View more videos at: http://nbcchicago.com.
Plenty of media coverage on the protest outside Ald. Cappleman's office, and the agreement reached with the Salvation Army.
- Mark Brown in the Sun-Times (now there's a surprise!)
- CBS Chicago
- Windy City Times
Excellent example of reblogging done well. It has all the site to visit for the info yet provides a place for people to discuss the event. UU can't cover everything and when 4 or 5 other news sources are there it becomes pointless to also cover it yourself.ReplyDelete
There are plenty of stories that UU covered in the past that no one else did and that is where UU shines! By highlighting issues and stories that others either didnt know about or werent curious enough to find.
Do the protestors even live in the neighborhood? Probably ran straight back to the red line 1/2 block away and we'll never see them again...ReplyDelete
If even a quarter of the protesters had been from this Ward, I would have been impressed. The fact they were shipped in from around the city shows how little support they have from those of us that actually LIVE in the 46th ward.ReplyDelete
Oh, and they have a new FB page title Uptown Uprising... it is pretty funny, in an ironic way. If they put this much effort in getting a job vs. avoided work, they would be very successful and able to contribute to society vs. just accepting government hand outs. (Paid for by those of us that actually do work)
This is ridiculous. Tell these people to get a job or get out of Uptown. The Alderman has more important issues to deal worry about.ReplyDelete
Cap on WBEZ right now....ReplyDelete
GEEZ! I didn’t realize the hottie convention was in town!!ReplyDelete
You know what they say: The uglier the crowd, the lamer the cause – and this cause be LAME! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD – WEAR MASKS ALL YOU ONES AND TWOS!
And I agree with the other posters, these people are not from here, they are not part of the voting pool, they are unemployed slackers who have no grasp on reality or what is right. They are inherent moochers, users and gypsies.
*escorts protestors to Montrose Harbor to push off pier*
This just reminds me of the old cliche "give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats his entire life."ReplyDelete
That being said, I completely agree with Cappleman on this. I drive past the Wilson underpass every day and hate to see people sleeping out in the cold like that. Obviously they are all congregating there because of the meal delivery. Feeding them every day does nothing to help them but survive another day in the same position. We need to help them in other ways that makes permanent changes.
I also don't think it is fair to classify the protesters as unemployed or not from our ward. That is pretty ignorant, don't assume or I will throw another cliche at you. I actually saw 2 of them walking toward the protest sight yesterday from Wilson and Sheridan. Who knows, they may be from here or they took the bus from somewhere else. That doesn't really matter. They are American citizens like everyone else and are entitled to protest and voice their displeasure.
With all that being said, if you agree with Cappleman, which I think most do from our ward. Then call up his office and voice your support for him so he knows most of us have his back and want him to keep fighting for this issue to be resolved.
jtizzle, I agree with you that those living under the Wilson viaduct need help to become self sufficient. However I don't think they are congregating there because of the meal delivery. Sorry, its not that simple. I mean, the Sal Army will serve meals to anyone who shows up there, is that fact enough for you to leave where you are living to go live under the Wilson Ave bridge? I am guessing not. I think they are congregating there because: 1)they do not have their own place to live and 2) they have some cover from the elements under the bridge. Another reason is that there is safety in numbers and once one guy beds down there, others will follow.ReplyDelete
I am curious about exactly what you agree with Cappleman about. If it is that the people living there need more than just a hot meal, then I think absolutely everyone on all sides would agree with that. If it is that the people living there continue to be homeless because the Sal Army feeds them, well I disagree with that. I think that is a simplistic way to look at the problem and I don't think there is any evidence to back that up. Or is it that you hope, as Cappleman appeared to, that by getting the Sal Army to move out of Uptown, the homeless would simply move out as well? While I know many in Uptown would be happy if those experiencing homelessness here would simply go somewhere else, I don't think moving a problem is solving it.
The SA truck serves lunch to about 100 people a day. I've never seen more than seven or eight guys camped out under the overpass at Lake Shore Drive at any one time. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that moving the truck elsewhere will cure eight guys of homelessness. What's the plan for the other 92 people now going without lunch? That group includes mostly housed people--and some employed people--who are living hand to mouth. Take away enough social services and low-income housing and . . . TADA! You've just created more homeless folks. Not smart.ReplyDelete
I know there are some hard-core folks here who are positively gleeful about the prospect of ridding Uptown of the last vestiges of low-income folks, and maybe they are willing to ride out five to ten years of making things worse before they achieve their goal of total class segregation. (They may succeed; money and power wielded with total disregard for others is usually quite effective. Perhaps in 15 years Uptown will be the utopia they are imagining--maybe like that creepy town Disney engineered in Florida, but edgier and with better architecture.)
But for folks who are less comfortable using economics to inflict blunt force on people with rather fragile lives, please encourage the alderman to go slow and steady and come up with an actual plan to substantively improve Uptown. If he gives in to the folks who are screaming for him to just start hacking randomly into the fragile ecosystem here, things are going to go south real fast and stay that way for years.
Plus, some of the folks who have zero-tolerance for living near the poor AREN'T going to stick it out if Cappleman makes things worse before they get better, and they'll take themselves and their money elsewhere, leaving things a bigger mess than before they came. That'll push back the realization of the utopian dream another decade or so.
