The Billy Taylor Park Event of Sept. 23rd
If you are aware of what has been going on in Mt. Hope for many years, with the violence brought on by the embedded drug culture in Mt. Hope's African American Community and the City of Providence's refusal to enforce the drug laws, you will get a kick out of this ProJo article, or a laugh, or else you will get further infuriated.
The event, which was ostensibly against violence, wreaked violent havoc on the neighbors adjacent to Billy Taylor Park.
The community police were at a loss to cope.
They did not want to upset the "community", read, "minority" per political pressure!
What??????
http://www.projo.com/ri/providence/content/projo_20060924_pcamp24.310e12d.html
Posted at 11:20 PM | Community | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Lafeter's Folly
On Catch-23 Redoux and Katie Laferte's allegations
“Mount Hope doesn't need fifteen organizations fighting each other. We're talking about twenty blocks here.”
“ . . . rather than staking out territory and duking it out like the kids are doing in their ridiculous ‘gangs . . . ”
I’ve learned to have a sense of humor in dealing with Mt. Hope's unselfish, though ambitious and thoroughly ambivalent, citizen activists, because, well, a sense of humor is definitely needed in order to keep one's sanity -- otherwise one would roux the day they ever became active in neighborhood politics.
I think our illogical commenter, Ms Laferte, got caught a little bit off base in her mini-rant mini-skirt, about Mt. Hope neighborhood organizations, and here, she gets picked off base, to use a baseball metaphor.
I’ve been involved in community work in Mt. Hope and with GCCC for many years and have experienced no conflict with any other Mt. Hope organizations. The Mt. Hope organizations I know of have separate missions which do not overlap. For instance, the Ministries do community outreach to poor people using government funds, and the MHNA uses government funds to provide after school programs, while the GCCC uses only member dues to to their work, which focuses on quality of life issues.
Our Catch23 writer says that, “
“Mount Hope doesn't need fifteen organizations fighting each other. We're talking about twenty blocks here.”
And even earlier, in a related statement, she compares Mt. Hope organizations to teenage gangs fighting over turf.
“ . . . rather than staking out territory and duking it out like the kids are doing in their ridiculous ‘gangs’.”
Who are these 15 organizations, Ms. Laferte; which ones are duking it out; and what are they duking it out about? I, myself, want you to inform me as I’m a long time member and leader of one of the organizations (GCCC).
And I assure you, Katie, the "kids" don't in any way see their gangs as "ridiculous" -- they see them as deadly serious, as you should, too, as we all should. How many have died?
It seems to me that this commenter cemented herself concretely in an abyss of obese hyperbole, if you know what I mean. In other words, I think she’s got it all wrong.
Our Catch23 commenter asks that:
"The organizer of these meetings has told me she's contacted the GCCC leadership on a few occasions to extend an invitation to attend. I would like to pass on the information to a member who would like to get involved (not someone who would derail the process, but someone who would be willing to attend as a representative of the principles of the GCCC)".
My stance on meeting with other organizations at the request of CATCH is that that would be a waste of our time if they provided GCCC with no clear agenda. If CATCH had a concrete proposal for the GCCC organization asking GCCC to perform a certain function for them or aid them in a specific area or task we would have looked over the request carefully, put it to our members, and acted on it one way or the other. But we received no proposal, no phone call to discuss issues, just an e-mailed meeting announcement.
Since my wife, Irene, was battling cancer at that time, all such insignificant activities, we just put them on the back burner.
GCCC categorically rejects Ms. Laferte's allegation that a rift exists between any Mt. Hope organizations and challenges her to prouduce evidence of her unfounded manipulative, delusional, and paronoid accusations.
But we (you) can certainly create a rift if you so desire!
But we did ask a GCCC member to represent GCCC at a CATCH meeting; Ellen Baver; and Ms. Baver left that CATCH meeting in tears after being viciously attacked by the woman who works at the Learning Center, Ann Marie Ready, and from someone from the Mt. Hope Neighborhood Association, a Mr. Carvallho, and Ms. Devine all for Ms. Baver’s writing a letter to the editor of the Providence Journal and the East Side Monthly expressing her point of view as a Mt.Hope mother, parent, and resident who walks Camp Street on a regular basis.
See the July 7th post, Pro Jo Editorials = Two of a Kind -- Does Mayor Get It? : the comments made under that post, using names like Kangroo Communique, et al.
Ghastly behavior! I’m appalled at the gall of these people. To publicly attack and criticize someone for exercising their right to free speech, their right to voice their political opinion? To verbally attack her out of the blue in front of all the other people present at the meeting.
One person implied, (in what I consider a manipulative lie) that Ms. Baver's letter offended Mt. Hope's youth -- can you countenance such an outrageous accusation -- who did Ms. Baver's letter offend, the youthfull drug dealers on Camp Street?
Another person told Ms. Baver that she intervened to keep somone from burning down her, the Baver's, house! Can you imagine?
