I have been following the local/regional gentrification conversations for a little over 5 years and in my opinion, here are some ways to solve this complex issue in real time:
(1)DE-BUNK the myths about gentrification
•Myth #1: “Gentrification is inevitable.” Reason: Because gentrification isn’t a force of nature (such as a hurricane or flood), it can't be inevitable.
•Myth #2: “Gentrification is insignificant.” Reason: Based on its definition alone, gentrification is quite significant. Gentrification: “the buying and renovation of houses and stores in deteriorated urban neighborhoods by upper or middle-income families or individuals, raising property values but often displacing low-income families and small businesses” (www.dictionary.com).
Description: At least 3+ homes in EPA exceed $2M market value. Source: Redfin website; 12/2021.
(2)DECIDE to house locals otherwise pushed out by gentrification
•Solution #1: Are you a renter in East Palo Alto? If you are a local who grew up in the area (pre big-tech) and you want to stay in the area, consider room-mating with other long-time residents. Hint: Use your networks.
•Solution #2: Are you a homeowner in East Palo Alto? If you are a community elder or long-time resident who owns property (pre big-tech), consider opening your home for rent to long-time residents at an affordable price. Hint: The cost to rent a room in your home should not be the same as the cost of a monthly mortgage payment.
Description: Poster designed by Austin Matthews for an Atlanta-based Gentrification TV show. Source: Instagram; 9/2021.
(3) DESIGN policies which lessen housing displacement caused by gentrification
•Solution #1: Attend city council meetings and stay informed about housing issues in the community and in the region.
•Solution #2: Advocate for policies on the ballot which keep EPA’s housing market affordable for renters and homeowners alike, especially for working-class, long-term and/or legacy residents. Maintaining access to affordable housing is one of EPA’s founding pillars.
Description: My mom, (whose been displaced from EPA) wearing Displaced Lane Clothing; 11/2018.
As the saying goes, “If you aren’t part of the solution you are part of the problem.” I believe that the same is true when it comes to the issue of gentrification. I hope these tips give folks a starting point for solving this problem.
Kyra Brown is a long-time resident of EPA whose maternal grandparents went to Ravenswood High School. In response to the displacement of many of her friends and family members out of EPA due to sky-rocketing rents, in 2018 she founded Displaced Lane Clothing. Her hope is that the clothing line starts conversations about housing struggles and that those conversations lead locals to create systems change, thereby preserving our community. For updates on Kyra’s affordable housing/anti-displacement work follow her on Instagram: @displacedlane.
I remember I moved back to East Palo Alto (EPA) from Washington, DC in 2015, and when the topic of gentrification came up in conversation, people often said, “Gentrification is inevitable.” At the time, I gathered that because gentrification wasn’t a force of nature (such as a hurricane or flood), it couldn’t be inevitable. I gathered that specific factors, even if I didn't know what all of them were, contributed to the process of gentrification overall. Around 2017 to present, the response to the topic has shifted to, “Gentrification is insignificant.” According to www.dictionary.com, gentrification is defined as: “the buying and renovation of houses and stores in deteriorated urban neighborhoods by upper or middle-income families or individuals, raising property values but often displacing low-income families and small businesses,” while insignificant is defined as: “too small to be important; of no consequence.” While some still contend today that gentrification is insignificant, it is my position that based on its definition alone (gentrification), the contrary is true.
For example, one of the homes that my great-grandmother owned in the Gardens, when I was a child, sold in 2004 for $660,000. This was before Facebook HQ was located in the Belle Haven neighborhood of Menlo Park and long before Amazon was located in EPA. Although my great-grandmother’s home was built in 1947 and she bought it much cheaper than $660,000, it is currently valued at over $1M, some 17 years later. Moreover, for East Palo Alto to have become a city where houses are hitting the $1M mark, when it was one of the first cities in the Bay Area to enact Rent Control to ensure affordable housing for its residents – is anything but insignificant! In my experience, the sky-rocketing cost of housing in EPA is one of the reasons the city has been and continues to become gentrified. EPA is the home of Ravenswood High School, Nairobi Day School and Nairobi College. EPA is the home of a former Black Panther Party Chapter (see image below). It is a community having been redlined into existence, yet seeking to govern itself so much so that the case for Incorporation went to the Supreme Court. Growing up, I remember hearing stories about a group of Black folks known as “The Floating Crap Game” who organized themselves and made it their mission to incorporate the city. This begs the question: What happens to our beloved community of East Palo Alto, when the children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those who incorporated the city, can no longer afford to live here, because of gentrification? Answering this question is a matter of colossal significance.
