We consider how various coalitions influence redevelopment projects in cities, especially as communities demand more inclusion in the development process. Based on qualitative research, we investigate the approval process for the 235-acre megadevelopment project at Port Covington in Baltimore, Maryland, and how stakeholders, including developers, community-based organizations, politicians, and impacted community members view the project, the tax increment financing (TIF) granted by the city, and community benefits agreements (CBAs). Community leaders leaned hard on the development corporation, demanding community and city-wide benefits before a TIF could be approved. We analyze the processes of the Port Covington CBA within the context of the political and economic dynamics of Baltimore. This case study adds to our understanding of how communities respond to corporate-led developments through coalition building, effectively gaining power in how elite governing regimes dictate development in cities.
AkchinDon. 1992. “Port Covington.” The Baltimore Sun, August 2.
2.
Ashley Consulting, LLC, Hodges Development, LLC & SB7, Inc. 2018. South Baltimore 7, United Communities: Organizational Assessment & Strategic Planning Report. MD: Baltimore, SB7.
3.
Baltimore Neighborhood Indicators Alliance (BNIA).2018. Data for the Community Statistical Areas (CSAs). https://bniajfi.org/.
4.
Baltimore Sun. 1904. “Will be Port Covington.” The Baltimore Sun. July 21.
5.
Baltimore Sun. 1979. “Exports Slump at Chessie Coal Pier.” The Baltimore Sun. September 14.
6.
BalzariniJohn E.ShlayAnne B.. 2015. “Gentrification and the Right to the City: Community Conflict and Casinos.” Journal of Urban Affairs38 (4): 503–17. doi:10.1111/juaf.12226.
7.
BaumHowell S. 2001. “How Should We Evaluate Community Initiatives?” Journal of the American Planning Association67 (2): 147–58. doi:10.1080/01944360108976225.
8.
BlancoIsmael. 2015. “Between Democratic Network Governance and Neoliberalism: A Regime-Theoretical Analysis of Collaboration in Barcelona.” Cities44: 123–30. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2014.10.007.
BrownLawrence. 2016. Protect Whose House? How Baltimore Leaders Failed to Further Affordable and Fair Housing in Port Covington. Unpublished paper, used with permission of the author.
12.
BrownLawrence. 2019. “Community Health and Baltimore Apartheid.” In Baltimore Revisited: Stories of Inequality and Resistance in a U.S. City, edited by KingP. NicoleDrabinskiKateDavisJoshua C., 73–81. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press.
ChouinardJill Anne. 2013. “The Case for Participatory Evaluation in an Era of Accountability.” American Journal of Evaluation34 (2): 237–53. doi:10.1177/1098214013478142.
15.
CoombeChris. 2012. “Participatory Evaluation: Building Community While Assessing Change.” In Community Organizing and Community Building for Health, edited by MinklerMeredith, 346–65. New Brunswick: Rutgers Univ. Press.
16.
CrensonMatthew. 2017. Baltimore: A Political History. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
17.
DaviesJonathan S.2011. Challenging Governance Theory: From Networks to Hegemony. Bristol, England: Policy Press.
18.
Davies JonathanS.PillMadeleine. 2012. “Hollowing Out Neighbourhood Governance? Rescaling Revitalization in Baltimore and Bristol.” Urban Studies49 (10): 2199–217. doi:10.1177/0042098011422576.
FisherBridget. 2015. The Myth of Self-Financing: The Trade-Offs Behind the Hudson Yards Redevelopment Project. Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis and Department of Economics, The New School for Social Research, Working Paper Series 2015–4.
21.
FloridaRichard. 2002. The Rise of the Creative Class … And How it’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community, and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.
22.
FuldBenjamin S. 2018. “We’re Not Against Development, We’re Against Bad Deals”: How Baltimore Negotiated the Port Covington Community Benefits Agreement.”Journal of Business & Technology Law13: 279–317. https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/jbtl/vol13/iss2/6.
23.
GallagherJohn. 2010. Reimagining Detroit: Opportunities for Redefining an American City. Detroit, MI: Wayne State Univ. Press.
GarbodenPhilipJang-TrettienChristine. 2018. “There’s Money to be Made in Community’: Real Estate Developers, Community Organizing, and Profit-Making in a Shrinking City.” Journal of Urban Affairs42 (3): 414–34. doi: 10.1080/07352166.2018.1465346.
HarrisKirk E. 2015. “Because we can Doesn’t Mean we Should and if we do: Urban Communities, Social and Economic Justice, and Local Economic-Development-Driven Eminent Domain Practices.” Economic Development Quarterly29 (3): 245–61. doi:10.1177/0891242415575423.
