Longhill Gardens Meeting Brings Opposing Sides Together
by Bill Dusty
On Wednesday, December 17, the real estate management company, WinnCompanies, held a presentation at Forest Park Middle School, in Springfield, MA, to further detail their plans to redevelop the currently-vacant Longhill Gardens condominium complex. Gilbert Winn was on-hand to present an overview of Winn’s design and management plans for the complex. The public meeting was organized by the Forest Park Civic Association (FPCA). Several members of the civic group Springfield Forward, which opposes the Winn plan, were present, along with other city residents who oppose the project.
FPCA president Brian Sears kicked off the meeting by stating this was the 5thh public meeting on the Longhill Gardens project, including a February annual meeting of the FPCA. Sears said his civic group saw no other viable option to the Winn plan for Longhill Gardens. He also said that the FPCA has no financial interest in Winn’s plan, and that the Longhill units currently owned by Concerned Citizens for Springfield would be sold to Winn once Winn formally takes ownership of the complex.
According to their website, WinnCompanies “develops, acquires and manages multi-family and mixed income properties throughout the United States.” The company was founded in 1971, and currently employs 2,300. Approximately 35% of its properties are low-income restricted.
Plans for the Longhill Gardens complex call for the demotion of some of the buildings there, bringing the unit total down from 211 to 111 units. The redeveloped units would all be designated for low-income housing – a designation that Winn said was necessary in order to qualify for the state funding Winn received.
Opponents of the Winn plan say that the city and the neighborhood itself is already overpopulated with low-income housing, and that adding more will only increase the city’s poverty rate as well as place more of a burden on the city’s already struggling school system. Members of Springfield Forward, meanwhile, have said that they are not against low-income housing, but that the current city plan for allotting low-income housing has historically resulted in the “warehousing” of poorer families, which in turn has created entire communities living in poverty.
After Sears completed his opening remarks, it was Gilbert Winn’s turn at the podium. Winn began with an overview of WinnCompanies history and company profile. After making several critical references to Springfield Forward in his initial remarks, however, one member of that group, Richard Carpenter, stood up and protested being called out by Winn. From there, a few other shout-outs in protest of the meeting’s format erupted as people stood up to have their say. Eventually, then, Sears was able to quell the angry crowd.
One of the meeting formats that was protested the loudest was the use of index cards for submitting questions to Gilbert Winn. Some in the crowd were concerned that only a few of the questions would be chosen, and that critical questions would be bypassed. Sears insisted that the cards were being used to avoid having people standing up and rattling on for extended periods of time. As things went, all questions submitted on the index cards were read.
Several members of the Springfield City Council also attended the meeting. Both councilors Bud L. Williams and James J. Ferrera III were on hand, and both are reportedly opposed to the use of over $550,000 in city-allotted funds that Mayor Domenic Sarno has signed off on to go to the Longhill Gardens project. Gilbert Winn said that the city had to invest some funds into the project to act as leverage for an additional $18 million in state and federal funding.
A City Council meeting is reportedly scheduled for Monday to discuss the $550,000 city appropriation to the Longhill Gardens project.
See a CBS-3 news video of the meeting here.
click on image to enlarge
click on image to enlarge
PDF
34 Responses for “Longhill Gardens Meeting Brings Opposing Sides Together”
Comments are closed
ADVERTISE AT THE SI
 |
 |
This was a meeting in a public building and members of the public spoke out because they were concerned that their views would not be addressed.
Gilbert Winn insulted Springfield Forward and Richard Carpenter in his opening remarks. He held the microphone and believed there would be no response from the audience except questions written on index cards screened by a member of the civic group that supported the proposal.
This meeting illustrated the human reactions of community members that have been shut out, misled and at times disrespected and badgered.
(As posted on MassLive)
FPCA President Brian Sears, after acknowledging the division of opinion in the neighborhood on the Winn proposal, began by outlining a chronology of public presentations of this development. (FPCA annual meeting, 2 tours of Winn properties, names of groups and agencies that have given approval, site problems, place of this meeting in the process, announcement of next Monday’s noontime meeting at Museum Park, 70 Chestnut Street.)
Gilbert Winn began a description of their involvement, noting that since the February annual meeting of the FPCA, the same questions had been asked over and over and that he was willing to answer them again tonight. He ran through several elements of a PowerPoint presentation describing Winn’s track national record and all the awards they had received, including their support for the Boys and Girls Club and their practice of enrolling all children in their developments in the Boys and Girls Club. He also described how hard he was pressed by David Panagore and both Mayor Ryan and Mayor Sarno to put market rate or elderly housing into Longhill Gardens. He had just finished describing in detail the physical reasons this development is unsuitable for elderly housing (no elevators, remote parking lot at the bottom of a steep hill) when he was interrupted by Richard Carpenter and Mrs. Pappas.