I know there are some hard-core folks here who are positively gleeful about the prospect of ridding Uptown of the last vestiges of low-income folksReplyDelete
Sure, there are some. There are also some who would prefer to have Uptown become a social services utopia.
The problem is that, reading through these comments and speaking to people on the street, very few people fall into either of those categories.
Most understand that there is a social responsibility to helping those in need, and are more than willing to donate time, money and/or support to ensure that those who need help get it.
I've dropped off school supplies and Toys for Tots and have always been amazed at the mountainous stacks of shopping bags and boxes unto which I add my contribution.
Fairly obvious that the people making those donations (and some of them quite sizable, I might add) are of stable means.
Dealing in such absolutes is a rather GWB-like approach. It wasn't right when he did it (obviously) and it isn't right when others do it - especially when there are more examples than not of people who truly care about the well being of others and are consistently painted as evil (ie - money and power wielded with total disregard for others is usually quite effective).
This past week has been filled with comments about how the alderman and his supporters are heartless and don't see the bigger picture, hate the poor, etc, etc.
That simply isn't true, and repeating these statements only succeeds in widening the divide between so many people who actually share a common cause. Approaches may be different, fine. But, nothing of substance will be accomplished by perpetuating this animosity.
This statement result may be true:
they'll take themselves and their money elsewhere, leaving things a bigger mess than before they came.
It may be true that they'll leave because they don't want to stick it out.
But it may also be true that despite some of these peoples' efforts to do the right thing and be socially responsible, they're continually being shit on and grow sick of it.
Again, dealing in absolutes is a tricky thing.
Susan , to the contrary, I hope he accelerates this process. Therey are plenty of shelter beds they could sleep in vs under the viaduct. I have zero compassion for those offered help and then refuse it. Their decision to be miserable should not be my decision too. Rund up and jail them. What they are doing is illegal , period.ReplyDelete
I live in Uptown, was active in the protest, and I personally know at least 80 of the protestors, all of whom live in Uptown.ReplyDelete
I know there were folks from Rodgers Park supporting us.
I know there were folks from Lakeview/Hotel Chateau area supporting us.
I know there were residents from Wilson Men's Hotel protesting.
Folks from Food not Bombs were also there.
Uptown SuperHero, the idea that we bussed people in from other parts of the city makes no sense; first of all, why would we do that when we have enough homeless/poor right here in Uptown?
Second, this protest was put together in a matter of days by people who care about the plight of the poor. Most of us who protested actually have jobs. I'm sure there were some folks from the shelters who protested, because, you know, they have a vested interest in being able to survive and stay off the street until they get back on their feet
The new Uptown Uprising page is not put together by homeless/jobless people; again, it's put together by folks who care about other people.
Brian Kilpatrick, just because someone doesn't have a job doesn't mean they don't have a right to live in Uptown.(Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, remember?) If you don't like the people who live here then why don't you move? Usually when people don't like a neighborhood, that's what they do.
Wang Chung: It's juvenile to make fun of how people look. I'm pretty sad that you'd stoop to that level. I'd like to know what you did to personally make yourself look the way you do? I mean, as far as I know, your parents had sex and out you came, and that's about as much effort as you put into it, which doesn't amount to much. So please, don't take us back to high school. Stick with the issues, argue your points, and keep it civil. Suggesting that you'd drown them all in the harbor...really? REALLY? Do I have to point out how incredibly bigoted and evil that is? Even if I agreed with you on Cappelmans stance I would disassociate myself with you, and I encourage other posters and readers to do so. I'd be careful too, if I were you, because your words could come off as a threat. Make sure you don't slip and say any of this in public or in person, because you're treading on very dangerous ground.
-Eric, Uptown resident since 1989
I suspect that Mr Chung is a prov ACK E turd.
By that I mean someone purposefully being over the top in his comments in order to discredit the Cappleman supporters.
Just a suspicion.
hey man "paragraphs"--paragraphs.
It will make your writing easier to read.
Than being said I too think many/ most of the protesters were from Uptown. I'd guess half or more were tied to JPUSA in some way.
OOOOH, I said "Tied " and JPUSA in one sentence. Whip me, beat me call me saved!
Eric Clayton from now on you shall be known as: Lecturing Larry.ReplyDelete
Don’t take yourself so seriously. Do you really think I’m out to kill people? REALLY? Well, I guess you don’t know me but I’m not, so relax friend.
By the way, I was in High School a few years ago so your insult falls flat with me. Personally, I prefer a well-rounded insult that is shallow on a person’s looks, yet also deep regarding their beliefs. I call it a Holistic Subjective Insult.
jon, plenty of shelter beds? What do you know about it. Shelters around the city turn people away every day because they are full. What should those people do then? When turned away from shelters, they are usually told to go to the nearest police station or hospital, but I can understand why they would be skeptical of receiving help there when it was usually someone from the Dept. of Human services that sent them to the shelter that turned them away in the first place.ReplyDelete
Cappleman speaks on WBEZ regarding the protest and related issues. Go down to the fourth sound link. I'm listening now.ReplyDelete
Shelters around the city turn people away every day because they are full.ReplyDelete
See? This is an area where we need to improve. People keep saying this and to ask, honestly, what can be done about this?
