December 17, 200519 yr WTF! I am sick of the churches and schools and their disrespect for our neighborhoods! They seem to do what they want regardless of how the residents feel.
December 20, 200519 yr West End can't stop mall CityLink Center would serve addicts, ex-cons, homeless By Allen Howard Enquirer staff writer The proposed CityLink center here would be unlike any other in Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky. This mall would be for the homeless, for ex-convicts, for drug addicts. West End residents are concerned. The inspiration for CityLink is the PathMall in Los Angeles. http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051220/NEWS01/512200335/1056
December 20, 200519 yr It burns me up that the lead guy behind this is from Mason. Of course, his family will be just fine in their own little bubble.
December 20, 200519 yr "The inspiration for CityLink is 3,000 miles away, in Los Angeles. PathMall is a one-stop center where the homeless can literally shop for services - job training, a beauty salon, drug treatment, help with government assistance": http://www.epath.org/index_01.php
December 21, 200519 yr Went to the meeting and it could be barely be called such. Just a whole bunch of damn shouting.
December 21, 200519 yr If it does happen the residents can work to make sure that the center functions responsibility or they can run away.
December 21, 200519 yr I was at that meeting. The West End Community Council voted against the CityLink development. It was unanimous. I have never seen the West End so united. Looks like Crossroads is at a crossroads.
December 21, 200519 yr Community votes against center CityLink proponents push project, despite meeting By Allen Howard Enquirer staff writer The West End Community Council on Tuesday night voted against CityLink, but planners still want to go forward with it. http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051221/NEWS01/512210359/1056
December 21, 200519 yr For the second straight meeting Dale Mallory tried to shut down the West End Community Council without a motion to adjourn and without a vote. He wants to delay any vote until the point where the building is already purchased and construction has started. By that time, the vote would be meaningless. Now if you read the article, these churches are in an awkward position. They are saying that they don't care what the community thinks and they are going forward with it anyway. I wonder what their congregations think of that position. I would think it would be untenable for some of the member institutions and their constituents.
December 21, 200519 yr Their congregations probably think it is fine, as long as it is not built in Mason.
December 22, 200519 yr People all over the basin and hillsides are against this! not just westenders.
December 23, 200519 yr Unfortunately, I think chances are pretty good that it will get built. And that will be a shame because it will show what the city really thinks about residents of the West End.
December 23, 200519 yr People all over the basin and hillsides are against this! not just westenders. Damn straight on that Max. Our community is outraged, but we are not alone. The West End Community Council voted unanimously against the project. The Dayton Street Neighborhood association voted unanimously against the project. The Over the Rhine Brewery District voted unanimously against the project. The Klotter-Conroy residents association and the Clifton Heights Improvement Association strongly oppose this project. The principals of the three schools oppose this project, and so do the parents of the children. Every single business in Brighton has signed a petition opposing this project. The Churches of the West End have come together to sign a petition to oppose this project. Even the Catholic Church in the West End has signed on in opposition to this project, and Catholic's usually don't take public positions without the Pope's blessing. We also have existing social service agencies in my community think that the placement of this facility is a bad idea. You would have to wonder what white guy in the suburbs thought it was a great idea to relocate soup kitchens and homeless shelters from Washington Park and put them across the street from three schools and a playground. When faced with overwhelming opposition, what do they think? "We are going ahead with our plans. The city zoning allows us to build the center. It doesn't matter what the (community) council says." That was the first time in all the presentations and negotiations that CityLink and Crossroads have truly been honest with us. It doesn't matter what we think. They don't care what we think. They could give a damn about our children. If they haven't been responsive to community concerns now, what do you think is going to happen when conflict and problems occur once the center is up and running? What happens when something happens to one of those children? I will give you a hint; they aren't going to damn then either. After all, they are on a great crusade. They are pyramid builders. This facility is going to be a $12 million dollar monument to their own greatness. It will be the largest such facility in the history of the State of Ohio. It is going to attract severely mentally ill and addicted indigents from the entire region. They will be able to pat themselves on the back for "doing the right thing" as they drive home to the suburbs, even though they are going to rip apart my community. Screw them.
December 24, 200519 yr You would have to wonder what white guy in the suburbs thought it was a great idea to relocate soup kitchens and homeless shelters from Washington Park and put them across the street from three schools and a playground. The current Lords Gym, Drop InnCenter and Gospel mission are within a block of Washington Park Elementary, and I don't think there has been any harm to the children at this school. Also, the Drop Inn Center and Tender Mercies, as well as all the subsidized housing are still staying in Washington Park. I don't think it is quite accurate to say they are moving all this stuff from Washington Park to the West End. Also, Washington Park and this proposed site are not that far apart from each other (maybe a dozen blocks). I think your stronger argument is to connect with OTR and point out that all social services do not need to be provided in this one geographic area. And also point out, as you have, the hipocrisy of Christians to live with their families as far away from poverty and minorities as possible. This is a guilt erasing measure for them, which may or may not actually help people.
