Gentrification shaming makes no sense to me.

[Anonymous]

“ Please educate yourself and read the literature in the subject”

This is the worlds most useless phrase. You didn’t even provide ideas of what literature to read. Don’t be such a snob. If you think you’re right, back up your points, and you’ll win people over if you don’t talk down to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh? Because you're pushing people out of the neighborhood who possibly lived there for generations and can't afford it anymore (rent or property taxes) due to people like you.

Whether this bothers you or not is one thing but it's absolutely true that this is a real thing going on.

Right - but the question becomes - as an UMC white family - what should you do? I don't want to live surrounded by all white people. I want my kid to have a diverse friend group, racially, ethnically, and socio-economically. While yes, UMC white people moving into historically black neighborhoods pushes black people out. But the alternative is to move to a white-only area, which seems worse to me.

It seems to me that the system here is clearly racist, but that individual families moving to black neighborhoods (as primary residences) aren't doing anything wrong, and may in fact be doing the best they can to fight racism. What would you propose they do instead? Move to Arlington?

PP. The thing is, it's obviously fine and maybe even good for society when it's just one or two white families moving in and integrating the neighborhood (assuming you are decent people and use the neighborhood public schools/don't call the cops on your neighbors for noise or other petty complaints, etc.).

however, it gets to be a big problem without a good solution when it's tons of white families doing it and completely changing the cultural tenor of the area. See, for example: Brooklyn and all its myriad problems related to this issue.

You really don't get why the old families are unhappy about this? It's not just having to see white faces. It's all the restaurants and bars and stores that come in chasing their money, which they can't afford and which raise their rents. It's their schools changing and no longer servicing their community's needs.

There is a lot of literature about this issue, I shouldn't have to tell you this. None of this is a mystery.

+100

Please educate yourself and read the literature in the subject

I’m the PP whose comment begins with “Right -“ above. I completely understand why the older families dislike this. I’ve actually read a fair amount about this, although if you have book/article suggestions I’m happy to have them. But my question remains - it’s not rhetorical. What do you think a UMC white family should do? Moving to Columbia Heights or another place makes you a gentrifier, and that’s not okay. I can’t afford to live in like Cleveland Park, nor do I want to. Is it really better for me to move to Arlington? Is that what you would have me do? I’m honestly asking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:people saying don't call the cops on black people We can only call the cops for white Vagrants and Vagabonds? I don't care what they look like, they got to go if they don't belong and that is what the police are for.

Moving into a predominantly AA neighborhood and calling the police on folks for doing what they had been doing for years IS racist!

[Anonymous]

This issue isn't easy, but permit me to make a few points and ask a few questions:

Property Taxes The idea that long term black owners are being pushed out due to property taxes doesn't comport with the realty of DC's property tax regime. DC has a homestead deduction that caps the amount property a tax liability can increase in any given year. 25% of a number set 30 years ago is nominal. And that number is much lower than in most jurisdictions that may only reassess every 5 or 10 years but don't have a cap. Furthermore, DC's mill rate is exceedingly low. You can argue that our income tax is regressive (I personally think it is at more than 8% for people making basically at 2x the poverty line), but that's got nothing to do with property tax. That's a red herring/lazy argument that simply doesn't hold up tp scrutiny. Please show me the actual data that shows a long term (read: generational owners) are moving from DC due to property tax increases. That data would include the comparative property tax rates paid in new jurisdictions (which in most cases would be higher than in DC).

Forced Out What does it mean to be "forced out"? I'm asking in all seriousness. If a family that lived through the crack epidemic in (what is now known as) NoMa realized that their investment (or the investment from their parents or grandparents) allows them to cash out and move to a lower COL jurisdiction, is that a push or a pull? If they sell to a black family does that change your answer? Real estate is one of the most accessible ways to create wealth; in some cases generational wealth. The idea that white people driving up housing prices and creating opportunities for black families to cash in ignores the positive societal result of black families creating wealth. The unspoken policy initiative here seems to be that black families don't have the right to cash in, and if they do they are "selling out" or they aren't doing it of their own free will.

