One of the best uses of empty church buildings: homes for new religious congregations

Posted on by

A recent piece by Jonathan Merritt suggested there are many empty American churches and communities struggle to know what to do with them:

Many of our nation’s churches can no longer afford to maintain their structures—6,000 to 10,000 churches die each year in America—and that number will likely grow. Though more than 70 percent of our citizens still claim to be Christian, congregational participation is less central to many Americans’ faith than it once was. Most denominations are declining as a share of the overall population, and donations to congregations have been falling for decades. Meanwhile, religiously unaffiliated Americans, nicknamed the “nones,” are growing as a share of the U.S. population…

Converting old churches into residential spaces, like St. Augustine’s and St. Vincent De Paul, is becoming more popular. Churches’ architectural flourishes—open floor plans, exposed brick, vaulted ceilings, and arched windows—often draw buyers of means who are looking for a residential alternative to ubiquitous cookie-cutter developments.

While this type of sacred-to-secular conversion may be a tough pill for former members to swallow, many are even less satisfied with the alternatives. A large number of abandoned churches have become wineries or breweries or bars. Others have been converted into hotels, bed-and-breakfasts, and Airbnbs. A few have been transformed into entertainment venues, such as an indoor playground for children, a laser-tag arena, or a skate park.

Based on research I have been working on in recent years, I’ll offer a suggestion of what could be done with these buildings that is not covered in the article: repurpose these buildings for other religious groups. I have found a variety of religious congregations that are willing to buy and/or use older religious buildings constructed by others: megachurches that are opening satellite campuses, new congregations that would not have the resources to buy land and construct a whole new building, and minority religious groups or immigrant groups who are new to areas. The biggest stumbling block might be not just the price of the building but also the possible price of renovations. At the same time, a church in decent condition could look very attractive to religious groups with limited budgets or who want a building that already fits in with the surrounding neighborhood. Numerous churches and synagogues in the Chicago area have been reused by different religious groups, particularly as certain groups left urban neighborhoods in white flight or congregations dissipated due to declining attendance.

Are there any religious organizations that try to match buildings with possible congregations? The article discusses a group that works with churches to use less of the building and use of the rest of it for community space. But, how about a directory where a new or growing congregation could go to in order to find a congregation that is trying to leave their building?

Below the surface, one of the issues present in this article is the matter of zoning. It is not necessarily easy to initially get approval to build a religious building in certain locations but it can be even harder to take what was once a religious building and convert it to another use once the neighboring residents get used to the religious building over decades. Residents like the predictability of their surroundings, even if they do not necessarily like the religious building in the first place.

What it takes to run for local government positions in the Chicago suburbs

Posted on by

Getting elected to local suburban office may not require many votes but how do you become a candidate in the first place? A look at some of the steps in the Chicago suburbs:

Most suburbs — as well as school boards, library boards, fire district boards and park boards — require nominating papers to be filed from Dec. 10 to Dec. 17. A few towns like Elgin, Aurora and Naperville had early filing periods…

The number of signatures required to get on the ballot varies by race, the state board of elections says. For example, for library districts it’s at least 2 percent of the votes cast in the last election for library trustees, or 50, whichever is less. For nonpartisan village board positions it’s at least 1 percent, and for nonpartisan city council positions it’s a minimum of 5 percent of votes cast in the last election for those offices.

Candidates must file a statement of candidacy and a receipt showing they filed a statement of economic interest with the appropriate office (most will be with the county clerk’s office), Meyer said. The latter can be done online, but Meyer recommended first-time candidates do it in person. They can also sign a voluntary oath to the state constitution, he said…

Money is the biggest obstacle to running for office, said Audra Wilson, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Illinois. She estimated a strong campaign for a contested suburban city council or village board position could require close to $30,000. Direct mailers are the most significant cost, followed by hiring a campaign staff, she said.

File nominating papers, get signatures from local residents, file a statement of candidacy, gather money, and then run a winning campaign. And with the article suggesting “Just 31 percent of local races were contested in 2017 in Cook, DuPage, Kane and Lake counties,” it may be enough to just get on the ballot.

