Oh, Eric...
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Don't Take These Skinheads Bowling
So a group of Skinheads who are all in the Military allegedly beat a homeless man with pipes in Spring Grove Village and this is the first I've heard of this story? The arrests happened last month.
According to the news reports, local residents in Northside gave information that helped catch all of these suspects.
Another story on it is here.
Also according to the story, they man beaten is no longer living on the street.
I found this because of another story of a 'homeless' man being beaten and robbed in Downtown last night.
Why didn't this story get more coverage? Did I just miss it in the Enquirer?
According to the news reports, local residents in Northside gave information that helped catch all of these suspects.
Another story on it is here.
Also according to the story, they man beaten is no longer living on the street.
I found this because of another story of a 'homeless' man being beaten and robbed in Downtown last night.
Why didn't this story get more coverage? Did I just miss it in the Enquirer?
How Long Before the Protests Start?
So, how far away is the nearest full line grocery store from the Kenwood Fresh Fare closing at the end of the month? There is a Trader Joe's near by, but is that an affordable replacement?
I'm waiting for protests...
I presume that I will be waiting for a long time. There must not be any old people living in Kenwood, nor any poor people. Did this store serve Madisonville or Silverton? Are community activists not paying attention? Are they overworked and just not able to help the people of Kenwood? Are they making a judgement about who lives in Kenwood that may or may not be true but would be prejudiced no matter what? Ok, I'll just back to waiting now...
I'm waiting for protests...
I presume that I will be waiting for a long time. There must not be any old people living in Kenwood, nor any poor people. Did this store serve Madisonville or Silverton? Are community activists not paying attention? Are they overworked and just not able to help the people of Kenwood? Are they making a judgement about who lives in Kenwood that may or may not be true but would be prejudiced no matter what? Ok, I'll just back to waiting now...
Monday, May 17, 2010
Dear 3CDC: Offer a Better Deal
Below, Griff joins 3CDC in urging the Drop Inn Center to make room for the growing gentry class in Over-the-Rhine. While 3CDC's proposal may be the start of a longer conversation, it does not appear to be a viable solution as it is currently structured.
This Enquirer article has some numbers that should be cause for concern about the suggested "restructuring" of the Drop Inn Center. Presently, DIC is a 250-bed facility. The 3CDC proposal would have space for a total of 170 people: 50 women, 60 men, and some sort of transitional facility (for men) with 60 more beds. (There's also a suggestion for a facility for a facility open only to 18 - 24 year old homeless people that I suspect would be quite small.)
So we'd go from 250 emergency beds available in OTR to just 110. I've previously pointed out that during the winter months, DIC's capacity is already insufficient to meet the demand for emergency shelter.
Griff also makes the same mistake as does the linked Enquirer article: linking DIC to concern about sex offenders. Yes, an SCPA student was murdered last year, and yes, it was tragic. And yes, the perpetrator was a convicted sex offender. But he was not a resident of DIC. In fact, the DIC does not permit registered sex offenders to stay in its facility. Washington Park Elementary was a block away from the DIC for years with no problems. And the W.E.B. Dubois Middle School is just a few blocks away. Why are the "concerns" suddenly acute with the opening of SCPA? Because we like those students better for some reason?
Finally, I'll point out that Griff's concerns about loitering in Washington Park are likely to become moot, as the park is slated to be closed--either partially or altogether--for 18 months beginning this fall, if funding for renovations is finalized.
I'm not among those who claim that the Drop Inn Center has some sort of "right" to remain where it is, and that neighborhood development must necessarily happen around it. But it should not be displaced unless and until a reasonable replacement is available. 3CDC needs to go back to the drawing board.
This Enquirer article has some numbers that should be cause for concern about the suggested "restructuring" of the Drop Inn Center. Presently, DIC is a 250-bed facility. The 3CDC proposal would have space for a total of 170 people: 50 women, 60 men, and some sort of transitional facility (for men) with 60 more beds. (There's also a suggestion for a facility for a facility open only to 18 - 24 year old homeless people that I suspect would be quite small.)
