With a do-nothing mayor like Ron Dullums, it's easy to see why this pall has extended to Oakland, at least in the minds of most people.
What's interesting about Oakland, though, is that its future may not really depend at all on the behaviors of its politicians. Sure, they can slow down one thing and speed up another, but they are at the mercy of the underlying trends just the same as the rest of us.
I was pleased to see The OakBook begin a series on the gentrification of Oakland. Of course, they use different words for it, and they go to great pains to label "gentrification" as a politically charged word.
I have a reputation (such as it is) for telling things as they are. In that vein, let me be very clear about what is happening in Oakland: The black people are leaving. In large measure, they are being replaced by Latinos, with a few whites and asians filling in the rest of the mix.
Here's a separate piece of information that hasn't received very much media attention in the politically correct Bay Area press. Take a look at Oakland Unified's "two-year comparison report" (caution: PDF file). I take a look at these kinds of reports when they come out because, as an Oakland property owner, I realize that a big part of my investment is the performance of our beleaguered school district.
In any event, the report was largely unexciting. Things generally improved, as they have for the last 10 years. OUSD's crypto-trend of becoming a reasonably good school district continues unabated. I call it a crypto-trend because no one talks about it, which is probably just as well, since discussion would probably cause the powers-that-be to try and stamp it out as some kind of racist trick.
Back to the PDF. Usually, I look at these documents they way they're intended to be viewed -- taking into account the ratio of kids performing at or above grade level for each task. But in this document, a separate piece of data jumped out at me -- the denominators.
According this PDF, in 2008--2009, this was the ethnic breakdown of the Oakland school system: 1894 whites, 9358 Latinos, 4206 Asians and 9555 African Americans.
In 2009-2010, there were 1968 whites, 9827 Latinos, 4093 Asians and 8647 African Americans.
Now, let's net out those numbers to see how the district's population has changed:
- Whites, +74 (+3.9%)
- Latinos, +469 (+5.0%)
- Asians, -113 (-2.8%)
- Blacks, -908 (-9.5%)
One of these numbers jumps out as far more significant than the others. A 10 percent reduction in black students in a single year is an enormous change. While I'm sure some part of it is attributable to charter schools or some such, what I can say is that none of it is due to lower overall attendance at Oakland schools. The total number of students increased by 65 from 26,880 to 26,945 over the last two years.
This school district information goes along with the information in the census and the OakBook article to paint a clear picture of Oakland.
The bottom line is this: Oakland is no longer a black-dominated city. And, in several years it will see a black proportion of the population lower than the average American city. This is incidentally is exactly what has happened in San Francisco.
There are some cities in America with sizable affluent black populations -- Atlanta is a great example. Oakland is not such a city. As such, the marked decrease in black population in Oakland is a symptom of the city's rapid gentrification.
There's another movement that I view along similar lines. It's the group of people organizing to encourage locals to enroll their kids in local public schools. Most recently I read an article about a parents' group doing this for Oakland High -- a traditionally low-performing high school.
Such efforts are not really activism. They're actually a natural reaction by rational parents to gentrification. I expect similar movements soon for schools such as Montera Middle School -- a school located in a predominantly upper-middle class area which suffers from low local enrollment and attendant busing of students from bad parts of town.
This is the steamroller of gentrification: Fueled by easy access to Bart and great amenities, encouraged by lackadaisical city planning policies and galvanized by moronically inept activists trying to hold it back.
And, these are all reasons why, in the midst of this sluggish economy, I expect those who invest in Oakland to reap rewards as the unemployed and poor gradually leave our beautiful town.
I'm not sure if your two OUSD examples are the same as gentrification. Middle and upper middle class families returning to their local schools is not the same as moving into new areas.ReplyDelete
Its more like two ships passing in the night than causation.
In this case, I believe the families coming back to local schools is strong evidence for gentrification. The entire reason why they are willing to do this is because the ratio of residents in their local boundary has improved to the point where they know that they can push out the low-performing troublemakers.ReplyDelete
If they didn't think they could do that, they would not for movements like this.
I don't know how you're equating gentrification w low performing troublemakers but let me explain why your supposition about the school's being an example of gentrification is not accurate:ReplyDelete
--Most of the areas where locals are returning to school have always been solidly middle, upper middle or wealthy. That's the case with the areas surrounding both Montera Middle in Montclair and Edna Brewer in Glenview (where the Consider Oakland High parents come from).
-The lower performing students don't come from those neighborhoods. They transfer from other districts, using the OUSD options process which let's students do this whenever there is space.
Up until about 10 years ago local middle class and wealthy families did not go to the local schools. Since about that time local residents have been trickling back in, to the point where the elementary schools are a majority filled by locals (in varying degrees) and a minority still out of district students.
The Middle Schools are still a majority out of district , but that to is changing. And not all the out of district students are trouble makers. Many of them are good students of all backgrounds.
Sandre Swanson made the same point as you recently. He said that 10% drop takes away the muscle the blacks of Oakland held. I suppose our representatives can find some other group's butt to stick her nose up. They can try mine.ReplyDelete
I do not see this as bad news for Oakland at all, I do have some sympathy for whoever gets stuck with Oakland's victims of the evil & racist gentrification.
Great news! Maybe my husband and I will be able to move back to our beautiful old house in Oakland some day if the gentrification keeps up and the criminals move elsewhere. Glad to see you are still blogging.ReplyDelete
That last comment by The Asian Man was so rude and so unnecessary. If you want a city with low crime and white collar occupants, just say so. Any race and any people can fill that up, there's no need to pin point a race of people.ReplyDelete
Yes. that comment had little tact.ReplyDelete