Black Panther Party Newspaper clipping -- September 9, 1972; Source: Twitter
While rising housing costs is one indicator that the process of gentrification is well underway, I submit that the expansion of the Tech industry is another. To be fair, over the last few years, Big Tech has responded to the criticisms of locals and activists that its expansion has exacerbated the Bay Area’s housing crisis, therefore contributing to the gentrification of the Bay Area more broadly, and the shrinking of the Bay Area’s historically black communities, more specifically. In 2016, Facebook, in coalition with community groups announced its investment of $20M into the Catalyst Fund for Affordable Housing. In 2020, Google announced a $250M investment into affordable housing projects. This begs yet another question: If Big Tech has committed to building mass housing in the region but not undergoing mass hiring of Black and Latinx people from the region, who is actually going to be around to benefit from these housing investments, in the first place? Will there be any locals left? This isn’t to insinuate that Facebook and/or Big Tech must fix every social problem in Silicon Valley. However, it is to underscore that Big Tech’s expansion and subsequent gentrification/displacement of historically disenfranchised Black and Brown communities is one problem which has a ripple effect. For this reason, our collective solutions to Silicon Valley's social problems must be as well-rounded and multifaceted as our American social fabric is complex. In other words, there are no easy answers.
Tech companies are microcosms of larger society. This is why I raised both issues of housing and hiring in my Open Letter to Mark Zuckerberg in 2016 (http://writetoliveblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/an-open-letter-to-mark-zuckerberg.html). Between then and now, I have observed that (1) when (many) Tech companies hire Black people and people of color, it is often a matter of time before they are pushed out of these companies, (2) in the same ways that we are systemically pushed out of our neighborhoods via the process of gentrification -- to make room for Big Tech’s expansion (See Figure 1 and 2).
It is my hypothesis that systemic racism is the culprit in both situations and left unaddressed, it encourages and maintains the status quo. In other words, the tide of systemic racism (in the form of gentrification) washes away our historically Black communities and communities of color. The tide of systemic racism, which shows up as punishing and/or firing the few Black and Brown Tech workers who speak up about their experiences with racism in the workplace, washes away even the small numbers of "diversity hires" within these companies.
Serve the People San Jose & De-Bug Silicon Valley Banner Drop at Google, Summer 2018
In February 2021, MarketWatch published an article stating that Big Tech is pledging to diversify their numbers (https://www.marketwatch.com/story/facebook-twitter-bank-of-america-and-other-large-companies-pledge-to-hire-diverse-leaders-11613759174). Yet, this is said every few years and the numbers don’t seem to have hit a tipping point. In fact, last summer, and in the wake of George Floyd's state-sanctioned murder, Bloomberg published an article entitled, “From Apple to Facebook, Tech’s New Diversity Pledges Follow Years of Failure (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-23/apple-amazon-facebook-google-microsoft-data-on-black-hiring).” According to the article, 3.1% of Facebook’s senior leadership is Black and 1.5% of the company’s Black employees hold technical roles. Sheryl Sandberg insinuated that she is, “Committed to have 30% more Black people in Facebook’s leadership positions by 2025.” As for Google, their numbers are even lower -- only 2.4% of their employees are Black. Numbers don’t lie. I am in the process of researching the numbers of Latinx employees in the Bay Area’s Big Tech companies across the board. The gentrification of historically Black and Brown communities is no insignificant matter. Nor is the relegating of Black and Brown people strictly to menial positions and seldom to senior leadership positions within these Tech companies. We need more than pledges. We need progress. When Facebook and Google pledge money for housing and pledge positions for hiring, who keeps track? Something has got to give.
