I intentionally did not use the term "withintrification" in the editorial, as income into the neighborhoods are being generated and managed in different manners. I believe places like Chicago's Bronzeville and the Deuces in St. Petersburg are better examples for that type of neighborhood organizing.
I also understand WPB's economics, know and acknowledge its downtown is more successful than DT Jax's. However, that isn't a factor in the point of the editorial. Regardless of everything else, the Northwest has had funding to fix up a park, invest in renovating a historic AME church, help a legacy business get a revamped storefront and a new A/C system, help local small businesses grow into brick and mortars, in a manner that fits within the historic integrity and scale of the neighborhood and in a way that aligns with its traditional culture.
All of these things are applicable in the Eastside with the amount of funding that could come its way via the CBA. As such, it serves as a good example of how a CBA could benefit Eastside churches of similar scale, parks, infill housing, small commercial buildings and a commercial corridor like A. Philip Randolph Boulevard. All this assumes CBA funds would be utilized in a proper manner and not mismanged.
Historic Eastside will be able to achieve everything the Northwest has done to date through the CBA, the TIF and ongoing investments being made there today. Unfortunately, there aren't to many historic Black neighborhoods in the state that can say the same thing. So for the Eastside, the Northwest can serve as a example of what some of the things it wants to accomplish could look like upon completion.
Also, I don't think any of these neighborhoods actually want concentrated poverty. That doesn't work out to well economically. So affordable housing takes on a different lens within them, in comparison to the discussions happening outside of them. You want to get convert people into homeowners instead of renters, as that's the easiest opportunity for a family to began to build generational wealth. Eastside currently has a higher percentage of homeownership, which is a benefit to it. Yet, ultimately, mixed income is the goal. They can't have viable commerical areas within them if all the residents are living in poverty. So having higher income levels is a good thing and not necessary gentrification. I guess its all about balance.