Camden is Shifting, I hope

Power loves a vacuum and you can call Camden "Hooverville" right now. It's a game of musical chairs in our fair city and here are the changes.

1. We will have a new mayor in the fall, most likely - Dana Redd (giving up her state Senate seat and City Council seat. FYI she replaced a Senator who entered Federal prison today :P)

2. We will have a new President of the City Council - Angel Fuentes is running for State Rep.

3. We will have 2 new city council members - Fuentes and Redd are running for new offices

4. We will have a new state appointed COO - Judge Davis leaves this week

5. We will have a new Public Safety Director - Vega resigned last week

6. We will have a new State Rep - open seat

7. We will have a new State Senator - open seat

8. We will have a new CEO of Cooper's Ferry Development Corp., nonprofit developer of the Camden waterfront - Tom Corcoran left for a similar job in Philly and the V.P. will move up.

9. We have a new Chancellor at RU-C - Wendell Pritchett came over from U Penn

10. And we will have a Gubernatorial election in November, which may or may not give us a new Gov.

You have lame ducks running for a different office, you have vacancies, you have higher-ups running for re-election, and most politicos are paying attention to the election - not governing.

Two things happen when there is this much tumult.
One is that people hunker down and try to keep everything at status quo until new people arrive and the situation can be assessed.

Two is that people proceed into the void and hope to shape the landscape before new people are in place. This is the more likely scenario. People take advantage of the fact that eyes are elsewhere and there is opportunity to act. In Camden, this may be a good thing. If the regular cast of elected officials is looking at the election, there is room to maneuver and actually make some headway in this town where every pol puts their thumb on the City's neck!

The city is in the midst of trying to apply for as much Federal stimulus money as it can. This was not a good time for the COO to walk out.

The city is in the midst of reshaping the police force and getting officers on the street instead of behind the wheel or a desk. This has not been easy. Not a good time for the PS Dir. to quit.

The city needs jobs, jobs, jobs. Not a good time for 2 key City Council people to leave to campaign.

I don't know that it matters if the State Rep and State Senator change. The state legislature is still a bit of a mystery to me.

It is a great time for a new Chancellor at Rutgers, Camden - the academy does not move well with interim place-holders, no matter how good they are.

It is a great time for new leadership to take on the development issues of waterfront neighborhoods. Tom did his job well and was a great champion for Camden. But even he needs to move on to a new challenge and let his successor take a run. Young blood can be a game changer.

Stay tuned. It should be a very interesting Fall season!

Camden Waterfront Development 101

So two headlines in Camden caught my attention today.
Headline one is that the June unemployment rate in Camden is at 18%. Of course the actual rate is probably closer to 30% given the way the rate is figured.
Headline two is that a Union County Senator in NJ is trying a last minute block of the demolition of the state prison in Camden that is built on PRIME Delaware River waterfront land with fabu views of the Philly skyline.

Some of the more vitriolic commenters in Camden have used their flawless logic to suggest that if unemployment is high, the prison should stay open because it provides jobs. How many of those jobs are held by Camden residents has not been reported (our hometown newspaper is not exactly an investigative powerhouse). Let's say 20% of the prison staff are Camden residents and there are 500 employees (I'm taking a wild guess here). That would mean 100 jobs for Camden residents. That is a number worth talking about if it is valid. Did I mention that it has been reported that all the guards and staff were redistributed in the NJ Corrections system. So no jobs have been lost, just moved. The value of this land far surpasses its current use. The neighborhood is organized, but very poor and suffers from regular drug dealing, drug users, gun violence, etc. It also has a large share of social service agencies located there.

So the Senator's question is why is the state demolishing a relatively new facility whose lifespan is not yet up? Maybe the question should be, will Camden generate more tax money from a taxpaying development (as opposed to a state building that pays no taxes) and generate more stability in the neighborhood, thus costing the state less in the funding it pays to "take care of" Camden?

I doubt that any analysis has been done on this property, what its value is, what its future use value is, tax revenue expected, or how it will affect the neighborhood's revenue production. Compared to its current tax status (0) and the negative impact on the neighborhood - would you like to buy a home with a lovely view of the prison?-, any development would likely provide a net revenue gain. If something is to be built on the prison site, would there be jobs for residents in construction and in whatever the development becomes? Would it be a net gain to the city in jobs (remember the prison staff got transferred)?

