Thursday, December 28, 2006

New Albany's great shame, proliferating rats and the "trash brigade" commentary.

We’re closing 2006 with a late flurry of passion with respect to the state of the city and how it might be improved, and I’d again like to thank readers for their continued participation this week as we’ve again explored “cleaning up” New Albany as a major community theme for 2007.

With so many things happening in the city, and believe it or not, with numerous positive developments literally occurring every day, I keep thinking to myself that from an editorial standpoint, there are numerous other topics we could be covering.

Or are there, really?

Whenever the "clean up" topic arises, NAC's readership numbers skyrocket, comments spike, and the whole enterprise shifts to another level. Quite obviously, there are many among us who believe in the merits of the seemingly self-evident position that without addressing a fundamental enforcement failure on the part of this community, any conceivable foundation for future success will be shaky, at best.

Accordingly, this recurring notion of cleaning up the city obviously has some semblance of legs, and yet, as has been noted, nothing much ever is observed to happen. The bulk of the local political and governmental bureaucracy seemingly remains unmoved. We’re neither consistently acknowledged, nor presented with any clue as to projected institutional changes beyond the application of temporary Band-Aids and the occasional implementation of partisan political photo-ops in support of the two-party system.

In 2007, we hope to determine why, and to make inroads toward changing the culture of calculated unaccountability for which New Albany is rightly, if sadly, known.

Tuesday's “trash brigade” essay, which was reprinted from the suddenly burgeoning Tribune forum, raised a number of questions, comments and private e-mails. The essay came from an unidentified apologist of the status quo, who reasoned that any effort to bring slumlords into general compliance with basic property standards in fact constitutes an attack on the poor and less privileged. Arguably the most eloquent response to this curiously reasoned position came from New Alb Annie, author of the Diggin’ in the Dirt blog, and I’m lifting it to the NAC marquee to give her words the exposure they properly deserve.

And, be sure you read Ann's Thursday blog entry: Rats and Resolutions.

----

Whoever authored the "trash brigade" commentary certainly has the right stuff to hold a position in our current political cabinet, with its culture of non-enforcement and ludicrous reasoning for doing so.

How many homes in New Albany that are in violation are owned by 'poor people'? In the majority of cases, these houses are owned by slumlords, who take advantage of poor people. The unfortunate, many times uneducated tenants don't know that they, although they may be poor, uneducated and without other things like a good credit history or financial resources, are entitled to value for their rent money. They don't, in many cases, realize that means the windows and doors are supposed to work properly, the furnace and water heater is supposed to be functional, the roof isn't supposed to leak, vermin isn't supposed to be infesting the premises.

No, they are poor, and they consider themselves lucky just to have a roof over their head. Maybe they are in a Section 8 program, and they don't want to make waves. They simply do not know what their rights are, and the slumlords want it to stay that way. And the City of New Albany is happy to aid and abet.

Slumlord X makes a hefty campaign donation every few years to whomever the favored candidate is, and in return, the slumlord continues business as usual, safe from those pesky building inspections that cities with a tenant rights association have.

Tolerance? What about justice? What about minimum community standards being enforced, equitably, so that everyone, rich, poor or in the middle can enjoy the same basic rights--a clean, heated place to live, in a building that is maintained to those minimums set forth by law, in a community that does not allow heaps of trash to pile up and scofflaws to add to the heaps when it pleases them?

The new class of poor who seem to be getting exploited now are Hispanics, and the City of New Albany is helping all the slumlords out with this. Many of these renters do not speak the language well, do not realize they, as tenants, have certain rights when it comes to housing standards. When the educated among us complain about the conditions of these myriad dilapidated rental properties, we're not complaining about the people who live in them, unless those residents are blatant lawbreakers. No, it's the non-enforcement of codes that irks.

But what response do our complaints get? Oh, that's right, we're prejudiced against the poor. So who would be the more prejudiced, those who want to see rental properties cleaned up and well-maintained, or those who turn a blind eye to the conditions the occupants live in? My, my, our administration wouldn't be assuming that because these people may be poor, they like to live in dirty, ill-kept slums, would they?

One way out of the vicious cycle of non-enforcement of codes is an active tenant rights group. Tenants, especially those who are uneducated or have impediments to understanding their basic rights in terms of rental housing, need to be informed that they can withhold rent payments for certain reasons like non-functioning heat, and that they cannot be evicted for complaints about issues like this. But here in New Albany, the practice has been, and continues to be, to empower the slumlord at the great detriment of the city.

----

Thanks, Ann. That's a marvelous statement of principle.

20 comments:

  1. I have never had the pleasure of meeting Ann(I don't think). Hope that changes someday. She is one sharp person.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Just think if Annie could spend her talent and brains on things like the MSPA area plan, instead of rats? What could any of us be doing if we didn't have to constantly chase down local government? ugh...

