In Chinatowns across the U.S., tradition and history collide with luxury development

Just a few hundred people of Chinese heritage still live in Washington, D.C.’s Chinatown. Many have been pushed out to cheaper and safer areas.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

Penny and Jack Lee, now married, grew up in the 1960s and 1970s among the thousands of people of Chinese heritage who lived in apartments lining the main stretches of Washington, D.C.’s bustling Chinatown.

“Chinatown was very bright, vibrant,” Jack Lee recalled. “All of our recreations ended up being in the alleys of Chinatown.” They felt it was a safe haven, he said.

But the neighborhood didn’t stay the same for long. First came a convention center in 1982 that displaced many in the majority Chinese community. Then, in 1997, came the MCI Center, now Capital One Arena, a few blocks from the heart of the neighborhood. These developments, as well as luxury condos, caused rents to rise and forced grocery stores and restaurants to close. They also pushed residents to move to safer and cheaper areas, Penny Lee said.

Just a few hundred people of Chinese heritage still live in the neighborhood, mostly in Section 8 apartments for lower-income residents. There are now fewer than a dozen Chinese restaurants, as well as the long-standing Chinatown gate and non-Chinese businesses with signs bearing Chinese characters. Jokingly called the “Chinatown Block,” reflecting its diminished size, what’s left of the neighborhood is mere blocks from a wealthier area that contains the U.S. Capitol and the National Mall.

Chinatowns across the nation face a similar reckoning. In major Chinatown neighborhoods, luxury development and public-use projects have altered the fabric of these historic communities, according to more than two dozen activists, residents and restaurant owners. While some argue these developments accelerate local economies, many interviewed by CNBC say they destroy the neighborhoods’ character and push out longtime residents.

Some Chinatown residents benefited from the development boom, selling properties to developers or drawing more customers from increased foot traffic. Many others, meanwhile, have been driven out by higher rents, limited parking and increasingly unsafe conditions.

The changes in Chinatowns across the country look similar, though they’re unfolding at different timelines and magnitudes. Chicago’s Chinatown, in comparison with other Chinatowns with shrinking populations, more than doubled its Chinese population between 1990 and 2020.

“Those who are interested in preserving D.C. Chinatown should look toward its intrinsic value to tell the Chinese American story, the American story,” said Evelyn Moy, president of the Moy Family Association, which provides education and assistance to residents in Washington, D.C.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

Cities already deeply affected by gentrification and high-end development stand as templates for how the shift may unfold elsewhere. For many, housing is the problem — and the solution.

“We can’t build our way out of the housing crisis, but we can’t get out of the housing crisis without building,” said Ener Chiu, executive vice president of community building at East Bay Asian Local Development Corporation in California, which has built 2,300 permanently affordable homes in Oakland.

A case study in the heart of Manhattan

In Manhattan’s Chinatown, which dates back to the late 1800s, residents and local organizations said there are two interrelated fights: one against luxury development, and another to build more affordable housing and maintain existing apartments. Some have been frustrated that money and government support have gone toward skyscrapers and not the longtime residents who still struggle to secure housing in the neighborhood.

Opponents say tall, modern buildings — such as One Manhattan Square, a 72-story residential skyscraper in nearby Two Bridges developed by Extell Development Group, which features units priced at over $1.2 million — will affect surrounding property values, the structure of neighboring buildings and the percentage of Asian residents in Chinatown.

Opponents say tall, modern buildings such as One Manhattan Square affect surrounding property values, the structure of neighboring buildings and the percentage of Asian residents in Chinatown.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

There are also plans to develop four more towers ranging from 62 to 77 stories, each with 25% affordable housing, by Extell, JDS Development Group, and Chetrit Group.

City councilmember Christopher Marte and residents of the Lower East Side and Chinatown filed a lawsuit against the buildings’ developers and the city in October, arguing construction of the towers will create further environmental and health issues. The suit contends the developments violate the Green Amendment granting New York state residents the right to clean air.

Extell and JDS Development Group did not provide comment for this story.

Some residents have shown tentative support for the luxury buildings, saying they might make the neighborhood safer or bring in wealthier Asian residents who could boost Chinatown’s economy. Most who spoke with CNBC, however, expressed frustration over the rapid development of these megaprojects.

