Those of us who follow urban development issues are well aware of the neighborhood busybody who organizes others to stop developments. It’s one reason why California housing is so expensive, as it’s too easy – thanks to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and local slow-growth ordinances – for naysayers to derail housing and business projects.
When people think of NIMBYs ("not in my back yarders"), they usually think of residents of middle-class suburban neighborhoods or wealthy historic districts who don’t want to see changes to their neighborhood’s character. But the tendency to act like a NIMBY is widespread, and even afflicts lower-income and working-class neighborhoods.
So now we see a weird phenomenon taking place from Oakland to Los Angeles, where residents of older and economically struggling neighborhoods are angry as wealthier people move in. The latest conflagration takes place in LA’s Frogtown (Elysian Valley) neighborhood, where shortsighted anti-gentrification activists recently succeeded in shuttering a popular flea-market crawl.
People are also reading…
“Residents weren’t simply frustrated by the nuisance created by the crawl,” per a Los Angeles Times report paraphrasing a neighborhood activist, but “many also believed the venture was emblematic of the economic forces that are gradually erasing the tight-knit community they grew up in.”
Oh please.
That tight-knit community was, as recently as a decade ago, a gang-infested area known for its crime and blight. All neighborhoods change. People in this country have every right to move anywhere they choose. Gentrification mainly provides benefits to the existing neighborhood, as newcomers improve buildings and public spaces and bring amenities to the area.
As a 2019 study by the Philadelphia Federal Reserve noted, gentrification did not push many older residents out of their neighborhoods and had little impact on rents. In fact, City Commentary explains that poor, non-gentrifying areas had the highest rates of population loss -- the result of poverty rather than newcomers.
Instead of calling names (“trust fund hipsters”) and halting popular community events, long-time residents of up-and-coming neighborhoods should work together with their new neighbors to build the best-possible neighborhood for everyone.
