You are currently browsing the monthly archive for October 2009.
Fifth in a series. The community organization I work for organized an issues forum with the three candidates running for Mayor of Syracuse. These highly subjective and biased ruminations on the candidate’s remarks (I have endorsed and volunteer for Stephanie Miner) are solely those of your humble blogger and may not be reproduced without the expressed, written consent of Major League Baseball. Or if you buy me a nice present. Or if you ask nicely.
Here are the current perceptions of neighbors living in the south, southwest and near-west sides about the crime in their neighborhoods, even after all the efforts of concerned neighborhood residents, the current administration and the police department: Hundreds of drug houses and corners with open sales of illegal drugs; frequent gun shots; loitering gangs on corners and at vacant houses; poor or no response to 911 calls–especially to non-emergency/quality of life issues and to ANY issue on weekends; vandalism and property destruction; reckless driving and speeding–both cars and 2-3-4 wheeled motor bikes.
Two questions: First, please give us your definition of community policing. Second, as Mayor, how will you use your definition of community policing to make our neighborhoods safer?
Otis Jennings: Otis believes that real community policing would mean having a police force that builds realtionships with the neighbors and engages the community. Mr. Jennings believes that one way to deal with crime in our neighborhoods is to increase the number of police on the force. He mentioned that there is a class of potential officers currently undergoing training and that the incoming federal stimulus money will enable the city to start another class this coming year. He committed to maintaining the police force at this higher number of officers, even after the stimulus money has been used up in three years. Oh, and he feels our pain. Someone busted into his car and stole his GPS device while he was out campaigning.
Stephanie Miner: Stephanie believes that true community policing results when neighborhood residents have developed relationships with police officers that they know and trust. When this trust level increases, information is shared more freely and crimes are solved more easily. Too much emphasis on crime suppression has led to an atmosphere of fear and distrust of the police. Too many residents are unwilling to share information with police officers. In addition, Stephanie believes that the poor response time of the police is due to their traveling from call to call dispatched from 911. Ms. Miner believes the city could improve response times by using the kind of technology that will enable the police to better analyze crime data, systematically identify problem spots and more efficiently deploy police officers.
Steve Kimatian: Steve believes that community policing results when uniform police officers are working in a community on a regular basis–to the extent that they are known by residents as the neighborhood beat cop. Steve has an overarching philosophy of zero tolerance for what may be referred to as petty crimes: noise, parking trash. He wants to establish a baseline of order in the community, so that residents respect and maintain their property and neighborhood out of respect for their neighbors. Mr. Kimatian also has a five point crime program, but only discussed one point–a youth curfew. He believes that there are too many kids out late at night and they can be exploited by gangs. Steve acknowledged that not all kids can be taken home because of problems there, so he would invest in a counseling/service center where kids can be evaluated and referred to needed services.
Steve Kimatian
Fourth in a series. The community organization I work for organized an issues forum with the three candidates running for Mayor of Syracuse. These highly subjective and biased ruminations on the candidate’s remarks (I have endorsed and volunteer for Stephanie Miner) are solely those of your humble blogger and may not be reproduced without the expressed, written consent of Major League Baseball. Or if you buy me a nice present. Or if you ask nicely.
The organization I work for asked each candidate to respond to a 50-odd answer questionnaire on neighborhood issues. We then crafted an individual question to ask each candidate at the forum based on one of their responses.
Steve Kimatian: In your cover letter and in the margins of the questionnaire, you state that you agree in principle with 14 of SUN’s specific proposals, but cannot make promises about funding and staffing levels due to the economic problems facing the city. Do any of these proposals dealing with housing and crime strike you as so important that you will commit to them now, borrowing from other programs if necessary?
Steve stated that while there were certainly issues he would support by putting additional funding into their budgets, he still could not give specific commitments to dollar amounts or staffing levels until actually staring at the budget spreadsheets. Later in the evening, he referenced the demolition of vacant houses and the counseling component for his youth curfew plan as ideas that he would transfer money to from other parts of the budget.
