January 10, 200619 yr A guest column from the Jan. 10th Enquirer: ----------- Your Voice: Laurie Hyatt The adage "There's no free lunch" proves itself again in the case of CityLink. There is a cost for everything, and CityLink is no exception. ----------------------- "And for those opposed, what alternative solution would you offer for the use of an empty warehouse?" ^I reject this particular counterargument that the proponents of CityLink make in response to those who don't want to see CityLink at the proposed site. Why does anything have to be done with an empty warehouse right now?? To the people in the neighborhood who don't see the site's vacancy as inherently bad that's like saying: "Let me punch you in the face." "No." "Well, what do you propose to do with all that unbruised face?" Maybe the people in the area view it as an opportunity for something else besides CityLink. It is easy to understand the opposition to a project that will likely foreclose the possibility of a positive project on the site or in the surrounding area. "Well-intentioned residents of Cincinnati and surrounding areas are trying to find an effective solution for Cincinnati's unacceptable racial and poverty problems via CityLink in the West End." So now CityLink is going to solve the city's racial problems?
January 10, 200619 yr I don't get the racial angle. Ever since they started having problems with support they have tried to introduce a racial divide where there is none, which is certainly a healthy approach given our city's recent history. Not one black person in the West End voted in support of the CityLink center at our last community council meeting. That is some divide.
January 10, 200619 yr Laurie Hyatt has no idea where the site is, other than it is down "there" somewhere.
January 10, 200619 yr Ms Hyatt's article is such a stereotype it is impossible not to notice. Mason ? sigh But if this place is so great, why aren't other communities begging for it ?
January 10, 200619 yr A great observation from a a fellow neighbor. Perhaps the major issue (and one I don't see raised) is the experience with The Drop In Center and Tender Mercies etc. around Washington Park. The issue is not so much the condition of the people attracted to those centers, it's those attracted and then turned away or evicted because of being intoxicated, disruptive etc. These are the ones "on the streets" near the centers (Washington Park, 12th Street), with no place to go or means to get there. This, then, creates visible public behaviors that become disruptive and destructive to the creation of "community". Without a plan to deal with these "unintended consequences", this type of center (though needed in a community) results in further neighborhood deterioration.
January 10, 200619 yr You know what bothers me about someone in Mason talking about "NIMBYISM"? It is her own Masonites that are fighting the UC Behavioral Health Center that would be an even less invasive $30 million dollar project. http://www.uc.edu/news/NR.asp?id=3045
January 10, 200619 yr And for those opposed, what alternative solution would you offer for the use of an empty warehouse? What is your plan to decrease the 40 percent poverty level there? Or are you willing to sit back and be "good men who do nothing"? We good men who do nothing sure are busy doing something...We can point to project after project of rehabs, and infill. More community activism takes place here than any other place in Cincinnati. And will Citilink raise or lower that 40% poverty number? Come on. And I am a commercial real estate agent by trade, let me list it and find someone for you. Max, I agree, it is needed, but the location is what is in question. Why put it next to a neighborhood that is trying to get on its feet? I agree with the assessment though as it pertains to Washington Pk. Tyrice, you need to get a handle on your racial anger, racism and bigotry is not the answer here. Hate me because I challenge your opinion, not because you "assume" I am white. (the chicken doesn't do me justice, I look a bit different in reality)
January 10, 200619 yr How dare this guy tell me to get a hand on my racial anger. Who the hell is he? I never envisioned him as white or black. Nor did I use the word "assume" which he misleadingly put in quotation marks. Challenge: of all the social services located near the School for Performing Arts please recite some instances where kids were hurt. One other thing, there already is drug dealing going on outside the Heberle school.
January 10, 200619 yr What social services are located near SCPA? Did you mean Washington Park Elementary?
January 10, 200619 yr Enough with the personal attacks. Keep this about CityLink ONLY. I am very interested in both sides and the last thing I want to see is a good discussion go to the waste side. There are other Cincinnati message boards that cater to that justification and we like to pride ourselves in good dialogue (Outside the urbanbar of course) Thanks.
