attempted to prevent Blacks from moving into their communities. In reaction to blockbusting, unscrupulous real estate agents' scare tactics, and other racially divisive strategies, Whites fled ethnic neighborhoods as African-Americans moved into new housing markets. This ultimately maintained the pattern of racial segregation.

In the late 1950s and 1960s, efforts were launched to halt racial succession and produce stable, racially integrated neighborhoods. Encouraged by the early Civil Rights Movement, these efforts and the community groups involved in them sought to convince White residents of integration's moral and practical values and attempted to stabilize neighborhoods by holding and attracting new Whites. Most of these efforts were unsuccessful, but the activism prompted some scholars and community leaders to question long-standing assumptions about racial change. Research reports, informed by the Chicago experience, emerged and argued that racial change was not inevitable (Saltman, 1990; Goodwin, 1979; Molotch, 1972; and Taub et al., 1984). In certain circumstances, massive and sustained intervention efforts could stabilize integration, at least slowing the process dramatically. Several community organization efforts-mostly in suburban areas-proved the scholarly case.

Chicago's most famous integration effort was directed by the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. The Southern Christian Leadership Conference's 1966 campaign, led by King, sought to open segregated housing markets in Chicago to Blacks. Campaign leaders organized a series of marches through militantly White neighborhoods in the Chicago area. Hundreds of Whites hurled bottles, stones, and racial epithets at the marchers. In Marquette Park (also known in official census documents as the Chicago Lawn area), King was struck in the head by a brick. Television footage of the marches remains the most disturbing images of the movement.

Forced to back down from his opposition to integration efforts, Mayor Richard J. Daley negotiated an open housing agreement with campaign organizers. Once the marches were halted and King had left the city, however, Daley failed to follow through with the bulk of the city's obligations (Biles, 1995). In a 1967 address, Daley reiterated his opposition to civil rights initiatives. Speaking of King, Daley said, "He is a troublemaker.... He doesn't know our problems. He lives in Atlanta. We don't need him to tell us what to do. He only comes here for one purpose, or to any other city he has visited, and that is to cause trouble." (Biles, 1995.)

Of course, political relationships cannot fully explain the failure of integrationist strategies in Chicago. Molotch's (1972) study of South Shore's racial transition in the 1960s emphasized the discriminatory way in which race was embedded in real estate practices, creating a dual housing market for Blacks and Whites. According to Molotch, Blacks exhibited a strong demand for housing in racially changing neighborhoods (given that these neighborhoods provided some of the few opportunities for quality housing available to Blacks) while White demand was quite low (1972). Since Blacks were willing to pay more than Whites for the same housing, Molotch argued that change was inevitable. Based on the experience in South Shore, Molotch was not optimistic about the contemporary potential for stable racial integration. The dual housing market was so entrenched, he argued, that sustained integration under existing circumstances was impossible.

Over the course of the 1980s, Chicago's racial integration has developed in new directions. Predominantly White, affluent neighborhoods like Lincoln Park, Beverly, and Hyde Park welcomed, accepted, and/or accommodated middle-class Blacks. A few communities (though not in large numbers), as our following analysis will show, have developed stable diversity along racial, ethnic, and economic lines.

Study Communities4

By reviewing scholarly research, community reports, newspaper accounts, and interviews with local informants, we examine the history of four neighborhoods. We present the origin of the diversity and the demographic and socioeconomic character (over the past decade) of each neighborhood, focusing specifically on any issues or problems related to maintaining racial, ethnic, and/or economic diversity. We seek to understand how the racial, ethnic, and/or economic diversity in each neighborhood emerged, how it has been maintained, and any hurdles it must face, both now and in the future, to maintain such diversity.

Rogers Park
History

Rogers Park is a community 10 miles north of the Chicago Loop along Lake Michigan, at the northeast city limits (see exhibit 1). Once a farming community, Rogers Park has become a densely populated community containing a mix of ethnic groups and cultural institutions. From 1920 to 1960 the community was dominated by Russian Jews, Poles, and Germans. The housing stock consisted largely of multifamily dwellings, a fact that continues to shape the social character of Rogers Park (Chicago Fact Book Consortium, 1984). Since 1960, however, the area has experienced significant changes. The most significant involves its racial and ethnic makeup. While European ethnic groups remain in Rogers Park, there was and continues to be a growing migration of Blacks and Hispanics. During the 1980s this migration intensified as illustrated by the 212-percent increase (see exhibit 2) in Blacks and the 81-percent increase in Hispanics from 1980 to 1990. The migration of Blacks, Hispanics, and other groups into Rogers Park during the mid-1970s and through the 1980s is the prime reason for the area's current racial diversity.