Moving into a new neighborhood necessarily means acquiescing to whatever has been going on prior to your arrival This one cracks me up. It creates a false equivalence between calling the police on a black person walking down the street with calling the police for actual drug or crime activity. If I witness a crime committed by a black person that does not make me racist. I would argue that deciding not to call the police to report a black person due to white guilt is actually racist; it presumes that the illegal activity is inherently black; that's crap. I have lived for 20 years in a neighborhood that was the epicenter of the crack epidemic in DC. If you know anything about DC you know exactly where I live. The long term residents of this neighborhood didn't want crack and violence in their community. They don't speak of it as some badge of honor or look back fondly to secure street cred that they are black enough. They didn't want to be raising their kids in a neighborhood that had MPD on the take. This idea from purported deep thinkers that allowing crime to persist is necessary to perpetuate black culture conflates criminality of just being black with actual criminal activity. The fact that some (white) people can't tell the difference doesn't mean they are the same thing.

Stores that cater to "white people" are bad This is too easy and creates a construct that too often doesn't match with reality. H Street NE was burned out after the riots. Prior to that it was a epicenter of black culture in DC. But that ceased after the riots. You can blame DC pols for failing to create viable economic reinvestment in the neighborhood (and I so; the development zones in NW were never created in NE DC and then people were shocked when development didn't come). But there were very few city services in NE DC until the rehabilitation that started in the late 90s/early 2000 (see, Autozone plaza, streetcar, etc.) Whole foods didn't displace a viable black owned business. It displaced Murray's "Supermarket". If you have lived here long enough to know anything about the area you know it had a lousy selection, terrible quality produce and high prices. The Giant that opened up 3 blocks East was a HUGE improvement. There are lots of places where rents have increased and forced out long term business owners. H Street NE is NOT one of them. In the 2000s those buildings could be acquired for a song. There's also a chicken egg conundrum. Did businesses catering to black clientele depart and the black residents followed? Or did black residents leave and the single demo businesses closed as a result?

As I said, these are tough issues. And it is important that white people be allies of the black and brown communities. But please don't confuse the desire to be allies and support your cause with some sort of obligation to just sit back and ignore the complexity of these issues. There are lots of white people running around saying "I see you. I understand you. Whatever you say I agree with." That's called liberal guilt and, in my experience, it lasts exactly as long as it takes for those people to have adverse financial interests. If you want long term partnership then you need to be willing to have these types of conversations. Engage. If someone disagrees with you don't scream "racist" and walk away. "Read the literature" is a silly response. If there is literature on point then by all means cite it so I can read it, think critically about it and ask questions.

I will now sit back and enjoy being called a racist...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh? Because you're pushing people out of the neighborhood who possibly lived there for generations and can't afford it anymore (rent or property taxes) due to people like you.

Whether this bothers you or not is one thing but it's absolutely true that this is a real thing going on.

Right - but the question becomes - as an UMC white family - what should you do? I don't want to live surrounded by all white people. I want my kid to have a diverse friend group, racially, ethnically, and socio-economically. While yes, UMC white people moving into historically black neighborhoods pushes black people out. But the alternative is to move to a white-only area, which seems worse to me.

It seems to me that the system here is clearly racist, but that individual families moving to black neighborhoods (as primary residences) aren't doing anything wrong, and may in fact be doing the best they can to fight racism. What would you propose they do instead? Move to Arlington?

PP. The thing is, it's obviously fine and maybe even good for society when it's just one or two white families moving in and integrating the neighborhood (assuming you are decent people and use the neighborhood public schools/don't call the cops on your neighbors for noise or other petty complaints, etc.).

however, it gets to be a big problem without a good solution when it's tons of white families doing it and completely changing the cultural tenor of the area. See, for example: Brooklyn and all its myriad problems related to this issue.

You really don't get why the old families are unhappy about this? It's not just having to see white faces. It's all the restaurants and bars and stores that come in chasing their money, which they can't afford and which raise their rents. It's their schools changing and no longer servicing their community's needs.

There is a lot of literature about this issue, I shouldn't have to tell you this. None of this is a mystery.

30 years ago, most schools in DC weren't serving anyone's needs, other than free childcare. Gentrification has been a driving force in changing that. Please explain how anyone would have been better off with the old DCPS.