January 11, 200619 yr A guest column from the Jan. 10th Enquirer: ----------- Your Voice: Laurie Hyatt For others not involved or committed to this endeavor, there is a "forced" cost - whether real or imaginary - that they did not volunteer for or want in their lives. CityLink is not "their baby." And, in all fairness, I understand their concern. In all honesty, how many of us would want CityLink in our back yard bordering our property, not knowing how it will affect property values, etc.? All the data to the contrary does not ease the pain. There's always that one exception that slips through the cracks and defies the statistics. So there is no "solution" here. Where is all the data to the contrary? Where is all the evidence that this institution will increase safety and security? Has a large concentration of social services been beneficial to Over The Rhine? This project is going to move a large concentration of social services and the mentally ill from Over the Rhine and locate them next to schools, homes and businesses. Are residents of the Washington Park area outraged because losing these institutions will adversely affect their safety and security? Is 3CDC mad because they are losing out on the prized $12 million dollar development that CityLink calls a "gem"? Why haven't Covington and Newport fought for this prized new development? These people are deluded if they expect any neighborhood to be happy simply by making an effort to concentrate violent psychotic people in it. I would love to see "all the data to the contrary" that they have presented. So far, that data has consisted of Mason resident Mark Stecher claiming that crime is going to go down because Jesus is coming to the neighborhood. I am down with the S.O.G. coming to town, but they should also tell us about the number of manic depressives and schizophrenics that are coming along with him. A facility of this size will most probably treat thousands of people for mental health every year, and a good portion of them will be severely mentally ill with a high risk of violent self destructive behavior. But here is the good news: Democracy is alive and well. If CityLink is to succeed, it must be willing to take the heat and wrestle its cause in the marketplace of ideas with their opponents. They must convince those opposed that whatever their perceived "cost" may be, it is worth the risk. If Democracy was alive and well, then CityLink would have no chance. Everybody and their mother has lined up against it in the affected communities. The people that are for it, like the churches and the social service agencies, are all from somewhere else. Our Churches in the West End are opposed to this, and have nothing to do with it. And for those opposed, what alternative solution would you offer for the use of an empty warehouse? What is your plan to decrease the 40 percent poverty level there? Or are you willing to sit back and be "good men who do nothing"? The West End already has a comprehensive plan that includes this site. The people of the West End spent a long time on that plan, and it was approved by City Council a couple of years back. That plan does not call for a homeless mall for drug addicts, ex-cons, and the mentally ill. A company already in the West End sought to buy the site, and it has seen interest from a retail outfit. Many people that live in the surrounding neighborhoods would like to see a Kroger there. I would like to see anything that brings jobs and development instead of the mentally ill to our community. Laurie Hyatt of Mason is a graduate student at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and a volunteer for Wellspring Community Church. The Mason bit says it all. Some bible thumper from the burbs that is trying to save the world without regard to the law of unintended consequences. The arrogance of some people.
January 11, 200619 yr But here is the good news: Democracy is alive and well. If CityLink is to succeed, it must be willing to take the heat and wrestle its cause in the marketplace of ideas with their opponents. They must convince those opposed that whatever their perceived "cost" may be, it is worth the risk. That is the quote that really through me for a loop also. If it were true we would not even be discussing this issue right now, it would be dead. EDIT: Anyone who addresses themselves in the third person will not get free press on Urban Ohio. Feel free to post any of the opposition letters from the site below, just nothing from that guy - Respectfully montecarloss http://www.notocitylink.com/opposecitylink.html
January 17, 200619 yr A neighbor recently attended a crossroads meeting here is what happened Subject: Fw: Crossroads meeting Sunday Jan. 15, 2006 CityLink second copy 01/16/2006 10:22 An FYI... Crossroads Community Church held a Crossroads members only informational meeting on CityLink. This meeting took place on the Chapel on Sunday, January 15, 2006, at 7:00 PM. Copious notes were taken and a highlight of the evening follows. Tim Senff - Staff director for Reachout at Crossroads and Chris Macklin head of interaction with City Gospel Mission were leading the meeting. Approximately 250-300 people were in attendance. Tim Senff asked the audience to hold their questions as we would have a question and answer session at the end of the presentation. Tim mentioned the they had a diverse group of people tonight: - Crossroads/CityLink junkies - those that show up for anything Crossroads does - people who are curious about CityLink - people with varying levels of questions i.e. have seen protesters, media, have had friends talk to them about CityLink - people who are not excited about CityLink Tim stated everyone was welcome and that this was an informational meeting with 2 main purposes. 