provincial and federal officials, for a conference focused on preventing hate and maintaining social cohesion in cities and communities in these geographies. The event was financed by the Office of the Attorney General, British Columbia, Canada and the US Consulate, Vancouver.

Brianna Bear, Traditional Knowledge Keeper and Artist from the Songhees Nation, opened the event with a Land Acknowledgement, recognising Indigenous peoples as the traditional stewards of the land and expressing gratitude to those who reside there.

Throughout the event, speakers discussed how hate, extremism and social polarisation are manifesting in the western parts of Canada and the US and how global crises – including the disinformation around them – are exacerbating these challenges. While the threat is multi-faceted, participants agreed on the importance of local governments and proactive local leadership in the face of these threats through coordinated responses that address rising levels of hate and social polarisation and initiatives that help residents “disagree better”.

Marianne Alto, Mayor of Victoria, British Columbia, (Canada), drew attention to the city’s new community well-being plan and its relevance to hate prevention. She said the approach “puts the obligation on the city to respond to crisis with the goal of upholding collaboration and cooperation as a model for how to move forward together”.  

City officials from Edmonton, (Alberta, Canada) provided an update and received feedback on a proposal to develop an early warning hate-monitoring system that would be part of the operationalisation of the city’s anti-racism strategy. Discussions focused on the proposal’s efficacy, including whether the local government or a non-government actor should ‘own’ this tool.

Discussions throughout the event drew attention to the cross-border nature of threats and the importance of enhanced cooperation for addressing them, including untapped opportunities to enhance non-law enforcement cooperation between cities in western Canada and the US. Participants underscored the importance of local governments building sustainable partnerships with communities to develop strong relationships with non-political city staff who stay through multiple administrations to ensure the sustainability of local prevention work in the city.

Participants also explored how cities can innovate to maintain social cohesion in times of global crisis and highlighted the importance of supporting and understanding the trauma of different communities, in particular those that have been historically-marginalised, and methods of building and sustaining trust and advancing truth and reconciliation. They emphasised the need to make more efforts to reach those communities that have been characterised as ‘hard to reach’.

Senior officials from Canada and the US highlighted their federal prevention policies and programmes – underscoring the importance of a public health approach to hate and targeted violence prevention — and the ways Washington, D.C., and Ottawa can support the needs and priorities of cities in their respective countries.

Finally, representatives from small municipalities spoke about the unique challenges they are facing when it comes to rising social polarisation and hate targeting migrant and other minority groups, as well as city officials and councilmembers, but how they lack the resources of larger cities to address them.  

Key Findings

• Cities in western Canada and the US are facing similar threats to social cohesion. It is more important than ever that cities can connect and learn from one another to address this shared priority by exchanging experiences, tactics, good practices and lessons.
• The threat landscape is increasingly complex and varied in cities in western Canada and the US, with mis/disinformation fuelling tensions and hate online and offline. Antisemitism, anti-Muslim, anti-Black, anti-LBGTQI+, anti-Indigenous peoples, anti-migrant and anti-government hate are on the rise in many cities and a growing number of local officials are under threat, including city council members who have been targeted by hate during council meetings and online.
• Polarisation is increasingly fuelled by false narratives on social media. There is a segment of the population that is feeling left behind who are being targeted on social media with anti-immigrant content that (wrongly) blames migrants, refugees and other new arrivals for housing and healthcare shortages and inequalities in cities. 
• In the face of such threats, a city’s response to incidents is critical to restoring community well-being. In the wake of a violent or hate-motivated incident, the tone for the response is set at the top by the mayor and city council. Leadership should prioritise community safety and well-being by leaning into community conversations on difficult topics and reimagining safety in public places.
• Under-reporting of hate crimes and bias incidents is a shared concern among cities in western Canada and the US. Addressing this deficit should be a priority for cities. Under-reporting is driven by a range of factors, including poor trust between historically-marginalised communities and police, limited awareness and capacity among community-based organisations (CBOs) and a lack of accessible reporting channels.
• CBOs offer several comparative advantages when it comes to hate prevention. CBOs can provide a link with ‘hard to reach’ communities to help overcome trust deficits between the local government and members of those communities. Their ability to consult and engage with both communities and local government can help give legitimacy to city policies or activities in communities where scepticism limits participation.   
• Local governments should take a holistic approach to supporting CBOs as prevention partners. Local governments can support CBOs by providing funding, enhancing their capacity through training and targeted networking and facilitating collaboration by convening and connecting community partners and incentivising cooperation rather than competition.    
• Strong local government-community relationships are vital and should be built and nurtured over time, not only in response to crises. Both structured and informal engagements grounded in empathy and understanding are the foundation for effective and sustainable city-led efforts to prevent hate and maintain social cohesion in times of global crises. When they are productive and mutually beneficial, these relationships can help neutralise efforts to divide communities.
• There is an imbalance between large and smaller cities in the resources and services available to support newcomers. This can lead to tensions between long-time residents and, for example, migrants, over limited resources and jobs, health care or housing with hateful backlash directed at newcomers and city officials.

Threats, Challenges and Needs Facing Cities in Western Canada and the US in Addressing Hate, Extremism and Polarisation

Threats and Challenges

Cities in western Canada and the US are facing an increasingly diverse and shared set of threats and challenges from hate and extremism. Researchers, practitioners, mayors and city officials discussed general trends and the specific ways these challenges are affecting their cities, exacerbated by global challenges.