Obviously putting more beds in one area won't cut it. So maybe creating more shelters is part of the solution.
Where, and more importantly, how (ie - cost)?
Also - prevention. What can be done to prevent the need?
These are issues, I think, Cappleman is trying to address. I could be wrong, but I hope that I'm not.
Irish Pirate said:ReplyDelete
"hey man "paragraphs"--paragraphs.
It will make your writing easier to read."
So true, and I usually do better at this. I did hit enter, at least, but I'll be adding spaces between paragraphs from now on. Thanks for the nudge. :-D
Wang Chung said:
"Eric Clayton from now on you shall be known as: Lecturing Larry."
I like that. :-D
Wang Chung said:
"Don’t take yourself so seriously. Do you really think I’m out to kill people? REALLY? Well, I guess you don’t know me but I’m not, so relax friend."
It's got nothing to do with me taking myself seriously, but anyway, I'm glad to hear you're "just kidding". I'd suggest that you refrain from such kidding, though, but I've already said my piece on that.
Wang Chung said:
"By the way, I was in High School a few years ago so your insult falls flat with me."
Well, I wasn't insulting you, friend, I was simply speaking truth. Preying on peoples looks is what kids do. If you're out of high school, then act like it.
Anyway, I'll try not to take myself, as well as you, so seriously. ;-)
-Eric, AKA Lecturing Larry.
"jon, plenty of shelter beds? What do you know about it. Shelters around the city turn people away every day because they are full. What should those people do then? When turned away from shelters, they are usually told to go to the nearest police station or hospital, but I can understand why they would be skeptical of receiving help there when it was usually someone from the Dept. of Human services that sent them to the shelter that turned them away in the first place."
What Sean said. And to add to it: Cappelman doesn't seem to understand that closing down SROs and Wilson Men's Hotel will put that many more people on the street. How is any of that a solution?
Or maybe he understands full well what he's doing? I don't know, you tell me.
"I know there are some hard-core folks here who are positively gleeful about the prospect of ridding Uptown of the last vestiges of low-income folks"
"Sure, there are some. There are also some who would prefer to have Uptown become a social services utopia."
Not true. We simply want to help the folks who live here, help the folks that need help. If there's no need for social services, then we can shut them down.
Until then, our goal is not to have some handout zone for anybody who wants a free lunch; we're being kind, because that's the right thing to do. How can you argue with kindness?
Larry the Lecturer
Lecturing Larry, AKA Eric Clayton, you have to pick one – either Lecturing Larry or Larry the Lecturer, you’ve referred to yourself as both. I suggest Lecturing Larry. It’s short, simple and sweet.ReplyDelete
Perhaps we’re getting off topic so: protesters, homeless, pigeons, alderman, Uptown and so on.
I would bet there are plenty of shelter beds in other parts of the city. They may not be in Uptown, so they can go to where they are available. Maybe Mr. Brown's front yard is available too...ReplyDelete
I have had homeless people shit and pee and shoot up and fu?k and sleep on my property. Where is my ability for the "Pursuit of Happiness" or does it not count for those of us that saved money to buy a home by cleaning toilets for a living (yup, did that, swear to God). If we were rich, we would be living in LP , not Uptown.
I guess the dream is only for those that the idiots from Konquer Kankeekee or Peorians for Peace or Occupying Space in Rogers Park deem worthy... ((rolls eyes))
Not true. We simply ....ReplyDelete
Oh, it's true, all right.
For every opinion there are always people at the extremes - that's what I was referring to.
I wasn't necessarily referring to anyone in particular.
@ Uptownsuperhero... there is no way I would live in Lincoln Park!!! Lincoln Park sucks!ReplyDelete
What about this idiot that Mark Brown talks about in one of his articles.ReplyDelete
"Miller credits the Salvation Army workers with previously having straightened out his veteran’s benefits to help him to obtain a $32,000 check for back pay. Instead of using the money to obtain housing, however, Miller said he put it toward paying off his daughter’s college and to help her ward off foreclosure."
Not to give the SA too much credit, there is a great Veteran's clinic that I know does great work for veterans also but....
Is this guy lying? So he gave his daughter a bunch of money to save her from foreclosure and pay of her college yet she LETS HIM LIVE ON THE STREET? How does Brown cite this as some kind of authority that this is a good thing? These people know exactly what to say to the press to keep their free housing and free food so they don't have to do anything. I've seen it too many times.
Also, I will say that not everybody is like that and some people need help. I am all for that.
Actually shelters on the West side and south side turn people away too. And you are probably confusing drunk cub fans for homeless people pissing etc. on your property.
Drunk Cub fans? Really? Give me a break.ReplyDelete
I wonder if Brown checked to see if this Miller guy actually served in the military. I doubt it. Did he check for ID? Do a FOIA request? Why would Miller have to get back-pay? Is our military into not paying our soldiers? If the military is not into paying our soldiers that would be quite the story. Now that would be journalism.ReplyDelete
I don't work for Cap, or have any connection to him besides running into him in the neighborhood. I don't even like him that much, he seems like an good guy. I am just pissed off about BS media reports.
I will step away from the computer now......