The Two Bridges fight is an experiment in looking out for residents’ livelihoods while “fighting against a very anti-humanity way of seeing a city,” said Alina Shen, the lead Chinatown Tenants Union organizer at grassroots community organization CAAAV: Organizing Asian Communities. “It’s a response to the fact that people who remain in Chinatown feel a deep pessimism for what’s happening and from literally being in the shadow of a ledge of a mega tower.”

The struggle with luxury developers has also involved the fight for secure housing.

Manhattan Chinatown’s housing stock is “really aged,” which has led to costly fires, according to Thomas Yu, executive director of Asian Americans for Equality.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

Chinatown’s housing stock is “really aged,” but sparse vacant land has made creating affordable housing difficult, said Thomas Yu, executive director of Asian Americans for Equality, which has created 1,200 affordable housing units citywide. The development process for new units can take years, he said, and developers have rapidly sought out Manhattan’s Chinatown as the borough’s “last place with huge potential returns.”

Evictions, buyouts and deregulation of rent-stabilized housing have contributed to Chinatown’s population decline and illegal sublet situations, according to Yu.

Chen Yun, a tenant leader for CAAAV, said she had a landlord who for years refused to repair heating and hot water. She said she and her husband would boil pots of water at work and bring them home to bathe. They also dealt with a collapsed ceiling, she said. Yun spoke in Mandarin, translated by Shen and CAAAV communications manager Irene Hsu.

In 2005, Yun helped grow the Chinatown Tenants Union to help residents fight landlords and report faulty conditions. However, residents continue reporting similar housing issues, which Yun said has pushed some onto the streets, and more residents have mobilized to oppose developments they say could exacerbate these issues.

“No matter how beautiful or well-built these buildings are, [residents] simply can’t afford it, it’s not within their means, and these luxury buildings have nothing to do with us,” said Yun, who lost her job during the pandemic and spends much of her retirement money on rent.

Yu, of Asian Americans for Equality, said his organization is not against development but that more affordable housing should go up instead of solely market-rate buildings. Asian Americans have among the highest citywide poverty levels and have poor odds of finding secure housing, Yu said.

Some argue luxury development is eliminating affordable housing opportunities by sheer proximity, as one of Chinatown’s ZIP codes was excluded from a city loan program for low-income areas since it also included the wealthy Soho and Tribeca neighborhoods.

In Manhattan’s Chinatown, residents and local organizations said there are two interrelated fights: one against luxury development, and another to build more affordable housing and maintain existing apartments.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

Some residents expressed feeling an intense divide between their local government and Chinatown — fueled in part by rezoning debates, not to mention a proposed $8.3 billion 40-story jail in the neighborhood.

Zishun Ning of the Chinatown Working Group has led protests against the proposed jail, as well as against the Museum of Chinese in America, which stands to benefit from the jail’s expansion via a $35 million government investment. Ning said the city government’s “big development” agenda has “pitted us against each other.”

The museum’s leaders said they’ve been scapegoated, as they weren’t included in development talks with the city but could not turn down the money.

Moving out

For many Chinatown residents, rising rents and sparse affordable housing have left them with one choice: moving away. But challenges often follow residents, and once they resettle, some face familiar changes.

Maggie Chen, a receptionist in Boston who has lived in an affordable housing development for eight years, said rising rents have made her reconsider whether living in Chinatown is economical.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

Many Chinese residents have relocated from Boston’s Chinatown to the nearby suburbs of Malden and Quincy, said Angie Liou, executive director of Boston’s Asian Community Development Corporation. Luxury buildings have opened in these suburban satellite Chinatowns as developers look to capitalize on less developed parts of the city, pushing residents further away.

In Manhattan, a woman with the surname Yang, who requested partial anonymity to preserve her privacy, said she had lived in a $1,100-per-month Chinatown apartment, which her family could no longer afford due to increasing rent. After applying for public housing through the NYC Housing Authority, she moved eight miles away in 2009 into a $400-per-month apartment in East Harlem.

“It was a hard readjustment period just because my life is even to this day still tied to Chinatown, so the train commute is an extra hour,” Yang said. She spoke in Fujianese, with translation by Ling Ren, Asian Americans For Equality’s manager of residential services.