Based on these steps and numbers, does this suggest there are too many local government offices to fill? Even as Americans like local suburban governments, it may not be as effective if few suburbanites actually want to participate. Consolidating local government units – such as the push in Illinois to limit new governments and consider eliminating other units, albeit at a slow pace and some governments defend their existence – could address the issue but many wealthier suburbanites are probably unwilling to hand over control of their own communities to others.

Mapping county votes in the 2018 House elections

Posted on by

More media outlets are using maps to illustrate the results of the 2018 election. See this story from NPR that uses country level voting to show where the two parties picked up or lost House seats:

NPRcountyelectionresults2018.png

Of the 41 congressional districts that Democrats turned from red to blue this election, 38 were suburban, according to an analysis by The New York Times. (Democrats may pick up one to two more seats, once all votes are counted and elections are certified.)

But more granular than congressional districts overall are the counties that compose them. We mapped the percentage of House ballots cast for the party that received the most votes in each suburban county, and we looked at how that compared with 2016.

This map hints at metropolitan regions swinging toward one party or another while still generally adhering to the patterns of big cities and close suburbs vote Democratic and further-flung suburbs vote Republican. Regions like Seattle, San Francisco, Chicago, and Boston swung entirely Democratic. Some were more split: Denver, San Antonio, Miami, Orlando, and Washington, D.C.

An expanding sociological concept: emotional labor

Posted on by

As society changes, sociological concepts can be used in new ways or change their definition. As one example, sociologist Arlie Hochschild is asked about the expanding use of “emotional labor”:

Beck: Since the time you coined it, have you noticed the term becoming more popular? How is its use expanding?

Hochschild: It is being used to apply to a wider and wider range of experiences and acts. It’s being used, for example, to refer to the enacting of to-do lists in daily life—pick up the laundry, shop for potatoes, that kind of thing. Which I think is an overextension. It’s also being applied to perfectionism: You’ve absolutely got to do the perfect Christmas holiday. And that can be a confusion and an overextension. I do think that managing anxiety associated with obligatory chores is emotional labor. I would say that. But I don’t think that common examples I could give are necessarily emotional labor. It’s very blurry and over-applied…

We’re trying to have an important conversation but having it in a very hazy way, working with blunt concept. I think the answer is to be more precise and careful in our ideas and to bring this conversation into families and to the office in a helpful way.

If you have an important conversation using muddy ideas, you cannot accomplish your purpose. You won’t be understood by others. And you won’t be clear to yourself. That’s what’s going on. It’d be like going to a bad therapist—“Well, just try to have a better day tomorrow.” You’re doing the right thing, you’re seeking help, but you’re not getting clarification and communicating clearly. It can defeat the purpose; it can backfire.

Sociologists and other scholars can spend a lot of time developing precise definitions for particular social phenomena. While this may seem like arcane or unnecessary work, it is a critical task: having a clear definition then often leads to more precise measurement which can then lead to more productive use of data.

At the same time, sociologists need to be nimble in updating concepts to changing conditions. A great concept from several decades might no longer fit – or it could still be highly relevant. The originator of the concept could adjust the idea (though it is easy to see why this might be difficult to do given the amount of time one invests in the original concept) or the academic community could come to a consensus. Some concepts from the early days of sociology are still regularly discussed and taught while others were abandoned long ago. Such as in the case above, concepts might be adapted by others in unique ways. This could lead to disagreement or an acknowledgement that the concept now means something different in broader circles.

It would be interesting to analyze the changing conceptualization of key ideas within sociology. The concept of emotional labor is now 35 years old. Is that a normal lifetime adhering to an original definition?

Escaping to a tiny house/anti-McMansion for a getaway

Posted on by

The business Getaway offers tiny houses as an escape from the typical urban area, smartphone dominated life:

The “tiny houses,” or cabins, measure 8 by 20 feet, or about the size of a living room. They cost about $30,000 each to build and are shuttled on truck beds from a factory in Massachusetts to their destination.

McMansions they ain’t. In fact, these two are the anti-McMansion crowd, too.