It is amazing to me, no, outragous to me, no, more like incomprehensible to me that there is no jobs plan for Camden. None. Nada. And now a state Senator is going to say - you know - the state may need that prison, so let's not be so hasty to tear it down. Senator - you want a prison so badly - move it to your county.

What would you like to see on that site? I have heard that the neighborhood would like a park. Nice, but there is a waterfront park on the other side of that neighborhood. Do we need another? How about if this land makes some money? Luxury condos? - doubtful. Casino and hotel? - I've heard that idea - we could steal revenue from all the Pennsylvania people. But given how badly Atlantic City is doing, I doubt that will be allowed to happen. How about a grocery store? It would be tucked back into a corner of Camden, but it is easily accessible by residents. Being tucked back means it is much less likely to be robbed - no easy getaway. Make it a waterfront grocery with a full service deli (like they have at Wegmans) and people could eat there, enjoying the waterfront views. Don't taxpaying residents deserve a waterfront view like the prisoners had? Since it is state property or DRPA property or City property - it should be able to be sold for a $1. Then there would be no need for TIF or other incentives. Just build your business and open it. Pay taxes like everyone else. Or lease the land for 25 years. Anything you build there right now will have a shelf life of maybe 30 years. A 20 year run as a grocery would be nice. Give the neighborhood some stability and an anchor.

A grocery would provide some jobs. It would provide nutritious food which is in short supply in Camden, but it won't provide much tax revenue, especially if the land is leased (though a PILOT could be part of the lease). What if condos were built? They would pay residential property taxes, but there would be no jobs. And a bunch of rich people who buy condos in a rough neighborhood will demand lots of services from the city, costing more than they contribute. Not a good bargain.

The point of riverfront space is to make it revenue producing AND accessible to residents so they can enjoy some nice manicured space too. There is an expectation that once the prison is gone, the riverfront walkway on the south side of the BF bridge will extend north to this land. That would enable north Camden residents to easily use the riverwalk.

So can we find a use that fulfills all our needs? First, lets make sure the prison goes away.

murder, mayhem, guns, cops - another day in the urban core

I follow both Kansas City and Camden comings and goings. Right now, in the heat of August, most bloggers and newsies attentions turn to crime and violence. Atmospheric heat = street violence. Just another season in the crime cycle. But this year people are pointing to a decline in the rate of violent homicides on the streets, but others point out that the rate is slowing while actual numbers are still higher in KC and Camden, even though nationally the numbers and rates are declining. I have a couple of news articles in my list to the right, that discuss the current sea change in the Camden police department. If you want to know what's going on in KC - read Tony's Kansas City blog (see my blog roll). Here's my take on the situation:

Rule #1 - there will forever be violence, murder, and mayhem on the streets where poor people are stuck because drugs, unemployment, and despair lead to crime. So all these folks that keep commenting on news stories and blogs should stop judging and realize it is a sobering reality to live in the urban core because that is all you have.

Rule #2 - statistics are always interpreted and interpretation is subjective. Does it matter if crime rates are going up or down if we still have 150 homicides in KC and 30 in Camden in 8 months? KC is 475,000 people in 300 square miles. Camden is 76,000 people in 9 square miles. Size matters.

Rule #3 - police on the street is part of the solution. In Camden, the new chief has put cops on the street to practice spot enforcement and martial law. It's designed to be a wake up call for rampant lawlessness on the streets in some neighborhoods. Basically, however, it is saying that the police will force crime to go underground. That sounds good - because if you aren't dealing on the streets, it is less likely that a drive-by shooting will claim innocent people sitting on their porch or stoop, or a kid playing in the street. It's laughable that the police union in Camden is whining about lunches missed and grieving the loss of time off. Sorry, but millions of people work their lunch hour every day to get the job done (I do). Camden is in trouble and it is your job to help fix it. It's a big change when the new chief says go patrol in the tough neighborhoods - and now you don't have a choice. Why did the police every have a choice? And if there are too few cops in Camden, why were any of them assigned to sitting behind a desk?

