problem is no one with money is taking a chance there. Everyone with money goes to other areas that have more of a chance to turn into a "good" neighborhood.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'money' but people with professional incomes have moved into units in EPA. But, it's double edged. Middle class people move in, drive up prices, bring their expectations (parks, education, culture, etc), tax base and slowly drive out long time residents --and then you get people who bemoan 'gentrification'. They want the coffee without the caffeine, as it's put. But then, if it does not gentrify, then others lament the lack of investment and 'flight' of those who can leave due to some success, or whatever --it's not as if people living there would not move out and find a better neighborhood if they could (with few exceptions of the kind of people who love 'grit' and 'authenticity' as if other people are inauthentic, somehow.
Basically, it's a complex situation and many (but different) people will be unhappy with the different possible outcomes of change in the community.
I read that piece, and I agree it was well done. It's not available for free online, alas. The summer issue had a Nu ber of takes on the SF housing crisis and they are all free online: http://www.boomcalifornia.com/2014/06/summer-2014/