Some Chinatown residents have looked to the suburbs for cheaper rent, lower maintenance costs and better parking, said Patty Moy, manager of China Pearl Restaurant, which has locations in Boston and Quincy, Massachusetts.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

“One of the unique aspects of Flushing is what I call the 15-minute neighborhood, the idea that you can live, work, play, go to school, partake in open space, shop, sort of all within 15 minutes,” said Ross Moskowitz, partner at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, who represents several developers’ projects in the neighborhood.

And as more people move in, rents go up, meaning many residents who relocated to Flushing for cheaper rent have found themselves in the same battles with developers that they fled from, according to Jo-Ann Yoo, executive director of Asian American Federation.

Chinatowns and the pandemic

Many debates surrounding luxury development and affordable housing were accelerated by the pandemic, which shuttered hundreds of businesses across Chinatowns. After experiencing xenophobia and discrimination fueled by anti-Chinese sentiment during the pandemic, many people stopped coming to Chinatowns and frequenting restaurants, clothing stores and art shops. Local families were forced to restrict spending, and some businesses had to cut staff and hours.

Some businesses in Oakland have been unable to build back after looting and anti-Asian attacks on public transit caused many residents to fear going out after dark, said Evelyn Lee, former president of the board of directors at Oakland Asian Cultural Center. This has contributed to reduced pedestrian traffic in Chinatown, she said.

Manhattan Chinatown native David Leung took over Wo Hop Restaurant in 2016. Leung reduced his restaurant’s hours in 2020 during the Covid pandemic and watched as storefronts emptied.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

Mei Lum is the fifth-generation owner of Wing on Wo & Co., the oldest operating store in Manhattan’s Chinatown, as well as the founder of the W.O.W. Project. She said there isn’t a robust next generation to “really problem-solve and think through these circumstantial, political, and contextual issues arising in the neighborhood.”

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

Still, many small businesses are threatened by the changes. The new generation hasn’t frequented restaurants such as Hop Lee as often as older clientele due to differences in taste, said the restaurant’s owner, Johnny Mui.

“A lot of our businesses now, they’re more for a higher income bracket, and it’s just growing over the years slowly,” said Carry Pak, a Chinatown resident and CAAAV youth leader. “Having spaces where the immigrant community can still feel comfortable with being able to speak the language to street vendors or grocery vendors is particularly key.”

The stadium debate

Another common issue facing Chinatowns: sports arenas and other public-use venues. Some argue stadiums can provide Chinatowns with more foot traffic and opportunities, though others say they have historically destroyed homes and attracted chain businesses that outcompete Chinatown businesses.

Plans for a new Oakland Athletics ballpark a mile from the city’s Chinatown, which prompted concerns from residents, fell through last month after the team purchased land for a new stadium in Las Vegas.

In Philadelphia, plans for a new arena have irked some Chinatown residents and business owners, who say developers and city governments have neglected the community’s needs.

“We as a community need to be opposing it as much as possible in case there’s legs to this idea that the arena is going to be built,” said John Chin, executive director of the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation.

Pia Singh | CNBC

A proposed $1.3 billion Sixers arena would sit blocks from the city’s Chinatown Friendship Gate. The privately funded arena is in the first stages of construction. Developers are working on gaining entitlements and approvals as the project moves toward its scheduled September 2031 opening date.

The development team expects the 18,000-seat arena to be a “major economic driver” for Philadelphians, projecting $400 million of annual economic output and 1,000 jobs.

Since the proposal was made public last summer, several Chinatown community members and residents petitioned the developers and city leaders to shutter the project. Experts previously said professional sports stadiums fail to generate significant local economic growth, and tax revenue is insufficient to make positive financial contributions.

The owner of Little Saigon Cafe in Philly’s Chinatown, a man known as “Uncle Sam,” leads a coalition of more than 40 association leaders against the arena development. Uncle Sam, a Vietnamese refugee, came to the city more than four decades ago.

“If the arena is built, it will destroy a community, destroy our culture,” he said.

“We’ll fight to the end. We’ll do everything we can to defeat this [arena] project,” said “Uncle Sam,” the owner of Little Saigon Cafe in Philadelphia’s Chinatown.

