Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on October 9, 2010 at 8:25am

Thanks for sharing this information John.
Can you (or anyone else) please shed some light on who the players/organizations are in this?
I think it would be useful to know more details re: the purpose of the SW Common Council and who is involved. Likewise, I'd like to know the status of the Sector4 CDC and who is involved in that (I think that I remember that John Borek used to to be Director of that entity).
Finally, it would be helpful to understand how/if these entities relate to the 19th Ward Community Association and the City.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Inge Mallory on October 11, 2010 at 9:15am

O M G Sherri..........I am so out of the loop. Looks like another done deal in the ward. I am constantly amazed how a few select people can make such monumental decisions that impact a the whole community. Thank you for putting this all together in such a clear manor.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on October 11, 2010 at 10:04am

I will not be able to attend the meeting but would very much appreciate an update on the discussion.... This all feels very de-ja-vu to what happened when urban brew suddenly (at least to the average citizen) transformed to Boulder. In that event, a few select people were 'in the know' and the rest were essentially informed of the plan at a 'community meeting'.
maybe this is the 'fast ferry' of the 19th ward!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LaShay Harris on October 12, 2010 at 12:22am

Tonight I sat in the meeting (State of Boulder Coffee Shop) listening to good points on both sides. What seems to stand out is there has been a change in the direction we are taking due to a combination of things good, bad and indifferent. I have much respect for all the players in our community. I was and is still against redistricting the use of the Boulder Building. I have my reservations solely to to the lack of transparency. I went through several emotions during the meeting. Initially it was no way can we allow the coffee house to move and then it was maybe it was a good idea. This issue is a complex one since the community spear headed this project. What I like most is my community, more like a village, started this process and had a vision which is now being changed without initial input. Change is inevitable and what I see is we need to continue to encourage diversity in our nieghborhood. I ask that we all get informed and make sure you understand the facts. The buisness owner has the right to sell. He just need the approval for redistricting. The proposed Jewish Communiy Center will be a non-for-profit buisness so the building use will need to change. There is also some clarifications we all need to undersatnd inregards to the deed. Please contact your delegates and have some dialoge if not to at least become informed. Keeping positive, we had a strong presence in the meeting from the community. We are a community of diverse citizens and we need to keep an open mind. I am learning to do after losing what I love most to a house fire. I would have liked our community to have this dialogue sooner. I respect that I may disagree with the plans but there are common grounds we can all agree on. The major one is we love and care about our community and we want to see it thrive.
If that may mean exploring options that are different then, yeah I get it. What I don't get is why was there no dialogue about the issues with recruitment of businesses and the state of Boulder sooner?
I guess that goes back to my transparency question. Moving forward I urge my fellow neighbors to stay informed, get informed and for those who are informed keep up the good work.
Blessings

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Boutet on October 11, 2010 at 12:16pm

Here is a note J.B. Afoh-Manin just sent asking I to post post it on Location19.
------------------------------

Monday October 11, 2010

An Open Letter to The Sector 4 Community Development Corporation (CDC) Board of Directors (and the Sector 4 Common Council, the 19th Ward Community Association and other interested parties):

Context

My name is J.B. Afoh-Manin and I am the president of the 19th Ward Community Association. On the eve of a very historic meeting I felt it necessary to put some of my thoughts on paper. However, it should be noted that this note represents my personal beliefs and not that of the Executive Committee of the 19th Ward Community Association. Based on the information I have received, through meetings with Rabbi Asher Yaras, Sector 4 Common Council, Sector 4 CDC, the 19th Ward Community Association and other means, it is my understanding that there are proposed negotiations for the sale of Boulder Coffee Shop on Brooks and Genesee Street to the Chabad House of the University of Rochester. It should be noted that one crucial party whom I have not heard from is the proprietor of Boulder Coffee itself. Herein lays the problem: lack of communication and transparency. With better communication there may not have ever been a need for tonight’s meeting or if there were a need, camps, nor lines in the sand, may not have needed to have been drawn. We are a community and should never forget the unity in that definition.