I was thinking this exact thing. Sometimes change is better for everyone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This issue isn't easy, but permit me to make a few points and ask a few questions:

Property Taxes The idea that long term black owners are being pushed out due to property taxes doesn't comport with the realty of DC's property tax regime. DC has a homestead deduction that caps the amount property a tax liability can increase in any given year. 25% of a number set 30 years ago is nominal. And that number is much lower than in most jurisdictions that may only reassess every 5 or 10 years but don't have a cap. Furthermore, DC's mill rate is exceedingly low. You can argue that our income tax is regressive (I personally think it is at more than 8% for people making basically at 2x the poverty line), but that's got nothing to do with property tax. That's a red herring/lazy argument that simply doesn't hold up tp scrutiny. Please show me the actual data that shows a long term (read: generational owners) are moving from DC due to property tax increases. That data would include the comparative property tax rates paid in new jurisdictions (which in most cases would be higher than in DC).

Forced Out What does it mean to be "forced out"? I'm asking in all seriousness. If a family that lived through the crack epidemic in (what is now known as) NoMa realized that their investment (or the investment from their parents or grandparents) allows them to cash out and move to a lower COL jurisdiction, is that a push or a pull? If they sell to a black family does that change your answer? Real estate is one of the most accessible ways to create wealth; in some cases generational wealth. The idea that white people driving up housing prices and creating opportunities for black families to cash in ignores the positive societal result of black families creating wealth. The unspoken policy initiative here seems to be that black families don't have the right to cash in, and if they do they are "selling out" or they aren't doing it of their own free will.

Moving into a new neighborhood necessarily means acquiescing to whatever has been going on prior to your arrival This one cracks me up. It creates a false equivalence between calling the police on a black person walking down the street with calling the police for actual drug or crime activity. If I witness a crime committed by a black person that does not make me racist. I would argue that deciding not to call the police to report a black person due to white guilt is actually racist; it presumes that the illegal activity is inherently black; that's crap. I have lived for 20 years in a neighborhood that was the epicenter of the crack epidemic in DC. If you know anything about DC you know exactly where I live. The long term residents of this neighborhood didn't want crack and violence in their community. They don't speak of it as some badge of honor or look back fondly to secure street cred that they are black enough. They didn't want to be raising their kids in a neighborhood that had MPD on the take. This idea from purported deep thinkers that allowing crime to persist is necessary to perpetuate black culture conflates criminality of just being black with actual criminal activity. The fact that some (white) people can't tell the difference doesn't mean they are the same thing.

Stores that cater to "white people" are bad This is too easy and creates a construct that too often doesn't match with reality. H Street NE was burned out after the riots. Prior to that it was a epicenter of black culture in DC. But that ceased after the riots. You can blame DC pols for failing to create viable economic reinvestment in the neighborhood (and I so; the development zones in NW were never created in NE DC and then people were shocked when development didn't come). But there were very few city services in NE DC until the rehabilitation that started in the late 90s/early 2000 (see, Autozone plaza, streetcar, etc.) Whole foods didn't displace a viable black owned business. It displaced Murray's "Supermarket". If you have lived here long enough to know anything about the area you know it had a lousy selection, terrible quality produce and high prices. The Giant that opened up 3 blocks East was a HUGE improvement. There are lots of places where rents have increased and forced out long term business owners. H Street NE is NOT one of them. In the 2000s those buildings could be acquired for a song. There's also a chicken egg conundrum. Did businesses catering to black clientele depart and the black residents followed? Or did black residents leave and the single demo businesses closed as a result?

As I said, these are tough issues. And it is important that white people be allies of the black and brown communities. But please don't confuse the desire to be allies and support your cause with some sort of obligation to just sit back and ignore the complexity of these issues. There are lots of white people running around saying "I see you. I understand you. Whatever you say I agree with." That's called liberal guilt and, in my experience, it lasts exactly as long as it takes for those people to have adverse financial interests. If you want long term partnership then you need to be willing to have these types of conversations. Engage. If someone disagrees with you don't scream "racist" and walk away. "Read the literature" is a silly response. If there is literature on point then by all means cite it so I can read it, think critically about it and ask questions.

