A reader who attended last night's Fix Wilson Yard fundraiser/progress report writes:
As best as I can recall,
- The "Sunshine Ordinance" has its roots in the FWY lawsuit. A serious sign of progress.
- The FWY team will be filing a preliminary injunction to halt further construction. The PI is different from the temporary restraining order (TRO) filed previously, since the PI requires an indication of success in the suit, not the indication of success AND proof of irreparable harm.
- Holsten got the TRO stifled via pleading to the judge that the construction must go on, in short, to keep construction workers employed in a down market.
- Holsten is continuing construction at his own risk. Just because we see construction going on doesn't mean that the cause is lost.
- If the FWY lawsuit is successful, the plaintiffs will be allowed to dictate the future of the WY site. FWY requests that people submit their ideas of what they'd like to see on that site. So far, the mixed/market rate housing is popular.
- Shiller is using the same WY strategy from the Maryville Academy site. If FWY is successful, Maryville development will be subject to those results.
- FWY is highly confident in their chances, but need more $$$!!
- FWY legal costs include paying for research (the city dumped huge amounts of paperwork on FWY and FWY needs people to review), travel, and reimbursing expert witnesses/testimony.
- FWY has raised (an astounding) $75,000; but forecast their needs to be close to $150,000.
- People could support FWY's cause by engaging the media via social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter. All of the major media outlets have a twitter/facebook presence. Media won't give FWY any attention unless they believe that there is a strong public interest.
- Also, use the "contact us" links on media website to communicate with them. The more people approach the media, the higher the likelihood of them taking action.
- While Shiller is resistant to making public appearances, she is dutiful in showing up to court and sitting with the City and Holsten.
- May 19th is the date of the next court ruling to decide on Holsten's request that the suit be dismissed.
*to keep construction workers employed in a down market.*ReplyDelete
Well maybe when they are unemployed and have no income they can move into the no income housing they are building.ReplyDelete
If the development had actually been planned by someone smarter than a fifth-grader, those workers could be building something worthwhile.ReplyDelete
I didn't realize that the WY project was a jobs program.ReplyDelete
I just hope the stars are aligning in such of way that King Richard and Helen get the message loud and clear they work for us, all citizens of Chicago.ReplyDelete
I saw something in Gay Chicago asking if they thought Daley was doing a good job. Most said yes because he supports GLBT.
So as long as he does that you put blinders on?
That is also why a lot of people support Helen.
Just silly, silly!
Perhaps all those poor bordering-on-unemployed Walsh construction guys could be filling potholes if they're so desperately in need of work.ReplyDelete
$62 million will pave a lot of streets ... finance a lot of schools ... fix a lot of broken down infrastructure ... hire a lot of cops.
Trust me, TSN. Construction workers are not poor. A Laborer (bottom of the ladder in the construction world) in Chicago makes over $34/hour in straight wages. Add in Pension, Medical, Dental, etc. and it goes to over $50/hour. Carpenters, Electricians, masons, etc. all make more than that. It's one of the big reasons this fiasco is costing us taxpayers so much $$$$$.ReplyDelete
R, I saw that same thing in Gay Chicago and thought, too, how blind they are to the shenanigans. But, then again, no one ever stereotyped gay men as being smart. Alot of them may be pretty, but smart they aren't.ReplyDelete
I think the GLBT need to realize they are part of the entire world. I have always been amazed at the knee jerk community reaction. Helen hasn't voted for or supported/initiated anything related to gay issues in the last 10 years but.....ReplyDelete
The GLBT community is in a tight race with the black community for the "mindless political support" award.ReplyDelete
WTF does "...how blind they are" and "..the GLBT need to realize they are part of the entire world." mean?ReplyDelete
I’m sorry, but what exactly does that have to do with anything on this topic? Hate like that is so George W Bush.
"They" single-handedly rescued Lakeview when it looked then like Uptown does today. Which seems to me to be a bit better then you two are doing. How "they" vote is according to their needs.
And as for "no one ever stereotyped gay men as being smart" Really.... That’s just ignorant.
Thats the kind of crap you hear in Bridgeport.
Well a lot of gay businesses supported Helen Shiller over my candidate James Cappleman.ReplyDelete
Being a gay man I had a conversation with someone in Boystown last week and they were Helen Shiller supporters because she has done so much for the poor and the gay community.
She got booed at the Pride Parade last year. The only politician that got booed.
Also the owners of Sidetracks give her money as well as Chuck Renslow.
Frankly, it's not a stereotype I am not from here but lived her 10 years after living a lot of other places and I have never seen people so blindly follow politician because they support GLBT causes.