Our Power

As the economic arm of Sector 4 you are charged with protecting the economic interests of the more than 35 thousand inhabitants of Sector 4. It has come to my attention, after reading the deed, that there are at least two legal safeguards to protect the integrity of the coffee shop as a coffee shop: 1.) The 10 year use clause and 2.) The right of first refusal clause. Thus, at first glance, you have the right to stop or enable any potential sale with a yea or a nay vote.

My Goal

As an attorney, especially a criminal attorney, I greatly resist the very natural urge to "rush to judgment" and will not condemn nor compliment before all the evidence is in front of me. Thus my goal upon attending the meeting tonight, 10/11/10, is to listen with an open heart and mind with the understanding and belief that what our community needs and wants, based on surveys, charrettes and numerous conversations, is a coffee shop which serves not only as a place to purchase a cup of java but also as a gathering spot and meeting space for individuals and organizations alike.

Conclusion

The number one item I request in this process is transparency. Transparency allows individuals to acquire information in real time, to ask questions, and feel a part of the decision making process. Thus, with transparency there is no need for innuendo, rumors or gossip. At this time I encourage you, with the strongest urging, to use your moral compass, as to what is right and wrong, by listening, hearing, and digesting the words, sentiments, emotions, and feelings of all those who will speak not only tonight but also those who will call, e-mail, text and mail their positions on the fate of our coffee shop in the weeks to come. You and I have been elected and selected to serve as Stewards of the communities needs, wants and wishes; we must fulfill our duties.

Submitted With the Utmost Respect,

J.B. Afoh-Manin, Esq.
President of the 19th Ward Community Association

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Laura Suda on October 11, 2010 at 1:30pm

J.B., this is a very well-written letter. I agree and hope we can have transparency tonight so that everyone will come away feeling satisfied. Thank you!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Georgia NeSmith on October 12, 2010 at 5:12am

Actually, despite that lengthy meeting last night, there will be no transparency. There will be no transparency because last night wasn't an opportunity for the community to be involved. Boulder's owner made it clear that he wasn't there to listen to us at all. He was there to "clarify" his intentions, not to be in the least bit moved by what people said.

Apparently, this is a done deal. As I see it, the Sector 4 CDC is going through the motions of letting the community have input, when it expects all along that it will approve the Chabad house as an appropriate use of the building.

This whole thing smells to high heaven.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Georgia NeSmith on October 12, 2010 at 5:45am

That was 2+ hours completely wasted.

Why?

Because Boulder's owner made it very clear that he wasn't there to listen to us. He was there to "clarify" misinformation. It's a done deal.

As I see it, the Sector 4 CDC is going through the motions of getting community input - because it was forced to. In his opening remarks Dana Miller stated that they would not be "bullied" by petitions - which he erroneously attributed to resistance to Chabad House because it is Jewish.

I don't recall his retracting that statement, even after every opponent stated they had no problem with welcoming Chabad House into the community.

Quite frankly I left that meeting angrier than I was BEFORE. I was particularly angry with Boulder's owner because he clearly does not understand what it means to be part of a community. What it means is you DON'T make a unilateral decision such as this. EVEN IF YOU CAN, you DON'T.

The CDC also erred significantly in not involving the community earlier than this, BEFORE Boulder's owner became so entrenched in the deal.

Dana apologized for not involving us earlier in the sale of the building to Boulder in the first place. That apology was empty of substance, given what has happened since.

There is a REASON people opposed the sale to Boulder. THIS IS IT. Because once the sale went through, we lost control over the building. And now we are going to lose it as a building OPEN TO THE PUBLIC for PUBLIC (i.e., not religious, not private) purposes.

This stinks to high heaven. It stinks NOT because of the nature of the pending new owner, but because THE COMMUNITY WAS NOT CONSULTED AT A TIME WHEN COMMUNITY FEEDBACK WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

Last night supposedly was about giving us an opportunity to give input. RIGHT. It was a sham from beginning to end. The owner said it's going to happen. And nobody on the CDC board corrected him. Nobody on the CDC board said that approval of the change in use was still up in the air.

Boulder is moving into the building across the way. Well, as I said, and others reiterated, we don't go to Boulder because it's Boulder. We go because of the building. Because we feel ownership, and rightfully so, deed or no deed.