December 25, 200519 yr I think your stronger argument is to connect with OTR and point out that all social services do not need to be provided in this one geographic area. I think this is reasonable. However this is in part a consolidation of services. And also point out, as you have, the hipocrisy of Christians to live with their families as far away from poverty and minorities as possible. This is a guilt erasing measure for them, which may or may not actually help people. I am a christian and live in OTR and I am involved. Also know many christians who live in OTR/West End who do a lot in this community. Not fair to paint with such a broad brush. Its called stereotyping. West End Kid - Also, I will play devil's advocate (ironic huh?) What would folks propose as an alternative? I would be willing to bet that if you actually polled all the resident's in the area including the CMHA housing, etc. the opposition may not be overwhelmingly against. West End/OTR are poor communities in which a large percent of the population is below the poverty line and might like a job training center nearby and other services that are well done. I certainly understand the concern, but one can hardly condemn a facility when you don't even know how good a job they might do. And 200 people at a community coucil meeting hardly represents the sentiment of a community of over 8000. 15,000 if you include OTR. When I read and listen to the opposition and see that much of appears to be rhetoric filled with misinformation and unsubstatiated claims I think it makes it hard for proponents to empathize with your position. I do think it is not the best location in the world, however I think the real concerns are property values and future development. Just be honest and say that what it is - don't hide behind the children. The kids down here have to worry about driveby shootings, drug dealers looking for future dealers, and not getting pregnant before they are 13. Not a homeless person looking to get back on thier feet or someone looking for medical assitance. The risk to the schools are not any higher than they are currently - at least have not yet seen any real data to support that it is. Even better would be for your groups to propose a viable alternative. Do the legwork and find a new and better location that would work and you might have more luck as well. All I "hear" is whining and insults and I lean towards supporting your position. No telling what they "hear". Also, check out that facility in California and research all the horrible things they are doing for the community (and be open to the possiblity that they may actually be GOOD for the community). That might help your position for opposition as well. I think you need good hard concrete DATA. Unsubstantiated accusations and emotions are probably not going to get you very far.
December 26, 200519 yr Somewhere OTR I have one question... Are you a property owner in the west end?
December 26, 200519 yr Somewhere: I am a christian and live in OTR and I am involved. Also know many christians who live in OTR/West End who do a lot in this community. Not fair to paint with such a broad brush. Its called stereotyping. Note that I said the "hypocrisy of Christians who live as far away from poverty and minorities as possible". Of course not all Christians are of the same mold. I am specifically stereotyping the SUV driving, suburban mall, consumer, vineyard Christian. :)
December 27, 200519 yr West End Kid - Also, I will play devil's advocate (ironic huh?) What would folks propose as an alternative? I would propose that they place this in an area not close to schools, homes and businesses. Queensgate has been suggested. Queen City Barrel, Spinney Field, or some sites near the Mill Creek Rivera have also been suggested. Jim Tarbel thinks that some of the industrial sections of Spring Grove would be ideal. I wouldn’t want to put such a massive concentration in any neighborhood next to schools and homes. I would be willing to bet that if you actually polled all the resident's in the area including the CMHA housing, etc. the opposition may not be overwhelmingly against. West End/OTR are poor communities in which a large percent of the population is below the poverty line and might like a job training center nearby and other services that are well done. CMHA has put 150 million into the West End in the Hope VI redevelopment. I don’t think that they could take a public position, but if they could it would probably be a resounding NO! As for the actual residents of CMHA, I also think they would oppose this plan. CMHA has many residents in the West End, and not one person from our community showed up in support for the project at the last meeting. Not one. Just because someone lives in subsidized housing does not make them support moving homeless shelters and soup kitchens from OTR to their backdoor. It doesn’t automatically make them think that placing a facility like this next to schools, businesses and homes is a good idea. I rent to people at affordable rates, and they don’t want it either. It isn’t just property owners. Most people that live here aren’t property owners, and they don’t want it either. You talk about a job training center; we already have that in my community. It is called the Job Corps. Every social service provided in this center is already provided in our community. The only new thing it is going to bring is 40,000 square feet of transient housing and some soup kitchens, and they are also going to bring along the patrons of these services with them. We already have the CAT House for drug and alcohol treatment in the West End. We have the West End Health Clinic. We have a state of the art rec center with weights, ball courts and an Olympic sized pool. We already have every facility offered already in place. Our network is already arguably better. They add nothing but a massive expansion of transient housing. We oppose that. I certainly understand the concern, but one can hardly condemn a facility when you don't even know how good a job they might do. And 200 people at a community coucil meeting hardly represents the sentiment of a community of over 8000. 15,000 if you include OTR. When I read and listen to the opposition and see that much of appears to be rhetoric filled with misinformation and unsubstatiated claims. I think it makes it hard for proponents to empathize with your position. I do think it is not the best location in the world, however I think the real concerns are property values and future development. Just be honest and say that what it is – don't hide behind the children. The kids down here have to worry about driveby shootings, drug dealers looking for future dealers, and not getting pregnant before they are 13. Not a homeless person looking to get back on thier feet or someone looking for medical assitance. The risk to the schools are not any higher than they are currently - at least have not yet seen any real data to support that it is. For one thing, I am not “hiding behind the children”. When I open up my back door I can see this site. I live one block away with my wife and two baby boys. I am not hiding behind anyone’s kids; I am standing strong in front of my own. They are my most valuable assets in the entire world. I take them to the park right next to this center on a regular basis. We were there today. During the summertime I go to the Dyer Sprayground that is located there. I am a stay at home dad. I am passionate about my children, and I care about all of the children of my community. It isn’t some façade that I am hiding behind. I have real concerns about my kids, and those concerns are also reflected throughout our community. The principals and educators don’t like this plan. I don’t either. It is probably fair for people like you to be cynical and assume that other people have vested interests. My vested interests are my wife, my family and my community. Don’t play that off like I am making it up as I go along. It is a big deal. Certainly some business owners care more about commerce and the safety of their own employees than they care about my children. Makes sense to me. They aren’t in business for my children. I agree with you that the argument needs to be broadcast on many different levels. I am not the public spokesman for a movement. I am a stay at home dad that is concerned about my kids. I am passionate and emotional about this because this project could hit my family and my community at our core. There is no doubt that this will