They don't support gay rights they support getting elected and robbing from the citizens that elected them.
"- Holsten got the TRO stifled via pleading to the judge that the construction must go on, in short, to keep construction workers employed in a down market."ReplyDelete
Are there quotes from the courtroom to support this? The judge should have laughed this argument out the chamber.
I thought the judge had denied the TRO because the plaintiffs could not prove they were monetarily harmed from the construction proceeding.
Well Buzz, I think it's perfectly clear WTF "...how blind they are" and "..the GLBT need to realize they are part of the entire world." mean. The gay community has become a single issue constituency with blinders to anything not within their very narrow, and often superficial, view. Helen supported a few progressive measures beneficial to gays years ago. Only a moron would believe that Helen would represent our community better than one of our own, an out and proud gay social worker. Chuck Renslow? His entire business is based on keeping the drugs flowing in Uptown. Chicago Free Press? I can only assume they want to keep the dregs out of Boystown.ReplyDelete
Those who read and voted in the Gay Chicago thought da mare was doing a good job reflect Bridgeport!! Blind!ReplyDelete
Side Track owners live in Lincoln Pk. If they think she is such hot sh**t they should move up here to the Peoples Republic. Renslow was busted last summer for drug sales and prositution (pimping for under age boys) yet he is still heralded as a leader and HELLen's buddy. Could she be the connection that gets him -convicted felon- liquor licenses?
Just had this conversation with someone. Helen likes to be the "savior" of the downtrodden, so she supported gay rights long ago, when very few others did.ReplyDelete
Now Uptown has a large gay population that doesn't need "saving." She can't give them what they want, which is safe streets, gang-free communities and good schools. Those who want those things are the ones who boo her at the Pride Parade and the Gay Olympics.
Those who don't see or live with Uptown's quality of life issues are the ones who still believe in the 1980s version of Crusader Helen. Those who have to live with 2009 Helen's insane "urban unplanning" issues are the ones she sees as traitors.
First, is anyone aware whether or not this report has been updated. It presents some actual facts on how much subsidized housing is in Uptown, relative to the entire city, and the character of the housing stock of Uptown overall (at least at the time of the report, about 2000):ReplyDelete
Second, I don't know how this became about black people and gay people allegedly mindlessly following Shiller (thanks, WCE)--as a black voter, I find it as insulting as you saying it's unfair to say all condo owners hate poor people. But hey, I wouldn't want to make it all *racial* or anything...
AS for the lawsuit, if FWY wins, is the proper outcome that this particular class of plaintiffs get to re-write the plan, or that the plan be reopened to the entire community (whether or not they joined in with FWY or supported the lawsuit) to provide input and shape the "new" plan. For example, what if the entire community (or as broad a consensus as possible) decides they don't want any housing at all?? If not don't you think the risk is run that any plan ultimately carried out will look less like what the community wants, and more like what a particular part of the community wants?
And before the regulars pile on, this question is not inspired by some blind love for Shiller. I just thought the point of this lawsuit was to re-open things up to broad community input, not just to give the plaintiffs the authority to re-write the plan as if they represent the entire community.
"give the plaintiffs the authority to re-write the plan as if they represent the entire community."ReplyDelete
"any plan ultimately carried out will look less like what the community wants, and more like what a particular part of the community wants?"
NL, just curious, do you just as strenuously object to the current plan? It represents the same dichotomy, except it's Shiller and COURAJ's ideal that's being built right now. It's pretty scary, huh, to be completely left out of the planning process?
I have no idea who the decisionmakers will be if FWY is successful, but I hope it's opened up to the entire Uptown community, and a non-partisan outside-of-Uptown entity does the tabulating. In fact, the original plan, with vibrant retail, movie theatres, true mixed-income housing, and pedestrian-friendly spaces would be aces with me.
Oh, yeah, and home ownership. That, to me, is the most important missing ingredient in the current WY plan.ReplyDelete
Give most people a crap rental unit for next-to-nothing in a neighborhood they have no previous ties to and it builds no community involvement. Give them something in their own names, that they own, maintain and pass on to their children, and it builds community spirit and pride.
"TrumanSq said: "NL, just curious, do you just as strenuously object to the current plan? It represents the same dichotomy, except it's Shiller and COURAJ's ideal that's being built right now. It's pretty scary, huh, to be completely left out of the planning process?"ReplyDelete
Ok, as I've stated before, no I personally don't have strenuous objections to the current plan, and I see it as an attempt to compromise the various competing interests in the neighborhood.
The reality is, though, there is now a lawsuit that may or may not stop the construction, and if that is the case, then that is just my point--will simply replacing one "dichotomy" with another be what's best for the community at large?
