What a crock 'o crap.You'll notice he repeatedly cites 10 plus year old 'opinion polls in favor' of WY, and the community 'wants more affordable housing'And the same old Shiller-based nonsense that the suit is motivated by certain people wanting to maintain property values.For someone looking out for the future of Uptown, all he could do was cite some random, 10 year old supposed 'majority' opinions?
The acts of a desperate man.
Hey, this is good it means they must know the lawsuit has merit.
There is nothing wrong with protecting our property values!!! MY GOD.
Jason, I agree 100%.....but in COURAJ/Shiller's eyes, anyone with a condo up here has 2 horns.Funny, coming from a woman living up in peaceful Andersonville, making over 100k.Can you say Hippy/Hypocrite?
Let us hark back to "It's a Wonderful Life" and one of the tenets of the movie. Jimmy Stewart, when he no longer existed, saw how much good he did with the savings and loan by giving people the opportunity of home ownership. Because helping people rise above poverty was a good and noble cause.Upon returning to reality here in Uptown we see how Shiller champions the cause of enabling, extending to the poor the opportunity to remain in poverty; an opportunity to see hard work and tenacity as an extollation of "the Man" and evil. She dresses the wolf of government handouts and sub-par existence as the sheep with herself being their shephard. It is unfortunate they don't see the slaughter to which she leads them. That path which leads to gang violence and a perpetually downtrodden survival. Even Karl Marx had higher hopes and aspirations for his followers.
Did anybody count how many times Kaplan said the phrase “low-cost housing”? What an irony with the current projected cost coming in at over $450 thousand a unit.
The radio interview outlines the tactic that we typically see over and over again, so it is good to be mindful of it. #1, discredit a group of people by giving selfish motives (ie, those condo owners are only protecting our property values, and #2, the majority really wants this as witnessed by the charrettes and referendums (never mind that the information he provided was inaccurate, misleading, and that the purpose of the referendum was not to obtain the will of the people but to support their agenda.)When he buys into the same tactics of having the ends justify the means, then ethical behavior and truth be damned.
For me, it's not the low income housing component, it's exposing how our tax dollars are diverted and spent, and how we've been deceived so Helen has a monument for her legacy. Just reading the argument presented in the FWY law suit, it could blow the roof the way business is done in Chicago. The law suit couldn't come at a better time....following the Blago pay-to-play incident. These people will not understand that without taxes paid by the evil condo owner, there would BE no Wison Yard project!
Maybe Fix Wilson Yard or UNC or whoever is carrying the brightest torch for this movement right now should pay a polling company to get a real scientific poll of residents in the census tracts surrounding Wilson Yard. I don't know how much this would cost, but it might be worth looking into to kill this stupid false Shiller argument that the public majority in Uptown wants more affordable housing.
I'm wondering if a better use of money needed for this should just go toward Fix Wilson Yard? Helen would discredit any survey and make up a reason why it was inaccurate. Remember, in Helen's way of thinking, the right way is only her way.
very interesting uptowner. I would certainly donate for that.
Re: Polling. Its a good idea, but I agree with the response that poll numbers can be distorted, even obvious ones. Unless a non-partisan (Neither Shiller/Kaplan or FWY) firm handles the polling, then I believe it would be a waste of money.An idea: what about a series of Town Hall meetings, taking care to include the districts that got to vote on the ballot initiative from November regarding public housing utilizing taxpayer funds? Topics including public safety, employment opportunity, the role of social services in our community, and the like. I am thinking that people who don't have access to the internet need to be heard as well. Thoughts?
Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinions. But, when you shape facts in order to force your opinion on others, then you are a self-aggrandizing piece of shit.
Who has been voting yes to all these referendums over the years he is talking about? As someone fairly new to the area, I am a little confused by this.Is this the same "voting" that takes place every time Schiller is running for re-election? I have to assume this is the case as with the current state of the neighborhood....any resident would never want a 2009 version of Cabrini Green in their backyard. Not only for the mere fact that they cost taxpayers $450k a piece but for pure safety sake.STOP THIS INSANITY NOW and expose the corruption that Schiller has long been dictating.