Otis Jennings
Third in a series. The community organization I work for organized an issues forum with the three candidates running for Mayor of Syracuse. These highly subjective and biased ruminations on the candidate’s remarks (I have endorsed and volunteer for Stephanie Miner) are solely those of your humble blogger and may not be reproduced without the expressed, written consent of Major League Baseball. Or if you buy me a nice present. Or if you ask nicely.
The organization I work for asked each candidate to respond to a 50-odd answer questionnaire on neighborhood issues. We then crafted an individual question to ask each candidate at the forum based on one of their responses.
Otis Jennings: You would give owners of properties with large and illegal trash set-outs a 24 hr. notice before having DPW clean up the mess and fine the owners. 24 hours is a long time for wind to blow trash around, animals to rip through bags and neighbors forced to put up with the problem. Trash smells like hell in the hot summer months. Why give problem properties a break? They don’t give neighbors a break!
Otis responded that he believed that it was a requirement to give a homeowner a 24 hour notice before picking up trash and fining them. However, he stated he was “not married to that.” I will pick things up immediately if I find it is legal to do so. Otis also asked for neighbors’ support in calling in violations to the city and expressed his desire to clean up the city.
Stephanie Miner
Second in a series. The community organization I work for organized an issues forum with the three candidates running for Mayor of Syracuse. These highly subjective and biased ruminations on the candidate’s remarks (I have endorsed and volunteer for Stephanie Miner) are solely those of your humble blogger and may not be reproduced without the expressed, written consent of Major League Baseball. Or if you buy me a nice present. Or if you ask nicely.
The organization I work for asked each candidate to respond to a 50-odd answer questionnaire on neighborhood issues. We then crafted an individual question to ask each candidate at the forum based on one of their responses.
Stephanie Miner: You oppose SUN’s call to increase Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for both the SHARP handyman grant program and the Urgent Care owner-occupant loan program for emergency repairs. We live in economic times when credit is tight and incomes are stagnant. These programs have been called the loans of last resort for many families. How do you propose to help families stay in their homes if you oppose increases to these historically underfunded programs?
Stephanie replied that her answers didn’t reflect a disinclination to help families struggling to finance home repairs, but her desire to systematically change the entire Community Development Block Grant program. A new administration will have the chance to make the program more efficient, fund more direct housing issues and decrease the city’s reliance on the money to fund City hall salaries and overhead. She said no to our requests for these programs because she wants to create something better.
First in a series. The community organization I work for organized an issues forum with the three candidates running for Mayor of Syracuse. These highly subjective and biased ruminations on the candidate’s remarks (I have endorsed and volunteer for Stephanie Miner) are solely those of your humble blogger and may not be reproduced without the expressed, written consent of Major League Baseball. Or if you buy me a nice present. Or if you ask nicely.
The neighborhoods on the south, southwest and near-west sides of Syracuse make up only 15% of the city’s households, but our neighborhoods harbor 45% of the city’s vacant houses. There are over 1,500 vacant houses in the city, an increase of nearly 40% from the totals reported just four years ago. The city’s responses to the problem are clearly not working. Vacant houses are places to buy, sell and hide illegal drugs and weapons. Vacant properties are illegal dumps for trash and junk cars. Vacant houses draw youths who loiter, fight and make noise into the early morning hours. The vacant houses are targets for arson, depress home values and make it hard for neighbors to get homeowners insurance.
As Mayor, what will you do to reduce the number of vacant houses in our neighborhoods, adequately maintain the vacant houses remaining and rehabilitate more vacant houses for new owner/occupants?
Stephanie Miner was incredibly impressive on the housing issues presented to her, not surprising since during her time on the Common Council she has worked closely with our organization and others to improve the flawed Community Development Block Grant program that funds most housing work in low income city neighborhoods. Stephanie emphasized that we can’t demolish our way out of the problem and stated that the city needs to prioritize rehabilitation of properties over new construction. Stephanie also made an eloquent appeal to value the beautifully constructed older homes in our neighborhoods, (“that which makes us unique”) even if it may cost a little more in the long run. To this end, she also feels that the city should invest in deconstruction of houses, saving what we can of our houses rather than carting everything to the dump.
