Perverse, isn’t it?Generations of “leadership” in the city of New Albany were weirdly content to see the historic city center transformed into a dumping ground for both animate and inanimate objects – for people, for garbage, for dilapidated and sub-standard housing, and for the fruits of sloth, venality and plain stupidity.
Now the current generation must determine a way to undo the damage inflicted on the city by the elder political statesmen, all the while bearing the dead weight of numerous residents who decry the problem but continue to support those pillars most dedicated to maintaining it – among them the council’s Gang of Four, the culture of the rental property slumlord and the lowest common denominators of Bud Light, white bread and Wal-Mart.
As we’ve conceded all along, it took decades of neglect to get here, and it will take time to come back from the abyss, and when we pause to consider what is needed to augment embryonic efforts under way on many fronts, one thing is clear: Every little bit helps, and if money can be found to help in the effort, we’d be fools not to take it.
Linden Meadows, a middle income starter home subdivision composed of relocated homes moved by the Community Housing Development Organization from the area taken by hospital expansion to city-owned land, and which finally is underway after months of delays, will bring matching money into New Albany that can be used to rehab and replace decrepit housing.
This much has been clear from the beginning, and yet this no-brainer of a plan has spent close to a year ensnarled in litigation initiated by people concerned that the property in question should not be used in this manner.
I’m not here to argue with the legal process, and I won’t impugn the motives of those in opposition, who have the perfect right to utilize the legal system to make their case – and, concurrently, the obligation to respect the final ruling even if it goes against them.
Rather, as a gauge of the extent to which opponents of Linden Meadows have in fact cooperated in the politicization of the case, whether unwittingly or not, it would be interesting to know the sources of financing for the legal fees incurred in the struggle against the project.
Does the mere mention of this in a public forum imply that NA Confidential dares to suggest certain obstructionist motives are less lofty and more partisan than others?
Yes, it does.
In the meantime, I’m emphatically lifting a $15.67 pint of progressive ale to the Linden Meadows project and to those who have sought to make it reality in the face of politically motivated opposition, widespread apathy, and less than stellar coverage on the part of local media organs.
----
In a completely unrelated note, two local blogs have provided links to a glossy magazine profile of Main Street innkeeper and businesswoman Valla Ann Bolovschak, whose milieu is somewhat different than that inhabited by Community Housing – as SOLNA piously reminds us, not better, not worst, just different.
Indeed, there are many paths to a better city, and each of us must do our part to make this a better place to live.
Diggin’ in the Dirt displays the cover of “Today’s Woman,” which is graced by a photo of Valla Ann.
Meanwhile, the spitwad blogyard offshoot known as Freedom of Speech (which doesn’t allow comments) celebrates “THE PATHS OF POWERFUL WOMEN-VALLA ANN BOLOVSCHAK” in typically turgid style – all screaming capital letters, poor grammar, an unattributed excerpt from the magazine article, fawning adulation and a blog author still pathetically clinging to a fictitious identity as a college professor in a futile quest for respectability.
Please, for the sake of all that’s reasonable in the world, go there and read what Erika writes. It should suffice to say that the professorial sham’s not working, although the transgendered creator’s desire to become campaign manager in a future mayoral contest should strike fear in the hearts of those that he/she aims to support.
From the magazine article:
"You should do in your heart of hearts what is right for your community, for your business, for your neighbors," she (Bolovschak) says.
NA Confidential absolutely agrees with this assessment, and wishes Valla Ann much luck in her quest to free the K & I Bridge for pedestrian and bicycling routes … although when the day comes that the bridge once again is open for use, we don’t expect to see many of the Little People of New Albany strolling across it.
They might fall through the grates, don’t you know?
7 comments:
I offer this only to keep the fur-flying to a minimum:
I've spoken with the lead plaintiff and am somewhat mollified by the earnestness and lack of ill will inherent in the parties' opposition to Linden Meadows.
That said, I believe the plaintiffs continue to disagree with the facts as they are, as I believe them to be, and as a judge has now ruled.
Further, they come awfully close to characterizing the claims of "benefits" to the city as bogus, if not downright lies.
And while some politically ambitious sorts have made cash contributions to the effort, for whatever motives, the underwriting for the costs of this case are being borne predominantly by the publicly identified parties seeking to block the development.
It is still my opinion, however, that a certain faction has a vested interest in seeing to it that no good thing happens on the Garner watch. Linden Meadows is inarguably a good thing, and investing seed money to block progress is just one more tactic of a cabal intent on keeping New Albany down in the muck.
So long as that faction can continue to buffalo the populace into believing "nothing good can happen in New Albany," they stay in (or achieve) the power to keep it that way.
As I've long said, what you do here and what I do elsewhere is aimed at only one thing: To get the people to pay attention. I've no doubt that anyone paying attention will see who the looters are and who truly has a vision for tomorrow.
Remember, this is the bunch that still wants to argue over whether we should build a parking garage to anchor downtown redevelopment, who still wants to cast blame anywhere but on those who have wielded the levers of government.
Erikkka and her konfederates are just the witless tools of wreckers and looters. Ignore the tools, NAC, and go after those wearing the toolbelts.
I still support it.
RR - I still support as well. My assumption is that any crime minded individual is more apt to drive here than to walk across the bridge. However, since I am active in the work to open the bridge, I will ask an officer their opinion. Perhaps we can come up with some strategies to address concerns. I think good lighting would be start.
Regardless, I believe the pros would out weigh the cons.
The folks in Portland could be saying the exact same thing. I also know that, like in New Albany, there are small pockets of activists in Portland working to reverse negative trends there. I've often thought a good opportunity exists for cooperative efforts, given our common problems and river heritage. I think a literal bridge would be a great start to a figurative one.
Louisville/New Albany ties will be very important to our future. People often tout New Albany as a small town but our history is undeniably an urban one. Our small town-ness is in many ways indicative of failure and attempts to preserve that small town a strange pride in having failed.
I support the bridge opening too. I think it will help overcome Louisville's perception that New Albany, Indiana is really far away because, my gosh, it's in another state!
I've had so many friends who have completely overlooked the great home values here to opt for far more expensive and smaller homes in Butchertown or the Highlands, all because they'd "have to move to another state" to buy a home here. It's never made a lot of sense to me, but it's there.
If we can do anything to make New Albany more of an inclusive part of the Louisville metro area, I think we should support it.
And by the way, criminals can walk across the K&I bridge right now if they want to--even though it's not legal. The gates don't really keep anyone out, and hey, they're criminals, right? Whaddaya think they're gonna do, wait until it's legal for them to cross the bridge to flee from or commit a crime? "Yeah, I robbed that service station, but I sure don't want to cut across the bridge to get away until they open it up to pedestrians."
Portland has a bad reputation but it is not populated entirely by criminals.
Several co-workers from my previous job lived in Portland. They weren't criminals and they weren't poor either. In fact one woman's husband was a vice president at PNC.
I also have a friend who restores houses there as a part-time business and never seems to have a problem selling them.
It's interesting that my present co-workers who live in the East End and in the counties surrounding Louisville have the same perception of New Albany that New Albany has of Portland.
To them New Albany is a place where poor people and criminals live. And, after all, the only time you see New Albany on the news is when someone commits a crime.
Whenever they hear about some kind of violent crime in New Albany they ask me if it happened close to where I live and if I knew the persons who were involved.
Maybe we should be worried about our criminals walking across the K&I bridge to Portland.
No doubt there's bias on both sides. If you dropped the average person onto a random street, though, they couldn't tell the difference between many areas of either neighborhood.
I support the initiative to tear down 64 in western Louisville. Anyone else?
Post a Comment