They cluster the tiny houses in groups of 20 or so on leased woodland, just outside major cities. Each outpost has a long-term lease on private land. Cabins are spaced 200 feet from one another, allowing sufficient privacy. And you can drive right up to the door…

They share a love for community, neighborliness and a skepticism toward social media. They also share “old-fashioned values” that were affirmed with a course they took from Robert Putnam, who authored “Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.”

While this business can be pitched as offering a return to nature and in-person experiences, I wonder who it is selling to. Two quick thoughts:

  1. This really is another lifestyle option for people to pursue. Work hard for weeks on end, get buried in your smartphone, and then detox for up to two weeks in a tiny house in the woods. Perhaps everything is a commodity these days but this is just another hotel option.
  2. This could reinforce the idea that tiny houses are unusual (there are still just a small number of them) and primarily for people with money (especially when they have nicer features or are priced nightly like a decent hotel). How many Americans could access this? How many would want to?

This is very different than tiny houses for affordable housing. This is tiny houses for profit (and perhaps some good time away from “normal” life).

Expect numerous contested suburban districts in the 2020 elections

Posted on by

Winning close races in the suburbs helped Democrats take the House. These same districts will likely be contested again in 2020:

Democrats gained nearly 40 House seats this year, and suburban districts like this one accounted for the majority of those pickups, according to FiveThirtyEight…

“Those are going to be the first districts that Republicans pursue in their in their bid to win the majority,” said David Wasserman, political analyst at the Cook Political Report…

These districts still have plenty of conservatives around to put up a fight in the future. In short, this year’s midterms don’t mean Democrats will have an easy path in these districts.

Jesse Hunt, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, says he’s bullish on the GOP’s future. But he acknowledges the party has work to do on how to appeal to more suburban voters.

It will be interesting to see how much voters in the middle suburbs factor into the decisions Democrats make about candidates and a platform for a presidential candidate in 2020. Similarly, whether Republicans regain some of these districts could depend on how well Donald Trump speaks to these suburbs. In both cases, the middle suburbs may push the two parties to not just play to their base.

52% of Americans say they live in a suburban neighborhood

Posted on by

A call for a more official definition of suburban areas starts with new data on the percent of Americans who say they live in a suburban neighborhood:

Much of America looks suburban, with neighborhoods of single-family homes connected by roads to retail centers and low-rise office buildings. For the first time, government data confirm this. According to the newly released 2017 American Housing Survey (of nearly 76,000 households nationwide), about 52 percent of people in the United States describe their neighborhood as suburban, while about 27 percent describe their neighborhood as urban, and 21 percent as rural.

This seems just about right based on data I have seen from the Census Bureau regarding the percent of Americans who live in suburbs. The 2002 report “Demographic Trends in the 20th Century” put 50.0% of Americans in suburbs, 30.3% in central cities, and the rest in rural areas. More recent figures I have seen put the percent of Americans in suburbs just over 50%.

I would guess the above figures are off a few percent for a few reasons:

1. Some urban neighborhoods feel suburban. If suburbs are marked by single-family homes and driving, plenty of urban neighborhoods in the United States would count. This is particularly true in more sprawling cities in the South and West.

2. Some rural neighborhoods marked by bigger lots and/or smaller population densities might officially be considered suburban neighborhoods by the Census even if they have a more rural feel.

We need more research to confirm or dispute the first study to claim a causal connection between social media use and depression and loneliness

Posted on by

A new psychology study argues that reduced time spent with social media leads to less depression:

For the study, Hunt and her team studied 143 undergraduates at the University of Pennsylvania over a number of weeks. They tested their mood and sense of well-being using seven different established scales. Half of the participants carried on using social media sites as normal. (Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat did not respond to request for comment.)

The other half were restricted to ten minutes per day for each of the three sites studied: Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat, the most popular sites for the age group. (Use was tracked through regular screen shots from the participants’ phones showing battery data.)

Net result: Those who cut back on social media use saw “clinically significant” falls in depression and in loneliness over the course of the study. Their rates of both measures fell sharply, while those among the so-called “control” group, who did not change their behavior, saw no improvement.

