Should local governments spend money to help fix up historic Black communities?

This may not be the same thing at all, but there was a show called Extreme Makeover where they remodeled or even totally rebuilt homes for people in need. The down side of that was a lot of the people couldn’t afford the increase in insurance and taxes and a lot of the people lost their homes.
I think it’s a good idea to try to fix up communities, but it generally won’t work if the people are living in poverty.

” The crowd sits quietly, listening, until a groan breaks out across the audience when Mr. Hughes tells them the governor declined their meeting invitation.”
This kind of sums it up. DeSantis will cheerfully wipe out communities of color, historic or not, in his pursuit of his fascist agenda.
Has the preservation committee contacted the ACLU? This sounds like something right up their alley.

These things happen all over, in different ways. The “cleaning up” of inner cities by gentrification, which prices out the original residents, is a good example.

Many Black communities were destroyed in the 1950s when the many laned interstate highway was built through their formerly vibrant neighborhoods. That mistake should not be willfully repeated in these “enlightened” times. It should be easy enough to reroute the planned highway around the outskirts of a developed area.

I realized I didn’t actually answer your Q. Yes, I believe local governments should indeed spend money t9 fix up historic communities, whether black or not. They should explore all the resources available, including grants and donation generating programs.

If any buildings are deemed “historic” then that goes a long way to stopping big construction projects.

Forgetting about Desantis, I’ll answer the broader question, and ask a few of my own.

- is the black neighborhood inherently historical or valuable and worth of redoing? Or is the neighborhood being chosen solely because it had black residents, but with no historical value otherwise?

- assuming the area is rehabbed and preserved, will there be restrictions on who can live there? Will it be a ‘black only’ enclave? Will whites and asians be prevented from moving there if they wish?

- does the state (or county, or whoever) have similar rehab projects for lower income and lower quality white neighborhoods?

We need all the facts.

A loud YES.
State and Federal government ruined these communities in the 50’s and 60’s by cutting highway projects right through by eminent domain.

You’re talking about spending money to help fix up the communities but in the details you say there are plans to destroy it! Maybe the state should first concentrate on not destroying neighborhoods where people live and then one can talk about fixing up – maybe through local grants to the communities if that’s what they want.

When they look at where to put a new road, they look at the location(s) which they deem to be most disposable. They’re not going to spend billions buying new office buildings from the owners to put roads there, so they look at where’s a cheap place they can buy owners out and put the roads there. I’m not saying it’s right, I’m saying that’s what they do. Definitely when people are bought out, they should be relocated.

I saw a documentary about this happening somewhere in the midwest. The houses were all run down because the local industry (maybe it was an auto factory) was not there any longer. The sad part for the residents was they loved their neighborhood. They loved the closeness of having each other around, block parties, etc. then the bulldozers came and eliminated plot by plot. The residents were moved to low income housing but it wasn’t the same sense of community they had in their old neighborhood.

@jca2 And Robert Moses did it in the Bronx in the 1960s. He actually destroyed a multi-ethnic community called East Tremont to build the Cross Bronx Expressway. He could have built it some blocks up and not destroyed as much but some of his friends owned buildings there! I’m studying more and more about this crap and it is infuriating.

@janbb we just drove through the Bronx last week, going to visit family in Manhattan. South Bronx is now being gentrified, called SoBo. They have fancy cafes and stuff, and are putting in new, tall residential buildings. I think it’s the demand for housing in NYC which is pushing the borders out.

The man who I was talking to about it is very upset about the proposed road and he told me background about the area and everything ge said you could tell he really took this topic and the lives of the people who lived there to heart. He told me he met with some resistance from the community for his help. Some push back because he was white. That’s a huge mistake in my opinion. Take all of the help you can get. Plus, as a woman, I’m thrilled when men stand together with women on women’s rights issues.

Even if the road gets stopped, I think the area will decay if some money isn’t put in to maintain the area and the houses. This can happen in any community, the normal life cycle of towns. I’m not talking about a major revamp, I don’t know the state of the houses there. They may not be very safe for severe weather, which could ruin the community in one bad storm.

@Elbanditoroso Good point about anyone moving in. There is a gay area in Ft. Lauderdale called Wilton Manors that used to be predominantly Black. Gay people started buying houses and fixing them, and have “taken over” the area.

