Thanks for Everything (Now Get Out): Can We Restore Neighborhoods without Destroying Them?

by Joseph Margulies

For too long, she said, organizations have treated neighborhood residents “as an afterthought,” with residents “being told things after they happen.” People are too used to “they talk to us, about us, without us.”

Scholars have long shown that public policy tends to favor the preferences of the haves over the have-nots, so if disagreements arise between the rich and poor residents of Olneyville, the wealthy will probably get their way.41 Unless controlled, therefore, the innovation district will likely continue the trends already under way in the neighborhood. Even if the city’s administrators recognize the risk and try to avoid it, the economic and political forces operating in today’s neoliberal environment all but guarantee that the neighborhood will continue to get wealthier, whiter, less equal, and more expensive.

If, for instance, the people living in Olneyville believed that English for Action provided a more valuable service than some other organization in the neighborhood, they should be allowed to allocate their resources accordingly. That choice should not be made by an outside foundation. Organizations would thus be accountable to the neighborhood and the people who live there, rather than to a distant philanthropy. The neighborhood would be better off, since the needs and wants of low-income residents would be catered to directly.