Longhill Gardens Fight Visits FCB Meeting
by Bill Dusty
Richard Carpenter was the final speaker at a scheduled 30-minute public speakout held just prior to the regular meeting of the Springfield Finance Control Board (SFCB) on Thursday morning. Carpenter had come to voice his displeasure with a comment attributed to Springfield’s Chief Development Officer, David Panagore, in an article in the weekly publication, The Reminder.
Carpenter is a member of the neighborhood citizens organization, Springfield Forward, a group that has been vigorously opposing City-approved plans by Real Estate management company WinnCompanies to purchase a Citibank-owned property on Longhill Street, Longhill Gardens, and convert up to 111 units for use as low-income housing. Springfield Forward contends that the city has more than its share of low income housing, and that adding more to the Forest Park neighborhood would be counter-productive.
Supporters of the Winn plan, meanwhile, insist that this was the only viable option for the property if it was to be rehabilitated within a reasonable period of time.
In the Reminder article, Panagore was reported to have said that the idea of not wanting more low-income housing in the city “bordered on being racist.” But Panagore himself insisted that he never made that comment. And when Finance Control Board Executive Director Stephen Lisauskas took his turn before the Board just after Carpenter’s speech, he told the five members of the Board that the Reminder will apparently be retracting the statement in its next issue.
So goes the drama that surrounds the oftentimes heated battle over not just the fate of Longhill Gardens, but also the growth of low-income housing throughout the city.
In the case of Longhill Gardens, both sides would seem to have legitimate points to argue. Supporters have touted WinnCompanies impressive track record of redeveloping and maintaining properties – including properties it already oversees in Springfield. Conversely, Springfield Forward has a point when they say Springfield already has its share of low income housing. And it is neither hateful nor inaccurate to say that low-income neighborhoods are also high crime neighborhoods. That is simply a statement of fact. Springfield Forward’s concerns about an increase in crime do have merit.
The Intruder spoke briefly with David Panagore while at the SFCB meeting. He said that being able to have a stable, quality property owner was important in getting Longhill Gardens back on track to being a part of the Forest Park neighborhood. He said the kind of funding WinnCompanies received from state simply does not exist for market-rate housing. And he also cited widespread support for the WinnCompanies plan from residents abutting the Longhill Gardens property.
Russell Selig said in an earlier Reminder article that if left vacant and unattended, the properties at Longhill gardens would become a “copper mine” for vandals breaking into the various units to scavenge piping.
For its part, Springfield Forward has disputed the issue of widespread support for the WinnCompanies redevelopment plan. The group maintains that the City went to WinnCompanies without a serious search for alternative developers. They also have cited conflicts of interest on the part of members of two neighborhood groups supporting the Winn plan, the Forest Park Civic Association and Concerned Citizens of Springfield, the latter of which reportedly purchased units at Longhill Gardens back in 2005. And the group has decried the existing physical condition of the Longhill Gardens property, which WinnCompanies had earlier committed to maintaining on its own (prior to state funding approval).
Springfield Forward recently announced that it was taking its case to the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development. As developments are progressing, however, the WinnCompanies plan appears to be pretty much a done deal. But the City – along with other supporters of low-income housing projects – should understand that the issue of creating more and more low-income housing in Springfield will only become more and volitile as middle income and higher income families and residents resist their city’s decades-long slide into seemingly ever-increasing poverty.
Read continuing debate on the WinnCompanies/Longhill Gardens saga at this earlier Intruder story (scroll down to comments section).
The Intruder stopped by Longhill Gardens after attending the SFCB meeting on Thursday. Below are some photos taken on a quick tour. The property actually looked in very good shape at that time – far better than the vacant land just to the north, which was overgrown and dumpy looking.
31 Responses for “Longhill Gardens Fight Visits FCB Meeting”
Leave a Reply
Thanks, Bill, for the very complete summary of all points of view and for the up-to-date images.
Good images, it helps to see some concrete facts and images.
But , the story still seemed to be mostly citizens with their own perspectives, and very little concrete facts. I don’t know if that is because Winn is going out of their way to whitewash over the issues in order to decrease citizen uproar and interests, or whether this information is in fact impossible to obtain.