So that's why I always thought that if the FWY lawsuit won, it would be about re-opening the process and not simply replacing one "dichotomy" with another.
Also, I am really tired of folks like yourself saying people who rent cannot create a sense of community, and that such can only be created by those who have mortgages (or suggesting as much). Aside from the potential classist implications of what you say, it's just untrue. I reside in one of those rentals (subsidized, no less..) where there are people who have a strong sense of community, strong ties to the community, are very involved in schools, issues affecting resident life, etc, and who had no prior ties to Uptown, but have nonetheless remained here for decades because they like it here. It's on the balance, safe but affordable, with a lot of amenities often only seen in wealthier communities--and I mean the basics, like access to parks, lakefront, good transportation, lots of real grocery stores, some different school options. Not a perfect place, but some of these folks came from truly rough parts of the city (like Cabrini on its downswing), and appreciated Uptown's greater sense of safety and accessibility. So trust, a transplant to Uptown can certainly find things about the place good enough to cause them to want to put down roots--even if they are "just renting."
I can appreciate that there are condo owners here who seek to make a home in this community, and were not just speculators looking to buy low and sell high-- and I don't understand why you assume no renter can develop the same long-term interest in the community.
PLus, I don't know that these buildings will contain low quality "crap" rentals. If there is some proof to suggest these are going to be low-quality poorly managed "slum" buildings, that's something I would like to see, and that's really something everyone should be made aware of.
But if FWY wins, then let's open the whole thing up again to all because some people may say, not another condo, please, just as some may say no more rentals, please.
Whoa, NL, calm down. You're projecting all sorts of stuff on me that just ain't there.ReplyDelete
First off, you don't see any problem with the current WY plan. Well, I do. I see the interests of many residents unrepresented and TPTB saying that it's all-inclusive for all of Uptown. It clearly isn't (the very existence of FWY is proof enough of that).
Yet you get very nervous about FWY possibly, if improbably, making the decisions in the future about what goes into Wilson Yard. Believe me, every single person who donated to FWY feels that exact same fear about the current plan, and we have the pleasure of paying for the construction. I'm just sayin' -- pretty damn scary, isn't it, to not have your voice represented in what goes on in your community? Welcome to my world.
I find it hard to understand how you don't see the parallels between portions of the community that Helen Shiller is actively excluding, and your fears that Fix Wilson Yard will exclude a different portion of the community -- the one that includes you. Do you feel that the 8 or 10 block clubs adjoining Wilson Yard all being against the plan, yet being ignored, is "what's best for the community at large?" Funny how those fears only come into focus when it's the side one supports that may not be in control.
Second -- get off the cross about my supposed bias against renters. I rented in Uptown for the exact same amount of time I've owned here. I'm the first person in my family in four generations of renters to own a home in this neighborhood. So, obviously, I'm not biased against renters and don't feel a class distinction against my parents, my grandparents and my siblings. Nor do I think I personally made a huge jump across class borders when I went from paying a landlord to paying a mortgage company. Into creating straw men much?
Finally, you say renters have the same loyalty to a neighborhood as homeowners. But you're bringing up renters who've been here for many generations. Remember, Holsten signed a pledge saying CHA wait list families have first crack at the Wilson Yard housing. The majority of folks who'll have precedence are from outside of Uptown. Do you really think 178 families moving into those rental units from outside of the area will have the same loyalty and ties to the community as long-time renters? As people who've put their life savings into purchasing their homes?
As far as crap rentals, I stand by that -- doesn't matter if they're made of solid granite. The fact that five experienced home developers have pulled out of the housing portion of WY, leaving the oh-so-wise Helen Shiller and Peter Holsten as managers, means that they will be crap rentals. The fact that no urban planner is involved, and no urban planner can be found to support the current plan, means they'll be crap rentals. The fact that building 100% low-income rental-only communities, with absolutely no chance of home ownership, has been disbanded everywhere in Chicago --except Wilson Yard -- means that they'll be crap rentals.
Nothing I say can change your mind, obviously. And unless you can see that the current plan excludes the input and approval of much of the community surrounding Wilson Yard, just as you fear Fix Wilson Yard will exclude your input and approval, nothing you say will change mine.
But please, don't make this into a class war. Please stick to what I say, not to what you infer you know about me.
TSN, I was not "on the cross" about anything-- I responded to what you said, which was:ReplyDelete
"Give most people a crap rental unit for next-to-nothing in a neighborhood they have no previous ties to and it builds no community involvement. Give them something in their own names, that they own, maintain and pass on to their children, and it builds community spirit and pride."