I will now sit back and enjoy being called a racist...


Impressive post. I was thinking along the same lines but you explained it so knowledgeably and articulately. I would add in my opinion it is stupid to blame individuals for doing what is in their own best interest. We are all hardwired to do that. The government needs to enforce rules and regulations that benefit the larger community. If black people are being forced out, the government is to blame rather than white people who are moving in. Blacks have a lot of power in DC. They need to lobby for more affordable housing and tax breaks for low income people. DCPS is finally starting to improve and that helps all kids not just white upperclass kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh? Because you're pushing people out of the neighborhood who possibly lived there for generations and can't afford it anymore (rent or property taxes) due to people like you.

Whether this bothers you or not is one thing but it's absolutely true that this is a real thing going on.

Right - but the question becomes - as an UMC white family - what should you do? I don't want to live surrounded by all white people. I want my kid to have a diverse friend group, racially, ethnically, and socio-economically. While yes, UMC white people moving into historically black neighborhoods pushes black people out. But the alternative is to move to a white-only area, which seems worse to me.

It seems to me that the system here is clearly racist, but that individual families moving to black neighborhoods (as primary residences) aren't doing anything wrong, and may in fact be doing the best they can to fight racism. What would you propose they do instead? Move to Arlington?

PP. The thing is, it's obviously fine and maybe even good for society when it's just one or two white families moving in and integrating the neighborhood (assuming you are decent people and use the neighborhood public schools/don't call the cops on your neighbors for noise or other petty complaints, etc.).

however, it gets to be a big problem without a good solution when it's tons of white families doing it and completely changing the cultural tenor of the area. See, for example: Brooklyn and all its myriad problems related to this issue.

You really don't get why the old families are unhappy about this? It's not just having to see white faces. It's all the restaurants and bars and stores that come in chasing their money, which they can't afford and which raise their rents. It's their schools changing and no longer servicing their community's needs.

There is a lot of literature about this issue, I shouldn't have to tell you this. None of this is a mystery.

+100

Please educate yourself and read the literature in the subject

What literature? The literature is not one sided. This is a complicated topic. Lots of blacks want nice things in their neighborhood- nice coffee shops, restaurants, supermarkets. It increases the job availability for them and their kids. They also enjoy getting a Starbucks coffee sometimes. These things though go hand in hand with increasing rents, etc. It is just how the free market works. I wish the US had more of a socialist bent but it is completely free market based. Crying and screaming about it won’t change a thing

[Anonymous]

Until public housing is removed root and branch from Columbia Heights, it is impossible for it to be truly gentrified. I’ve lived in 5-6 neighborhoods and rent my house instead of selling when I move. I love seeing the city gentrified and really don’t care about what the implications of that are to anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Until public housing is removed root and branch from Columbia Heights, it is impossible for it to be truly gentrified. I’ve lived in 5-6 neighborhoods and rent my house instead of selling when I move. I love seeing the city gentrified and really don’t care about what the implications of that are to anyone.

Me too. I fking love gentrification and all the prosperity associated with it.

[Anonymous]

To add to 17:48's excellent analysis re property taxes---
In addition to the homeowner rate, there are also additional tax breaks given to senior citizens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This issue isn't easy, but permit me to make a few points and ask a few questions:

Property Taxes The idea that long term black owners are being pushed out due to property taxes doesn't comport with the realty of DC's property tax regime. DC has a homestead deduction that caps the amount property a tax liability can increase in any given year. 25% of a number set 30 years ago is nominal. And that number is much lower than in most jurisdictions that may only reassess every 5 or 10 years but don't have a cap. Furthermore, DC's mill rate is exceedingly low. You can argue that our income tax is regressive (I personally think it is at more than 8% for people making basically at 2x the poverty line), but that's got nothing to do with property tax. That's a red herring/lazy argument that simply doesn't hold up tp scrutiny. Please show me the actual data that shows a long term (read: generational owners) are moving from DC due to property tax increases. That data would include the comparative property tax rates paid in new jurisdictions (which in most cases would be higher than in DC).