Demographic/Socioeconomic Profile

As mentioned, Rogers Park has experienced significant racial and ethnic change since the 1960s. Exhibit 2 indicates that the community's overall population gain was due to increases in the number of Blacks, Hispanics, and others, as there was a 37-percent decrease in the number of Whites. This dynamic has greatly increased the level of racial and ethnic diversity in the community. Contributing to the community's diversity is the notable immigrant population, with almost one-third of the population foreign born. Economically, Rogers Park is middle class, with a median income slightly below the city average (see exhibit 2). Several factors account for its middle-class makeup:

■Loyola University draws residents to the area and plays a role in economic development.

Reasonable rents and housing prices make the area more attractive to some young singles and families (Chicago Fact Book Consortium, 1984).

■ Public transportation provides easy access (a 30-minute trip) to downtown.

However, the economic character of the Rogers Park community is changing, becoming as diverse economically as it is racially and ethnically. Census data for 1990 indicate that rates of poverty and households headed by women increased from 1980. In fact, since 1969 the percentage of families living below the poverty line rose from 5 percent in 1969 to 16 percent in 1989 (see exhibit 2). Also, poverty rates in Rogers Park are not evenly distributed among racial groups. For example, poverty rates for Blacks are twice that of Whites or Asians in Rogers Park, although this disparity is less than in the city as a whole (Gronbjerg et al., 1993). These data show the diversity in Rogers Park is more complex than cursory examinations indicate and suggest that maintaining such diversity will be equally complex.

Maintaining Racial, Ethnic, and Economic Diversity in Rogers Park Although little specific research on Rogers Park exists, two studies provide good insight into the character of the community's diversity (Gronbjerg et al., 1993; Welter, 1982). These studies point out some concerns and problems Rogers Park residents, community activists, and elected officials must face if the area's diversity is to be maintained and stabilized. These include:

■Roughly 85 percent of Rogers Park's 27,770 housing units are rental, and minority groups are most likely to be renters (Blacks, 95 percent; Hispanics, 94 percent) (Gronbjerg et al., 1993). The rental character, along with other factors mentioned below, has raised concern over transience in Rogers Park and the community's ability to stabilize. This concern is bolstered by Rogers Park's high rate of residential mobility. In 1990, 69 percent of Rogers Park residents reported that they had moved to their current residence in the last 5 years, with more than a quarter having moved to their current residence from outside of the city of Chicago (Gronbjerg et al., 1993). Rogers Park has a significant foreign-born population (30 percent). Among those who are foreign born, 21 percent had arrived in the United States during the last 3 years, and 35 percent had been in the country 5 years or less (Gronbjerg et al., 1993). The high rate of in-migration from other countries means that Rogers Park has to deal with issues such as intergenerational differences in adjustment, language barriers, and lack of a voice to advocate specific concerns of immigrants. Community organizers indicate that outreach to these groups is difficult, given language differences. Schools

have been forced to deal with this issue; data indicate that the percentage of students who do not speak English is particularly high in Rogers Park.

■Rogers Park is characterized by an aging White population and a young and growing Black and Hispanic population. This has created concern over the stability of the community's racial, ethnic, and most importantly, economic diversity. Again, data suggest that Rogers Park is losing Whites in their peak income years (35-44), while gaining younger (25–34) Blacks and other minorities with considerably less income (Gronbjerg, et al., 1993).

While Rogers Park does not have a severe crime problem, compared with other areas in the city, crime, gangs, and drugs have been significant concerns of residents. Discussions with community leaders, and other interview data, make it clear that crime, gangs, and drugs are perceived to be (and in some spots are) real and increasing problems (Maly and Nyden, 1994). The perception of Rogers Park as unsafe is a real concern for community leaders and others interested in maintaining the area's current diversity, given that fear of crime is one of the prime forces inducing people to move. ■Rogers Park has experienced difficulty maintaining existing stores and attracting significant economic development. Currently, the community has no major grocery store since the last moved out in 1993. Both Howard Street and Morse Avenue have been areas perceived to need development.

■ Although Rogers Park is largely a rental community, homeownership and appreciation rates are a concern. Only 15 percent of Rogers Park's households own their homes. Also, and possibly more troubling, while average home selling prices greatly increased between 1985 and 1990, these prices have dropped from 1990 to 1995 (see exhibit 3). There does not appear to be a great demand for Rogers Park housing, particularly among people who wish to own.

Exhibit 3

Average Home Selling Price and Average Rents in Four Chicago Neighborhoods*

Rogers Park

Edgewater

Uptown

Chicago
Lawn

57,902 63,341 66,508 70,405

$97,800 $155,000 $147,006 $135,239 $370-450 $450-575 $650-825 105,500 147,026 163,836 178,838 365-450 460-640 675-1,100 126,600 138,333 151,156 240,071 335-385 450-580 650-825 350-525

N/A

400-600

*Source: Living in Greater Chicago, The Buyers and Renters Guide! 1996 Edition. GAMS Publishing, Inc.

The public and private schools in Rogers Park are overcrowded. A new elementary school, built in the community in the last 2 years, was already overcrowded when it opened. The overcrowding has reached such a level that some schools have portable units of two to four classrooms in the school yard to handle student overflow. This