Dear Editor:
In the 70s/80s, Hoboken was struck by an invigorating lightning bolt that, on the surface, appeared to be an exciting rediscovery of the vibrancy and edginess of an urban ‘frontier.’ Artists, musicians, young and old alike migrated to this hidden gem that had long ago been left behind. The little city on the waterfront was unique, convenient without the lifelessness of homogenized suburbia. But, as sometimes happens when lightning strikes, fires ensued, giving birth to the terrible legacy of ‘arson for profit.’ As years passed the public’s memory of these fires and their consequences faded.
For decades many Hoboken citizens, new and old alike, struggled to scrub away the heartless corruption that marred the city, caused displacement and allowed harmful overdevelopment. Slowly, ever so slowly, the ashes of the merciless were swept away and everyone looked forward to an all-inclusive transformation of the city, freed from the clutches of the iron fist of monied interests. A repackaged city arose from those ashes but, sadly this liberated enclave is not meant for everyone.
Bulldozed out of the rubble of yore, our shiny new city is being shaped for new, deep-pocketed and preferably transient residents. Largely gone are the scrappy workers, the rough and tumble, the artists and the musicians. The last remnants of unconventionality quirk and custom clinging by fingertips to the place they call home, treading water helplessly in a sea of market forces. No longer is this a community, but an award-winning commodity, where history is capped at 10 years or less, a blind eye is turned to the ongoing carnage as ravaging continues and resident after resident is pushed out of town.
Obviously people move all the time, but there’s a big difference between somebody moving for their own reasons and their being pressured to leave. We call the result of this pressure displacement and now it’s not only our renters who are being displaced. Homeowners, often older residents, cannot afford the tax increases and are forced to exchange their familiar neighborhood for a purchase price that replaces a long-time resident with the highest bidder. Many of these residents, owners and renters alike, don’t want to leave, but have no choice.
In Hoboken, taking homes and property via market forces is considered perfectly legitimate and even thrilling to some, but to those who are negatively impacted, steroidal gentrification is a tragedy. There might be affordable neighborhoods to which displaced residents can move, but being forced out carries with it a heavy heart and an undeniable feeling of loss.
For some displacement is merely a profit opportunity. Yet, years of displacing one class of people in order to bring in a completely different economic group and calling it “revitalization” has erased the soul from our urban ‘frontier.’ At this point, continuing to avoid addressing displacement is indefensible. Forcing out the less affluent of Hoboken is like clear-cutting a forest. Sure, the lumber companies make a lot of money, but the forest is destroyed. Why would we ever view such destruction as ‘neighborhood improvement?’
Cheryl Fallick