You were making a lot of assumptions, and sorry you could not have connection to your community until you had a mortgage, but that's your experience, not mine, and not everyone's, so who is projecting and creating strawmen? Your words imply your belief that spirit and pride can't come with being a renter, but now it seems like you're saying something a little different.
AS for the rest of your post, as I said, I thought that re-opening the process to the whole community was the point of the FWY lawsuit because they believed the TIF was illegal and ill-conceived. But now it seems they just want to re-write it the way they want to, and the FWY group does not necessarily speak for the whole community. This is the first I heard that their goal was to take control of re-writing the plan without re-opening it to the whole community.
I am not "afraid" of either plan, and in the end, I just want something good for all in Uptown, and all who come to Uptown, to be built. But to me it seems common sense not to do something that just appears to be the flipside of what you say Shiller is doing.
AS for renters outside of Uptown, the renters I am referencing did come originally from outside of Uptown and some have stayed here, along with their families, some come back after leaving, etc., just as what can happen with someone in a house. My point is that just as a new condo owner from Hoboken can come here and develop a connection (whether because of their mortgage or they like the neighborhood), so can a renter who used to live on the Near North side, or West side or SOuth side of Chicago. It is possible, is what I'm saying, and not fair to imply that it can just never be, if you are a renter.
But that is why I think, IF they win, open it up to all, and maybe housing will fall by the wayside completely, since I don't think anyone is going to be completely satisfied and the rift will be there based on who is perceived to be "controlling" the housing plan.
TSN said: "Nothing I say can change your mind, obviously. And unless you can see that the current plan excludes the input and approval of much of the community surrounding Wilson Yard, just as you fear Fix Wilson Yard will exclude your input and approval, nothing you say will change mine."ReplyDelete
Also, TSN, if that is the case, then what is the harm in re-opening the discussion? WY does not exist in a vacuum in Uptown. What goes there is also going to impact those of us a couple of blocks to the North in Uptown, may bring in jobs, retail options for the whole community. Hence, it warrants making sure the entire community is fully aware of what's going on and at least having a chance to give input on what any new plans should look like. I thought that's what FWY wanted? So why do you seem to be fighting it when I say it, especially since you said something similar:
"I have no idea who the decisionmakers will be if FWY is successful, but I hope it's opened up to the entire Uptown community, and a non-partisan outside-of-Uptown entity does the tabulating. In fact, the original plan, with vibrant retail, movie theatres, true mixed-income housing, and pedestrian-friendly spaces would be aces with me."
Okay, this is just getting long and circular and confirms for me that neither of us is going to change the other's mind. So be it.ReplyDelete
I'm not saying it's right for FWY to be the sole decisionmaker, or a decisionmaker for Wilson Yard, period.
What I am saying is, it's interesting that you object to the merest HINT that your views may be left out of the decisionmaking process, while at the same time you don't see that the parallel situation already exists -- that so many Uptown residents have been left out of the current decisionmaking process regarding Wilson Yard that they felt they had no recourse but to sue Holsten and the city.
Here ends my part of the discussion.
TQN said: "I'm not saying it's right for FWY to be the sole decisionmaker, or a decisionmaker for Wilson Yard, period.ReplyDelete
What I am saying is, it's interesting that you object to the merest HINT that your views may be left out of the decisionmaking process..."
Um, TSN, I really think we are agreeing on the fundamental point--let's make sure that whatever is ultimately constructed reflects the community's consensus. So, I don't see what your argument or frustration is about regarding my agreement with you on that point. So let's agree to...agree??
NL, the reason for all the tension around the WY is that there was never really community process in the first place. Yes, Helen tells the press that the discussion was the most inclusive process ever, but if you've ever witnessed the way she does zoning, you quickly learn that her process for everything else is no different from the way she does zoning.ReplyDelete
There's a long history of a promotion of a class war with a rigid belief that different groups will remain at opposite ends of the spectrum for all eternity. Helen claims to "represent" one class of people because if she doesn't, no one else will. Thus, she's the self-proclaimed savior of the poor. Anyone else opposed to Helen is thus labeled as being against the poor. The Trib believes it. The Sun-Times believes it. Ben Jovarsky from the Reader believes it, and many in the gay community believe it. It's why anyone who ever ran against Helen was vilified as hating poor people and it was believed by her supporters.
The change we've started to witness in the last couple of years is that Helen is having a more difficult time convincing people that she's really a savior, but if you read Jovarsky's latest about all the different wards, he's still holding out that Helen will reinsert herself as the poor's savior and foe of Daley.
