Wednesday, December 24, 2014

Happy Holidays to WMATA

Source: "Red Line (Washington Metro)" Wikipedia.org
I've always been a great fan of public transit. I particularly enjoy DC's public buses, with their comfortable seats, great views of the city, and friendly passengers. One of my many long-range research projects has been to write a book about American bus culture called I Ride the Bus, to move beyond the usual focus on American car culture and show the interesting social life created among passengers, bus operators, bus depot employees, bus "foamites" (people who love buses so much that they are said to foam at the mouth), and so on. My appreciation of public transit led me to work for NYC Transit for nearly two years, which also exposed me to new aspects of the social worlds created on subways. We sociologists love it when such social worlds become visible, or, in the case below, audible to us.

A few weeks ago, I was on the Orange line and got a peek into WMATA's world of work. The train seemed to be having some door trouble. A man in WMATA gear pushed the call button to talk with train operator. Here was their conversation (I changed the numbers they used in the conversation):

  • This is the train operator. How may I help you?
  • This is 9XX. 
  • No, this is 9XY...Who is this?
  • This is 9XX. 
  • Is this Mr. Morales? ...You've been with me all this time? ...I'm so glad you're with me! You are one of the best!
  • There is no one leaning on the doors. There is a problem with the doors. 
  • Thank you! I have been having trouble with the doors 8, 10, 20, 24. We've been losing them across the city. I'm so glad you're with me. Thank you.

The operator's appreciation of a fellow worker and his specific skills was so spontaneous, revealing some of the joys of the collaborative work in places like WMATA. Organizations in general rely on the technical and social skills of their employees, including their abilities to work collaboratively, in order to function day-to-day and over many decades.

Happy Holidays to WMATA. Thanks for all the great work that you do.

Happy Holidays to all the residents of Ward 6 and of the entire District too!

Friday, December 5, 2014

The Legacy of Marion Barry (III)

Last night, we went to the Wilson Building, where Marion Barry was lying in state for 24 hours. We waited in line outside, while protesters against police violence and the murders of Michael Brown and Eric Garner moved from the Wilson Building out into the city. Inside the main entrance of the Wilson Building, the casket was covered with a kente cloth and an enormous number of red roses. It was a moving occasion.
The Republic
As I discussed before, Marion Barry has several legacies, as someone who supported gentrifying development even while providing jobs to, and greatly identifying with, low-income residents, as well as someone who supported DC's cooperative movement. Here I talk about the work that his administrations accomplished in reducing poverty in DC.

In January, a Washington Post poll found that most residents in Washington, DC, think that the city officials have little control over gentrification, displacement, and inequality: “Washingtonians often see that boom benefiting different groups. What many residents do agree on is that the city’s mayor and other elected officials have little ability to ensure that the new prosperity will lift all boats.” (1)  While this poll may reveal a lack of confidence in the current political leaders in DC, it also reflects a feeling that these processes are inevitable or even that trying to stop them might lead to worse results. Sociologists, however, have found that political leaders have a dramatic effect on poverty and wealth. In his comparison of rich democracies, the amazing sociologist David Brady (2009) found that governments greatly determine one's risk of poverty and shape the experience of poverty. Political actors in the formal political arena determine the nature of the welfare state and thus the nature of poverty in each country. In his book, he found, “Poverty is lower and equality is more likely to be established where welfare states are generous, Leftist collective political actors are in power, and latent coalitions for egalitarianism exert influence, and all of this is institutionalized in the formal political arena” (p. 6). Poverty and inequality not only vary across wealthy democratic countries but also vary within countries like the United States.

During the 100 years of Congressional control over DC, Congressional politicians elected by people far away from DC ran the DC government. The chairmen of the Congressional DC committees included segregationist politicians such as Senator Theodore Bilbo of Mississippi, and, until 1972, Representative John McMillan of South Carolina. In 1974, DC Home Rule allowed DC residents to vote on who would run the city and, as a result, they could finally shape the city. When Barry became Mayor in 1979, he brought leftist collective political actors into DC government, actors allied with broad coalitions advocating egalitarianism and the implementation of social policies that would specifically help low-income residents.

During his first, second, and third terms as Mayor from 1979 to 1991, Marion Barry realized programs that reduced poverty in DC, including his well-known jobs programs. These programs specifically targeted low-income residents, seeking to provide these residents new opportunities. In his autobiography, Barry wrote:
We spent a lot of time fighting against folks who were not affected by poverty, unemployment, homelessness, inequality or the citywide deficiencies in education. As the mayor and the leader of the local government, I saw that we could use budgets and more city revenue and resources to try and create more opportunities for those who did not have opportunities, while still managing a major city to do well. That was my job as the mayor, not to be satisfied with the status quo, but to build a much better Washington for everyone. (p. 158)
The approach of the Barry administrations during the 1980s reduced poverty in DC.

In the graph below, we can see that the percentage of people living in poverty decreased both in the US and DC during the 1960s. This large decline can be explained by the federal War on Poverty and the myriad of policies that helped low-income people escape poverty. However, while poverty continued to decline in the US, DC poverty increased in the 1970s.


Then, after Marion Barry become Mayor in 1979, poverty in DC decreased -- from 18.6% to 16.9% -- through the 1980s, while poverty increased in the US -- 12.4% to 13.1% (see chart to the right). The unique decline of poverty in DC suggests that District policies aimed at helping low-income residents made a difference.

In the 1990s, however, the DC poverty rate increased to 20.2%, even while poverty decreased in the US as a whole. From 1995 to 1999, Marion Barry had his fourth term as Mayor. Within months of his inauguration, the Congress imposed the Control Board. The five-person Control Board could override decisions by the Mayor and the city council and implemented a broad reorganization of the District government.(2)  The Control Board implemented significant budget cuts and undermined Home Rule. During the period of the Control Board, poverty increased in DC.

While the Barry's administrations will continue to be debated, the numbers on poverty show that poverty reduction is one of the legacies of Marion Barry's 1980s administrations. Marion Barry's early administrations demonstrate that political leaders can make a difference in reducing poverty and creating a new, more inclusive city. And other kinds of leaders can make policies that increase poverty and create an exclusive city.