Winn then resumed his PowerPoint, comparing the characteristics of the present condo use with their proposal. These include laundry facilities, security arrangements, a play area, structural soundness, maintenance, handicap units, landscaping, rent levels and payment of taxes. Rent levels under Longhill Omega were $550. and $750. while under Winn, they would be $500. and $820.
Site improvements will include demolition of the worst buildings and quadrupling the ratio of parking per unit over what is there now.
Carl Deitz of the city’s Office of Housing described the city’s fear that the building might be snapped up at auction by a straw man who would buy Shalom Segelman’s mortgage for pennies on the dollar or another “bottom feeder.” He also noted that 55% of Springfield families qualify to live in this building and that NO project-based subsidies will be used.
FPCA Board Member Jane Hetzel, who had passed out cards to members of the audience, started to introduce the question and answer period by announcing she would read questions from all cards, but was interrupted by opponents asking if this was “the normal process for a public meeting” and seeking to ask questions from the floor. When Brian and Jane were unsuccessful in regaining control, others challenged them and tried to respond to their issues. City Councilor Bud Williams moved to the front of the hall to point out that, while he did not support this project, this was “their [the FPCA’s] meeting” adding that “we have to have proper discourse” and “act like we’re mature.”
Opponents finally quieted down when Jane explained she would read all questions, grouping questions by topic. Here, in order, are most of the questions and answers raised at the meeting.
What is the source of funding? Federal and state subsidies in the form of tax credits or low-income loans.
Your claim the property cannot be turned into elderly housing is insulting.
Why do you need 4 parking spaces per unit? Is your security for the tenants or to protect the neighborhood from the tenants? What if your security system goes down and all the cops are baby-sitting Longhill? This question was shouted by an angry man standing on the sidelines who said he lives on Fort Pleasant Ave. and that things are much quieter since Longhill Gardens has been vacant.
What happens to working class housing because businesses leave Springfield because of tax increases?
Where’s the money coming from and why isn’t elderly housing appropriate? Winn cited parking problems and lack of elevators as cited before.
What about sidewalks? No information about city sidewalks; interior sidewalks will be repaved.
What about a driveway connection to Hazelwood Ave.? No answer.
What about lots on Edgeland where garages were? Winn will entertain proposals for reuse of this vacant land.
Please describe your tenant selection procedures. We’ll check for income, criminal history, number of people and we’ll enforce provisions of the lease in Housing Court.
[Shouted from the audience] What will you do about drug dealers who visit School Committeewoman Antonette Pepe asked this man to be quiet.
What parts of the job will be subbed out? Will workers have health insurance? Will you use local contractors? Winn said this project will create a lot on construction jobs; it’s worth $11million.
[Asked by a union representative] Is this a prevailing wage job? Will you commit to using 50 to 60% Springfield residents for rehab? Will workers have health care and retirement? Not a prevailing wage job; it’s not required. Winn will follow all labor requirements.
[Question about health insurance and workers comp asked by representative of the Carpenters Union 108] Winn provides full health insurance and workers comp.
City Councilor Jimmy Ferrera breaks in to ask whether Winn “can live without the city’s $550,000.” Winn explains that city matching funds are required for these projects, and that the city’s money will leverage $18million in state funds.
Will Winn be reachable locally? Yes.
What do you get in return? Winn isn’t just handed the money to use it any way they want. The project must remain affordable for 30 years, and Winn cannot sell it for 15 years.
Would it be possible to petition DHCS to allow the project to be market rate housing? Winn promises to write to the state tomorrow and ask to include as many market rate units as possible, possibly as many as 20 or 30.
Antonette Pepe breaks in to describe how promises made in the name of affordable housing destroyed the Hollywood neighborhood where she grew up.
Is there a problem with Northern Heights? Winn bought it four years ago and renovated it two years ago. Half the inherited tenants the tenants have been replaced through evictions.
What connection does Carl Deitz have with Kerry Dietz and Keith Construction? Carl Dietz has met Kerry Dietz a couple of times in the course of their work. They are not related; their families come from different parts of Germany where Dietz is a very common name. He has no relationship with Keith Construction.
Do you have a general contractor and who is it? Keith Construction from Stoughton MA. They have more workers involved with multi-family housing in Springfield than anyone else. [Someone interjects that their subs were underpaid on Pynchon Place.]
What income level will your tenants have? 60% of median income, that is $30,000. to $40,000.
Security will be off-site with on-site security to be added if it is needed. Winn added “I want this project to be attractive.”
Mrs. Pappas asks about the screening process for Section 8 tenants, quoting Carl Deitz saying that one “cannot deny anyone with a Section 8.” Winn promises to screen for credit worthiness and criminal history.