@ Yo, regarding dealing in absolutes:ReplyDelete
Actually, I was specifically addressing the balanced, reasonable, in-the-middle folks because I believe they exist. I merely referenced the--ahem!--rather vocal, extremist sect whose presence is not unknown on this board.
And I'm genuinely sorry if I offended you with the comment about money and power being effective when used without regard for other people. I do NOT think that's what Cappleman is doing and I do NOT believe that is the attitude of all his supporters, not by a long shot.
It is, however, the self-declared attitude of some of his supporters. They have been so very blatant about it that I felt pretty sure they would not object to my characterizing them that way. I totally agree that it's unhelpful to recast someone's opinion into an unflattering extreme (not just unhelpful, it's dishonest also) . . . but when people represent THEMSELVES as not giving a crap about other people, I don't think it's necessary to whitewash it.
I even thought about inserting some direct quotes I've read on UU specifically to avoid the sort of criticism you've offered. But that would seem like I'm somehow targeting those individuals, and that wasn't really my point either.
Hope that helps.
No one has rights in this society except for the underprivileged . Perhaps that is why we have the culture we have. As long as I'm picking up the tab, I should shut up. Going to college, working hard...why. I can just have an Obama phone, link card and tada no problem. What happens when the government goes belly up and all those sick of donating and paying taxes disappear to the burbs ? Again, kill the middle class. Tax them to death. I agree and fully support Cappleman. Making a true change takes guts. The status quo is easy. I am for a homeless free uptown with good schools, community and equality. The dice roll both ways.ReplyDelete
Is it just me? Or does it seem that the Sun Times lives in a glass house. After all, the homeless living on lower Wacker Drive (i.e. under the Sun Times building) were relocated to Uptown (as reported by Mark Brown at the Sun Times). I don't see the Sun Times sending vans to the Wilson Men's club to haul them back. Neither do I see them building housing for the homeless in the downtown neighborhood where they hailed from.ReplyDelete
Uptown SuperHero! said:ReplyDelete
"Sean, really? You think it is funny that I have had all that I mentioned above happen to my property that I worked extremely hard for?"
Uptown SuperHero, I don't know if Sean thinks it's funny or not, it didn't appear that way to me, but I personally don't think it's funny that you've had that stuff happen to you and your property, and you have every right to call the police on those folks if you can ever catch them in the act.
Disrespect for other people's property is never acceptable, and I'm sorry you've had to deal with that. I've had the same thing by our dumpster area and I can't send my kids out with the garbage because it might not be safe. So, anyway, just to let you know that I commiserate with you on this.
-Eric Clayton, AKA A Lecturer that is named Larry.
Park the truck under the bridge at Fullerton avenue and the lakeshore for a month or two. Lets see if there is a migration of the people sleeping under the Wilson bridge. Oh yeah, that would never happen because it wouldn't be tolerated in Lincoln Park. Cappelman is looking out for the homeowners of Uptown. We need to repay him with our support and our votes come election time.ReplyDelete
Why did Cappleman back down? At first it seemed as if he was kicking a** and taking names. He even went so far as to give them a deadline. Now he says they will work together to solve the problem. Why didn't he just start with that?ReplyDelete
Uptown Superhero and Down and Out in Chicago:ReplyDelete
I’m genuinely sorry that you guys (or women—I guess you could be women, I don’t know) feel so disempowered in this neighborhood. Please know that while I am concerned for people coping with the problems of homelessness, I am also concerned for homeowners. I don’t exactly like it when I’m walking my kids to the car in the morning and have to make sure no one took a dump on our parking pad the night before. I call the police when I look out the window and see people smoking marijuana in the alley. But it’s not a zero-sum game, you know? It puzzles me when you interpret concern for the poor as lack of concern for the middle-class.
As a homeowner I’m delighted that Cappleman is working hard for the interests of homeowners, I’m just disturbed that he isn’t working equally hard for the interests of people who don’t own homes. Shouldn’t he be serving the needs of all his constituents? A neighborhood that pits the interests of some its residents against the interests of other residents is a crappy neighborhood.
I agree Susan. And a neighborhood that spends $35 million in public tax money for a PRIVATE condo development is only making things worse.ReplyDelete
How exactly is a tower full of luxury condos going to improve the quality of life in Uptown? It's not.
How are the underpass dwellers homeless when they are constantly offered housing, which they refuse????ReplyDelete
Shouldn't we use a different noun for them???
Netbizz, what homes are being offered to the homeless guys under the overpass? Are you talking about shelter space? A temporary shelter isn't a home. And even shelter space is scarce in many cases.ReplyDelete
It puzzles me when you interpret concern for the poor as lack of concern for the middle-class.ReplyDelete
Well put, Susan.
And a neighborhood that spends $35 million in public tax money for a PRIVATE condo development is only making things worse.
... I'm so sick and tired of you anti-Wilson Yard people.
Oh man lots here.ReplyDelete
First, when you hear people whining about public whizzing near Wrigley and using it as a diversion from similar activity here think JPUSA. It's one of their favorite arguments.
Now since the CUBS were forced to add porta potties around the Wrigley area perhaps JPUSA could start a new company and do something similar in Uptown.
The Poop People!?
The Piss People!?
The PP People!?