Eye in the Sky,The people voting "yes" are your neighbors. They may not the people you might normally encounter in your social circles, but they are people who live in the neighborhood..they even include condo owners!Also, Wilson Yards will NOT be Cabrini Green"; they will be SMALLR versions of 4640 & 4645 N. Sheridan Roads.
Starck Mad,Marc Kaplan isn't the only one who's citing the past.FIx WIlson Yards reps continually tak about the CURCL study which "prove" that rental housing hasn't changed. However, that study completely misses the Real Estate Bubble that grew after 2001, andonly recently burst. This bubble affected Uptown's low cost housing. For exaple, Uptown Baptist CHurch has 12 members live on 2 block stretch of Sunnysde (800-900). 11of them had to move out due to thir homes being tured into condos (who no real option to buy).The 12th stayed because he owned a condo.The people who moved out, and were ignored by the Uptown Chicago COmmission affliated groups are the very type of people they are now claiming they want to move into Wilson Yard.
My concern about the referendum was that its intent was to support an already formulated position. Of course, people will want more affordable housing. What voters didn't know was that this referendum was going to be twisted out of context by their alderman to give the green light to build half million dollar subsidized units in 100% low income buildings. I guess the real truth got in the way of Helen's agenda again.
Notice that Kaplan also referred to the most recent referendum as supporting Wilson Yard. The same referendum initiative that only allowed people to vote in certain cherry-picked precincts. I believe he used the words "open" and "democratic" in almost the same breath.Liar.
JP didn't mention it, but there's a very good chance a lot of people who don't live in the neighborhood also voted for the referenda. A lot of people "get their mail" at one or more spots in the TIF zone and can vote in several precincts.
Shiller cherrypicks the precincts that get to vote on various referenda.For example the precincts immediately south of Wilson Yard on Kenmore and Sheridan didn't get to vote.It may be because those precincts had the highest votes for Cappleman in the last election and make up the most hardened opposition to the aldercritter.Or perhaps it's just a coincidence and Anne Hathaway is sitting in my oversized clawfoot tub right now waiting for me.Of course since I am typing it is unlikely Anne is here.
Also I wouldn't worry too much about Kaplan. I believe he has been a pain in the ass since at least the 70's around here. I should know. I was here when the buffalo walked the plains.His accent is just as annoying now as it was then. I have a prayer:Lord, as we await the ascension of our New President Barack Obama please show Mark Kaplan the light and lead him back to the East Coast.His dignity and leadership is needed there.Amen.
Everything about Kaplan's comments smack of the hippy-dippy out of sync past.WY has indeed changed, from the original plans.We can't even get an updated rendering of the altered plan. Will it be like the Aldi? Prison-like facade with entrances to the 400k no-income units in the back?Should current 'property owners' worry about the outcome of WY. Hell yes. Should ANYBODY else worry about WY's outcome? Hell yes.
JP, how is your new neighborhood? Don't your new neighbors have any blogs where you can impose your beliefs?
Bradley,Appromixmately how many of the votes were "fraud"? I find it hard to believe that many, if any, of the votes were fradulently cast. Sandra Reed wathe Democratic COmmitteeman from '96 to '04. She ws responsible for Democratic Election judges. Surely she had enough competant people to tackle most fraud. And could the Uptown CHicago COmmission and their members have rallied just ONE percent of the vote (50 out of 5400+) against Shiller to take a day off and watch the polls and challengey that they recognized from the shelters (or at least taken a rough count to see if a 30 bed shelter had 100 voters or 30).If you recall the Acorn issue with the Obama campaign, even if there were several hundrd false registrations, they would need to get past the judges, who could screen them. If UCC/Anti-Shiller campaigns, which supposed represent "The Community" (rather than just a significant portion), can't convince 50 peope to take 1 day off (with 1-2 YEAR's notice), doesn't that strike you as strange? Zesty,In some ways, it's better than Uptown (the homeowners are generally more open to people different thn themselves), some the same (we have had murders around hre,some not too far fro my home By the way Zesty - do you althosesame standards to Craig Gernhardt, who has never lived in Uptown? Can you show me the restrictions on this blog?