So we'd go from 250 emergency beds available in OTR to just 110. I've previously pointed out that during the winter months, DIC's capacity is already insufficient to meet the demand for emergency shelter.
Griff also makes the same mistake as does the linked Enquirer article: linking DIC to concern about sex offenders. Yes, an SCPA student was murdered last year, and yes, it was tragic. And yes, the perpetrator was a convicted sex offender. But he was not a resident of DIC. In fact, the DIC does not permit registered sex offenders to stay in its facility. Washington Park Elementary was a block away from the DIC for years with no problems. And the W.E.B. Dubois Middle School is just a few blocks away. Why are the "concerns" suddenly acute with the opening of SCPA? Because we like those students better for some reason?
Finally, I'll point out that Griff's concerns about loitering in Washington Park are likely to become moot, as the park is slated to be closed--either partially or altogether--for 18 months beginning this fall, if funding for renovations is finalized.
I'm not among those who claim that the Drop Inn Center has some sort of "right" to remain where it is, and that neighborhood development must necessarily happen around it. But it should not be displaced unless and until a reasonable replacement is available. 3CDC needs to go back to the drawing board.
Dear Drop Inn Center, Take the Deal
The Cincinnati Business Courier reported last week that 3CDC has sent a letter to the Board of the Drop Inn Center with an offer to move facility. Full details were not released, but the article reports that it includes 3CDC managing the the move process and helping to get funding for the relocation and ongoing operations.
If the Drop Inn Center does not take this deal, they are fools. When the SCPA opens, the pressure will mount beyond control. Legal action may follow soon after. The problem for the Drop Inn Center rests on two fronts. First they have to deal with sex offenders living at the DIC, which likely would violate the law when the SCPA opens less than a block away.
Second, the DIC would face far more pressure to deal with what happens outside its doors. That would be the congregation of people in the park and on 12th Street using/selling drugs during the day, some then going into the DIC for the night, the rest going else where because the DIC won't take them. This second part is the problem the DIC has refused to deal with since I can remember, they attract criminals. Sure they claim they are not the problem and they do their best to keep it outside the center. That is the problem, if it is outside the center, they do nothing to stop it. If they cops did a sweep of those loitering outside the DIC on 12th Street or in Washington Park, we would hear the DIC and other homeless activist howl in protest.
The DIC has a deal in hand. They can hem and haw and act like peacocks all they want to save face within activist community, but they really need to take the deal. Further more they can't waste much time about it. The school year starts in August.
If the Drop Inn Center does not take this deal, they are fools. When the SCPA opens, the pressure will mount beyond control. Legal action may follow soon after. The problem for the Drop Inn Center rests on two fronts. First they have to deal with sex offenders living at the DIC, which likely would violate the law when the SCPA opens less than a block away.
Second, the DIC would face far more pressure to deal with what happens outside its doors. That would be the congregation of people in the park and on 12th Street using/selling drugs during the day, some then going into the DIC for the night, the rest going else where because the DIC won't take them. This second part is the problem the DIC has refused to deal with since I can remember, they attract criminals. Sure they claim they are not the problem and they do their best to keep it outside the center. That is the problem, if it is outside the center, they do nothing to stop it. If they cops did a sweep of those loitering outside the DIC on 12th Street or in Washington Park, we would hear the DIC and other homeless activist howl in protest.
The DIC has a deal in hand. They can hem and haw and act like peacocks all they want to save face within activist community, but they really need to take the deal. Further more they can't waste much time about it. The school year starts in August.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
What Happened In Lockland?
It's hard to know what to make of the students involved in the "senior prank" at Lockland High School, since it's not entirely clear what they actually did that night.
Regular readers will recall that last January, I was critical of officials who decided to file criminal charges against students who unplugged engine block heaters for diesel school buses, causing the cancellation of school in Mason. The Lockland students are also being criminally charged (some as adults, as they are 18) and face suspension or expulsion.
Early reports indicated that the students were ransacking the school, throwing books into hallways. When I read that, my thought was, "That's not a prank. That's vandalism." But an article in yesterday's Enquirer suggests that the conduct was much tamer. I can't figure out what the kids intended to do with the rubber bands and cups of water, but the "prank" hardly seems destructive, if that story is accurate.