Pia Singh | CNBC

Private and government-led investments in public spaces have pushed out lower-income residents, said John Chin, executive director of the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corp. His organization empowers native Chinese speakers to voice their opinions to Chinatown’s elected officials, city representatives and Sixers development heads.

The Sixers did not respond to a request for comment on how the development would impact Chinatown.

Last month, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney announced the city would conduct an independent study on the arena’s impact on the community.

Staying alive — and growing

Many Chinatowns have struggled to secure government support while they contend with tough conditions in the economy and the real estate market.

Yet some Chinatown leaders remain optimistic they can work with developers to maintain the neighborhoods’ character. Some leaders doubled down on fighting developers to preserve historic architecture and businesses, while others embraced development to grow opportunities for residents.

Business owners in San Francisco’s Chinatown who spoke with CNBC said the neighborhood’s businesses, though still recovering, are keeping the city’s culture alive.

Rebecca Smith | CNBC

San Francisco Chinatown’s more than 14,000 residents, many of whom are low-income and elderly, have faced housing shortages. Modern businesses are taking over decades-old shops.

However, business owners who spoke with CNBC said Chinatown’s businesses, though still recovering, are keeping the city’s culture alive.

George Chen, who owns the contemporary Chinese restaurant China Live, remains optimistic about getting San Francisco’s Chinatown back to its heyday.

“You can look from my roof and go see pretty much the 22 blocks of Chinatown, and I think there’s a cultural relevance to keeping the immigrant story alive,” Chen said.

At least one U.S. Chinatown has grown while others shrink.

The Asian population of Chicago’s Chinatown has more than doubled in three decades, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Many new residents are Fujianese from Southeast China and have driven new restaurants, buildings and support services.

Paul Luu, CEO of Chicago’s Chinese American Service League, said families have moved from other Chinatowns to Chicago’s to take advantage of the city’s nonprofits and the growing local job market. He added that its distance from the pricier South Loop makes prices cheaper than in other cities.

The Asian population in Chicago’s Chinatown has more than doubled in three decades, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Noah Sheidlower | CNBC

Despite the growth, Chicago’s Chinatown is facing some of the same issues as those in other cities.

Some residents have expressed concerns about a $7 billion development called The 78, which will include high-rises, residential towers, office buildings and a riverwalk to the north of Chinatown. Some fear The 78 would raise rents and property taxes, as well as push out local businesses and residents.

Luu said The 78’s leadership team approached Chinatown leaders early in development to hear concerns and work to establish more affordable and accessible housing and commerce.

As high-end development occurs in the right locations, it can promote the local economy and encourage progress, said Homan Wong, an architect on the board of directors for the Chicago Chinatown Chamber of Commerce. He said issues of parking and safety still hurt Chicago’s Chinatown but that the Chamber remains focused on working with developers to keep the community growing.

“The opposite of development would be decay,” he said. “The reality is that if you don’t move forward, you’re going to fall behind.”

— Noah Sheidlower reported from Boston, Chicago, New York and Washington, D.C. Pia Singh reported from Philadelphia. CNBC’s Rebecca Smith contributed reporting from San Francisco.

Source link

#Chinatowns #tradition #history #collide #luxury #development

Supreme Court rules 9-0 that bankruptcy filers can’t avoid debt incurred by another’s fraud

The Supreme Court in a unanimous decision Wednesday ruled that a California woman could not use U.S. bankruptcy code protection to avoid paying a $200,000 debt that resulted from fraud by her partner.

The court said that the woman, Kate Bartenwerfer, owed the debt even if she did not know about her husband David’s misrepresentations regarding the condition of a house when they sold it to San Francisco real estate developer Kieran Buckley for more than $2 million.

Buckley had sued the couple and won a judgment for those misrepresentations.

The 9-0 decision written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett resolves a difference of opinion between several federal circuit appeals courts on the question of whether an innocent party can shield themselves from debt for another person’s fraud after filing for bankruptcy.

The ruling cited and reinforces a Supreme Court decision in 1885, which found that two partners in a New York wool company were liable for the debt due to the fraudulent claims of a third partner even though they were not themselves “guilty of wrong.”

Barrett dismissed Bartenwerfer’s grammar-focused argument, which claimed that the relevant section of the bankruptcy code, written in the passive voice as “money obtained by fraud,” refers to “money obtained by the individual debtor’s fraud.”