affect property values. It could affect commerce, employment, business development, residential development, our tax base and other issues. I think that this project has the potential to rip this community apart. I have no doubts about it. I think it is bad for everyone, and I apologize for putting so much focus on the kids, especially my own. But if you had kids, you would fight for them too. I would also like to address the unsubstantiated claims argument that you mentioned. One of the main areas that I have been focusing my research on is how a new and large influx of the homeless population could impact our community. Much of my research has been on critical problems among the homeless. These problems include mental illness, drug addiction, criminal activity, rates of recidivism, violent behavior, and incarceration. We could talk about deinstitutionalization, which is a four decade old policy of shutting down state psychiatric hospitals and releasing mentally ill people into our urban core. Deinstitutionalization has contributed to a legion of mentally ill people roaming our cities. I believe that it has contributed greatly to urban decline. An estimated 200,000 severely mentally ill people are homeless and roaming the streets and shelters nationwide. I believe that deinstitutionalization and the policy of shifting the mentally ill from caregivers to the streets, shelters and prisons is a national shame. The largest health care provider for the mentally ill in this country is the L.A. County jail, which serves more mentally ill clients than any psychiatric hospital in the country. The second largest mental health provider is Rikers Prison in New York City, and the third largest is the Cook County Jail in Chicago. In virtually ever urban county in this country more mentally ill people languish in jails, unable to get the care that they need, than in psychiatric hospitals. The largest mental health care provider in Ohio is the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility in Lucasville, commonly called Lucasville prison. The frontline caregivers of our current mental health system are not medically trained clinicians; they are our policemen and women. Here are a couple of informational items of interest that I have found. ====================================================== http://www.psychlaws.org/GeneralResources/fact2.htm • Jails and Shelters Serve as Surrogate Hospitals The woeful failure to provide appropriate treatment and ongoing follow-up care for patients discharged from hospitals has sent many individuals with the severest forms of brain disease spinning through an endless revolving door of hospital admissions and readmissions, jails, and public shelters. At any given time there are more individuals with schizophrenia who are homeless and living on the streets or incarcerated in jails and prisons than there are in hospitals: o Approximately 200,000 individuals with schizophrenia or manic-depressive illness are homeless, constituting one-third of the estimated 600,000 homeless population. Many eat from garbage cans and are victimized regularly. o Nearly 300,000 individuals with schizophrenia or manic-depressive illness, or 16 percent of the total inmate population, are in jails and prisons, primarily charged with misdemeanors, but some charged with felonies, that were caused by their psychotic thinking. o Less than 70,000 individuals with schizophrenia or manic-depressive illness are in state psychiatric hospitals receiving treatment for their disease. PBS did a special on Ohio’s prisons and the effects of shutting down State Psychiatric Hospitals. It is entitled “The New Asylums”. You can watch a PBS special on Lucasville’s mentally ill here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/asylums/interviews/ I particularly liked the insights of Mr. Wilkinson: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/asylums/interviews/wilkinson.html ==================================================== Our current mental health system leaves a lot to be desired. We lock up the mentally ill in jails that are ill prepared to deal with them. I personally think that a jail is the worst possible place for a sick person. As sentences expire and jails get overcrowded, these poorly cared for people are then released into the population. Many of them end up at shelters. Their rates of recidivism, where they relapse into dangerous and self destructive behavior are quite high. Their rates of re-incarceration are also quite high. If you had a flow chart, it would be quite simple. Mentally Ill people are funneled into prisons, they are then let out and funneled into shelters, where they then commit crimes and are funneled right back into they prison system. This is happening all the time. One Ohio prison study found that 72% of mentally ill patients were rearrested during the follow up period, including 41% within 6 months, and 53% during the first year. Of those arrests, 34% were for violent crimes. These sick people are among the most violent agents in our nation. The mentally disabled constitute less than 1 percent of our total population, but they commit 5% of the yearly total of homicides. The National Institute of Mental Health found that from 9% to 15% of all violent acts come from this small segment of the population. Talk to me about “unsubstantiated claims”. Every case study and every shred of evidence that I come across plays out the same way. This is going to have a negative impact, and the body of evidence is quite substantiated and it all points to disaster. This segment of our population is not properly cared for, and they are dangerous. We don’t want them. You should be able to see why. Even better would be for your groups to propose a viable alternative. Do the legwork and find a new and better location that would work and you might have more luck as well. All I "hear" is whining and insults and I lean towards supporting your position. No telling what they "hear". I am no real estate guru. I gave you some sites earlier. There has to be a better place than this. If you had a choice unto where you were going to concentrate violent psychotic people, it probably wouldn’t be right across the street from three schools and a playground. Maybe it is just me. Maybe the whole world has gone insane. And maybe I need to move out into the suburbs like everyone else. I never wanted to follow the herd, but just maybe they are on to something.
December 29, 200519 yr Here are a couple of takes from two of the city's independent media outlets. The first is from last week's (12/21/05) CityBeat: PHOTO: West End resident Carlos Sartor collects scrap metal from a lot recently cleared by One City. Sartor plans to sell the scrap to a local junkyard. Photo By Stephen Novotni CityLink Divides West End Social services agency would be city's largest By Stephen Carter-Novotni Depending on whom you ask, the CityLink project is something that could save the West End or kill it. CityLink is planned to be the largest private social services offering in the city. The idea is to provide about 100,000 square feet of space -- the size of a large department store -- that would offer the city's poor a one-stop social service mall, where they could receive health care, job training, drug counseling and more. http://www.citybeat.com/2005-12-21/news2.shtml The second is from the Cincinnati Beacon, 12/20/05: CityLink is a BIG Step in the Right Direction Tuesday, December 20, 2005 Posted by Andrew Warner With consolidated services it is easy for people to find the necessary outlets to turn their lives around when they need it the most. It seems most people agree with me and other CityLink supporters… until it comes to their own neighborhood. http://www.cincinnatibeacon.com/index.php/magaddiction/comments/citylink_is_a_big_step_in_the_right_direction/
December 31, 200519 yr The Vineyard Community Church has officially resigned from the CityLink board of directors. They have decided that they don't want to be a part of it, and that they will no longer fund this project. Vineyard and Crossroads are the two largest churches in the City, and they were the moneymen in the CityLink plan. I respect the Vineyard's decision to cut bait. If only Brian Tome of Crossroads could divorce himself from his gigantic ego for a second and see that locating a horde of violent psychopaths next to schools, playgrounds and homes is a bad idea..... I offer a toast to the Vineyard Community Church. They are done with CityLink. One down, one to go.