Elevators cost $4000. each per David Panagore. Why not use city money for that? Winn says, OK, well then I can do elevators, but not kitchens and bathrooms.
How will the security system help the neighbors?
Richard Carpenter asks about bail problems and the presence of sex offenders at Northern Heights
Taxes: Winn has paid back taxes for 192 units and will be returning this development to the tax rolls.
A man objects to Winn’s tone as condescending.
A woman agrees, but also says that members of the audience were rude and that their behavior was embarrassing.
In fairness, Sheila, Richard interrupted Gilbert Winn only after Winn repeatedly criticized SF in his presentation. Winn even apologized for his tone later in the meeting, saying he was just weary of the months-long debate.
On the index card matter: At first, Ms. Hetzel did not make it clear that “all” questions would be read. She simply said that the audience would write down questions and she would read the questions to Winn. I believe there was some mention of sorting, as well (although I think she meant sorting by subject). Some in the crowd wanted a neutral party to read the questions from the cards, as they thought only a select few would be chosen and that Ms. Hetzel would be picking which questions would be asked.
When Ms. Hetzel finally did state that all the cards would be read (this was after Williams stepped in), the objections ceased.
The index card thing – although well-intended – was probably a waste of time, anyway, since a good amount of people just stood up and asked their question. Plus, Ms. Hetzel had a hard time reading the handwriting on some of the cards.
With regards to the index cards, it allowed for more questions to occur. It helps keep order, especially on very emotional issues. We have used this method numerous times in the past. We also allowed for numerous people to speak and ask questions. By the end of the night, I don’t know of anyone that did not ask a question that they wanted to ask.
I also find it laughable that the show of hands (which was not counted) was overwhelming in either case. I saw it as less half opposed, but admit that it was fairly close to 50-50. Which is not surprising since public forums usually bring out the no votes over the people in favor or the proposal.
Again, nothing could have been said to change the mind of those deeply opposed to the development. And nothing was brought up at the meeting that changes the opinion of those for it. We still support the development and look forward to the development getting under way.
I expect Longhill Gardens to be a wonderful neighbor.
If I’m not mistaken (correct me if I’m wrong), this project will be undertaken in ward 3. If the citizens of the ward are so passionate about the project, whynot put it up to a ward-wide vote? Results of the election would be binding and it would get city officials off the hook of either supporting it or opposing it.
The most constructive way to interpret the broo-ha-ha over Longhill Gardens is to acknowledge the emerging community consensus, including both sides of this controversy, that Springfield in general and Forest Park in particular have reached the outer limit of tolerance for badly maintained low-income housing inhabited by irresponsible people.
It is unfortunate that consensus had to be reached around public discussion of the Winn Corporation’s excellent plan for restoring Longhill Gardens as a tax paying asset to the city and the neighborhood. It is particularly unfortunate that opponents have chosen to overlook and even attack Concerned Citizens, the one organization in the city that took the lead in facing up the ungovernable mess that Longhill Gardens had become. But this is often the ragged and unfair way things get done, especially in an environment of reduced resources and political instability.
Complicating the problem is the on-going failure of the Forest Park Civic Association to make good on its obligation, as set out in its by-laws, to serve and reach out to the whole Forest Park neighborhood, the whole of zip code 01108. The sense of being “out of the loop” as much as anything created the civic participation vacuum which opponents of Longhill Gardens have cleverly exploited.
Let us hope that bureaucrats who operate the city’s housing subsidy affordable housing programs get the message that enough is enough. Let us hope that HAP and the SHA bring their inspection standards into line with local ordinances and the state sanitary code and that our state legislators use their muscle to see that future affordable housing developments are sited in the lily white suburbs just beyond our borders.
It is my hope that the Winn plan for Longhill Gardens goes forward, but that the affordable housing bureaucracy also gets the message that Springfield has had enough.
Sheila, the best way for the message to be heard is for it to be stated loud and clear now that Longhill Gardens will not open because it does not have the majority support of the community, the units are not needed and the funds, especially the $550,000 in Springfield HOME Funds can be much better spent.
To Mr. Ferrera and to Mr. Williams;
Thank you for standing up for the public on this issue.There were mega sneaky deals with Longhill Gardens and you were there to help.
You are true public servants and again THANK YOU.
What is notably absent from the discourse is the fact that a community vote was taken via a “show of hands” vote. Out of 10 rows of chairs, 7-1/2 rows voted AGAINST the current plan. That leaves 2-1/2 rows in favor. Let’s see …. that means that over 70% of the community voted against the project. Of course Mr. Sear’s thinks a show of hands is laughable. He supports the project and has been working behind the scenes for over a year to make this happen.
