[Peace-discuss] more than a nuisance

Wed Feb 11 12:18:40 CST 2009

It is far from preposterous.  Insulting is in the eye of the beholder.  
If you should dare to look below
the surface you will find the (Cake-esque 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPaJl7tZstM>) nugget that the criminal 
nuisance ordinance runs at cross-purposes to
the "law forbidding landlords from denying housing to persons because of 
a criminal record". 

The effect of this criminal nuisance property ordinance is to create a 
/de facto/ repeal of the "law forbidding landlords from denying housing 
to persons because of a criminal record".  No landlord wants the 
endangerment of the stiff penalties of the Criminal Nuisance Property 
Ordinance.  Ya just can't have it both ways.

Actually, I think that Prussing knows that that this Criminal Nuisance 
Property Ordinance is in fact a backdoor nullification of the "law 
forbidding landlords from denying housing to persons because of a 
criminal record", and that is why she is pushing for it.

Wayne

Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> My posting definitely did not focus on "upkeep", but on neglect.  The 
> point is: "Some people were afraid to go out into the hallways in 
> their own building because of the violence and violent people going in 
> and out, or living next door, down the hall, just up stairs."  By 
> "toxicity" I mean all these threats, which you and I do not face when 
> we step outside our homes.
>
> Of course this law should not be repealed, and it is preposterous and 
> insulting to people with criminal records that you should ask in this 
> context.  We are not talking about people with a past here, but with 
> people who continue to be a threat to those around them.  Very different.
>
> I'm not sure why you bring up rich politicians who do not live in our 
> community, but if you have information that GW Bush or Cheney or 
> Rumsfeld or someone is moving in, and you want to apply this ordinance 
> to them, more power to you.  (And I'm not sure how Obama is much of a 
> "dangerous criminal" yet, but that seems even more beside the point here.)
>  
> Ricky
>
> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag>
> *To:* Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com>
> *Cc:* peace discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>; Community 
> Courtwatch <discuss at communitycourtwatch.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 11, 2009 9:49:11 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] more than a nuisance
>
> Excuse me, but your posting did focus on upkeep.
>
> The City of Urbana has a law forbidding landlords from denying housing 
> to persons because of a criminal record.
>
> Do you think this law should be repealed?  I am intending this to be a 
> serious question.
>
> Certainly not all dangerous criminals have criminal records, vis a 
> vis, the past and current President, many members of Congress,...
> And not all persons with criminal records are really "dangerous 
> criminals", but there may be some correlation.
>
>
> Ricky Baldwin wrote:
>> And basic maintenance is not my point, Wayne, but the hazards and 
>> sometimes terror of living in a building or in a neighborhood where 
>> landlords keep renting to dangerous criminals, and so on.
>>  
>> Ricky
>>
>> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag>
>> *To:* Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com>
>> *Cc:* peace discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>; Community 
>> Courtwatch <discuss at communitycourtwatch.org>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 11, 2009 12:13:53 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] more than a nuisance
>>
>> Your previous experience and hard work is noted and appreciated by 
>> all, but Basic maintenance is not at all what the proposed urbana 
>> criminal nuisance ordinance is about.
>>
>> The most recent draft is available at the city's website. 
>> http://www.city.urbana.il.us/Urbana/City_Council/Agendas/01-12-2009/ordinance_2008-11-135.pdf
>> Additional info here:
>> http://www.city.urbana.il.us/Urbana/City_Council/Agendas/02-09-2009/ordinance_2008-11-135.pdf
>>
>> Ricky Baldwin wrote:
>>> My opinion may not be popular on either of these lists, but I think 
>>> I ought to explain where I'm coming from.
>>>
>>> In the nineties I worked for ACORN - an association I was never 
>>> prouder of than in this last election.  As a lone NYC Council member 
>>> once said in another context - about not so different attacks on 
>>> poor people organizing for their rights to vote, to improve their 
>>> communities, to live in decent housing and safe neighborhoods, 
>>> attacks by people who oppose all those things - "It is a badge of 
>>> honor!"
>>>
>>> When I was at ACORN I spent my days and evenings six days a week 
>>> walking around in the poorest, most dangerous (a.k.a. "worst") 
>>> neighborhoods in the cities where I worked, talking to people who 
>>> lived in toxic environments.  There were many rats, and in Buffalo 
>>> skunks, garbage in the streets not swept by the city, abandoned 
>>> buildings, vacant lots.  When it rained water cascaded down the 
>>> walls of the living rooms and kitchens where we sat and talked and 
>>> they offered me orange juice and tried to figure out why I wasn't 
>>> married and we planned the next meeting and how to get the press 
>>> interested and which local preachers might help and which might get 
>>> in the way, which cops were honest and which were dangerous 
>>> criminals.  Front doors of apartment buildings didn't lock or had 
>>> been broken for months.  Some people were afraid to go out into the 
>>> hallways in their own building because of the violence and violent 
>>> people going in and out, or living next door, down the hall, just up 
>>> stairs.
>>>
>>> These were hazards, nightmares, not mere "nuisances".
>>>  
>>> Landlord after landlord refused to fix anything, get rid of any 
>>> dangerous tenants haunting the buildings, or take any responsibility 
>>> at all.  People in these communities were trapped.  They lived there 
>>> because they had few options, and there was very little recourse.  
>>> We organized together and fought the landlords, pressured city 
>>> government to hold them accountable, and demanded that the landlords 
>>> and the local government take some responsibility for the neglect 
>>> and toxicity of those neighborhoods.  It was always an uphill climb, 
>>> because money and influence and property rights were always on the 
>>> other side. 
>>>
>>> We won some, one piece at a time, but in truth we lost more often.  
>>> I think a lot of us know that song.  Even the victories were often 
>>> mixed bags, but we improved real lives.
>>>
>>> I do have concerns about the proposed "Nuisance Ordinance" - some 
>>> along the lines I think expressed by Charlie Smyth - and I'd like to 
>>> see a more community-based, even complaint-driven system, rather 
>>> than reliance on the police - but overall I support this effort.  I 
>>> hope I've explained why. 
>>>
>>> I continue to support efforts to expose and address police racial 
>>> profiling and other abuses of power.  I still hope we as a community 
>>> can strengthen the police review board some day soon.  But I do not 
>>> see this ordinance as repressive on its face, but potentially very 
>>> progressive.
>>>
>>> In Solidarity,
>>> Ricky
>>>
>>> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>   
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090211/f872113d/attachment.html