The 46th Ward is not the only economically diverse ward in the entire city but it is the most polarized. We can blame the polarization on many but the one who should be able to change that is our alderman who has been in power for over 20 years. She promotes the war to keep her power base and it helps her to hold onto her crown. I want an alderman who's willing to be a public servant and bring all the different groups together. It's possible, but at this point, we just don't have an alderman who will ever have the skills to do it.
For anyone who believes in the need for more low income housing, they should be strongly opposed to the WY project. It goes against HUD's definition of adequate housing and on top of that, we could build 3 units for every 1 unit some place else. The self proclaimed savior believes the ones with low income only deserve low standards. I ain't buying it. The question, NL, is why are you?
NL, out of curiousity, would you be more for the current housing being built at Wilson yard? Or mixed income housing that was originally promised and offers something that every person in the community wants, taxpayer or not? That's what fwy is fighting for, they still agree low income rentals are important, but not in it's current form. Agree or disagree? NL, All low income to satisfy one spectrum of the neighborhood, or mixed to satisfy all? in terms of housing?ReplyDelete
FWY isn't fighting for or against housing, at all.ReplyDelete
FWY is fighting the abject corruption of the TIF process.
The only reason the housing argument comes into play is to emphasize that Shiller has been ignoring the legal process of TIF distribution (which also includes thumbing her nose @ proper social construct).
She violated the "open meetings" act with regards to public input.
Well, she's openly and vehemently ignored public input that didn't match her vision.
She violated the "but/for" clause of the TIF structure.
She's done legal end-arounds to shoe horn in a fresh new slice of voters into her ward w/quiet assistance from other elected officials you all know, I might add. State and FEDERAL level.
Go ask Jan Schakowsky her thoughts on Wilson Yard. You think Helen is a master of doublespeak? Jan's an expert at mindless gum flapping. If you think she is unaware of the situation, you overlook the fact that these will be her voters, too. And someone wants to become a Senator.
In short, Helen's all checks and no balances - and FWY is the only entity with the balls to call out Shiller and Daley's TIF/slush fund structure.
As for the issue of FWY being victorious, FWY is already soliciting input from ALL sectors of the community with regards to redevelopment plans.
Those reading UU who were previously unaware of this, are now aware of this and should contact FWY with their suggestions.
You want to be heard? Speak up. At least there is one entity in this ward who actually wants to hear all sides, and it ain't Helen.
As for the GLBT Helen supporters, y'all need to wake up and realize you're little more than predictable pawns of the alderman.
Everyone wants safe and clean neighborhoods with good schools and all of that. But how in the hell are you going to pay for that when 68% of the money (property taxes) designated for city services are going into "special projects" across the city?
And what happens when there isn't enough property tax money to pay for things? The City hikes other taxes; or raises fess, or sells off public assets!
TIFs adversely affect everyone in this city.
She only gives you want you want in order to shut you up and stay clear of her intentions of building a self-perpetuating political powerhouse; and to a lesser extent, her own perverted lil' version of Haight Ashbury.
And she's doing a very good job. The only thing she hasn't done in awhile is come along and pat y'all on the head and said "good dog".
It's great that she's given people south of Irving Park some love; but, she is - and by logical extension the people who vote for her are - giving folks north of Irving the shaft.
Thanks! While y'all have your World Foods and such, we get stuck with over-crowding, violent crime, deteriorating infrastructure.
'preciate your help.
People need to remember that the 46th ward encompasses more than just their block, and that votes affect everyone.
The only folks who still support this woman are those who are too deeply and greedily integrated into her schemes, or lack the political awareness to realize they're being used.
Ben Javorsky's even given up her. Once a supporter, now he's an angry critic.
Caterwalling back and forth about housing, class issues and/or anything else is simply missing the entire point of the issue and you're doing nothing more than dancing politely at the end of Helen's leash.
"I reside in one of those rentals (subsidized, no less..) where there are people who have a strong sense of community, strong ties to the community, are very involved in schools, issues affecting resident life, etc"ReplyDelete
The reason NL doesn't see anything wrong with The Wilson Yard project is the same reason she doesn't mind living in the subsidized housing she currently resides in. It is all she has ever known, and as you know once your in the system, well lets just say the data doesn't point to it creating independence. The same people she has contempt and spite for are the same people paying the difference on that fine subsidy. I understand some folks might think that this money comes out of Obama's, Shiller's, or Daley's pocket but that isn't the case.
As far as being involved in the schools? Uptowns schools are awful. We have to pay almost and extra mortgage payment just to send our child to a private school (imagine doing that and not getting government help). If you have multiple children forget about it, you have to move. Even our friends who live in "subsidized" have to pray they get there kids in a better school of choice.