Jakob Guhl, Senior Manager for Policy and Research, Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), which hosts the Strong Cities Network’s Management Unit, identified some of the militant white supremacist groups that are spreading divisive narratives in western Canada, including Active Clubs, White Lives Matter, Atomwaffen Division, the Diagolon network and the Hammerskins. While they are Canada-based, some of these groups have an explicitly transnational outlook that threatens the United States. Jakob also highlighted the prominent QAnon-inspired conspiracy theorist and self-proclaimed ‘Queen of Canada’, Romana Didulo, who has declared Victoria to be the capital of her ‘Kingdom’ and has previously issued calls for violence, including for the public execution of elected officials.

Jakob noted that misinformation related both to domestic issues, like election denial, and international issues, such as the Israel-Hamas conflict, has increased polarisation and tensions in communities across western Canada. He explained that these dynamics are exacerbated in a context where the Canadian information environment is being skewed by social media platform policies such as the Meta News Ban that limit access to high-quality sources of information. While many of these trends can be found across Canada, Jakob did note there are some regional variances. For example, a recent ISD report found that digital anti-Muslim hate plays a more pronounced role among extremist and hate groups in B.C. than at the national level.

John McCoy, Executive Director of the Edmonton-based Organization for the Prevention of Violence (OPV), highlighted several issues that are being weaponised online in western Canada by hate and extremist groups to further divide communities. These include debates around sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) in schools and migration. On the former, he shared that roughly half of Canadians oppose teaching SOGI to children in schools right now and that this issue has been used within protest movements and online to sow division. On the latter, he lamented the rapid decline in public support in Canada for immigrants.  

He also pointed to the low levels of hate crime reporting as a challenge facing cities in western Canada. He noted that the urban Indigenous population has the highest rate of unreported incidents, in part, because of trust issues with police. More broadly, he said it was important for municipalities to look at how they can address these issues, including by creating more spaces and opportunities for people from different communities to interact and build trust. 

Tony McCleer, Co-founder of Life After Hate, stressed the importance of preventing rising polarisation and political divisions in our communities to reach a point “where we no longer see our opponents as human beings … can no longer have discourse with them … and can’t see the humanity in them”. Tony went on to underscore that, “underneath the differences between groups that garner so much attention” is that “there’s so much that we actually have in common”. He noted that “when we cannot see the opposite side, there is no bridge that we can use to connect” the two sides. “When we can no longer see the humanity in our opponent, we end up going to a very dark place.”

StopHate AB’s Nina Saini highlighted the resource gap between urban and rural communities in Alberta and the challenge this poses to the latter’s ability to integrate the growing number of immigrants entering these communities. She said that these rural areas “are going through levels of shock” with these new arrivals to their small and largely homogenous communities and fears for the psychological safety of the migrants who are being targeted by hate. At the same time, young people from vulnerable groups, including members of the LBGTQI+ community are leaving these rural municipalities for urban centres at increasing rates “in order to feel accepted, to feel safer, and feel there is some opportunity for them”. Nina underscored the need to bridge the gap between rural and urban centres and recognise that “they are all citizens of the province” and deserve the same level of services and support regardless of the size of their city.

Nina also emphasised the need to ensure that opportunities and resources are the same for long-term residents and new arrivals to a community. It is when there is a real or perceived imbalance, she said, that “we get into that place of fear … we become less open … more insular … and this can lead to more hate crimes and violence, and further erosion of social cohesion”.

Several participants acknowledged that there is a segment of the population that is feeling “left behind” and is vulnerable to anti-immigrant disinformation that blames migrants, refugees and other new arrivals for housing and healthcare shortages and inequalities in cities. Some shared how misinformation surrounding global issues has contributed to a rise in hate crimes, with local incidents being fuelled by false narratives pushed out on social media. This is not unique to North America. According to recent research from the University of Melbourne’s Centre for Cities, immigration and misinformation are now the global issues that cities see as having the greatest local impact (previously it was climate).

On- and offline hate has also targeted local elected leaders. Several local elected leaders highlighted the increasingly complex and contentious nature of city council meetings where a small number of constituents are targeting councils and their members with hate. In some cases, council members face a safety challenge, with angry constituents approaching the bench.

In Victoria (British Columbia, Canada), Mayor Marianne Alto encouraged municipalities to band together to push back against a social media environment that has become increasingly combative and prone to the spread of mis- and disinformation and refute misleading or false information. She emphasised that this is an area where cooperation among cities sharing common interests needs to be enhanced. Michelle Harris, Strategic Planning and Communications Adviser for Victoria (British Columbia, Canada), echoed this call. With 13 municipalities and dozens of non-governmental organisations on Victoria Island, she emphasised the importance of speaking out with one voice and purpose against the hateful and conspiratorial rhetoric that is targeting communities on the island daily. “The more cities can collaborate in pushing back against hateful messages, the more we dissipate the fear”.

Speakers noted that the fear driving some discriminatory backlash is often linked to perceptions of “scarcity”, a concept that is contributing to divisive and hateful rhetoric that Victoria Mayor Marianne Alto described as a “lie”. She said that “while there are individuals who are desperate”, it is important to look at a community more wholistically and get the balance of resources right so that all parts of the community benefit rather than being pitted against each other. To do this, speakers noted that municipalities and NGOs need to work together to collectively challenge the concept of scarcity and target support where it is needed most.