If this was a non-destructive prank, then we're once again witnessing the results of over-criminalization of bad conduct. A school suspension and school-related discipline is appropriate. It might even be appropriate to disallow the students from participating in graduation ceremonies (but not actually from receiving their diplomas). But a felony record? Really?
Some of the students are charged with resisting arrest and fleeing from police. That's a separate issue. (Separate, that is, if the charges are legitimate--which is not always the case with a resisting charge.) If students really ran from or physically struggled with police, their conduct might have been criminal. Once your prank is exposed and you're caught, you don't start a police pursuit. You have to accept the consequences, even if that means a night in jail before your mom can get you released.
Yesterday's article focuses on an 18 year-old college-bound senior, for whom a felony record would be crippling. If the grand jury indicts her and the other students, I hope the authorities offer them some sort of diversionary disposition--some sort of result that involves acceptance of responsibility and community service, but no criminal conviction. If they stand indicted and aren't offered a way out, we'll find out whether 12 people of Hamilton County are willing to brand an 18 year-old a felon for high school hijinks.
The case raises an interesting contrast to the treatment accorded MU's Pi Beta Phi sorority members who behaved badly in April. According to the Enquirer, police encountered them intoxicated and urinating on the side of the road. That's classic disorderly conduct. But no one was cited; instead, the buses were "escorted" to Lake Lyndsay. And none of the students was charged criminally for their destructive behavior, even though some it certainly constituted criminal damaging. Yes, I realize that different police departments from different counties were involved. But it's fascinating that some people get police escorts to parties after bad behavior, and others get police escorts to the Justice Center.
Regular readers will recall that last January, I was critical of officials who decided to file criminal charges against students who unplugged engine block heaters for diesel school buses, causing the cancellation of school in Mason. The Lockland students are also being criminally charged (some as adults, as they are 18) and face suspension or expulsion.
Early reports indicated that the students were ransacking the school, throwing books into hallways. When I read that, my thought was, "That's not a prank. That's vandalism." But an article in yesterday's Enquirer suggests that the conduct was much tamer. I can't figure out what the kids intended to do with the rubber bands and cups of water, but the "prank" hardly seems destructive, if that story is accurate.
If this was a non-destructive prank, then we're once again witnessing the results of over-criminalization of bad conduct. A school suspension and school-related discipline is appropriate. It might even be appropriate to disallow the students from participating in graduation ceremonies (but not actually from receiving their diplomas). But a felony record? Really?
Some of the students are charged with resisting arrest and fleeing from police. That's a separate issue. (Separate, that is, if the charges are legitimate--which is not always the case with a resisting charge.) If students really ran from or physically struggled with police, their conduct might have been criminal. Once your prank is exposed and you're caught, you don't start a police pursuit. You have to accept the consequences, even if that means a night in jail before your mom can get you released.
Yesterday's article focuses on an 18 year-old college-bound senior, for whom a felony record would be crippling. If the grand jury indicts her and the other students, I hope the authorities offer them some sort of diversionary disposition--some sort of result that involves acceptance of responsibility and community service, but no criminal conviction. If they stand indicted and aren't offered a way out, we'll find out whether 12 people of Hamilton County are willing to brand an 18 year-old a felon for high school hijinks.
The case raises an interesting contrast to the treatment accorded MU's Pi Beta Phi sorority members who behaved badly in April. According to the Enquirer, police encountered them intoxicated and urinating on the side of the road. That's classic disorderly conduct. But no one was cited; instead, the buses were "escorted" to Lake Lyndsay. And none of the students was charged criminally for their destructive behavior, even though some it certainly constituted criminal damaging. Yes, I realize that different police departments from different counties were involved. But it's fascinating that some people get police escorts to parties after bad behavior, and others get police escorts to the Justice Center.
First Place!!!
Anyone who now tells you that two months ago, they predicted the Reds would be in first place in mid-May--after a three game series with the Cardinals--is lying.
Go Reds!!!
Go Reds!!!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)