“Innocent people are sometimes held liable for fraud they did not personally commit, and, if they declare bankruptcy, [the bankruptcy code] bars discharge of that debt,” Barrett wrote. “So it is for Bartenwerfer, and we are sensitive to the hardship she faces.”

The debt to Buckley, which was originally a court judgment of $200,000 imposed in 2012, since has grown to more than $1.1 million as a result of interest, according to Janet Brayer, the San Francisco attorney who represented Buckley in a lawsuit over the house sale.

Brayer said that debt is growing at a current rate of 10% annually and that it excludes attorney fees to which she is entitled to under California law.

“We have been working on this since 2008, and now finally have been vindicated and justice served for all victims of fraud, Brayer said. “Hence, I am a happy girl today.” 

Iain MacDonald, a lawyer for Bartenwerfer, did not have an immediate comment on the ruling, saying he planned to discuss the decision with her.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a concurring opinion joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, noted that the ruling involves people who acted together in a partnership, not “a situation involving fraud by a person bearing no agency or partnership relationship to the debtor.”

“With that understanding, I join the Court’s opinion,” Sotomayor wrote.

The ruling on Bartenwerfer’s case came 18 years after the events that triggered the dispute.

Bartenwerfer, and her then-boyfriend David Bartenwerfer, jointly bought a house in San Francisco in 2005 and planned to remodel it and sell it for a profit, the ruling noted.

While David hired an architect, engineer, and general contractor, monitored their progress and paid for the work, “Kate, on the other hand, was largely uninvolved,” Barrett wrote.

The house was eventually bought by Buckley after the Bartenwerfers “attested that they had disclosed all material facts relating to the property,” Barrett noted.

But Buckley learned that the house had “a leaky roof, defective windows, a missing fire escape, and
permit problems.”

He then sued the couple, claiming he had overpaid for the home based on their misrepresentations of the property.

A jury ruled in his favor, awarding him $200,000 from the Bartenwerfers.

The couple was unable to pay the award or other creditors and filed for protection under Chapter 7 of the bankruptcy code, which normally allows people to void all of their debts.

But “not all debts are dischargeable,” Barrett wrote in her ruling.

“The Code makes several exceptions to the general rule, including the one at issue in this case: Section 523(a)(2)(A) bars the discharge of ‘any debt … for money … to the extent obtained by … false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud,'” Barrett wrote.

Buckley challenged the couple’s move to void their debt to him on that ground.

A U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge ruled in his favor, saying “that neither David nor Kate Bartenwerfer could discharge their debt to Buckley,” the opinion by Barrett noted.

“Based on testimony from the parties, real-estate agents, and contractors, the court found that David had knowingly concealed the house’s defects from Buckley,” Barrett wrote.

“And the court imputed David’s fraudulent intent to Kate because the two had formed a legal partnership to execute the renovation and resale project,” she added.

The couple appealed the ruling.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that David still owed the debt to Buckley given his fraudulent intent.

But the same panel disagreed that Kate owed the debt.

“As the panel saw it [a section of the bankruptcy code] barred her from discharging the debt only if she knew or had reason to know of David’s fraud,” Barrett wrote.

Bartenwerfer later asked the Supreme Court to hear her appeal of that ruling.

In her opinion, Barrett noted that the text of the bankruptcy code explicitly bars Chapter 7 from being used by a debtor to discharge a debt if that obligation was the result of “false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud.”

Barrett wrote, “By its terms, this text precludes Kate Bartenwerfer from discharging her liability for the state-court judgment.”

The justice noted that Kate Bartenwerfer disputed that, even as she admitted, “that, as a grammatical matter, the passive-voice statute does not specify a fraudulent actor.”

“But in her view, the statute is most naturally read to bar the discharge of debts for money obtained by the debtor’s fraud,” Barrett wrote.

“We disagree: Passive voice pulls the actor off the stage,” Barrett wrote.

The justice wrote that Congress, in writing the relevant section of the bankruptcy code, “framed it to ‘focu[s] on an event that occurs without respect to a specific actor, and therefore without respect to any actor’s intent or culpability.’ “

Source link

#Supreme #Court #rules #bankruptcy #filers #avoid #debt #incurred #anothers #fraud