Needs

Participants underscored the comparative advantages that municipalities have in mitigating the impacts on social cohesion that these threats are having. Whether through the targeted programming and services that they can provide, or the trust and legitimacy they have with communities, local governments are often better placed than higher levels of government to create an environment that can prevent further polarisation. However, throughout the workshop, discussions highlighted the varied needs that cities have to fully leverage these advantages. This is particularly important for many smaller and mid-sized cities, which often lack the capacity to anticipate, prepare for and respond to the impacts of global crises on their communities and are eager for good practices from other cities to apply in their local contexts.

Throughout the workshop, city officials and other participants identified some of the different needs of cities to allow them to become more active and effective in preventing and responding to the range of threats discussed. These include tools and guidance to:

• Build bridges with historically-marginalised populations and other communities where trust has been frayed or is otherwise lacking to deepen and broaden engagement.
• Identify gaps in belonging and social cohesion across the city, including by using a data map to highlight where people feel safe and how to help them feel that they belong.  
• Work collaboratively with communities on scenario planning in the event the city is impacted by a global crisis.
• Use city social media channels – which local governments often rely on to spread the word about city-led initiatives to local communities – while managing the potential escalation of hateful comments.
• Provide a trauma-informed lens for city interactions with communities.
• Overcome chronic community underreporting of hate crimes and bias incidents.
• Deliver proactive, intentional and multi-language outreach to communities in the city that is inclusive of everyone.
• Develop a plan for addressing digital hate that reflects the needs and priorities of local communities.

Key Themes

1. Mitigating the Impact on Local Communities: The Role of Local Governments in Times of Global Crisis

Local governments are well placed to support residents who are impacted by global challenges, both through direct engagement and targeted communication. This does come with some risks, however, when navigating divisive and challenging issues. For example, local elected officials are facing increased pressure from their residents to respond to crises, particularly the conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine. However, discussions highlighted how a response from a local government can lead to more anger and disappointment from constituents. Some asserted that since local elected officials are not experts on these crises, they should resist pressure from their constituents to weigh on them or else run the risk of inadvertently alienating certain communities in their city. To help navigate this challenging environment, participants emphasised some things that cities should keep in mind:

• Actors at all levels should avoid shaming and name-calling and instead show empathy and compassion for those who disagree with them.
• Where a global crisis is impacting different parts of a city differently, city-led or facilitated conversations with affected community members must acknowledge the trauma on all sides.
• Municipalities should work with community-based organisations and trusted community brokers to facilitate conversations and mediate between individuals and groups on different sides of a divisive issue.

Scott Goodmanson, Mayor of Langford (British Columbia, Canada), said it was important to recognise the consequences a city may face when it contributes to addressing a global challenge that seems remote from the needs of its residents. He pointed to how some Langford residents were angered by his decision to pursue a Sister City initiative with a Ukrainian municipality. They asked: “Why should Langford deal with a global issue when we have our own issues at home?” Mayor Goodmanson responded that cities that take small measures to help cities in need become stronger and more resilient as a result. 

Ricardo Gambetta-Alvarado, Director of International, Immigrant and Refugee Affairs, City of Aurora (Colorado, USA) highlighted the importance of ensuring that residents are provided accurate information regarding the impacts of a global crisis, such as migration, on local communities and the risks when this does not happen. For example, the mayor and council members were involved in circulating misinformation about Venezuelan migrants. Although the local police, City Manager and other public officials were pushing out factual information about the situation, the misinformation from some local elected leaders fuelled a false narrative that right-wing social media influencers and some national politicians helped spread about Venezuelan gangs who had overrun Aurora, a city of 400,000 people.  

2. Leading by Example: Proactive, Principled, Responsive and Consistent Leadership from Local Elected Officials in Times of Global Crisis

Local elected leaders from cities in western Canada and the United States discussed challenges and responses to threats being impacted by global crises. They identified several lessons learned from their work leading cities in efforts to maintain social cohesion in times of global crises. These include: a) making space and otherwise creating opportunities for people to get to know their neighbours; b) acknowledging the limitations of local government and working with and through trusted experts to provide support; c) meeting people where they are; d) focusing on commonalities (e.g., child safety) when having conversations with groups that have historically been at odds with each other; and e) identifying and working with partners who want to bring the community or communities together.

Mayor Chris Roberts from Shoreline (Washington, USA) shared how income inequality in his city is growing and putting more pressure on local government and its limited resources. The government’s ability to address these concerns is being tested. He emphasised how local leaders “must focus on doing what’s right for our communities… be bold and take the actions that are necessary to protect communities…. We must speak on behalf of marginalized communities’ members and use our voices to protect as many people as [possible].”

Mayor Scott Goodmanson of Langford (British Columbia, Canada) highlighted how the city has experienced significant population growth over the past few years but without commensurate expansion of infrastructure (e.g., parks, roads, school districts, sewers, etc). This inability of the City to meet the demand for services has led to frustrations among the population, with a small group of people then contesting the previous election (which produced the city’s first new mayor in 32 years). He said the new City Council is trying to be more proactive and responsive to the concerns of local residents, but change takes time and residents need to have patience.

Mayor Amarjeet Sohi of Edmonton (Alberta, Canada) said that with population of 1.1 million (and growing), Edmonton is the most northern large urban centre in Canada and is facing similar challenges as other cities represented on this panel. He pointed to the City’s anti-racism and anti-hate action plans, which are designed to, among other things, address the disinformation and misinformation challenges facing Edmontonians, including those related to income inequality and zoning.