The owner believes that moving will enable to cut his overhead. What he doesn't seem to grasp is that by moving into the ho-hum ordinary building across the street he will likely LOSE considerable patronage, possibly to the point that the overhead will STILL be too high for the income sustained.

Even the students, who seem to be the #1 priority in this whole deal, will be less likely to cross the bridge for an ordinary place. But..

There are 35,000 residents in the SW corridor. There is ONE coffee shop. ONE. We have to ask: what has the owner done to reach out to those 35,000 residents?

How is it that he has essentially a monopoly with this coffee house but he can't get enough people (so he claims) to make it work for him?

He accused opponents of being "rigid."

Is that what we are?

That's a contemptuous statement that demonstrates his lack of understanding of this community.

Of ANY community.

Because when you are a part of a community you don't make unilateral decisions. NOT EVEN IF YOU CAN.

The CDC board is comprised of representatives appointed by each of the five community associations in Sector 4. I say it's time for those organizations to look at the appointees and demand a change.

Georgia

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on October 12, 2010 at 8:23am

So this is a 'done deal'???

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Georgia NeSmith on October 12, 2010 at 10:48am

I have to acknowledge to everyone that I will be moving, not just out of the ward but out of the state. The sudden, tragic death of my son-in-law in June left my daughter with 5 children at home, ages 4-19, to raise on her own. If my plans work out (still awaiting Sec.8 approval to port my voucher), I will be living within a bike ride of the family.

I had planned to move 9/1, but had to keep pushing everything ahead for a variety of reasons. Part of the procrastination, deep down, is about having to say goodbye to a 20-year collection of dear friends. But I need to move before the snow flies, and I want to be "home for Christmas."

Still, I will fight for what is right in this community until my very last day.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Kittredge on October 12, 2010 at 10:15am

Rock on, Georgia...my impressions exactly. No one could have said it better!

Dave

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Georgia NeSmith on October 12, 2010 at 5:52pm

Thanks for your additional detail, Sheri. Spot on with my recollections.

According to Wilton, he initially refused the Rabbi's offer, and did so several times subsequent. I have to ask: if the building is such an overhead headache, it seems to me he would have jumped at the first offer.

I too am curious as to why the other businesses he guarantees he will bring in if he moves across the street would not do so unless he is there.

If the Chabad House will attract students, why wouldn't some other student-oriented RETAIL business do so as well?

Others called attention to the fact that the Chabad House would take that building off the tax rolls.

Presumably Wilton believes this is a win-win for everyone because the empty building across the street will have more businesses in it.

I want to know - what happened to the U of R's intention to use at least part of it for its human resources department? What happened to the U of R's commitment, period?

A U of R staff member was there speaking for himself, not the U of R. He said he has tried very hard to get students to cross over the bridge, with little success. They fear for their safety, he said. While we all know that part of that fear is realistic, part of it is also the result of an unacknowledged culture of racism. I do not want to minimize the very real existence of crime in that area. But the reality gets blown out of proportion.

When I had my house on Ellicott Street, I had a housemate who was a visiting prof in the Chem Department. She was Chinese. She told me that her friends thought she was insane to live on the west side of the river. They were certain she would be attacked. Wong had to walk to work as she had no car. I did drive her during the worst weather, but she walked 90% of the time.

She walked the right way. She would stop and say hello to people. She would talk to them. She knew whose grandmother was ill and which family had a newborn. She made friends everywhere she walked.

Age, of course, makes a difference. 20-year-olds do not have the same social skills. Nonetheless, her experience proved that her friends' fears were unfounded.

Regardless, I have no doubt that students will cross the bridge if there is enough there to draw them.

There are countless universities across the nation that are smack dab in the middle of troubled urban environments. And the surrounding business communities oriented toward student clientele nonetheless thrive.

I have no doubt that the building across the street would be filled were it not for the current recession. I would hate to see us lose 955 as a PUBLIC space because of a temporary blip in the economy.

If Wilton is so intent on moving across the street, he has the right to do so. But 955 should remain a PUBLIC space.

More effort should be put into finding an alternative buyer. As it stands now, there has been no effort whatsoever to seek out anyone else.

This Weds. night there will be a COMMUNITY-run meeting @ 6 pm. (an hour before PCIC) @ the NSC (aka NET) office.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page