1) Info 2) they want you to feel our passion, catch the passion and be an advocate for CityLink. Overview of CityLink - Campus of compassionate service provided by different agencies providing holistic help in 1 location. Goal - Help people break the cycle of poverty, to achieve dreams, and have hope. Logo - Relief - Relationship - Real Life Change. A video of Mark Stecher (President of OneCity) was played. Mark mentioned the following points: - we identified what works and what doesn't in Cinti. - met with everyone we could - did focus groups - found most services in Cinti based on relief not changing cycle of poverty - simple solution - relationships, it is not enough to give money, need to get hands dirty - dream is to get real life change A film clip from the movie "Miracle" was played. "Change the way we play, change the team chemistry." Back to video of Mark: - Cinti services are spread out - people have to walk to get services - key ingredient from research - put services under 1 roof - services like dental, legal, game room, literacy, hair salon ... - services will give relationship; Relief - Relationship - Out of poverty Back to Tim Senff: 2 key points: - not good stuff happening - not winning, not playing as team "God wants us to change the game - we need to provide relationships." - research shows relationships are necessary in life - relationships are messy - take time - God needs us to form relationships. - there will be staff at CityLink, need volunteers to build relationships, You are needed Kirk shared his life experience as a graduate of City Gospel Mission's Exodus program. He has been clean 17 months and is now on staff at City Gospel Mission. Back to Tim Senff: - "I think this is a good idea, I believe this is God's idea, we take this seriously, Leadership of Crossroads have fasted over this and prayed about this." - mentioned MLK 's "I Have A Dream" speech. Tim : " We have a dream as well, poverty broken. people with hope, peoples lives are going to be changed. The Body of Christ in Cinti is going to be different because of CityLink" - Four pillars of CityLink: Health & wellness, Recreation, Employment & Education, Life skills - Core Tenants: Lord's Gym, Crossroads Health Center, City Gospel Mission, Jobs Plus. - "Mall of compassionate services." - Lord's Gym and Crossroads Health Center ARE NOT MOVING TO CityLink - they will have a satellites at CityLink **sexual predators will be told CityLink can't help you and they will be outsourced. - financial services will be offered - "Nothing is set in stone." (THIS SCARES ME TO DEATH) - went over the timeline of CityLink: 2004: 10 founding partners, research, got core tenants 2006: 22 churches involved, 150 volunteers, community leaders, closed on bank Street. 2008: Development, 1000 volunteers Grand opening 2007-2008. - CityLink did most complete research in history - qualitative & quantitative research, focus groups, visited Path Mall in LA, a place in Houston, invited hundreds of churches to join them. - Criteria for Site: - talked to the West End Community council & Pastors, sent letters to residents, cleaned up a lot in the West End, "Cops said cleaning this lot would be a blessing to them. We re- moved 400 tires from the lot." CLAP CLAP CLAP - Saturday, May 20, 2006 program "GO CINCINNATI" - we will be rocking Cinti service wise paint buildings, work in schools with major emphasis in the West End. 9 Criteria for CityLink site: 1) Population: close to those who need services, highest level of poverty, want inner city decided on 800 Bank St, (after looking at 19 other sites) Bank St. will be main location will have satellites in Oakley, Loveland, Madisonville in future. Gave following stats: West End: poverty 55%, Not completed high school 43%, No jobs 63%, not land owner 80%, 2) Size: want 5 acres, accessibility, affordable, parking for staff, volunteers. Bank Street is 5 acres bldg. will be 100,000 sq. ft. green space, parking. 3) Accessibility: walk distance near bus lines & highway, accessible to city & SURROUNDING AREAS. (THIS IS SCARY) 4) Parking - for hundreds of volunteers and staff 5) Safety - design, lighting, needs to be safe safety is a concern in the West End - Security - will work with the West End so it is a Blessing to the area. 6) Affordable 7) Zoning - Chris Macklin said "it conforms to zoning ... no problems there ... no issue there..." WHAT ABOUT ZONING APPEAL? HELLO? 8) Other - no environmental issues - looked at Queen City Barrel site 9) Available for sale - 800 Bank Street is the ideal site - we will be a blessing to the West End and our City. We will be a blessing to the West End and surrounding areas by providing employment services, mentors, we will be a good neighbor because we will be an employer, we will do community service projects, we will create greater interest in the West End, people will visit the neighborhood & businesses, more attractive neighborhood with CityLink building there. "Some of you will want to move there!" CityLink will be an architectural jewel." - HOW TO GET INVOLVED: - attend GO CINCINNATI leader meetings Feb. 8 & 12 - Prayer - Service projects - various opportunities LOVE SQUAD for protesters to provide them with pizza & coffee (LAUGHTER & CLAPPING!!!!) Tim then ended the meeting with these words: " People have good concerns... we are aware of this, if you have specific comments or questions stay after with us and we will answer them." He then took off his microphone and ended the meeting. About 20 people stayed and bombarded them with questions. But the majority of the people left. THEY DO NOT WANT THE CONGREGATION TO HEAR ANY NEGATIVE FEED BACK!
January 18, 200619 yr I still think the fear level of people living in surrounding areas (Conroy/Klotter, Fairview, OTR) is misplaced, except those who live in the immediate vicinity. Most of the people who will be taking advantage of CityLink services are already here, folks. I see them everyday when I walk my dog or walk to work. They're just scattered amongst the warren of streets, alleys, tenements, and abandoned buildings of OTR and the West End. There is certainly something to be said for giving them incentive to come out into the daylight (so to speak) and trying to get them some effective help. If only there were a site on the east side of Queensgate that are about the same distance from most of the West End and OTR as the Bank St. site, but not so close to homes and schools.
January 18, 200619 yr I still think the fear level of people living in surrounding areas (Conroy/Klotter, Fairview, OTR) is misplaced, except those who live in the immediate vicinity. Most of the people who will be taking advantage of CityLink services are already here, folks. I see them everyday when I walk my dog or walk to work. They're just scattered amongst the warren of streets, alleys, tenements, and abandoned buildings of OTR and the West End. Los Angeles had a problem (or maybe they still have it) with police from nearby cities just dropping off homeless people in their downtown. I wonder if having a facility like CityLink will cause the police and others from nearby communities (Covington, the numerous townships, etc.) to do the same thing in the West End. Would CityLink have the resources to handle all these people?
