U.S. to designate poor L.A. areas a 'Promise Zone,' eligible for aid (2014, tax)

[yby1]

"L.A.'s Promise Zone stretches through Pico-Union, Westlake, Koreatown, East Hollywood and Hollywood, what Mayor Eric Garcetti called some of the "toughest, challenged areas" in the city."

U.S. to designate poor L.A. areas a 'Promise Zone,' eligible for aid - latimes.com

Now the feds are getting in on LA's gentrification? (even more)

[hipcat]

That money should have went to areas south of the 10 Freeway. South LA is the most impoverished area of LA.

[yby1]

Originally Posted by hipcat

That money should have went to areas south of the 10 Freeway. South LA is the most impoverished area of LA.

Agree. This money will be used to push out the poor, not help them. That money would be better utilized in South LA.

[GatsbyGatz]

As if LA wasn't already burdening the US enough for the number of welfare services, now we're adding a second shovel to effort in burying away more tax dollars.

... Just kidding! I'm sure that conversation would start many heated, angry arguments. I'm glad there's a nation-wide effort to help a huge part of LA that is truly struggling. It's nearly surreal to see some of the conditions of LA not only because it is an American city, but because it is in one of the most expensive cities in the US. Very sharp dichotomy between the rich and struggling (I won't call them poor because that is a relative term; LA is an expensive city and SoCal is difficult to afford in general for a vulnerable class of people.)

[lrmsd]

This isn't new. Local and fed government have for decades and decades, designated certain areas, main streets, downtowns, etc as either 'historical' or some other label to indicated promise [refurbishment or 'main street district'], as a means of receiving funding and economic investment, while attracting businesses and residents to the area. This has been done across the country and even the world. Even UNESCO heritage sites, etc. are a way to drive/develop an economy and infrastructure to an area that otherwise would have stayed neglected.

Just mentioning that the feds are not just now 'getting into gentrification'. Gentrification is a relatively new term for an activity that has been happening for over a hundred years, perhaps longer....

Sometimes it's successful. Often, a location or investment will not live up to its hype, though. Time will tell, as they say....The thing that LA has going for it is that so many people continue to be drawn to the area, and space is at a premium. So the success of this type of program may be a result (displacement of people not withstanding when I say success).

[Nerf Herder]

man, it's just like some war torn 3rd world nation, next thing you know they'll be sending US Marines to the area to uphold peace and order

[munchitup]

There are 5 promise zones right now. By 2014 I think the administration wants to designate 15. Perhaps South LA will be on that second run of designations.

This is awesome news but if not planned properly I can see this having the result of pushing out poor people and not actually helping them. It seems many are puzzled why Central LA would get the designation over South LA, which is definitely far more blighted and poverty infested. Perhaps it is because Central LA has a far greater shot at full-on revitalization than South LA.

But as I mentioned before this could just lead to gentrification and turning Central LA into the stereotypical "playground for the rich". As long as the money is focused more on improving the affordable housing situation and job creation and social resources (things that urban nerds like me won't get all excited about and probably won't really see many tangible/visual "results") then I think this will lead to a better Central LA for the most vulnerable residents. If this is spent on improving transit, cleaning up streets, improving pedestrian accessibility and other more "tangible" programs, then I could see this being nothing more than an engine for gentrification, which would probably end up pushing out current Central LA residents.

[mrsltd]

Originally Posted by hipcat

That money should have went to areas south of the 10 Freeway. South LA is the most impoverished area of LA.

And WHERE in South LA matters. Some parts of the area (Crenshaw, Vermont Knolls, West Adams, etc.) are fairly well off.

One of the newspaper articles (written the year after the 1992 riots) I remember highlighted the area known as "South Broadway". It was mentioned in the article that more attention was focused on the Crenshaw area (to present a showpiece for the taxpayers) but most of the rest of the south side, including South Broadway, was relatively neglected by the city. Old-timers told a story of the area when, back in the early '60s and farther on, there were sit-down restaurants, a bowling alley, and a real sense of community. Not sure if anything has changed for the better that way there in the past twenty years but they could start in the 90003 where Broadway is (or anywhere in the adjacent area).

[majoun]

Originally Posted by hipcat

That money should have went to areas south of the 10 Freeway. South LA is the most impoverished area of LA.

South LA isn't represented by Xavier Becerra in Congress. It's not a coincidence the Promise Zone's within Becerra's district.

Also, South LA is not targeted for gentrification and "economic cleansing"

[UB50]

Pico-Union and Westlake are definitely distressed. Koreatown, eh - not so much since it seems like a ton of private money is going in there.