Second, wait. What's that knock at my door? Is it my conscious?
I'll be back.
I remember reading about the Chicago Continuum of Care and Chicago's 10-year Plan To End Homelessness, to include a "housing first" component.ReplyDelete
That was in 2002.
I see we're now on version 2.0 which began last August.
It's a nice-looking brochure.
Your incisive commentary and PBR drinking skills are always welcome in Uptown.
For some reason though whenever you post I always think about this Monty Python sketch.
Perhaps it's because of the years you've spent skateboarding without a helmet and fighting the cops.
Fact: Maryville will be a Private RENTAL development. At least initially.
Fact: Subtracting the 9 million bucks from the TIF going to the Park District that means JDL is ONLY getting a MERE 25 million in TIF money. Subtract the forced "low housing fund donation etc" and it may be under 20 million depending on how you calculate it.
Now personally I'd rather increase the density at the site and reduce the amount of TIF money, but like a prophet in the biblical desert my genius is largely unrecognized.
Increasing the density would allow the developer to profit more and bring more lovely market rate residents to Uptown and reduce the necessity for TIF money to be used. That's a WIN, WIN, WIN. Three wins which is nearly as good as three ways.
More such people means more shoppers, more restaurant goers, and more people to watch me in my next play at The Annoyance Theater--Skateboarding Without a Helmet and the Art of Brain Maintenance.
Now if the development is valued at say $250 million after construction at the current rate of property taxation that likely means a yearly property tax payment of say 4-5 million dollars. In other words JDL would pay down the TIF contribution in about the same number of years as Rahmbo has fingers on his hand--4 1/2.
Damn, I amuse myself sometimes.
Seriously, I don't like TIF's, and I'd rather see the density upped in lieu of this amount of TIF money being used, but taking everything into account it's a damn good deal for Uptown, the city as a whole, JDL and probably lots of connected lawyers, architects and accountants.
One last thing perhaps JDL should be required to set aside a certain number of parking spaces in their building for Zip-Car/I-Go Rentals etc. Also think about requiring car "lifts" where practical where one car can be raised above another. I've been in a building in the West Loop and it basically turns one parking space into two.
I'm tempted to suggest the city turn some of the 80+ schools targeted for closing into shelters or SROs, but I'm terrified they would only jump on the 3 in Uptown...ReplyDelete
Susan, thanks so much for your posts. What you're saying makes sense. I don't know why so many people think that completely removing resources for the poor RIGHT AWAY is going to help anything. It's all just out of sight out of mind BS. I also wish people understood that if you live in a large city, you're going to see a population of homeless people. It doesn't make it right, but it's a reality that we have to face and try to remedy rationally. This should be a slow and steady process for Uptown. Just like we should be taking care of our homeowners, we have to take care of people who do not have homes. That is what being a community is all about. If you don't like it, maybe you shouldn't live in the city of Chicago or you should be living in a more gentrified area at the least?ReplyDelete
As for you, Wang Chung, you've discredited anything you say about this matter to me on UU. Your comments were very small-minded and definitely do not help the population of Cappleman supporters. People like you make this all seem bigoted, and if you want our alderman to be successful in his current planning, you should watch what you say. This is a serious matter and involves the livelihood of a lot of people of misfortune.
I understand what Cappleman is trying to do, but people like you will make this seem negative and like I said, your current behavior will not help your cause at all. It's always funny and cool to joke about pushing people off the pier that you deem inferior, right? Well, maybe to you! Unfortunately, I work at an elementary school and this would be something one of my middle school kids would say...
Everyone, I know this isn't an easy subject and like I said, if Cappleman is really trying to do what he says he is, I understand where he is coming from. But again, I think the rate in which he is executing his plan isn't going to help anyone. At least not in the long run. We may see some short-term results, but after that, things may go downhill.
For the record, just because a person is protesting, doesn't mean they are jobless or a "gypsy". That is an ignorant assumption. I was really sad to see so many assumptions happening in this thread.
Alie--Uptown resident since 2009
I agree Susan. And a neighborhood that spends $35 million in public tax money for a PRIVATE condo development is only making things worse.
How exactly is a tower full of luxury condos going to improve the quality of life in Uptown? It's not.
First of all they are not private condo development, they are market rate apartments with 10% of the units which will be affordable housing.
Regarding the TIF money,which I am not a fan off, $9 million will be used to bring the Clarendon Field House up to code.
Please use facts when you are trying to make a point.
Carol Marin interviews Mark Brown on his Uptown series of stories.ReplyDelete
"Today we give you the backstory on a big story" is her lead in.
Is it just me or does Mark Brown look like Homer Simpson?
I post. YOU decide.
Of course Mark Brown knows who really is concerned about the welfare of the homeless. Hint: In MarkBROWNworld it ain't Cappleman.
Side note for your amusement.
Mark Brown lives in Oak Park.
Carol Marin lives in Lincoln Park.
(I will leave the next line up to your dear UU commenters.)
@Alison -- Not sure I understand your comment: "I think the rate in which he is executing his plan isn't going to help anyone."ReplyDelete
For too long, people of this ward have been told that slow and steady changes (read: cracking down on crime, decreasing vagrancy, upping economic development) were in the process. In reality, nothing was occurring, and I dare say we were moving backwards. With the election of Cappleman, businesses are finally seeing Uptown as a place to open up. In addition, residents from other wards (your fellow Chicagoans) are seeing Uptown as a neighborhood into which they can move.