January 18, 200619 yr They're just scattered amongst the warren of streets, alleys, tenements, and abandoned buildings of OTR and the West End. For awhile I was considering an investment in a property in the mohawk area and while taking pictures of the property on a 3rd visit a bum was starting to come out of a barricaded "except for back window" home a few properties away. If it is this bad now I can't imagine it getting any better when citylink is built. Sadly I have given up on the west end, brighton area for now unless citylink plan fails.
January 18, 200619 yr Max, You just summed up the entire argument. The question is, how far will this chilling effect reach?
January 18, 200619 yr Just to play Devil's Advocate, what if the bum Maximillian saw were able to clean up, get a job and an apartment because of the services CityLink hopes to provide. You will be more persuasive if you acknowledge, and are able to rebut, your opponent's stance.
January 18, 200619 yr Kendall, He may be able to, but it only takes one or two to drift out and do real damage to the area. I do not think there are many who say this is not needed, it is the location. Max does not want to invest in an area (that desperatly needs investment) due to its proximity to this. I am all for helping those who can not help themeselves, but no one wants this in their backyard. Would you be willing to make a significant investment into property on Mohawk with Citylink being a stones throw away?
January 18, 200619 yr No, I wouldn't want to invest a stone's throw from the place. I thought I made that clear two posts ago. I don't support the Bank St. site. But I see a lot of people making dire predictions about areas more than a couple blocks away that I just don't think are going to happen if CityLink is built. For example, CityLink would not stop me from buying a house in City West or on Klotter.
January 18, 200619 yr Just to play Devil's Advocate, what if the bum Maximillian saw were able to clean up, get a job and an apartment because of the services CityLink hopes to provide. You will be more persuasive if you acknowledge, and are able to rebut, your opponent's stance. Why can't he do that now ? CityLink does not offer anything new. Maybe the guy likes living in a barricaded house.
January 19, 200619 yr I still think the fear level of people living in surrounding areas (Conroy/Klotter, Fairview, OTR) is misplaced, except those who live in the immediate vicinity. Most of the people who will be taking advantage of CityLink services are already here, folks. I see them everyday when I walk my dog or walk to work. They're just scattered amongst the warren of streets, alleys, tenements, and abandoned buildings of OTR and the West End. There is certainly something to be said for giving them incentive to come out into the daylight (so to speak) and trying to get them some effective help. If only there were a site on the east side of Queensgate that are about the same distance from most of the West End and OTR as the Bank St. site, but not so close to homes and schools. Rodger Howell of CityLink said that this facility would serve between 35,000 and 40,000 people a year. That is more people that Over The Rhine and the West End combined. From the post on the Crossroads meeting, the people at Crossroads claim that some of the major social service agencies will stay anchored in OTR and use this area as a satellite. If all that is true, this is just a massive expansion of social services in our urban core, not a consolidation. This thing is the size of a Wall Mart. We are going to get a huge boost in shelter space, on top of the shelters we have, which are only filled to 79% occupancy. XU Melanie talked about indigent dumping in LA. It doesn't just happen in LA. Sick people get discharged from area hospitals and they put them in a cab bound for OTR. I think this massive expansion is going make our urban core a magnet for the region. One or two neighborhoods simply can't shoulder the burden for an entire region. You look at the forward thinking developments across the river and wonder what the administration in Cincinnati is thinking. They have over 5 acres on this site. Think of how many people could benefit from a downtown Kroger with parking. That is what people from the West End always clamor for. I think the people on the hillsides and OTR would go there. And if people from other Kroger locations didn't want to work there, I am sure you could find some people quite willing for work already in the community. You could employ people, you could let people keep their money in the community, you could improve the tax base, and you could give thousands of people one of the services that they want.
January 19, 200619 yr Just to play Devil's Advocate, what if the bum Maximillian saw were able to clean up, get a job and an apartment because of the services CityLink hopes to provide. You will be more persuasive if you acknowledge, and are able to rebut, your opponent's stance. Why can't he do that now ? CityLink does not offer anything new. Maybe the guy likes living in a barricaded house. Amen. We already have these services. Does a massive expansion of them help? They like to stress the job training. Before this proposed deal, we have the Jobs Plus Employment network in OTR and the Job Corps already in the neighborhood. After this deal, we will still have the same two institutions, but no additional jobs. If you do something that can attract development you can add the jobs that people need. Once this baby is in there it is going to be there for a long time. There won't be a second chance to rethink things and make them right. A huge concentration of social services and a policy of shifting the mentally ill from hospitals to the shelters and streets has crippled our urban core. After decades of playing the same game, the "new" solution is going to be a massive expansion of more of the same. Nick Spenser had a well written article on that yesterday.