"In some ways, it's better than Uptown (the homeowners are generally more open to people different thn themselves)"You should get to know them. Sounds like you could learn a lot. Maybe you'll grow up a little. In the meantime, please leave our neighborhood alone. You have done enough harm already.
I've learned that some people are not capable of change. They have a preconceived agenda that divides the world into victims and perpetrators and ANYTHING that would counter their perception is ignored.For those who are focused on identifying victims, they usually perceive themselves as either a victim or the victim's crusader, and all poor people are automatically victims. All middle class condo owners are perpetrators and most especially if they don't make affordable housing their main cause in life. It's their black & white view of the world that helps them identify themselves as the cape crusaders of Uptown. It gets even worse when they toss religion into it. Personally, I think they've seen way too many Batman movies.
Holey Moley, Holy Moly! Great sereotyping, and perpetuating division.There's nothing wrongwith condos -- providedthat they are made at a rasonable rate.The recent real estate bubble burst across the nation, and especially in places like Miami, showed that there is such a thing as out of control condoization. Many people who lved in Uptown, and were NOT in subsidized housing, who endured the HIGHER crime rates, were not able to buy the condos that used to be their homes. These people paid full rent, worked long hours, and kept their families out of trouble. They didn't have time to attend CAPS meetings, and apparently erroneously believed that by keeping to themselves, anjust keeping good relations with theirimmediate neighbors, that was god enough. Also, condos can be a great thing to help he poor, such as Habitat for Humanity. It's too bad the Uptown Chicago COmmision & their members never pushed for that type of houing when real estate prices were low. It would hav, among other things, dampered the stereotype that anti-Shiller people are anti-poor.Th anti-Shiller has missed the best opportunities to help some of their poorer neighbor become homeowners in their neighborhoods (and thereby allies).The best they can do now is bring in organzations like NACA (naca.com) andRogrs Park & Lakeside Developmnt Corporations to do seminars to help current Uptown residents become homeowners elsewhere. You could legitmately claim to have heped XX number of Uptown residents become homeowners, again erasing the stereotype you have let perpetuate.
I t hink JP is drin ki n his gasp of the Inglish langage has dinmished severely in a shoort tim.
JP, if you really believe it is in the best interest of the poor to get them moved out of Uptown into other neighborhoods, why don't you organize a seminar or two yourself and see what happens. Maybe you could enlist couraj or ONE to assist in the planning. Alderman Shiller could be your guest speaker.Why don't you try it and get back to us on how it works out for you.
JP, you are ignorant, and that's not an insult. It's a fact.Craig HAS lived in Uptown, and he's mentioned it frequently here on this blog.Instead of dropping in for a few moments every 6-8 weeks from the far south side, why don't you pay a little more attention to what's being said on this blog?Also, he's not preachy like you, so his comments don't generate the scorn your comments get.
Craig also admits that certain things have changed since he lived in Uptown, unlike JP, who still lives in the days when Sandra Reed was running for office, when the Uptown Snack Shop was open, and when "bookmarks" were a campaign issue.That Uptown is a memory now. Except to JP, who wallows in that time and feels he still has his finger on Uptown's pulse (although he chose not to live here two moves ago). His constant references to UCC holding the sole responsibility for all of Uptown's ills are a hoot. Keep on posting, SouthShoreJP, because it's always entertaining. But may I suggest you put all the keys back on your keyboard next time?
When capes get tied too tightly around the neck, the end result is brain damage from a lack of oxygen. That's the problem when people run around with capes on all the time.
I never said anything about "fraud". The irony of being homeless, without a permanent address, one can have several addresses even non-existant ones. Granted, this isn't entirely legal but this is Chicago and Helen we're talking about.
The referendum was a joke because Shiller hand picked the blocks that already had very high public housing percentages. Blocks that were mostly condo owners were barred from voting.The results were statistically irrelavent, and not siting the referendum as having as "hand picked demographic" is misleading and dishonest. Anyone who quotes it, i.e. Mark Kaplan and JP Paulus, can immediately have their credibility thrown out the window. They are willing to lie and deceive to support their cause, so nothing they say can be trusted.