(1) Marc Fisher, “In the District, redevelopment exposes old fault lines,” Washington Post, Jan. 19, 2014, p. A1, A16.
(2) The Control Board’s official name was the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority. For the entire text of the bill that created the Control Board: H.R.1345, District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Act of 1995 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate), http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c104:h.r.1345.enr: 

Thursday, December 4, 2014

The Legacy of Marion Barry (II)

On Saturday, the District will continue to commemorate the legacy of Marion Barry at the Convention Center starting at 11am (the entire schedule is here). Soon after this event, another aspect of his legacy will be commemorated, his legacy as DC's Co-op Mayor. Barry's cooperative legacy will be discussed at the DC Solidarity Economy Summit scheduled on Saturday, December 6th from 3:00-7:00pm at the Impact HUB DC, 419 7th St., NW, Second Floor. Everyone is invited, and tickets are free through Eventbrite or by contacting Allison Basile, 443-562-5856.

As discussed by the organizers, the Summit is "the first ever gathering of organizers dedicated to building a movement to create a new and more humane economy—a solidarity economy—in the District of Columbia." Those involved in the summit are part of "a movement afoot to unite groups working for economic justice, and to benefit the low and moderate income residents left out of DC's luxury-inspired development."

The wonderful Ajowa Nzinga Ifateyo has written about Barry's cooperative legacy ("Marion Barry: DC's Co-op Mayor"), which uses parts of, and goes far beyond, a paper I wrote about DC's long cooperative history. Here is what she said:

Marion Barry: DC's Co-op Mayor
by Ajowa Nzinga Ifateyo

Early in his D.C. political career, the late Mayor Marion Shepilov Barry, Jr. set out to make the District of Columbia a model city for cooperatives.

Soon after he started his first mayoral term in 1979, Barry remarked at a February 1980 conference:
In Washington, as in every other major urban center in America, we have entire sections of our city which have been abandoned and neglected by the mainstream of economic activity…Although private enterprise has neglected or abandoned some areas of our city, we must not give up the fight. It is time for the citizens of these areas themselves to become owners and providers of the basic services needed for daily life. The cooperative movement is just what is needed to provide this opportunity.[1]
The Poor People’s Development Foundation reported at the time that Barry “has indicated that he will use his good offices to establish Washington, D.C. as [a] ‘demonstration’ city for cooperative development.”

Early into his term, Barry established an "Energy Office" whose job was to help residents set up energy cooperatives, especially around heating oil, according to Johanna Bockman, cooperative scholar at George Mason University. The Energy Office also supported food cooperatives around urban gardening.

A year later, on June 13, 1980 Barry issued a Mayor's Order establishing a Commission for Cooperative Economic Development. The Co-op Commission’s first head, a national advocate for cooperatives by the name of Cornelius “Cornbread” Givens, said the group was “the very first commission of this kind anywhere in the nation”... To read further, click here.

Join the exciting discussions at the DC Solidarity Economy Summit this Saturday 3-7pm (Impact HUB DC, 419 7th St., NW, Second Floor). Everyone is invited, and tickets are free (through Eventbrite or by contacting Allison Basile, 443-562-5856).

For a list of the huge number of cooperatives in DC, visit Coop DC's Coop Directory.

Monday, November 24, 2014

The Legacy of Marion Barry

On Friday evening, the Annual DC Historical Studies Conference hosted "The Legacy of Marion Barry" roundtable discussion. It was a fascinating discussion, but there is so much more to say about his legacy. This is especially true, given that Marion Barry passed away this morning.

University of Maryland, Baltimore Country, history professor G. Derek Musgrove and I organized the roundtable, with the support of the chair of the conference organizing committee Matthew Gilmore. The roundtable brought together authors (and one filmmaker) who had written or are in the process of writing about Marion Barry:
  • Steven Diner, Professor of History, Rutgers - Newark, and author of “Washington, The Black Majority: Race and Politics in the Nation’s Capital,” in Snowbelt Cities: Metropolitan Politics in the Northeast and Midwest since World War II. 1990. 
  • Dana Flor, filmmaker, “The Nine Lives of Marion Barry.”
  • Maurice Jackson, Professor of History, Georgetown University. Working on a social, political and cultural history of African-Americans in Washington (1700s until the present).
  • Harry Jaffe, journalist, Dream City: Race, Power, and the Decline of Washington, D.C. 1994. 
  • Jonathan Agronsky, journalist, author of Marion Barry: The Politics of Race.
  • G. Derek Musgrove, Moderator and Professor of History, University of Maryland, Baltimore County.
The speakers offered many amusing stories. At the same time, the history professors Maurice Jackson and Steven Diner worked hard to pull the discussion away from its persistent focus on the personal life of Barry and his character flaws. Jackson stated that he did not consider Barry the savior of African Americans, nor did he consider him a pariah. Barry was part of much broader social and political movements that shaped the city we have today. Barry did not end poverty in DC, but, Diner emphasized, others mayors across the country have not eradicated poverty either. Like all cities in the US, DC suffered from the very American and very global urban crisis of the 1970s through 1990s. Jackson and Diner sought to capture the world created in DC during the 1970s in which Barry was one of many important actors. 

Jackson provided a progressive analysis of Barry that recognizes the complicated class nature of Barry's legacy:
  1. While white residents may condemn Barry, Barry has been a long-time ally of white gentrification. He worked to gentrify downtown DC, supported the revitalization movement, voted against rent control, and provided benefits to both white and black elites. Jackson said that both white and black elites were responsible for Barry remaining in office and for the urban crisis. [Jackson later gave this further clarification: both black and white elites financially did well during the Barry years but that the Reagan years and federal budget cuts played a major role in the urban crisis of the 1990s; I would say that the elites could also be seen as having a role in the urban crisis.]
  2. At the very same time, Barry has been one of the only leading politicians that speaks for the poor in DC, not in a condescending way or from the viewpoint of charities, but as an equal. Barry represents hope for, and provided needed jobs and services to, low-income residents in particular. In a previous post, I discussed a Washington Post article about long-time supporters of Barry, including a Richard Butler: 
"But even if Skyland gets a Walmart, Richard Butler won’t have the mayor he wants most. Butler, 50, learned to cook while he was locked up. He’s now doing well as a line cook in one of the city’s new restaurants. Have any of the recent mayors made his life better? 'All I want is Marion Barry,' said Butler, who is African American and a permanent resident of Barrytown. 'He’s the only one who ever looked out for the people, always said the right things to us.'"
Agronsky similarly noted that many low-income residents see Barry as the "Black Rocky," "someone who keeps on fighting until the end."