January 19, 200619 yr http://nickspencer.blogspot.com/2006/01/how-to-kill-city.html Tuesday, January 17, 2006 How to Kill a City I think Cincinnati, over the last 30 years, has run a clinic on how to kill a city. Over that time frame, we have run an almost perfect playbook on how to drive people out into suburbs or out of the region entirely. When you take a step back, and look at it in a big-picture sense, its almost awe-inspiring. You really can't do it much better. So how do you kill a city? How do you make sure an urban area becomes so inhospitable, so unattractive, that it kills development before it even begins. How do you make sure that the evacuation from your core neighborhoods is so severe it drains the area of all but those of the least means? It starts with a lack of regional cooperation. Make sure the city and county are at odds, then make sure the neighboring counties think even less of the city. Get it to a point where just being cordial with each other is considered regionalism, and showing up together for a photo-op is called a show of cooperation. Avoid any kind of regional government entity with teeth; make sure the suburbs continue to sprawl outward with new construction of homes and office parks. Don't even joke about metro government even though its worked pretty much everywhere else. Now that you're sprawling, and the nicer areas and nicer jobs keep getting farther out, cut off the city. Whatever you do, do NOT pass any kind of transit initiative. If you do a light rail campaign, make certain its badly run and unrealistic in terms of cost and construction. Cut that city off at the knees-- they could handle the sprawl if there's a connecting train, so make sure that light rail defeat is so convincing it doesn't get on another ballot for fear that supporting it would mean pissing money and time away. No, get people addicted to cars, and make them hate walking and mass transit. When they take those cars downtown, make parking them as difficult as possible, and make sure you aggressively enforce parking meters. Make it a hassle. Now, you've cut off the city from most of the new investment. But a lot of people still like cities. They like the historic texture, the authentic neighborhood business districts, the culture. So override that by making the area as terrifying as possible. Make sure all your low-income housing is concentrated, preferably as close to downtown as possible. Now that you've done that, get a bunch of social services in. This works out great: conservatives like it because they don't want the poor anywhere near them, and liberals will fall for it if you dress it up as compassion and call any other strategy 'kicking out the poor' or 'gentrification'. The concentration of poverty will have a host of negative effects: the lack of investment will diminish the tax base, and you'll see less in basic services provided. That means less police. This makes the area a perfect place to commit crimes. More crime means more people are willing to forgo the excitement of a city in favor of suburban safety. This is maybe the most effective part. Because once you concentrate this stuff, you're practically all the way there. You can keep doing it, indefinitely. You can build social services, jails, and low income housing developments over and over, and each time, just argue that this is where the need is. Just make sure you don't spread this stuff out. A region is a big place, and if you spread low income housing out across every neighborhood and jurisdiction, no one would even feel it. If you put shelters and jails in non-residential areas, they'd barely be noticed by all but those who use them. Isolated, poverty swells. It will grow and grow, until it takes over an entire city. You're almost all the way there, but cities are stubborn. They get in people's system. They are still the place most regions put their major people magnets: stadiums, convention centers, museums, arts venues, and entertainment districts. People get down there, and they say, wow, look at all there is to do down here. Now, you've already fixed this a little bit by making people feel unsafe. But the surefire way to negate this impression is to cut those people magnets off. See, cities thrive on connectivity and walkability. So NEVER stick that Baseball park in the middle of the downtown or even directly adjacent to it. Cut it off. Use roads if you can. Nothing kills pedestrian traffic like long crosswalks. Don't put it near bars, shops, and condos-- put it around a sea of parking, or office towers with nothing on the storefront level. Before you know it, you can bring 60,000 people downtown and it will still have little to no meaningful impact on the city's economy. But amazingly, there are still groups of folks who will take a chance on your city. Urban pioneers. Almost nothing is too bad for them once they see that architecture and its potential. And while you may have to deal with some small number of passionate advocates for revitalization, there are ways to diminish those numbers. Make sure you're city isn't gay-friendly. The GLBT community can work wonders for an urban area, keep them away through State bans on Gay Marriage, never get a human rights ordinance that includes them. And watch out for immigrants. They are fueling growth in cities around the country. Avoid any concentrated efforts to attract new Americans. Oh, and artists. you can get away with creating arts districts in name, but don't implement financial incentives for them or develop artist specific housing. If you do all these things, you will kill your city. Do these things, and they set off an amazing chain reaction. Before you know it you will be spending most of your time arguing about race, poverty, and crime. Most people will talk about the city the way they talk about a dying relative. Few people will go there, and when they do, they'll be in and out as fast as possible. You may look at this and say its nothing new, stuff everybody knows. And yet, we continue to do it. We are, every day, making things worse. We're expanding our jail in the middle of downtown. This one is just mind-blowing in its stupidity. It sits next to Broadway Commons, the largest undeveloped parcel of land in our downtown. We need that area to be developed into residential units and maybe some kind of entertainment. It has nearly as much potential as The Banks, and its cheaper. It could be THE big project that turns downtown around. But nobody is going to develop it with a jail right there. Would you pay 250k for a condo that looks out at the fucking Justice Center? We're going to build CityLink in the West End. Metro Government? Ha. Light Rail? Ha ha. Dead last in terms of documented foreign born population and apparently we like it that way. No artist housing developments. No Human Rights Ordinance and a State Ban on Gay Marriage. We continue to do everything and anything possible to kill this city. Its done through an odd mixture of arrogance, incompetence, and fear. Undoing all of it would be a daunting task, but even worse, there's no WILL to do it. The system as it exists right now is working for most people. And so the decline continues. City government becomes less and less meaningful, and certainly less capable of doing much of anything about it. Its a sad, sorry state of affairs for a city with this much beauty, this much history. Its sad to watch it die.
