Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on November 7, 2010 at 8:04pm

THanks for sharing these conditions related to the Boulder building sale.
It does not sound like 'community use' of the Chabad House building will be particularly easy and the restriction of no food (due to Kosher laws) makes the space even less attractive for groups who may want to use it for meetings, etc.

Permalink Reply by Eleanor Coleman on November 7, 2010 at 9:48pm

I agree with your assessment. I also feel that the boost in activity on that corner is going to provide an economic change for the positive. At a time when the entire city is struggling with filling storefronts, we're going to do it. The very presence of the Chabad House will put a "stamp of approval" on UR traffic into the area. Controversial/unfair as it is, UR traffic means greater policing and increased safety for us all.

Most of the folks I work and talk with across the SouthWest Quadrant, if they are even aware of Boulder, are not having any trouble with crossing the street for coffee. While they are obviously not the folks who are emotionally or otherwise connected to the Boulder history, they are part of the SouthWest and part of the area the Sector 4 CDC is charged with serving.

The more pressing issues I hear are in regards to public safety and improving education systems. I'm hoping that the increase in communication we are seeing via Location19, which is a direct result of the Boulder turmoil, will provide an increase in venues for the entire SW to connect and support one another. The "place," to me, isn't as important as the need for connection to actually happen.

Permalink Reply by Marian Boutet on November 8, 2010 at 1:19am

It’s looking as though the intended buyer and seller of Boulder Coffee will prevail in their desire to see the building sold and used as a Chabad house. There's a lot of money at stake, of course. There's the profit to be made on the sale of the building itself. There are the rents to be collected from the storefronts across the street. There's the promised flood of new business we're told to anticipate because the Chabad house will "validate" this side of the river in the eyes of the U of R students. Maybe it will happen that way; smarter people than me have said it will.

It’s a different matter when you try to attach a value to the loss of good will and trust among community residents who, in good faith, donated their own money (piddling amounts by comparison) to see the Carr building restored and turned into a neighborhood coffee shop. It’s difficult to put a value on it, but it does have a price, and maybe it will turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory for the parties involved, as well as for Sector 4 CDC.

I admit that I’m getting crankier as I get older. But I've seen this kind of stuff before, and it just doesn’t get any easier to take with the passage of time.

Permalink Reply by Eleanor Coleman on November 8, 2010 at 7:56am

Don't equate standing strong in what you believe as "getting crankier." I am optimistic that, if we continue to come to the table with opposing viewpoints, we'll avoid future debacles such as the Boulder issue.

I am fully aware that the force, and funds, behind the 19th Ward is a primary reason that a building worth less than a dollar is now valued at one-half million dollars. However, the 19th Ward Community Association is not represented in many of their 21 Districts, Districts made up of people who are clueless about what is going on at the corner of Genesee and Brooks. They are very aware, however, that their streets are not safe - and it's getting worse - and their kids are not being educated.

At the 19th Ward meeting to make a decision about Boulder, it was touted as a meeting that would need more space for all the opposing views yet only about 16 people showed up to weigh in, some from the same District. In my mind, Boulder is not an issue that "moved" a good portion of the 19th Ward. There was a much bigger outcry and opposition to Rite Aid moving from the now SW YMCA to the corner of Thurston and Brooks.

Again, I am believing that we will go forward with more connection and potential for true community-based power , even if it is as a result of becoming aware of the severe disconnection that exists among us.

Peace!

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on November 8, 2010 at 8:32am

Eleanor, you're absolutely right but i want to add one thing - for people to 'come to the table' they need to a)know that the table is there, b) be invited and/or encouraged and c) believe that their presence at the table is as important as everyone else's presence.
Whether talking about Boulder or the 19WCA or any other 'entity' in this community, there are many people who feel left out, unwanted and/or as if their input doesn't matter. People can only have this experience so many times before giving up!
Public safety is a HUGE issue here- it has been so for many, many years. Likewise, this community has had a strange love/hate relationship with the UR - on the one hand expecting them to 'invest' in our neighborhood and on the other hand fearing that they are taking it over.
We are a community divided in many, many ways including relationships of various 'leaders' - we all need to find a way to navigate through the 'muck', find what unites us and move ahead with some plans to make it happen!