Flor observed that "who Marion Barry is is who you are." For example, if you or a family member gained a job through Barry's summer youth jobs program or a job in the DC government, then you would likely feel much gratitude toward Barry. Jaffe noted that Barry opened the city government to African American employees and should be given credit for that. An audience member, who had worked for Barry in the late 1980s and early 1990s, discussed how people sought to work for Barry because he was a "visionary" with "a genuine spirit of public service." After years of Congress' mismanagement of the city, Barry got the city's budget in order and began building a new kind of city, "a modern city." Jaffe  recognized Barry as "the best politician in DC" with a deep understanding of the political structure with which he had to contend to build this new city. In his autobiography, Barry writes:
We spent a lot of time fighting against folks who were not affected by poverty, unemployment, homelessness, inequality or the citywide deficiencies in education. As the mayor and the leader of the local government, I saw that we could use budgets and more city revenue and resources to try and create more opportunities for those who did not have opportunities, while still managing a major city to do well. That was my job as the mayor, not to be satisfied with the status quo, but to build a much better Washington for everyone. (p. 158)
And, yes, there is much more to say about his legacy.

Rest in Peace, Marion Barry. 

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

Vote Yes on #71: Legalization and Mass Incarceration in DC

ACLU report "The War on Marijuana in Black and White."
DC is second after Iowa for having with the 
largest racial disparities in marijuana possession arrest rates per 100,000.

Basically, Ballot Initiative #71 seeks to legalize marijuana possession for personal use by those 21 years of age or older. Here is some clarification from the DC Cannabis Campaign:
  • Possession of marijuana is NOT LEGAL in Washington, DC.
  • The decriminalization of marijuana possession legislation passed the DC City Council on March 4, 2014 but will not become law until it has been reviewed by Congress for 60 legislative days (late-July).
  • Medical marijuana IS LEGAL in Washington, DC, but for only registered patients with a limited number of approved medical conditions: AIDS/HIV, cancer, glaucoma, and multiple sclerosis. [This is a reprint of a previous post so this section is out of date.]
Ballot Initiative #71 is only about possession and growing for personal use. There is nothing in it about selling or taxing marijuana. The Ballot Initiative will allow DC residents 21 and older to:
  • Possess up to two ounces of marijuana outside one’s home
  • Grow up to 3 mature marijuana plants inside one’s home
  • Allows growers to keep all the marijuana grown at home
  • Does not allow anyone to sell marijuana (DC rules prevent this question in the ballot)
Why do I support Initiative #71? I am working on this campaign because the current laws about possession of marijuana are implemented in a racist manner. According to last year's ACLU report "The War on Marijuana in Black and White," DC is second after Iowa for having with the largest racial disparities in marijuana possession arrest rates per 100,000:


According to a report by The Washington City Paper91% of those arrested in DC on marijuana charges were African American: 
According to arrest numbers obtained from the Metropolitan Police Department and crunched by a statistician, between 2005 and 2011, D.C. cops filed 30,126 marijuana offense charges. A staggering number of those—27,560, or 91 percent—were filed against African-Americans. Only 2,097 were filed against whites.(WCP, April 22, 2013)
And marijuana use is basically equal among African Americans and whites:
Marijuana use is roughly equal among Blacks and whites. In 2010, 14% of Blacks and 12% of whites reported using marijuana in the past year; in 2001, the figure was 10% of whites and 9% of Blacks. In every year from 2001 to 2010, more whites than Blacks between the ages of 18 and 25 reported using marijuana in the previous year. In 2010, 34% of whites and 27% of Blacks reported having last used marijuana more than one year ago — a constant trend over the past decade. In the same year, 59% of Blacks and 54% of whites reported having never used marijuana. Each year over the past decade more Blacks than whites reported that they had never used marijuana. (ACLU, "The War on Marijuana," p. 21)
The marijuana laws are allowing the wasteful and racist mass incarceration of African Americans, as well as the generally wasteful mass incarceration of so many people. (See my previous posts on mass incarceration and debt and solitary confinement) Please vote yes on #71. You will find the initiative on the back of your ballot today. 

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

They do what they can get away with: DC Displacement of the Poor

As many of you know, there is much discussion about the future of the DC General homeless shelter. This morning, the Post's Petula Dvorak stated, "Developers are salivating over D.C. General. It's a huge property with plenty of potential. So there's no question that it will be shut down and sold. That part of the plan no one is worried about." Mayor Gray is rightly calling to rehouse those at the DC General shelter before closing it, but his plan is based on an unfounded belief that private apartment owners will now come forward and house the hundreds of families at DC General at rents far below market rates. Thus, in the interests of "salivating" developers, hundreds of homeless people are going to be displaced again? DC General is District property and could be renovated, maybe even employing homeless or near-homeless workers, if the District wanted to do so. However, developers and homeowners in the area are working hard for the "revitalization" of the DC General area, which they see as requiring the removal of their homeless neighbors. The deterioration of DC General is required as proof of the need for "revitalization."

Photo by Empower DC
A few weeks ago, I went to a great panel discussion, "Racism in the New DC," organized by Empower DC, which spoke to these issues from a very refreshing perspective. The speakers were three public housing residents working to maintain public housing and public schools in DC (Marlece Turner, D. Bell, and Shannon Smith), as well as Dr. Sabiyha Prince (the author of African Americans and Gentrification in Washington, DC), Ron Hampton (a former police officer and activist against police abuse), and Post columnist Courtland Milloy.

The main takeaway from the panel discussion was that institutional racism (not individual racist people but a racist system) works based on the idea that brown and black people do not deserve as good things as white people do. Improvements in the city are made for white people both because they often have more money and also because they are seen as deserving better things, like better schools and better services.