Forced Out What does it mean to be "forced out"? I'm asking in all seriousness. If a family that lived through the crack epidemic in (what is now known as) NoMa realized that their investment (or the investment from their parents or grandparents) allows them to cash out and move to a lower COL jurisdiction, is that a push or a pull? If they sell to a black family does that change your answer? Real estate is one of the most accessible ways to create wealth; in some cases generational wealth. The idea that white people driving up housing prices and creating opportunities for black families to cash in ignores the positive societal result of black families creating wealth. The unspoken policy initiative here seems to be that black families don't have the right to cash in, and if they do they are "selling out" or they aren't doing it of their own free will.

Moving into a new neighborhood necessarily means acquiescing to whatever has been going on prior to your arrival This one cracks me up. It creates a false equivalence between calling the police on a black person walking down the street with calling the police for actual drug or crime activity. If I witness a crime committed by a black person that does not make me racist. I would argue that deciding not to call the police to report a black person due to white guilt is actually racist; it presumes that the illegal activity is inherently black; that's crap. I have lived for 20 years in a neighborhood that was the epicenter of the crack epidemic in DC. If you know anything about DC you know exactly where I live. The long term residents of this neighborhood didn't want crack and violence in their community. They don't speak of it as some badge of honor or look back fondly to secure street cred that they are black enough. They didn't want to be raising their kids in a neighborhood that had MPD on the take. This idea from purported deep thinkers that allowing crime to persist is necessary to perpetuate black culture conflates criminality of just being black with actual criminal activity. The fact that some (white) people can't tell the difference doesn't mean they are the same thing.

Stores that cater to "white people" are bad This is too easy and creates a construct that too often doesn't match with reality. H Street NE was burned out after the riots. Prior to that it was a epicenter of black culture in DC. But that ceased after the riots. You can blame DC pols for failing to create viable economic reinvestment in the neighborhood (and I so; the development zones in NW were never created in NE DC and then people were shocked when development didn't come). But there were very few city services in NE DC until the rehabilitation that started in the late 90s/early 2000 (see, Autozone plaza, streetcar, etc.) Whole foods didn't displace a viable black owned business. It displaced Murray's "Supermarket". If you have lived here long enough to know anything about the area you know it had a lousy selection, terrible quality produce and high prices. The Giant that opened up 3 blocks East was a HUGE improvement. There are lots of places where rents have increased and forced out long term business owners. H Street NE is NOT one of them. In the 2000s those buildings could be acquired for a song. There's also a chicken egg conundrum. Did businesses catering to black clientele depart and the black residents followed? Or did black residents leave and the single demo businesses closed as a result?

As I said, these are tough issues. And it is important that white people be allies of the black and brown communities. But please don't confuse the desire to be allies and support your cause with some sort of obligation to just sit back and ignore the complexity of these issues. There are lots of white people running around saying "I see you. I understand you. Whatever you say I agree with." That's called liberal guilt and, in my experience, it lasts exactly as long as it takes for those people to have adverse financial interests. If you want long term partnership then you need to be willing to have these types of conversations. Engage. If someone disagrees with you don't scream "racist" and walk away. "Read the literature" is a silly response. If there is literature on point then by all means cite it so I can read it, think critically about it and ask questions.

I will now sit back and enjoy being called a racist...

I appreciate your thoughtful post. I completely agree with you about Black homeowners in DC, due to the reasons you listed. I think that in DC, the people who are hurt by gentrification are renters. I assume that working class Black families who rented in Columbia Heights in 2000 can no longer afford to rent there, and thus have been forced out. And that sucks.

Where I disagree with you about crime and calling the police. I think that there’s some nuance here that matters greatly. If you witness a murder, by all means, call the police! But yes, I do believe that you need to think twice about calling the police on Black people for matters that don’t involve immediate safety or serious crimes. There are waaaaay too many white people who will call the police on Black people for “looking suspicious” or “loitering” or god knows what else and it’s putting people in danger. And drugs - it’s easy to say “well, that’s illegal and law abiding neighbors don’t want it” - but how many white people do you know who have done plenty of coke with no repercussions? That’s not a coincidence - that’s institutional racism, and I don’t want to be a part of it. So no, as a white gentrifier, I don’t think it’s okay to call the police on a Black neighbor committing a drug crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To add to 17:48's excellent analysis re property taxes---
In addition to the homeowner rate, there are also additional tax breaks given to senior citizens.