The "protestors" are merely upset that there are any changes occurring in this ward, period. They appear to be more interested in agitation than really evaluating the problems in the ward. For example, they are willing to permit people to live in horrid conditions rather than work to find better housing for those in most need.
Cappleman is not solely responsible for the "changes" that are occuring in the ward. Like it or not, it is a natural progression of development in the city of Chicago to move north. If anything, the "protestors" are trying to maintain something that was only artificially kept in place by Shiller for so many years. That "artificial" environment nearly lead to the destruction of Uptown.
The only "change" that Cappleman can really be held accountable for is being an Alderman that is finally looking at what is going on, evaluating what is not working, and moving from there.
The SA truck controversy was fabricated by the "protestors" and hyped by lazy media that really did not want to look into the real facts of the story. If anything, the "protestors" should be held accountable for their knee-jerk reaction and failure to want to engage in a reasonable conversation.
All of this is not to say that those of limited means should be or are being forced out of Uptown. As the chorus has so often said, Uptown has a significant amount of subsidized housing and support services for the homeless, etc., indeed more than any other ward. And before I get accused of not caring, I live (and chose to live) across the street from one of the best run Section 8 developments in the city. Good neighbors that I don't want to lose.
Its time that balance be restored to this ward. Its also time that ONE, LAC (or are they Uptown Uprising?) learn that they can't always win. They got their way for years and didn't improve the ward. Let's try something new. Let's change.
"The "protestors" are merely upset that there are any changes occurring in this ward, period. They appear to be more interested in agitation than really evaluating the problems in the ward. For example, they are willing to permit people to live in horrid conditions rather than work to find better housing for those in most need.
Just stating facts here: At least 80 of the protestors are FULL TIME members of a group that runs 5 homeless shelters, a second stage housing facility, and provides low income housing for those over 55. The shelter also provides meals a few times a week for anyone who needs it. There is a free store where there are shoes and clothes and furniture and things that people can have to get back on their feet. They provide daycare so families can take classes and look for jobs. When clients are able, they move into second stage housing, yet can continue to use the daycare for up to 2 years, when they then move out completely and are on their own. I've been part of it since 1989 in a supporting role, and am very glad to be working with people who really know how to help the poor and homeless.
We don't like that men live in chicken coops; what we don't want is the men to be forced out of those chicken coops and onto the streets. They can live that way if they choose. It's not up to you and me to force them to live otherwise.
You wrote: "Cappleman is not solely responsible for the "changes" that are occuring in the ward. Like it or not, it is a natural progression of development in the city of Chicago to move north. If anything, the "protestors" are trying to maintain something that was only artificially kept in place by Shiller for so many years. That "artificial" environment nearly lead to the destruction of Uptown."
When you refer to development, what type or types of development are you referring to? Economic development, infrastructure development, or something else?
When you say that an artificial environment nearly led to the destruction of Uptown, what are you referring to specifically? What bullet did we dodge? I've lived here since 1992 and was unaware of any impending doom, but I don't follow media news much and I'm totally open to hearing what you have to say.
One more thing: If you were an "agitator" I am happy to hear about what motivated you. But if you weren't, well, I have no reason to believe you have special insight into what motivated others, and it's not particularly useful to hear you framing out your guesses as if they were facts. It weakens your credibility.
Thanks for the encouraging words. Every bit of friendliness is good for encouraging civil discourse!
I would rather they spend money bringing in a private condo development than any more druggies or sex offenders. Enough already.ReplyDelete
I don't think poor people are unsightly. Class is also part of diversity, I think. Why doesn't Cap do something about the rats, though?ReplyDelete
I have been reading this and other outlets regarding these issues for some time and I have refrained from comment because it is a sensitive topic that I am not well versed (I find it is better to read and think but know I have this to say). This is a big deal for Uptown; I have not seen Cap involved in an issue with this amount of heat since he was elected. I support Cap then and now and believe his heart is in the right place for the overall betterment of the Ward. Uptown has an established identity and a big part of it is at the heart of this issue.ReplyDelete
My question is this: I have been told and believe (perhaps erroneously but I ask other to please correct me when warranted) that our Ward has more services than most others with regards to the homeless and poor. If this is the case, should we not be striving for more of a balance with our neighbors; or at least the average Chicago Ward? Isn’t there a healthy balance that everyone can agree on? If we are to reduce the number of low income housing in the 46, should we not start with the perceived 'worst' facilities or the services that benefit homeless the least? Target these bad few and see where we stand before 'displacing' anymore people in need?
I read that there are six other places the homeless can go for food without the SA truck under the viaduct. My understanding of the Wilson Men's Hotel is the rooms are not even the equivalent of a college dorm with a high amount of tenants who either have mental issues or addictions that prevent them from moving on to something better. Is this an incorrect assessment? If so, why should we be inspired to keep the hotel around? What benefit to the Ward is this building providing? I am all about helping the poor but not at the expense of the safety and viability of our neighborhood (sorry if that offends you but there are more than the poor and homeless living in this Ward). If other section 8 or low income housing buildings can be operated so well, why can't we insist they ALL operate this way?