I asked the panel about a recent Post article that had said that, "Almost 10 years after the District vowed to assure low-income residents in four areas that they wouldn't be displaced if their neighborhoods were revitalized," the District decided that this was "overly optimistic." The District was considering a policy change to "no longer guarantee that residents have a right to stay in their neighborhoods, and the promise that existing public housing won't be demolished until a new building is constructed to replace it would be abandoned." Empower DC and others have been warning people about these false promises for some time.

So, I asked the panel, is this a new policy? or is this a statement of what the District was already doing? Courtland Milloy immediately said, "They do what they can get away with." He explained that, when District officials made these promises, they had to to make their redevelopment plans and the destruction of public housing palatable. Earlier, Milloy had stated that we need to acknowledge institutional racism and that these "revitalization" policies are in the interest of property owners and not in the interests of the homeless and other poor DC residents.

How can we change the situation in which "They do what they can get away with"? As a start, we might recognize that the journalist's statement "So there's no question that it [DC General] will be shut down and sold. That part of the plan no one is worried about" is not a statement of fact but rather a statement supported by those who are interested in this outcome and "can get away with" it. It is a political statement in the battle over space in the District. The next step would be to support a range of policies, including permanent public housing and permanent affordable housing in the District.

Saturday, September 27, 2014

Introducing DC Public Housing Radio

I just started a new page, DC Public Housing Radio (you can see the tab above), as an attempt to document the vibrant musical life in DC public housing projects. I'm not tech savvy enough to make an online radio station, but I did make two YouTube playlists: "DC Public Housing Radio" or to the "DC Public Housing History." However, if anyone out their is already doing this kind of project or is planning to, let me know and I'll advertise what you are doing. 

Monday, September 22, 2014

Be a Part of DC Historical Studies

The Annual Conference on DC Historical Studies is approaching, Nov. 20-23, 2014 at the Carnegie Library. The theme of this year's conference is "Making New Washingtons: Historical Consciousness in a Transforming City." The conference is always fascinating and so exciting. One particularly interesting event will be a roundtable on Marion Barry's new book:

Barry by the Book: A roundtable of authors who have examined Marion Barry's career
  • Jonathan I. Z. Agronsky, journalist, author of Marion Barry: The Politics of Race. 1991.
  • Jonetta Rose Barras, journalist, author of The Last of the Black Emperors: The Hollow Comeback of Marion Barry in the New Age of Black Leaders. 1998.
  • Steven Diner, University Professor, Professor of History, Rutgers University; author of “Washington, The Black Majority: Race and Politics in the Nation’s Capital,” in Snowbelt Cities: Metropolitan Politics in the Northeast and Midwest Since World War II. 1990.
  • Dana Flor, filmmaker, “The Nine Lives of Marion Barry.” 
  • Maurice Jackson, Associate Professor of History and African-American Studies, Georgetown University.
  • Harry Jaffe, journalist, co-author of Dream City: Race, Power, and the Decline of Washington, D.C. 1994.
  • Moderator: Derek Musgrove, Assistant Professor of History, UM Baltimore County; author of Rumor, Repression, and Racial Politics: How the Harassment of Black Elected Officials Shaped Post-Civil Rights America. 2012.

You can register now, so reserve your place at this exciting conference.

You can also take part in DC Historical Studies by volunteering at the conference. This is a great way to get to know the great organizers of the conference and to meet the many scholars involved with the conference.

Volunteers are needed to:
  • Prepare Conference packets and badges,
  • Register attendees and distribute packets and badges,
  • Host presenters, direct attendees,
  • Staff “Green Room” and Press Table,
  • Distribute and collect evaluation forms and any handouts,
  • Moderate sessions,
  • Assist and Time presenters, assure that room is prepared,
  • Work AVs (1), responsible for assuring that speakers have equipment and that they leave it there.
  • Support tour guides,
  • Man the “Movie Room”,
  • Attend one of 2 one-hour orientation sessions.
Contact: John O’Brien: jobrien3910@verizon.net

Looking forward to seeing you at the Annual Conference on DC Historical Studies!

Friday, September 12, 2014

DC Gentrification Video

Last week, I gave the annual presidential address to the DC Sociological Society about gentrification in DC. You can view a video of my address below. I start with a bit of history about the DC Sociological Society, which has its own connections to gentrification in DC. I then define gentrification, show some historical trends and maps, and discuss four myths/narratives about gentrification.


The fabulous discussion afterwards covered a wide range of topics, but there were two that I found particularly interesting.

First, we talked about looking beyond the economic motivations behind gentrification to its political motivations. What are the political motivations behind gentrification? How is DC as a whole threatened by gentrification? As discussed in the talk, one former resident of the Arthur Capper public housing project told me: “It [Arthur Capper] was part of the District of Columbia…like a finger or an arm in the body of the District of Columbia…You just cannot destroy a community and expect the city to thrive and survive.” His comment was surprising to me at the time. What is the nature of this District he is talking about? How is it being destroyed?

Second, we talked about renters. Many amazing community organizers in DC are working to increase low-income home ownership, especially through limited-equity cooperatives. I argued that we should also work to support renters, including by maintaining and expanding public housing, because about 41% of DC residents are renters and those in low-income jobs can barely afford to pay rent, let alone to buy a place. What would have to change in DC and nationwide to create a good environment for renters, especially low- and very-low-income renters? How might we create a positive "renter nation"?

Thanks to the DC Sociological Society, our host Mason's Sociology and Anthropology Department, and the audience for an amazing discussion.

Thursday, September 4, 2014

Update on My Gentrification Talk Today

The DCSS Presidential Address will take place in Founders Hall, Room 310 (same building, different room) on Thursday, Sept. 4th:

Johanna Bockman, DCSS President, Mason sociologist, DC Blogger
“Sociology in DC, Sociology of DC: Studying Gentrification”
Thursday, September 4, 2014
6:30pm reception, 7:00pm address
Mason’s Arlington Campus at Virginia Square Metro station
Founders Hall, Room 310 (see map below)
Hosted by Mason’s Sociology and Anthropology Department

The event is free and open to the public.