Ms. Ready, Mr. Carvhallo, Ms. Devine, write your own letter of dissent to the editor, for Christ’s sake--voice your disagreement in the public forum like Ms. Baver had the courage to do.
Cowards! Cowards all!
Ms. Baver reported to me that she was totally unprepared for such a vicious, personal attack and that it really shook her and her family up. She left their meeting in tears and was upset for days afterwards. Ms. Baver is one of the Mt. Hope residents and GCCC members who has worked the most courageously, and unselfishly, for positive change in Mt. Hope.
What way is that to treat someone whom you invited to participate in your meeting?
I wish I had been there --I really, really wish I had been there. Despicable behavior! Shame, shame, shame on all you who participated!
Since my wife, Irene, successfully beat her cancer (she’s cancer free, thanks, to all of you kind people who inquired) she has attended every meeting of CATCH. She has not yet heard of a proposal for GCCC from CATCH.
So what’s the deal, Ms. Laferte?
What have you and CATCH got for the GCCC?
What are you calling for?
You sat right next to Irene at the last CATCH meeting, and you had every opportunity to follow up on this Catch-23 post of yours, yet you were as quiet as a little mousey. Are you mousey by nature?
Here is another Laferte quote from the Catch-23 post:
“The much maligned CATCH program has held a series of meetings since the spring about "affordable housing." The fallout of these meetings is the idea that all Mount Hope organizations should get together and talk to one another, to develop trust and accountability and really try and deal with the various problems people perceive in the neighborhood rather than staking out territory and duking it out like the kids are doing in their ridiculous ‘gangs’.”
What do you mean, “The fallout of these meetings . . . “? Should we all be in our “fallout” shelters?
And by the way, Ms. Laferte, who told you Mt. Hope organizations don’t have “trust and accountability” -- or are you making that up?
CATCH, Ms. Laferte? Who? Empty rhetoric, Ms. Laferte: we await proof?
Has anyone observed anything like a gang war between Mt. Hope organizations?
I think Ms. Laferte needs to stick to organizing neighbors and community residents to clean up the empty land trust lot that blights the view from her house: she has organized at least two such clean-ups, calling them “Community Cleanups”, when in fact they only cleaned up the filthy part of the community that she could see from her front window: I participated in one of her so called “Community Clean-ups, and I felt used and dirty afterward. And I vowed, never again.
There are many kinds of community activists -- Ms. Laferte is one kind.
Some people are only involved in CATCH because they think they can have some minor input into the affordable housing that is going into Abbott Court, the Walkway off of Knowles Street where Ms. Laferte lives. CATCH should be aware of such motives.
As far as for CATCH, none of the three principal organizers lives in Mt. Hope, nor have they invested financially in Mt. Hope. Only their meeting moderator, Ms. Devine, is a Mt. Hope resident, with a financial commitment to Mt. Hope. She is a professional in social work for Miriam Hospital. She is the CATCH front person because she lives in Mt. Hope.
In fact, most of the people involved in CATCH and the Mt. Hope Empowerment Network are what I refer to as Professional Liberals. They draw their paychecks either from the government or from organizations that draw funds from the government for social services. It is important for their careers, for their resumes, to be involved in something like CATCH. I call it resume building. Although these people all have an ulterior motive, I believe that all these people strongly, honestly believe that they are doing good. They just cannot tolerate anyone who disagrees with them. I do. I personally disagree with them. Believe me, liberals are less tolerant than conservatives, and I am in no way a conservative, but believe me, you, Professional Liberals are the least tolerant of all, as evidenced by their attack on Ms. Baver for voicing her opinion.
I consider the leader of CATCH to be Dr. Peter Simon, of the Health Department, and I wish he had the courage of his convictions to confront his associates for their viscious and unconsionable attack on GCCC's Ms. Baver.
I think CATCH or now, The Empowerment Network, can do some good and bring some needed services to people who need them. I hope they can bring some of their ideas to fruition.
GCCC remains ready and willing to work with CATCH: we simply await a written proposal explaining what CATCH is all about and what role they wish GCCC to play in their plans. I strongly believe that GCCC should be operated in a professional, legal, business-like manner. CATCH should approach GCCC with these principals in mind.
I respectfully ask CATCH if they have plans that include GCCC, please forward them in writing to us, or simply call us up on the phone, or e-mail us, and fill us in on the details. GCCC is open to considering any projects that will benefit the entire Mt. Hope community, as expressed in our Mission Statement.
GCCC also remains willing to reach out to the Mt. Hope learning Center’s Ms. Ready and to the MHNA’s, Mr. Carvhallo and to CATCH to work toward common goals benefiting Mt. Hope: but we strongly believe that the individuals who attacked Ms. Baver owe her an apology for their vicious and unconscionable, personal, ad hominem attack on her at the winter, 2005, CATCH meeting.
Yeah, one must have a “mind of winter” to behold “the nothing that is not there and the nothing that is.” To quote Wallace Stevens.
And, oh yeah, one must have a mind with a sense of humor, otherwise, well . . .