Rule #4 - jobs, jobs, jobs - urban core neighborhoods are dysfunctional because there are no jobs. The rest of the country is starting to feel that now. Suburban neighborhoods with foreclosures are finding that the houses are unsightly and unkempt and making people annoyed. Petty crime is up in the suburbs. We glorify a suburban widow dealing drugs in Weeds. Why? because she can make money doing it - why else? Drugs in the urban core is a business - a violent, dangerous, cutthroat business. It is an illegal business, but when there is money to be made, people will make it. Don't have to commute, dress is casual, I know my co-workers, and I get paid in cash. This is the American dream. If farmers in Afghanistan can grow poppies as a cash crop, inner city residents will deal drugs. Give people something else to grow or sell or get paid to do that is commensurate with their time and effort - and people will stop selling drugs. But please, don't offer the drug dealers and users a minimum wage job working 40 hours a week at the grocery store as a substitute unless there is health insurance, walk to work, easy wardrobe, and a willingness to accept people not judge them. Will people want to get off the dangerous streets? Yes, they will. But not to be insulted, to earn a fraction of what they had earned, and to not be compensated to replace the incredible danger of their former job.

I think the police are incredible people - they take on a job that most people don't want. But just because you wear a badge, doesn't mean you have license to be a prick or a bitch. Doesn't mean you don't have to maintain control of a situation - I get it that police can easily be in danger and not everyone likes them. It is a dangerous job and no one has forced you to take it. You do the job and we are grateful, but it doesn't make you immune from criticism. You carry a gun and are licensed to use it on your judgment. That's an incredible responsibility. But bear in mind that people are to be protected too, not just brutalized and ordered about. It is a difficult line, but we need you to do your job and do it well - not just be a thug. We have plenty of those on the streets already.

Race and Loathing in America

I posted 3 new news articles about problems in Camden. The articles are interesting, but it is the comments to which we need to give attention. Wow - blood in the water and the racists, neo- patriots, anti-tax/anti-government haters come out of the woodwork. The theme of the commentary is that Camden residents are to blame for all their own ills, the city's decline and inability to rejuvinate, the high taxes in NJ, and the fiscal woe of suburbanites. Maybe Camdenites cause cancer too.

Given the story on Dr. Gates at Harvard this week, we begin to see that not much has changed yet in the post-racial America. On the Courier Post site there is a steady cacophony of haters that repeat their mantras over and over and dominate the public sphere. I can't change their minds, but I do think that their residual impact is real and needs to be addressed. The constant "hater soundtrack" eats into the psyche of this city and people begin to nod, agree, and give up. The Judge's upbeat messages sound laughable against the soundtrack of the anti-Camden chorus.

Camden has deep, multiple, problems that are not easily overcome. The city may never turn around. But the city can be a great place for low and middle income people to live with dignity, safety, and with decent public services. People like to pontificate that you have to get the schools fixed, otherwise no company will come here. Or you have to get the crime down, or no employees will live here. Rutgers has the same mentality - we won't get more students unless the city is "fixed." I have a completely different viewpoint. You have to give people a reason to come and stay, and they will. This city does everything it can do to actively dissuade people from coming here, staying here, and liking this city. No amount of waterfront development will overcome a lethargic and rude bureaucracy. No amount of redevelopment funding will overcome a school district that won't communicate with its constituency. We like to think the problems of Camden are completely insurmountable unless we have zillions of dollars. It's just not the case.

I really don't care who is running the city - whether it is George Norcross, Dana Redd, Governor Corzine, Judge Davis, or the Chief of Police. What I do care about is that the city be run for the benefit of the residents and that the institutions have as much pride being in Camden as the many residents who are from Camden have. Go to a Camden High School football game or reunion and you will see the pride. Do people throw trash on the street? Yes. Does open air drug dealing exist? Yes. Does that mean there is no respect for the city? No. It means that people are behaving accordingly in a dysfunctional place. If there are no trash containers on the street and if they are not regularly emptied, why should I care if I throw trash on the ground? If there are no jobs and no plan to create jobs, why should I disregard the one activity where I know I can earn money? And don't start throwing morality at this. People who see that a Harvard professor can be arrested in his own home because he is black are not going to buy into a morality defense of a racist system.