December 31, 200519 yr It is a difficult position to tell people what is good for their own community but sometimes it is necessary anyone care to find out where this guy lives so I can propose a methadone clinic to go next door to his house. My best guess is that it is Andrew F Warner of West Chester, it is amazing how generous people are when they live 30 miles away. I am just seeing so much wrong with this article........ I travel through the West End a lot and I see boarded up buildings and nobody is doing anything about them.Why are the people so against somebody trying to do something for this community?" Another drive by community planner. I travel through West Chester and see a lot of vacant land and nobody is doing anything about it. Why are the people so againt somebody trying to do something for this communtiy? Mine sounds better.
January 1, 200619 yr CityLink must answer tough questions Laura Kleckner The proposed West End CityLink project exposes incredibly complex social issues for which there are no easy answers. Citing two years of research and a Los Angeles-based model, CityLink organizers claim to have a foundation waiting to be molded into a solution using the community's input. ========================================================== AMEN! :clap: CityLink has not only failed in the dissemination of information, many of their presentations have been intentionally misleading. The only time during the process that they have been honest with us is when they admitted that they don't care what we think anyway, and that they are going to go forward with the project no matter what.
January 1, 200619 yr Kudos to Vineyard for dropping out of this project! I checked out the website for the PathMall in Los Angeles. I noticed that they started as a small organization in a church basement. Over time, they grew larger. So the founding church actually helped people in their own neighborhood. Plus, they started small. I would be afraid that creating a huge center such as CityLink would be overwhelming. I too am afraid that Cincinnati would become a drop-off place and would end up exhausting our resources.
January 6, 200619 yr I think that Nick Spencer makes some great points about CityLink on his blog. http://nickspencer.blogspot.com/2006/01/citylink.html Tuesday, January 03, 2006 CityLink Let's start with one of the more controversial stories out there, shall we? Residents of the West End (and quite a few OTR residents) are fighting hard to stop a coalition of churches (none of which are actually based in the West End) from turning an abandoned industrial site into a "one-stop shop" for homeless social services. You may recall I brought the issue of homeless services up during the campaign, proposing the relocation of the Greater Cincinnati Homeless Coalition and the Mary Magdalen House away from the Main Street district. Also, Mayor Mallory talked during the campaign about consolidating social services and putting them under one roof to minimize any negative impact on our neighborhoods. Looking at this proposed project, I see two serious flaws: first, its not really a one-stop shop. It won't contain most of the bigger shelters/services currently in existence: no Drop Inn, no Mary Magdelen, no Tender Mercies. So, in essence, you'll likely just see more growth in what Rudy Guliani called the "compassion industry." To be an effective one-stop, it seems to me there shouldn't be so many other options just a few blocks away. The second problem is obviously location. Again, you see social service agencies recklessly locating near mass concentrations of housing, schools, and private investment. Maybe someone can educate me on this: can't we create a special zoning classification for social services? One that requires them to locate in non-residential areas? The common-sense approach would be putting a real One-Stop, with full participation from all Coalition-involved social services, in Queensgate. To date, I have not heard a truly logical argument against Queensgate. Its an industrial area, but its also downtown adjacent, on bus routes, and its actually safer than OTR or the West End. The old Queensgate jail site will undoubtedly become available soon, I'd recommend purchasing that site from the county and doing a combination of rehab and new construction on the site. I will say that I like the notion of a well-funded, attractive center that offers a number of options for the homeless. However, I also think the plan's proponents are being a bit optimistic about the whole notion. If they really do have security and police on the premises, they'll probably not have nearly as many clients coming through the doors. I know its unpopular thing to say, but living down in OTR, I've seen it myself: most people's idea of who the homeless are down here is just wrong. Many of them are people who have been evicted from their apartments for constantly committing crimes. They are aggressively panhandling, breaking into cars, and abusing drugs a lot more than the social services want to admit. Too many of them aren't victims of anything besides their own poor decisions. And they're not going anywhere that might hold them accountable for their actions-- especially not when there's another shelter a quick walk away. Let's do the right thing here. Let's show some compassion towards the residents and business owners in OTR and the West End, who risk their safety everyday to help improve our city. My proposal: have the city purchase the factory site and develop it, and let the Churches use that money to secure a better site in Queensgate. This project will take years to complete no matter what-- let's make sure we get it right. I have never understood why CityLink is so dead set on this one site for their homeless mall. The affected communities are unanimously opposed to this development right next to schools, playgrounds, businesses and homes. The proposed Queensgate site is less than a mile from the Bank Street location. Jim Tarbell likes to point out that we have workable sites on Spring Grove. The placement of this facility is a disaster.