Vice Mayor Doreen Garlid of Tempe (Arizona, USA) was the first Native American woman elected to the City Council, which, she noted, “finally reflects the diversity of the community” that includes more than 150 nationalities. Acknowledging rising levels of hate and division in and around the city, she highlighted steps the local government and City Council are taking to address these challenges. These include initiatives aimed at increasing the reporting of hate crimes in the city. For example, together with Arizona State University, Tempe hosted a forum with historically-marginalised communities to explore ways to make the hate crime reporting process easier in the Tempe community. The local government has also developed and distributed a guide to businesses and schools on how and where to report. 

More broadly, she shared how the Democratic Mayor of Tempe worked with the Republican mayor of neighbouring Mesa to create ‘Disagree Better Arizona‘, an initiative focused on teaching Arizonans “to relate to each other in a respectful manner”. In October, it hosted a forum for community members to share differences and tensions surrounding the November election and discuss what happens the day after the vote. She said that the City was reassuring its citizens that things “are going to be ok”.

Participants shared perspectives on the importance of coordinated responses among municipalities. Moreover, particularly in such polarising times, they reiterated that “solutions must be for the long-haul, rather than tailored to short-term election cycle considerations”.

Speakers also shared their cities’ experiences working to build trust with First Nations communities. For example, Edmonton created a committee of elders from these communities to advise it on its anti-racism strategy. Committees like these are important as they can report back to the local government on the issues impacting Indigenous peoples that the city can help address. Vice Mayor Garlid shared the work that the National League of Cities has done in this area, including developing a ‘roadmap to repair‘, a guidebook for local elected leaders to learn how to build bridges with Indigenous peoples. 

Local officials exchanged experiences on how they are navigating the impacts that global crises are having in their cities, which are increasingly undermining community cohesion and targeting the officials themselves.

Ryan Witten, Board Co-Chair of Alaska Vision3, a non-profit organisation based in Anchorage (Alaska, USA), said his organisation aims to envision Alaska’s future 30 years from now and to work collaboratively towards that vision. It focuses on entrepreneurship, innovation, climate change adaptation and community resilience. Ryan said the approach involves bringing people with diverse viewpoints together to develop solutions rather than coming to the table with predetermined answers.

Amy Lubick, City Councilor from Port Moody (British Columbia, Canada), a small city outside of Vancouver, highlighted some of the city’s challenges, including divisions over issues like Israel-Palestine and rapid development, the latter which is fuelling the scarcity mindset and leaving long-time residents scared. She said there were lessons learned from addressing climate change – i.e., building climate resilience across a city – that should be applied here. Neighbours and communities need to take care of each other during crises, whether it is climate- or hate-induced, no matter their backgrounds or disagreements.

Danielle Summerville, Cultural & Community Outreach Programs Manager, City of Colorado Springs (Colorado, USA) shared that following the November 2002 Club Q mass shooting, which targeted the city’s LBGTQI+ community, the City identified it as a bias crime and addressed the needs of this historically-marginalised community in the state’s second most populous city and one which “leans into conservative values”. She said that when the attack happened, the local government was not used to working with communities that said they did not feel safe or that there was space for them in their city. In the aftermath, however, the government found itself coming along as an ally of the affected communities but recognised that it lacked the necessary expertise to engage effectively. So, at the outset, it sought to listen and learn from the experts, including those from the community.

Danielle discussed the City’s role in providing resources and support, including the creation of the Prism Community Collective, a central hub and resource centre for those impacted by the Club Q attack, and plans for a public memorial to honour the victims. She said the city is working closely with the victims’ families to ensure the memorial is visible and honours the lives lost.

Amy Lubick stressed that local governments should provide a trauma-informed lens for their interactions with communities. To facilitate this, local government should train their officials in trauma-informed practices and ways to avoid re-traumatisation. Danielle pointed to Colorado Spring’s 1,000 Neighborhood Initiative, which aims to help address mental health issues by encouraging residents to connect through gathering and build a social support system in their own neighbourhoods. “It can be anything from a small lunch on the porch or a large block party”, she said. 

Salima Ebrahim, Chief of Staff, City of Edmonton ( Alberta, Canada), and head of their anti-racism work, said the City’s Anti-Racism Strategy is part of a city-wide effort to promote a holistic approach to community safety and well-being as it works to address systemic barriers and promote transformational thinking throughout the city. She noted the rise in hate incidents in Edmonton targeting various communities, including Black, Muslim, East Asian, South Asian, Jewish and LGBTQI+. In the face of such threats, how a city responds to incidents that shock its values is critical, she said. The tone for the response is set at the top by the City Council, and she commended her Council’s leadership in prioritising community safety and well-being, including by leaning into community conversations on difficult topics and on how to reimagine safety in public places. This includes the establishment of a Community Safety and Well-Being Task Force to gather community input on combating hate across Edmonton and updating City bylaws to make it clear that harassment based on race, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation, among other identifiers, is ‘legally unacceptable’ in Edmonton. She said the first motion adopted by the current City Council was centred on collaborating with the community to create an ant-racist Edmonton. 