January 19, 200619 yr Maybe the guy likes living in a barricaded house? That's ridiculous. Come on, settle down. You don't think homeless people from everywhere within 15 miles aren't already coming to OTR? Even if they aren't "dumped" here, this is where the existing social services are. And you're not going to have much luck panhandling at Rookwood Commons. It has to be the easiest place to get by as a homeless person already. I'm not sure where you guys think all these thousands of homeless folks are right this minute, if not within two miles of Fountain Square. I agree completely that once CityLink is built it won't be going away any time soon. That's why it should be built in Queensgate, near enough that the users can walk there, but not right next to schools and homes, such as West End Kid's. And yes, it is an expansion of social services. Some would say an expansion that is sorely needed. In any event, if CityLink is built there will definitely be people using it to justify evicting the existing services from OTR so they can turn it into condos. Which is fine, the one-stop approach is likely more effective anyway and unnecessary duplication is a waste. The unfortunate thing is that West End Kid and his neighbors get dumped on. Which, for the third time, is why I oppose CityLink.
January 28, 200619 yr http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060128/NEWS01/601280375/-1/all Impeachment petition roils West End BY ALLEN HOWARD | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER WEST END[/b] - A member of the West End Community Council has filed a petition with the group's executive committee, calling for impeachment of council president Dale Mallory.
January 28, 200619 yr "I think it is absurd to have people coming in lately to destroy the work we have done in the West End." I was trying to think of the list of accomplishments that Dale Mallory has done for the West End. Must be a long list, because I can't think of anything.
February 7, 200619 yr Council member lakeeta cole is going to support a resolution to council against citylink . Her office wrote me back. Dear Maximillian, :-D Thank you very much for your e-mail about the resolution to oppose Citylink. I appreciate your willingness to share your thoughts with me about this issue. I am happy to be able to support this resolution. Thank you again for your message. Sincerely, Councilmember Laketa Cole President Pro Tem
February 7, 200619 yr I just recieved this email about the Cole Resolution. All, Next Tuesday, Laketa Cole's committee is expected to present a motion for resolution out of her Neighborhood Committee in support of our opposition of the planned CityLink. Then on Wednesday this resolution is expected to go in front of the full Council. It is critical that we let Lakita know that the community is against CityLink and supports her position . Her email address is [email protected]. She will get the email, and your voice makes a huge difference. We also need folks to attend the Tuesday meeting and if possible be willing to speak against CityLink. Please send a personalized email to Lakita to let her know why you think CityLink is bad for our City. In addition please also consider asking her how you can have a chance to speak at the council meeting on Tuesday. Your voice is critical. In addition the timing is critical. The emails need to be sent today ASAP. I apologize for the short notice but I just found out. Tuesday @ 3pm at the OTR recreation center Please note that the Center is located on the 1700 block of Race str, its just across from the south parking lot of Findlay market. If you are able to attend the neighborhood meeting on Tuesday in OTR please indicate that you will be there and you are against CityLink. Lets stick together and fight this senseless facility. If you need more information on CityLink please refer to www.notocitylink.com
February 7, 200619 yr If you are going to send an email to Ms. Cole...be sure to spell her name right. It's Laketa! Not Lakita!
February 8, 200619 yr Didn't get to the meeting - but saw the end on tv. Looks like Bortz, Cole, Crowley & Ghiz are all pretty much on board on this. Don't know how much they can do, though.
February 8, 200619 yr So if you support citylink you are a revolutionary? :roll: Che would be rolling in his grave. Crossroads' CityLink supporters - Revolutionaries unite! You are getting this e-mail because you have expressed interest in being kept up-to-date on how you can help with CityLink Center. Asyou know, CityLink isa major effort we're putting our passion and resources behind with the vision of helping people movefrom relief to relationship to real life change. It's really about helping to change our city! We just received word that there will be a CityLink Forum this Wednesday, Feb 8 at 6pm at the Lincoln Recreation Center in the West End (1027 Linn St. Cincy 45203). Directions are below.This forum will be moderated by Lincoln Ware, talk show host of The Buzz 1230 AM. Brian Tome, along with other CityLink pastors and Mark Stecher, will be presenting. Throughout the past months, there has been a small group of very vocal opponents to this project. 8-) These are the same people who have picketed our church five times. We feel that this event on Wed nightis an opportunity to do two things: 1) tell of the benefits we see that CityLink will bring to the West End and to Cincinnati, and 2) to show the city that there are MANY people who are excited about CityLink and plan to make it a reality by giving their time and passion. So here's what we're asking - that you make room in your schedule and come to this important event and be vocally supportive of CityLink while there. Cheer when wecast our vision for fighting poverty! Pray when fear creeps in or lies are told! And speak up in love people during conversations and public forum discussions!(ummm you should tell your church members not to give picketers the finger when entering the church parking lot)We want hundreds of people there on Wed night! This is part of the revolution. It's a revolution of love, of standing up for those in poverty - those looking for a change in life. Come on out Wed night and help make this dream a reality. Working for change - Brian Tome & Tim Senff
February 8, 200619 yr Can someone ask them why this project has to be so damn big? It would be bigger than the LA version they are basing this on. I read in the NYTimes that LA has over 40K homeless. Do they want this to become a regional shelter? BS
February 8, 200619 yr Ok, so I haven't been following this story that closely, but one thing seems clear to me: its the location that bothers everyone not the building of such a center itself. I have not taken the time to go through and read everyone's comments but where is the best location for this kind of place in Cincinnati? I am with everyone and do not want this in the West End, but I am curious to know where everyone would prefer it to be.
