I recently moderated a rare gathering of four former Atlanta mayors — Bill Campbell, Shirley Franklin, Kasim Reed and Andrew Young — at the American Contract Compliance Association’s National Training Institute. The mayors’ assignment was to look back over 50 years of efforts to expand opportunity in public contracting for minority-owned companies. But the more important question was not what happened in the past. It was what local and state officials are prepared to do now.

That question has taken on new urgency as affirmative action and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives face sustained legal and political attacks.

The association, founded in 1986, is a nonprofit dedicated to equitable employment and contracting practices in the public and private sectors. Since its founding, its annual institute has provided not only training but also networking and continuing education for professionals responsible for administering and monitoring public contracting programs. Its motto — “Integrity, Courage and Commitment” — seems particularly appropriate for this moment.

The idea of bringing the four former Atlanta mayors together was the brainchild of Rodney Strong, a former director of contract compliance for the city. Strong told me he wanted the mayors to tell their own stories in hopes of inspiring the more than 800 conference participants to recognize that they do not have to simply roll over in the face of today’s challenges — that they can push back and continue fighting for fair opportunity.

That theme carried into a preconference interview with an Atlanta television reporter who asked each former mayor the same question: What would Atlanta look like today if diversity had not been a priority?

Campbell said diversity was “central to our core,” adding that Atlanta’s government should look like the rainbow of people who make up the city and country. Young emphasized gender diversity and recalled how a woman contractor living in public housing ultimately won a multimillion-dollar contract to pave airport runways.

Reed challenged one of the most persistent excuses for failing to hire minority contractors: We can’t find qualified firms. “If you come to Atlanta, you are going to find them,” he said. Franklin connected diversity directly to Atlanta’s historic growth from a sleepy railroad town into a major metropolis. “We don’t hesitate to say that we are here to protect and preserve it and grow it in a way that includes everyone,” she said.

Those comments underscored an important lesson for today's public officials: Atlanta’s commitment to inclusion is not simply a social program layered onto economic development. It is a central part of the city’s economic development strategy. Expanding the pool of businesses able to compete for public contracts has helped create companies, jobs, wealth and a broader business community.

When it came my turn to moderate the discussion, I focused on a harder question: How can these programs survive in an environment in which affirmative action and diversity, equity and inclusion are under sustained legal and policy attack?

The mayors repeatedly returned to two words: courage and leadership. They urged compliance and procurement officials to communicate directly with their mayors, county executives, governors, legislators and other policymakers rather than assume that political leaders understand the challenges they face.

Franklin recalled a strategy she sometimes used while serving as chief operating officer for the late Mayor Maynard Jackson. Staff members would develop a goal and then meet separately with the mayor, each approaching the issue from a different perspective. By the time Jackson had heard the arguments from several trusted advisers, Franklin said, they often had won his support.

There is a lesson in that story for public managers and elected officials today. Career officials have an obligation to explain to elected leaders what policies are accomplishing, what obstacles businesses face and what may be lost when those policies are weakened or abandoned. Elected officials, in turn, have an obligation to listen, ask hard questions and make informed decisions rather than simply react to the political winds.

One exchange during the conference illustrated another challenge. When a participant asked how public compliance programs could be strengthened, I turned the question back to her. She hesitated and looked around the room before answering. “OK, you asked me. I am tired of seeing the same companies get all the business.” Her frustration raises a legitimate concern. Public contracting programs should create pathways for emerging businesses, not simply recycle opportunities among a small group of established firms.

But established Black- and women-owned businesses offer an important counterargument. One contractor described successfully completing public projects through joint ventures with majority-owned firms, only to find that those same firms would not partner with his company when competing for private-sector work.

That exposes a dilemma policymakers should understand. If thriving Black- and women-owned businesses are pushed out of public contracting because they have become “too successful,” while discrimination continues to restrict their access to private-sector opportunities, success itself can become a penalty.

The answer is not to choose between emerging and established minority businesses. Good public policy must create ladders for both — helping smaller firms develop the capacity to compete while allowing experienced firms to grow, scale and compete for increasingly complex and more lucrative work.

And access to contracts is only part of the challenge. Minority- and women-owned businesses may also confront limited bonding capacity, undercapitalization, weak cash flow, restricted access to credit and difficulty developing the relationships that often lead to private-sector opportunities. Effective contract-compliance programs must address these structural barriers so that economic opportunity can continue to expand. Governments that succeed in these efforts will be stronger for it.

Governing's opinion columns reflect the views of their authors and not necessarily those of Governing's editors or management.