Salima explained that the underlying objective of Edmonton’s City’s Anti-Racism Strategy is to put in place structures, mechanisms and funding to develop and support programmes to reduce all forms of hate and extremism and help ameliorate the effect of hate on communities across the city. The Strategy also reinforces an important message to all residents: there is no place for hate in Edmonton. Mayor Sohi and his team have taken several ‘transformative actions’ to begin implementing the strategy: 1) increasing accountability to the community; 2) authentic engagement with the community; 3) reflecting city demographics in management roles in local government; 4) equity of grants and funds to community organisations (CAD 3.6 million distributed); 5) simplifying access to City spaces and facilities; 6) education and awareness for the City and the public; and 7) support for cultural resurgence. 

Speakers highlighted the need for cities to prioritise trust-building activities with historically-marginalised communities and those where trust is lacking. Ryan Witten said that “communities move at the speed of trust” so building or repairing it where it has been frayed is essential. A key piece of this, he added, is local governments showing up consistently and having conversations with community members, understanding the nuances of different communities and involving properly trained staff in these efforts. Amy Lubick noted that the local government should be ‘a one-stop shop’ for community needs, while Danielle Summerville pointed to the role of trusted sources and influencers in building community trust and engagement.

Participants underscored two pillars of effective and sustainable city-led prevention: 1) trust across city government and between the city and local communities; and 2) a local government that reflects the diversity of the residents it is meant to serve. They pointed to the need for proactive, intentional and multi-lingual outreach to communities that is underpinned by a steadfast commitment to improving the quality of life of all residents. This can include ensuring all relevant documents are translated into the appropriate languages, translators are on hand for in-person conversations or community sessions and that online translation of the local government websites is available.  

City-led outreach should recognise the emotions, lived experiences economic insecurities of residents and the local government should not only listen to concerns brought forward by its constituents but also advocate for solutions or change on their behalf. Participants pointed to examples of where cities, particularly larger ones, have established offices dedicated to promoting equity, diversity and inclusion and/or combatting racism and now have diversity officers on their police forces.    

In addition to addressing hate facing their residents, participants shared some of the steps city councils have taken in response to hate that is increasingly targeting them. They look to have well-structured council meetings that allow for authentic processes where grievances are brought forward in a meaningful but respectful way. These include moderating meetings (e.g., limiting time for constituents to speak), refining policies to control council meetings and using technology to physically distance while still listening.

Discussions highlighted different ways to overcome a common need identified across many cities: how to overcome the chronic underreporting of hate crimes and bias incidents, particularly by historically-marginalised communities where trust levels with government are often low. The City of Bend (Oregon, USA), for example, has put reporting mechanisms in schools and talks to students about how to report bias incidents which are not crimes but impacts emotional and psychological safety of students. Victoria (British Columbia, Canada) Chief of Police, Del Manak, emphasised the importance of strengthening partnerships between local police departments and community organisations to improve hate crime reporting and early intervention.

3. Awareness Raising, Funding, Training and Networking: How Federal Governments Can Support City-Led Prevention

Robert Burley, Executive Director of Public Safety Canada’s Canada Centre for Community Engagement and Prevention of Violence (Canada Centre), and Tiffany Sewell, Associate Director of Field Operations for the US Department of Homeland Security’s – Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships (CP3), outlined the work of their respective offices and how they seek to empower support the hate and extremism prevention efforts of local actors, including municipal governments.

Robert said the Canada Centre, through policy work, research and funding programmes, aims to increase knowledge of pathways to radicalisation to violence and support interventions through a public health approach. To advance this objective, the Centre collaborates with various levels of government, including universities, civil society organisations, police, provincial governments and municipalities.

Much like the Canada Centre, Tiffany shared that CP3 embraces a public health approach as it works to establish and empower local networks and communities to prevent targeted violence and terrorism through funding, public awareness and technical assistance. She emphasised the importance of understanding the difference between protected rights and actions that are not protected by the Constitution. She highlighted how CP3’s approach focuses on addressing the health, safety and well-being of whole communities through multidisciplinary approaches and stakeholder engagement. Tiffany referred the participants to several CP3 initiatives of particular relevance to municipalities, including behavioural threat assessment and management teams that have been set up and targeted violence prevention frameworks that have been formulated in several states through CP3 grant funding and technical support. She also reinforced the importance of connecting local communities with federal resources and providing technical assistance to these critical stakeholders. As part of this effort, she said that DHS is working with Strong Cities to help small and mid-sized cities in the United States develop prevention frameworks that are tailored to needs and priorities of their local communities

Speakers pointed to some of the ways in which the threats have evolved since their respective offices and grants progammes were launched more than five years ago. Robert pointed to the evolution of online threats and the difficulty of content moderation, particularly on platforms like TikTok. Although millions of videos with violent extremist content have been removed, he said many more remain online. He also added that youth radicalisation is a growing concern, with several cases of minors recently arrested for terrorism offences in Canada. 

Tiffany noted how disinformation is complicating the threat environment and the increasingly localised nature of the threats. On the latter, she explained how CP3 has adapted by creating regional prevention coordinators and prevention resources tailored for local stakeholders. These include the above-mentioned state strategy development packages and technical assistance to help local communities set up prevention strategies.

They both stressed the importance of continuing to find ways to strengthen cooperation between federal, state/provincial, municipal and community-based stakeholders in their respective countries and between Canada and the United States. With respect to the latter, they mentioned a new joint project to develop a Canada-US community of practice to support the exchange of prevention experts and practitioners. 