February 8, 200619 yr I am with everyone and do not want this in the West End, but I am curious to know where everyone would prefer it to be. Queensgate is the location you hear batted around most. I would say a location that is not near 3 schools, something more of an industrial area, not just building (they are looking at an industrial site already but within a residential area). Space is not an issue as we have a tremendous amount of inventory that fits these specs. And it should not be right next to an area that is trying so hard to turn itself around. We have so many sites that meet the specs that Citilink prefers, and still in close proximity to downtown but without the negative impact on the community that the Bank st location would have. Also, if anyone would like to go...I will try and make this myself, it should be interesting; Please join us in City council chambers tomorrow to encourage Council to move forward with a vote against CityLink. We need council to suspend the rules to allow for an immediate resolution. You can help by attending this meeting and by agreeing to speak. In addition you can send emails to council. Cecil Thomas is planning to abstain as he goes to one of the churches. I think we should let him be.
February 8, 200619 yr All- Why such a rush to have council vote on this now? The organizers of CityLink weren't even notified about the vote. I agree that CityLink has done a POOR job of communicating their plans. But tonight at 6pm in the Lincoln Community Center there will be a CityLink discussion forum. It's an opportunity to ask real questions to Mark Strecher and Brian Tome and challenge them to shift their thinking. We need more open discussion of this, not continued fighting. We all agree that the idea is good, it's just the location that's contested. Or at least I agree with that. I urge you all to attend the meeting, encourage respectful dialog, voice your opinions and ask the people of CityLink to pray about your concerns and really internalize them. They are doing so much praying for their leaders, they need to be honest and pray about your concerns too. I understand that it may be hard for these organizations to change plans now, but if they need to, then they need to swallow their pride and do so. In any case- I'd urge you all to attend the meeting tonight and suspend the vote until next week. It may make no difference but it at least sends a message that you are reasonable and willing to make sure you know all of the facts before hastily proceeding as well. Two wrongs will not make this situation right and I believe a vote tonight before the forum would be another wrong.
February 8, 200619 yr MY APOLOGIES. I JUST found out that hte Zoning meeting about CityLink is on Monday, that's why the need for the vote now. I urge everyone though to keep on making strides towards a positive dialog. I hope that everyone will attend the forum tonight at 6pm at Lincoln recreation center.
February 8, 200619 yr Ok, so I haven't been following this story that closely, but one thing seems clear to me: its the location that bothers everyone not the building of such a center itself. I think some people, myself included, are questioning the size of this facility. I read somewhere that Citylink is 4 times the center in Los Angeles, yet Cincinnati's homeless population is about one tenth the size of Los Angeles' population.
February 8, 200619 yr I am just a resident/property owner that is against citylink. I am against the location and the size. It would be bad if a carbon copy of the planned citylink would be placed even in Queensgate. The only way I would agree to a citylink placed somewhere else it would have to fit this criteria. No more than 25,000 sq ft, it would have to be placed in an area away from any residential area including lower price hill, all the current social service agencies would have to consolidate and leave their current locations. Then I would agree to it. I urge everyone though to keep on making strides towards a positive dialog. I hope that everyone will attend the forum tonight at 6pm at Lincoln recreation center. Re: Dale Mallory's CityLink "Forum" in the West End Representatives from NoToCityLink will not be attending Dale Mallory's CityLink "Forum" scheduled for Wednesday, February 8th. Our decision is based on the following reasons: We did not receive an invitation to the event. Notification and/or invitations were only extended to the media and CityLink organizers; with the exception of Vineyard Community Church, which pulled out as a supporting partner well over two months ago. The event is inaccurately represented as an event organized by the West End Community Council. It is our understanding that Dale Mallory's authority to conduct the business of WECC is suspended due to the impeachment proceedings currently underway. To our knowledge, no other WECC members are involved in this initiative. The moderator, Lincoln Ware is biased in favor of CityLink. Lincoln Ware gave a clear endorsement to CityLink thereby creating a conflict of interest for someone acting as moderator in a public forum. "I happen to think, personally, it's [CityLink] not a bad idea." "I go along with Markus Jenkins" [CityLink Representative on the broadcast] -Lincoln Ware on the Lincoln Ware Show on Channel 38 WBQC, February 5th, 2006. CityLink presented to the West End Community at two separate community council meetings (October and November). An official community position of opposition to the CityLink Center subsequently followed. (http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051221/NEWS01/512210359/1056) This event is touted as one which offers dialogue to all citizens of Cincinnati. Sadly, CityLink has declined multiple requests from surrounding communities to "educate" the Cincinnati community on their proposed facility. This, coupled with the exclusionary design of the "forum", raises concern that the purpose of this event is not education, but instead public manipulation (see attached email to Crossroads members). Should you choose to cover this event, we ask that you expose the questionable event structure and closely examine all information presented by CityLink and Dale Mallory. By design, this event can not accurately represent the feelings of the Cincinnati urban community. Additionally, we request that you include NoToCityLink's position in your media coverage.
