By Miheema Goodine, on January 9th, 2019 Racism is the result of historic actions, thoughts, and laws that still impact society. Racism is embedded in the traditions and institutions of the United States. It is especially tragic when racism shows up in spaces that were built to be havens against it. Barry Farm has a rich history in which these instances occur.
Barry Farm, also known as Hillsdale, began as a settlement established after the Civil War in 1867 for free blacks and formerly enslaved African Americans. Abolition created labor problems, loss of productivity, and efforts to restore the plantation system. In many plantation societies, governments sought to force former slaves back to work with strict vagrancy laws, coercive labor contracts and regressive taxes. Ultimately, the abolishment of slavery did not produce many changes. Former slaves continued to do their former slave work of tobacco farming, breeding and whatever was asked of them. Because the 14th amendment was not properly enforced, Reconstruction brought about Black Codes and the Ku Klux Klan. It was difficult for the formerly enslaved blacks to adjust to being free around whites and for whites to adjust to being around free blacks.
The Origins Of Barry Farms
The Freedmen’s Bureau was created by Congress in order to help former slaves adjust to society after the abolishment of slavery. The Bureau enlisted Oliver O. Howard as the commissioner whose job was to ensure the well-being of blacks, both free-born and formerly enslaved. Hillsdale was built by Oliver O. Howard whose mission was to advance the rights of blacks. The name originated from the landowner James Barry who was an incorporator of the Washington Canal Company. After the property was purchased, African Americans squatted on it until arrangements could be made for them to build homes for themselves. Free black people were offered $215 – $300 to buy an acre of land to build a house and $76 for lumber to construct a house from the Freedman Bureau. Slaves wages varied but they received from $100 a year for unskilled work and up to $500 for skilled work. Freedman and refugees of the war worked every day for plantations in and around the District of Columbia and came home in the evenings to build their modest 14 ft x 24ft two-room houses, using the light of bonfires or lanterns candlelight.
The neighborhood was home to activists such as Frederick Douglass Patterson, Garnet C. Wilkinson, and Dr. Georgiana R. Simpson. Many historical accounts do not acknowledge the relationship the Douglass’s have with the resident and often “whitewash” the history. Charles Douglass, the son of Frederick Douglass was a teacher in the community and advocated for the District of Columbia Emancipation Act. If the Douglass family’s connection to Barry Farm were better known, it’s possible that the future of the community would not now be in jeopardy.
The Deterioration of the Site
By 1900 Barry Farm’s original landscape began to be separated for construction. The Alexandria Branch of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad separated the community from Popular Point. Half of its original land was turned into military bases after WW2, which displaced a few of the descendants of the first tenants. The 20th century required a better means of transportation and more modern renovations, which led to many of the original homes being razed. Railroad tracks that had been laid for the construction of the Suitland Parkway, isolated Barry Farm between two traffic arteries: Suitland Parkway and Interstate 295.
Today the District of Columbia government plans to demolish and redevelop the historic site. The District’s Council wants to turn housing, that was at one time affordable, into retail space and market-rate units. These new upscale designs attract new residents while displacing the former tenants. When you observe the urban and modern surroundings of the neighborhood, non-residents view Hillsdale as the eyesore of Ward 8. But the D.C. City Council redevelopment plan, which puts the desires of new residents ahead of the needs of natives and long-term residents, is flawed. The area has been under development for over a decade as part of the New Communities Initiative to renovate dilapidated public housing. The Housing Authority has already begun to demolish the site while leaving residents with the option to relocate until the development is finished or move using a Section 8 voucher.
The citizens have had their fair share of injustice since the construction of the neighborhood. Over the years, the citizens have watched their community decrease in size. Today many health codes are violated . . . → Read More: Barry Farm: The Destruction of a Historic Landmark
By Brenda Hayes, on November 6th, 2014 
Cross-Posted from ONE DC
In a town rife with Non-Profits that seemingly have all the answers for what ails longtime D.C. residents as they face gentrification-fueled displacement, ONE DC’s July 26th meeting was a much needed breath of fresh air for me. I asked permission to record the meeting for my radio show This Light: Sounds For Social Change, thankfully permission was granted to me to do so.
