Those with a political agenda often distort facts to suit their purpose. Opponents of rezoning in New York City are an example. They claim that rezoning displaces people of color and are citing a report published by the Churches United for Fair Housing (CUFFH). That report concluded that,
While displacement trends existed before the zoning changes, they were significantly accelerated during this time, implying the zoning changes exacerbated previous displacement pressures rather than alleviating them. [emphasis added]
While the report finds an implication that zoning changes are causing displacement, opponents of rezoning are claiming a definite causal relationship.
A former urban planner with the New York City Department of City Planning examined the data used for the report and came to a very different conclusion:
- Racial displacement and replacement is real in the communities studied in the CUFFH study and elsewhere;
- The data does not support a conclusion that zoning changes induce racial displacement and replacement;
- In Park Slope, there was greater racial change in the years prior to rezoning than in any period covered in the CUFFH study, and the white population declined numerically and as a percentage of the population since 2000;
- There were dramatic racial changes in other areas such as Bushwick that were not rezoned;
- Other areas that were rezoned, such as Bay Ridge, did not have similar racial change…
In nearly every census track that the former planner examined, the population of blacks and Hispanics increased after rezoning. These increases were in both actual numbers and as a percentage of the area’s population. So, while rezoning opponents are claiming to have evidence of racial displacement, the data shows that the exact opposite is occurring.
The lesson in this tale is that caution is advised when reading about studies. Context matters, and the context of those who are reporting on studies (as well as those conducting them) will determine how they view the data. If we accept their conclusions without a critical and objective analysis, we might be accepting blatant falsehoods.