+1. Most senior citizens and disabled people who own at least half the home get a 50% break. It needs to be applied for. There is a high-ish (>100K) income cap for this benefit. There is also the Schedule H tax credit for low income owners and renters. Also needs to be something you file to claim. People can claim these things on $1 million homes. Low income seniors don't really need to begin to pay property tax until their assessed value is >$400K, and one of the lowest rates in the country above that. I used to help people apply for these things, often filing refund claims for as many open years back as possible for people. I think the problem is many people don't know they exist or don't bother to apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This issue isn't easy, but permit me to make a few points and ask a few questions:

Property Taxes The idea that long term black owners are being pushed out due to property taxes doesn't comport with the realty of DC's property tax regime. DC has a homestead deduction that caps the amount property a tax liability can increase in any given year. 25% of a number set 30 years ago is nominal. And that number is much lower than in most jurisdictions that may only reassess every 5 or 10 years but don't have a cap. Furthermore, DC's mill rate is exceedingly low. You can argue that our income tax is regressive (I personally think it is at more than 8% for people making basically at 2x the poverty line), but that's got nothing to do with property tax. That's a red herring/lazy argument that simply doesn't hold up tp scrutiny. Please show me the actual data that shows a long term (read: generational owners) are moving from DC due to property tax increases. That data would include the comparative property tax rates paid in new jurisdictions (which in most cases would be higher than in DC).

Forced Out What does it mean to be "forced out"? I'm asking in all seriousness. If a family that lived through the crack epidemic in (what is now known as) NoMa realized that their investment (or the investment from their parents or grandparents) allows them to cash out and move to a lower COL jurisdiction, is that a push or a pull? If they sell to a black family does that change your answer? Real estate is one of the most accessible ways to create wealth; in some cases generational wealth. The idea that white people driving up housing prices and creating opportunities for black families to cash in ignores the positive societal result of black families creating wealth. The unspoken policy initiative here seems to be that black families don't have the right to cash in, and if they do they are "selling out" or they aren't doing it of their own free will.

Moving into a new neighborhood necessarily means acquiescing to whatever has been going on prior to your arrival This one cracks me up. It creates a false equivalence between calling the police on a black person walking down the street with calling the police for actual drug or crime activity. If I witness a crime committed by a black person that does not make me racist. I would argue that deciding not to call the police to report a black person due to white guilt is actually racist; it presumes that the illegal activity is inherently black; that's crap. I have lived for 20 years in a neighborhood that was the epicenter of the crack epidemic in DC. If you know anything about DC you know exactly where I live. The long term residents of this neighborhood didn't want crack and violence in their community. They don't speak of it as some badge of honor or look back fondly to secure street cred that they are black enough. They didn't want to be raising their kids in a neighborhood that had MPD on the take. This idea from purported deep thinkers that allowing crime to persist is necessary to perpetuate black culture conflates criminality of just being black with actual criminal activity. The fact that some (white) people can't tell the difference doesn't mean they are the same thing.

Stores that cater to "white people" are bad This is too easy and creates a construct that too often doesn't match with reality. H Street NE was burned out after the riots. Prior to that it was a epicenter of black culture in DC. But that ceased after the riots. You can blame DC pols for failing to create viable economic reinvestment in the neighborhood (and I so; the development zones in NW were never created in NE DC and then people were shocked when development didn't come). But there were very few city services in NE DC until the rehabilitation that started in the late 90s/early 2000 (see, Autozone plaza, streetcar, etc.) Whole foods didn't displace a viable black owned business. It displaced Murray's "Supermarket". If you have lived here long enough to know anything about the area you know it had a lousy selection, terrible quality produce and high prices. The Giant that opened up 3 blocks East was a HUGE improvement. There are lots of places where rents have increased and forced out long term business owners. H Street NE is NOT one of them. In the 2000s those buildings could be acquired for a song. There's also a chicken egg conundrum. Did businesses catering to black clientele depart and the black residents followed? Or did black residents leave and the single demo businesses closed as a result?