We should all note that he had no problem with 12 board members voting at a private, closed, “emergency meeting”, and then telling the Mayor, the Developer and the media that the “entire community unanimously supports this project” because of those board member votes. Yet, a show of hands where nearly 100 community members voted – is labled as “laughable.” Oh, Mr. Sears…. what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
Nonetheless, over 70% of the community voted against this project. Witnessed by those community members, council members, media. The community has spoken. Will the Mayor still be foolish enough to not listen?
Longhill Gardens Hearing called by City Councilor Bill Foley
Museum Park Community Room
December 22, 2008
About thirty people were present.
City Councilor Foley introduced the hearing and asked that remarks and questions be restricted to issues having to do with Winn’s plan for management of Longhill Gardens and its ability to manage the complex successfully. He said he was looking for information on how they propose to keep these apartments from getting out of hand, how they will be kept as good neighbors. He acknowledged that the city council has little to do with allocating this money, but they do want to know about Winn’s management skills as demonstrated in Springfield and elsewhere.
Gilbert Winn introduced Nancy Barlow, manager of Northern Heights, and passed out a thick packet of information on this and other projects and Winn’s background in general. He described their operations nationwide, saying they focus on New England, particularly Massachusetts including several developments in Western Massachusetts. They specialize in “problem child” developments such as Longhill Gardens, putting together funding for capital repairs and bringing in professional management.
They have a record of improving the neighborhoods where they have gone in. He cited the example of Museum Park where the meeting was held and recalled its history as a hotel and a condominium development which failed after owner occupants moved out leaving an irresponsible tenant population known for illegal activity. Winn put together a $6million funding package to rehab the building and also adapted plans to meet objections of the Armory Quadrangle Civic Association which was concerned about having more low income housing in their neighborhood.
Winn sees Longhill Gardens as the same kind of failed condo project as Ashford Place (now Museum Park) and, similarly, sees a publicly funded plan as the best solution. He pointed out that the state doesn’t allocate funds to inexperienced or incompetent developers and went on to describe improvements such as decreasing its size, adding additional parking, on-site management, a play area, laundry facilities, security cameras, six handicap units, re-pointing the brick, and replacing kitchens and bathrooms in all units.
Councilor Foley asked how they would deal with tenants who cause trouble, how they would be removed.
Winn answered by asking Brian, a 14 year Winn employee, to describe their eviction process which is: problem tenants are initially called into the management office to discuss problems; issues discussed are put in writing in the form of a letter to the tenant. If problems continue, the tenant is sent a 30 day notice to quit. If they do not leave voluntarily, Winn takes them to Housing Court, and if problems cannot be solved at that level, Winn takes them to trial which leads to eviction. Brian says Winn is good at implementing this process.
Councilor Foley asked about where Winn has managed developments as big as Longhill Gardens, ones with 100 or so units.
Brian said they had many projects that size and larger, adding that “I have 15 to 20 that are bigger. Northern Heights [on Central Street in Springfield] is bigger, one in Chicopee is bigger and Mill Valley in Amherst has 140 units.”
Councilor Foley asked about parking.
Gilbert Winn said that whereas now there are 35 to 40 spaces for over 200 units, they propose 100 parking spaces for 110 units.
Councilor Foley asked whether parking would be accessed via Longhill Street.
Gilbert Winn said parking would be accessed via both Longhill Street (for the new spaces) and Edgeland Street (for the existing lot which would be re-engineered and landscaped).
Councilor Bruce Stebbins asked about the project costs, tax credits and the cost per square foot.
Gilbert Winn said the acquisition and rehab cost per unit would be $175,000. to $180,000. with $110,000. in hard costs (construction costs). This works out to $12million in construction costs, $3.5million for acquiring the mortgage on Longhill Omega units and 19 other units plus “soft” costs for design, environmental, finance plus the 10% development profit allowed by law.
Financing this work would be via federal tax credits plus a few state tax credits. Tax credits are sold by developers to corporations who use them to offset federal and state taxes. Money raised in this way is used to underwrite the expenses detailed above.
Rental income alone for projects like this would not support the cost of acquisition and rehabilitation. Without income from selling tax credits, the most that a developer could do would be to repaint and do carpentry. HOME funds can be used only on affordable housing. The $550,000. HOME funds will leverage $18million in federal funds.
Councilor Foley repeated that the meeting’s focus would be on Winn’s management skills and the project’s funding,
Councilor Ferrera asked whether Museum Park was primarily seniors.
Gilbert Winn said that the focus was on “nearly elderly,” that is 55 and older.
Ferrera asked whether Longhill Gardens would be done in two phases as was Museum Park.
