Yesterday, in New Orleans, protesters stopped the planned demolition of dilapidated public housing units at the B. W. Cooper public housing complex. Today, fresh from this success, protesters are poised to march on City Hall to stop other planned demolitions. The Housing Authority of New Orleans has announced plans to demolish four public housing developments in New Orleans and replace them with mixed income neighborhoods. The demonstrators are opposed to these demolition plans and believe it is part of a conspiracy to prevent poor African Americans from returning to New Orleans.
In contrast, the re-development of these units will benefit the former occupants of these housing projects. Creating units that offer modern amenities, less dense living conditions and a mix of inhabitants is preferable to the situation that existed in B.W. Cooper and the other housing projects in New Orleans. Prior to Katrina, housing projects were characterized by a high crime rate, gang activity, a thriving illegal drug trade, prostitution and filth.
To see how a redevelopment can be done correctly people should investigate the former St. Thomas housing projects, which are now the RiverGardens neighborhood and a new Walmart store. It is a vast improvement over the situation that existed previously and should serve as a model for the redevelopment in many of these other projects.
Unfortunately, instead of moving forward and providing hope to residents, professional protesters and experienced agitators succeeded in shutting down the B.W. Cooper demolition last night. Now, this same group wants to thwart the demolition plans at three other housing developments.
In reality, none of the previous residents of these public housing developments have a “right” to return. Residents lived in these facilities courtesy of the taxpayers of the United States. They did not own these units. Instead the units are owned by the federal government and the people of this country.
All of these facts are disregarded by the professional protesters who came in to New Orleans from other states, carrying signs and yelling at work crews hired to do a job that had been approved several years ago. Yesterday, at the B.W. Cooper protest, license plates were spotted from Ohio, Kentucky and Massachusetts. Who are these individuals? What stake do they have in New Orleans? They have the luxury to come into town and protest and then leave and not have to face the crime and trash that characterize the housing projects.
The president of the B.W. Cooper resident organization favors the demolition of the units. It has been approved by HUD and the Housing Authority of New Orleans. Now, 28 months after Katrina, it is past time for these damaged public housing developments to be razed and replaced by mixed income developments.
The new plan calls for modern buildings that are part of mixed income neighborhoods. It is the humane plan to offer a better living environment for public housing residents. It is the height of arrogance to demand that the same residents move back to the same apartments. The living arrangements did not work before Katrina and will not work again. A new plan is needed in this post-Katrina environment. It will not only benefit the public housing residents, it will benefit all of the citizens of New Orleans.
Jeff Crouere is a native of New Orleans, LA and he is the host of a Louisiana based program, “Ringside Politics,” which airs at 8:30 p.m. Fri. and 10:00 p.m. Sun. on WLAE-TV 32, a PBS station, and 8 a.m. till Noon weekdays on WGSO 990 AM in New Orleans and the Northshore. For more information, visit his web site at www.ringsidepolitics.com. E-mail him at jeff@ringsidepolitics.com
" believe it is part of a conspiracy to prevent poor African Americans from returning to New Orleans." - Why would they want to return to a city with some of the worst crime and poverty in the USA? I appreciate how it can be hard to get out of the ghetto, but now that those residents are out, why on earth would they move back in? I saw what those housing projects looked like before Katrina, they were not places that the residents were proud to live in, it was not a warm close knit community. New Orleans is never going to have a strong steady job market, there is no opportunity there unless you are in the oil or jazz business. Why go back? Written by Capt. Obvious
on 12/21/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Call for an investigation into who paid the protesters. How much ya wanna bet there's a guy named Nagin behind it? The outstanding idiocy of this event should have our internal investigators doing handstands to get to the bottom of it. New Orleans has a chance to restore itself into a world class icon but someone has a monetary interest in maintaining the criminal element. Someone with clout. There is enough destruction of the American fabric without this type of thing helping. The storm washed away a great deal of the filth that once inhabited N.O. Don't let the storm be just a wave in cesspool, only pushing aside the vile debris long enough for our already heavily abused taxes to provide new plumbing for old sewage. Let it be the start of something great for once. Written by Concerned Taxpayer
on 12/21/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I personally don't see what there is to protest. If what I've read is true then there are two things that are obvious to me:
One, the quality of the housing will be better and two, there will be less people packed into one area. Both of these seem like positive changes to me. If people have something to more or less call their own, they can take pride in it, especially if the people who don't aren't jammed into the same building as you.