January 6, 200619 yr CityLink center purchases land West End group opposed to one-stop agency files protest By Allen Howard Enquirer staff writer WEST END - Planners of CityLink, the one-stop social service center to serve the homeless, drug addicts and ex-cons, moved closer to their goal Tuesday by purchasing the vacant building at 810 Bank St. for $1.4 million. http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060106/NEWS01/601060432/1056
January 7, 200619 yr This guy wants our input so lets give him our input!! Hi there. My name is Tim Senff and I'm on the staff of Crossroads Community Church in Oakley as our Director of ReachOut, which basically means that I help to head up all the things we do to reach out to those in need in our city and overseas. I am also on the board of CityLink Center along with reps from the other churches & organizations that comprise CityLink. I recently received this e-mail forwarded from a friend who lives in Pendleton who also attends Crossroads. I wanted to take just a moment first to tell you thanks for your interest in our city and CityLink. We appreciate everyone's opinions and believe that dialogue is going to get us closer to where we need to be. In fact, we had a great meeting with West End pastors this past Tuesday and I believe that is the beginning of even greater collaboration in the future. I felt the need to respond b/c while I appreciate your passion, there are many things in this e-mail that aren't true. I know you're seeking truth, so I wanted to tell you some specific things that are not true and some that are. Hopefully this can be a way to continue dialogue as we together try to help those in need. One additional thing I want to offer is that Crossroads is simply one of 10 founding partners, no greater than anyone else. First, here are some things that are NOT true that were discussed in your e-mail: We have absolutely no plans to use the park adjacent to the 800 Bank St property. None. It plays no part in our treatment plan. There is absolutely no deal set with the seller of 800 Bank St. to make extra cash from Crossroads members, etc. We (CityLink) actually offered significantly less than the list price of the property. Trust me, we don't have money to give away. We need things for the most fair price we can. And we are seeking to conduct every interaction and transaction with the upmost integrity. So the suggestion of impropriety in this purchase is also not true. We have had no interactions with members of the media who happen to be Crossroads members who have said, "I cannot cover this story b/c I'm a Crossroads member and can't expose the truth." So that is also not true. Whatever Lincoln Ware and others are saying is of their own will. We have not "fed" him or others anything they're saying. And in terms of Crossroads being an "unlimited money source," anything we've done that has required finances have come from the pockets of Everyday Joes like me - as we like to say, we have no "phantom fat cats" funding things. It has come from sacrificial giving from normal people. I'm still asking myself often why I pledged so much to our church's building campaign :) We are actually looking into putting satellite locations in places like Oakley. In fact, we're in discussions with a church in Loveland to do that there right now. The only reason we feel 800 Bank St is a great anchor site for CityLink is b/c of it's proximity to large numbers of people in poverty. So this is a city-wide vision, and one we're excited to consider in Oakley. We have met with West End pastors and will continue to do so. After meeting, some of them said, "I'm very encouraged by the humility of CityLink and am open to continued dialogue. Had I known a month ago what I know now, I'm not sure I would have signed that petition." We are not even allowed to have transient emergency shelter at our facility (zoning prohibits it). Rather, we're only allowed to have transitional housing for people who demonstrate the desire to change their lives. They need to agree to a case plan for life change. We're about a hand up, not a hand out. Our motto is "from Relief to Relationship to Real Life Change." In other words, we aren't interested in just giving someone a fish - we need to teach people to fish so that they negative cycle of hopelessness can be broken. I know that Brian Tome did not say the other sites we considered wouldn't work b/c they didn't have a park nearby. Again, our plan has nothing to do with using a park. Nothing. And if someone did overhear something said like that, I know it was taken out of context b/c that is not our plan. We did not know the seller before pursuing the property and have absolutely no ties with him. None. This is totally above board. So I hope this helps set the record straight of some of the accusations that have been levied against CityLink. While we understand your concerns re: CityLink, here is why we think it will be a blessing to the West End and surrounding communities: 1. Place for positive change. (People AND Property) CityLink Center is a place for positive change. It's a place where people explore new life skills, get access to important services, and meet other people who are growing and a beautiful neighborhood campus that will draw positive attention from across the city. Great for the West End. Building CityLink Center at 800 Bank Street means that current West End residents benefit the most. Better job training in the West End leads to better incomes for West End residents; easy access to health care in the West End leads to better health for West End residents. A beautiful, safe, thriving building on Bank Street means better lighting, more attention, more investment in and around Bank Street. 2. Integrated services for individual life change. (People and programs) CityLink Center brings together experienced service providers, professional intake counselors, and hundreds of volunteers so that people seeking change can have a customized plan to move their life in a better direction and the support to make it happen. CityLink will offer a collection of holistic services and programs through a network of on-location service providers, visiting partners and a referral network. With experienced service providers and ministries like Jobs Plus, Crossroad Health Center, the Lord's Gym and City Gospel Mission and additional visiting programs and classes, CityLink will be a place to go for job placement and job coaching, health screening and parenting classes, a gym and a mentor, spiritual education and a support group of friends. It is not an emergency shelter, it is a place where programs and people come together for lasting change. 3. beautiful Campus. safer Neighborhood. (Property) The CityLink Center is a $10MM investment which will completely reverse the aesthetic dynamic on the north side of the West End by adding an attractive, bright, welcoming building and surrounding green space. The building will be designed using CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) with improved lighting to illuminate the block, secured fencing, and elimination of blind spots. 4. A commitment starting now. Building CityLink Center is a commitment to making a $10MM improvement in the West End. This investment is only a part of the equation. The building of CityLink Center is also about channeling resources, mobilizing volunteers and being involved in the community. CityLink will be involved in community discussions, community safety programs and committed to being a great neighbor, starting now. For example, we had 50 volunteers help clear a vacant lot off of Findlay near Linn St. last Saturday - a lot that is home to many drug deals and other criminal activity. We cleared 400 tires, pulled out many dead trees, and cleared brush. This is just an example of the type of positive impact we believe CityLink can make in the community. 