Gilbert Winn said no, that at Longhill, they will buy all units at one time. He also said that although they have an option to buy Longhill Gardens, they do not own any units right now. They play to buy 192 units at the end of January 2009. They are in conversation with the rest of the owners and have signed options with some of them.. Their goal is to own all units in 2 months.
Councilor Ferrera asked whether all owners will get the same amount.
Gilbert Winn said that all prices are different, adding that separate negotiations have been undertaken with all owners.
Councilor Ferrera asked about how the complex is zoned.
Phil Dromey from the city planning department said all were Residence C.
Councilor Ferrera asked about project labor agreements for construction work.
Gilbert Winn said these matters are different in each project. HOME and tax credit requirements differ. He pledged to give 50% of the value of their contract to Springfield metro area contractors. (This is said to include all of Franklin, Hampshire and Hampden counties.)
City Council President Bud Williams said he is on record as being opposed to this project, but that he wants a better understanding. He is afraid that this development will end up as a problem, especially in this economic climate. He doesn’t blame the developer, but says that the city didn’t do its due diligence by not having considered several projects for these funds. He wonders how many units will be market rate.
Gilbert Winn says that at present none are market rate, but that in response to a question he got at Wednesday’s meeting at Forest Park Middle School, he is applying to the state to get approval for 20 or 30 market rate units included.
Council President Williams would like a copy of that request.
Councilor Foley opens the meeting for questions from the public.
Can you describe the tenant profile for Longhill Gardens?
Nancy Barlow says it will be a mixture of private paying tenants and people with vouchers. All prospective tenants, including those with Section 8 vouchers, will get background checks for credit and criminal records.
What about people who get into trouble after moving in?
Gilbert Winn says he wants Longhill Gardens to be as much like market rate housing as is possible and cites the example of Museum Park where the meeting it taking place.
City Council President Williams says he’s against warehousing a lot of low–income people.
FPCA President Brian Sears asks Winn to comment on tenant satisfaction at Eastbrook.
John Avery from the Carpenters’ Union wants jobs for Springfield residents/
Gilbert Winn says that half the contracts will be local, “hopefully for Springfield.”
What percentage of people in Springfield would meet income guidelines for this project?
Winn says 55% according to Carl Dietz of the city’s Office of Housing.
What are your plans for the vacant land on Edgeland Street and, potentially, on Longhill Street?
Winn is open to offers to buy this vacnt land for the cost of acquiring it.
Re: senior citizen housing what would it cost to take your hard costs…how much more for elevators? What other costs are in the $15million?
Winn says that elevators cost $200,000. per elevator. In addition, there are other costs associated with an elderly project including installation of grab bars, emergency access, a requirement that 25% of units be handicap accessible, and wider hallways to accommodate wheelchairs. Longhill Gardens has the additional problem, when elderly units are being considered, of having the large parking lot down a steep hill from the buildings. Winn prefers elderly projects, because they are easier to manage. As for the financial information, this information has previously been made available to the questioner who Winn invites to email him with further questions.
Councilor Ferrera comments that the city could use open space and asks whether Winn would consider taking the tax credit and giving the land to the city.
Winn asks whether this is a negotiation, adding that if he could get city council support for this project, he would consider giving the vacant land to the city.
Lies, lies, lies…
This Guerrilla Warfare approach to a public debate is most disturbing.
~ You hide behind anonymous screen names and throw wild accusations.
~ Your second argument goes against the first. For example, you argue that you don’t want Longhill Gardens reopened because of how bad it was – than argue that concerned citizens got Longhill Gardens closed because they wanted more money from a developer.
~ Signature have been obtained using misleading tatics by using generalities like “don’t you prefer elderly house to subsidized housing” or “hey I’m a member of the FPCA, won’t you sign this petition to protect our neighborhood.” Great, you have signatures from misleading our neighbors – you still can’t find me 100 people who are so outraged that they won’t show up to the FIFTH FPCA meeting or even 10 people against it to show up to the City Council meeting today.
I have never said that the entire neighborhood was polled – that is not the way that the FPCA has or will operate. For the same reason why the Mayor won’t set up a special election to determine democratically whether the majority of the residents of Forest Park favor the proposal. You elect Mayor’s and City Councilors to make the decisions and be accountable for such decisions. You do not run the City or Country based on popularity polls for every decision. All of my letters said that the FPCA Board of Directors voted and overwhelmingly support the proposal (even included the numbers on the March letter, 12 for and 3 against).
Finally, why we ask for someone maybe a little more neutral to give their opinion on the “raising of the hands.” Like I said – I’m not objective, but to say it was 70-75% is laughable. I thought it was under 50%. I thought it was 40%, but close enough to half the crowd that night.
