Jeffries v. Broker on Neighborhood Names
Today The Brooklyn Paper ran an op-ed from Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries about why he’s introducing a bill to formalize the process of naming neighborhoods as well as one from a Rapid Realty broker named Lanishia Goodwin about why she supports new neighborhood handles. From Jeffries’ piece: “The consequences of realtors providing misleading information are broad….
Today The Brooklyn Paper ran an op-ed from Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries about why he’s introducing a bill to formalize the process of naming neighborhoods as well as one from a Rapid Realty broker named Lanishia Goodwin about why she supports new neighborhood handles. From Jeffries’ piece: “The consequences of realtors providing misleading information are broad. Working families are pushed out of rebranded neighborhoods as housing prices soar. Newer residents pay more to rent or buy, largely as a result of the deceptive marketing. This is why I plan to introduce the Neighborhood Integrity Act. This bill will require the city to develop a community-oriented process before brokers can rebrand a neighborhood or redefine its boundaries simply for commercial purposes. These new names rarely result from community input and are often disconnected from a neighborhood’s history, culture or tradition.” Meanwhile, Goodwin has this to say, in part: “In Brooklyn, even familiar names are nicknames for other neighborhoods. Prospect Lefferts Gardens was borrowed from a group of buildings in the Prospect Heights neighborhood, What about Ocean Hill and Kensington? They’re really Flatbush. And what about Stuyvesant Heights? Most of the owners of the million-dollar real estate in this historical area grew up there won’t argue that it’s Bedford-Stuyvesant…Brooklyn as a whole has also become such prime real estate—there are so many people moving farther and farther into Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy, Crown Heights, and Bushwick—that it can no longer defined by just prime neighborhoods.”
Jeffries: Neighborhood Integrity Matters [BK Paper]
Goodwin: New Names Help Brooklyn Grow [BK Paper]
“It’s just a catchy, pseudo-hip acronym that is supposed to impart cachet to a part of Crown Heights. Since CH is “bad” marketing on its own, ProCro is supposed to magically erase the fact that you are in Crown Heights”
do you think people would stop moving to “ProCro” if they called it Crown heights? highly unlikely.
brokers have been calling all of bushwick “east williamsburg” for years now. everyone moving there knows it’s bushwick and have no problem saying they live in bushwick.
I’m with Herkimer Maid and MM’s points here. The only problem I see for Jeffries’ proposal is that there is a First Amendment right of a real estate broker to call an area whatever they want. Of course, the bill could be OK from a free speech POV if it simply requires a broker to correctly identify the city’s designation for the neighborhood in addition to any made-up moniker they use for marketing. (Obviously, law-talking types who specialize in 1st Amendment issues would know more.) That way a broker could call the blocks between Classon and Bedford the “Bedford Hills” part of Bed Stuy (much like people sometime distinguish North, Center and South Slope, or use any of the various Victorian Flatbush names).
But please, no ProCro. That’s even more of an abomination that BoCoCa.
I would support Jefferies if he were introducing a bill to prevent realtors from coming up with stupid neighborhood names simply because they were, Stupid.
It all comes down to common sense. Do your research, walk a ‘nabe…hell, read this blog. Then decide if you are moving to an area, regardless of the name.
Though, I think this thread should begin renaming areas of Brooklyn, let’s give back to the communities!
“Sunset Ridge” (boarder of Sunset Park and Bay Ridge)
Who’s next?
I think it’s fine to have micro-neighborhoods within larger neighborhoods. Take Harlem, for instance. Within Harlem is Morningside Hts, Central Harlem, Sugar Hill, Spanish Harlem, Mount Morris Park, and more. No one in any of these areas is in any doubt that they still live in Harlem, which is much smaller than Bedford Stuyvesant. Bed Stuy’s boundaries are as large as small cities in other places in this country. Some micro-neighborhoods are needed.
Micro-neighborhoods give people a sense of identity, help identify (for good or ill) that neighborhood to others, and practically speaking, tell someone where the heck you are in a vast area like BS.