5. Inviting Input. Over the past two years we've tried to meet with as many people and conduct as much research as possible. We need talented people with sharp minds and big hearts (like yours) to help us fight against the status quo and fight against accepting a life that is far less than what God has planned for us. We have met with leaders, sent letters explaining our plans, passed out surveys seeking input, met with West End pastors(and plan to continue meeting with them), and will be holding many smaller community meetings. All interested individuals are welcome. This is our heart, and I hope it helps paint the portrait for what we see for the future of the West End. Thanks - Tim ********************************************************************************* I'm not sure who wrote this but really says alot. All, I have a long note below but there are some data points regarding Citylink that some may find interesting enough to get through the entire note. Feel free to forward. 1. Citylink wants to use the city park near 800 Bank street as an outdoor treatment facility. They have never discussed this but it is critical to their treatment plan. 2. There is some speculation that may raise suspicion that the current owner of 800 Bank seems to have an inside track on this purchase and stands to make $400,000- $500,000 from the Crossroads donors just for securing the property. I cannot prove this but research indicates this may be a case of the good ole boy's club scratching each other's back. 3. Citylink opposition is stacked against us, many media reporters are faithful Crossroads members, City planners are taking liberties in linking transient housing to the community plan, and the WECC president Dale Mallory has been working as a lone WECC member to push Citylink through although the community is clearly against it, and the mayor Mark Mallory has stated this is a community issue and does not want to get involved. This is clearly a City issue as several City council members have joined the WECC meetings just to see whats going on and City council has begun facilitate meetings regarding this. 4.We know that Crossroads has an unlimited money source, but Crossroads was not prepared for the community being united. This in its self is surprising as the WECC is known for being divided. Local radio stations such as the Buzz ( Lincoln Wares) is trying to make this a racial issue but it isn't working because the community is far from divided on any lines. We stand united. In some ways you can thank Dale Mallory and Crossroads for bringing the community together as they tried to slip one over on us and it didn't work. 5. All 22 Churches in the West End, The OTR Brewery District, West Mcmicken community Council, CUF, Dayton Str neighborhood association, Klottter/Conroy neighborhood Association, and the WEST END Community council have taken a formal position in opposition. There isn't a single community group in the basis that supports Citylink. This is wrong for our neighborhood and wrong for our City. 6. According to one Citylink board member, the Citylink board is aware that the West End and Over The Rhine areas are in the process of revitalizing. They understand that the homeless population is moving out of the basin area and that is why they need the facility to be on a bus line. In addition this person also shared that they expect this facility to be a magnet that will draw homeless people from Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, and other states. 7. There is plenty of land in Oakley near the Crossroads church where this site could go but for some reason they are convinced that our neighborhood needs this service. 8. The main use for this facility under the certificate of zoning is transient housing. All other services cater to transient housing. This is the format in which Citylink sold it to the City of Cincinnati. This facility which will house sexual offenders is 800 feet from 3 schools and presents a clear and present danger to the children in our community. The details begin: Last Tuesday I overheard the head of Crossroads, Brian Tome say that they are not considering other sites because the other sites that meet the criteria that they gave us, does not have a park. In our previous discusions they have not mentioned the need for a park because they know that this would be very inflamatory. According to him Citylink needs a park because part of the "treatment is to counsel the needy in the park". This is turning out to be a 2006 version of Washington park and the Drop Inn center. We all have seen what this has done to Washington Park. Also after doing research we found that the current owner of 800 Bank is an LLP called Old State Family. This company was formed in 2004 about the same time that Citylink began to move forward. The owners of the company is a husband and wife Gerald L. and Andrea L. Hardcorn. This appears to be their first commercial property purchase. They purchase the property for ~$900,000. This is a huge amount of money for your first commercial venture. In addition after more research we found that they are very involved with religious based social services. Some folks might draw the conclusion that they may be some sort of a front company for Citylink that stands to make $400,000 - $500,000. Keep in mind that Gerald Hardcorn is the owner of J & A Interior. Systems, Inc., Florence, KY. It is likely that this company may be prepromised by Citylink to do all the interior renovations. http://www.awci.org/cd/pdfs/8407_b.pdf http://www.awci.org/cd/pdfs/8407_x.pdf http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:4A-F9Rfdb7YJ:www.dcchome.org/Annual%2520Report%25202005.pdf+Gerald+L.+and+Andrea+L.+Hardcorn&hl=en The cards are stacked against the opposition as Citylink has tentacles everywhere. Many of the news reporters are very devout Crossroads members. Many members have privately shared with WECC folks that they cannot cover a story against Citylink. We are hopeful that by sharing this information we can convince some of the devout Crossroads members to look a bit deeper in their hearts and help us out. http://www.wkrc.com/calendar/story.aspx?content_id=E65B4175-C803-49E8-B35C-9F26CE7739F4 http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050519/COL03/505190389/1007 Please also note that many believe that the President of the West End community Council intentionally misled and misrepresented the West End Community by secretly meeting with Mark Stecher and Brian Tome and giving WECC sign-off for them to move forward. Fortunately the Dayton Street folks heard about this and got the word out. Many believe that Dale Malory in an attempt to keep the WECC from voting against the Citylink project forced two delays of the vote (delaying 2 months) and attempted to postpone the third vote when the community decided enough was enough. Dale was quoted in the paper the day before the third vote attmept as saying that once Citylink closes on the property there is nothing the Community can do. Many WECC folks believe that Dale had hoped to delay the vote so Citylink could have time close on the property. If the WECC votes against Citylink, the Community Council can file an appeal to the Zoning Cerificate. At the last community meeting it seems to some that Dale carefully planned to have Larry Haris, senior City planner, tell the West End Community how Citylink fits in the WECC development plan agreed by the residents. Dale had hoped that this sound byte would have been captured. If Larry would have been permitted to present, he would have told the community and media that the WECC plan calls for an increase in residence, he has said in past meetings that the transitional housing component will increase residents. Larry has argued in past meetings that the WECC calls for commercial business to be located in the West End. He believes that the Cafe and the Hair salon are considered commercial business. Keep in mind that the "cafe = soup kitchen" is free and only available to transient housing folks. In addition these services are only considered by zoning regulation to be incidental uses. Incidental uses can only occupy less than 10% of the building. As you can see there is a lot to this story and the West End folks are up against forces in the City, media and the rich churches. People automatically believe that because Crossroads is behind it that it must be good. We would like for folks to look under the covers. If you were unable to attend Tuesday night's community council meeting, here is the news clip. The West End has spoken and it has a united voice (and official vote) against CityLink locating in the West End.