The problem as I see it is if they’re going to specify “we’re going to spend money to fix up historic black communities” then other groups, for example whites (as evidenced on this very site where some white people take huge offense at special money or privileges going toward black people) are going to say “why should we spend money to fix up black communities? Nobody is fixing up my (white) community.” We’re in such a divided nation now, I don’t see specifying black communities as being something that would work.

The article says nothing about “fixing up” Black neighborhoods. Throwing that into the mix is a red herring. The issue is one of not destroying another Black neighborhood in addition to those that were burned down or destroyed by having an hgihway run through them as described in the article. Justice is the issue, not favoritism, not that a little “favoritism” may not also be warrented after years of inequity.

@janbb I think we need to think about both. Not destroying the community and also being willing to help maintain it. If it’s a poor area someone has to step in to help maintain it. Either younger family members, charity groups, or the government. If it isn’t maintained then it is even harder to fight to not destroy it. That goes for other places around the country too. The flora will begin to take over, weather will wear on the buildings, it needs some care and it needs to be protected against developers if it is truly an important historical area.

The downtown area of Wildwood, FL needs a paint job and some fixing, and it would look so much better. I think we should pay for it in a temporary tax (I’m not in that county anymore, but I would be fine paying for it if I was). It would be such a small amount per tax payer.

There many examples of roads being driven through existing communities and they are littered with the promises that were made to the people that lived there; bigger and better and more modern homes, improved facilities, new community centres you name it but the end result is always the same, the new roads destroy the communities in their path.

It’s a really complicated question and doesn’t have a clear answer.
I’d be more in favor of a program that let’s people from bad neighborhoods move away from them for a better life. Like paying for someone’s trade school as an example.

Bad neighborhoods have deep seated issues due to decades of poverty and corruption and you can’t fix that in a few years of construction.

No. Why should black communities be the only ones to get economic help? That’s racist!

If they pick by “poorest communities” they might be mostly black communities anyway. But at least race will not be in the heading. Sounds better to you?

Of course they build roads in areas with low property values. What do you expect? If it were your responsibility to make a route would you destroy expensive homes and buildings in perfect condition or the slums and low value homes? Race does not always have to be drawn into it.
Back in the 1950s, “They” decided our country needed a highway system so we could better fight the Commies. “They” began building the Lake Ontario Parkway along the south shore of Lake Ontario. My, now long deceased, neighbor farmed about 200 acres along the shore in Braddock Bay. “They” decided the road had to travel across his property. His family farmed that area for generations as did the hundreds of other farmers along the route. That made no difference to “Them.” “They” came with dozers, excavators, trucks and graders and just tore through his property. He tried to resist. (He said there is a dozer in the bay somewhere that he started up and sent on its way into the water.) He was paid a pittance for the land since “they” only took a few acres. But, the road cut his property in two and prevented him from reaching the other half. He could no longer make a living by farming. He ended up as a line worker at Kodak.
By the way, the Lake Ontario Parkway is beautiful. I say thanks to Ed when I drive by.

@LuckyGuy I don’t think the government is purposely going after minority areas, it just happens this area has a lot of history. Maybe most land has a lot of history. I just feel bad about the poor being pushed around or not having nice and safe places to live. I think the surroundings we live in matter.

Just north of the area there is farm land where I think an exit would make so much more sense. I don’t understand it. I’ve wanted an exit there since I moved here. The exit I want would be on I75. The proposal is extending the turnpike (a toll road) but they actually merge together. If you look on GPS at Wildwood, FL, you’ll see where the turnpike (hwy 91) meets I75 just south of 44.

Then if you look a little north 466 (east west) turns north changing to 475 and rides right along I75. There should be an exit there in my opinion.

I’d go with Obama’s opinion that black communities invest in themselves. Black or white, the government will do what they want in the name of progress.

@KNOWITALL but that’s the problem, in a nutshell.

Progress to the black community may mean building the community and making a cohesive neighborhood.

Progress to the government more likely means highways and on-ramps and off-ramps and shoppettes.

That’s what created the mess in the first place.

There is a difference between fixing up historic black communities and bulldozing them to the ground which I suspect is what is intended here. It is easy to destroy communities if everyone pretends they are actually doing them a favour.

@flutherother My point as well.