Tom mentions this Washington City Paper piece about the blight on 9th Street NW and its gardener, Shiloh Baptist Church. Shiloh has blocked efforts by developers and entrepreneurs hoping to use the liquor license to transform the area—a strategy they've had a hell of a lot of success with in, for example, all the areas south and west of 9th St.
From the quotations in the article one gets the impression that the Shiloh antagonists are mobilizing for the usual reasons: concerns regarding the pernicious influence of nightclubs, alcohol, and rock and roll. I have my doubts. The fact that the church officials cite concerns about nightclubs but are, in fact, activizing against Ethiopian restauranteurs and the people behind a vegetarian cafe suggests that they have their eyes on the larger wave of gentrification. Nightclubs would likely follow development that linked the growing Convention Center area to U Street.
Perhaps more importantly, development begets development. I can think of a compelling reason or two for Shiloh Baptist Church to work to maintain derelict, low-cost properties in its immediate vicinity. The church recently completed a $5.5 million expansion, an option that might not have been available to them (and would not be in the future) were the surrounding properties undergoing a commercial revival. Tellingly, the article hints at further expansion efforts.
Possibly the church's leaders recognize that gentrification might change the racial make-up of the neighborhood and thereby its flock.* And, hey, it may be the case that the church's leaders are just that ignorant. Maybe they're willing to cultivate a nasty 9th Street in order to ensure local prohibition (despite the fact that the run-down liquor store near the church will probably only close once newer establishments squeeze it out). But maybe they're just business savvy developers themselves.
* Tommy says that the church's parishioners are largely suburban, so maybe this explanation doesn't apply. Since the church is organizing against the interests of the neighborhood, the flock's actions are all the more deplorable if they aren't local. Regardless, I've read conflicting accounts about the demographic groups in the District that gentrification actually forces out of neighborhoods, so it's hard to say whether this fear is founded under any circumstances. But it certainly seems as if the criminal element are among those dislocated.
Posted by Kriston at September 26, 2005 4:55 PMI think they really are just that dumb and/or callous. It doesn't take much to get a church committee riled up. They're not the most deliberative bodies in the world.
Also, check out the article's concluding paragraph:
Felton, who lives in Clinton, Md., says that just because relatively few members of the congregation live in Shaw doesn’t mean Shiloh doesn’t know what’s best for the community. The church has provided programs for local children, the homeless, the deaf, and the elderly. “People from Virginia and Maryland are doing more to benefit the city than people in the neighborhood,” he says.
Funny, funny stuff.
Posted by: tom at September 26, 2005 5:01 PMOften feels like people from VA/MD know what's best, doesn't it?
Posted by: 6878265 at September 27, 2005 10:39 AMWell, they do sell beer after 10pm.
Posted by: tom at September 27, 2005 5:02 PM