Ideas flow at public meeting for new North Omaha innovation district fueled by $30M state grant
Dozens of people offered thoughts during a Wednesday public meeting about what the new innovation district in North Omaha should look like. (Cindy Gonzalez/Nebraska Examiner)
OMAHA — Could North Omaha create its own version of Kansas City's Keystone Innovation District? Or Indianapolis' 16 Tech, or the RICE innovation hub in Atlanta, which focuses on building Black businesses?
The three campuses were spotlighted Wednesday as examples of entrepreneurial and tech-centric hubs akin to what could be built locally as the Omaha Inland Port Authority embarks on its newest mission: development of an innovation district, funded partly with $30 million in state funding.
Nearly 100 people turned out for the public meeting that kicked off a six-month visioning process for the new district, which is to be developed within the boundaries of the port authority's roughly 3,000 acres in North Omaha, near Eppley Airfield.
Davielle Phillips, an Omaha architect who is vice chair of the port authority board, said the initiative got off to a good start, with more participation than anticipated at the meeting held at the Venue at Highlander Accelerator.
The board is also overseeing development of an industrial-focused business park funded by a separate $90 million state grant. That initiative, in contrast, was beset early on by criticism that the development team did not seek enough public engagement and input.
For the innovation district, the port authority board hired HR&A Advisors Inc. as a consultant that, along with partners Lamp Rynearson and Vireo, are to create a business plan model for the local innovation district. The consulting contract is for $546,000.
During the public meeting Wednesday, the consultant team presented demographic and other data about the North Omaha area and offered examples of other innovation districts. It also highlighted the health-focused EDGE District rising on the University of Nebraska Medical Center campus.
Participants split into groups to discuss what they'd like such a district to look like and achieve. Several said they'd like housing to be a component, along with job training. Many said they'd want the campus to nurture and grow tech startups; draw young talent; raise the area's per capita income and have a multigenerational and multicultural flair.
One group said music should play a role, along with cultural events and block parties to build community.
Phillips said his goals for the meeting were met, including good attendance and engagement. He said he also wanted to clarify that the innovation district is separate from the long-discussed industrial business park, which was met with resistance from many area residents who worried the city might use the power of eminent domain to force acquisition. That option has been ruled out.
'I want to let people know we heard them; we listened,' Phillips said of the gathering.
Other port authority board members attended, including mayoral chief of staff Tom Warren, as did North Omaha City Councilwoman-elect LaVonya Goodwin.
Tuesday, focus groups were invited to offer input. Next steps, Phillips and the consultant said, include a public meeting this summer to continue to build upon the ideas.
Still to be determined is the exact location of the innovation district within the port authority boundaries, along with its size, shape and character, Phillips said. He said the port authority board likely would seek bids for a developer to build out the district campus.
Both the innovation district and the industrial business park are to be anchors of the port authority and are seen as key to helping more private businesses produce jobs and economic development that benefits North Omaha area residents.