The meeting opened with a visual recap of June’s meeting. A 1950 to present timeline of redlining and economic cycles that lead to displacement hung on one of the walls. An adjacent wall held a visual that had the word “Concentrated Poverty” written in the center, surrounding those words were some of the commonly held beliefs about people who live in poverty; rampant drug abuse, crime, apathy.
We all sat in a familiar “meeting circle,” introduced ourselves and said how long each of us has lived in D.C.; there was one man who has lived in D.C. since birth, 60+ years.
Next we were led to do an exercise in which attendees were asked to present a physical movement that represents their perspective of gentrification and displacement. Some of the poses and movements included a young white woman who stood with her back to the rest of the group as she covered her eyes, blind to what was going on just behind her. A few people held stances of defiance, arrogance, indifference and helplessness.
For the second part of the exercise, we were asked to physically represent empowerment, action and change. I was most struck by what one Shaw resident, who happens to be a black woman, did; she held an invisible protest sign high above her head, two young white participants quickly stood in support behind her holding their invisible placards up. What these three participants represented to me is the need for community lead, driven, and sustained movement for equity in housing, work, and education.
Before the meeting, I interviewed longtime community activist Linda Leaks who handed out Terms of Empowerment, a seven page glossary of housing-related terms in which residents should become familiar when trying to remain in neighborhoods besieged by gentrification.
I also interviewed Patricia Trim, a 40+ year Shaw resident. During our conversation Ms. Trim told me how her mother would come to D.C. during the week for her job with the Federal Government and leave her with relatives in Virginia. Ms. Trim’s mother couldn’t afford to have her stay here in D.C. until she was sixteen years old. Ms. Trim and her mother moved several times, Champlain Street in Adams Morgan, 18th and Wyoming, 17th and T Sts., each time staying in apartments until the rent was raised to a prohibitively high amount.
Ms. Trim recently drove to Columbia Heights to see a dentist on 14th Street. As she drove to her appointment she realized she was in the neighborhood where she grew up. After her appointment, she decided to drive around a bit and was astonished at and dismayed by all the changes that have taken place in recent years. She couldn’t bring herself to drive down Champlain Street the street where she first lived when she and her mother moved to D.C.
When she arrived back home that day, she went to her bedroom to pray. She tearfully asked “What I have done to fall so far from grace to be treated less than a human being.” I fear too many D.C. residents people are asking that same question.
By Liane Scott, on September 15th, 2014 
Johanna Bockman is a sociologist and curator of the blog Sociology in My Neighborhood: DC Ward Six. She has been working with Grassroots DC and the Potomac Gardens Community on the production of the documentary Potomac Gardens Inside and Out (which you’ll soon hear more about on this site and beyond). Below is a post from her site of particular relevance to DC’s public housing communities and anyone interested in increasing the amount of affordable housing in the District of Columbia.
My Gentrification Talk & Video
By Johanna Bockman
Last week, I gave the annual presidential address to the DC Sociological Society about gentrification in DC. You can view a video of my address below. I start with a bit of history about the DC Sociological Society, which has its own connections to gentrification in DC. I then define gentrification, show some historical trends and maps, and discuss four myths/narratives about gentrification.
The fabulous discussion afterwards covered a wide range of topics, but there were two that I found particularly interesting.
First, we talked about looking beyond the economic motivations behind gentrification to its political motivations. What are the political motivations behind gentrification? How is DC as a whole threatened by gentrification? As discussed in the talk, one former resident of the Arthur Capper public housing project told me: “It [Arthur Capper] was part of the District of Columbia…like a finger or an arm in the body of the District of Columbia…You just cannot destroy a community and expect the city to thrive and survive.” His comment was surprising to me at the time. What is the nature of this District he is talking about? How is it being destroyed?
Second, we talked about renters. Many amazing community organizers in DC are working to increase low-income home ownership, especially through limited-equity cooperatives. I argued that we should also work to support renters, including by maintaining and expanding public housing, because about 41% of DC residents are renters and those in low-income jobs can barely afford to pay rent, let alone to buy a place. What would have to change in DC and nationwide to create a good environment for renters, especially low- and very-low-income renters? How might we create a positive “renter nation“?
Thanks to the DC Sociological Society, our host Mason’s Sociology and Anthropology Department, and the audience for an amazing discussion.