It seems to me the only sane way to deal with an issue where each side allegedly has evidence at contrary with the other’s position, is to put it to the public in the only fair and equitable method possible- make it a binding referendum.
If in fact Winn has the public on their side as they claim, what possible harm could it cause them to have the citizens of the city (and not their corrupt administration) make the real decision?
Only a corrupt organization fears the light of disclosure and community discussion and determination.
Private property transactions are not subject to referenda. If that had been a possibility, the community would have been able to stop sale of the Mason Square library by one private party to another.
Sheila,
If you follow your false argument, then you assume that state and federal tax credits and subsidies are none of the public’s business. If this was a “private matter” then Winn would not need Mayor Sarno’s support letter.
When our taxpayer monies (may) be used by Winn, then that’s a public matter. For you to even infer that this was a private deal devoid of public input is baseless. Interesting how you view the matter.
Property transfers between private entities (e.g. Citibank and Winn or the Springfield Library and Museums Assoc. and the Urban League, for example) are not subject to public referenda.
Is the disposition of a large garden apartment complex involving the use of low income tax credits “the public’s business?” Absolutely, but this doesn’t mean that a referendum (which, even if it were appropriate, would cost the city thousands to conduct) an effective means of preventing it any more than a referendum on sale of the Mason Square Library by one private entity to another would stopped that.
Sheila,
Read your post carefully.
Was it not you who wrote some time ago that greater weight should be given to the residents on Longhill Street? Was it now you who said that CCS knows the in and out’s of this matter, and “newcomers” should defer to that seasoned command of the facts by your group, CCS?
If you said that, and I believe you did on Urban Compass, then how supportive can you be for an equal participation of public scrutiny on how tax monies may be used on the Winn Plan. There can be no hues or degrees of public weight – we are all taxpayers (yes, I do pay taxes!), and all concerned taxpayers have an equal voice to examine and comment and question the Winn plan.
A referendum is not necessarily the best option, but even that is better than dismissing the public from any participation in this decision.
And by the way, just in case you haven’t read this, among the several hundreds residents who oppose this plan, the majority of them have lived Springfield most of their lives. What’s the magic number of years in residence before a citizen has the right to participate in decisions using public funds? Is it 2 years? Is it five years? Is it 10 years? At what point do you and CCS grant permission for citizens to participate in the decision making their community? I repeat, hundreds of residents who have lived here most of their lives signed those letters of opposition.
All I can say, is OUR tax monies are going to help rebuild this property Not all of WINNS money, and our tax dollors are going to be paying the rents there also, or partial of the rents. WHEN WILL WE FREAKING LEARN… when it is given and not earned there is no care for it, no pride no sweat equity, SURE as SH*T some young mother with 6 kids and no daddy getting rent paid will live there and soon enough her sugar daddy who is working and living under HER (our) roof rent free. I am all for helping people out and God knows I needed it in my youth, but I always earned it, took care of it and earned the respect of the neighbors. They should have made it MIXED income, maybe some owners of affordable housing living nextdoor would help keep things in-line as they care about where they live, yea short term everyone will be on thier best behavior, it will wear off and back to what it was originally… crime, poverty, drugs, postitutes, theifs. I lived it, I seen it, I felt it and I was happy when it was gone. YES people will be making a killing on a dump or cash out so to speak, who or what I have no idea and honestly I do not care. KARMA
It is hard to understand how contributions such as the latest from Clip4U and TommyTom advance their cause. While all of us have experienced the frustration of being on the losing side of an important issue and the temptation to lash out that comes with it, it is less clear how public statements such as these are helpful to themselves or to the public dialogue.
I look forward to a future in which an issue presents itself on which Springfield Forward, and others in the community can agree and cooperate. Now THAT would be a winning team.
Sheila,
You’re attempting to take a high road by avoiding the issues raised by your own statements.
The issue brought forth to the Finance Control Board focused not on Longhill Gardens but the comments made to The Reminder. Who’s opinion did those words reflect?
http://www.springfieldmedia.com/Special_Edition.html
Sheila,
The issue brought forth to the Finance Control Board dealt with comments by C. Panagore. Those comments attacked Springfield Forward with respect to their statements about Longhill Gardens. The two were woven together…but again, my last posts related to your comments in Urban Compass…you raised issues beyond what was stated at the FCB.
