The Community Development reader chapters were very interesting because they looked at the essential question of why communities exist. We have talked a lot about preserving communities in New York City and ways to influence policies regarding them, but it is important to discuss why they matter in the first place. In the realm of large urban areas, communities are often overlooked in the bigger economic and political picture of things. However, they are a vital element to the people who live their lives in these cities. While it was thought that urbanization would wipe out the existence of communities, that is simply not the case. Urbanization has changed the ways in which communities operate, but does not erase the need people innately have to connect with one another. Communities in a rural setting were necessary from an economical standpoint because people relied on one another for the goods and services necessary to survive. While this aspect is not necessary in urban environments, the social and psychological services provided by community belongingness is perhaps even more essential in urban centers.

Chapter 2 of the Reader looks at poor communities and the ways the government is working to ‘develop’ them. O’Connor points out that the term community development really doesn’t have any sort of standard definition. Normally it is used to describe interventions into a community as part of a long term strategy. The problem with these individual ‘interventions’ is the creation of an abundance of short term programs which address immediate needs but do not create the infrastructure for lasting improvements in the community. These ‘solutions’ are also competing with the economic interests in a community, especially those in New York City that are targeted for development. Throughout the chapter we see that there are so many different interests at play in one community that there is really no solution that can please everyone involved. The accounts of various housing and development strategies throughout history highlight the fluctuation between different interests and how when one party gets what they want another loses out.

In Chapter 3, DeFilippis looks at the histories of both community control and development. I found this chapter to be the most confusing because the struggle between who should control the fate of communities is so unclear. Each side to the argument has valid claims- residents should have a say in what happens to their homes, but landowners and investors also have a right to invest and develop. While residents have important views regarding their communities, they might not know the bigger picture of the issue or plan. And just as valid, urban developers may know about the big picture of their hopes for the project, but know nothing about the community that exists where they want to view. While learning about this topic, I’m not sure I see a clear side that is right. Hopefully by reading more about the subject I can begin to form a more well rounded view of the issue myself.

DQ: Who has the right to say what happens in a community? What are the qualifications- Land ownership? Years of residence? Income? Education? Public Involvement? Political Office?