By Grassroots DC, on June 9th, 2014 
cross-posted from the Washington Peace Letter written by Will Merrifield
The exploding housing costs that have accompanied the influx of new residents into DC have brought mass displacement of life-long residents and a subsequent spike in family homelessness. Currently, in the District, a person making minimum wage must work approximately 132 hours per week, 52 weeks a year, or earn $27 an hour at 40 hours per week to afford a 2 bedroom apartment at “Fair Market Rent”.
The reality of this housing market is that if you are a senior citizen on a fixed income, a person with a disability, or a low to medium wage worker, odds are, you cannot live in DC without some sort of housing subsidy or other support. In other words, there needs to be a way to fill the gap for these individuals between what they can spend on housing and the current market rate.
The most effective way to fill this gap is funding public housing and rent subsidy programs in the long term. Unfortunately, the District’s subsidized housing waitlist is currently closed and numbers approximately 70,000 households. While the number of low cost rental units has dropped by 50% since 2000, the number of rental units in the city costing more than median rent has tripled. DC government claims these issues are due to a lack of resources and are largely out of their control.
However, while DC officials are telling the community that they do not have enough revenue to adequately invest in affordable housing, they are routinely sacrificing public resources in the interest of “smart growth.”
In the past year, plans to help DC’s soccer team, DC United, materialized. Mayor Gray proposed to trade away the Reeves Municipal Center, at 14th & U St. NW, in order to help the soccer team build a new stadium at Buzzard Point. In addition to the land swap, the city would put up about $150 million in tax incentives to acquire the property, trading the government building in a prime location and essentially absorbing the stadium’s financial risks through dubious tax deals.
The Reeves Center land swap that may occur in our city’s next mayoral term is just one example of the District’s subsidization of large-scale commercial developers to the tune of billions of dollars through real estate devaluations and public land giveaways.
Meanwhile, the city is taking in budget surpluses of over 100 million dollars each fiscal year. The city government is gambling our tax dollars in the interest of developers and building a city for people who do not yet live here, and likely will not stay.
The net result of these decisions can be seen on every street corner as market rate affordable units are being converted to luxury condos. These policies have led to the mass displacement and homelessness described above.
As of February 2014, there were 2,527 homeless children in DC Public Schools. That number excludes the countless families that are not technically homeless but instead rely on others to take them in night after night. Furthermore, these policies have the effect of dehumanizing and further marginalizing low to medium income residents of Washington, DC. This past winter, the city completely ran out of shelter space and was housing families in rec centers, which is usually reserved for natural disasters. Essentially, the District is telling these residents that they are not wanted and have nothing to offer the City.
We as a community must take a stand to end this cycle of displacement. DC is not a playground for “young professionals”. Economic development that prioritizes amenities for these individuals over affordable housing is both unsustainable and immoral.
Change will not come from the top down. Real change will have to be led from the bottom up and must prioritize the needs and realities of the most marginalized and disaffected residents of the city. This change must start in community meeting spaces where residents can talk to one another with the ultimate goal of creating their own vision of DC and how it should develop in the future. It’s critical that organized communities and activist groups work to share more resources to strengthen the impact of these efforts.
Through this process directly impacted communities can develop their own leaders, create meaningful political coalitions and generate the necessary political will to make their vision a reality. But that process must start now and must be urgent. As any minimum wage worker, disabled senior citizen, or recently homeless family can . . . → Read More: The True Cost of Gentrification
By Grassroots DC, on April 15th, 2014 
On February 18, a panel discussion on the critical implications of “urban renewal” in DC communities took place at American University. The first speaker was Johanna Bockman. An Associate Professor of Sociology and Global Affairs at George Mason University, Bockman also runs the blog Sociology in My Neighborhood: DC Ward Six. We posted that video here a few weeks ago.
The second speaker in the series was Claudia Barragan a Master’s student at American University’s School of International Service. She has worked as an urban planner and on the panel provides a critical look at gentrification through this occupational lens.
American University students Sophia YoshiMi and Luis Enrique Salazar organized the panel discussion. Part three is Parisa Norouzi. We’ll post that next week.
|
Subscribe to Blog via Email
|