January 7, 200619 yr A letter sent to the mayor by someone opposing citylink Dear Mr. Mayor, The proposed CityLink Center is planned to be nearly the size of a typical Target store. Rodger Howell, Director of CityCure and a member of the CityLink Center, expects the center to serve 35-40 thousand people a year.* This is most definitely not a neighborhood issue. With that said, however, the neighborhood (and all surrounding neighborhoods) in which the proposed Center plans to locate has stepped up to the plate and has performed due diligence. Countless hours have gone into researching this type of facility. The proposed CityLink Center is enormous and will be a magnet for the tri-states poor and homeless population. If this is a neighborhood issue, the neighborhood/s has spoken with a unanimous voice of opposition. That voice continues to seek help from its elected officials. Is it not the responsibility of the elected officials to hear the people's voice, recognize and represent it? It is my sincere hope that you recognize, even the possibility, that the traffic generated/attracted to this proposed facility will not be bound to the invisible boundaries of the West End.Consider if you will, the selected location is a mere 1.2 miles in distance from City Hall. The West End isn't even 1.2 miles square. The impact from this Center will affect the entire downtown basin ? the city center. Those in opposition believe in this city. We believe in rapid re-population and revitalization, things this city desperately needs. Without these volunteer, grass roots efforts what is left? These same people have the means to direct their energy elsewhere. The Center will not be good for this city and will drive this city in a direction it may not intend to go. It is my sincere hope that you seriously consider the affects the proposed Center will have on this city, and not just one community. To continue to declare that this is a neighborhood issue seems irresponsible.
January 8, 200619 yr I think CityLink will be a boon for our community. A community is people living together cooperatively. It is not a bunch of yuppies moving into our neighborhoods and dividing us as a people. And stop using the schools as an excuse when you are really just concerned about your property values. No one put a gun to your head and forced you to live among us. City Link is gonna happen. Deal with it. :mrgreen:
January 8, 200619 yr I think CityLink will be a boon for our community. A community is people living together cooperatively.... CityLink will attract people with severe drug addictions, alcoholism, and mental problems to the West End. I would be somewhat surprised if everyone will be able to live in complete harmony in that environment.
January 8, 200619 yr I may have overlooked it but I haven't seen anyone post the no to Citylink site yet, so here it is http://www.notocitylink.com/
January 9, 200619 yr I think CityLink will be a boon for our community. A community is people living together cooperatively.... CityLink will attract people with severe drug addictions, alcoholism, and mental problems to the West End. I would be somewhat surprised if everyone will be able to live in complete harmony in that environment. The West End already has people with addictions and people with mental impairments. City Link would provide them proximate treatment. They'd know people care and that is a great recipe for harmony. The people leading the hue and cry against City Link are people who are bitter that they bought property in the West End rather than OTR. I've a degree in urban planning from Morehouse and believe me when I tell you I've seen this scenario play out many times before. :mrgreen: Tyrice, I edited your post to correct the format, content wasn't modified - montecarloss
January 9, 200619 yr Grasscat & Myself met one of the resident/builders of the Klotter/Conroy area and he expressed great passion against this. Here is a letter that I found that summed up many of his concerns. For those of you that aren't familar with this part of Over-the-Rhine, you can find photos of their area here: http://www.pbase.com/montecarloss/klotter_conroy To: City of Cincinnati Manager, Mayor, Council Members, Dev. and Planning Director From: Klotter / Conroy Residents Association Date: 12/8/2005 Subject: City Link Center at 800 Bank Street Dear City Officials, Please be advised that on Dec 7, 2005 the Klotter / Conroy Residents Association at our year end meeting voted strongly in opposition to the City Link Center locating at 800 Bank Street. While we are sympathetic to the plight of the homeless, we believe a facility of this size and nature, at this location, will do much more harm than good. As an additional show of opposition, a petition being circulated through our neighborhood has 43 signatures to date, with many more to come. City Link at 800 Bank Street is being opposed by our neighborhood for the following reasons: * City Link by intent will become a magnet for the homeless. This huge influx of homeless people, many with criminal backgrounds, to the fringe of our neighborhood will certainly mean a significant increase in an already unacceptable level of crime. * The Klotter / Conroy neighborhood over the past 25 years has continuously improved from arguably the worst neighborhood in the whole city to one that now boasts of a 60% owner occupant rate. Private investment over the past 25 years for both re-hab and new construction is well in excess of $10,000,000 and growing. As a positive spin-off effect of this development for the city, residents frequent restaurants and shops downtown, on Main Street, and Finley Market. To put our neighborhood’s momentum and the even greater momentum very evident in the West End and Clifton Heights today in jeopardy, due to the placement of the City Link homeless shelter, would be very short sighted planning by city officials. * Property values in our neighborhood will be adversely affected, due to our close proximity to City Link. Property values are not only tied to actual crime rates, but also to perceived safety. It is hard to imagine the perception of safety not being adversely affected, by a large number of homeless people navigating to and from this shelter. * It is unbelievably irresponsible to locate a center offering services to persons with substance abuse problems and criminal backgrounds, within very close proximity to three schools. Please consider redirecting the energy, resources, and talent slated for 800 Bank Street to a more isolated, less residential location or into helping existing social services in OTR and the West End. Thank you, Klotter / Conroy Resident’s Association
January 9, 200619 yr No one put a gun to your head and forced you to live among us. Tyrice can you please enlighten us by what you mean by "us"?