4. Maintaining Social Cohesion in Times of Crises: The View from Small, Rural and Remote Municipalities

Discussions focused on the roles and specific prevention-related needs – e.g., infrastructure, programmatic funding and expertise – of smaller municipalities and local governments in rural areas, which are often different than those of larger municipalities. 

Heather Richardson, City Councillor fromthe5,000-person city of Flin Flon (Manitoba, Canada), detailed some of the challenges that are threatening social cohesion in her city. These include unemployment, poverty, social exclusion and lack of services, including healthcare and mental health support. She said that the city is now grappling with how to manage the growing number of Indigenous people in remote neighbouring villages who are moving to Flin Flon to be closer to health and other services. There are rising tensions with the long-time residents of the city who see the newcomers as ‘taking over’ already limited housing or adding to the existing ‘unhoused’ population. She lamented that the city simply lacks the services to accommodate this influx of newcomers. These tensions are leading to increased hate directed at the City Council members, with one councillor being targeted in particular, along with her family members.  

Mindy O’Neall, Assembly Member, Fairbanks North Star Borough (Alaska, USA), said that Fairbanks, with its some 130,000 residents, suffers from disjointed local governance. The borough has three mayors and bodies of government that have different authorities and do not coordinate. This complicates efforts to address some of the challenges it faces, such as the United States’ highest rate of domestic violence and sexual assault crimes against women, as well as housing and job shortages. She said people in her borough are hurting but that the local government often has little to offer in response. She noted that Alaskans are generally very anti-government: “we have representatives in the state legislature, even our own governor, who are really against government intervention at all levels. And so that’s a challenge because then you are really depending on… private industry or nonprofits to help”. More broadly, she highlighted the lack of resources and organisations in Alaska to help municipalities deal with these issues.

She added that the local government is currently not doing much to address the online aspects of the threat and highlighted the need to develop “a written plan and [to secure] community buy-in”. O’Neall also pointed to the important role that local newspapers can play in raising awareness about mis- and disinformation and standing up for elected officials.

Andres Portela, Equity and Inclusion Director, City of Bend (Oregon, USA) shared that Bend, a city of some 106,000 residents, grew by 40,000 during the COVID-19 pandemic. It has become an “urban tech scene” as a result of the growth, but an urban growth boundary has prevented it from expanding outwards, constraining the local government’s ability to respond to the strains of such rapid growth. For example, housing prices dramatically increased and as a result, only 8% of the City’s workforce can afford to live there. Andres also pointed to the spike in bias incidents during this period, including a high-profile racially-motivated hate crime. Adding further context, he noted that the city’s history is “rooted in exclusion”, first of Indigenous peoples and then Blacks and Asians. As a result, a city that was historically overwhelming white has had to deal with rapid population growth and diversification in recent years and the City Council and this new office face backlash from a predominantly white, homogenous population, as new residents move in. He also said Bend “has a history of violent extremism, with the KKK previously operating in the area”.

Bend’s City Council established the Office of Equity and Inclusion in response to these historical and other challenges. This three-person office, he explained, focuses on preventing hate speech, discrimination and targeted violence, as well as promoting belonging in community spaces. More broadly, the city is working to be able to share multilingual information to its residents and has brought together various organisations to address equity and inclusion issues. Bend is working with community-based organisations (CBOs), the local university and other community partners to identify and address gaps in belonging and social across the city to highlight “where people feel safe and how to help them feel that they belong”. Part of this effort involved the creation of an equity indicator report – with a peer review process – to better understand and address disparities and the development of a data map to highlight “where people feel safe and how to help them feel that they belong”. 

Victor Aguillar, Jr, City Councilor, San Leandro (California, USA), which neighbours Oakland, said the city of about 92,000 people has evolved from the country’s ‘most racist’ city to one where the local government is working to address the needs of all communities across the increasingly diverse city. For example, he said that the city has implemented programs to help with housing costs and eviction moratoriums during the pandemic.

San Leandro faced a mental health crisis, leading to the killing of Steven Taylor by police in 2020. Councilor Aguillar noted that this sparked community advocacy for mental health programmes in a city that has no mental health department of its own. San Leandro has also implemented civilian police oversight, which has contributed to a reduction in police shootings and improved community-police relations and is working with the Department of Human Services to push out information to community members who are suffering from mental health or other crises about how to access non-law enforcement services. The City is also looking beyond the police and working to strengthen cooperation with CBOs and other stakeholders, including individual Council members, who have “eyes and ears in the community”, to share concerns and needs before a crisis emerges. These police reform efforts have triggered political blowback in the City Council, he explained, with some members the target of hate speech, including online, for trying to reform the police.

San Leandro continues to face a challenge from hate speech, which has been exacerbated by international conflicts. For example, the Israel-Gaza crisis has led to protests and is linked to an increase in hate speech in the city, prompting the City Council to prepare itself to manage public safety threats posed by the protests. He also explained that the Council’s first openly gay member has been targeted with hate, leading the council to implement a code of conduct for council meetings to ensure it remains a ‘safe space’ for residents and Council members alike. There is concern, however, that the code could be weaponised by future Councils for being an attempt to ‘censor’ residents. 

5. Enhancing Cross-Border City-to-City Cooperation for Prevention: Looking Beyond Law Enforcement

Border communities often face additional challenges, and participants emphasised the importance of having meaningful cross-border relationships and cooperation between cities in western Canada and the US, including for addressing shared threats such as human and illicit substance trafficking, hate and extremism.