Camden Redevelopment 101

I attended a planning board meeting tonight, City of Camden, that was held in the Crammer Hill neighborhood. The meeting was a legal session to take testimony from the planners and from citizens. The planning board was to vote on the plan at the meeting and if approved, send it on to City Council for approval. What transpired was a succession of rookie mistakes in how to bring a community plan forward, how to conduct a public meeting, and how to generate community consensus. In the 1980s, the Boston Redevelopment Authority presented a plan to the Dudley Street Neighborhood and said here is what we are going to do for you as we redevelop your neighborhood. The neighborhood revolted and came up with their own plan, worked with the BRA, and the neighborhood is still doing well today. It is the textbook example of what went wrong, what to do instead, and how good the outcome can be. Apparently the Camden planners missed that class.

Here is some unsolicited insight on how the City of Camden might proceed with their neighborhood planning, how to bring them up for public approval, and what they might get out of the process.

1. the city did a good job in having meetings with the community, focus groups, charettes, and all the other forms of input, dialogue, and citizen involvement. But it was all organized by the city planning staff and their consultants. None of this was citizen led or driven. Buzzzzzzz. 1st mistake.

2. the final version of the plan was finished by the city staff in May, but until tonight, the residents had not seen it. Buzzzzzzzzzz 2nd mistake.

3. the neighborhood is 73% latino. there was no translator nor were any of the materials available in Espan~ol. Buzzzzzzzzzz. 3rd mistake.

4. the city staff and consultants went to great length to assure the residents that no pieces of property on the eminent domain list were occupied, nor would they try to acquire any occupied properties. Eminent domain is a huge issue for residents in Camden and is the cornerstone of most neighborhood organizing against redevelopment. Planning staff just had to make one correction to the plan - 8 properties listed as vacant, but now they find in fact they are occupied. Then during comments, a business owner points out 3 of his properties on the acquisition list but he is using them - so please take them off. Buzzzzzzzz. 4th mistake.

I'd had enough at that point and left the circus.

Here's how this could have gone smoothly, been done in partnership with the community, and had a result that all parties could live with.

1. the presentation of the final plan to a group of 100+ residents should be done by the community group with the staff. Leave your consultants on the sidelines. they have no credibility in the neighborhood. If you don't have a plan that neighborhood leaders will step up and present, then your work is not yet done.

2. the community leaders should make the presentation to the planning board with the staff and consultants. they should have a scripted role to play, not be relegated to the comment line. It's just so demeaning and disingenuous to have your consultant spout about all the public meetings you had while the community leaders are orchestrating people to stand in line to make their statements opposing the plan. If people are adamantly opposed to what you are proposing, then you need to keep working to find an acceptable compromise. Neighborhood is not just a geographical concept. It is social fabric.

3. DO YOUR HOMEWORK - don't come to a legal hearing when you have not checked your occupancy list for a year. You will (and did) get blindsided when people who live and work in the neighborhood on a daily basis point out your errors. You lose all your credibility.

4. Respect your constituency. Don't have your consultant go through all the neighborhood stats, leading off with 73% latino, and then not have a translator or other bilingual preparations. It is insulting.

I'm not trying to be an I told you so, but this stuff is basic planning 101. The city should be embarrassed.

What is Bias?

Note: the cartoon is from Mike Luckovich blog http://blogs.ajc.com/mike-luckovich/2009/07/14/july-15/

The Senate hearings are on and apparently a number of Senators feel that the default setting for the judicial, legal, and rest of the world is the way they see things. Coincidentally, this view emanates from a white, male, perspective that is generally skewed by wealth and education. If you think differently, you are "biased." Judge Sotomayor is getting that "bias" thrown at her at every Republican turn to speak. Well, guess what fellas. It is 2009 and not everyone thinks as you do. In fact, we elected (with a solid majority), a president that thinks differently than you do.

Those that blast Judge S. are certainly entitled to their opinion, to use their venue to espouse that opinion, and to vote accordingly. But I am so very tired of having their opinion defended at my expense. That somehow my opinion is un-American, socialistic, "biased," or some other denigration. Just stand for your own opinion and stop throwing me under the bus.

Another soulja gone. Too much to bear

I was cruising on FB and looking at pages of friends I hadn't heard from in a while just to see what's up. I went to the page of one of my new Camden friends, Dafiq Rasheed. There were zillions of posts on his wall, all about him being gone, RIP, and yes, he died.