I have lived in uptown for seventeen yaers and have never voted for Shiller and guess what I"m gay and not a dog on her leash.ReplyDelete
NL said “I see it as an attempt to compromise the various competing interests in the neighborhood.”ReplyDelete
The current plans is so far from the “compromise plan” that Ald. Shiller touted during the 2003 election that even Shiller should be embarrassed. The plan as our Ald. promised back when she was running against Sandra Reed was: Mixed income housing, a theater, Target, Aldi, restaurants, and shops.
NL right now all we have is 100% all low-income housing - and it’s not even for Uptown needy. We also have an ass-backwards Aldi and nothing else. Please note that businesses make decisions to locate in a certain commercial areas strictly on economic criteria. They look at the demographics to determine the likelihood of success. The Wilson Yard census tract has 39% of it’s residents living below the poverty level. Bringing in more low-income housing brings this # up to 41%. This is far from the commercial magnet and retail jumpstart this community needs.
This whole argument that the "gays" are voting her in is laughable. I am gay and I know a lot of gay people in Chicago ... I have a hundred gay friends from Chicago just in my circle of Facebook friends.ReplyDelete
Many of the gay people I know are my neighbors who live up and down the streets of Uptown. I have yet to meet one gay person in my 10 years here who even likes Shiller, much more would vote for her.
I "get it" that the owner of Sidetracks ... and a core group of *older* gays who reap financial benefits from her ... still support her financially, and there are likely a few in Lakeview that just vote out of ignorance (if they vote at all), but they are few and far between in this ward and in this younger generation.
Sheesh, I even have a gay doctor, well-known in the community and affiliated with Howard Brown who thinks she is a crazy woman.
Actually, I think if the gay vote were propoerly mobilized (to actually go to the polls on city Election day), they would be the group that would put her opponent over the victorious edge!
CHipdouglas says: "The reason NL doesn't see anything wrong with The Wilson Yard project is the same reason she doesn't mind living in the subsidized housing she currently resides in. It is all she has ever known, and as you know once your in the system, well lets just say the data doesn't point to it creating independence. The same people she has contempt and spite for are the same people paying the difference on that fine subsidy. I understand some folks might think that this money comes out of Obama's, Shiller's, or Daley's pocket but that isn't the case.ReplyDelete
As far as being involved in the schools? Uptowns schools are awful. We have to pay almost and extra mortgage payment just to send our child to a private school (imagine doing that and not getting government help). If you have multiple children forget about it, you have to move. Even our friends who live in "subsidized" have to pray they get there kids in a better school of choice."
Chipdouglas, you are quite ignorant. You don't know me, yet you know that I've never acquired independence? Yes, I grew up in subsidized housing, and am remaining here awhile longer because it is a SAFE affordable building while I save up dough to move on, whether to rent in market rate or buy a condo--but whatever I do, don't worry, CHIP, it won't come out of your pocket.
And maybe you're just mad because you plunked down money on an over-priced condo to live in a neighborhood that had not quite reached maximum gentrification standards? If so, that's the risk you took CHIP, you can't blame that on subsidized housing residents or even Obama or Shiller.
ANd for the record I attended local public schools and attended very good universities for B.A. and post-B.A. degrees, working and earning my degrees at the same time. Education is not cheap, especially when you want to "do good" with it.
Anyway, I would say more but I'd rather let you continue to open your mouth and reveal how much of a narrow-minded person you really are. Have fun running your mouth and spouting off your bitter theories about poor people and liberals.
HM said: "The self proclaimed savior believes the ones with low income only deserve low standards. I ain't buying it. The question, NL, is why are you?"ReplyDelete
HM, what part of, if FWY wins, let's open the process to the whole community, which may decide it wants no housing at all, don't you get? I really think you folks engage in selective reading and knee-jerk disagreement when you see someone who does not see things exactly as you do. No, I don't see the current plan as "low standards" for Uptown--we just don't agree on that point. BUT I am a realist--if FWY wins, let's make sure all knows what's going and have a plan that the community can support and live with.
Then why the heck couldn't the gay people mobilize in the last election and let Art & Company at Sidetrack know that we the gays don't appreciate them supporting Helen Shiller? For that matter Tom Tunney? Is he blind or never drives through Helen's Ward?
Plus I know a lot of lesbians that think she is great.
Perhaps the 100's of people on your face book that don't vote in our ward?
It's just amazing to me that no one endorsed James Cappleman from the gay business community in the last election.