Funds for both projects originally were approved by the Nebraska Legislature as part of the Nebraska Economic Recovery Act of 2022, seeded with federal pandemic-related dollars, though the legislation and funding sources have since been updated.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Ditched by Trump's EEOC, job applicant advances bias lawsuit against Sheetz
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. A Black job applicant who alleged that gas station chain Sheetz disproportionately screened out Black, Native American, Alaskan Native and multiracial applicants moved to continue his case June 5 after the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission abandoned it. EEOC filed a class-action lawsuit in April 2024 alleging that Sheetz maintained a longstanding practice of screening all job applicants for past criminal convictions and rejected those with such records. This practice violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, EEOC said in a press release, because it had a disparate impact on applicants of certain racial backgrounds. However, the agency moved to have the case dismissed last week because it determined that the disparate-impact claims would conflict with President Donald Trump's April 23 executive order directing agencies to cease enforcement of such claims. EEOC asked the court to defer dismissal of its claims by 60 days to allow the commission to notify class members so that they could obtain private representation. The legality of Trump's executive order on disparate-impact claims proved contentious, with one of EEOC's own administrative judges calling the order 'highly illegal.' But the June 5 filing in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania is one of the first examples in which the order has been put into practice. Trump said the end of disparate-impact liability enforcement was necessary because it inhibited businesses from hiring applicants on the basis of merit and skill. He also said that disparate-impact liability is unconstitutional and 'threatens the commitment to merit and equality of opportunity that forms the foundation of the American Dream.' The push to end disparate-impact liability is one of the goals stated by the conservative Heritage Foundation in its 'Project 2025' presidential transition document. The organization wrote that the concept should be thrown out because under disparate-impact theory, 'discriminatory motive or intent is irrelevant; the outcome is what matters. But all workplaces have disparities.' That logic has been met with resistance by former Democratic officials of the U.S. Department of Labor and EEOC, who said in May that disparate-impact liability is explicitly outlawed under Title VII and has been upheld by U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The former officials cautioned employers that they should avoid following Trump's executive order so they do not violate federal laws. 'Disparate impact liability is a necessary element of advancing equal opportunity for all, consistent with America's national commitment to equal justice,' the officials wrote. In a press release, plaintiff-side firm Outten & Golden, which is partly representing the job applicant in the Sheetz case, said EEOC had spent nearly a decade investigating the claims at issue and had found a basis to allege evidence of systemic discrimination. 'Our client has a right to be judged on his qualifications, and not to be denied a livelihood by policies that exclude people with stale convictions that are unrelated to the job,' said Ben Geffen, senior attorney at the Public Interest Law Center and a co-representative for the plaintiff, said in the press release. 'When the government steps back, we step in. We will not allow political interference to wipe out hard-won legal protections.' A similar dynamic played out following EEOC's abandonment of several lawsuits it filed on behalf of transgender workers alleging discrimination following an executive order from Trump. Advocacy groups have since filed to intervene on behalf of plaintiffs in those cases. Recommended Reading Shell Oil did not discriminate in hiring decision, 5th Cir. says
Business of Fashion
8 hours ago
- Business of Fashion
The Business of Beauty Global Forum: Tracee Ellis Ross on Community and the Power of Celebrating Differences
NAPA, CALIFORNIA — When actress and Pattern Beauty founder and CEO Tracee Ellis Ross was growing up, she often wondered if one day her counter could be lined by products that actually worked for her natural, textured hair. 'Little did I know,' she said on stage at The Business of Beauty Global Forum in Napa Valley, California, 'I was beginning my entrepreneurial, business-building, experiential [journey] to put together what became my brand Bible before I even met my partners.' Ross sat down with The Business of Fashion founder and editor-in-chief Imran Amed Tuesday to discuss the meaning of community, and how to create a brand that is rooted in celebrating its customers' differences rather than shared aspirations dictated by culture. The story of Ross' business began in her childhood, when it was rare to see Black women's natural hair on television. Back then, beauty products geared for natural hair framed curly, textured hair as a problem to be fixed, rather than a style to be emphasised or celebrated. It was this lack in representation of Black hair that drove Ross to dream of building Pattern Beauty. It was not an easy start. Ross drew initial scepticism when she eschewed the traditional route of partnering with hair stylists. 'Mostly, stylists had actually gotten my hair in trouble,' she said. 'They were not the people that taught me how to wear my hair naturally. The history of my family, the legacy of my life and others … and my own trial and error is how I discovered what worked for my hair.' Even so, Ross, who does not have a business background — she said that initially she didn't even know what a C suite was, joking, 'Don't you want to be in the 'A suite'?' — has scaled her six-year-old brand by focussing on the message that everyone's hair is unique. 