Councilmember Janice Zahn highlighted Bellevue’s (Washington, USA) increasingly multicultural population and the importance of understanding issues shared with neighbouring cities in British Columbia like Victoria and Vancouver. The City of Victoria’s Laura Parent called for more cooperation in addressing threats to social cohesion, stressing that social cohesion “is everyone’s jurisdiction”.   

Participants mentioned the importance of sharing good practices between cities along the US/Canada border to address common threats. For example, Councilmember Zahn pointed to the City of Bellevue’s Safe Parking Pilot programme, which provides those living in cars a clean, safe, off-street parking area with nearby access to bathrooms, showers and a kitchen, as well as case management and related services to support residents.

Del Manak, the City of Victoria’s (British Columbia, Canada) Police Chief, shared how his department meets internationally with counterparts in other cities across the border and internationally, including to discuss shared hate and extremism threats. He pointed to the Major Cities Chiefs Association, where police executives representing the largest cities in Canada and the US meet to share ideas, experiences and strategies.

Among the challenges facing law enforcement in border cities, he said, is keeping up with the speed and flow of information among organised crime and other malign groups and trying to understand the trends in the hate and extremism threat landscape. He also pointed to the challenges police departments and local governments face in terms of managing public protests that are increasingly linked to global crises, including striking the right balance between safeguarding freedom of expression and public safety.   

While applauding these efforts, participants highlighted the importance of stronger city-to-city cross-border cooperation outside of the law enforcement realm to address shared threats to social cohesion.

6. Strengthening Local Government – Community Partnerships for Prevention: Strategies and Lessons Learned

Participants emphasised that strengthening partnerships between local governments and communities should form a pillar of any city’s prevention efforts and shared several strategies

and lessons learned from their cities’ diverse experiences.

Participants pointed to several comparative advantages of community-based organisations (CBOs) in prevention. For example, they can serve as a link with ‘hard to reach’ communities and help overcome trust deficits between the local government and members of those communities. Through their ability to consult and engage with both communities and local government, CBOs can help give legitimacy to city policies or actions in communities where scepticism limits engagement. 

Discussions highlighted that the role of the local government in supporting CBOs should extend well beyond just funding; they should ensure CBOs have the knowledge, relationships and training required to maximise their impact. Further, participants agreed that local government has a unique role to play in convening and connecting community partners across their city, as well as in encouraging and incentivising them to collaborate rather than compete.

A city’s approach to community engagement should be grounded in empathy, speakers underscored. This approach needs to be respectful of and effective for the community, creating safe spaces for dialogue while acknowledging systemic failures and the importance of long-term relationships between city staff and communities that outlast a single mayoral administration. They also underscored that local governments and city councils should recognise and respect the knowledge and practices of Indigenous and other historically-marginalised populations.

Sanjiv Shrivastava, Councilmember from the District of North Saanich (British Columbia, Canada), spoke of his city’s affluent, educated population and the challenges of polarisation due to limited job opportunities and increasing densification in the city of 12,000 people. He cited recent tensions in the city council surrounding the city’s new ‘community plan’ with divisions manifesting between ‘anti’ and ‘pro’ growth councillors. He said that a lot of the divide is driven by fear of change or ‘the other’ and ‘ignorance’, underscoring the need for systemic change to address social issues and the role of education and public awareness in this change. To help de-escalate tensions, he added that the City Council has intensified its efforts to engage with all communities across the city. It is conducting a survey that is looking at “loneliness and social isolation” across the city to guide where it should create community centres and facilitate more community interactions.

Norm Leech, Co-Chair, Metro Vancouver Aboriginal Executive Council, highlighted the important role of non-profit organisations in creating liveable cities and of “volunteers and community members in addressing social issues” and elevating the concerns and needs of the most vulnerable parts of a city. He added that an effective approach for building durable community-local government partnerships involves building relationships with city officials who are not tied to a particular mayor or political party and will stay through elections. As one participant shared, it is these city employees “who get things done” over the long term.

Norm said that local governments should create more opportunities for face-to-face interactions among different communities in a city, as this can help create empathy and resolve conflicts. He pointed to the circle process as one method for creating safe spaces for difficult conversations, underscoring that conflict resolution should focus on commonalities rather than differences. This process “creates the space where people not only know that they will be heard but also that they have to listen”. He said that his organisation is using this approach in parts of Vancouver in order “to resolve conflicts in the neighbourhood before you have to call the police”.

Ricardo Gambetta-Alvarado, Director of International, Immigrant & Refugee Affairs, City of Aurora (Colorado, USA), said that the city of 400,000 people is the most diverse in the state (where one in five are foreign-born and 160 languages are spoken). It is the only city in the state with an immigrant integration plan. He underscored the importance of the city working with non-profits and community groups to support migrants and address issues affecting women migrants in particular. Mentioning the recent weaponisation of misinformation regarding the migrant community in his city by politicians, he stressed the value of strong local government–community relationships, built and nurtured over time, including through informal interactions, which can withstand efforts by politicians or others to divide communities and the city.

Ricardo added, however, that amid all the negative attention being given to his city right now, it was important to remind people of all the wonderful things in and about the city. He pointed to the city’s Global Teen Police Academy and Global Fest as two examples. The former offers residents aged 14 – 17 the opportunity to learn more about the daily functions of the Aurora Police Department. It was part of an effort by the city to rebuild police-community relations that had frayed over the years. The latter is “a free, multicultural experience bringing the sights, sounds and flavours of nations from around the world to celebrate the diverse people and communities that call Aurora home”. According to Ricardo, it is the only city-sponsored event in the city where residents are part of that planning.