28.
HarveyDavid. 1991. “A View From Federal Hill.” In The Baltimore Book: New Views on Local History, edited by FeeElizabethShopesLindaZeidmanLinda, 227–42. Philadelphia, PA: Temple Univ. Press.
29.
HarveyDavid. 2000. Spaces of Hope. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California Press.
30.
HarveyDavid. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
31.
HarveyDavid. 2012. Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution. London: Verso.
32.
HorakMartinMussoJulietShiauEllenStokerRobert P.StoneClarence N.. 2015. “Change Afoot.” In Urban Neighborhoods in a New Era: Revitalization Politics in the Postindustrial City, edited by StoneClarence N.StokerRobert P., 1–32. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press.
33.
Janssen-JansenLeonie B.van der VeenMenno. 2017. “Contracting Communities: Conceptualizing Community Benefits Agreements to Improve Citizen Involvement in Urban Development Projects.” Environment and Planning49 (1): 205–25. doi:10.1177/0308518X16664730.
34.
KleineAndrew. 2019. City on the Line: How Baltimore Transformed its Budget to Beat the Great Recession and Deliver Outcomes. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
35.
LanahanLawrence. 2019. The Lines Between Us: Two Families and A Quest to Cross Baltimore’s Racial Divide. New York: The New Press.
36.
LeesLoretta. 2003. “Super-gentrification: The Case of Brooklyn Heights, New York City.” Urban Studies40 (12): 2487–509. doi:10.1080/0042098032000136174.
37.
LeesLorettaSlaterTomWylyElvin. 2008. Gentrification. New York: Routledge.
38.
LefebvreHenri. [1967] 1996. “The Right to the City.” In Writings on Cities, edited by KofmanEleonoreLebasElizabeth, 63–184. London: Blackwell.
39.
LehrerUteLaidleyJennifer. 2009. “Old Mega-Projects Newly Packaged? Waterfront Redevelopment in Toronto.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32 (4): 786–803. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00830.x.
40.
LevineMarc V. 1987. “Downtown Redevelopment as an Urban Growth Strategy.” Journal of Urban Affairs9 (2): 103–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9906.1987.tb00468.x.
LoganJohn R.MolotchHarvey L.. 1987. Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California Press.
43.
LyonMelissa ArnoldHenigJeffrey R.. 2019. “Blurring Lines? How Locally Based Collaborations Handle the Redistribution/Development Tradeoff.” Urban Affairs Review55 (4): 1100–24. doi:10.1177/1078087417740704.
44.
MallachAlan. 2018. The Divided City: Poverty and Prosperity in Urban America. Washington, DC: Island Press.
45.
MarantzNicholas J. 2015. “What Do Community Benefits Agreements Deliver?” Journal of the American Planning Association81 (4): 251–67. doi:10.1080/01944363.2015.1092093.
MasseyDouglas S.TannenJonathan. 2015. “A Research Note on Trends in Black Hypersegregation.” Demography52 (3): 1025–34. doi:10.1007/s13524-015-0381-6.
49.
McGovernStephen J. 2009. “Mobilization on the Waterfront: The Ideological/Cultural Roots of Potential Regime Change in Philadelphia.” Urban Affairs Review44 (5): 663–94. doi:10.1177/1078087408323943.
MeleChristopher. 2017. Race and the Politics of Deception: The Making of an American City. New York: New York Univ. Press.
52.
MeyersRoy T.2019. “The Port Covington TIF: Did Baltimore “Protect This House?” In Tax Increment Financing and Economic Development, edited by JohnsonCraig L.KrizKenneth A., 83–99. Albany, NY: State Univ. of New York Press.
New Port Covington. 2016. Amended and Consolidated Memorandum of Understanding. Baltimore, MD.
55.
OrrMarion. 1992. “Urban Regimes and Human Capital Policies: A Study of Baltimore.” Journal of Urban Affairs14 (2): 173–87. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9906.1992.tb00284.x.
56.
OttenRichard. 2019. “Under Armour’s Global Headquarters and the Redevelopment of South Baltimore.” In Baltimore Revisited: Stories of Inequality and Resistance in a U.S. City, edited by KingP. NicoleDrabinskiKateDavisJoshua C., 306–12. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press.
57.
PeckJamie. 2012. “Austerity Urbanism: American Cities Under Extreme Economy.” City16 (6): 626–55. doi:10.1080/13604813.2012.734071.
PierreJon. 2011. The Politics of Urban Governance. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
60.
PillMadeleine. 2018. “The Austerity Governance of Baltimore’s Neighborhoods: “The Conversation May Have Changed but the Systems Aren’t Changing.”Journal of Urban Affairs, 42 (1): 143–58. doi:10.1080/07352166.2018.1478226.