This isn’t the first study to find a link between social media use, on the one hand, and depression and loneliness on the other. But previous studies have mainly just shown there is a correlation, and the researchers allege that this shows a “causal connection.”

I’m guessing this study will get a good amount of attention because of this claim. Here is how this should work in the coming months and years:

  1. Other researchers should work to replicate this study. Do the findings hold with undergraduate students elsewhere in similar conditions?
  2. Other researchers should tweak the conditions of the study in a variety of ways. Move beyond undergraduates to both younger and older participants. (Most social media research involves relatively young people.) Change the national context. Expand the sample size. Lengthen the study beyond three weeks to look at longer-term effects of social media use.
  3. All the researchers involved need time and discussion to reach a consensus about all of the work conducted under #1 and #2 above. This could come relatively soon if most of the studies agree with the conclusions or it could take quite a while if results differ.

All together, once a claim like this has empirical backing, other researchers should follow up and see whether it is correct. In the meantime, it will be hard for the public, the companies involved, and policymakers to know what to do as studies build upon each other.

McMansion owners giving thanks for their homes on Thanksgiving

Posted on by

I recently watched Kate Wagner, of McMansionHell.com fame, deliver a TED Talk titled “I hate McMansions – and you should too.”

Yet, with Thanksgiving here, I thought about all the Americans who live in such homes. How many of them are giving thanks today for their McMansion?

On one hand, the McMansion is viewed as a monstrosity, a destroyer of neighborhoods and land, a caricature of quality architecture, and perhaps the ultimate symbol of American turn-of-the-21st-century greed and consumerism. On the other hand, the McMansion is a shelter and genuine home for millions of Americans. This is a tension that is not easy to resolve. There are numerous critics of McMansions and a variety of reasons to dislike the homes (and prefer other kinds of dwellings). And numerous Americans might enjoy their McMansion (and perhaps for the same reasons critics dislike them).

Perhaps we can be thankful for the free discussion about McMansions and having the resources that would make a McMansion purchase possible (even if we personally would not make such a choice). On a related note, with all of the advice this year about how to avoid turning Thanksgiving dinner into a political battle, I would recommend that everyone celebrating Thanksgiving in a home that could be considered a McMansion would be better off not commenting on the faults they see in such a home while they are there. Of course, if while they find themselves later in the day traveling somewhere in a SUV to acquire Black Friday items, making a connection between McMansions, shopping, and American acquisitiveness might be apropos…

Secondary cities attractive but have a ways to go to catch biggest US cities

Posted on by

New data from Redfin suggests Americans are moving to secondary big cities:

Nashville, Sacramento, Atlanta, Phoenix, Austin and Dallas are among the top-10 cities with the largest influx of new residents, according to new data from the Redfin real estate brokerage…

“People in the coastal markets are just fed up with double-digit price increases, and they’re moving to a commuter town or to the middle of the country,” said Daryl Fairweather, chief economist for Redfin. “In our most recent ‘hottest markets’ report, Indianapolis tied for third place with Boston among the cities where homes go under contract fastest. People are moving there from Chicago, Los Angeles and the Bay Area because it’s affordable.”…

“It’s the combination of affordable housing and jobs that are causing people to move,” said Daren Blomquist, senior vice president at ATTOM Data Solutions, an Irvine, Calif.-based property database.

“In places like Tampa, Dallas and Las Vegas, there’s a booming economy, with lots of jobs, along with relatively affordable homes. You can cut your housing costs in half if you move to Dallas from Los Angeles and there are jobs there, too.”

The United States has now had a decades-long hierarchy of the largest cities: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago. It would be interesting to see if other regions could challenge those top three in terms of population or status/importance. I have written before about the case that could be made for Washington, D.C. but it also has relatively expensive housing and may be considered a secondary city. In population, Chicago has lost ground compared to Toronto and Houston may overtake it soon. But, does Houston or Toronto have the same status? Most of the locations on the list above of secondary cities are Sunbelt cities with relatively recent population growth and/or importance. Can a place like Phoenix or Nashville or Dallas translate these changes into global city status? It would take a lot of work and changed perceptions.