When does the guise of goodwill become a roadblock to the progress of a community? Uptown is the last frontier along Chicago’s north lakefront that has staved off gentrification and has made that attribute one of its strengths. I don’t believe that Uptown needs to be gentrified to grow but the forces of change have similar roots. I think that Cap is trying to do right by these people and by other demographics in the ward (and I am not only talking about the million dollar house owners but the several hundred thousand dollar condo owners and all the renters too).
And Eric, at last, exposes the double standard. He objects when someone says they want to keep people living in squalor yet asserts thayt because Alderman and others want change they want to throw people to the street.ReplyDelete
And more cynical man than I could claim those 80, Eric, have a vested interest in keeping things just the way they are.ReplyDelete
We've had all these posts raging for weeks and nobody has used this song?ReplyDelete
I have a nice video camera but times are tough for me, if they weren't I would gladly go into Wilson Men's hotel for a night or two and make a little documentary on it, I've been in worse situations and not much scares me anymore. How much is it per night there, anyhow? Maybe I could take one for the team before they close so all of you can see the truth.
@Fake Bar ownerReplyDelete
I knew it, even before that laborious copypasta.
When you say that an artificial environment nearly led to the destruction of Uptown, what are you referring to specifically? What bullet did we dodge? I've lived here since 1992 and was unaware of any impending doom, but I don't follow media news much and I'm totally open to hearing what you have to say.
OMG, we were nearly destroyed by an artificial environment? OMG.
My property taxes (along with my condo assessments) are nearly double what they once were, thanks to here a TIF, there a TIF, and a metric ass-ton of marble and granite and stainless steel dumped in the hood during the housing bubble years.
It’s been weird watching this thing with Wilson Men’s Club, Hotel Chateau, and a food truck. Despite being a gainfully-employed, long term owner, I feel as though I’m also being nudged out, albeit more quietly, a little more slowly, and with no reference at all to those “evidence-based best practices.”
Mr. Mayor and Mr. Alderman: Kind sirs, the knees of my working class salary are getting a bit wobbly.
The Brownian Odyssey continues.
It's Koppelesque. Those who are old enough to remember the Iranian Hostage Crisis may "git" that quote.
UPTOWN HELD HOSTAGE! DAY 321.
Here's 2day's installment.
The Tribune kicks in with a story and a quote from our beloved former leader Helen "Strip Club, Strip Club, I never lobbied for a Strip Club" Shiller. Then she yelled "show me the money". Or not.
Of course I'm trying to think of a pretentious IrishPirate historic analogy to this moment in Uptown history. I've come up with a number.
However, today dear Uptowners, I only give you one.
The Battle of Gettysburg and specifically Pickett's Charge.
Why do I post this one? Because comparing the Shillerista regressionists to the stinkin', backwards looking, traitorous Confederate horde will annoy the few of them who actually read this. I'm all about annoying people. It's a gift given to me by the Dalai Lama after I caddied for him back in the 1970's.
The first few minutes of this video from the movie "Gettysburg" will sorta explain what I'm doing here.
Think of what follows as Trott's Trot: The Battle for Cricket Hill. One small, but memorable part of the Battle of Uptown.
General Trott, ponytail flying proudly and earring glinting in the sun, who will lead the assault speaking:
into your hands I commend my spirit."
Speech from General Shiller who remains in the rear with the gear:
"UP people to your posts. Let no person forget today that they are from Ole Uptown."
Troops Chanting while Captain Mindy dances around dressed as a condiment. Mustard to be exact.
Uptown Not Yuptown. Uptown Not Yuptown. Uptown Uptown Uptown.
For your SROs.
For your Subsidized Housing.
For your pill mills.
For your homeless shelters.
For your homeless living under viaducts.
For your hookers.
For your gangbangers.
For your Halloween shootings.
For your drug dealing.
For your shitty schools.
For your Jesus Freaks.
For your dead innocents.
For your children without hope.
For your elderly living in fear.
The rest as we say is history.
How about holding the management and the owners responsible for the living conditions of some of these buildings? I'm sure some of these places are horrid. Im also pretty sure the tenants were complaining a long time ago. Nobody cared then, now everyone is concerned. I'm thinking these things were purposely left to fester, so when people wanted to come in and do a mad sweep, they could. The managers and owners get away with being slumlords and the tenants suffer by being pushed in the streets.( with the notation of" nobody should live like this")ReplyDelete
I'm tired of the media exploiting Uptown for ratings. If they really cared about street people and affordable housing they'd do something about providing such services in their own area.ReplyDelete
Instead, the Loop businesses and developers buy their way out of the problem, relocate their homeless to Uptown, and then complain about how Uptowners handle the problems they dump on us. Enough trying to debate with these fools. They aren't worth our blog space.
Many of the patients there were probably on the methadone program down the street also. Kudos, to the DEA for shutting this place down.ReplyDelete
I was asking the question of someone else.
Are you saying that the impending destruction of the "artificial environment" (that was JJGUptown's phrase, not mine)created by Shiller was higher property taxes and higher condo assessments? I would think higher property taxes would be linked to higher property values, which most homeowners view positively.