To those who may not know what “Sheila” stated on the Urban Compass blog about the Longhill Gardens issue, here is the full quote:
“Those who oppose the Winn option are new to efforts to rescue Longhill Gardens while CCS activists, who know the options inside out after years of looking for a solution to the complex problems presented by Longhill Gardens, support it. CCS’s opinion and the opinions of residents living closest to Longhill Gardens should be taken seriously by the Mayor as he thinks through his decision tonight. Those who know the most and have the most to lose support Winn,and that should be taken very seriously.
Opponents to the Winn proposal, on the other hand, are not only newcomers to this issue but they live outside the immediate vicinity of Longhill Gardens on Appleton Street, Washington Street, Fairfield Street, Forest Park Ave., upper Sumner Ave. and, judging from the photo in the paper, even across town in McKnight. Should their fears and arguments be disregarded? No, they should not, but they are less relevant to the Winn proposal for Longhill Gardens than as generalized expressions of concern for demographic trends in the neighborhood and the city as a whole. (And by the way, I haven’t heard of even one opponent who toured local Winn projects when they had the chance.)
If Longhill Gardens was to have had a future as a successful owner-occupied condo complex, this would have happened in the 1980s when it switched from rental to condo. The city was in better shape twenty years ago, the economy was stronger, and optimism was in the air, but Longhill Gardens was not able to ride that particular wave. Instead, those condos were bought by irresponsible absentee owners intent on maximizing profits by renting to anybody and reinvesting nothing in the buildings, and the downward slide began.
For anybody to simply throw out untested ideas and optimistic scenarios for Longhill Gardens at this late(!?) date is unrealistic and and even irresponsible because it distracts the community from the real choice which is thumbs up or down on the Winn plan, which confronts us all tonight, and most particularly confronts Mayor Sarno.
Let us hope that despite his loyalty to supporters who oppose the Winn plan, he is able to see that a vacant Longhill Gardens or a demolished Longhill Gardens will only present all of us with another set of problems.”
Here is the link to the entire thread where this quote is cited for the FULL CONTEXT.
http://urbancompass.net/?p=1224
The simple facts of the matter is that this neighborhood has been relatively peaceful and much safer since they evicted everyone.
Reducing the concentration of people in this neighborhood is the answer.
The “Gardens” should be demolished and made part of the landfill it sits on!
Then maybe a small , quiet park would be nice.
Oh Yes Bottom Line … finally someone has said it out loud. This neighborhood is, after years and years of noise, crime, stolen cars, drug deals, syringes in yards, condoms on front lawns, stolen cars, prostitution, burglaries, car break in’s, assaults, stabbings, shootings … FINALLY PEACEFUL, quiet, and SAFE. People are sitting out on their porches again, taking a walk through the neighborhood, jogging, walking their dogs, all without fear! We are all talking with each other and commenting on how the neighborhood has improved 100%. I have seen more people out and about this past summer than I have in ages. And some who previously supported this Winn proposal are now experiencing and accepting this FACT and they are having second thoughts. Everyone LIKES THE PEACE and quiet, the dramatically reduced crime, the safer, cleaner streets. Haven’t heard one single complaint about the dramatic reduction in crime! My friend who lives on Longhill told me he finally will let his children out to play for the first time in years. All this back and forth talk will not alter the reality that this neighborhood is experiencing its first decent spell in years.
Woe to all of us 2 years from now when Longhill is completed and goes back to what it was 2 years ago! And it will. And no amount of propaganda will change that. It will return to what it was, only under new management.
Need proof? Winn manages Northern Heights off of Main on Central. Just sit in your car outside the Dunkin Donuts some night and watch for a few hours… It is quite a different experience from the scripted “tour” that Winn arranged for us to see. Sit and watch the drugs dealers and users making their deals, the prostitutes arranging their business, fights, weapons, vandalized cars, etc. And just check out the police blotter on the crime emanating from that development… Very Scary Stuff.
And now, courtesy of this very small, but vocal and connected group of supporters, the “excellent Winn managment company” will be bringing these same wonderful management skills to us at Longhill real soon.