I went to the Atlantic City newspaper and found his obit, a story about his death and couldn't believe it. Still can't. In shock. This was a great young man. He ran for city council in Atlantic City this June and lost (I blogged about this previously). He was smart, wanted to make a difference in his community, had style and ambition, and knew how to play the game. He transferred to RU-Camden in January and that's when I met him. I don't even remember how now, but we had instant rapport. He would come by my office to talk politics and about racial issues. He was out to save Atlantic City, but cared about Camden too. He was 19.

My world is a bit upside down right now. He died last week and the funeral was last Thursday. I didn't know a thing. Apparently he drowned at a pool party. What? How can this be?

Going to KC - the time has come

I leave in 4 hours for the airport to fly to KC for a noon funeral for our beloved DeShawn. I spent the evening doing anything but thinking about this. But now the flood of issues spill forth and writing is the only way I know to express what I feel.

Despite the haranguing I took from the blogosphere this week on Citadel, I know that what I do and say works for me and that I must do what I do. It is why I met DeShawn and I am better for that.

I've been called a do-gooder, a hero, a sycophant, a narcissist, a dangerous subversive, a pioneer. It is very odd to have people comment on what they see as your motives for how you live your life. Eveyone is entitled to their opinion, including me. Tonight, my opinion is dark and foreboding. I feel like an impotent charlitan who thinks they can make an impact on the world only to see that it is a grain of sand on a vast beach.

I can intellectualize for hours about the urban condition and race relations. I can craft rings of logic around racists and dullards that will tie them in knots. I can champion a cause, advocate for a position, sit in judgment, and create understanding with the best of them. But none of these skills I possess will change the fact that a young person died. Cynics will attest that thousands of people die every day and more are born every day. It is like life is some huge conveyor belt where we get on and fall off - either during the journey or when the belt comes to an end. Realists will say, it is what it is and it is inevitable. Preachers will comfort us, friends and neighbors will join in commraderie to support the living, and the chapter of the world that had DeShawn in it will be closed. He was here and now he is not.

But we all have an impact on the next person - whether intended or unintentional. Whether it is Scrooge or George Bailey - each person affects the next. Some people look at it like dominos where the impact is sustained, each to the next. I think of it more as a ripple effect that ebbs and flows and gets pushback. Ripples don't die out, they just meet an immovable object that pushes back and moves the ripple in another direction. That's how I want to think of DeShawn. Not as gone and forgotton, but a ripple that met an immovable object and is now pushed off in a new direction. His energy is still with us though his body may be finished. That energy is roaming and is affecting people he didn't even know - like the people that are reading this. He affected me in ways that he was never aware of. So maybe we aren't impotent and maybe we aren't charlitans. Maybe we should not feel dark and foreboding, but enlightened and flush with the understanding that our "life" is energy that never ends. I'll see DeShawn tomorrow in the faces of his family, in the grief that will pour from friends and neighbors. I'll feel his energy in the hope that we all have for others to not have their ripple interrupted so soon. I'll know he is out there moving his energy to have interactions in new ways that we don't yet comprehend. It will be a good day.

Kansas City Citadel Project

UPDATE: Here is a link to a second post by Midtown Miscreant and the comments. Apparently they are very threatened by my comments and took it personal by trashing me as well as message. An old strategy - if you can't win on the message, shoot the messenger. I stand by my opinions and comments.

The Kansas City blog-world is buzzing about today's City Council consideration of funding for the Citadel Plaza retail development project. I don't know what the current plans look like, but I saw an iteration a year ago. It had failure written all over it. I know a thing or two about urban commercial development and know that if you don't build it for the right retail mix and pre-lease, no one will come and you will have a vacant bombshell on your hands.

The Citadel project is at 63rd and Prospect next to a busy highway where people would have to exit to shop, then get back on the highway. It is near a large hospital and medical center. It also is technically on the poor and minority side of town (though within a mile of affluent whites). Many ill-informed people think that Troost is still the official racial dividing line. It is more likely Paseo and perhaps, US 71/Watkins Highway. I put together this short demo to talk about retail trade strategy and a trade analysis of the area (which I am sure is having no bearing on the public sector decision making).

What really fries me is that commenters on the blogs are very self assured that this is a bad development deal because:
1. who in their right mind would shop in this neighborhood because it is has poor people and crime
2. why would white people shop in a black neighborhood?