BILL – any take on the unofficial raising of hands tally?
note to blabbit – make sure to use your other screen name so as to appear like their are more of you (remember to stick to those geurilla warfare tactics – you may also want to go after me personally or my family, anything but the issues)…
One other note – if you do not like the public meeting we hold, I invite you to organize your own public meeting. I also invite you to go beyond one issue.
The FPCA has had a very busy year working for the entire neighborhood. We fought Kim D’s Billiard on Vermont, we were there over the summer fighting against a full liquor license for the outdoor pavilon at the VFW, we met with CVS multiple times to make sure the redesign on the CVS at the X was not what corporate wanted to do but what the neighborhood deserves from CVS, we fought the requests for more used car special permits in the neighborhood.
We fight for entire neighborhood on multiple issues.
So, if you want a SIXTH public meeting for the Forest Park residents to attend – please feel free to organize it. (Another note to blabbit, here is where you make fun of our annual meeting which had more people attending than probably any neighborhood meeting in the City).
I can’t comment on the hand-raising. I was seated at the front of the hall, and was preoccupied jotting down notes for the most part, so I didn’t get a look at the hand count.
70% against the project. I stand by it.
Was it an Annual Meeting for the Civic Association or was it a Public Meeting? One or the other …. but not both.
No fun about how many people showed up at the Annual Meeting (ooop’s, Annual meeting – your words. Guesss that clarifies that it was not a Public Meeting) but it seems that those opponents gave the civic association the largest Annual Meeting it has had in years.
As Sheila said: one of the problems was that the community was kept out of the loop.
As to the woman who spoke at the end of the meeting – the exact quote is: “I am sorry that there was so much shouting, and that people were telling Mr. Winn HE was rude, but maybe there would not have been so much suspicion and anger if we had known about this project from the beginning and not been kept out of the process.”
Sitting at the rear of the room gave a view of everything. The last 7-1/2 rows raised hands in opposition. And yes, democracy is still the way we do things – or at least it should be.
I was standing right next to Mr. and Mrs. Pappas and Mrs. Manion when the hands went up. Back right of the room. Think I had the same reaction the Mrs. Manion and Mrs. Pappas had – wasn’t even close. Depends on the glasses you were. I admit it, but you won’t. Fine keep going with your unofficial 70% – what does it mean. Do you mean to tell me that this was a microcosm of the neighborhood? That “your 70%” would hold across the neighborhood? Funny about democracy – I don’t remember the city wide vote for the trash fee or the tax rate or anything else for that matter. We elect officials to make decisions on our behalf.
Again, I disagree – it was not even 50% and the percentage of forest park residents that given the facts and not the guerrilla warfare tactics would vote overwhelmingly for this proposal. Outside Mountainview, Westernview, and Forest Park Ave there are probably 20-30 houses with signs. What’s wrong – you could only get two on Longhill St. Why’s that?
As for the FPCA Annual Meeting – it is publicized and is a chance for ALL Forest Park residents to come and get together. There was no one at the door checking membership status. And the thought that the ten people at the front table who opposed the proposal (before they even heard Winn speak) made it the largest neighborhood meeting is also very funny.
But again – stick to trying to belittle the FPCA. STAY very far away from the fact that it makes no sense for senior housing or that someone should buy it and make it a park. Apparently having a 735 Acre Park close by isn’t enough.
Dear Mr. Sears,
I walked every house on Longhill and only 2 were for Longhill..6 were not home and several people(5) said they supported us but because of bulling and neighbors for Longhill they supported us privately..and we put up 4 signs..some were removed by outsiders..I think your biggest mistake is that you all felt you could leave people out of the loop…you understood the problem better than we did..you acted as though we didn’t need a say…sorry butI feel I do..The first time I went to a FPCA meeting…..last January I voiced my fear of Longhill returning and your father Paul Sears turned to me and gritted through his teeth”What do you want there? A park? The first time I saw Mr. Winn was in Febuary and when I asked questions I was shouted down and you were quite rude..It’s on tape..so then you can see why I feel tonly Mrs. Triggs has shown a true civic appoarch to this mess.I admire her for stepping across lines..She has done more good for your group than any one.
So Phoebe
What would you like done with the property?
Who would you like to do it?
And once we noted more than two people were against the proposal (which did not happen until we held our Annual Meeting), we very quickly organized opportunity to visit Winn properties and see what type of management company they are. We then held another meeting in March to vote as a Board on whether we supported the proposal.
Did you visit any of the Winn properties?
Or was your mind made up before they even had a chance, because either my father or I might have been rude?
Well, there were about three dozen other contactees mentioned in a Citibank memo.
Other than that – let’s say none were preferable to purchase the units.