61.
PurcellMark. 2013. “Possible Worlds: Henri Lefebvre and the Right to the City.” Journal of Urban Affairs36 (1): 141–54. doi:10.1111/juaf.12034.
RhodesR. A. W.1997. Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity, and Accountability. Milton Keynes, England: Open Univ. Press.
66.
RizzoMary. 2019. “Image and Infrastructure: Making Baltimore A Tourist City.” In Baltimore Revisited: Stories of Inequality and Resistance in a U.S. City, edited by KingP. Nicole, DrabinskiKateDavisJoshua C., 257–70. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press.
67.
SaitoLelandTroungJonathan. 2015. “The L.A. Live Community Benefits Agreement: Evaluating the Agreement Results and Shifting Political Power in the City.” Urban Affairs Review51 (2): 263–89. doi:10.1177/1078087414527064.
SamuelsBarbaraMatthew HillC.CherayilMonishaWilliams-BrownD’Sean, D. 2016. Port Covington Master Plan—Comments of ACLU of Maryland and Public Justice Center, Letter Addressed to Mr. Thomas J. Stosur, Director Baltimore City Department of Planning, June 16.
70.
SanphilipoMary A.AustinStephen P.StevensKristen L.. 1989. Fort Covington: A Historical Overview of the Archaeological Resources Associated with the Development of the Port Covington Area, Baltimore, Maryland. Baltimore: Baltimore Center for Urban Archaeology, No. 33.
71.
The SB6 Coalition and Sagamore Development Company. 2016. Community Benefits Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding. Baltimore, MD: The SB6 Coalition and Sagamore Development Company.
SmithNeil. 1979. “Toward a Theory of Gentrification a Back to the City Movement by Capital, not People.” Journal of the American Planning Association45 (4): 538–48. doi:10.1080/01944367908977002.
79.
SmithFraser C. 1980. “Baltimore’s Trustees Play High Finance on a Tightrope; Gambles Sometimes Lose.” April 14; “City Made Any Building Eligible for Aid via Bonds.” April 17; “City-made Quasi-public Corporations Produce a New Category of Public Official.” April 19; “As Shadow Government Grows Stronger, its Accountability to the Public Lessens.” April 20. The Baltimore Sun.
80.
SoutherJ. Mark.2017. Believing in Cleveland: Managing Decline in “the Best Location in the Nation.” Philadelphia, PA: Temple Univ. Press.
SpenceLester K.2015. Knocking the Hustle: Against the Neoliberal Turn in Black Politics. Brooklyn, NY: Punctum Books.
83.
StokerRobert P.1987. “Baltimore: The Self-Evaluating City?” In The Politics of Urban Development, edited by StoneClarence P.SandersHeywood T., 244–66. Laurence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
84.
StokerRobert P.StoneClarence N.WorgsDonn. 2015. “Neighborhood Policy in Baltimore: The Postindustrial Turn.” In Urban Neighborhoods in a New Era: Revitalization Politics in the Postindustrial City, edited by StoneClarence N.StokerRobert P., 50–80. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press.
85.
StoneClarence N.1989. Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta, 1946–1988. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.
86.
StoneClarence N., and StokerRobert P., editors. 2015. Urban Neighborhoods in a New Era: Revitalization Politics in the Postindustrial City. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press.
87.
StromElizabeth. 2008. “Rethinking the Politics of Downtown Development.” Journal of Urban Affairs30 (1): 37–61. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9906.2007.00373.x.
88.
TaylorKeeanga-Yamahtta. 2019. Race for Profit: How Banks and the Real Estate Industry Undermine Black Homeownership. Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press.
89.
TeafordJon C.1990. The Rough Road to Renaissance: Urban Revitalization in America, 1940–1985. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
90.
TrounstineJessica. 2018. Segregation by Design: Local Politics and Inequality in American Cities. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press.
91.
WeissCarol H. 1995. “Nothing as Practical as Good Theory: Exploring Theory-Based Evaluation for Comprehensive Community Initiatives for Children and Families.” In New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Concepts, Methods, and Contexts, edited by ConnellJames P.KubischAnne C.SchorrLisbeth BWeissCarol H, 65–92. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
92.
WheelerTimothy. 2000. “Baltimore Seeks Assembly Approval for Bonds not Needing Voters’ OK.” The Baltimore Sun. January 19.
93.
Wolf-PowersLaura. 2010. “Community Benefits Agreements and Local Government: A Review of Recent Evidence.” Journal of the American Planning Association76 (2): 141–59. doi:10.1080/01944360903490923.