Otis Jennings bombed on this issue–he praised Roy Bernardi’s tax auction of delinquent houses as a means to deal with vacant houses. The auction was something I dedicated 6 years of my organizing life to kill, a program that decimated our neighborhoods. The auction disproportionately hurt the low income folks that could not afford to pay off their back taxes or negotiate a payment plan with the city–resulting in a net transfer from owner/occupants in low income neighborhoods to investor/speculators. Otis also said he would implement the recommendations of a 2005 ESF study on vacant houses. I’ve never heard of the study and he didn’t explain even one provision it contains.
Steve Kimatian name checked the Flint land bank as a way to deal with vacant houses, but he had no seeming recognition that land banks require state approval to create and Governor Patterson has already vetoed a land bank bill once. Steve also seemed to be gung ho for demolition, especially of dangerous homes and those contributing to crime. Steve promised to immediately demolish those houses that were in dangerous condition or a focal point of criminal activity. He also promised to meet with neighbors and listen to their ideas for saving some houses from demolition. However, Steve’s main points on vacant housing seem to involve a back hoe and a wrecking ball.
I posted a tweet today about feeling old because today is the 34th anniversary of Carlton Fisk’s famous walk-off home run in Game 6 of the 1975 World Series. A friend responded to my tweet by reminding me that the Sox lost Game 7.
My response takes longer than 140 characters:
To @BCubbison:
Game 7 of the 1975 World Series was a painful memory, just one of many for the fans of what was once the most snake bit team in pro sports :
Losing the 1946 World Series in Game 7 when Enos Slaughter scored the winning run in Game 7 of the 1946 Series, running from first to home on a single, allegedly because Johnny Pesky hesitated on throwing the relay home.
Losing the 1948 pennant in a one game playoff to Cleveland when Ted Williams was flustered by the “Boudreau shift.”
Losing the 1949 pennant to New York by losing the last two games of the year to the Yankees.
Losing the 1967 World Series in Game 7 to the Cardinals when light hitting Julian Javier hit a home run off an exhausted Jim Lonborg, pitching on short rest.
Losing the 1978 pennant to the Yankees in a one game playoff, featuring the pop fly home run by less than light hitting Bucky “F***ing” Dent.
Losing Games 6 and 7 of the 1986 World Series to the N.Y. Mets–both blown by the Sox in horrific fashion. (Vin Scully’s call of Game 6: “So the winning run is at second base, with two outs, three and two to Mookie Wilson. (A) little roller up along first… behind the bag! It gets through Buckner! Here comes Knight, and the Mets win it!”)
Losing the 2003 ALCS to the Yankees when Grady Little left an exhausted Pedro Martinez in too long and light hitting Aaron Boone homered for the win.
That was then, this is now. 2 World Championships, 2 American League pennants, 6 playoff appearances in the past 7 years. The Sox are arguably the best team of the new millennium. Especially since coming from down 3 games to-none to beat the Yankees in 2004, the old hurts don’t hurt as much. Sox fans were able to let go of the pain and the fatalism. I, like many Red Sox fans, made a pilgrimage to my father’s grave to let him know that the Sox had finally won–his 76 years overlapped the Sox’s 86 years of futility. He saw many games at Fenway in the 1940’s while in the Navy and stationed in Portsmouth N.H.
So the short answer to your tweet is–1975 was a hell of a Series, the Sox played well, but the Reds played a little better. I still remember that I hit my elbow on the drop ceiling in my parent’s basement when I leapt out of my chair as Fisk waved his homer fair. It’s still the greatest Series ever–and my Sox took the ‘75 Reds (perhaps the greatest team ever–certainly the best team of the 1970’s) to seven games and almost won the damn thing. (I’m so much calmer now, I will not even mention Larry Barnett’s missed call on Ed Armbrister’s interference that cost us Game 3.)
Now I know why I abhor organized religion, while clinging to personal belief–because organized religion is just a bunch of narrow-minded idiots with the organizing philosophy of street gangs. I guess I’m more interested in moral philosophy and consequent political/cultural behavior than in the trappings of church-dom.