Drug dealers still operate freely right around the Crossrroads, Camp & Cypress, within sight of the Police Department's District 8 Substation -- it takes both a "mind of winter" and a "sense of humor" to tolerate that!
John Twomey
Posted at 04:04 AM | Community | Comments (0)
Afforable Housing
I picked up this morning's ProJO and there on the front page an article about how RI trails the rest of the country in housing construction.
Our state came in dead last with only 1505 units added, nearly half of the 2nd to last state, Alaska, and 3rd to last, Vermont.
One so called expert quoted (Barnet from Rhode Island Housing) explained the declining numbers by blaming communities: "Most communities are wary of new housing, and that has constricted supply to the choking point," Barnett said.
I wonder if that is really an accurate statement. Are communities wary of building new housing, Or is Barnett speaking in code, when what he actually means is that most communities are wary of building affordable housing and sometimes affordable housing advocates use the term 'affordable' when they mean both 'affordable' and 'subsidized'.
Here is how this article defines affordable:
Housing is considered affordable when a household spends no more than 30 percent of its gross income on the rent or mortgage, taxes and insurance. To be affordable in Rhode Island, a housing unit must sell or rent at a below-market price, made possible with a government subsidy.
Let's do some math: in 2004 the median sales price of a home in Providence was $262,000 (the median price is the middle price in the range of all home prices where an equal number fall below the median and an equal number place above the median. The median price is considered more accurate than the average price because averages become skewered by extremely high and extremely low prices.)
The median wage in RI was approximately $45,000, per year in 2003 according to the Census Bureau, which breaks down to a monthly income of aprox $3,750, per month. If you put 30% of that toward housing you would be paying $1,125, per month for housing. For a home buyer that $1,125 would have to include mortgage (principal and interest), taxes, and insurance.
Using these figures a household with the median income of $45K would qualify for a home loan of $130,000. That price is $132,000, below the median home price in Rhode Island.
A 30 year loan of $130,000 at 6% interest would require a monthly payment of principal and interest of $779, leaving $346, dollars for taxes and insurance, and with rising taxes and the rising cost of insurance, that $346 may barely be enough.
Try to find a house in Providence for $130,000 today, and you can understand the problem people earning around the median income of $45,000 would have in buying a house. That figure is $132,000 below the median single family home price.
Let's look at that $45K wage: given a rigid 40 hour work week the wage earner would be making aprox $23, per hour. I think many people make far below that figure per hour and would in fact be happy to make 23. Imagine how difficult it is for people who make half the median, or $11, per hour. It would take a two income household making $22,500 each to equal the median wage, and they would still be hard pressed to find a home in the price range for which they qualify.
That is where the many programs for first time home buyers come in and where subsidized housing becomes so important.
Let's look at these figures another way; let's look at them from the angle of the median Rhode Island house price, $262.000. What income need be earned to qualify for that median priced house?
Working backwards, a 30 year loan for $262K @ 6% interest would require a monthly payment of $1570, and your taxes and insurance would run another approx $400, per month for a monthly total housing cost of $1,970, per month.
Let's see, if $1,970 = 30% of X, X would then = $6,566, per month or a yearly income of $78,800, that is $33,000 or 43% higher than the median income (the Median Income is 57% of the income needed to buy the Median Price house.
Let us now table these figures for easy reading.
-- Median house price in RI -- $262,000
-- Income needed to buy Median priced house -- $ 78,800
-- Median income in RI -- $ 45,000
-- Mortgage for which median wage qualifies -- $130,000
-- Difference between Median Income and
income needed to buy median priced house -- $ 33,000
-- Percent difference between the Median
Income and the income needed to purchase
a Median Priced house -- 43%
-- Median Income is what percent of income
needed to buy Median Price house -- 57%
-- Difference between the Median Price
house and the house for which a
Median Income qualifies -- $132,000
-- Percent difference between the Median
priced house and the house for which
a Median Income qualifies -- 50%
(Anyone wish to buy half a house?)
Of course these figures are approximate and calculated on a cheap desk calculator using statistics readily available, thus they should be considered only ballpark figures. Still I believe they are accurate enough to give a snapshot of the wage/home prices dichotomy.
I'm sure it is possible to build attractive and financially feasible affordable housing. I just wish that anyone debating housing would be careful to differentiate between affordable and subsidized and Mixed Use housing (both affordable and subsidized in the same development). Communities are tired of housing developers and housing advocates trying to pull the wool over their eyes by mixing up the terms.
The difference in impact on a community between affordable housing and subsidized housing is huge.
I'm no advocate of the government getting involved in our lives, but maybe it is time for govt. to step in and devise a comprehensive plan for building affordable housing that is both attractive and affordable.
We've seen what affordable looks like when left to private developers: ticky-tacky, unattractive homes, cheap construction, and diminishing property values in the immediate surrounding area.
We can do better than that with our tax dollars.
To read the ProJo article, click on link below.
R.I. trails the rest of the country in housing construction
To comment, click link below.
Posted at 06:53 PM | Issues | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