What about the possibility of Citibank just slicing up the parcels it owned and selling off the buildings separately, to different buyers, and having those buyers develop the lots independently? I understand there are 19 other units owned by others, but they could be bought out just as they are now being bought out by Winn.
As far as potential uses, the property is currently zoned Resident C, but it’s just a matter of a couple of CC meetings to make any adjustments, if needed.
That doesn’t make me feel all warm and fuzzy. This has been going on for 12 months, 9 since the mayor gave his support, and still no one else has expressed any interest.
But again, who are you going to rely on to find someone to develop it? And are you suggesting that a 211 market rate project is better than a 111 income eligible housing development?
Market rate does not require any additional parking, on site management, public room, screening, or security. Just look up and down belmont.
As someone who lives within 1/2 mile of the buildings – I would not want to gamble years of having an abandoned building on hoping Citibank will find me a good buyer/developer to improve Longhill Gardens.
Would you hold your breath on Citibank?
One final note (and this doesn’t relate to your previous posts Bill – it’s just a general post)…
I would hate for this belittling of each other to go on. I really believe that most people will be on the same side for many zoning and important issues in the neighborhood. I am afraid that if this continues the way it is that we are going to end up with the Hatfield-McCoy feud here in Forest Park.
I am asking everyone involved to please take a step back, breathe, and try to stick to the issues and not belittle individuals or the two groups on either side.
I have contact George Pappas and we will be meeting with George next week. This has gone on long enough.
Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, or what ever you may celebrate.
Enjoy it, enjoy your family, and have a wonderful new year.
Please let’s move on, but if we need to keep going on this issue than please stick to issues and let’s act civilized.
Thank you,
Brian P. Sears
I suppose the only real questions is why the meeting was organized in manner that clearly sowed discord and denied the benefit of the doubt to the naysayers. If ever I have witnesses a farce of democracy, this was it.
This is clearly an affront to democracy and the concept of fairness to all. From the agenda schedule, to the opening statements, to the specifically preplanned method of gauging support for various positions of groups in the room, to the specific location of various groups, this was all orchestrated to achieve the circus atmosphere and dilute the message or organized community resistance. Similar methods were employed by such nefarious groups as the Stasi, dictator Mugabe in Zimbabwe, and Pinochet. There can be no doubt that this was anything other than a fairly organized meeting. As usual, the hidden agenda trumped out true democracy.
Don’t let them fool you into believing that joke of a meeting was anything but preplanned (especially from a psychsocial perspective) to sow discord and land just the result the organizers wanted.
I wish there was a full audio and video recording so that it can be clearly demonstrated beyond any doubt that this was a setup.
The whole series of meetings have been planned as a show and not a meaningful oppurtunity to excersize the deomcractic principle and effect the will of the majority.
We will all fail to evolve to a higher level of community activism adn involvement unless we take immediate actions to stop just this sort of pre-planned anti-democratic kangaroo court antics of the FPCA.
Greg,
What about the City Council meeting yesterday – did you attend that meeting? I wasn’t allowed to interupt or demand the meeting got rearranged to my desires…
Are they in on it too? Are they part of the anti-democratic movement?
Greg – I opened the meeting, gave Winn an opportunity to present his information, had Carl Dietz comment on Winn and this proposal, and then opened it to questions. Yes we had the majority of questions through index cards, but we allowed numerous questions from the floor.
How would you have handled that meeting differently?
Not told people to “be quiet” and “stop talking” because this was YOUR meeting.
That would have been a good beginning.
So I should allow everyone in the room to speak whenever they want.
Let me ask you, how many public meetings on the subject have you held?
Why haven’t you organized a public meeting on the subject?
You can organize the space, organize the PA system, send out the mailers, send out the press release, and have a public meeting. It’s not that hard – only costs a few hundred dollars. Unless you will send a letter to all registered voters in ward 6 and than it could cost a couple thousand dollars.
Again I ask, are you allowed to speak whenever you want at the City Council meeting?
How about this for a New Year’s resolution… Try not hijacking every meeting your at… or maybe just try and be respectful…
For the record, I never said be quiet and stop talking. I ask people to wait and respect our agenda. I did say that it was OUR meeting and OUR agenda would be followed.
Now – did you have a question that was not asked at the meeting? Because there was an ample opportunity for all questions.
“So I should allow everyone in the room to speak whenever they want.”
Yes, anything else is anti-democratic.
And a city council meeting’s conduct and rules regarding public speaking are well codified and pass legal muster. But, the city council chambers are not an open democratic system, in the republic model all duly elected leglislators (in this case the city council) are allowed equal speaking time, it is the outsider citizens that are not, thus preserving the balance of perspective.
That Kangaroo court of a meeting was anything but just, and despite your innuendo, was clearly designed from the very beginning to achieve just the discord and opposition fragmentation that occurred.