More info: http://dcsociologicalsociety.wordpress.com/2014/08/14/thurs-sept-4-dcss-pres-address/


Tuesday, September 2, 2014

A Reminder about My Talk on DC Gentrification this Thursday

The DC Sociological Society is kicking off the 2014-2015 year on Thursday, September 4th with the DCSS Presidential Address by me. I'll be talking about gentrification in DC. The event will happen at Mason's Arlington Campus, which is just a couple of blocks from the Virginia Square Metro (see map below, Orange/Silver lines) and has visitor parking underneath the building. The event is free and open to the public.
Johanna Bockman, DCSS President, Mason sociologist, DC Blogger
“Sociology in DC, Sociology of DC: Studying Gentrification”
Thursday, September 4, 2014
6:30pm reception, 7:00pm address
Founders Hall 716
Mason's Arlington Campus at Virginia Square Metro station
Hosted by Mason's Sociology and Anthropology Department
For more info:
My academic webpage: http://soan.gmu.edu/people/jbockman
My blog: http://sociologyinmyneighborhood.blogspot.com/
DCSS: http://dcsociologicalsociety.wordpress.com/events/upcoming-dcss-events/
I hope to see you there!


Here's a map showing the parking and Metro locations:

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

My Talk on Gentrification Thurs, Sept 4th

The DC Sociological Society is kicking off the 2014-2015 year on Thursday, September 4th with the DCSS Presidential Address by me. I'll be talking about gentrification in DC. The event will happen at Mason's Arlington Campus, which is just a couple of blocks from the Virginia Square Metro (see map below, Orange/Silver lines) and has visitor parking underneath the building. The event is free and open to the public.
Johanna Bockman, DCSS President, Mason sociologist, DC Blogger
“Sociology in DC, Sociology of DC: Studying Gentrification”
Thursday, September 4, 2014
6:30pm reception, 7:00pm address
Founders Hall 716
Mason's Arlington Campus at Virginia Square Metro station
Hosted by Mason's Sociology and Anthropology Department
For more info:
My academic webpage: http://soan.gmu.edu/people/jbockman
My blog: http://sociologyinmyneighborhood.blogspot.com/
DCSS: http://dcsociologicalsociety.wordpress.com/events/upcoming-dcss-events/
I hope to see you there!


Here's a map showing the parking and Metro locations:

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Affordability in DC

Today, the Post published an article titled "D.C. ranks 2nd best for poor families," which described a report by the Citizens Budget Commission.(1) However, in contrast to the article's title, the article recognized that "being the most affordable place to live is not the same as actually being an affordable place to live." The article's title suggests that DC is one of the most affordable cities for poor families, but the report does not make this claim.

First, the CBC report stated that the very poor would have to use their entire income to pay for rent and transportation in DC and elsewhere:
Generally, all large cities in this analysis are affordable to moderate- and middle-income households...None of the cities analyzed is affordable for a single worker household or a very low-income single worker household. For a low-income family, only two cities [San Francisco and Washington, D.C.] are affordable, although very close to the threshold. The problem is particularly troubling for very low-income single households; these households, assumed to earn a wage equal to the national poverty line, require more than 100 percent of that figure [100% of their income] for location costs in all cities but Philadelphia, where location costs are 95 percent. 
According to the report, DC is more affordable than other cities but still unaffordable for the poor in general, and the very low-income in particular. The title of the article was very misleading. Very-low income single workers would have to spend 112% of their income on rent and transportation.

Second, in the report, the authors use median income for the metropolitan area, not for the more narrow DC area, which means that the low-income families they are analyzing have much higher incomes than is the case within the more narrow area of DC. Data based on the DC Metropolitan area includes households in the counties around DC, which happen to be six of the ten wealthiest counties in the nation, according to Forbes, and thus presenting DC incomes as much higher than they actually are.

The CBC report measures a specific group of low-income households, which they define as making $46,600. If we take a different number, the DC Median Household Income (2008-2012)(Census), which is $64,267, then a low-income family would be making about $32,133. There is a great difference between a household making $46,600 and one making $32,133. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, in the DC Metro area, here are some jobs, which pay around $46,600 full-time:
Desktop Publishers $45,610
Medical and Clinical Laboratory Technicians $46,230
Surgical Technologists $46,920
Crane and Tower Operators  $47,100
The CBC report defines these residents as low-income. In the DC Metro area, here are some jobs, which pay around $32,133 full-time:
Taxi Drivers and Chauffeurs $29,740
Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance Occupations $31,820
Healthcare Support Occupations $32,040
Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners $32,770
In general, as I have written about before, middle-, low-, and very-low-income residents are forced to compete with each other for the very small number of affordable housing units in DC, while higher-income residents do not have compete in the same way for housing. As a result, many households end up paying more for rent than is financially sustainable. According to the American Community Survey (2012), among DC renters, 40.2% of households use over 35% of their income to pay their rent:
The Post should have been clear up front that the CBC report did not argue that DC is actually affordable for poor families, but rather it is more affordable than most for those making $46,000 and most affordable for single professionals making $65,000.

Last week, I was in San Francisco and learned about their very different system of affordable housing. This very intriguing information will be in my next blog post.


(1) While the Post says that CBC is nonpartisan, the Post did not explain what the CBC's audience or approach is. CBC gave its Corporate Leadership Award to Google, which was the focus of a panel at last week's American Sociological Association conference as a major actor in hyper-gentrification in San Francisco.

Saturday, August 16, 2014

Anti-Spammer Activities

I temporarily removed a blog post "Gentrification on Capitol Hill," which has been getting an insane amount of hits, mostly from spammers. I also restricted who can comment. These are temporary measures.

P.S. I re-posted "Gentrification on Capitol Hill," which you can find in the Blog Index under Gentrification. 

Friday, August 8, 2014

Immigration and the Decline of Capitol Hill (II redux)

In my previous blog post, I had discussed the observations by Mary Z. Gray, who was a child on Capitol Hill in the 1920s. She discussed how Capitol Hill had begun to decline during that time. In response to my post, my neighbor Sandy, a great researcher of our block on 10th St, SE, wrote:
I hope I haven’t misstated the basis of the post. Our block of 51 houses is typical in many ways of Capitol Hill’s development. The first black family bought a new house in 1872, joining 15 white families already living here. What was happening in the 1920’s? Both black and white families were moving here...The Hill was a viable community appreciated by its residents. [Read further in the comment section.]
From a brief look at the Census data, it is clear that where Mary Z. Gray lived, around 3rd and E. Capitol, was very different from the history of our block down at 10th St, SE. Between 1890 and 1930, Gray's neighborhood was almost completely white for blocks (with the exception of a few African American live-in servants and African Americans living in alleys in NE). The overwhelming majority of the whites were "native" whites, mainly with parents from the mid-Atlantic region, not from abroad. So, her area was quite different from 10th St.