Per Brown, Cappleman says no food trucks.ReplyDelete
Per Brown, Cappleman backs down on food trucks.
I heard the NPR interview and he clearly said he never wanted anyone to go without food and that he wanted the social services to work together. I'm not clear how this means he hates the homeless and he wants them out of the ward.
He did,however, come across that he didn't want the status quo which wasn't getting homeless people off the streets. In any other neighborhood, it would be good for an alderman to work with the social service agencies to get the homeless off the streets. In Uptown, it means something else. Why is that?
@ Holy Moly:ReplyDelete
Part of the reason it's different in Uptown is that here there are a large number of people who are experienced with working with the poor, and who understand that getting homeless people off the streets won't be accomplished by curbing social services to them and shutting down SROs. That merely shifts homeless people to other neighbors, which is a solution (of sorts) for Uptown, but not for the homeless.
I'm exceedingly glad to hear that Cappleman's working with social services to get homeless people off the streets if that means he has a better model for it than the current one, which I agree isn't working.
If he has such a plan, though, he hasn't mentioned it yet. In his statement published here on Uptown Update, he went to talk to the men under the overpass and offered to get them to shelters and/or rehabs, which is sounds exactly like the same approach the Salvation Army is using, minus the soup. That isn't a new plan.
It's just the old plan, without soup.
The thing is that the social services keep getting money and they are not helping the people that need it. We need to look for ways to help people move forward..not just keep them where they at. You have to do more than just feed people every night.ReplyDelete
Susan, I guess I'm missing something. Where did Cappleman say he wanted to "curb" social services and that he had the power to "shut down" SROs? I was looking all over his website and I get his newsletters and I never saw it. Could you show me where?ReplyDelete
I did listen to the NPR and it said he wanted to have a summit of social services come together to discuss how they could work together. Wouldn't it be better for Cappleman to hear from them first, or would you rather he just make up plans on his own without talking with any social services? Which is it?
Since you are so kind as to ask, I'd say it's much better that he consult with social services already at work in the neighborhood instead of coming up with something on his own. This is the first I've heard of a summit meeting with a large group of social services--that's very encouraging. Which NPR show was it? I'd love to hear it.
As to where I'm getting my information regarding Cappleman's desires and political influence regarding social service activities and SRO’s, I’ve found the Uptown Update to be fairly informative along these lines—I encourage you to read the articles that are linked in the very post we are commenting on right now.
Susan, I heard about NPR's interview on Cappleman's FB page. Sometimes I like to hear straight from the person rather than rely on a reporter's opinions about what Cappleman's beliefs are. Here's the NPR interview.ReplyDelete
I also read Cappleman's press release about the Salvation Army incident. Did you get a chance to read it yet? I know it was put on UU. I didn't find anything that reports he wanted to "curb" social services.
As for shutting down any SRO, I read on UU where Mark Brown accused him of shutting down an SRO. Aldermen are fairly powerful but I have my doubts any aldermen has that type of authority. If Cappleman did, he's much more powerful than I give him credit for.
Holy Moley, thanks very much for the link to the interview.ReplyDelete
Yes, I have read Cappleman's response, and I read his newsletters. I try hard not speak for anyone else's motives or intentions until they themselves. That's why I'd be surprised if I actually wrote the words "Cappleman WANTS to ___" because I don't feel like I really know what he wants. If I did, I shouldn't have, but I doubt I did. I'm still kinda hoping he intends to improve things for our poor neighbors instead of slowly squeezing them out. But the jury is still out on that.
But I definitely don't rely solely on a politician's word for anything--I read other sources and ultimately I "listen" more to they do than what they say. You probably do too, unless you're . . . unusual. :)
I doubt an alderman can unilaterally close down anything solely on his or her own personal authority. If he exercises political influence in such a way that something's shut down, it's effectively the same thing.
Susan, I also listen to what they do. Cappleman goes out into the parks to speak with the homeless. Does that count for anything? He was a social worker before he was an alderman and he reports that he founded a homeless shelter. Does that count? Would that perhaps say something to how he feels about the homeless?ReplyDelete
As for the Chateau, Cappleman reported that he tried working with the previous owner and got nowhere. Kind of like what Tunney went through with this same previous owner and the Diplomat. I'm delighted that he used influence to get another owner who would be more responsible. I'm sure the neighbors and businesses in the area are as well.
Mark Brown continues his articles on Uptown and the homeless.ReplyDelete
Today's installment: KFC, bring us KFC, we're sick of McDonalds.
You have to just love the quotes in Brown's latest article.ReplyDelete
“We’ve got more food than we know what to do with,” says Tamara “Tami” Walsh, who has been on the streets for 19 months since losing her home in Channahon. She found out last week that her daughter is expecting Walsh’s fifth grandchild.
I thought Walsh was exaggerating about the food, and still do to some extent, but as if to reinforce the point, Hernandez and Ramiro Velazquez, the homeless marathon runner, picked that moment to feed the birds and squirrels.
The article goes on to state that none of them want to eat the soup from Salvation Army. From all the hysterical comments, I thought for sure they were all starving in the park.
Gee, I wonder why Mark is just now mentioning there's no shortage of food? Do you think maybe he just forgot?