As I said, these are tough issues. And it is important that white people be allies of the black and brown communities. But please don't confuse the desire to be allies and support your cause with some sort of obligation to just sit back and ignore the complexity of these issues. There are lots of white people running around saying "I see you. I understand you. Whatever you say I agree with." That's called liberal guilt and, in my experience, it lasts exactly as long as it takes for those people to have adverse financial interests. If you want long term partnership then you need to be willing to have these types of conversations. Engage. If someone disagrees with you don't scream "racist" and walk away. "Read the literature" is a silly response. If there is literature on point then by all means cite it so I can read it, think critically about it and ask questions.

I will now sit back and enjoy being called a racist...

I appreciate your thoughtful post. I completely agree with you about Black homeowners in DC, due to the reasons you listed. I think that in DC, the people who are hurt by gentrification are renters. I assume that working class Black families who rented in Columbia Heights in 2000 can no longer afford to rent there, and thus have been forced out. And that sucks.

Where I disagree with you about crime and calling the police. I think that there’s some nuance here that matters greatly. If you witness a murder, by all means, call the police! But yes, I do believe that you need to think twice about calling the police on Black people for matters that don’t involve immediate safety or serious crimes. There are waaaaay too many white people who will call the police on Black people for “looking suspicious” or “loitering” or god knows what else and it’s putting people in danger. And drugs - it’s easy to say “well, that’s illegal and law abiding neighbors don’t want it” - but how many white people do you know who have done plenty of coke with no repercussions? That’s not a coincidence - that’s institutional racism, and I don’t want to be a part of it. So no, as a white gentrifier, I don’t think it’s okay to call the police on a Black neighbor committing a drug crime.

You’re crazy. I would call the police if I witness a drug crime. I don’t care if the person is black, white, Asian, Latino, or whatever. It’s illegal. Full stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This issue isn't easy, but permit me to make a few points and ask a few questions:

Property Taxes The idea that long term black owners are being pushed out due to property taxes doesn't comport with the realty of DC's property tax regime. DC has a homestead deduction that caps the amount property a tax liability can increase in any given year. 25% of a number set 30 years ago is nominal. And that number is much lower than in most jurisdictions that may only reassess every 5 or 10 years but don't have a cap. Furthermore, DC's mill rate is exceedingly low. You can argue that our income tax is regressive (I personally think it is at more than 8% for people making basically at 2x the poverty line), but that's got nothing to do with property tax. That's a red herring/lazy argument that simply doesn't hold up tp scrutiny. Please show me the actual data that shows a long term (read: generational owners) are moving from DC due to property tax increases. That data would include the comparative property tax rates paid in new jurisdictions (which in most cases would be higher than in DC).

Forced Out What does it mean to be "forced out"? I'm asking in all seriousness. If a family that lived through the crack epidemic in (what is now known as) NoMa realized that their investment (or the investment from their parents or grandparents) allows them to cash out and move to a lower COL jurisdiction, is that a push or a pull? If they sell to a black family does that change your answer? Real estate is one of the most accessible ways to create wealth; in some cases generational wealth. The idea that white people driving up housing prices and creating opportunities for black families to cash in ignores the positive societal result of black families creating wealth. The unspoken policy initiative here seems to be that black families don't have the right to cash in, and if they do they are "selling out" or they aren't doing it of their own free will.

Moving into a new neighborhood necessarily means acquiescing to whatever has been going on prior to your arrival This one cracks me up. It creates a false equivalence between calling the police on a black person walking down the street with calling the police for actual drug or crime activity. If I witness a crime committed by a black person that does not make me racist. I would argue that deciding not to call the police to report a black person due to white guilt is actually racist; it presumes that the illegal activity is inherently black; that's crap. I have lived for 20 years in a neighborhood that was the epicenter of the crack epidemic in DC. If you know anything about DC you know exactly where I live. The long term residents of this neighborhood didn't want crack and violence in their community. They don't speak of it as some badge of honor or look back fondly to secure street cred that they are black enough. They didn't want to be raising their kids in a neighborhood that had MPD on the take. This idea from purported deep thinkers that allowing crime to persist is necessary to perpetuate black culture conflates criminality of just being black with actual criminal activity. The fact that some (white) people can't tell the difference doesn't mean they are the same thing.