January 9, 200619 yr A community is people living together cooperatively. It is not a bunch of yuppies moving into our neighborhoods and dividing us as a people No one put a gun to your head and forced you to live among us. I am just impressed that you had the nerve to put those 3 sentences within the same paragraph. Are you saying young professionals are not allowed or whites are not allowed in "your community"? Does racism know no bounds? And has class warfare jaded you to the point of stupidity? OK, I have been staying quiet on this board but Tyrice is the type of person who brings out the lesser side of me. Please tell me that you are simply trying to take the contrarian viewpoint here. No reasonable, let alone educated person could possibly think this was a "boon". We have a few Urban Planners on these boards and a couple of people who know a little about real estate and community building. So please engage us in a bit of discourse and explain your post a little further. P.S. The school excuse- My mother, Mona Redmond retired from Bloom after 32 years of teaching, I would not want her in that environment, nor any of her coworkers, let alone children. So come on, lets wax intellectual.
January 9, 200619 yr The Michael Redmond's of the world are great fans of displacing the poor. They never see the darkside of gentrification. If it weren't for ReStoc stockpiling properties Redmond and his ilk would have us all out in the street. I pray for a mudslide that results in Klotter residents being homeless. See how they like the view down here.
January 9, 200619 yr Is that it? come on, I will come back to this board in an hour or so, have something better than ^
January 9, 200619 yr and buy the way, its mulberry, not Klotter so try attacking that one if you want to get to me. Grasscat, has locustofboards signed in under just a different name?
January 9, 200619 yr No one put a gun to your head and forced you to live among us. Tyrice can you please enlighten us by what you mean by "us"? Certainly. When I refer to "us" I am speaking of those who have lived in the community for most of their life. This is the opposite of "them." I define them as those carpetbagging greedheads who have to get their grubby hands on any property that has a view. :mrgreen:
January 9, 200619 yr Is that it? come on, I will come back to this board in an hour or so, have something better than ^ Michael couldn't stand the heat so he got out of the kitchen...now if he'd only get out of our city.
January 9, 200619 yr Although I have trouble believing you are even remotely serious, I will entertain this discussion anyway; Certainly. When I refer to "us" I am speaking of those who have lived in the community for most of their life. This is the opposite of "them." I define them as those carpetbagging greedheads who have to get their grubby hands on any property that has a view So you have been here all your life in the West End? You have done an excellent job so far, a model for communities everywhere. Your only beacon of hope lies on a street that has attracted those "carpetbagging greenheads" (Dayton) and the rest has gone to crap. Look at the history of the community, it did not originate as one of the crime capitals of Cincinnati, and it does not have to continue that way. All to often we lay down for one or two voices of opposition and it outways the rest of us, well no more. Whose voices are louder at the West End Community Councils? Dale? NO! you are seeing a fundamental shift in many of the communities downtown and yours is one of them, not from poor to rich (the rich still will not give that community the time of day) but to a place where crime and homicides are not the norm, where more vacant buildings do not stand than occupied ones, and it will become a place where people want to live vs have to live. You sir, are the epitome of what has been wrong with downtown, well no more, there are louder voices in the room now.
January 9, 200619 yr Michael couldn't stand the heat so he got out of the kitchen...now if he'd only get out of our city. That was unnecessary.
January 9, 200619 yr Its OK, let him lash out and you will see how weak the othersides argument really is. Intellectual laziness there Ty they expect this facility to be a magnet that will draw homeless people from Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, and other states. help me out here, is this an us or a them?
January 10, 200619 yr Yeah, you are a real beacon of hope. What a joke! Don't forget that it was Whitey who tore our community apart with I-75.
January 10, 200619 yr And let me know when you want to introduce this intellectualism you keep threatening.
January 10, 200619 yr And let me know when you want to introduce this intellectualism you keep threatening. Why is development a bad thing, Tyrice? The West End and OTR are large neighborhoods that need investment. If abandoned buildings are being rehabbed, how is that chasing away long time residents?
January 10, 200619 yr Yeah, you are a real beacon of hope. What a joke! Don't forget that it was Whitey who tore our community apart with I-75. Tyrice, first I want to say welcome to Urban Ohio. I don't think we had the chance to say that yet. Usually when people come on here they introduce themselves. Second while it is obvious that their is some disagreements, I think your opinion can be of value to weigh in on the other perspective that we might otherwise not see. Last, please refrain from using slurs on Urban Ohio, it won't be tolerated. While I personally don't have a problem with the term "whitey" the context that you used it needs to be avoided.
January 10, 200619 yr I apologize for the perceived slur. In the future I will eschew "whitey" in favor of "caucasion oligarchists." Monte, I look to learn much from our exchanges and I apologize if I was disrespectful.
Create an account or sign in to comment