« Good News Feature | Main | Rude Awakening: The Hidden Cost of Drug Dealing »
Pro Jo Editorials = Two of a Kind -- Does Mayor Get It?
Brussat & Baver in Thursday's and Friday's Providence Journal
Interesting stuff on this weeks Providence Journal’s editorial pages concerning two different neighborhoods facing similar issues, and our City Officials (i.e. the Cicilline administration) still don’t get it: on Thursday a commentary titled, Downtown’s droogs: Book’em!, by David Brussat, of the Journal’s Editorial Board and on Friday, a Letter to the Editor, by Ellen Baver, a property tax paying citizen of Mt. Hope and a proud GCCC member.
The point Brussat’s Pro Jo Commentary makes is that the downtown area, while being pushed as a high end residential district called “Downcity”, suffers from lax enforcement of the law and the city ordinances that make for a good quality of life for residents. Rowdiness is the rule and drunken louts ruin the quality of life for residents who are expected to pay beyond half a million bucks to live in beautiful “Downcity”.
Brussat uses many words to make his case elegantly, but one quote boils it down nicely, “. . . it is the job of City Hall to make sure that the police have the authority, the will, and the power to do the job.”
Ms Baver’s letter, addressed to Mayor Cicilline, takes us on a walk down seedy Camp Street with her and her kids, past the addicts and dealers and garbage, to Billy Taylor Park where her young children ask about the “Drug Mural” on the retaining wall there.
She asks, “Why are good, tax paying homeowners being victimized by home and car break-ins and having to live in fear in their own homes and neighborhood? We feel like hostages to addicts, dealers, thieves and other criminals. Drive a few blocks away, to any other East Side neighborhood, and everything is clean and quiet.”
Ms. Baver goes on to question the understanding of Mt. Hope residents that the City has an unwritten hands-off directive for Mt. Hope drug dealing, containing it and its attendant crime to the Mt. Hope neighborhood. Bravo, Ellen Baver.
Both of these editorials deal with the same issue. City officials failure to get tough on the criminals, louts, and “droogs” who negatively affect the quality of life for residents and thus ruin entire city neighborhoods.
What is it the Cicilline administration does not get? Just this. That property tax paying residents are fed up with the Cicilline administration’s pandering to nefarious forces instead of protecting the interests of the property tax paying citizens who shoulder the burden of the City’s finances and who make up the strong backbone of the city’s character.
It seems that the Mayor is so worried about losing a single vote by being strong on crime and quality of life issues that he is willing to lose property tax paying voters en masse.
I like both these pieces and I intend to write to the Journal to voice my support for both Brussat’s and Baver’s point of view and just to throw in my two cents.
John Twomey
Posted at July 1, 2005 11:10 AM
Close, but no cigar.
I wrote it all by myself, without input from anyone else, just like my previous posts (as 'The Elephant Vanishes' and 'Super Frog Saves Tokyo', but not 'The Elephant Vanishes II' -- not sure who that was).
Katie says I shouldn't post, but I just can't help it.
Happy (early) Bastille Day,
Brian Laferte, unaffiliated
Posted by: Brian Laferte at July 5, 2005 07:40 AM
Kangaroo Communique ponders her own post and how it got so close to the truth without her ever wanting it to be this way. But that's the way it goes when you don't have the courage to post using your own name.
Posted by: Biting Crocodile at July 5, 2005 04:14 AM
Some weak links want to wait for the market to take its course and correct what is wrong with Mt. Hope, but stronger blood courses through some of us in Mt. Hope who don't want to wait. We want City Hall to do the job it was elected to do. We want a safe neighborhhod, a clean neighborhood, and no more politically correct pandering to drug dealers, thieves, and other criminals.
You, who worry that some yuppie won't buy in Mt. Hope because of Ellen Baver's letter, bury your face deep in your rag, for now is the time for your tears.
Real estate values? What about the quality of life right now!
Posted by: John at July 2, 2005 12:41 AM
Does the link for Ms. Baver's letter work correctly? I just tried it, scrolled the contents, and couldn't find her letter. Has it been removed?
Jen
Posted by: Jen at July 1, 2005 03:07 PM
I don't ponder why people say Mt. Hope is a bad neighborhood, I understand why they say that. I live here, and I see the reasons every day. The truth hurts, but I appaulad her telling the truth. Perhaps the city will enforce the laws and stop letting criminals run the neighborhood. I think there are more important things to worry about than real estate.
Don't post again unless you use your real name. I know who you are.
Posted by: John at July 1, 2005 02:52 PM
The next time you begin to ponder 'Why are realtors telling people that Mount Hope is a bad neighborhood?' you can refer back to Providence Journal Metro Section, July 1st, 2005. That letter to the editor is going to have the people Mrs. Baver would like to see coming into the neighborhood turning away in droves.
Kangaroo Communique
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _
Editor's Note: John Twomey
The Kangaroo Communique is the Laferte coalition
_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _
Editor's response: John Twomey
"You see, I don't ponder (if you ponder) why realtors tell people that Mt. Hope is a bad neighborhood, (do they?) and I guess it is because of all the bad press Mt. Hope recieves in the Providence Journal. (Does it?) (No.)
Actually, now that you mention it, I don't know of any realator who bad-mouths Mt. Hope. Why, just recently, Gerri Schffiman, of Residential,one of the most successful realtors on the East side, sold an investment property by developers on Jenkins Street for a record $295,000.
I guess she did not call Mt. Hope a bad neighborhood.
And the historic Laferte house on Knowles and Abbot is undergoing an upwards of $100,000 renovation. I guess it is because of all the bad press that they are investing all that mortage money into Mt. Hope.
Pretentious and ludicrous some are among us, and they sometimes post to this website. But their intention is always to undermine, to backstab those who have a clear vision and a direct course of action that they intend to see through to the end: instead of building on action, they try to tear down by inaction and criticism. Everyone knows, it is far easier to tear something down than it is to build something. Just recognize it for what it is--jealously and resentment.
These are the types of people who have given up on our city government, on ever hoping to move them to deliver better services to Mt. Hope. They made a few phone calls, wrote a few letters, and when they didn't get their way, got discouraged, and adopted the attitude that, "It don't matter what you do, you can't win." Could it be that they made bad choices, chose an ineffective strategy, that caused their failure?
Now that they have failed, they want everyone to fail in their footsteps. Bitter, bitter is the brew.
But good luck to you."
Biting Crocodile (John Twomey)
Posted by: The Kangaroo Communique at July 1, 2005 12:04 PM