    ReplyDelete
  3. I too would like to meet Ann, as I have admired her writing on several occasions. I'd also like to meet many others whose comments I have enjoyed on the NAC blog. I know a few of those who make comments here, but not many. I think that it would be fun to meet more.

    I very much like the idea of having an informal meet and greet session for those who enjoy reading and/or commenting on NA Confidential. Roger mentioned a similar idea yesterday in response to Sloburn's comments. I'm really not talking about a political planning session or anything of that sort--just an informal social gathering to meet others who seem to share a common interest.

    Of course, there could be no better setting for such a gathering than Rich-O's Public House. What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, we could do one at the Public House if that's the collective desire. Now the hard part: When?

    Days get more hectic as the week progresses, so Monday or Tuesday arguably are the best times for me.

    If there's a general feeling about date and time, then I'll post on the marquee for all to process, and we'll see what happens.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sloburn, thanks. I hope you got the email I sent you a few months ago about MSPA--we'd love to have you as a part of the group, and we also have an opening on the board if you are interested.

    We (the MSPA) asked the Historic Preservation Commission to send a letter to Mr. Cristiani about the dumpster that's been placed on the vacant lot across from your house, and they did so, telling him that this is not permitted within historic districts without obtaining prior approval.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, dang it, count me in too!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous12:07 PM

    Say when, and I am there!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Not sure that a "drinking" establishment is the place that I want to be seen in but I'll try.(VBG)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Okay, I'll throw out a date: Monday, January 8.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'd love to meet some blog people at the public house on Jan 8... might lift our winter blues alittle.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sloburn: Yes we do.

    Time: 6? 7?

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have a meeting in Evansville in the morning on the 8th, but believe that I should be back in town by 7:00 that evening. Game on!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous4:23 PM

    I have to adjust my schedule, but I'll plan to be there as well. 7 is best.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Cool. The first meeting of Confidentiaholics Identified.

    The first order of business, aside from ordering beers, should be to come up with a snappier antonym for anonymous.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Barring conflict with work, coun t me in!

    ReplyDelete
  16. As it stands now, I'll be there too.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous9:52 PM

    I was going to make a snappy comment about ordering "Miller lites" (I know Roger's opinion on the subject) but I have refrained!

    ReplyDelete
  18. I feel famous. Not only did you cut and paste my post from the tribune to motivate response on your blog, you have honored me by mentioning me in your end of the year wrap up.

    It's a shame that for someone who writes so well, your ability to read and comprehend is pathetic.
    your comment: "The essay came from an unidentified apologist of the status quo, who reasoned that any effort to bring slumlords into general compliance with basic property standards in fact constitutes an attack on the poor and less privileged."

    You obviously missed the point.

    I think i'll have to start my own blog. That way I can just be a big wind bag and point fingers at everyone else. It's amazing how judgemental you and your readers are.

    Do you ever go back and look at how many unkind, mean-spirited things you say about other people and elected officials?

    And you wonder why they don't listen to you? Has it occured to you that you may be part of the problem?

    In the tribune forums, there were two issues that needed to be addressed. One was a disruptive neighbor and the other was illegal dumping. Both issues were resolved with a phone call. It didn't require a protest, a march, or the beating down of elected officials.

    It would be more convincing for you to walk the talk. You obviously have plenty of free time on your hands, so why aren't you running? surely it would be an easy election with all the support of the 30 or so people on your blog.

    I'm sure you don't have the nerve to actually seek public office. It's so much easier to sit back and ridicule the people in office.

    Do you support any council members? If so, which ones and why?

    Well i'm off to annie's blog. I'm looking for support for my run for office, and she seems to think i'm a good fit!

    Peace. Out.

    Vote WUNA '07

    ReplyDelete
  19. wakeupnewalbany, NA Confidential believes in a higher bar than is customary in the blogosphere, and follows a disclosure policy with respect to reader comments.

    First, you must be registered with blogger.com according to the procedures specified. This is required not as a means of directing traffic to blogger.com, but to reduce the lamentable instances of flaming and personal attacks on the part of the anonymous.

    This you've done already.

    Second, although pen names are perfectly acceptable, the senior editor (yours truly) must be informed of your identity, and according to your preference, it will be kept secure and confidential.

    To reiterate, I insist upon this solely to lessen the frequency of malicious anonymity, which unfortunately plagues certain other blogs hereabouts.

    You may e-mail me at the address given within my profile and explain who you are.

    Thanks for reading, and for being part of the community here, one that is respectful of the prerequisites of civilized discourse, and that seeks to engage visitors in dialogue.

    By the way, belated or not, I reserve the right to edit or discard comments from those who don't follow the site rules.

    ReplyDelete