Mary Z. Gray would likely have questioned whether "The Hill was a viable community appreciated by its residents," especially considering how she discussed the 1920s segregation she witnessed in Capitol Hill businesses, including those on Pennsylvania Ave, SE, between 3rd and 4th. She remember deciding that she wanted to have peach pie at one restaurant, Sherrill's, with her family's African American live-in servant Oscie:
One day as we were passing Sherrill's, I suggested that we go into the restaurant section and have some peach pie. It was August, and there is nothing to match fresh peach pie...[Osci said], "I knows you sick. I can't go into Sherrill's and sit down at a table and eat a piece of pie." She was recoiling as I neared the door. "Why not? Don't you like peach pie?" "Sure I like peach pie, but you know I can't go in there and eat it." She looked frightened....When we got home, I told Mama about what happened. "Tell her she can go to Sherrill's," I said..."No, she can't go into Sherrill's to eat," Mama said softly. "Oscie's right. You should have listened to her...That's just the way things are. There are certain places colored people can't go. That's just the way it is."... And that's the way it was on Capitol Hill -- and throughout most of the country -- in the 1920s. (301 East Capitol, pp. 31-32)
Racial segregation did not always exist in the past. The 1890s marked a worldwide turn toward racial segregation and divided cities. This segregation did not appear everywhere suddenly or naturally, but rather took a great deal of work by whites, driven in part by the desire to maintain their housing values and other privileges. I am going to look further at the Census data to see how the area was changing by age, race, immigration flows, and housing values.

If parts of Capitol Hill escaped the worldwide turn towards divided cities, then we should consider ourselves lucky. Yet, if we step back and take a look at DC in 2010, we can see Capitol Hill at the center of a divided city/region (green dots are white residents; blue dots are African American residents):


NY Times interactive map





Immigration and the Decline of Capitol Hill (II)

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Immigration and the Decline of Capitol Hill

In the 1920s, Capitol Hill became vacated and began falling apart. The author of the amusing and insightful 301 East Capitol, Mary Z. Gray, noted the decline of Capitol Hill during her childhood at this time:
It wasn't just that there were not other children around; all of Capitol Hill seemed to be becoming decrepit. If Mama weren't having Grandpap's elderly sisters to Sunday dinner, she was making 'courtesy calls' on maiden ladies in black dresses who cherished 'papa's' memory, and feared that their inheritance was not enough to see them through. Consequently, their inherited family houses badly needed upkeep and repairs, but the money wasn't there to do it. Many once-elegant houses were falling apart. Capitol Hill was beginning its downhill slide, which didn't begin to reverse upward for the next 30 or more years. (p. 89)
Capitol Hill's downhill slide would continue for many decades afterwards. Many white families, including Mary Z. Gray's, moved to the suburbs, but they would or could not sell their houses to African Americans or other groups understood by whites at that time as reducing the value of their houses and neighborhoods. Whites used racially restrictive covenants and more informal means of housing discrimination to maintain their housing values. African Americans lived in particular parts of Capitol Hill, and their numbers on Capitol Hill increased in the 1930s with gentrification in Georgetown and the 1960s with the destruction and gentrification of Southwest DC. In the 1920s, those white families left behind could not maintain their houses and there were not new, younger white families moving to Capitol Hill. This downhill slide happened well before the Great Depression of 1929. What was happening in the 1920s?

Yesterday, I came across a very interesting additional cause of this decline. The glorious urban sociology professor at the New School Janet Abu-Lughod, who sadly passed away in December, wrote about a similar 1920s decline of the East Village and Lower East Side in New York City:
When immigration laws were changed in the early 1920s...the normal flow of successive new immigrants through the area was interrupted, leaving a weakened real estate market which in the period immediately following World War II collapsed entirely, as the children of the final European immigrant cohort availed themselves of both prosperity and the new opportunities for subsidized suburban settlement; they deserted the zone wholesale.(1) 
The 1921 and 1924 immigration laws placed quotas on the number of immigrants by country of origin allowed into the US (while completely excluding Asian immigrants). According to George Mason University's History Matters website: "Initially, the 1924 law imposed a total quota on immigration of 165,000—less than 20 percent of the pre-World War I average." Could this severe reduction in immigration flows, based on racism and ethnic discrimination, as well as the increasing use of racially restrictive covenants and more informal means of housing discrimination, have helped bring about the collapse of Capitol Hill in the 1920s? Further investigation will be needed to figure this out.


(1) Abu-Lughod, Janet. 1994. “Diversity, Democracy, and Self-Determination in an Urban Neighborhood: The East Village of Manhattan.” Social Research 61(1):181–203.

Friday, July 18, 2014

Don't Destroy CCNV!

Mitch Snyder
"Politicians in the District love to close shelters for so-called humanitarian reasons. But after shelters close they don’t seem to care all that much that people who lived there don’t have anywhere to go, and often end up on the streets." -- Diana Pillsbury, "In Defense of Shelter"

DC government wants to shut down the Community for Creative Non-Violence (CCNV) shelter near Judiciary Square, and some in the government also want to close the DC General shelter on Capitol Hill. My sociology colleague at Mason, Victoria Rader, wrote about one of the founders of CCNV, Mitch Synder (see picture). Several years ago, I went with a bunch of my friends to tour of CCNV, what is technically called the Federal City Shelter. What impressed me right away was that our tour guide was one of many homeless who lived at CCNV and who run the shelter themselves. CCNV is a unique homeless shelter, an asset that should be preserved, at least until the day arrives when all the residents have apartments or some kind of shelter that they can afford.