I also know that renovation can cost alot, especially if you have to hire workers like the government and buisinesses often do. Anyone familiar with Las Vegas knows that hotels are often imploded, and a new building is put up on the site after a few years of use. It's because it would cost the hotel more to clean the place up. Examples would be Stardust and Aladdin, though I'm sure they're not the only ones. Extreme Home Makeover regularly demos homes, because they also realized that rennovating is more costly. And these are for-profit bussinesses that we're talking about. I'm sure they, if anyone, would know and take the cheapest route possible for the best bottom line. I'm also pretty sure that those old low-income housing units have been lived in a lot harder than any hotel on the Las Vegas strip.
I realize that New Orleans is fairly infamous for the level of corruption in the government, but honestly, this sounds like a pretty straight-forward move. I think it would be shadier if they tied up a mess of money trying to clean up buildings that have out-lived their time and bred the lawlessness that many of you have detested so far. Written by Garrett
on 12/21/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Absolutely. It is the height of arrogance to ask the people that have not paid for housing to return to the housing they have torn up. Renovate the property so they can destroy it again and again and again. That will do two things. It will create jobs and the corruption with those contracts, AND IT WILL KEEP THE CRIME AND CRIMINALS AND THUGS IN ONE PLACE INSTEAD OF RUINING EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD. REBUILD THE PROJECTS NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!! GIVE THEM FREE CRACK PIPES, WHATEVER!!!!!! Written by JeffisRight
on 12/13/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
HUD, HANO, and Nagin are putting together an abundance of free housing so we can be a welfare state with high crime. Two ways that Nagin and his bigoted ilk stay in power. 1. Free, Free, Free housing to all who promise never to work, never to make anything of themselves, never get educated, and keep voting in the same old guard of irresponsible corrupt and criminal politicians. 2. Keep crime high by getting as many people living in the projects as possible. The higher the crime, the more black the city and the less intelligent the black people who will continue to vote for the same old people. new project, old project, doesn't matter, it's a mind-set of don't work, you are entitled to free everything, just shoot some heroin and shoot a tourist. THAT will keep Nagin and the likes in office. Written by ChocolateCityMan
on 12/13/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Alfonzo Jackson of HUD just indicated on WWL that there will be MORE free housing than pre-katrina and that crime will not follow because "those big buildings cause crime and drug use" and these will be smaller. HAVE CHIEF RILEY ARREST THOSE BAD BUILDINGS......OH, AND THE THUGS THAT THREATENED TO BURN A WHITE PERSON'S CONDO FOR EVERY HOUSING UNIT DEMOLISHED.
He further stated that public housing residents have LIFETIME RIGHT TO PUBLIC HOUSING IN PERPETUITY and HUD will provide them with free housing in perpetuity and has no power to make them move under any circumstances.
Currently housing voucher requires no money at all from the recipient.
It is not affordable housing...........IT IS A TOTAL HANDOUT FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A JOB, UNLESS YOU CONSDIER PROSTITUTION, DRUG DEALING, AND HITS A JOB.
The housing vouchers actually put working people at a disadvantage to obtain housing because a voucher is worth 130% of the rent.
I rent a one bedroom to a working person for $700, but a housing voucher is worth $964 for the same one bedroom. (I don't take the inflated rent money because I refuse to further a plan which punishes working people and rewards those who do not work and wastes public funds by over-paying for rent.)
Free housing in perpetuity with no incentive to ever obtain employment and free housing that puts working people at a disadvantage is wrong and will hurt this city.
Helping the helpless in one thing, but encouraging people to never work and punishing, instead of rewarding, those who work by giving vouchers to those living off the government that put the working person out of the running for housing, is wrong.
We need a 50% voucher except under extenuating circumstances such as a permanent disability and we need public housing to be a stepping stone and NOT provided in perpetuity and an entitlement.
