gentrification

and that these revenues are not erased by the demands of newcomers for civic improvements.” 39Some advocates we spoke with fear that new tax revenues generated by new higher incomehouseholds will be earmarked for improvements in services in gentrifying neighborhoods, at theexpense of other neighborhoods in the city.A number of cities link appreciating real estate prices to affordable housing needs. Theyestablish housing trust funds, which require developers who are granted zoning variances tocontribute to a pool for the creation of more affordable housing. Boston’s linkage-fee programhistorically funded affordable housing throughout the city, and often financed housing in lessexpensive neighborhoods, in part to increase the cost-efficiency of housing created. A new initiativeties at least a portion of the revenues to the neighborhood whose revitalization generated the fees.It is not clear whether such an arrangement enhances neighborhood equity or detracts from it, andthe Lawyers Committee on Civil Rights recently filed suit, arguing that the agreement violates fairhousing law. Within the private sector, the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, concerned aboutmaking housing affordable to its current and future employees but wary of government-mandatedlinkage fees or other requirements tied to expansion, is soliciting area corporations for money for a$20 million housing trust fund.3. Greater Income Mix, Deconcentration of PovertyInterest in increasing a withering tax base is not the only reason that many cities are activelytrying to attract upper- and middle-income households. Cities are also desperate to reduce the highand costly concentrations of poverty households contained in their borders. A communitydevelopment director in Cleveland noted, “I know it’s not politically correct, but with an averagepoverty rate of 42 percent, what my target neighborhoods need is a little gentrification.” Successfulefforts to improve incomes, deconcentrate poverty and create a greater income mix inneighborhoods have significant impacts on the wellbeing of families and children, according toTurner and Ellen, in a summary of the existing research on so-called “neighborhood effects”:The bulk of the empirical evidence conducted to date suggests that neighborhoods matter.Various neighborhood conditions appear to significantly affect a wide range of individualoutcomes at every state in a person’s life and across social and economic dimensions. Highpoverty rates, the absence of affluent or well-educated neighbors, high unemployment, highrates of welfare recipiency and the absence of two-parent families have all been found toplay a role in one or more important outcomes for families and children. However, althoughthe effects of neighborhood environment are found to be significant, they are consistentlymuch smaller than the effects of family characteristics. 4039 Lang, Michael, “Measuring Economic Benefits from Gentrification,” Journal of Urban Affairs, Vol. 8, No. 4, p.37.40 The best summary of the literature on neighborhood effects is Margery Austin Turner and Ingrid Gould Ellen,“Does Neighborhood Matter? Assessing Recent Evidence,” Housing Policy Debate, Volume 8, No. 4.19