I have been hearing great acclaim about Diana Pillsbury and her work to save DC's homeless shelters. According to Diana, CCNV "is by far the largest shelter in the DC area, and in the country, with a capacity of around 1,350 people, regularly serving +/- 1,200 people." Diana says:
From my point of view, discussing the demolition of the Federal City Shelter is premature. This winter, we had deaths occur due to hypothermia: people froze to death. We have a family shelter that is at capacity, and many families who have no place to live. Youth providers turn away young persons seeking shelter daily, they too, are at capacity. Public housing has been cut to the point that it is almost non-existent. Housing prices are on the increase. Why then, are we talking about shutting down DC’s largest shelter? Can we really find housing for 1,200 people, when can’t even house those persons currently on the street? Is this really about protecting the interests of homeless persons, or is it about the DC Government making money off the sale of the property? CCNV is the most valuable asset homeless persons have; and thus, people should think twice before agreeing to shut it down.
In 2007, DC General was turned into a homeless shelter because DC government closed the main homeless shelter DC Village (Ward 8) due to horrible conditions. Did closing DC Village improve the situation for our homeless neighbors in DC? Why would closing more homeless shelters improve the lives of our homeless neighbors? Well, maybe this isn't about improve their lives? At the CCNV Taskforce meetings led by Jim Graham and non-homeless people (see Eric Sheptock's video below):
Also present at the meeting was real estate developer Douglas Jemal, founder and president of Douglas Development Corp. The developer, known for revitalizing historic properties for use as retail, office and residential sites, said that he was looking forward to helping address problems with homelessness in Washington.
Is the CCNV Taskforce more about money to be made than about the money that needs to be spent on our fellow DC residents? As you can see in this WETA documentary on CCNV "Promises to Keep", many of the problems that CCNV has had since the beginning continue today, since the government does not want to pay to maintain homeless shelters or provide adequate affordable housing:


Here is "the homeless homeless advocate" Eric Sheptock speaking on the lack of representation of CCNV residents on the CCNV taskforce:


Tuesday, July 1, 2014

Navy Yard Neighborhood History Discussion on Saturday

This Saturday, July 5th, the Navy Yard Neighborhood Association (NYNA) is hosting "A Celebration
of our Community’s History Part I." During this afternoon event, there will be many interesting activities and discussions (including a presentation by me):

  • Screening of the documentary “Chocolate City
  • Oral histories of former and returning residents
  • Panel presentations by Johanna Bockman (on the history of the Navy Yard area) and Sabiyha Prince (on gentrification, race, and class; she is the author of African Americans and Gentrification in Washington, D.C.)
  • Exploration – building a shared community
  • Refreshments, activities for kids 

The NYNA is creating a series of events based on the idea "Learning from our past, Building bridges to our future." They are trying to deal with the past and do the difficult work of creating a connected neighborhood. From 1958, the Capper-Carrollsburg public housing project housed about 700 households in that area. The former residents had formed ties with each other and with homeowners nearby (including those around Garfield Park). The project was destroyed and replaced by Capitol Hill Quarter, a mixed-income development. The documentary "Chocolate City" is about the Capper-Carrollsburg residents' resistance to their displacement.

Many former residents feel great affection for Capper-Carrollsburg, and many were not able or allowed to move into the new development. NYNA seeks to create bonds between the former residents of Capper-Carrollsburg and the new homeowners and renters in the area. It should be a very interesting event because of this difficult work they are doing.

"A Celebration of our Community’s History Part I."
Saturday, July 5th, 2014, 1-5pm
200 I Street, SE, Washington, DC

The public is invited. Please share these event details with others. You can RSVP here

Sunday, June 29, 2014

Movie Series on Gentrification, Urban Renewal, and Resistance

Housing for All, DC Jobs with Justice, Empower DC, Jews United for Justice, ONE DC, and Washington Peace Center are sponsoring a great movie series. Summer in the City II is a documentary series exploring gentrification and urban renewal. They are starting with the amazing documentary "The Pruitt-Igoe Myth," which has truly great interviews with former public housing residents in St. Louis. The documentary inspired me to think about "Pruitt-Igoe and Ward 6."

So, the series has documentaries about DC and about other cities, examining the global trends of gentrification, urban renewal, and local resistance (yes, local resistance may also be global). Save these dates for fabulous discussions with grassroots organizers and residents working on the front lines of these trends. It all starts this Wednesday!

The Pruitt Igoe Myth -- see the trailer and flyer
Wednesday, July 2
6:00 PM
Southwest Library – 900 Wesley Pl SW

The Legend of Cool Disco Dan
Wednesday, July 9
6:00 PM
MLK Library – 901 G St NW
This film follows infamous graffiti artist Cool ‘Disco’ Dan as he discusses the changing city that he once marked. It tells the story of a changing DC during the era of the crack epidemic and the evolution of Go-Go, celebrating the culture of DC.

Southwest Remembered
Wednesday, July 23
6:00 PM
Southwest Library – 900 Wesley Pl SW
Southwest Remembered follows the effects of the federal plan of Urban Renewal in Washington, DC during the 1940s. Southwest DC was one of the first areas to undergo this effort, which ended with more than 23,000 displaced residents and a radically altered Southwest.

The Garden
Wednesday, August 6
6:00 PM
Emergency Community Arts Collective - 733 Euclid St. NW
A rose that grew out of the 1992 LA Riots, the community garden in South Central Los Angeles was a testament to community resilience. However, when the land is sold to a wealthy developer, the South Central Farmers are forced to show a different sort of resilience in their battle with city hall.

My Brooklyn
Wednesday, August 20
6:00 PM
Location TBA
This film follows the director, a self-described gentrifier, on her journey to peel back the complex layers of a changing city. Focusing on the closing of a popular and profitable African-American and Caribbean mall, the movie explores how migration into cities, city planning and racial divides come to a head in an all too familiar story about change in American cities.