'I don't want anybody to have my hair. I want people to have their hair. And the point is that they need to find the right products to support their hair, and that's what [didn't] exist,' Ross said. Pattern is now stocked at the likes of Ulta Beauty, Sephora and Boots. When it came to actually creating Pattern's product formulations, Ross selected manufacturers based in Los Angeles with whom she would work in close, face-to-face proximity, and personally tested 75 samples for the company's first seven SKUs. Ross remains heavily involved in product testing and recently learned there isn't just an absence in products for textured hair, but a glaring gap in the methodology for these products altogether in the testing phase. Last year, Ross learned that the lab Pattern used had eliminated testing for what's known as 'type-four hair,' or the most tightly coiled of hair textures, because the testing instruments were not effective. In response, Ross and Pattern Beauty VP of product development Ni'Kita Wilson worked with the lab to create workarounds, such as using silicon fingers that imitated consumers' fingers as they run through their hair and wide-tooth combs in lieu of the fine-tooth ones used before. The testing laboratory now implements the solutions Pattern Beauty helped to engineer as the standard method for testing curly hair. To Ross, a business that is centred on customers of colour, even amid broad rollbacks in DEI, is not only possible, but profitable. Calling on people to remember their humanity in whatever role they assume, she said, 'To me, the diversity of our humanity is what makes our world great. And in all honesty, it's also really good business.' The Business of Beauty Global Forum 2025 is made possible in part by our partners Front Row, Unilever Prestige, Citi, McKinsey & Company, Getty Images, Grown Alchemist and Stanly Ranch and our awards partners L'Oréal Groupe and Sephora. If you are interested in learning about partnership opportunities, please contact us here.
Miami Herald
11 hours ago
- Miami Herald
The Justice Department wants to end an agreement it reached with a Pa. bank it accused of redlining in Philly
Two years ago, the U.S. Department of Justice accused a Pennsylvania bank of redlining - avoiding lending in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in and around Philadelphia. ESSA Bank & Trust, based in Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, denied the accusations but entered into a settlement agreement with the federal government in which the bank had to give more than $2.9 million in loan subsidies to homebuyers in formerly redlined communities. The bank also agreed to devote resources to soliciting mortgage applications from Philadelphia residents in neighborhoods it was accused of ignoring, to include Philadelphians in its program for low- and moderate-income homebuyers, to work with local groups to provide homebuyer education, and to target historically excluded neighborhoods with its advertising. On Friday, the Justice Department asked the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to allow it to end the five-year agreement three years early. The court filing is in line with other recent Justice Department moves across the country to end similar fair-housing and antidiscrimination settlement agreements. Lisa Rice, president and CEO of the National Fair Housing Alliance, said in a statement that by taking these actions, "this administration is empowering bad actors and leaving millions of our nation's most vulnerable unprotected and exposed." The Justice Department said in its motion Friday that ESSA Bank "has demonstrated a commitment to remediation," including disbursing required loan subsidies, and is "substantially in compliance" with other terms of the court order. The bank did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday. The department noted that its motion was "unopposed." But on Monday, the National Fair Housing Alliance and local civil rights organizations filed a motion asking to join the case and opposing cutting short the legal agreement. "This effort would strip West and Southwest Philadelphia communities of the hard-won protections they were promised just two years ago," Rachel Wentworth, executive director of the nonprofit Housing Equality Center of Pennsylvania, said in a statement. "For decades, banks of all kinds have used redlining to deny neighborhoods of color access to wealth and opportunity, and ending this consent order sends a devastating message to these communities." The Philadelphia-based Public Interest Law Center and the law firm Stapleton Segal Cochran LLC, which has offices in Philadelphia and Marlton, are representing the Housing Equality Center, the National Fair Housing Alliance, and POWER Interfaith, the Pennsylvania faith-based community organizing network, as they oppose the Justice Department's motion to end the agreement. Eli Segal of Stapleton Segal Cochran said in a statement that "the rule of law demands more here than vague assurances of 'substantial compliance.' It demands court-ordered action." Olivia Mania, attorney and Penn Carey Law Catalyst Fellow at the Public Interest Law Center, said in an interview that "communities in and around Philadelphia deserve access to a lending market that's free from discrimination." "This isn't just about one bank," Mania said in a statement. "It's about whether the federal government will honor its role in dismantling structural racism in the housing market - or walk away when the cameras are off. The parties should be held to the terms of the consent order to ensure real, lasting change." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
