Despite decades of our raising the issue of displacement in the face of rising rents, many Americans still do not see this as a call-to-action or a failure of public policy. Here is why our housing messaging may be backfiring.
Large, adaptive-reuse projects are all the rage in urban planning today, but absent a fundamentally new approach—with affordability at the center of the process—they are likely to become engines of what's been termed "environmental gentrification."
Art and culture tend to be integral to helping disenfranchised communities self-identify, develop their identities, and organize around place-based issues. But its presence can also be used be used by real estate interests to market neighborhoods.
The power and process of boards that take control of a city or territory's finances is becoming more generalized, although they affect local democracy, impose austerity measures without controls, and lack mechanisms to evaluate their efficiency.
Recent news reports have highlighted the low number of federally-funded affordable housing projects that are built in high-opportunity areas, but an examination has found that strategic allocation changes are having a beneficial effect in New Jersey.
A tent city occupation in Atlanta is among several recent actions in cities around the country. Residents fearing displacement at the hands of publicly supported private development are organizing, and running for office, against it.
Seeing "No Matter Where You're From" signs in liberal-leaning towns makes me both smile and cringe. Why? Because I know the tolerant message belies the real feelings many have towards neighbors, not from other countries, but "other" neighborhoods.