CHipDouglass said: "The reason NL doesn't see anything wrong with The Wilson Yard project is the same reason she doesn't mind living in the subsidized housing she currently resides in. It is all she has ever known, and as you know once your in the system, well lets just say the data doesn't point to it creating independence. The same people she has contempt and spite for are the same people paying the difference on that fine subsidy. I understand some folks might think that this money comes out of Obama's, Shiller's, or Daley's pocket but that isn't the case."ReplyDelete
I submitted an earlier response to this *lovely* comment by CD and I don't know if it's still in the approval queue awaiting approval, or if I didn't hit the button, or if it was not approved,but just in case it's lost in cyberspace, CD, just wanted to highlight how ignorant this statement is. You know nothing about me except that I live in subsidized housing, and from that you deduce I lack independence, I guess have no knowledge of hard work, and have contempt and spite for people who live in condos. I never once said I have spite and contempt for those who live in condos. I also worked while obtaining my B.A. (after graduating from public schools) and earned a post-B.A. degree. Currently, it is cheaper and more fiscally responsible for me to utilize affordable housing a bit longer to save up some money, and maybe even buy a condo here in my neighborhood, which would be nice. People like yourself just get a kick out of shouting the same stereotypes and divisive language--yet I bet no one on this board will call you out this behavior, cause I guess you're a proper insider who tows the party line, word for word...
Anyway, I just wanted to point out the irony and ignorance of you making all these assumptions about my character and my beliefs based on the type of housing I live in--you know, just as you say people automatically castigate condo owners?
If my other post does make the board, just consider this an addendum, CHIP.
And maybe you're just mad because you plunked down money on an over-priced condo to live in a neighborhood that had not quite reached maximum gentrification standards? If so, that's the risk you took CHIP, you can't blame that on subsidized housing residents or even Obama or Shiller.Can't blame Shiller?ReplyDelete
Sure ya' can.
You do understand that subsidized housing is paid for by taxes, right?
Gradual, natural economic growth is required for the common good.
Property values are directly tied to that.
If the local economy doesn't grow, property values don't go up.
If property values don't go up, property tax revenue doesn't go up.
If tax revenues don't go up, how is the city going to pay for subsidized housing?
If the city has to go to the state, or to the feds, then you're income taxes go up.
By not allowing for natural economical growth, Helen is adversely affecting how much money the city collects to pay for its programs.
Helen's not 100% responsible for property values, granted - but she does have the influence to effect them.
By adding components to the neighborhood that do not promote economic growth (and to do so with dodgy tactics), she's openly working against everyone in the community - folks in subsidized housing and condo owners.
And those who do live in the subsidized housing, and dependent upon tax revenue, are more vulnerable to the failings of Helen Shiller than any condo owner.
I'm with ya' on a lot of your opinions, NL; but, don't give Helen a free ride when she fails to live up to even the minimum standard of the responsibilities of her position (which is also paid for by tax dollars).
Yo, I understand completely that tax money goes into subsidized housing, as my tax dollars goes into various programs, services, etc., subsidized and paid for by public money. ChipDouglass's comments though had nothing to do with that, IMO--at least as directed toward me, his comments smacked of lumping all people who live in subsidized housing in one big pot. Be angry at Shiller, disagree with her position, etc.--trust me, I am so not trying to change anyone's mind about Shiller nor generate any kind of Shiller love here--but don't use that anger and distrust of SHiller as an excuse to jump to huge conclusions about people whose rent is not "market rate," which is what I feel CD did.ReplyDelete
"No, I don't see the current plan as "low standards" for Uptown--we just don't agree on that point." NLReplyDelete
It was clear all along that you didn't agree. I understand that.
Here's what you either don't understand or don't want to understand: HUD, which is known for its advocacy for housing for the poor, supports our claim about low income housing and is adamantly opposed to your standards. What makes you more of an expert in housing than HUD?
There lies the problem with Helen. She freely ignores expertise on low income housing, on retail development, on urban planning, on public safety, and on how to best empower the poor. She just goes with what she thinks will work. Her opinion is everything and the expertise of professionals in these fields mean nothing.
It sounds like it means nothing to you as well. And you are questioning my intelligence? Excuse me?
I'm not sure how many of you commenters to this post were at the meeting at Holiday Club or those most previous, but it sounds like most of you haven't been to one and are only getting your info about FWY on this website. But, while it has quite a bit of information, it's far from complete. You all really should attend one before posting the comments you are posting.ReplyDelete
FWY is working amazingly hard to get as much of the community to participate in this as they possibly can. They have REPEATEDLY asked for suggestions for WY as to what Uptowners want on this corner and in this building. If you aren't letting them know then you shouldn't bitch about what happens. You don't just throw money at them and think all is ok. "Faith without deeds is dead."
