After reading the two texts for today’s class, I was able to gain a new perspective on gentrification – that it can be viewed as positive by those who had originally grown up in that neighborhood. A simple monetary example was described in the NY Times article, where those living in rent regulated apartments remain unaffected by the rise in rent prices, and can enjoy all of the in-flowing resources to the neighborhood. I imagine that can be very validating – seeing your apartment spike in value means that many other people are trying to secure housing in your neighborhood, and you can stick your chest and say “I was here first!” However, if the cultural change brought by gentrification is considered too great by residents, then certainly no amount of monetary gain can offset that.

When considering the intersection of rent regulation and gentrification, an interesting idea (though admittedly difficult to implement) occurred to me. I wonder what would happen if rent regulation allowed children who grew up in specific neighborhoods to remain there under stabilized rates. I think this would help mitigate some of the culture loss that is associated with gentrification, to the point where gentrification could bring a “cultural refresh” to the neighborhood in question; ushering in new (and generally young) tenants would bring new ideas, while keeping the area grounded in its roots through its longest tenured residents. Perhaps a policy like this would reduce the range of outcomes of the gentrification process, and minimize the magnitude of change that it can bring to neighborhood, be it positive or negative.