Progressives within churches are doomed to defeat at the hands of the conservative, corporate, institutional politics crowd. We shouldn’t attempt to fight on their turf. The progressive American Episcopals are learning this the hard way–being attacked on several fronts, largely because of their liberal political and cultural views.
I was raised an Episcopalian, the American version of the world-wide Anglican Communion–the local branch of the Church of England. Episcopals in America have gone from being the establishment WASP church of my youth to being a fairly progressive group–ordaining women and gays as priests, even ordaining an openly gay man as a Bishop. One big happy liberal family.
But, in culture war America, the gay thing sent conservatives around the bend. Some parishes have tried to set up their own Episcopal Church and others sought to move their franchise from the American Church to one of the more conservative branches, one even based in Africa. The Anglican church leaders have fretted and prayed and equivocated–but have done nothing to support the progressive Episcopal leaders.
Now, a new wrinkle has been added to put pressure on the progressive Episcopals. The Catholic Church has for years allowed disaffected Anglican individuals and priests convert–even allowing Episcopal ministers to remain married and serve as Catholic priests! Now, the Catholics will allow entire congregations to convert, keeping some aspects of the Anglican liturgy intact.
Does the Anglican hierarchy oppose this? No, Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, head of the Anglican Church, embraces this as historical inevitability. This is viewed as a rapprochement with the Catholic Church from which the Episcopals emerged in schism over Henry the Eighth’s need to marry and divorce at will.
The Anglican Communion has become the third largest organized religion in the world–evangelizing large swaths of Africa and Asia. The dirty little secret about the church is that no one respects the gay-loving, liberal Americans, but it’s our money that allows most of the impoverished missions across the world to do its work.
A pox on all their houses.
SUN will be attending the Showdown In Chicago, taking 15 folks to what is looking like a massive protest at the annual convention of the American Bankers Association–the evil heart at the center of the pressure on Congress to gut all legislation to help poor folks struggling with foreclosure and predatory lending.
The protest has been endorsed and publicized by neighborhood groups, labor unions and now . . . the Communist Party of Illinois!
It’s rare for me to have friends who are experts, so it’s exciting to relate the following from my friend Mike, who is the Exhibition Designer/Preparator for the Columbia Museum of Art, Columbia S.C.
When I heard that his museum had the big Turner to Cezanne exhibit right before Syracuse, I sent him the following e-mail betraying my culturally stunted sensibilities: “Turner to Cezanne–it’s coming here after you guys had it. What should a layperson like myself look for at the exhibit–or is it just corporate hype?” In reality, I was hoping he’d say it was just a PR thing and I could safely skip it. Wrong!
Hey Dude!
It’s a pretty sensational show, especially if you dig impressionism and post-impressionism. There were a couple of Welsh sisters (name of Davies) in the 19th century who inherited a million dollars, no strings, at the age of 20. They decided to spend most of it on modern art and did a fine job of selecting paintings. Nowadays, you can’t walk into a museum shop and swing a dead cat without knocking over the display of Monet calendars and coffee mugs – a fact that can dilute the way we receive Monet’s paintings. But Monet and the rest of those guys were revolutionaries of their time. The exhibition is chock full of major works by major painters. These are paintings that had a important influence on the direction of modern art. Cezanne’s The Francois Zola Dam is worth the price of admission, alone. Awesome. I looked at that piece pretty much every day for the run of the show and it never got old.
A word of warning: all works are under glass. That’s just the way they do things in Wales. But it’s low glare glass so it’s a very minor irritation. One of the most important ideas at work throughout modernism is that a painting cannot and should not be something else – like a nude or a tree or a bowl of fruit. It’s essentially a flat surface with an arrangement of marks on it. It’s what Rene Magritte was thinking of when he painted a realistic picture of a tobacco pipe and wrote beneath it ”This is not a pipe” Of course, serious painters throughout history have known this but it came to the fore in modernism and you can see this idea (among other things) taking shape in this show.
So that’s my fast and dirty ramble on “T2C” as it came to be known in hundreds of in-house e-mails. Exhibitions titles, like college courses, all get abbreviated.