Monday, June 23, 2014

The Destruction of Authenticity since the 1980s (re-post)

I've been having many conversations with people about the rising costs of cities around the world, so I thought that I would re-post this as an attempt to try to understand what is going on:

Brooklyn College sociology professor and wildly famous urban sociologist Sharon Zukinmade these observations about NYC in her most recent book:
But the city's historic diversity of uses, local specializations, small stores, and cheek-by-jowl checkerboard of rich people, poor people, and people broadly in the middle has been submerged by a tidal wave of new luxury apartments and chain stores. Global investment firms have bought thousands of low-cost apartment houses and prepare to raise the rent or sell them as condos, driving out older and poorer tenants. The fertile urban terroirof cultural creation is being destroyed by the conspicuous displays of wealth and power typical of private developers and public officials who build for the rich and hope benefits will trickle down to the poor, by the promotions of the media who translate neighborhood identity into a brand, and by the tastes of new urban middle classes who are initially attracted to this identity but ultimately destroy it. These forces of redevelopment have smoothed the uneven layers of grit and glamour, swept away traces of contentious history, cast doubt on the idea that poor people have a right to live and work here too -- all that had made the city authentic.
Her view of authenticity is that it has two mechanisms -- the protection what is seen as "original" (think historic preservation) and continual cultural innovation -- that are in tension, but are also in tension with (and used by) the homogenizing forces of redevelopment that we see in all cities today. The 1980s are a particularly important starting point for these homogenizing forces.

P.S. Zukin recognizes that authenticity is ridiculous in the urban context, which is always changing, but rather that authenticity is a continual concern of residents in cities. The idea of authenticity has real effects.

Friday, June 20, 2014

Car washing, shoe repair, and BBQ in Ward 6

On the blog Popville, the question was asked, "Where do you get your car washed?" AK responded:
I have taken my car to Peter Bug’s Shoe Academy on Saturdays. The workers there hand wash and dry the car, and it’s pretty cheap. There’s also some BBQ and you can drop off your shoes for repair and pick them up next time. It’s a fantastic community resource, and it helps out the people working there. Peter Bug is also great to talk to. If you’re lucky, you can chat with him about his many decades living in D.C.
... It’s at 1320 E St SE. Here’s some great info on Peter Bug (http://sociologyinmyneighborhood.blogspot.com/2011/09/peter-bug-fellow-sociologist-in-ward-6.html)
Thanks for the shout out from AK! Thanks also to Peter Bug for all that he does for Ward 6!

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Save the Shelters!

The Post reported that DC Council member Jim Graham suggested shutting down both the DC General homeless shelter (with 300 families) and the CCNV shelter with (with more than 1,000 single adults). Shutting down any homeless shelter will not make anything better for these people. A much better path is to speed up the process of building affordable housing, which is going so very slowly, and to do the necessary repairs of the shelters while keeping them open. Of course, one can dream about opening all the DC hotels to the homeless shelter residents. Is that option being offered? Are there some alternative places in DC where these 2,000 people will be housed?

I made similar warnings about similar suggestions before: "Warning: Save the Shelter and the People" and "Warning: Save the Shelter and the People (II)." Yes, the situation is terrible in the shelters, but being without shelter is worse. So many times, politicians use criticisms of the shelters or public housing as justification to eradicate the shelters and public housing, making the situation worse.

Also, CCNV is a very unique shelter. The topic of a future post!

Sunday, June 8, 2014

Legalization and Mass Incarceration in DC

Today, I spent two and half hours collecting signatures near Eastern Market to put legalization of marijuana on the ballot. It was probably the most enjoyable political work I've done. People were either silently against it or so incredibly excited. Also, I found that a lot of people just wanted to ask about the Ballot Initiative and about the confusing marijuana laws in DC.

Basically, Ballot Initiative #71 seeks to legalize marijuana possession for personal use by those 21 years of age or older. Here is some clarification from the DC Cannabis Campaign:
  • Possession of marijuana is NOT LEGAL in Washington, DC.
  • The decriminalization of marijuana possession legislation passed the DC City Council on March 4, 2014 but will not become law until it has been reviewed by Congress for 60 legislative days (late-July).
  • Medical marijuana IS LEGAL in Washington, DC, but for only registered patients with a limited number of approved medical conditions: AIDS/HIV, cancer, glaucoma, and multiple sclerosis.
Ballot Initiative #71 is only about possession and growing for personal use. There is nothing in it about selling or taxing marijuana. The Ballot Initiative will allow DC residents 21 and older to:
  • Possess up to two ounces of marijuana outside one’s home
  • Grow up to 3 mature marijuana plants inside one’s home
  • Allows growers to keep all the marijuana grown at home
  • Does not allow anyone to sell marijuana (DC rules prevent this question in the ballot)
The DC Board of Elections gave the DC Cannabis Campaign the official circulating petitions on April 23 and the Campaign is currently collecting signatures from registered DC voters. The Campaign has until the first week of July to collect over 22,373 valid signatures in order to put the initiative on the ballot in November’s General Election (info from the DC Cannabis Campaign website).

Why am I out collecting signatures? I am working on this campaign because the current laws about possession of marijuana are implemented in a racist manner. According to last year's ACLU report "The War on Marijuana in Black and White," DC is second after Iowa for having with the largest racial disparities in marijuana possession arrest rates per 100,000:


According to a report by The Washington City Paper, 91% of those arrested in DC on marijuana charges were African American: 
According to arrest numbers obtained from the Metropolitan Police Department and crunched by a statistician, between 2005 and 2011, D.C. cops filed 30,126 marijuana offense charges. A staggering number of those—27,560, or 91 percent—were filed against African-Americans. Only 2,097 were filed against whites.(WCP, April 22, 2013)
And marijuana use is basically equal among African Americans and whites:
Marijuana use is roughly equal among Blacks and whites. In 2010, 14% of Blacks and 12% of whites reported using marijuana in the past year; in 2001, the figure was 10% of whites and 9% of Blacks. In every year from 2001 to 2010, more whites than Blacks between the ages of 18 and 25 reported using marijuana in the previous year. In 2010, 34% of whites and 27% of Blacks reported having last used marijuana more than one year ago — a constant trend over the past decade. In the same year, 59% of Blacks and 54% of whites reported having never used marijuana. Each year over the past decade more Blacks than whites reported that they had never used marijuana. (ACLU, "The War on Marijuana," p. 21)
The marijuana laws are allowing the wasteful and racist mass incarceration of African Americans, as well as the generally wasteful mass incarceration of so many people. (See my previous posts on mass incarceration and debt and solitary confinement)

The campaign needs so many more signatures. Please consider volunteering to collect signatures.