Get ready folks. Enjoy the lovely, safe, quiet, peaceful neighborhood while you can.
Fasten your seat belts, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
That post by Alex says it all. He noted”…the peace and quiet, the dramatically reduced crime, the safer, cleaner streets” due to the closing of Longhill Gardens.
What people in that area are experiencing is what they and all of Springfield are entitled to: the basic right to enjoy life in and around their homes. Is it a “done deal” that Longhill Gardens will reopen and again negatively impact the basic qualities of life. It is never too late.
It’s never too late to take a stand for your basic rights. Never too late to inform our elected leaders and media of what is on our minds.
http://www.springfieldmedia.com/Longhill_Gardens.html
It’s too bad that people with as much time and passion as those who worry about the future of Longhill Gardens under the Winn Corporation cannot find another outlet for their anxiety and fears than to post on the internet. Simply repeating their disappointment and predicting more problems will not improve the neighborhood and run the risk of unnecessarily raising the level of concern in the community.
I have no “cause” to advance, It has shown that my voice and other voices did not have the impact on the issues regarding Longhill and money is stronger that the opinions of the people at hand, I will tell you this that when they were renting it did impact Forest Park Ave and other areas, please do not look directly at the street they are located on. I am fearful that it will result in what it was, is that wrong of me to have fear since I experienced it in the past? I hope this all works out for the best, I really do. But I do not have faith that it will, considering it will all be low income. It should have been mixed and owner occupied as it creates pride in earned-ownership as they have a vested interest in the property. Forgive me for venting out and using the context as I did in my post, it was anger, but it sure beats fear. I will support what ever happens in the best way I can.
TOMMYTOM, voices like yours are what is needed to make Forest Park and Springfield better places for usa. In your last post, you openly expressed your fear and you based it on personal experience, but you also articulated your hope that the present proposal “works out for the best,” and your willingness to “support whatever happens in the best way [you] can.”
Nobody could ask for more.
I share your hope, your willingness to support the eventual outcome at Longhill Gardens under the Winn Corporation, and your implied willingness to take action. I also sincerely hope that you will stay active in neighborhood activities and speak out, not only on the internet, but at meetings of the Forest Park Civic Association http://www.forestparkca.com , monthly Police Beat Team meetings and elsewhere.
To continue to be a strong neighborhood, Forest Park needs participation from everybody, old timers and newcomers both. Old timers need to welcome new faces, new voices and alternative points of view. And first timers need to take the risk of coming to meetings and speaking up. A healthy neighborhood of one where all points of view are valued.
Don’t worry TOMMYTOM, Sheila is a known corporate/city apologist. She has already been corrupted and appears to go out of her way to obfuscate the truth.
About the only thing I agree with her about is that in order to succeed in wresting control of the government away from the corporate sellouts and mafioso, is to have the involvment of as many citizens as possible in order to sieze control of our destiny by ousting each and every politician in the city, and ending the fascist control board.
I live up the street from Longhill Gardens, on Longhill Street. I drive by it every day on the way home. It has been an eyesore for the 8 years I’ve lived near it.
I sent a letter of support to Mayor Sarno. Although I would have preferred that Longhill Gardens would have been made into mixed income housing, I think that what Winn is proposing is better than leaving it vacant the way it is.
I used to live in Chicopee (my parents still do). We lived on a street that bordered the old Chicomansett Village apartments. Growing up, that area was very bad, a lot of crime, and we even had our house broken into by someone who lived there.
In the mid-90’s, Winn Development took over that property. They used the same public funding plan that they are going to use here. What may surprise some people is that once Chicomansett Village became “subsidized housing”, the problems dropped substantially. That was in large part due to what Winn did. They improved the place both visually and with better management. The buildings were sided and landscaping was put in. They evicted tenants who were not paying the rent. They cracked down on people who were on subsidies, but who had extra people living in their apartments.
Ever since then, Chicomansett Village has not been a neighborhood concern in Chicopee. It is no longer the renowned hotbed of crime that it once was.