MIXED INCOME ONLY WORKS IF YOU HAVE 10% POOR, 90% RICH LIKE THE CAN COMPANY. WHEN YOU HAVE BUMS WHO DO NOT WORK, OTHER THAN DRUG DEALING AND KILLING, MIDDLE CLASS WON'T LIVE WITH THEM.
Written by BuildingsKill
on 12/13/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
You will excuse me, Jeff, if I don't call you "dear", but I'm not used to doing that in English. For some reason, though, as a Cajun I am used to calling a man "cher", which means the same thing. Anyway, I think your article on the "out-of-town" opponents to the demolition of public-housing buildings is distorted, as is the thinking of many people in New Orleans. If I understand your argument, you are in effect saying that the buildings themselves are worthy of condemnation because their former inhabitants lived a reprehensible lifestyle. It's as though some moral stain seeped into the bricks and mortar which can be removed only by destruction and replacement. The thinking seems mythological to me, somewhat like the thinking that slaughtering a goat or a lamb has the power to redress the injustice wrought in the universe by sin. I don't believe the myth of atonement, even as applied to Jesus Christ, and I certainly don't believe it as applied to public-housing buildings. I agree with you that the lifestyle lived in the public housing over the past twenty years has been reprehensible, but I invite you to recall the time when those buildings housed primarily people of low income who required shelter. They were blessed buildings once, though in your mind they may be cursed now. If we want to restore the blessing, let us renovate the building. I do not believe Mr. Babers, who claims that renovation is more costly than demolition and replacement. I also remind you that you are using a sleight of mouth when you say that HANO has decided to demolish them. There is only one man in HANO, and that is Mr. Babers. Since when does one man constitute a Board of Directors, and since when does one man have the right to determine what happens to property owned by the City? I want those buildings to be renovated, not destroyed. I believe that the Secretary of HUD and Mr. Babers (aka HANO) have Oliver Thomas' motives in their desire for demolition. After all, the TP has already told us that demolition alone will bring someone the pretty profit of $31M. That's ONLY the demolition. Who is profiting from all this? I have renovated a 19th century home in the Faubourg Marigny and know that renovation is less expensive, if similar quality is retained. I have looked at River Garden, and similar quality was definitely not retained. In fact, River Gardens has proved the possibility of renovating the old buildings by retaining five of the old St. Thomas buildings. They are quite handsome. Finally, the out-of-towner accusation is an old one. I heard it as young man from my segregationist neighbors speaking of people coming into town to integrate our City. For me, it's a compliment. I also remind you that they would not have had to come, if our home-grown City Council had had the courage to vote against demolition, as they were asked to do. When the Council allows its security guard to manhandle and handcuff Dr. Quigley, Assistant Dean of Loyola Law School, we know that we are in bad shape! Written by Robert Desmarais Sullivan
on 12/13/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Yeah, let's bring back the projects. Let's bring back the drugs and crime. Anybody against the preponderance of drug dealing, murder, violent, crime, etc. MUST be a bigot, homophobe, racist and intolerant. Arnie Fielkow's cowardice and kowtowing to these moronic, buffoonish protestors was shameful and disgraceful. Hey Arnie: move over and let some of the women on the council show you what backbone, intestinal fortitude, courage, guts and balls are---obviously Arnie has none of those attributes. Finally, as Jeff accurately alludes to, these cesspools of human habitat are paid for "we the people"--hard working, tax paying, playing by the rules American citizens. Written by Randall
on 12/13/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jeff, dear, this article is very, very good. What is important is that residents of the housing projected will have pride in their homes and in themselves. Dignity to all regardless of their wealth is essential. Individuals must have means available that will give them hope and are essential to the raising of children and eventually moving into homes of their personal choice throughout this city, homes which belong to them and are not the perpetuation of poverty and dependence on government assistance. This together with improvement in the educational system of this city and the state are essential. Out of town protestors, who will leave, are creating an unfortunate situation that will not save people and their future but will only retain the same old sense of dependence on others and not independence. Written by RhettsWife
on 12/13/2007
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