Permalink Reply by Ken Maher on November 8, 2010 at 9:26am

I agree with your skepticism, Margy. We seem to be getting a late start to the practice of transparency here, and there's no track record to give anyone the confidence that deals of this nature will not continue to be made behind closed doors in the future.
And as far as providing an economic change for the positive, that remains to be seen. Even one of the prime retailers in that area, Dave Etzel, owner of Dalberth's, said the sale of the building "probably won't help the retail."
As for the no-food rule for the "outside" use of Chabad House, does that mean that we won't even be able to pick up a cup of Lyjha Wilton's coffee across the street and bring it into the building for a meeting? On the other hand, Chabad House in Brighton sells kosher pizza at lunch time on school days; could the new 19th Ward site offer a limited kosher menu to guests as a fund-raising and community outreach effort?

Permalink Reply by Eleanor Coleman on November 8, 2010 at 9:56am

I like your broad thinking (kosher pizza). SWAN's longtime consultant, Mike Moss, suggested the same thing.

Regarding "place at the table" The most recent Sector 4 CDC meeting was attended by ALL representatives of Sector 4, except Neighborhood United, as they have not yet identified a representative to the CDC. This expanded board representation was approved last October when the CDC had a Strategic Planning meeting at which their separation from the SW Common Council (brought about by selling the property at 955 to Lyjha Wilton without input from the greater community) was put on the table. Sector 4 leaders and Board officers came to the agreement that neighborhood group representatives should be brought back onto the Board to begin to heal the wounds and to more effectively represent the entire SouthWest.

After much follow-up, phone calls, emails, etc., by the CDC over the last 8 months, all but one of the neighborhood groups is represented. And I have to add, the fact that they "invited" me to be part of the Board is significant. I am known for being a little too transparent at times.

The healing and the growth will take time (This I Must Earn). I believe the CDC is making every effort to earn your trust and partnership.

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on November 8, 2010 at 12:05pm

my comment about 'place at the table' was not specific to the CDC - it was a general comment from years of experience and observation with many 'community groups' and/or 'initiatives in the SW, mostly in the 19th ward.
I appreciate that the CDC has made an effort to expand their table but it remains split from the "Common Council" and, perhaps, other entities including elected officials. And, behind closed doors (or email screens) there is still a LOT of stuff being said, "lines in the sand" drawn deeper, etc.
IF the southwest is going to survive and thrive we need for people to BE united rather than talking about the importance of it. We also need the so-called leaders to find their OWN common ground and speak as a unified voice about what OUR community wants and needs. This, of course, requires courage, motivation and putting aside personal differences for the COMMON GOOD - all of these, i think, are some of the important core values of leadership!

Permalink Reply by Eleanor Coleman on November 8, 2010 at 3:15pm

I didn't think you were talking about just the CDC; it's just one example I've become more aware of lately and, unfortunately, part of the separation from the Common Council is related to personal agendas which are hard to address in open venues without slamming someone (verbally, of course).

Any chance you're available for the SWCC meetings (3rd Thurs, 6 p.m. @ SW Community Center)? I know you have a wicked schedule but it would be great to have you at the table.

If not, do you have any suggestions (actual steps in the direction of...) on moving toward the leadership model you referred to? I'm thinking we should meet. OR, maybe it's good that we're working out the kinks in full view. What every happened to World Cafe' - that seemed like a good start.

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on November 9, 2010 at 7:18am

the World Cafe is another example of a good idea/concept that got stalled BUT I think that we are just about to do some follow up with the group that was there and make a plan for the next step.
in terms of attending meetings on any regular basis, my schedule does not always allow this as some of my work is out of town.
I do have a lot of ideas about leadership models and one of my strong beliefs is that leadership is primarily about behavior and not title. I will share some thoughts about that when I have a bit more time.