I don’t think Jeffries is saying “white people stay out of the hood”, so much as he is trying to prevent brokers from creating from whole cloth micro-neighborhoods that have no context other than defining a real estate concern. I think there is some legitimacy in trying to stop the reshaping and rebranding of neighborhoods to the detriment of those who live there already. Saying in effect, “If its good enough to be called Crown Heights when I live here now, it’s good enough to remain Crown Heights when more affluent people want to live here.”
A “made-up” name like Prospect Lefferts Gardens has a geographic and historic provenance. This particular part of Flatbush has a distinct history that is not shared by adjacent parts of Flatbush. It is a separate neighborhood. But “ProCro” (gag) is nothing of the sort. It is not defined by history, topography, or even planned design. It’s just a catchy, pseudo-hip acronym that is supposed to impart cachet to a part of Crown Heights. Since CH is “bad” marketing on its own, ProCro is supposed to magically erase the fact that you are in Crown Heights, no matter what you want to call it. Nonsense.
“This bill will require the city to develop a community-oriented process before brokers can rebrand a neighborhood or redefine its boundaries simply for commercial purposes.”
So let me get this right – the community (and/or its representatives) will gather to determine what names are OK for brokers to use in describing existing neighborhoods.
Hakeem is a good guy, but that’s just dumb.
The only time I see this neighborhood renaming thing as working is when brokers show rental apartments to complete newcomers to the city, and charge Park Slope prices for something in East Bushwish.
Speaking of East Bushwish, I’ve seen ads for apartments that were actually in East Williamsburg claiming to be in Bushwick and ads for apartments very far out in Bushwick (near the cemetery) claiming to be in East Williamsburg. VERY strange.
The city (fire and police) does have its official names for these neighborhoods. According to them, the loft area of Bushwick (between Bushwick Ave., Flushing, Metropolitan Ave., and the creek/Queens) is actually East Williamsburg.
Once again, I will say that this non-issue that Jeffries is pushing is cynical, stupid and misguided, and is so transparently pandering as really to turn me off him as my representative. Is this really the time to be advocating for government expenses that won’t help anyone or anything except Jeffries and his career?
First, the idea that Jeffries cares about – or that the taxpayers should support an entire government bureaucracy to protect – the people supposedly “deceived” by organic naming processes is laughable. All this for the dastardly but so very dumb Outsiders with no map and no reading abilities and no perception or awareness or ability to see, hear, touch or feel who one day, after living in “ProCro” for 6 months are suddenly wake up and realize that they actually live in “Crown Heights”? Clutch pearls!! I demand my deposit back!!
Second, though brokers may be benefiting slightly from this, who is really making money off of this supposed deception? Owners. Owners who hire the brokers. But owners who – and I am guessing – happen to be predominantly solidly in Jeffries base. And you don’t see Jeffries focusing on them, do you? If you support this bill and think Jeffries concern is legitimate, think about that for a minute.
Third, if this should happen to pass, what will change? Nothing. Gentrification will move on, or it won’t, but it won’t be because of descriptions in ads. I think Jeffries is not wrong that we ought to be thinking about some of the potential negative effects of gentrification, and how we can work to mitigate them. But this is an incredibly divisive and disingenuous and totally ineffectual way of approaching the issue, and one that leads me seriously to question his integrity.
If he really cares about anything other than publicity and pandering, make them put cross streets on the listings, or a pinpointed map, and call it a day.
I agree with Jeffries. Brooklyn has undergone some significant changes over the past 10 years and I guess greedy Realtors would like nothing more than to turn the entire of Brooklyn into Williamsburg (picking that hood just based on the incredible investment returns that particular area has seen). He’s right to want to preserve the integrity of less gentrified nabes, rather than allowing them to be reinvented to be more like: insert-wealthy-neighborhood-name-here.
The majority of people will believe what they’re told — and if they’re told they’re moving to Clinton Hill, when in fact they’re in Bed-Stuy, then after a while it WILL become Clinton Hill. That’s already happening around Classon Ave. And whichever lucky Realtor succeeds in redefining those boundaries will make a boat load of dough, which is their ONLY goal. They don’t give a shit about the current residents. So, should the city allow a small group of people, who are ONLY interested in making money, redefine a neighborhood? The answer, to me, very clearly is NO they shouldn’t. Jeffries is standing up for people who have already created/defined a community, but don’t necessarily fit the demographic that will be able to line a Realtors’ pockets with gold.