Stores that cater to "white people" are bad This is too easy and creates a construct that too often doesn't match with reality. H Street NE was burned out after the riots. Prior to that it was a epicenter of black culture in DC. But that ceased after the riots. You can blame DC pols for failing to create viable economic reinvestment in the neighborhood (and I so; the development zones in NW were never created in NE DC and then people were shocked when development didn't come). But there were very few city services in NE DC until the rehabilitation that started in the late 90s/early 2000 (see, Autozone plaza, streetcar, etc.) Whole foods didn't displace a viable black owned business. It displaced Murray's "Supermarket". If you have lived here long enough to know anything about the area you know it had a lousy selection, terrible quality produce and high prices. The Giant that opened up 3 blocks East was a HUGE improvement. There are lots of places where rents have increased and forced out long term business owners. H Street NE is NOT one of them. In the 2000s those buildings could be acquired for a song. There's also a chicken egg conundrum. Did businesses catering to black clientele depart and the black residents followed? Or did black residents leave and the single demo businesses closed as a result?

As I said, these are tough issues. And it is important that white people be allies of the black and brown communities. But please don't confuse the desire to be allies and support your cause with some sort of obligation to just sit back and ignore the complexity of these issues. There are lots of white people running around saying "I see you. I understand you. Whatever you say I agree with." That's called liberal guilt and, in my experience, it lasts exactly as long as it takes for those people to have adverse financial interests. If you want long term partnership then you need to be willing to have these types of conversations. Engage. If someone disagrees with you don't scream "racist" and walk away. "Read the literature" is a silly response. If there is literature on point then by all means cite it so I can read it, think critically about it and ask questions.

I will now sit back and enjoy being called a racist...

I appreciate your thoughtful post. I completely agree with you about Black homeowners in DC, due to the reasons you listed. I think that in DC, the people who are hurt by gentrification are renters. I assume that working class Black families who rented in Columbia Heights in 2000 can no longer afford to rent there, and thus have been forced out. And that sucks.

Where I disagree with you about crime and calling the police. I think that there’s some nuance here that matters greatly. If you witness a murder, by all means, call the police! But yes, I do believe that you need to think twice about calling the police on Black people for matters that don’t involve immediate safety or serious crimes. There are waaaaay too many white people who will call the police on Black people for “looking suspicious” or “loitering” or god knows what else and it’s putting people in danger. And drugs - it’s easy to say “well, that’s illegal and law abiding neighbors don’t want it” - but how many white people do you know who have done plenty of coke with no repercussions? That’s not a coincidence - that’s institutional racism, and I don’t want to be a part of it. So no, as a white gentrifier, I don’t think it’s okay to call the police on a Black neighbor committing a drug crime.

You’re crazy. I would call the police if I witness a drug crime. I don’t care if the person is black, white, Asian, Latino, or whatever. It’s illegal. Full stop.

I’m the OP. Serious question: Have you ever been offered coke at a party? Or have you ever been aware that a friend or acquaintance used cocaine? If so, did you call the police?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To add to 17:48's excellent analysis re property taxes---
In addition to the homeowner rate, there are also additional tax breaks given to senior citizens.

+1. Most senior citizens and disabled people who own at least half the home get a 50% break. It needs to be applied for. There is a high-ish (>100K) income cap for this benefit. There is also the Schedule H tax credit for low income owners and renters. Also needs to be something you file to claim. People can claim these things on $1 million homes. Low income seniors don't really need to begin to pay property tax until their assessed value is >$400K, and one of the lowest rates in the country above that. I used to help people apply for these things, often filing refund claims for as many open years back as possible for people. I think the problem is many people don't know they exist or don't bother to apply.

Even if they don’t apply, taxes are low and increases are capped. It’s not because of taxes for majority of people leaving.

The black people selling their homes are cashing out and going to a nice area in PG county and buying a nice large SFH with a yard for the 500k plus they are getting. Friend of a friend moved down to nice retirement community in Fl.