February 8, 200619 yr <i>Sweet, maybe this beast will be stopped.</i> <b>City council votes 8-1 against CityLink</b> Cincinnati city council passed a resolution Wednesday against the one-stop social services shop proposed for the West End called CityLink – a 100,000-square-foot mall that would house a variety of social service operations.
February 8, 200619 yr The overwhelming majority of speakers were against the development I can vouch for that, I spoke against it (did I mention I am not a great speaker, just found that out today) and oddly enough, not a single Citilink person was there. Nate Livingston preached about grandstanding for 2 minutes while he himself was grandstanding, and there were two other usual suspects who spoke in support but no one from the organization itself. The place was packed also, although not a lot of room to begin with, it was standing room only at certain points. Thomas said he was voting against it because he thought the process should be allowed to play out meaning the zoning hearing and the appeals etc. All in all it was a good day for the anti Citilink crowd.
February 8, 200619 yr Who has final say in zoning ? The zoning board or the city council ? I was thinking it was like the Liquor board (state) where the city gives it's recommendation to the board. Is it the other way around with zoning ?
February 9, 200619 yr Quim, Council only gave its "non-binding opinion" yesterday, zoning will be the final say This is from the below article. Earlier in the day, City Council voted 8-1 on a resolution opposing the development. That vote will have no impact on a Zoning Board of Appeals hearing on the matter scheduled for Monday. This is a good article reflecting back on the past 2 days of meetings, http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060209/NEWS01/602090370/-1/CINCI CityLink cheered at forum But few of those in favor were West End residents BY DAN KLEPAL | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER WEST END - CityLink played to the home crowd Wednesday night - make that a home-away-from-home crowd. More than 400 people showed up for a two-hour forum to ask questions of CityLink board members and supporters of the controversial project that aims to build a $10 million to $15 million mall for social services on 5 acres along Bank Street, in what is now an abandoned slaughterhouse.
February 9, 200619 yr CityLink cheered at forum Cheer when we cast our vision for fighting poverty! Pray when fear creeps in or lies are told! And speak up in love people during conversations and public forum discussions! From citylink email to supporters LOL Looks like the sheep are following their master.
February 9, 200619 yr Amen to that Max. Those aren't people, they are sheeple! That pep rally last night was comical. I don't think that Brian Tome wants to go anywhere to speak unless he knows he can pack the house with hundreds of his own people who fawn over him and slobber like pavlovian dogs. That guy has some F'in ego. What about this one: Throughout the past months, there has been a small group of very vocal opponents to this project Some of that "small group" include: Cincinnati City Council West End Community Council West End Churches and Pastors Over the Rhine Chamber of Commerce CUF Neighborhood Association (Clifton Heights, University Heights, Fairmont) Brighton Business Owners Westwood Concern Dayton Street Neighborhood Association Clifton Heights Improvement Association Clifton Heights Business Association Over The Rhine Brewery District Klotter/Conroy Resident’s Association Pendleton Neighborhood Council West McMicken Improvement Association Principals of the three schools across the street from CityLink Brian Tome is lying to his own people.
February 9, 200619 yr As for City Council, I would have to say "WOO HOO!". I would like to thank the people who showed up to the Tuesday and/or the Wednesday Council meetings. I would like to thank the people who have written council on behalf of the opposition. A lot of neat people have come together on this. People have talked about having a bash at the Mockbee, with the proceeds going to the legal defense fund (the zoning appeal and any legal action beyond that). The Mockbee has a liquor license as well. I think it sounds like a great idea, but then again I have a drinking problem. WOO HOO!
February 14, 200619 yr http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060213/NEWS01/302130002 Zoning board scuttles CItyLink plan The Cincinnati Zoning Board of Appeals voted 3-2 Monday that the CityLink Center, a proposed one-stop shop for the poor and destitute, would violate the zoning code in the West End and should not be built there.
Create an account or sign in to comment