Note how Brian fails to address several of my earlier contentions in the previous post, and even tries to change the focus to why I failed to organize a meeting, when the only topic at hand is the failure of 12/17 meeting. Typical PR tactics from those who wish to stifle dissent.
Greg,
We disagree on how to run a public meeting, what else would you like me to comment on – you comparing me Stasi, dictator Mugabe in Zimbabwe, and Pinochet?
Again I ask, did you have any questions that you were unable to ask at the meeting?
Did you attend the City Council committee meeting at Museum Park? In this more informal setting it was still run much like the FPCA meeting. Opened by Foley, presentation by Winn and then opened for questions from the public.
So one last time – and please in detail – How would you have run the meeting?
Not told people to “Be quiet” and “Stop talking.” That’s for sure. Why do residents need to stand up and state “This is a public meeting and we are the public, so we have a right to speak.”
Just let people talk, even if you don’t like what they have to say. THAT is democracy and a public meeting on an issue. When all the neighborhood residents get to have a voice and get to be heard.
Mr. Sears,
I indeed did visit several of the Winn proporties..in massachusetts and New York.
I saw basic remodels and revisited each again several times…
Sir., one thing learned over the years in my business is NEVER come when you are expected because the only way to know for sure is not to be noticed…I can say nothing is what they show the public ..best to show up with no warning..The proof is in the pudding ..they are just managed projects.nothing more or less…
I wish we could have had a say in what we wanted or how to do it but the dye was cast and only the village idiot couldn’t tell by March that this was a done deal.So…what to do? FIGHT to save our area pure and simple….You feel there will be a war between neighbors? Should have cared 3 years ago.Sir : you don’t realize the harm you have done by ignoring the people who live here and pay taxes.raised their childern and now retire here…You threaten our elderly years with your blattant disregard of our fears ..
Wow! Powerfull! It would be nice to see some investigative journalism on this to shed some new light! Seeing as how the Republican can’t be bothered. It would be nice to visually see the truth and get past the Hall Mark cards!
As 2009 crawls into Springfield we have to ask what are our goals and how will we obtain them.
If greater economic development, higher property values and better safety and quality of life are desired, the obvious answer to Longhill Gardens redevelopment is NO.
If the only problem was that Longhill Gardens is a vacant eyesore, that could be solved with less costly demolition.
There would even be some justification *IF* Springfield needed more subsidized housing and was not already over saturated. Why construct a 30 year public liability at a cost of almost $22 million to taxpayers. Either develop the site as something needed like houisng for seniors, veterans and or mixed income or knock it down.
Elder housing or knock it down. As a Mr. Orlando Santiago wrote in “letters to the editor” in the Republican – we have long been known as the “City of Houses” but are fast becoming the “City of Social Services.” Surely we can do better for those in need than build a “segregated project” and absolutely do something better for the economic development for Springfield and and quality of life for our citizens. Too bad we had no leaders when this project was being formulated, and too bad we don’t have any now to stop it in its tracks and have the vision to do something better. Today on Masslive I read that the City is putting together a list of projects to present to Patrick Deval in order to get some $350 million dollars or so. How about putting Longhill Gardens on the list? How about asking for money to buy the mortgage, knock down this eyesore and begin the process of seeking something better for the site? $22 million of government to build a 30 year public liability that will require more and more social services, or $3 million or so to buy it and knock it down? How about it Mayor Sarno? We are saving $7 million a year in interest on that $52 million loan, and have been asked to come up with a list of needs to give to the Governor. HOW ABOUT SOME LEADERSHIP HERE? HOW ABOUT DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE CITY ? HOW ABOUT SOME BACKBONE ?
Winn is lucky that the Springfield Republican will not report on the statement by Dianne Wilkerson that she received a $10,000 unreported, tax free gift from Winn. This story has a local link because Ms. Wilkerson is from Springfield and Winn owns Northern Heights and proposes to redevelop Longhill Gardens.
Also absent from the pages of the local paper are any reports of the questioning of Winn’s ethics by Boston business partners. The Republican won’t even report on a news event that they attended where two city councilors and a state rep denounced Longhill Gardens. Plus most of the arrests that take place concerning Northern Heights on Central or Adams Streets do not hit the paper.
This neighborhood says NO! We don’t care if 12 FPCA members voted yes – 12 people don’t equal the entire neighborhood. 12 people don’t speak for me or myh neighborhood. NO! NO! NO!
Would Longhill Gardens be a suitable site for a new Forest Park Middle School and a new School Department headquarters. Is there stimulus money available to help Springfield construct a new facility, eliminate an eyesore and avoid building another human warehouse. Were these uses ever evaluated or was Winn and low income tax credits the only option allowed?