Layla Archuletta, Assistant City Manager, City of Santa Fe, New Mexico (USA), cited polarisation in her city, particularly around historical monuments and representation for Indigenous communities whose heritage in the city goes back hundreds of years. She shared some examples of contentious city council meetings on these issues and successful initiatives organised with community partnerships and faith-based organisations. She underscored the importance of finding common ground and working with diverse community groups to co-create solutions and the critical role of education and public awareness in addressing social issues and building social cohesion. Echoing other speakers, Layla stressed the need for local governments to work with community partners, including by providing seed funding “to create legacies” that last beyond the current mayoral administration or city council term.  

7. Communicating in Times of Crisis: What Role for City Leaders?

Participants engaged in a scenario-based tabletop exercise designed to explore the key communications role that local leaders play in response to hate and extremist-motivated incidents and intensifying polarisation in their city, fuelled or exacerbated by global crises. The exercise explored the key messages, modalities and partners for effective communications in times of crises, particularly when an incident has the potential to divide a community or render a particular community vulnerable to retribution or retaliation. 

Key takeaways from these discussions included the importance of:

Participants engaged in a scenario-based tabletop exercise designed to explore the key communications role that local leaders play in response to hate and extremist-motivated incidents and intensifying polarisation in their city, fuelled or exacerbated by global crises. The exercise explored the key messages, modalities and partners for effective communications in times of crises, particularly when an incident has the potential to divide a community or render a particular community vulnerable to retribution or retaliation. 

Key takeaways from these discussions included the importance of:

• Being proactive, including by ensuring that the city has:
• developed trusted relationships with community-based partners that can be leveraged in times of crisis;
  • early warning systems in place for residents to share information with local police or the local government about inter-communal or other tensions in the city;a crisis or emergency plan that includes guidance for responding to a socially-driven crisis and a properly trained team that can be activated should one emerge; and
• Ensuring factual and consistent communications surrounding an evolving hate-motivated crisis and working with community validators to help spread factual messages should a crisis start to unfold;
• Local elected leaders leading with the values of inclusivity and compassion, reminding local communities of what unites rather than divides them as residents of the city;
• Engaging with individuals looking to protest or agitate and setting expectations with them so they know their rights and what behaviours are not lawful;
• Understanding the appropriate role of police during protests and taking steps to ensure that the police are properly trained in de-escalation tactics;
• Providing regular updates to communities as a crisis unfolds and taking steps to counter related mis- and disinformation. This includes working with trusted partners in local communities to reinforce messages coming out of the mayor’s office or city council;
• Keeping politics out of the city’s response and avoiding statements from local elected that might exacerbate tensions;
• City leaders being present in the impacted communities and underscoring how the city will provide them with the necessary support;
• Calling for calm and respect should the crisis continue to escalate; and
• Using the incident as an opportunity to reimagine community cohesion.

5. Enhancing Cross-Border City-to-City Cooperation for Prevention: Looking Beyond Law Enforcement

Next Steps

Key findings from this workshop will inform the Strong Cities Fifth Global Summit, being held in Cape Town (South Africa) from 3 – 5 December 2024, which will feature local and national representation from Canada and the United States, both as participants and as sponsors.

Practices shared during the Victoria workshop and captured in this event report will also be integrated into the Strong Cities Online Resource Hub, which houses a library of living guides and toolkits on mayoral leadership and city-led action to prevent and respond to hate, extremism and polarisation. Additionally, to build on the Resource Hub’s growing City Spotlights Library, Strong Cities will partner with city officials from the workshop to create spotlights capturing their local governments’ inspiring and innovative prevention efforts.

Strong Cities, through its North America Regional Hub, will continue to work with cities in Canada and the United States in 2025 and beyond and looks to return to British Columbia in 2025 for the second iteration of this cross-border, city-to-city dialogue.

Additional Resources

• North America Regional Hub: Strengthening Community Cohesion and Countering Online Hate — Operationalising Local Prevention Efforts in Edmonton, Strong Cities Network, November 2024
• Global Crises, Local Impacts: Key Findings & Recommendations to Date, Strong Cities Network, September 2024
• Global Crises, Local Impacts: The Role of Canadian Cities in Maintaining Social Cohesion, Strong Cities Network, June 2024
• Impact: Catalysing City-Led Prevention, Strong Cities Network, June 2024
• Global Crises, Local Impacts, including latest findings and recommendations, April 2024
• A Guide for City-Led Response, Strong Cities Network, April 2024
• Preventing and Responding to Election Disruption and Violence: Ten Considerations for Cities, Strong Cities Network, March 2024
• Transatlantic Dialogue Initiative: Ten Key Findings in 2023, Strong Cities Network, March 2024
• Navigating Local Impacts of Global Crises: Ten Considerations for Mayors and Cities – Lessons Learned from the Israel – Gaza Crisis, Strong Cities Network, December 2023
• A Guide for Mayors: Preventing and Responding to Hate, Extremism and Polarisation, Strong Cities Network, September 2023
• A Guide for Cities: Preventing Hate, Extremism and Polarisation, Strong Cities Network, September 2023

Contact Information

For more information on this event and the Strong Cities North America Regional hub, please contact [email protected].