Check out this post and comment thread (I have a couple of comments posted) at Midtown Miscreant who, for some reason, is seen as some kind of authority on this subject.
Midtown Miscreant
The ever popular TKC also has been running some great investigative posts on this subject, but this one brings out the best in the commenters.
Tony's Kansas City

Everyone who weighs in on this issue is very sure that this project will fail for reasons 1 and 2 above. No one is talking about any Economic Development analysis or retail strategy - which is of course what you need to be considering.

I am so tired of white people and middle class people making their pronouncements about poor people and minority neighborhoods. Most of them are so scared of these areas, they never go there. So their pronouncements are nothing more than their own fears as fact. Having lived much farther east in KC than this particular location, I feel I can say with some assurity - they are all full of crap. Yes, there is crime. Yes, there is poverty. Is the area as safe as the most affluent neighorhoods? Yes and probably safer. Crime in these neighborhoods is not random burglaries but often violence directed at specific people and activities. Read my most recent posts. DeShawn didn't get killed on the street. He got killed in a basement, where, if he had walked away from the situation, would not have died there.

People who don't live in these neighborhoods assume that they would be shot on sight, carjacked, and mugged if caught on the street. Anything is possible, but is it highly unlikely. You are as likely to be carjacked at the Oaks mall or have your purse snatched as you are on the eastside of KC. You are as likely to see a gun chase down Brookside Blvd. as you are down Prospect (and yes, both have happened in the last 2 years). It is these engrained perceptions and assumptions of truth that stymie investment in the urban core in KC, in Camden, and most other places. Bankers, commercial brokers, and others who "know" by looking at the same stats they look at for the suburbs, make decisions every day that reinforce their ignorance at the expense of the people who are trying to live in these neighborhoods.

I suggested on MM's blog post that if an IKEA were put in at the Citadel, it would be a rousing success, because despite what everyone "knows" about the area, the draw of an IKEA would outweigh their fears. Comments after mine amply demonstrate that. So if you want to ensure success for your shopping center, maybe Sweedish furniture is the way to go.

Guns part II

Grief

We get jaded by all the news that flies in our faces. Revolution in Iran and a young girl dies in front of us on YouTube. Another shooting in the ‘hood and a young man lies dead or is the shooter. Gun violence breaks out in a poor urban neighborhood and a child is killed in the crossfire. But this is personal. This is real. This is one of my kids. And now he is no longer here. How can this be?

I vacillate between disbelief, sorrow, and anger. My anger is the most productive emotion. I can try to channel my grief into an outpouring of anger that can be directed towards some cause. I have proclaimed that I am dedicating myself to the cause of changing the acceptance of the gun culture. I could adopt the cause of rallying against gun violence, but that is redundant. Guns can only be violent since that is their purpose. “Gun violence” is just a politically correct way of saying get rid of guns, as if to say “I accede to the right to bear arms, but am against the violence.” Bullshit. The attractiveness and appeal of guns has got to go.

Glorifying guns as an urban accessory is what I am against. I was in a park this evening and a little kid was climbing on the slides and jungle gym. He pulled out a gun – a toy one. It looked somewhat real. He brandished it with bravado. That is the gun culture we have to change. That is the glorification of guns that makes them irresistible to kids, teens, and young adults who feel the need to possess them and even use them. This little kid saw “play” in having a toy gun to pull on me. He showed me his swag’a. Who would buy a toy gun for a child? My mom did. She had a very cute picture of me as a little kid with a holster around my waist and my six-guns pulled. I had a cowboy hat on too. Bam-blam-whooosh. I got you and then I blow the smoke from the barrel of my gun. This is no longer acceptable behavior by adults to model for kids.

This is the face I won’t be seeing any more. He died because we couldn’t help him say no to guns.


Instead, we model to our children and to each other that guns are a necessity to protect our selves, our turf, our respect, and our property, even if we are under no real threat of attack. We model that guns are exciting and scintillating bringing an aura of danger to the situation. Damn right they’re dangerous. How is that exciting or appealing? We model that guns are an urban accessory, whether you are a sports figure, a movie star, a rapper, or a pimp – you need a gun. If you don’t carry it, you have someone carry it for you in the form of a security detail. Yeah, don’t mess with me, cuz I got heat. It’s cool and a sign of status if you are holding or are near large caliber weapons. We fail our kids every time those images are reinforced, because it says to them – guns are cool and necessary.