IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v9y2019i1p25-d217180.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cui Bono? Assessing Community Engagement in San Francisco Community Benefit Agreements

Author

Listed:
  • Madeline Streiff Buitelaar

    (UC Hastings College of the Law, San Francisco, CA 94012, USA)

Abstract

A community benefit agreement (CBA) that provides tax breaks to a company often has provisions to help uplift the area where the business resides. A number of San Francisco companies, especially those in the technology sector, have received tax relief, a tangible benefit granted in exchange for operating in designated blighted areas, the details of which are delineated in publicly available CBAs. One CBA requirement for the tax break—community engagement—defies easy measurement. This paper assesses whether San Francisco companies were held accountable for fulfilling this unclear but core CBA requirement, namely, engagement with disenfranchised community members, an important part of their corporate social responsibility. To assess the community engagement stipulation of CBAs, this paper presents background on CBAs followed by interview data from two anonymous community liaisons who were formerly or are currently responsible for community engagement at companies that received the tax break. Themes found in the interview data highlight the limitations of CBAs that result from the unequal social exchange between companies and the indigent residents of blighted areas where the businesses are located. The study concludes that the benefits of the vague and unenforceable community engagement provision of CBAs do not justify the companies’ payroll tax exclusion. The disproportionality of this quid pro quo risks aggravating impoverished residents’ resentment of companies and their employees. The relevance of this study’s low participation rate among community liaisons is also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Madeline Streiff Buitelaar, 2019. "Cui Bono? Assessing Community Engagement in San Francisco Community Benefit Agreements," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:9:y:2019:i:1:p:25-:d:217180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/9/1/25/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/9/1/25/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sheridan Tatsuno, 2017. "San Francisco Renaissance: Yet Another Gold Rush?," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, in: Piero Formica (ed.), Entrepreneurial Renaissance, chapter 0, pages 143-152, Springer.
    2. Kemeny, Tom & Osman, Taner, 2018. "The wider impacts of high-technology employment: Evidence from U.S. cities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1729-1740.
    3. Gabriel Metcalf, 2018. "Sand Castles before the Tide? Affordable Housing in Expensive Cities," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(1), pages 59-80, Winter.
    4. Laura Wolf-Powers, 2010. "Community Benefits Agreements and Local Government," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(2), pages 141-159, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Doris Kwon & Olav Sorenson, 2023. "The Silicon Valley Syndrome," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(2), pages 344-368, March.
    2. Nathan, Max, 2022. "Does light touch cluster policy work? Evaluating the tech city programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(9).
    3. Noemi Schmitt & Frank Westerhoff, 2022. "Speculative housing markets and rent control: insights from nonlinear economic dynamics," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 17(1), pages 141-163, January.
    4. Christian Dustmann & Bernd Fitzenberger & Markus Zimmermann, 2022. "Housing Expenditure and Income Inequality," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(645), pages 1709-1736.
    5. Holstenkamp, Lars & Degenhart, Heinrich, 2013. "Bürgerbeteiligungsmodelle für erneuerbare Energien - Eine Begriffsbestimmung aus finanzwirtschaftlicher Perspektive [Citizen Participation Schemes for Renewable Energies - A Definition from a Finan," MPRA Paper 81263, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Murray, Cameron & Gordon, Josh, 2021. "Land as airspace: How rezoning privatizes public space (and why governments should not give it away for free)," OSF Preprints v89fg, Center for Open Science.
    7. Kemeny, Thomas & Storper, Michael, 2020. "Superstar cities and left-behind places: disruptive innovation, labor demand, and interregional inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103312, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Mense, Andreas, 2020. "The Impact of New Housing Supply on the Distribution of Rents," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224569, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    9. Sun, Tianyu & Chand, Satish & Sharpe, Keiran, 2018. "Effect of aging on housing prices: evidence from a panel data," MPRA Paper 94418, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Mar 2019.
    10. Boeing, Geoff & Wegmann, Jake & Jiao, Junfeng, 2020. "Rental Housing Spot Markets: How Online Information Exchanges Can Supplement Transacted-Rents Data," SocArXiv phgqt, Center for Open Science.
    11. Molloy, Raven, 2020. "The effect of housing supply regulation on housing affordability: A review," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    12. Maria Chiara Cavalleri & Boris Cournède & Volker Ziemann, 2019. "Housing markets and macroeconomic risks," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1555, OECD Publishing.
    13. Elliott Sclar, 2021. "The Infinite Elasticity of Air: New York City’s Financialization of Transferable Development Rights," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 80(2), pages 353-380, March.
    14. Maryann Feldman & Frederick Guy & Simona Iammarino, 2021. "Regional income disparities, monopoly and finance," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(1), pages 25-49.
    15. Neil Lee & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2021. "Entrepreneurship and the fight against poverty in US cities," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(1), pages 31-52, February.
    16. Satya Sai Kumar Jillella & Annie Matan & Peter Newman, 2015. "Participatory Sustainability Approach to Value Capture-Based Urban Rail Financing in India through Deliberated Stakeholder Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-25, June.
    17. Yuming Fu & Song Shi, 2022. "Barriers to urban spatial development: Evidence from the 2010–2011 Christchurch earthquakes," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 218-245, January.
    18. Auspurg, Katrin & Schneck, Andreas & Thiel, Fabian, 2020. "Different samples, different results? How sampling techniques affect the results of field experiments on ethnic discrimination," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 0.
    19. Lee, Neil & Clarke, Stephen, 2019. "Do low-skilled workers gain from high-tech employment growth? High-technology multipliers, employment and wages in Britain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    20. Kirk E. Harris, 2015. "Because We Can Doesn’t Mean We Should and if We Do," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 29(3), pages 245-261, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:9:y:2019:i:1:p:25-:d:217180. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.