I'm reading a lot of these commenters "hoping" they get more community input and "hoping" FWY isn't going to do whatever they want should the lawsuit win. If you attended ANY recent meetings you would know this is not what is happening. You would know they are constantly calling upon the community (YOU!!) for input. So get off your asses and go to a meeting. If it really means anything to you you will MAKE time to get to one and pay attention and participate. It's your government, it's your neighborhood, it's your tax dollars.
Helen has been in office for twenty years, not only because of pizza served to the homeless on election day but also because of inaction from the neighborhood. They just aren't angry enough to do something tangible.
Every single one of us on this website is to blame. Let's get up and get moving.
""ANd for the record I attended local public schools and attended very good universities for B.A. and post-B.A. degrees, working and earning my degrees at the same time."ReplyDelete
To end my current debate with NL I will say this..
I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE CURRENT MODELS OF GOVERNMENT HOUSING. That is what I believe, so pardon me for judging your comments, but there is no "situation" that you can tell me where I would say it is ok for the government to pay your bills. That is my belief. I believe if the government stepped out of this, that private charities and community churches would take care of those in need.
What I do think this community needs is a little bit of good old fashion SHAME. You have how many degrees yet you are still in the system? People should be ashamed. This "Everyone gets a trophy" society is crushing the foundation of what made this country great.
As far as owning a condo as you point out who says I own? We have two adults in this house and 4 jobs. Do the math. No government help, not even a jar of peanut butter. And we still find the time to volunteer..imagine that. It's called Pride.
Chip, there you go again. "Still in the system?" Hardly. I work, pay bills pay taxes, and am glad that not every apartment in the neighborhood is $ 2,400 for a 3-bedroom. I'm sure you know that acquiring an education does not always make you wealthy upon graduation. As for volunteer work, um, yeah, did plenty of it and still do. But even if you do consider me still "in the system," so what, CHIP? No one should be ashamed of receiving assistance where they currently are as they work hard to get to where they aspire to be.ReplyDelete
At least I hope you are consistent and reject any and ALL government assistance for ANYTHING that you might qualify for or that may benefit you and/or your family, including unemployment, government backed and funded student loans and grants, extra tax rebates and stimulus payments, etc.
And as for my conclusion that you carried a mortgage, that was based on this that you said: "We have to pay almost and extra mortgage payment just to send our child to a private school (imagine doing that and notgetting government help)." I assumed the "extra" you referred to was in addition to the mortgage you already paid.
The shame in this "debate" is that it started because you went out of your way to trash me based purely on my housing status (irony, huh?). It is a shame no one focused on the point of agreement--let's make sure no one feels shut out of the FWY process.
Chuck cam closest, I guess, by stating people should stop "bitching" on this board about it because FWY has been working hard to get ideas from people. Folks have portrayed it as if I, personally, am afraid that MY idea won't make the list, but my question is reaching beyond just me because the WY TIF is not all about me, just as it's not all about the FWY group. It's about UPTOWN.
So my point Chuck, is who outside of this UU/FWY community is aware of those efforts? Perhaps you can speak on where these solicitations for input are being made--only at FWY fundraisers and meetings? It's not "bitching," it's asking a valid question about who is being solicited for input and how do people--outside of the UU and FWY universe--even know about what's going on and how to provide their input if that's what they choose to do.
I simply assumed (maybe incorrectly, I don't know...)that if the lawsuit succeeded, one of the goals of suit would be to open the question back up to the community process, in more "neutral" forums that are not necessarily tied to FWY.
Honestly, I really don't understand the inclination to shut people down and insult them when there are questions about how to make sure the community is engaged in the process.
NL, you're not getting shut out of the process. You support the current model of WY housing while ignoring that it is exorbitantly way more expensive than market-rate housing to build and that it runs counter to expert research documented by HUD.ReplyDelete
It's your inability to respond to sound arguments that have you feeling shut out. You just choose to go the route of playing victim when you lose an argument and say you're shut out.
The argument that Helen has used all along to build more subsidized housing is the same one you've used: "It's replacing the housing lost to condo development." HUD would look at the rate of poverty in a census tract for guidance but Helen ignores that because it doesn't fit what she wants. And that's been the problem. If expert opinion doesn't fit what she wants, she chooses to ignore it and calls anyone who disagrees a racist.
If you have expert opinion from an unbiased expert that supports your beliefs about the WY housing, that would be another thing all together. Show me. I'm from Missouri.
For the money WY is costing they could have bought a lot current on the market real estate at market rate through out the city.ReplyDelete