I would hope that my opinion is given a little more weight than someone who lives across the city. This affects me more than it affects someone living on Washington Street or Appleton Street. I’d hate for someone with a general dislike of low-income housing to force me and my neighbors to live near an abandoned eyesore that is prone to dumping and eventual squatting and criminal behavior.
Your comments are excellent Mr. Slate. The closer you live to Longhill Gardens the greater your interest. You nor any Springfield resident should have to live near a boarded up eyesore.
Unfortunately, an eyesore is what the site has been the past eight months and continues to be. Why have the blight fighters been so quiet? The point is with some earlier intevention by the city, perhaps the complex could have been turned around instead of shut down. The fact that is was privately owned doesn’t explain why no city official noticed the deteriorating conditions or high volume of police activity.
Speaking of police activity, tax dollars from all of Springfield paid for the horrendous volume of calls generated by Longhill Gardens. The complex closed at the end of 2007. Statistics show crime down in the city and Forest Park neighborhood. Mere Coincidence?
As a resident of Springfield, I am concerned about our weak economy. Something about our city has caused an exodus of working people and we don’t attract new middle class residents. Longhill Gardens is a prime location to be developed for an excellent city living experience that would benefit the local economy with needed shopping and dining revenue.
Springfield is relatively small. We should look out for our own blocks but also remember a problem in Forest Park can affect residents in 16 Acres or the North End, and vice versa. We need more civic pride from all of the city speaking out. Just as residents from your area should speak out about probelms at the “X”; residents from the “X” area should speak out about a problem on Longhill Street.
Hopefully on behalf of your block, our neighborhood and our city something positive can come of Longhill Gardens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLfFdOa1GO0
Conditions at Longhill Gardens were reported early and often to Code Enforcement over the past few years, inspectors did the best they could and representatives were present at many Housing Court site visits and in court many times.
Question of the Day:
Where are the code violations generated by Longhill Gardens in 2008? There are some who live very close to that site and have been very aggresive and vocal in the past about code violations. Yet they seem to have been sooooo very quiet about the blighted conditions at Longhill Gardens in recent months.
IF the Winn proposal goes through and the project is reopened…will violations continued to be overlooked?
It seems that the closer the Longhill Gardens issue is looked at the more questions that arise.
http://www.springfield-ma.gov/housing/search-violations.0.html?letter=L&start_at=140
It seems as though the more answers that are provided, the more they are dismissed and the more vitriol is posted by “new” posters.
Those following this issue closely are clear that some people are satisfied and hopeful, others are worried but hopeful, and still others are extremely dissatisfied and distrustful.
Perhaps we should just leave it at that for now.
I can give my opinion on the code violations as a nearby resident. Although Longhill Gardens has been overgrown much of the summer, the fact that it will soon be redeveloped has made me more accepting of things like weeds and even broken windows. The new owner will fix it up when he takes over, and an end is finally in sight. I’d rather that code enforcement spend their energy on other properties.
I know that the city and the neighborhood group has been trying to get this property fixed up for the entire eight years I’ve lived near it. To me, they finally succeeded when it was put into receivership and the ownership group was ousted. I’m happy that the density will be lowered by half, and I’m happy that more offstreet parking will be created. I think that alone will transform the area.
The way I look at it, I think that Winn is going to do as good a job here as they have done elsewhere, and I think my property will increase in value and prestige once “Longhill” is no longer preceded with “murder at”. If Winn doesn’t do a good job, then they can be shut down just like the old owners were.
I can understand that people don’t want more low-income housing in Springfield, but to me, this is going to be a big improvement. It obviously isn’t the best possible outcome, but it will be a lot better than it was.
To all of you I repeat – fasten your seat belts, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
It is so nice that supporters of this project permit posters to speak out if they live across the street, have lived here for a specific number of years, or agree with those who want to push this project through. However, by the explicit definition of those supporter, if you are a “new poster” or disagree with them, or live too far away, you should go away and be quiet because your opinion is less relevant.
What happens in my neighborhood and my city IS my business. It all impacts my life every single day. I live here, I work here, I pay taxes here and I disagree and I will continue to say so.
Yet I note, isn’t it ironic that when TommyTom speaks out against the Longhill project, Sheila has this to say:
“It is hard to understand how contributions such as the latest from Clip4U and TommyTom advance their cause. While all of us have experienced the frustration of being on the losing side of an important issue and the temptation to lash out that comes with it, it is less clear how public statements such as these are helpful to themselves or to the public dialogue.
