What Do Community Benefits Agreements Deliver? Evidence From Los Angeles

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Advocates of community benefits agreements (CBAs) between coalitions of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and real estate developers contend that CBAs promote public accountability and responsiveness to community concerns. This study assesses the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District (LASED) CBA, which scholars and practitioners have described as a model for such agreements. I assess compliance with key provisions of the agreement related to jobs, affordable housing, and parks and recreational facilities. I also assess whether compliance with these provisions has yielded benefits beyond those required under existing laws and regulations. I find that the parties to the agreement have technically complied with many, although arguably not all, of its provisions. But some of the provisions in the CBA are not legally binding, other provisions overlap with requirements that the developer would have had to satisfy even without the CBA, and some reports required by the CBA are unavailable. As a result, outcomes such as living wage jobs and funding for affordable housing units are not clearly attributable to the CBA; other outcomes, such as targeted hiring, are unknown due to a lack of relevant information.Takeaway for practice: Although CBAs may not fulfill all the claims that advocates make on their behalf, they can play important roles in community development by directing public and private spending to underserved neighborhoods. But collecting and verifying the relevant data may be challenging, even if reporting requirements are clearly spelled out in the CBA. As the complexity of a CBA increases, so do the challenges of assessing outcomes and assigning responsibility for those outcomes

The financialisation of rental housing: A comparative analysis of New York City and Berlin

This paper compares how recent waves of private equity real estate investment have reshaped the rental housing markets in New York and Berlin. Through secondary analysis of separate primary research projects, we explore financialisation’s impact on tenants, neighbourhoods, and urban space. Despite their contrasting market contexts and investor strategies, financialisation heightened existing inequalities in housing affordability and stability, and rearranged spaces of abandonment and gentrification in both cities. Conversely cities themselves also shaped the process of financialisation, with weakened rental protections providing an opening to transform affordable housing into a new global asset class. We also show how financialisation’s adaptability in the face of changing market conditions entails ongoing, but shifting processes of uneven development. Comparative studies of financialisation can help highlight geographically disparate, but similar exposures to this global process, thus contributing to a critical urban politics of finance that crosses boundaries of space, sector and scale

Questions and Answers on Fair Housing Practices Legislation (1962)

https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/irving_fain/1035/thumbnail.jp

Citizens United Membership Meeting, Thu Eve 8 March 62 (handwritten)

Three pages of handwritten notes concerning membership changes in Citizens United.https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/irving_fain/1014/thumbnail.jp

General Assembly - 1963-1964

https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/irving_fain/1039/thumbnail.jp

Rhode Island Legislature (1959) - List

https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/irving_fain/1019/thumbnail.jp

Membership List, 1959; Citizens United for a Fair Housing Law in Rhode Island

https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/irving_fain/1011/thumbnail.jp

Membership List, 1960; Citizens United for a Fair Housing Law in Rhode Island

https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/irving_fain/1012/thumbnail.jp

Citizens United 1962

https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/irving_fain/1036/thumbnail.jp

Fact Sheet Concerning Fair Housing Practices Legislation

https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/irving_fain/1023/thumbnail.jp