I look forward to a future in which an issue presents itself on which Springfield Forward, and others in the community can agree and cooperate.”
Once TommyTom “cooperates” she suddenly
changes her tune to :
“To continue to be a strong neighborhood, Forest Park needs participation from everybody, old timers and newcomers both. Old timers need to welcome new faces, new voices and alternative points of view. And first timers need to take the risk of coming to meetings and speaking up. A healthy neighborhood of one where all points of view are valued.”
It seems Sheila has mastered the art of speaking out of both sides of her mouth.
Which is it?
Are all points of view valued? If so, why put down those who disagree with you? If newcomers are valued, why call them newbies and say their opinions are “less relevant.” If a “healthy neighborhood” is one where all points of view are valued”, why discriminate against those who may live a few blocks away and say they should be quiet because they live beyond your designated “civil right to speak out” zone?
To wit, and I quote Sheila:
“Opponents to the Winn proposal, on the other hand, are not only newcomers to this issue but they live outside the immediate vicinity of Longhill Gardens on Appleton Street, Washington Street, Fairfield Street, Forest Park Ave., upper Sumner Ave. and, judging from the photo in the paper, even across town in McKnight. Should their fears and arguments be disregarded? No, they should not, but they are less relevant to the Winn proposal for Longhill Gardens than as generalized expressions of concern for demographic trends in the neighborhood and the city as a whole. (And by the way, I haven’t heard of even one opponent who toured local Winn projects when they had the chance.)”
Either everyone is part of the neighborhood and has a right to express their opinions, or no one has. I don’t think the supporters get to dictate who has rights and who doesn’t.
Unfortunately – from the very beginning – that has been a pattern with those who support this project.
The concerns brought about by the arrest of resigned State Senator Dianne Wilkerson and the subpoena and contributions from Winn need to be addressed. Will any of this effect Longhill Gardens.
http://www.universalhub.com/node/21170
Dianne Wilkerson arrested, Chuck Turner arrested, and a HUGE article in the Boston Globe, Sunday, Nov 23, Money&Careers section, once again, linking Wilkerson and Winn with the Feds investigating both. To those who support Longhill and Winn, maybe its time to rethink your position. Before its too late to back out.
Longhill Gardens has been vacant for over a year. The “emergency basis” decision (by a hand full of connected players) to support an all low income project developed by Winn has proven to be a BAD housing solution and has not solved the problem of the vacant eyesore
The arrest of Dianne Wilkerson and her connection to Winn plus the numerous arrests of Northern Heights’ tenants demonstrate the need to reexamine the Winn proposal.
This neighborhood does NOT want this project. Ths neighborhood is overwhelmingly opposed to the Winn plan. This City is drowning under the weight of low-income only housing and to add another 109 units at 3-4people per unit, will add between 300 – 400 more low-income only families to the City’s already overburdened social services rolls and add ever increasiong crime to be handled by our overwhelmed police force. To have anyone state that you have to live in a certain place, or be a resident for a certain number of years before you are permitted to have a voice is appalling and absolutely unAmerican in every sense of the word. What I find truly disgusting is the audacity, the absolute arrogance of a billionaire, out of town , absentee landlord, who is getting $21,000,000 of OUR money to build this project while putting in $82,000 of his own, to decide that WE NEED MORE low income housing! What chutzpah! What gall! Winn, go build 109 low-income only housing units in Brookline – down the street from where YOU live!
P.S. Winn has now admitted giving Wilkerson a $10,000 “gift” to help her out while she was supporting his Columbus Center project and while she cast her vote in favor of tax dollars being used to fund it. To date, there have been over 400 articles – published around the globe – discussing Winn’s penchant for giving “financial incentives” to local civic associations and politicians to support his projects. I wonder, is anyone on the Federal level looking at HUD MA, Longhill Gardens, local politicans and civic associations, and anyone else “supporting” our local Winn projects? We know the Feds are looking closely at Winn in Boston… I wonder about here in Springfield. Hhhhhmmmmmmmm …